Aside from Perun, another notable god from slavic history that you can still find representation of today is named Radegast. He's basically a pitch-black god of hospitality, and since you were going on about how important hospitality is to Slavs... It's basically like being kind to strangers because you never know if they may be a god in disguise. He's also the name Tolkien chose for his Brown Wizard of the Woods.
JayLeePoe Interesting. I just remembered the Czechs make a beer called Radegast. The lable has a old god like looking being on it. I never connected this to an old Slavic god.
Radegast was a town, and the god was Svarozhich. In Severschina region of Russia and Ukraine (it's around the border) there was the same town Radogoshch in Kievan Rus' times. Btw, there were more similar toponyms: Lubeck and Lubech for example.
Yeah, well on the OTHER side of Slavic lands-- in Moravia it's Radeghast, The Dear Guest. But I do appreciate the different ways slavs see and do things which are otherwise virtually the same. Even if you are more Norse-Mongol-Slav ;p But yes, similar toponyms are like similar names. For example, if we jump far away to Ancient History: Baal Zebub = Belzebub. Baal = Lord in old Phoenician, the progenitor of all our languages (95%?). Probably a king who commanded archer cavalry, which could be seen as deadly giant flies ripping apart the enemy. Other cultures might think of The Stranger as a dark, insidious character but Slavs treat him as a Dear Guest-- even seeing that he may be pure darkness.
There is no such thing as a slav ethnicity. Slav is a religious term used by the Catholics during the eastern Roman Empire who called all the people of the slavic orthodox (pravo slaven) religion, “slavs” How many slavic nations are there???? About 14 How many “slavs” just in Europe???? About 400 million Are all these people from one tribe or ethnic group of people??? You have to be crazy to believe that. How many different nations do the slavs come from???? How many different DNA’s and ancient ancestors are all these nations made of??? Are the Serbians and Bosnians, who have Illyrian blood, the same as the Macedonians who have ancient Macedonian blood??? Or the same as the Bulgars from the Volga river??? Or the Russians who are vikings mixed with ancient sarmations????? Slavs are a slavic orthodox group of people, or people with a similar “slavic” language, including Croatians, slovenes, Polish and some others who are not slavic orthodox but speak a slavic language.
Many historians and archeologists agree with Florin Curta’s research about the slavs Some of Florins quotes; ….Such population movements, however, cannot be defined as migration. There is simply no evidence for the idea that the inhabitants of the sixth and early seventh-century settlements in Romania, Moldova, and Ukraine were colonists from the North who migrated down to the Balkans. Nor does the idea of a “Slavic tide” covering the Balkans in the early 600s fit the existing archaeological data. South of the Danube river, no archaeological assemblage comparable to those found north of that river produced any clear evidence for such an event taking place. Instead of a great flood of Slavs coming out of the Pripet marshes, I envisage a form of group identity, which could arguably be called ethnicity and emerged in response to Justinian’s implementation of a building project on the Danube frontier and in the Balkans. The Slavs, in other words, did not come from the north, but became Slavs only in contact with the Roman frontier. So slav is a religious term and a name the Catholics called all the people of the slavic orthodox (pravo slaven) religion. As well as countries who are not orthodox but speak a language like other slavs like Poland, Croatia Slovenia and some others. Macedonians, Serbians, Bulgarians from the Volga river and later Russians all became slavs when they converted to the slavic orthodox religion.
Watchman of MKDN bull shit that is conjecture that you can’t back up, as much as you can try to distance Macedonians from Slavic origins and tie them to Macedonians of time of Alexander it’s not working....you are hybrid mix of Serbs and Bulgarians
How can the Cyrillic alphabet be Bulgarian????? 😂😂 At what point in time did the Bulgarian empire, or Bulgaria ever occupy Solun (Thessaloniki) 😂😂 NEVER!!!!! AT NO POINT IN HISTORY!!!!!! Macedonians lived in the territory of Macedonia!!! Where solun (Thessaloniki) is located. Whatever you want to call them... slavs, Macedonians Whatever... the fact remains that Macedonians lived there, not Greeks or Bulgarians. And how many monasterys did these Macedonians build all over the territory of Macedonia in medieval times???? About 100. If the Macedonians were Greek, and if Greeks lived there, why isn’t there any monasterys down south in the rest of Greece???? 😂😂 One time its a Bulgarian alphabet, the next time its a Greek alphabet.... 😂😂😂 How many Greeks are called kirilos and metodious ? 😂😂 Greeks invented a story about slavs in order to disconnect the ancient Macedonians from medieval Macedonians so Greece can try and claim the history. “Slav” is a religious term for all the people of the slavic orthodox religion and today it also includes countries who speak a similar slavic language. There are over 400 million slavs from 14 different countries. They’re not one group of people or tribe, they come from different ancient ancestors and have many different DNA’s. Greeks and Bulgarians trying very hard to steal the history of the Macedonians!!
Watchman of MKDN dude you keep repeating that bullshit over and over like a broken fucking record like a scripted npc in shitty video game , repeating bullshit won’t make it true.... you are called Macedonian only because you took older toponym , it is actually so sad to watch people from small obscure new nations like yours so desperate to have any historical relevance so they appropriate other people’s history.... it’s shit Albanians do... wouldn’t be surprised if you are Albanian “Macedonian”
Glad I found your channel. Your videos are incredible. In particular I like the way you qualify what is known, what is unknown, what is partially known, and how a lot of history, especially in murky eras and regions such as this one, is comprised of best efforts at piecing together what was going on from incomplete information. At least, I really get that impression from your videos. This is way I like to study history, is keeping this historiography in mind. The study of history benefits from a skeptical mind more than is given credit for.
In regards to the north, Baltic people used to inhabit a much larger region before the Slavic invasions, which made Baltic peoples much more defensive afterwards. This can be seen in the large amounts of man made hill forts, mounds, and ditches
@@misterokatac We are not pushed to east. Eastern Slavs are slavianized, not real Slav. They became Slavic with the Christianisation thanks to Saint Tsar Boris Mikhail I and expansion of the Slavic influence to the East. But we're not pushed East. DNA shows that we have many things in common with people on Balkans millennia before someone uses the term Slavic.
Just look at "Macedonia" (FYROM). They have appropriated ancient Macedonian history as their own, despite them speaking a dialect of Bulgarian. It's incredible what people can be made to believe with enough propaganda.
Well DNA analysis disagrees with the "slav" theory. They cannot be one group of people or tribe because there's R1a and i2 haplogroups in Europe that are not related. If the slavs are R1a because of the area they came from, then the people in the balkans are not slavs because they mainly have the i2 haplogroup which has been in the balkans for 1000's of years. So today's Macedonians are not "slavs" but mainly ancient macedonians that have been there for 1000's of years. "Slav" is a religious reference for all the people of the slavic orthodox religion. The Macedonians invented the slavic/Macedonian alphabet in ohrid Macedonia in the 800's and then spread the slavic orthodox religion and alphabet through Europe and all the way to Russia.
Slavic origins and history is the most controversial theme out there. Every slavic nation has their own theory and lots of them contradict each other. I learned one thing in Ukraine, my Polish friends learned something different , Serbs learned a third version and westerners have a fourth version and so on. Its a endless debate
I think simplifying the issue into "versions" muddies the water. Whatever we can deduce from archeological findings and genetics is not a "version", it is as close to the truth as we can possibly get. Legends are hardly taken seriously in a scientific context. A real problem that does take place with any nation's history is that it gets taught in public school, where the government usually creates a narrative that is counter to reality. I can say this for certain, coming from Romania. It's sickening to me that millions of people get told a politically-motivated story based on who decides the curriculum. The only solution to this problem is looking at any evidence we might find, and drawing conclusions from those. You might come to the wrong conclusion, but making conclusions from unfounded information is worse.
goran bosnjak. yea its very similar, if other slavs speak slow i can understand most off it, and traditions are very similar. I'm saying that every one has a different version of WHERE the slavs came from
my family comes from Pelagonia in Macedonia, and we are not Slavs, our ancestors came from Knosos, they came out of Anatolia originally, people in this area have not been mixing much, our linguistics and culture have not changed much over the last few thousand years, and is closest related to Sanskrit
God of Lightning = Parom..slovaks still call him when things go bad - "Do Paroma,zase sa to jebe!!!!" ;P Americans might know him as Nicola Tesla - who was a Serbian Slav :D
Just an correction: Map shown at: 7:27 is meaningless. There no Muslims (nor Turks) on Balkan before 12th-13th century AD. Did you put this map in the movie by accident?
You mean AD? The map seems to be based around the 19th century, it would explain the Albanian population stretching so far but it shows Eastern North Macedonia as fully muslim? That makes no sense.
The presented theory is allochtonic theory about the Slavs appearing in Europe. There are however some archaeological findings (human bones- from which DNA was extracted or however it is called) that proves the opposite - the autochtonic theory. According to this theory - the DNA from the bones coming from peoples inhabiting territory of Moravia and Poland in pre Roman times does not differ from DNA of modern people living in this territory. That means, there were no significant genetic impact on indigenous peoples' DNA, which mean, there were no any great migration. Simply through the ages the languages, traditions and habits became more distinctive from each other.
Stop spewing such utter nonsense. Read "Cosmopolitanism at the Roman Danubian Frontier, Slavic Migrations, and the Genomic Formation of Modern Balkan Peoples" It was a flood of Slavs washing up the Balkans, just as contemporary Byzantine historians described it
There is a book called De Administrado Imperio written by Bizant emperor. In the book he gave to his son to help him rule, he said that Croats were a Slavic tribe who made a deal with Bizant. They defeated Avars in Dalmatia and in exchange emperor gave them land in the outskirts of the cities. Roman population moved to the cities (Zara, Salona etc) while Slavs remained in the outskirts. He also converted them to Christianity and said that they have a leader named Porgas. Its not a ficiton, that book is today in Paris in National library.
An item in your summary of Procopius's history is confusing. How could their religion be "monotheistic", while at the same time being like Nordic, and/or, Greco-Roman polytheisms?
How about the Rumanians in this period?How did such a large group speaking a Romance language very close to Latin manage to survive despite the Slavic,Bulgarian and Byzantine Greek influences and then morph into Wallachians and Moldavians?Maybe they were originally the Dacians that became romanised after Trajan's conquests.
Moldovans of Moldova have more than 30% of R1a (Z280, M458) which makes them the same level as Slovenes and Czechs. Except of Estonians (who are probably a mix of Finns and Balts) only Balto-Slavic peoples have these levels. Besides they have more than 15% of I2a-L621 the same as all Slavic peoples have except Poles and North Russians who have it a bit less (10 to 15%). If we compare Moldovans with Ukrainians and Croatians on R1a+I2a percentage we see 50-56% for Moldova and 62-67% for Ukraine & Croatia respectively. So you see :)
I don't know if the ethnic map of South Slavs is just a simple error or malicious intent, but I have to point out that is probably made by some Albanian ultra nationalist and is comletely fake. For example, in this map, Serbs in Bosnia are almost non-existent which is ridiculous.
@Koksal Ceylan This type of comment completely proves my point. He ignored the essence of my comment, then he proceeded with chauvinistic insults towards my ethnicity. Perfect example of a person who would have created/supported that map.
@@d.rankovic I'm not too sure this map is made by an Albanian, the Croatian majority shown in northern Bosnia and the Bosniak/Muslim majority in Eastern Bosnia where Serbs clearly are the majority or plurality even though there are undoubtedly Croats and Bosniaks living there too, it all suggests to me something less Albanian and more generally anti-Serbian. Perhaps the map is made by a Bosnian Croat. I don't know, but it seems like any map of ethnic groups of the Balkans is either inaccurate or misleading in some way.
@@Quintinohthree You are right, it could be someone else other than Albanian. It was just a guess. Anyway, the map is clearly wrong and it's made by some chauvinist anti-Serbian person.
First of all the most important Slavic god was Swietowit/Świętowid/Svatovit/Svetowit/Svetovid/Svevid - as there is many Slavic languages they are many different variant of spellings. His name means Świéty/Svati/Svieti = Holy/Saint and vit/vid from word Veda/wiedza = knowledge. He was a god with four faces represents N,S,E,W and also four season - spring, summer, autumn and winter. Each of this faces has different name and colour. Probably god named Bialobog/Bialovit/Bialoglow (bialy=white, bog-god, glowa=head) he was a god of North and winter. Jarovit/Garovit/Jaromil - god of east and Spring. As most of the records was destroyed during Teutonic Knights and Romans Christianisation of Slavic tribes it is difficult to put everything together but as we are Ind-European people so I find similarities in Hindu beliefs. Hindu four headed Brahma - god of creation is equivalent of Swietovit and he is part of Trimurti (triple deity) alongside with Shiva and Vishnu. In Slavic beliefs triple deity was called Triglow/Triglav/Triglav and those 3 are Svetovit= Brahma, Żiwie/Źiva/Živa/Diva = Shiva and I am not sure who is an equivalent of Vishnu. Meaning of Sanskrit vedas are Slavic Veda/wiedza = knowledge.
@@nestingherit7012 Śramati = Sarmaci. Both Devanagiri and 'spoken languages' (Slavic) have a common ancestor, written by knitting ropes, later replaced with runes and the mentioned written Sanskrit (thats when the division happend).
umm A few corrections Croats who moved to the Balkan at the beginning of 7 century came to the area with a formed parliament composed of chosen tribal leaders (župan= tribal leader) so you have to say that they had some political organization + there are some theories and evidences of Slavic states even before that in the area of Today Poland and Ukraine
The only evidence of Slavic migration is Constantine VII Porph. Which is highly debated as a source as he wrote it 300 years after the supposed migration. I don’t want to go too hard in the comment section but this video is incredibly misleading. Just on genetic basis 30-40 percent of Balkan dna is autochthonous.
Not true. I2 haplotip which is present around 50% is Southern Slavs is present around 25% in Ukranians and Belarusians, in Poles, Czechs and Slovaks around 10-15%. It ocmes from Slavs not from Balkan indigenous people
@@jimanast3593 Your the slave, buddy. If we are slaves, then how come we conquered this much teritory in Europe? South Slavs conquered whole Balkan. They literally took it from Byzantine. Only 10-15% of South Slavs have EV-13, and 5-10% have J haplogroups, and that is higly depending on the region
A lot of shitty comments, but i think your information here is spot on dude!... it's obvious that Slavs weren't "originally" natives in these regions (linguistically, physically and culturally) especially when south Slavs have a closer relation with east, west and north Slavs than Balkan antiquity itself... also the "Slavonic" alphabet wouldn't be could "SLAVonic" if not a single slav migrated into the Balkans.. obviously this was implemented for that specific purpose.. Also what's your views on those that try and debunk the Slavic migration theory?
Many historians and archeologists agree with Florin Curta’s research about the slavs Some of Florins quotes; ….Such population movements, however, cannot be defined as migration. There is simply no evidence for the idea that the inhabitants of the sixth and early seventh-century settlements in Romania, Moldova, and Ukraine were colonists from the North who migrated down to the Balkans. Nor does the idea of a “Slavic tide” covering the Balkans in the early 600s fit the existing archaeological data. South of the Danube river, no archaeological assemblage comparable to those found north of that river produced any clear evidence for such an event taking place. Instead of a great flood of Slavs coming out of the Pripet marshes, I envisage a form of group identity, which could arguably be called ethnicity and emerged in response to Justinian’s implementation of a building project on the Danube frontier and in the Balkans. The Slavs, in other words, did not come from the north, but became Slavs only in contact with the Roman frontier. So slav is a religious term and a name the Catholics called all the people of the slavic orthodox (pravo slaven) religion.
There is no such thing as a slav ethnicity. Slav is a religious term used by the Catholics during the eastern Roman Empire who called all the people of the slavic orthodox (pravo slaven) religion, “slavs” How many slavic nations are there???? About 14 How many “slavs” just in Europe???? About 400 million Are all these people from one tribe or ethnic group of people??? You have to be crazy to believe that. How many different nations do the slavs come from???? How many different DNA’s and ancient ancestors are all these nations made of??? Are the Serbians and Bosnians, who have Illyrian blood, the same as the Macedonians who have ancient Macedonian blood??? Or the same as the Bulgars from the Volga river??? Or the Russians who are vikings mixed with ancient sarmations????? Slavs are a slavic orthodox group of people, or people with a similar “slavic” language, including Croatians, slovenes, Polish and some others who are not slavic orthodox but speak a slavic language.
@@maugustyniak Older research considered that the high frequency of this subclade in the South Slavic-speaking populations to be the result of "pre-Slavic" paleolithic settlement in the region. Peričić et al. (2005) for instance place its expansion to have occurred "not earlier than the YD to Holocene transition and not later than the early Neolithic".[2][3][16][17] However the prehistoric autochthonous origin of the haplogroup I2 in the Balkans is now considered as out of date,[nb 1] as already Battaglia et al. (2009) observed highest variance of the haplogroup in Ukraine, and Zupan et al. (2013) noted that it suggests it arrived with Slavic migration from the homeland which was in present-day Ukraine.[22] The research by O.M. Utevska (2017) concluded that the haplogroup STR haplotypes have the highest diversity in Ukraine, with ancestral STR marker result "DYS448=20" comprising "Dnieper-Carpathian" cluster, while younger derived result "DYS448=19" comprising the "Balkan cluster" which is predominant among the South Slavs.[14] This "Balkan cluster" also has the highest variance in Ukraine, which indicates that the very high frequency in the Western Balkan is because of a founder effect.[14 Take it
Slavs settled areas previously abandoned by the Romans and other tribes during the crises of the 5th and 6th centuries. The Balkans were specially devastated and slavs took advantage of this to repopulate the whole region south of the Danube. Slavs represented such a large percentage of the population that non-slavic areas were referred to as 'islands'. Northern Greece and even parts of the Peloponnese had a large slavic presence until the 10th century
Why would the Romans abandon lands if it was "empty" ?And why would the Slavs migrate to a unknown lands leaving their "homelands" probably changeing the way of living. When at that time a few low harvests was a death sentence. It doesn't make sense.
You really don't know what you're talking about. Slavs raided byzantine empire and fought with them constantly. They came to agreed with them and when thry were bettayed they literally skinned alive byzantine general and burned him alive. Late, a group of 3000 pillaged and caused chaos in the Balkan
Listen there are chronicles and real history, Slavs was in Europe much earlier, capitol was in today Augsburg in 1500bc, because of that river have name after King Lech, even today. Venecia is Wenecja after Slavic tribe which create city there. You can fallow Slaws roots from middle east and they are line of Japhet son of Noa
@@ginaibisi777 You obviously didn't watch this video, or you weren't paying much attention, or are just trolling. 13:40 he does mention Thracians, just in case you missed it.
17:35 "Many place names today are still Slavic" >Many MORE places would still have their Slavic (original) name had the Greek assimilatory politics of the 1920s not happened.
Biggest evidence of Slavic settlements is the fact that the Peloponnesus region was called “Despotate of the Morea” until the formation of Modern Greece.Morea derives from the Slavic term “More” for sea or ocean.
Morea is a type of tree🤦. You idiot. Read the genetic research which explains How you are wrong. And Peloponnesian Greeks are descendants of their ancient Greek ancestors. www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=www.nature.com/articles/ejhg201718&ved=2ahUKEwi-tZ3dxtvvAhUHhv0HHeE_D6oQFjAAegQIAxAC&usg=AOvVaw0LbcKElz2Vh2GVBzfYqRsM I am glad I opened your eyes
Don't you know Greeks are grouped in Greek and South Italian ethnicity by MyHeritage. Greeks are not from Balkan they are originally b6 their DNA from South Italy. Don't you remember where lived Arhimed and Pitagora. Balkan was invaded by Greeks who moved from South Italy to Balkan. Do you know that today Turkes are muslimised Greeks. They are from Anatolia and Caucasus. People read any facts about genetics to find: History is mountains of lies and rabish.
Only document that is talking about migration of Slavs is Porfirogenits one, in that document Byzantine emperior Porfirogenit uses titles that are not called that way in Romeya-Byzantia in his time, He uses words from Western and Catolic world, such ignorance is not possible for man of that position and rank in Byzantia, also he describes some events that ocured after His death, only this two are indeniable proofs that significant parts of Porfirogenits work is falcificated, by the wrong terms, that falcificator used is visible that He is from Vaticans falcificating school, Slavs never migrated on Balcan, We are from here, We migrated to north, so still oficial history is based on rough brutal falcificates.
My grandmother and mother were born in eastern Serbia speaking a Romanian language. Their DNA show 70 percent Balkan with greek, Spanish, north African, Jewish DNA. Gedmatch says they are mostly Caucasus, middle eastern, Mediterranean. And north eastern Europe.
Linguistic, textual, genetic and archaeological evidence for the Out of India Theory of Indo European Languages Baghpat Chariots, Weapons and the Horse in the Harappan Civilization - Dr. BK Manjul th-cam.com/video/fZvKpjjTpgg/w-d-xo.html Findings from the latest genetic study conducted by ASI in collaboration withe Reich Lab at Harvard using the ancient DNA from Rakhigarhi slides at 29:00 mark th-cam.com/video/Dio3Ep0nlv4/w-d-xo.html th-cam.com/video/n4WFk0iEK5k/w-d-xo.html th-cam.com/video/f0Lg1b_8N54/w-d-xo.html th-cam.com/video/-wIu3dUsmtY/w-d-xo.html Here are the tribes that spread the Indo European languages from South Asia to West Asia, Central Asia and to Europe Avestan) Afghanistan: Proto-Iranian: Sairima (Śimyu), Dahi (Dāsa). NE Afghanistan: Proto-Iranian: Nuristani/Piśācin (Viṣāṇin). Pakhtoonistan (NW Pakistan), South Afghanistan: Iranian: Pakhtoon/Pashtu (Paktha). Baluchistan (SW Pakistan), SE Iran: Iranian: Bolan/Baluchi (Bhalāna). NE Iran: Iranian: Parthian/Parthava (Pṛthu/Pārthava). SW Iran: Iranian: Parsua/Persian (Parśu/Parśava). NW Iran: Iranian: Madai/Mede (Madra). Uzbekistan: Iranian: Khiva/Khwarezmian (Śiva). W. Turkmenistan: Iranian: Dahae (Dāsa). Ukraine, S, Russia: Iranian: Alan (Alina), Sarmatian (Śimyu). Turkey: Thraco-Phrygian/Armenian: Phryge/Phrygian (Bhṛgu). Romania, Bulgaria: Thraco-Phrygian/Armenian: Dacian (Dāsa). Greece: Greek: Hellene (Alina). Albania: Albanian: Sirmio (Śimyu). Shrikant Gangadhar Talageri talageri.blogspot.com/2020/03/the-rigveda-and-aryan-theory-rational_27.html Five waves of Indo-European expansion: a preliminary model (2018) Igor A Tonoyan-Belyayev I. Tonoyan-Belyayev www.academia.edu/36998766/Five_waves_of_Indo-European_expansion_a_preliminary_model_2018_
@@mkelkar1 Not out of India but out of the Caspian steppes area. One group went into Europe and another into Iran and Northern India. Dravidian people and language is not Indo-European.
If Slavs came down in the 7th century, how did they manage to pass on to the Romans 6.000 Serbian Slavic words, and the Roman Republik was founded circa 700BC. Latin language was developing much earlier than that, until it was standardised. We are talking about at least 1.500 years gap. How did the words get to Rome from Russia? Internet, drones? Your pick.
Uuuh... As an italian I would like to know these "Slavic Words" in latin... I bet you are talking about common indoeuropean root Words since Slavic languages and italic languages like latin are indoeuropean... Slavs were around in 700 BC but nowere near the balkans
A few Corrections are in order. Firstly, there are no Eastern Roman historians attributing the ease of Slavic settlement to Justinian's plague - which was spread all over Europe (despite its popular name and the worst scenario occurring in densely populated Constantinople) and almost certainly affected Slavs. Further on, based on all archaeological findings of both the Antes and the Sclavenes, we know for a fact that equipment was standardized in the sense that every excavated grave of a Slavic warrior features chainmail and sword (fashioned in East Roman style), an ax, round wooden shield, and a long spear. Some Slavic warriors were wearing belts with buckles adorned with Avar motifs, but they were most likely spoils of war or items of trade. The only group of Slavs that have fought without armor was warbands of young warriors who've fought entirely naked (barring the red paint on their body, hair, and face) and in melee (the ones that were described as being red-haired by Procopius), and some groups of Pannonian Wends who were tributaries of the Pannonian Avars, and relying on ambushes was a part of defensive strategies, and only against hosts that were too numerous and too well-armed, like the joint Avar-Roman host that assailed Sclavene territories after Daurentius slew Bayan's envoys and refused to pay tribute to him. Aside from that, both the Antes and the Sclavenes have utilized large breeds of horses for warfare, and matter of fact, an entire host of Antean and Sclavene horsemen was dispatched to evacuate Belisarius from Italy, which proves the aforementioned. Secondly, the Avars have only managed to subjugate the more passive parts of the Dudlebes, as well as parts of the Wends - certainly not the Antes and the Sclavenes, who were noted to have lived only under the reign of their own kings like Muzok and Mezamir (Antes) and chieftains like Radagast and Daurentius, of whom the latter was described as being the supreme chief of all Sclavenes. Procopius' early assessment of Slavic social structure was just that - an early assessment based off of early sightings of Slavic warbands that were initially considered to have been "small tribes governed by "military democracy". As interaction with Slavs intensified, he realized that the Slavs did exhibit an organized social structure, albeit admittedly, the Antes were the most centralized body of the Early Slavs, with a hereditary monarchy where one king reigned over all of the Antes, while among the Sclavenes, you've had one known supreme chieftain like the aforementioned Daurentius to whom other chieftains were subordinate, there was also a mention of Sclavene kings, like Perbundos, who led a coalition of Sclavene tribes deep into Greece. Likewise, the Avars were first invited to make a move against the Slavs by the Roman emperor Tiberius, and later on, Emperor Heraclius would invite Serbs and Croats from the distant Slavic northwest to liberate the northern provinces of the Avars and have them settle all those provinces as his vassals which he'd ennoble, which refutes any theory of the Sclavenes and Antes arriving to Southeastern Europe off of the back of the Avars. After all, the earliest Slavic raids deep into the Roman territory were accompanied by the enslavement of an estimated quarter of a million Romans in every province struck by the Slavs and the sacking and besieging of Roman cities, which were recorded as early as the first part of the 6th century - decades before the Avars were contacted by Emperor Tiberius, and before they reached the most distant part of the basin of the Danube. On top of that, the invading Sclavenes have also slain Asbadus/Asbados - the famed Roman/Gepid general, and have also annihilated his elite army, a feat which would've been impossible if the Slavs "only fought from afar", or worse, if they've "made no use of pitched organized warfare". The usage of poison arrows and guerrilla warfare was deployed only in defensive wars against a martially superior enemy - like against the combined Roman-Avar army during Maurice's campaign which was launched deep into Sclavene territories north of the Danube. In the work of Menander Protector, we find the following excerpt: "This movement of Avars against the Slavs did not only result from Emperor's envoys and the wish of Bayan to return the courtesy unto Romans for all the gestures of friendship and help that he had received from the Emperor but also because he held great hate for them (the Slavs) out of personal sentiment as well. The Avar leader has, therefore, sent envoys to Daurentius (Δαυρίτας) himself, and to his chieftains, calling on for their submission and enlistment among tribute-payers. Dauritas and the leaders alongside him replied: "Who is, then, the man which basks in sunlight that threatens to conquer our strength? We are used to ruling over others, not to being ruled over - of that, we are certain for as long as wars are waged and swords are forged". Since the Slavs acted so haughtily, the Avars were no different in boasting. Then the scolds and insults resulted from that, being that the barbarians are of a narrow and proud mind, and the fight broke out. The Slavs, unable to control their anger, killed the envoys, as Bayan found out from another source. Because of that Bayan has long since raised accusations against the Slavs, fueling a secret hatred against them, mad for they refused him, and angry that from them he received an unforgivable insult, in the same time he thought he would do a favor to Caesar and likewise *find a rich land to plunder, for far too long has the land of Romans been plundered by Slavs, and theirs (Slavic) - never by any of other peoples*." Thirdly, the Early Slavs seized and inhabited a massive territory that spanned from the east of Germany to the Baltic and the very distant fringes of Eastern Europe. Matter of fact, the bulk of the Sclavenes have lived on the northern shores of the Danube and were bribed by Roman authorities into maintaining that status quo, at least temporarily. Also, Slavs weren't "monotheistic", they were henotheistic. Even though Perun was their chief god, they also recognized the existence of other gods as well, hence why the Sclavenes and the Antes worshipped Perun and Veles - which also reflected their lifestyles, which were very warlike and militarized and subsided on animal husbandry, fishing, hunting, gathering and the practice of a form of agriculture that required the burning of the soil, so they weren't nomadic, but certainly not entirely sedentary either. It's also important to note that Procopius also states that the Sclavenes and the Antes shared the same customs, beliefs, and institutions. The same goes for the Wends, which is also supported by the homogeneity of early Slavic aDNA, YDNA, and language, although material culture was far more varied (depending on which culture they defeated and assimilated). Fourthly, the role of the Avars in all of this is overemphasized, and for the following reasons: a) As mentioned before, they were invited by the Romans to defeat and subdue unruly peoples on the Danube, like the Antes (who were Roman allies from time to time as well), and during the next century or so will be the foremost "allies" of the Romans against the Slavs, up until Heraclius invites the Serbs and Croats (Sclavene tribes) to defeat and annihilate them south of the Danube. b) While it's true that the Avar hosts were initially the largest, they were in time overshadowed by the Sclavene hosts, which have, after realizing that the Roman authority on the Danube is no more, begun launching massive invasions that were also preludes to the permanent settling of the lands they've seized and initiated the assimilation of the peoples they've defeated and temporarily subjugated. c) Western historians tend to make the mistake of not distinguishing the Slavs, even though primary sources from that era have noted that the Early Slavs were divided into three groups: the Wends, the Sclavenes, and the Antes, which brings us to the point of the "100 000 Slavs" that were part of the Avar host - most of them were Pannonian Wend tributaries of the Avars, while the rest were Sclavene allies who, thanks to their arrangement with the Avars, were exempt from abiding by Avar-Roman peace treaties, and would continue raiding and marauding as they pleased, which brought great displeasure to Bayan senior and junior, and the Roman emperors as well. d) Slavs would've invaded and permanently settled the lands south of the Danube one way or the other, the involvement of the Avars has only somewhat hastened of process, and by subsequently making sure that the Sclavene tribes would form the overwhelming bulk of those who'd settle and seize the territories in question by waging exhaustive wars with the Antes. At most, the Avars were a strictly Pannonian phenomenon and were never masters of the "Balkans", which is also supported by archaeology and modern genetic studies, and given that you're made a mention of primary Roman/Greek sources, you should also know that there's not a single one of them that claims that the Slavs were migrating with the Avars, but that they were invading Southeastern Europe at the same time. You could potentially make that point for the aforementioned Pannonian Wends, but not for the bulk of the invading Slavs - who were Sclavenes and Antes. e) Sclavenes have besieged Thessalonica five times (in 586 or 597, 604, 615, 617, and 676), and only in two of those sieges were the Slavs assisted by the Avars.
Furthermore, the Franks, Avars, and Magyars have only influenced the military and administrative history of the Pannonian Wends, and they're the ancestors of the Slavs of Balaton, Nitra, Great Moravia, and Slovakia, and they've never formed the bulk of the Early Slavs, but merely a portion of the Wends (the Early West Slavs). To interpret the history of the rest of the Slavs through their particularity is rather tendentious, and even ignorant of the full extent of the history of the Early Medieval Slavs, whether they're West, East, or South Slavic. Matter of fact, the bulk of the Early Slavs was made of the Sclavenes and the Antes, and the overwhelming majority of primary sources from that era were based on peaceful and hostile interaction with them. Further on, the military and administrative history of the Antes and the Sclavenes was strictly a mixture of Slavic traditions and East Roman/Greek influences, which was reflected in the First Bulgarian Empire as well, where Slavic and Bulgar tribal and administrative traditions were integral parts of the state, yet the latter would be entirely ousted by the Slavo-Roman model as early as during the reign of Boris I. Procopius, Book V, XXVII, 134: "(...) This exploit, then, was accomplished by the Goths on the third day after they were repulsed by the assault on the wall. But twenty days after the city and harbor of Portus were captured, Martinus and Valerian arrived, bringing with them sixteen hundred horsemen, the most of whom were Huns and Sclaveni and Antae, who are settled above the Ister River not far from its banks. (...)" Procopius about Slavic invaders capturing and enslaving a lot of Romans: Procopius, Book VII, XIII - describing events in the year 545 AD: "(...) For a great throng of the barbarians, the Sclaveni, had, as it happened, recently crossed the Ister, plundering the adjoining country and enslaving a very great number of Romans. (...)" Procopius of Caesarea: "(...) In Illyria and Thracia, from the Ionian Gulf to Byzantine surrounding cities, where Hellas and Chersonese regions are situated, (...) the Sclavenes and the Antes, penetrating practically every year since Justinian administering the Roman Empire, were inflicting irreversible damage to their inhabitants. In each invasion, I estimate 200,000 Romans were either taken as prisoners or killed (...)" Procopius about Roman attempts to stop the Slavic invasion: "(...) the Empire wasn't able to find just one only man just as brave to undertake this task." Pope Gregory I in a letter to the Exarch of Italy from the year 599: "(...) It deeply afflicts and disquiets me the Slavic nation that menace us. It afflicts me from what I already suffer from you, it disquiets me because they have already started to penetrate into the Italic peninsula through Istria. (...)" And according to Priscus, 610 Slavic tribes flooded into Greece. Procopius of Caesarea: "(...) Nay further, they [the Slavs] do not differ at all from one another in appearance. For they are all exceptionally tall and stalwart men, while their bodies and hair are neither very fair nor blond nor indeed do they incline entirely to the dark type (...)". Procopius of Caesarea: "(...) In more or less the same time [549 - 550] a Slavic army (...) gathered itself together and after crossing without encountering any resistance from anyone the river Ister [Danube], and later with similar ease the river Heuros, it divided itself for two parts. (...) Commanders of Roman garrisons in Illyria and Thrace fought against both those parts and even though they had already separated from each other, the Romans suffered - contrary to their expectations - a defeat and some of them fell dead on the spot, while others found salvation in escaping. (...) After all, garrisons had suffered such defeats at the hands of either one or the other of barbarian armies, one of the enemy bands fought against troops of Asbadus. He was a member of Emperor Justinian's personal guard (...) and he led a numerous and elite force of cavalry, which had been garrisoned for a long time inside the Thracian stronghold of Tdzurulon. But also, they were forced to retreat by the Slavs and most of them, shamefully escaping, got slaughtered, while Asbadus himself was captured and temporarily left alive, but soon after that the Slavs skinned him alive and threw him into a burning campfire. After that, the Slavs were plundering all neighboring Thracian and Illyrian lands without any obstacles and both of their two units captured many strongholds. (...) And those who had defeated Asbadus, later plundered, in turn, everything up to the sea coast, and captured in an assault the coastal city of Toperus (...) And they slaughtered 25,000 men, plundered everything, and enslaved all the children and all the women. (...)" John of Ephesus: "(...) In the third year after the death of Emperor Justin, during the reign of victorious Tiberius, the damned nation of the Slavs has risen, and marched through entire Hellas, through lands of Thessaly and Thrace, captured many cities and strongholds, plundered, burned, and robbed, seized the land and settled there with full ease, without fear, like in their own land. (...) they were plundering the country, burning it, and robbing, as far as the Great Walls [of Constantinople], and this is how they captured many thousands of cattle, as well as many other kinds of booty. (...) Until today, that is until year 584, they still continue to live in peace in the lands of the Rhomaioi, without fear and concern, plundering, murdering and burning, getting rich and highjacking gold and silver, capturing horses and plenty of weapons; and they have learned to fight better than the Rhomaioi. (...)" Menander Protector: "(...) About the fourth year of the reign of Caesar Tiberius Constantine, some hundred thousand Slavs broke into Thrace and pillaged that and many other regions. As Greece was being laid waste by the Slavs, with trouble liable to flare up anywhere, and as Tiberius had at his disposal by no means sufficient forces, he sent a delegation to the Khagan of the Avars. (...)" Strategikon of Maurice: "(...) They do not keep prisoners in perpetual slavery-like other peoples, but they demarcate for them a limited period of time, after which they give them a choice: they can return home after purchasing their freedom or stay among them as free people and friends. (...)" “Strategikon of Maurice: "...being freedom-loving, they are in no way inclined to become slaves or to obey, especially in their own land." (Strategikon of Maurice, ed. prep. V. V. Kuchma. SPb., 2004, p. 189)” Jordanes: "(...) These people, as we started to say at the beginning of our account or catalog of nations, though off-shoots from one stock, have now three names, that is, Venedi, Antes, and Sclaveni. (...) they now rage in war far and wide, in punishment for our sins (...) Though their names are now dispersed amid various clans and places, they are chiefly called Sclaveni and Antes. (...)" Procopius of Caesarea: "(...) Belisarius was eager to capture alive one of the men of note among the enemy, in order that he might learn what the reason might be why the barbarians were holding out in their desperate situation. And Valerian promised readily to perform such a service for him. For there were some men in his command, he said, from the nation of the Sclaveni, who are accustomed to concealing themselves behind a small rock or any bush which may happen to be near and pounce upon an enemy. In fact, they are constantly practicing this in their native haunts along the river Ister, both on the Romans and on the barbarians as well. (...)" Abraham ben Jacob (a 10th-century Sephardic Jewish traveler from Muslim Spain): "(...) Slavic countries extend from the Mediterranean Sea to the Northern Ocean. (...) Generally speaking, Slavs are warlike and violent, and if not for their internal discord and lack of unity, no other nation would be able to match them in strength. (...)" And about the arrival of the Croats and Serbs (but it was much later - not during the 500’s, but during the 600’s): Constantine Porphyrogennetos, "De Administrando Imperio": "(...) their ancestors were Pagan Croats and Serbs, known also as White [Croats and Serbs]. Great Croatia, called also White [Croatia], until today is still Pagan, just like neighboring [Lusatian / West Slavic] Serbs [Sorbs] (...)" And another excerpt - "De Administrando Imperio": "(...) Therefore everyone, who would like to do research about Dalmatia, can read herein about the way how the Slavic peoples took it. The Croats with their families came to Dalmatia and found the Avars in possession of that land. After fighting against each other for some time, the Croats defeated the Avars, partially murdered them, and partially forced them to submissiveness. Since that moment the country was seized by the Croats. (...)" “Daurentius is the first Slavic chieftain to be recorded by name, by the Byzantine historian Menander Protector, who reported that the Avar khagan Bayan I sent an embassy, asking Daurentius and his Slavs to accept Avar suzerainty and pay tribute because the Avars knew that the Slavs had amassed great wealth after repeatedly plundering the Byzantine Balkan provinces. Daurentius reportedly retorted that "Others do not conquer our land, we conquer theirs [...] so it shall always be for us.” Daurentius (to the Avar envoy): "Who is, then, the man who basks in sunlight that threatens to conquer our strength? We are used to ruling over others, not to being ruled over - of that, we are certain for as long as wars are waged and swords are forged". I've extracted the most relevant quotes from the primary sources and DAI, hope it helps.
Those who attribute the success of the Slavic invasion and colonization of Roman territories to the Avars omit the following: a) Serbs didn't invade in the 6th, but in the mid-7th century, and in toe with the Croats, and were tasked with exterminating all Avars south of the Danube and ruling all the provinces they’d liberate at the request of emperor Heraclius. b) The Slavs who've invaded, conquered, and colonized Southeastern Europe were the Sclavenes and Antes, not the “Avaroslavs”, who were noted to have been Pannonian Wends, and were, aside from the Greeks/Romans themselves, also distinguished from other Slavs on that very basis by Fredegar, and were mentioned only twice in all primary Greek sources, during the Siege of Constantinople in 626, and during one of the many Slavic sieges of Thessaloniki, where Saint Demetrius states they arrived to assist the already present Sclavenes who've besieged the city, lured by promises of the city’s wealth. c) By the time the Avars arrived at the Danubian basin at the invitation of emperor Tiberius, who had invited them for the sole purpose of waging war against the Sclavenes, Antes, and Kutrigurs, the Slavs were already invading and raiding Southeastern Europe for roughly forty years, and as deep as Southern Peloponnesus, Crete and the outer walls of Constantinople. d) All primary sources, like Jordanes, Procopius, Saint Demetrius, John of Ephesus, Theophylact of Simocatta, and Menander Protector state that the Sclavenes and the Antes were under the rule of their rulers like Mezamir, Muzhok, Dervan/Daurentius, and Radogost, and weren't subdued by the Avars, and distinguish them from the aforementioned Avaroslavs (Pannonian Wends). e) Attributing the success of the Slavic invasion and colonization of Southeastern Europe to the Avars is, aside from being contradictory to all primary Roman/Greek sources, since the very purpose of the invitation of the Avars was to wage war against the Slavs and the Kutrigurs, which is exemplified in the joint Avar-Roman invasion of Daurentius' realm, also a textbook example of 19th and 20th-centuries German, Italian, Greek, Hungarian and Austrian anti-Slavism designed to undermine the legitimacy of Slavic history, the geopolitical realities of Slavic territories, and to portray Slavs as a subsidiary mass of naturally subordinate peoples. Sources: Jordanes, Procopius, Saint Demetrius, John of Ephesus, Theophylact of Simocatta, and Menander Protector, De Administrando Imperio, Sima Cirkovic, Tibor Zivkovic, Dimitry Obolensky, and Frederick Hamilton Jackson.
Modern Western interpretations of medieval sources would indicate the Slavic area as being the main reservoir of slaves in the whole period of the Early Middle Ages, beginning probably in the 6th century, and with a peak around the 10th. This preference for slaves of Slavic origin - so strong as to make Slavs the slaves by antonomasia - has been easily explained: in that period Slavic people were the only ones who were still pagan, and this detail is most important as it explains why, by choosing them, early medieval slave traders - mostly Venetian, Genoese and Jewish - did not violate the new principles of the “Societas Christiana”, introduced by Pope Gregory the Great at the end of the 6th century, according to which baptized people must be excluded from slavery. What should be noted is that aside from this being a mere theory, it is also historically and etymologically inaccurate, and unconvincing. After all, the Medieval Latin words for “Slav” and “Slave” are not etymologically related. The Medieval Latin word for “slave”, and with it, its root as well, predates the first sightings and contact of mainland European civilization with the Slavs. The evolution of the name of Slavs "Sloveni/ Slaveni" comes from PIE *klew (to hear) evolving into proto-Slavic *slovo/ *slava (word/ fame), finally evolving into Sloveni/ Slaveni (those glorious/ those who understand each other). Meanwhile, the English word for "slave" comes from the Latin word "clavis/ clavus" (a key/ nail), which bore the Latin word "inclavare" (to lock in), ultimately giving rise to the word "sclavus" (slave - "a locked one"), which most likely entered the English language, along with a major portion of Romance words, with the Norman invasion. In 1881, a proper etymology was expressed, according to which the Greek word Σκλάβινοι does not stem from the self-name of the Slavs, but from the Greek verb σκυλεύο - "to extract spoils of war", and resonates in the manner in which Slavs and other ethnicities were enslaved - as prisoners of war. The aforementioned etymologies are free of politicization, are accurate, and are firmly rooted in history and linguistics. Based on this, the self-name of the Slavs and their Modern Helleno-Latin name coincided phonetically purely accidentally (F. Kluge, Etymologisches Wörterbuch der deutschen Sprache 1881/1989/2002), and the thesis where the modern word for “Slave” is not rooted in the self-name of the Slavs, and is refuted.” (Gerhard Kobler - Deutsches Etymologisches Wörterbuch 1995, Korth Georg - Zur Etymologie des Wortes 'Slavus' (Sklave) 1970, and Daniel Scholten - Deutsch für Dichter und Denker: Unsere Muttersprache in neuem Licht, 2020). The aforementioned theory and etymology are furthered by Korth Georg, Friedrich Kluge, Gerhard Kobler, and Daniel Scholten (and Grimm’s German Dictionary). Further on, the cognate with Sloveni/Slaveni is the word Sclavinii/ Slabini, a Latin that denotes Slavic ethnic groups. From a purely historical perspective, Greece and Gaul were Rome’s main reservoir of slaves for centuries, while the Irish were the main reservoir of slaves for their Normano-English oppressors for more than half a millennium, and before them, to Norsemen as well. Dublin was the largest slave market in Western Europe. Its main sources of supply were the Irish hinterland, Wales and Scotland, while in the Far and the Middle East, the Turkmen tribes would supply the largest portion of Eurasia with innumerable slaves for nearly a millennium. Aside from that, just during the earliest stage of the Slavic invasion of Roman territory south of the Danube (6th century), a fifth of a million Roman citizens (Procopius) were enslaved by the Sclavenes (early South Slavs) in just one Roman province, and just during a single raid, the number of their slaves kept growing as more and more provinces and their capitals fell to the aforementioned Slavs. In reality, the majority of slaves in the 6th and 7th centuries were the Christian Romans, not their Slavic captors. Granted the Slavs didn't enslave their enemies permanently, but they've enslaved them nonetheless, and in numbers that are substantially greater than the number of Slavs who were enslaved by non-Slavs during the entirety of the middle ages, and it renders the aforementioned non-Slavs as being more fitting to have their ethnonyms made “synonymous” with slavery The Western terminology for "slave", to a certain extent, is similar in form to the self-designation of the Slavs ("Sloven", "Slavjan" etc.) Their existence served as the basis for numerous anti-Slavic statements, theories, and consecutive waves of propaganda, which have sometimes acquired the scope of genuine mythologies. Moreover, these ideas were even given an academic platform. As it happened more than once, when “not entirely” adequate premises gained an academic platform and were entrenched there since. The premise of "Slavs" is the root of words for "slaves" found a permanent foothold in Western Academia, giving rise to a series of pseudoscientific, inform, but questionable, in essence, representations and statements. The essence of these premises is that these words are related to the ethnonym of the Slavs, allegedly, "due to the fact that in the Early Middle Ages, the Slavs became objects of the slave trade, which led to the use of their ethnonym as a designation for slaves." Sometimes, it was even argued that Western Europeans, whose languages contain these words, directly, massively, and regularly turned the Slavs into slaves, and in general, other far-reaching conclusions were made, such as that the "Slavs are slaves" and the Western Europeans are "their masters." Moreover, in the 18-19th century in Western European journalism, the idea was persistently exaggerated that even the word "Slav" itself comes from the Latin or Greek word for "slave". This was the “think tank” of an 18th-century French historian and publicist. Polemics regarding this myth and premise are found even in Dostoevsky’s "Diary of a Writer". As for the idea of the origin of the word "Slav" coming from the word for slaves - at the present time, it is not considered scientific and has long been recognized as erroneous, or even deliberately Slavophobic. The birthplace of this terminology is the ERE. In the Early Middle Ages, in the so-called Medieval Greek, the word "σκλάβος" (read as "sklavos" - "slave") appeared. Further - from the ERE and Medieval Greek, this word found its way to Medieval Latin (and from there to Medieval French) - the official, as well as international legal, political, commercial, and scientific language of Western Europe. Moreover, in different languages, it appears in different timelines. In accordance with Webster's Dictionary, the word appears in English only in the 14th century, while Webster gives an etymological origin of the basis of the premise of this stream of Slavic slaves dating back to the 10th century, specifically during the reign of Henry the Fowler and Otto I, therefore moot and chronologically off by several centuries. Thus, the direct appearance of these words in Western European languages, for reasons allegedly of the abundant trade in Slavic slaves, is excluded. Since the word has a clearly traceable and understandable history. And it did not arise in the West, but in ERE. The word for “slave” in Medieval Greek derives from the Greek verb skyleúo - meaning “to get spoils of war”, the first-person singular of which looks like skyláo. This etymology is established thanks to the following sources: F. Kluge, Etymologisches Wörterbuch der Deutschen Sprache. 1881/1989/2002, siehe Sklave: “... zu gr. skyleuein, skylan, V. zu gr. Skylon ", Gerhard Köbler, Deutsches Etymologisches Wörterbuch, 1995, Sektion "Slaven" and Daniel Scholten, Deutsch für Dichter und Denker: Unsere Muttersprache in neuem Licht, Sklave und Slawe “. Thus, it is proven that the Greek word "sklav", "slave" - comes from the abovementioned Med. Greek word, the original meaning of which was "seized in war".This etymology, and Georg Korth’s "Zur Etymologie des Wortes 'Slavus' (Sklave)" refutes the premise that the Med. Greek and modern Western word for “slave” derived from the self-name of the Slavs. This etymology is furthered by Korth Georg, Friedrich Kluge, Gerhard Kobler, and Daniel Scholten (and Grimm’s German Dictionary). Furthermore, it turns out that the "Slavs" and all these numerous Western European "sklavas" are only homonyms. There are innumerable examples of such consonant coincidences (both within the same languages, and between words from different languages). This is a fairly common occurrence, especially among Indo-European languages. Thus, in the ERE, a new word was found and associated with the verb that means "to seize trophies of war", which was from then on used to denote slaves. At the same time, the previous word for slave, which previously meant slaves, was repurposed to denote indentured serfs attached to the land they’ve toiled.
The only Slavs that were subjugated by the Avars were the Pannonian Wends (the rest of the Wends were either independent or vassals of the Franks), while the Sclavenes and Antes who formed the bulk of the Early Slavs, and the Slavs who've invaded and colonized Roman territories in Europe were independent, sovereign entities, and either at war with the Avars or allied with them, depending on the tribe (unlike the subdued Pannonian Wends). Based on the overwhelming majority of archaeological findings, on nearly all primary sources (like Strategikon of Maurice, Menander Protector, and Procopius, first and foremost) and the toponymy of Southeastern Europe, we know that the Slavs have played the leading role in the invasion of Southeastern Europe and that they were perceived as Rome's greatest threat on the Northern Limes, not the Avars, who in reality, were invited by Rome as their allies against the Slavs, as Menander Protector put its: "(...) About the fourth year of the reign of Caesar Tiberius Constantine, some hundred thousand Slavs broke into Thrace and pillaged that and many other regions. As Greece was being laid waste by the Slavs, with trouble liable to flare up anywhere, and as Tiberius had at his disposal by no means sufficient forces, he sent a delegation to the Khagan of the Avars. (...)" Crediting the Avars for the success of the Slavic invasion and colonization is first and foremost a modern, primarily German, Austrian, Hungarian, and even Greek narrative that has virtually no substantiation in history that originated in the writings of Pavel Jozef Safarik's dubious assessment of the early history of the South Slavs, and can only be attributed to ahistorical, political agendas that should be reviled and demonized in academic discourse, not adopted. We also know that at the time, the Avars didn't dare to invade Slavic lands by themselves, yet again, based on Menander's report: "This movement of Avars against the Slavs did not only result from Emperor's envoys and the wish of Bayan to return the courtesy unto Romans for all the gestures of friendship and help that he had received from the emperor but also because he held great hate for them (the Slavs) out of personal sentiment as well. The Avar leader has, therefore, sent envoys to Daurentius (Δαυρίτας) himself, and to his chieftains, calling on for their submission and enlistment among tribute-payers. Daurentius and the leaders alongside him replied: "Who is, then, the man which basks in sunlight that threatens to conquer our strength? We are used to ruling over others, not to being ruled over - of that, we are certain for as long as wars are waged and swords are forged". Since the Slavs acted so haughtily, the Avars were no different in boasting. Then the scolds and insults resulted from that, being that the barbarians are of a narrow and proud mind, and the fight broke out. The Slavs, unable to control their anger, killed the envoys, as Bayan found out from another source. Because of that Bayan has long since raised accusations against the Slavs, fueling a secret hatred against them, mad for they refused him, and angry that from them he received an unforgivable insult, in the same time he thought he would do a favor to Caesar and likewise *find a rich land to plunder, for far too long has the land of Romans been plundered by Slavs, and theirs (Slavic) - never by any of other peoples*." We also know the following from the Strategikon of Maurice: "...being freedom-loving, they are in no way inclined to become slaves or to obey, especially in their own land." (Strategikon of Maurice, ed. prep. V. V. Kuchma. SPb., 2004, p. 189)”. Maurice and his successors fought primarily against Slavs, and he dedicated the majority of his Strategikon's chapters on barbarian enemies to the Slavs and the Antes, whom he and as we've mentioned before, Rome as well saw as its greatest threat to the Northern Limes. Also, the Serbs and Croats didn't just settle Roman land but also waged war against the Avars at the behest of Heraclius, and "exterminated" every Avar South of the Danube, as Frederick Hamilton Jackson puts it: "The war with Persia in 600-614 strained the Roman resources and thus denuded the coast of soldiers, therefore the Avars and Slavs inroads ravaged as they pleased under Heraclius (610-640), who had called in the latter to drive out the Avars; Narona, Salona, Epidaurus, Burnum, and Rhizinium were destroyed. In 641 Pope John IV., a Dalmatian by birth, sent Abbot John to Istria and Dalmatia to ransom prisoners and collect relics. The Croats and Serbs exterminated the Avars in the middle of the seventh century and delivered the province, the Croats occupying the west to the river Cetina, the Serbs the east from the Cetina to Albania. De Administrando Imperio says the same: "Therefore everyone, who would like to do research about Dalmatia, can read herein about the way how the Slavic peoples took it. The Croats with their families came to Dalmatia and found the Avars in possession of that land. After fighting against each other for some time, the Croats defeated the Avars, partially murdered them, and partially forced them to submissiveness. Since that moment the country was seized by the Croats.". Sources: De Administrando Imperio and the Shores of the Adriatic by Frederick Hamilton Jackson.
@@numenoreaneternity6682 facinating. Do you think it is possible to get sources in thelibrary, i would really like to read more. i read all you have written and it really sparked my interest.
@@GGTanguera No,it's correct,Romanians descend from Latinized Paleo-Balkanic populations and potentially Roman colonists,and Albanians are a Paleo-Balkanic population which still retain the language(partially latinized).Check the facts,Romanians are native and Albanians are native,everything else it's just wishful propaganda.
@@shqipemalesore2620 Have you ever heard of genetics, linguistics, ethnography, archeology, antoropology etc.? There is no material, nor immaterial artifacts that prove that Albanians lived in the Balkans before 11 century. There are no genetic, nor anthropological similarities between Romanians and Albanians.
@@GGTanguera Have you ever heard about genetics,linguistics,etc...you are literally nonsense.Tell that to the historians... Again wrong,you don't know what you're talking about.Not a single evidence for your claim.
What is wrong with youtubers mashing up old propagandist positions that appeared prior to WWII and were never proven in any current study? Yes, the Avar-Slavic invasion in the Balkans was a big one and changed the cultural and to an extent the anthropological map of the region. However in Greece there was wholly different picture, the reason why Slavs never managed to establish a presence there. 1) Contrary to what happened in the Balkans, in Greece the Slavs failed to capture a single walled city and stuck to roaming around in bands in the mountainous regions attacking stables and farms for food and trying to establish anywhere they could all while trying to avoid the Greek militia hunting them around. 2) Slavs were enabled in doing so as above in No1 by the fact that the earlier Justinian plague had not only reduced the populations of the Empire but also caused movements around and a lot of upheaval. Yet, as said they still failed to capture a single city. 3) Byzantine writers often were writing a lot of gloom and doom in order to then praise even more their favorite Emperors that solved the solution. From what we understand the "massive invasion" of Slavs into Greece were not much more 200,000 souls in a land that then hosted easily 3 million (at normal times up to the double). Half of them established sclaviniaes (the Slavic camps) west of Thessaloniki in central-western Macedonia and the other half moved south to Peloponese. Both these Slavs NEVER occupied most of Greece as shown in the maps but rather circulated like nomads in big chunks or smaller groups raiding and pillaging farms for about a century. 4) Greek militia kept on chasing them around and gradually limiting them in specific regions in central-western Macedonia and in southern Peloponese, always in remote places. As long as they were hiding away and not raiding, Greeks did not bother about them - they often hired them as workers in agricultural activities, so it was not necessarily a constant warfare in all places - Slavs were afterall just trying to survive, they were not conquerors at any place. They worked a lot as shepherds less as farmers but they kept on being a plight as cattle thieves. For that reason they were banned from enterring in cities and they were not considered as "citizens", they were merely seen as a problem seeking solution, no pun intended, I erased the "final". Even their christianisation was not enough - they had to be taken out of Greece and be thrown elsewhere, which was largely down followingly. 5) Eventually with two campaigns in the early 9th century they were largely cleared out and in one last in the early 10th century their remains in South Peloponese were also cleared out. A great number of them were massacred (yes, call it a genocide if you like) and their remnants, mostly civilians, were transferred in Bithynia and Galatia, i.e. in central Minor Asia, funnily there where Gauls were thrown when they failed in their invasion in Greece - Medieval Greeks always honoring their ancestors and being avid readers of their history. It is a plausible hypothesis that additional extermination may have occurred during the Bulgarian raids into Greece in which Slavs naturally allied to Bulgarians, thus when the latter were losing and kicked out, their Slavic collaborators would had been dealt accordingly. 6) When Ottomans invaded Greece they found no Slavs in Macedonia, let alone in Peloponese or anywhere else. We know that since we have the full taxation archives of Ottomans of the 1400s and 1500s and the names of families in all villages and towns in Thessaloniki are Greek ones. The first Slavic names appear in the borderlines of roughly where the modern borders are (borders created by the geography - one has to see the mountains there to understand). Slavs re-enterred in Macedonia (the real one, northern Greece) really in later Ottoman times and in particular in the 18th-19th century when Ottomans had already cleared out a lot of Greeks from the region for rebelling in successive revolutions, then using Slavs as cheap workforce for fields as well as then on railway projects. 7) Onomatology of Slavic origins exists mostly in remote places of Peloponese but concerns places of no interest that were abandoned by Greeks for long periods, we don't talk just of towns and cities and mountains but really of random hills and rivers as big as your childrens' "rivers" made on the sand in the playground. LOL! A claimed 700 to 750 "Slavic names" was never successfully shown when it contained a lot of Greek-originated names while none ever juxta-posed the totality of placenames in a region like Peloponese... what? 50,000? 80,000? More than a 100,000? Plausible when talking of every little hill and "river". Now... most importantly : 8) DNA study on modern Greeks show quasi-non-existent Balto-Slavic genetic element which goes against the theory of "Slavs being absorbed into Greek culture'. Greeks show a 10%-12% "Balkan element" but that is not Slavic, it actually is shown even by Greeks of the Bronze Age (age of the Trojan War) : Greeks always had a north Balkanic element as they used slaves from Thrace, Illyria etc. since time immemorial. To put it bluntly, Bulgarians and Serbians even if mixed populations still have a considerable percentage of their population showing some Balto-slavic influence. Greeks looking like having Balto-slavic elements? Well... you are not going to find that many! LOL! DNA testing does not lie in that sense. 9) Archaeological remains also don't lie. Archaeological remains of Slavs in Greece are extremely few - and yes there was quite a lot of research on the matter by both Greek and foreign teams. At best they find a few sketchy pottery that can be labelled "Slavic" in places of no interest and that is all. It all makes reference to far smaller numbers than the "cataclysm" some imagined. Their numbers were big, 200,000 for example is indeed big and enough to cause a lot of destruction when roaming around like bandits. 6 and 7 really are very indicative and reinforce the "extermination" and "relocation" references in Byzantine texts rather than the "peaceful integration". Kind of like what happened to Gauls.
po Ajnhardu franacki hronicar 9.st. Period od 795. do 829. godine je zapisao Ajhnard. Njemu se pripisuje i taj dio koji se vezuje za 822. godinu i spominje južne Srbe: Exercitus de Italia propter Liudewiticum bellum conficiendum in Pannoniam missus est, ad cuius adventum Liudewitus, Siscia civitate relicta, ad Sorabos, quae natio MAGNUM Dalmatiae partem obtinere dicitur, fugiendo se contulit, et uno ex ducibus eorum, a quo receptus est, per dolum interfecto, civitatem eius in suam redegit dicionem. Missis tamen ad exercitum imperatoris legatis suis ad eius praesentiam se velle venire promisit. Ajnhard na Baljanu vidi samo Srbe neci ostake novonastale nacije 19.st .kao Hrvati i ostali ! Karlo veliki granicu prema Slovenima naziva LIMES SORABIKUS a ne Limes Slovenikus ,etnonym Srbi je stariji od etnonyma Sloveni !
You fail to mention that prior to the so called migration of Slavs from the Caucasus region, there already were civilizations in Poland. Consequently, the time period of recorded migration is not the actual period of migration. Meaning Slavs in small numbers came into the Central European location, Biskupin for example, centuries before the mass, recorded migration. These first groups numbering in perhaps a hundred or so individuals (including Lustians) setup Biskupin and other small enclaves before sending back messengers to the main civilization camps in the Caucasus and informing them about green, flat, rich pastures in the east filled with game of all kind. In addition, they told them these lands were distant enough to be out of the reach of the eastern Mongol horde. These messengers compelled the massive Slav drive east. Unrecorded Slav civilization can be traced back to approximately 800 BCE. The proof is in the archeological sites like Biskupin.
This is confusing and conflicts with other history with which I am familiar. I was under the impression that the Goths used to live in Poland. That they didn’t move out of there until like the fifth century. Something like that. That is when they went South into the Roman lands because they were pushed by the Huns. Are you saying that it was. Slavs who did this? As for the Mongols, they were very far away from this land. All the way in the far east. There is no record of them even in central Asia until 1221 when they started their conquering. That is 700 years after Procopius and 900 years after the Gothic wars. I do believe this is in the time of the Gokturks but, I am not sure.
@@Xochiyolotl Poland was officially established in 966, so they were there in unorganized tribal societies for hundreds of years prior. I have never come across any info about Goths being in the area.
Slavs didn't migrated in the 7th century to europe,slavs lives in europe since 8678BC.And 3322 years before,they have lived on north coast of the black sea.And i can conferm that migration of the slavs is lie,becouse if it was true,then 2.500.000 slavs would be migrating to europe.Lot of slavic history is falsification written by the nordic school in the 1890,but manny slavic truths has been discovered and perserved.And some documentaries about slavs are on spoken serbian language without english subtitle,so we unfortunately get to be uninformed.But i can recomend youtube videos,Slavs For 10700 Years In Europe,Slava True Story Of The Slavic Glory,and 6 part video Arkaim Swastika City.
Democratic and military ranking. It means there's a lot of warlirds, elder council and it's voted or publicly decided what should be done. As a community. Slavs never really liked to have a dictator. Military was priced and voivod and knez (sort of duke) whom the units listened to. That's why it was very hard to fight them since there wasn't a central system you could bring down.
The byzantinez didn't just add greeks to make greece more greek again, they also moved slavs from greece to anatolia and finally they also slaughtered a bunch of tribes in order to lower their numbers , the chronicles of monemvasia state how the governor of corinth killed a bunch of slavs and had the greeks resettle their former lands
Of course it isn't, although à migration can end up having similar or worse results to an invasion (live the Slavic migration) and sometimes an invasion might be less destructive than massive migrations since it only affects the elite (like the germanic invasions).
So much assumption... The author says there are no surviving texts but then you assume there are no states no identities and no leaders. There were a vast number of tribes but the Slavic identity was strog giving that it survived to this day. States were well recorded in the 9th century Balkan when Christianisation happened but there is no proof that there were no states or political organizing.
I can just imagine my broskis going apeshit about history, cus i'm from the Balkans. That you got 100% correct. There is no un-heated debate about history in the Balkans.
Hey Thersites, have you read Noel Malcolm’s ‘Kosovo, a short history’. I think it will give you some great insight on what happened with some of the indigenous and new people in the Balkans.
TheBeginning just talks about those people, Albanians, Serbs, and Vlachs. I don’t remember exactly, but I think he mentions Paleo-Balkanic people as well.
I suggest you to stop making videos about slavs, or eastern europe in general... here every nation have their story how they are oldest people on earth and first civilisation on earth xD ... no one takes official history as true and usually claim that that is some sort of western, jewish or vatican propaganda, depending on their political stances... I suggest more videos about thracians, illiryans and scythians, as we know very little about them all, any informations would be good... also if you want to examine claims off people in comments about slavs coming from balkans or being everywhere where they are now for thousands of years, you should start from Paleolithic continuity hypothesis...
You have mentioned slavs, bulgars, magyars and greeks but you have completely ignored illyrians who comprised the overwhelming majority of the Balkan populace! As a reminder there were more roman emperors from illyria than italy!
note:Romania in the map of 20:40 has no connection to modern Romanian state, this Romania is the Byzantine Empire and the name was in use for the greeks till the establisment of the modern greek state, the name is still in use in traditional greek songs and also the ethnonym Roman is in use by the greeks of the east that never had the opportunity to be under the authority of the modern greek state!
Most wars were fought to gain territory , if we follow that logic we Slavs came out on top , maybe we didn't deserve it but it is what it is. ( many blunders and mistakes by our enemies )The question now is how to consolidate our gains and how to stop fighting each other.
Blundering Tusk ancient bones shows slavians ar on same place like Poland up to 10 000 years. Just other countries tryied damage our history burning books etc when Poland was Under ocupation.
The fact that pyramids are in Egypt doesn't means they are made by Arabs. Many local Arabs in Egypt can have ancient Egyptians genome just because they are descendants of local people and just speak today Arabic and prey to Allah.
Alicio Desjarlais that's interesting i never know that. Mayby You right but i never Seen any evidence of this. But i'm not history man to. Just writed what i knows
7:25 wow that map is so incorrect that its not even possible to say just how much wrong is i this picture!Rebulic of Srpska not being serbian?Suuuuper big albanian ethnicity all the way to Skoplje?An enclave of serbians in hercegovina?A huge misrepresentation of Srpska Vojvodina?I like this map so much!Show me more
@TheBeginning If you did not contribute to fighting the Ottomans and make anything significant (besides skandenberg but the Ottoman empire simply walked around their territories as Skandenberg was on the defense for the whole time)
This is a nice and well-presented review of the piece of Slavic history during the 7th century. However, I would like to point out a few shortcomings: The title is misleading. The whole story is about a limited time span and it concerns the SOUTH Slavs only. There is nothing said about EAST Slavs there despite what is repeatedly claimed in the video. I think that these limitations of the presentation focus are not stressed sufficiently. One might object that in the 7th century, there were other interesting developments taking place in the Slavic world. There are (even written) sources indicating that, in the 7th century, there was the Kingdom of Samo. The kingdom unified some Western Slavic tribes in their fight against Avars and it lasted some 40 years. The sources suggest that the center of the kingdom lay somewhere in the Vienna region. It would be interesting to discuss developments taking place in other regions of the Slavic world (West, North, East). If for no other reason, as a prelude to the 9th and 10th-century events (Great Moravia, Kiev Rus, ...).
The Slavic invasion of the Balkans was Illyria's downfall and the worst. The wild Slavs leveled everything, leaving gloom and dust in their wake. Until recently, the Slawo-Serbs continued where their watch ancestors started. Not a century goes by when the Albanians are not massacred by them and atrocities are committed that are indescribable.
Shame on you for your personal teory ! The most white people are people who are very long on European Continent ! Even if the Slavs came , they are European ! And you must examine your faces as albanians and see in mayority what you are ! Real Albanians in Albania are a mixture of new commers and they look mostly like Maltese people ! I have been to Valeta and after that in Tirana and have seen the same faces . In Kosovo and in Republic Macedonia there are diferent faces of Albanian recogniceable entity like we the Macedonians are mostly European . It means that they are mixed by domicile European Macedonians , Slavs enlightened ! The provement you can find in the names of thoponimy from mountains Karavanki to Olimpus including Albanian thoponimus existed even today !
@Voskre Glavincevska not quite since the haplogroup majority is ev13 which is also shared by the greeks and the bulgarinaized thracians of south Bulgaria tell you the paleo balkan gene and its a north african gene who settled in balkan more then 12k years ago which is when after many years indo europeans mixed with them concluding to Illyrians greeks and thracians,today only greek and albanians being the sole paleo balkan survivors
@@voskreglavincevska3651What are you even saying?Other than all of your laughable propaganda,Albanians are a Paleobalkanic population and precede the Slavs in the Balkans,this is history.
Wrong history. When Slavs migrated, they destroyed all Roman cities and killed dwellers to get land. Local Christian Romance-speaking dwellers were called Vlachs by Slavs and were forced to flee into the forests and mountains due to Slavs ferocity. Vlachs were spread in all Balkans and finally forced to live together with Slavs. They formed islands of Romance-speaking in newly Slavic states. Today, the Vlachs, the heirs of Roman Empire are called Romanians and Aromanians. Large communities of Romanians are today in Serbia, Croatia, Slovenia and Bulgaria. Also large communities of Aromanians are in Bulgaria, Macedonia, Greece (the greatest community), Albania and Serbia. In Bosnia and Herzegovina Aromanians were Slavicized and finally partially Islamized; today they lost the maternal language and the memory of their history.
There was no significant migration of Slavs. Some Boshianks and Croatians call Serbian people living in Croatia and Bosnia "Vlachs" when they want to offend them, not knowing that they are giving them a compliment of saying that they are an autohtone or indigenous nation. 19 Roman emperors were born in what's today Serbia, and many of them never visited Rome. Slavic people are the least aggressive, and the least organized Europeans. How come that they conquered such a vast territory and that there are no traces of "Romanesque" languages in Balkan toponyms? You are obviously Slavic: including Budapest, Berlin, Prahova, Brasov, Bihor etc. You live on an "island of Romance-speaking" people thanks to Jesuits who worked hard to change the history and divide the Slavic tribes. Please do a DNA test. You are Slavic too unless you are a Hungarian. :)
@@daca8395 Maybe some Slavs. I believe that the Slavs are indigenous to the Balkans. There is no historical evidence of any big migration in 5, 6 or 7 century.
Were are you Shkavelli ( serbci) here ? hahahhahahahahahShkavelli occupied Illiraian- Albanian and others land Read this you SHKAVELLI. Albaninas are the oldest nation in EUROPE. Essai sur l'origine, les mœurs, et l'état actuel de la nation albanaise - Discorso sull’origine, costumi, e stato attuale della nazione Albanese. ”
@@71N1S4 we might not have written in our language however we have in Messapic and Greek Latin languages and if we didn't doesn't mean we didn't exist 🤣 and 4500 years in Balkan before Slavs👍
Maybe it isnt what you were trying to say, but vlachs did not emerge in the 11th century, but much earlier. Vlachs are all macedonians, illirians, thracians, and dacians which were latin speakers.
The term Vlach appeared as early as the 6th century, but the people it refers to have been more or less a continuous presence in the Balkans since BC. The identity of Vlachs seems to revolve a lot around the 5th legion Macedonica.
@@lechthesarmatian5958 "Northern Macedonia" is located on Paeonia for the most part. The lands of the old Greek Kingdom of Macedon,its heart if you will, are entrirely within Greece. There is nothing to be taken from the slavic country to the north. The name "Macedon" is used for purely political reasons.
Really enjoy your take on history as if seems to be correct - as I travel these areas - they help me get a sense of what was going down in the past Thanks
This is just western point of view. Some evidence are faked. Even on west they are a lot of sholars who claimed opposite. Mario Allinei, Giuseppe Sergi etc.
9 th century, "muslims" in Bosnia??? Not only, "MUslim" isn't a language - and Albanian nor Bosnian "Muslim" are muslim : no Torah, no Evangile following Matthew - even less the deseappeared of the Ebonites or Nazoreans... - not the christian Arab apochryphe of the childhood of Jesus, nor the -Arab - Qoran, which seems to require at least a few Aramean to understand that "the Kitab is the Book, and the Coran ... another one... talking of the Coran -Aramean - progressively transmitted by the angels, and the Book, given to the Prophets of the jews and the christians... Even present translations in general confuse Nas.r ( Ebionite?,Hebrews ) and Rumi ( Roman... , Byzantium ). But in present times the say they are muslim. Crusaders killed and thougth they were christians. The pope Nicolas V did accept murder , loothing and slavery at condition to baptise the victims, and he thought he was a christian; Now Belgium has a minister ( governement ) thinking he is a lesbian male, euh, ex-male. If you want to ...maybe you are a cabbage ? Or a pumpkin ? So okay, the can believe that they are muslim. Bit still in the 9 th century, there were no muslim in that part of Europe. There were in Spain , and buying slaves by Pippin the Short, Charlemagne ( the Frankish loother , that the church of Rome wanted to restaure the Empire, so the crowned him "Emperor", but he did allways demand they call him as he called himself, King of the Frankish... and he did decieve the church, parting his property under his boys as three different legacies . There was NEVER a Empire of Charlemagne in his own mind! Church fixes the administration, he goes to looth...Kind of Attila , and the church made the legend, giving some weigth to Rome, rival of Constantinopolis... Meanwhile, Arab "muslims , t buy slaves , under Pepin and Charlemagne went to ... Arles, Verdun, Valenciennes, Metz , Mainz,... and Abasside goldpieces walked untill Skandinavia... BUT no Muslim , even not fake, in Balkans in that time. At least,no people pretending to be "muslim" and being "a tribe" in Bosnia... Allso, the Italic population wasn't murdered yet...she had to remain untill beginning 20 th century ,before the genocide by Croats and Slovenians... So, propaganda for one or another warmonger of de 21 century? Non-sense...but bloody.
St. Tit formed the apostolic ortodox church in Dalmatia in the first century, do 500 years of Christianity in the Balkans before the Slaves "came" to the Balkans. So Tracians, Tribals, Dalmatians natives are Christian then the Slaves "came" asymeleted them back to paganism to baptise them again late to Christianity. Makes no sence, but don't know must be a western value.
The Balkans is essentially a big jar of multicolored jelly beans that too many passers by have shaken up and maybe added more beans. And, each bean has a self-professed expert who can absolutely never be wrong.
Well, this is a theory that is produced and forced in the West to decrease the importance of Slav nations. Some archeological and genetic researches and some historical documents prooves, that there was no Slavic migration, they were always on Balcans (old name is Hem) and from the Danube basin, they fled to the north. Also, there were ethnic groups Thracians, Illyrians, Vlachs, ... they were all just Slavic tribes. This theory has a lot of holes...
Illyrians and vlachians were never Slavs, on the contrary a lot of modern southern Slavs are just assimilated illyrians and thracians who adopted the slavic language This is the reason behind the DNA similarities between modern day "slavs" and the ancient people of Balkans
Maybe slavs are just the result of these people (illyrians, thracians, dacians, sarmatians) mixing with another linguistic group. Maybe uralic-turcik Maybe slavic languages are not that ancient
@@elusiveeagle8597 yeee I know ..I was mocking the commenters. Maurikios was his name cause he spoke greek. Maurice is the rendering in english cause everyone wants to make a character as his own..nationalism ! And ..sorry to correct you. He was the emperor of the only roman empire..byzantine or eastern was the proper continuation.. The western part was a wannabe roman empire and that is the starting point of competition between western and eastern christianity
@@freesbee5326 yes you're right, he was the de facto Emperor of the Roman Empire, or whatever its boundaries were at the time. Its hard to get things 100% correctly, because one needs to know with who one is communicating with, in regards to historical knowledge. The endind of Maurikios reign is one of the most tragic episodes of of Byzantine history. Peace!
Far as proper academic circles in the Balkans go, no one really disputes the migration. Some might argue on the extent of it, one side favoring a mass-migration view and another claiming that it was more limited in scope (i.e. only an elite warrior class), but the historical sources unequivocally state that the event(s) happened. Those who dispute the migration are populist pseudohistorians who prey on the lowest common denominator's sensibilities, actual academics don't refute proper sources. And as of late we've got genetics more or less confirming that a large scale migration took place around that time, putting the final nail in the "autochthonist" school of thought's coffin.
True. But too bad there are still people who believe these autochthonists and even genetics won't convince them since they claim it's a Vatican-Vienna-Berlin propaganda.
You all need a Slavic Union and need every person between ages 15 and 40 to get some military training. You keep getting your asses kicked in wars. I am American - 25% Slav- and wish you'd unite the way the EU has. Russia, stop being a bully and work as a team.
@@wynnhorton1208 man thats straight up bs,we are best fighters in europe hand to hand combat shooting tanks you name it,we need more unity and less corrupt leaders
Catholicism and germans made you weak...or...just Obedient. Wife commands and wives follow the parroch's will which follows vatican. What wife says is law otherwise no hanky-penky for little Pawěłczkscyťz ! East slavs technique was to focus on vodka. Balkaners solved the problem with slap-and-shut-the-faak-up Now they are evolved and need no more these ways.. There is porn on internet and everybody has an android phone
@@cv4809 civilized could mean many things. Usually when someone points hardly on this argument he/she is an imperialistic lover, a conservative, a racist and so on, from roman times. Everybody pretend his own culture to be better and so superior to others. I personally prefer a good big hearted man than an obedient one. An obedient that probably keeps all his frustration inside which could easily develop into who knows which kind of paranoia..into a pedophile, a bigot, a far right one or even worst a nationalist/patriot such a soldier !!
Becouse Swamps are fertile and numerous Slavs are most Numbered Ethnic group and living in bigest territory.Imagine how many Chinesse would be today if they lived in swamps...
Thank you so much for this amazing video. I am from the Balkans, Macedonia to be precise, and you did a great analysis on this complex historical issue. You also were spot on in identifying the biggest problem of the balkans today, and that is FACING REALITY. It is hard to achieve that in the Balkans, to renounce the national myths of pureness ecc and instead work together towards creating a better and more stable europe. But we are getting there, it's not that we don't wanna get there, its not like we are not trying. Its just that this is a complex world we live in xD Sadly, I have to say, the power disbalance between eastern and western Europe is not making these problems easier to solve. Because eastern Europe grows more divided and less willing to cooperate internally precisely because they rely too much on the west. Ultimately, this hinders the east's ability to solve its own issues. Great video, have a nice day.
Procopius mixed few things up. There is a supreme god in slavic religion (Svarog/Svarod), but he does not interfere nor hold supreme power. Perun is not supreme god. Most honorable in dome places (especially ones who honor st. Elyjah the most today), but not supreme one. Serbs mostly prefer Scetovid, and Russians Dazhdbog/Dajbog.
Nuno dos Santos There is no such thing as a slav ethnicity. Slav is a religious term used by the Catholics during the eastern Roman Empire who called all the people of the slavic orthodox (pravo slaven) religion, “slavs” How many slavic nations are there???? About 14 How many “slavs” just in Europe???? About 400 million Are all these people from one tribe or ethnic group of people??? You have to be crazy to believe that. How many different nations do the slavs come from???? How many different DNA’s and ancient ancestors are all these nations made of??? Are the Serbians and Bosnians, who have Illyrian blood, the same as the Macedonians who have ancient Macedonian blood??? Or the same as the Bulgars from the Volga river??? Or the Russians who are vikings mixed with ancient sarmations????? Slavs are a slavic orthodox group of people, or people with a similar “slavic” language, including Croatians, slovenes, Polish and some others who are not slavic orthodox but speak a slavic language.
@@WatchmanofMKDN it's a linguistic group actually,since people from east of Russia to Macedonia speak pretty much the Same language These people had a common origin and later on expanded
Constantine V according to where SLAVS came from, they would have the R1a haplogroup. Us Macedonians and most others of the Balkans have the original Balkan i2 Y haplogroup. If our ancestors migrated there, we wouldn’t have the i2 oldest DNA in the Balkans. And how can slavs be the same people when their are different origins such as R1a and i2 ???
Please do more such videos about slavic history. Like you can see in commentaries, in our part of Europe is lack of "cold eye" sight in this subject and lack of basic knowledge. Decades of communistic propaganda replaced scientific discussion.
You are not right, this is not 'cold eye' version of slavic history, it is geraman XIX century propaganda. decades of comunism was another propaganda, both Russian comunists from XX century and German nationalist from XIX century claim the same that Slavs came from east in VI century, but this is not true, Slavs live here much much longer. Slavs are direct dscendants of Lusatian culture or even older. There are strong evidences for that (Slavs are in Central Europe much much longer than V century) and all chronicles can be explained with this version, the idea Slavs came late from east is base only on one week clue and misunderstanding how people behave when climate changes. there is no evidence for the migration. The slavs just came everywhere in Europe becausee they were here almost always and they suddenly prosper because of climeta change or maybe some inventions. Only thee name Slavs is new the people itself are old.
Its not just the south slavs and albania. Its also us, the hungarians and also romanians and slovakians that are like this. I am quite frankly sick and tired of all this bulls*** going around especially online! Makes me wish all of us wouldn't exist in the first place! But i suppose theres nothing we can change about this now.
Ethnic map of Bosnia is very wrong, Serbs were majority in most areas. Also west part of Montenegro and others part of it were Serbs majority. My mother used to work in Statistic Institute of Yugoslavia so I have Census book at home. Serbs were majority in about 40% of Yugoslavia , but when communists made national republics, they didnt put all Serbs in Serbia republic
Dude, turn off your text notifications!
Thank you, I was going bonkers trying to find out what beeps on my computer.
@@EmilNicolaiePerhinschi 😂
Aside from Perun, another notable god from slavic history that you can still find representation of today is named Radegast. He's basically a pitch-black god of hospitality, and since you were going on about how important hospitality is to Slavs... It's basically like being kind to strangers because you never know if they may be a god in disguise. He's also the name Tolkien chose for his Brown Wizard of the Woods.
JayLeePoe Interesting. I just remembered the Czechs make a beer called Radegast. The lable has a old god like looking being on it. I never connected this to an old Slavic god.
Radegast was a town, and the god was Svarozhich. In Severschina region of Russia and Ukraine (it's around the border) there was the same town Radogoshch in Kievan Rus' times. Btw, there were more similar toponyms: Lubeck and Lubech for example.
Yeah, well on the OTHER side of Slavic lands-- in Moravia it's Radeghast, The Dear Guest. But I do appreciate the different ways slavs see and do things which are otherwise virtually the same. Even if you are more Norse-Mongol-Slav ;p But yes, similar toponyms are like similar names. For example, if we jump far away to Ancient History:
Baal Zebub = Belzebub. Baal = Lord in old Phoenician, the progenitor of all our languages (95%?). Probably a king who commanded archer cavalry, which could be seen as deadly giant flies ripping apart the enemy.
Other cultures might think of The Stranger as a dark, insidious character but Slavs treat him as a Dear Guest-- even seeing that he may be pure darkness.
Cool!
@@kyriljordanov2086 The beer brand is named after the old Slavic god.
As much as I love my homeland the balkans , every time I read these comments , I wish that I was born somewhere else lol
There is no such thing as a slav ethnicity. Slav is a religious term used by the Catholics during the eastern Roman Empire who called all the people of the slavic orthodox (pravo slaven) religion, “slavs”
How many slavic nations are there????
About 14
How many “slavs” just in Europe????
About 400 million
Are all these people from one tribe or ethnic group of people???
You have to be crazy to believe that.
How many different nations do the slavs come from???? How many different DNA’s and ancient ancestors are all these nations made of???
Are the Serbians and Bosnians, who have Illyrian blood, the same as the Macedonians who have ancient Macedonian blood??? Or the same as the Bulgars from the Volga river??? Or the Russians who are vikings mixed with ancient sarmations?????
Slavs are a slavic orthodox group of people, or people with a similar “slavic” language, including Croatians, slovenes, Polish and some others who are not slavic orthodox but speak a slavic language.
Many historians and archeologists agree with Florin Curta’s research about the slavs
Some of Florins quotes;
….Such population movements, however, cannot be defined as migration. There is simply no evidence for the idea that the inhabitants of the sixth and early seventh-century settlements in Romania, Moldova, and Ukraine were colonists from the North who migrated down to the Balkans. Nor does the idea of a “Slavic tide” covering the Balkans in the early 600s fit the existing archaeological data. South of the Danube river, no archaeological assemblage comparable to those found north of that river produced any clear evidence for such an event taking place.
Instead of a great flood of Slavs coming out of the Pripet marshes, I envisage a form of group identity, which could arguably be called ethnicity and emerged in response to Justinian’s implementation of a building project on the Danube frontier and in the Balkans. The Slavs, in other words, did not come from the north, but became Slavs only in contact with the Roman frontier.
So slav is a religious term and a name the Catholics called all the people of the slavic orthodox (pravo slaven) religion.
As well as countries who are not orthodox but speak a language like other slavs like Poland, Croatia Slovenia and some others.
Macedonians, Serbians, Bulgarians from the Volga river and later Russians all became slavs when they converted to the slavic orthodox religion.
Watchman of MKDN bull shit that is conjecture that you can’t back up, as much as you can try to distance Macedonians from Slavic origins and tie them to Macedonians of time of Alexander it’s not working....you are hybrid mix of Serbs and Bulgarians
How can the Cyrillic alphabet be Bulgarian????? 😂😂
At what point in time did the Bulgarian empire, or Bulgaria ever occupy Solun (Thessaloniki) 😂😂
NEVER!!!!! AT NO POINT IN HISTORY!!!!!!
Macedonians lived in the territory of Macedonia!!! Where solun (Thessaloniki) is located. Whatever you want to call them... slavs, Macedonians Whatever... the fact remains that Macedonians lived there, not Greeks or Bulgarians.
And how many monasterys did these Macedonians build all over the territory of Macedonia in medieval times???? About 100.
If the Macedonians were Greek, and if Greeks lived there, why isn’t there any monasterys down south in the rest of Greece???? 😂😂
One time its a Bulgarian alphabet, the next time its a Greek alphabet.... 😂😂😂
How many Greeks are called kirilos and metodious ? 😂😂
Greeks invented a story about slavs in order to disconnect the ancient Macedonians from medieval Macedonians so Greece can try and claim the history.
“Slav” is a religious term for all the people of the slavic orthodox religion and today it also includes countries who speak a similar slavic language.
There are over 400 million slavs from 14 different countries. They’re not one group of people or tribe, they come from different ancient ancestors and have many different DNA’s.
Greeks and Bulgarians trying very hard to steal the history of the Macedonians!!
Watchman of MKDN dude you keep repeating that bullshit over and over like a broken fucking record like a scripted npc in shitty video game , repeating bullshit won’t make it true.... you are called Macedonian only because you took older toponym , it is actually so sad to watch people from small obscure new nations like yours so desperate to have any historical relevance so they appropriate other people’s history.... it’s shit Albanians do... wouldn’t be surprised if you are Albanian “Macedonian”
Glad I found your channel. Your videos are incredible. In particular I like the way you qualify what is known, what is unknown, what is partially known, and how a lot of history, especially in murky eras and regions such as this one, is comprised of best efforts at piecing together what was going on from incomplete information. At least, I really get that impression from your videos. This is way I like to study history, is keeping this historiography in mind. The study of history benefits from a skeptical mind more than is given credit for.
In regards to the north, Baltic people used to inhabit a much larger region before the Slavic invasions, which made Baltic peoples much more defensive afterwards. This can be seen in the large amounts of man made hill forts, mounds, and ditches
Baltic peoples like Lithuanians also ruled too many Slavic peoples
Not really @@papazataklaattiranimam
I'm from the Balkans, this lecture is really good. Man, the slavs were so anarchistic, such a kickass tribe.
Not truth. They have always kick our ass. We just defend. We are not people of agresion. We are pushed to east just like Indians toward West.
Ironically, Russia would have returned to it's roots if it was taken over by the anarchists instead of the soviet communists.
Except, they don't exist.
@@misterokatac We are not pushed to east. Eastern Slavs are slavianized, not real Slav. They became Slavic with the Christianisation thanks to Saint Tsar Boris Mikhail I and expansion of the Slavic influence to the East. But we're not pushed East. DNA shows that we have many things in common with people on Balkans millennia before someone uses the term Slavic.
They had tribes with hierarchies and a priest class called Volkhvs so no, they weren’t anarchistic
"I'm Slavic and what I want to believe about my history is more important than history itself" lmao keep up the great work!
Papagei Taucher serbians in a nutshell
nah this is pure bullshit everyone that isn't spoon fed by western propaganda knows that
Slavic people have their true history in their hearts
Just look at "Macedonia" (FYROM). They have appropriated ancient Macedonian history as their own, despite them speaking a dialect of Bulgarian. It's incredible what people can be made to believe with enough propaganda.
Well DNA analysis disagrees with the "slav" theory. They cannot be one group of people or tribe because there's R1a and i2 haplogroups in Europe that are not related. If the slavs are R1a because of the area they came from, then the people in the balkans are not slavs because they mainly have the i2 haplogroup which has been in the balkans for 1000's of years. So today's Macedonians are not "slavs" but mainly ancient macedonians that have been there for 1000's of years.
"Slav" is a religious reference for all the people of the slavic orthodox religion. The Macedonians invented the slavic/Macedonian alphabet in ohrid Macedonia in the 800's and then spread the slavic orthodox religion and alphabet through Europe and all the way to Russia.
Slavic origins and history is the most controversial theme out there. Every slavic nation has their own theory and lots of them contradict each other. I learned one thing in Ukraine, my Polish friends learned something different , Serbs learned a third version and westerners have a fourth version and so on. Its a endless debate
I think simplifying the issue into "versions" muddies the water. Whatever we can deduce from archeological findings and genetics is not a "version", it is as close to the truth as we can possibly get. Legends are hardly taken seriously in a scientific context.
A real problem that does take place with any nation's history is that it gets taught in public school, where the government usually creates a narrative that is counter to reality. I can say this for certain, coming from Romania. It's sickening to me that millions of people get told a politically-motivated story based on who decides the curriculum.
The only solution to this problem is looking at any evidence we might find, and drawing conclusions from those. You might come to the wrong conclusion, but making conclusions from unfounded information is worse.
goran bosnjak. yea its very similar, if other slavs speak slow i can understand most off it, and traditions are very similar. I'm saying that every one has a different version of WHERE the slavs came from
my family comes from Pelagonia in Macedonia, and we are not Slavs, our ancestors came from Knosos, they came out of Anatolia originally, people in this area have not been mixing much, our linguistics and culture have not changed much over the last few thousand years, and is closest related to Sanskrit
@@FamMitrevski so your Greek?
Serbs are the worst of all 😂😂 full of lies.
God of Lightning = Parom..slovaks still call him when things go bad - "Do Paroma,zase sa to jebe!!!!" ;P
Americans might know him as Nicola Tesla - who was a Serbian Slav :D
Piorun w Polsce!
Sława!
Srbi se odmah odazivaju na pomen Nikole Tesle!
He was an albanian man. His real name was Niqola Teshla Hoxha
@@decimusausoniusmagnus5719 hahahahha what
@Dottor Cisafrulli hahahahahah 2hat
God of lightning - Perun. Indeed, a bolt of lightning in Polish is "Piorun"
Bolt is another word for nail, calk - ПИРОН
@@AlexanderKKolarov Sława!
hmm...like the viking/norse Þórunn? pronounced thorunn, from Thor, the god of lightning...interesting
@@oresama93 Yes, they both stem from the same Indo-European deity
Just an correction: Map shown at: 7:27 is meaningless. There no Muslims (nor Turks) on Balkan before 12th-13th century AD. Did you put this map in the movie by accident?
You mean AD? The map seems to be based around the 19th century, it would explain the Albanian population stretching so far but it shows Eastern North Macedonia as fully muslim? That makes no sense.
The presented theory is allochtonic theory about the Slavs appearing in Europe. There are however some archaeological findings (human bones- from which DNA was extracted or however it is called) that proves the opposite - the autochtonic theory. According to this theory - the DNA from the bones coming from peoples inhabiting territory of Moravia and Poland in pre Roman times does not differ from DNA of modern people living in this territory. That means, there were no significant genetic impact on indigenous peoples' DNA, which mean, there were no any great migration. Simply through the ages the languages, traditions and habits became more distinctive from each other.
Stop spewing such utter nonsense.
Read "Cosmopolitanism at the Roman Danubian Frontier, Slavic Migrations, and the Genomic Formation of Modern Balkan Peoples"
It was a flood of Slavs washing up the Balkans, just as contemporary Byzantine historians described it
@@dinsel9691the northern slavs didnt migrate
There is a book called De Administrado Imperio written by Bizant emperor. In the book he gave to his son to help him rule, he said that Croats were a Slavic tribe who made a deal with Bizant. They defeated Avars in Dalmatia and in exchange emperor gave them land in the outskirts of the cities. Roman population moved to the cities (Zara, Salona etc) while Slavs remained in the outskirts. He also converted them to Christianity and said that they have a leader named Porgas. Its not a ficiton, that book is today in Paris in National library.
An item in your summary of Procopius's history is confusing. How could their religion be "monotheistic", while at the same time being like Nordic, and/or, Greco-Roman polytheisms?
Slava rodu
Slava!
Slava brat!
Slava rodu i svima koji misle svojom glavom .
@@daca8395 slava narodzie
@Armin Wessler Bas tako .
What's up with the background noise? Is your kid playing with a Walmart light saber or something?
How about the Rumanians in this period?How did such a large group speaking a Romance language very close to Latin manage to survive despite the Slavic,Bulgarian and Byzantine Greek influences and then morph into Wallachians and Moldavians?Maybe they were originally the Dacians that became romanised after Trajan's conquests.
Moldovans of Moldova have more than 30% of R1a (Z280, M458) which makes them the same level as Slovenes and Czechs. Except of Estonians (who are probably a mix of Finns and Balts) only Balto-Slavic peoples have these levels. Besides they have more than 15% of I2a-L621 the same as all Slavic peoples have except Poles and North Russians who have it a bit less (10 to 15%). If we compare Moldovans with Ukrainians and Croatians on R1a+I2a percentage we see 50-56% for Moldova and 62-67% for Ukraine & Croatia respectively. So you see :)
@@rdtgr8 spot on brother
It's a bit weird that the video-creator uses BCE/CE but still uses the archaic "Eastern Europe" for everything in Central Europe and the Balkans.
I don't know if the ethnic map of South Slavs is just a simple error or malicious intent, but I have to point out that is probably made by some Albanian ultra nationalist and is comletely fake. For example, in this map, Serbs in Bosnia are almost non-existent which is ridiculous.
@Koksal Ceylan This type of comment completely proves my point. He ignored the essence of my comment, then he proceeded with chauvinistic
insults towards my ethnicity. Perfect example of a person who would have created/supported that map.
@@d.rankovic I'm not too sure this map is made by an Albanian, the Croatian majority shown in northern Bosnia and the Bosniak/Muslim majority in Eastern Bosnia where Serbs clearly are the majority or plurality even though there are undoubtedly Croats and Bosniaks living there too, it all suggests to me something less Albanian and more generally anti-Serbian. Perhaps the map is made by a Bosnian Croat. I don't know, but it seems like any map of ethnic groups of the Balkans is either inaccurate or misleading in some way.
@@Quintinohthree You are right, it could be someone else other than Albanian. It was just a guess.
Anyway, the map is clearly wrong and it's made by some chauvinist anti-Serbian person.
You hate the fact that we are the ethnic balkan ppl 🇦🇱🇦🇱 and there’s even more land in serbia u just hate the fact that we are indegious
@@aquord3351 Map is incorrect. Just look Macedonia , Bosnia, Montenegro and Greece ...
First of all the most important Slavic god was Swietowit/Świętowid/Svatovit/Svetowit/Svetovid/Svevid - as there is many Slavic languages they are many different variant of spellings. His name means Świéty/Svati/Svieti = Holy/Saint and vit/vid from word Veda/wiedza = knowledge. He was a god with four faces represents N,S,E,W and also four season - spring, summer, autumn and winter. Each of this faces has different name and colour. Probably god named Bialobog/Bialovit/Bialoglow (bialy=white, bog-god, glowa=head) he was a god of North and winter. Jarovit/Garovit/Jaromil - god of east and Spring. As most of the records was destroyed during Teutonic Knights and Romans Christianisation of Slavic tribes it is difficult to put everything together but as we are Ind-European people so I find similarities in Hindu beliefs. Hindu four headed Brahma - god of creation is equivalent of Swietovit and he is part of Trimurti (triple deity) alongside with Shiva and Vishnu. In Slavic beliefs triple deity was called Triglow/Triglav/Triglav and those 3 are Svetovit= Brahma, Żiwie/Źiva/Živa/Diva = Shiva and I am not sure who is an equivalent of Vishnu. Meaning of Sanskrit vedas are Slavic Veda/wiedza = knowledge.
Veda slavic, not Sanskrit?😂
Propagandicika.
@@nestingherit7012 Śramati = Sarmaci.
Both Devanagiri and 'spoken languages' (Slavic) have a common ancestor, written by knitting ropes, later replaced with runes and the mentioned written Sanskrit (thats when the division happend).
@@conceptofeverything8793 but why ,sra' instead of ,sar'?
Fake.
@@nestingherit7012xD
@@nestingherit7012 bo jak Mati sra to nie idzie wytrzymać xD
umm A few corrections Croats who moved to the Balkan at the beginning of 7 century came to the area with a formed parliament composed of chosen tribal leaders (župan= tribal leader) so you have to say that they had some political organization + there are some theories and evidences of Slavic states even before that in the area of Today Poland and Ukraine
Lubes in Lusitania.
Ljubuski in Hercegovina
Your 8:40 demographic map is off for Bosnia showing Serbs as Croats in the Republic of Serbia region.
Also Eastern North Macedonia being fully muslim LOL. I don't know what time period that map is based on.
The only evidence of Slavic migration is Constantine VII Porph. Which is highly debated as a source as he wrote it 300 years after the supposed migration. I don’t want to go too hard in the comment section but this video is incredibly misleading. Just on genetic basis 30-40 percent of Balkan dna is autochthonous.
Not true. I2 haplotip which is present around 50% is Southern Slavs is present around 25% in Ukranians and Belarusians, in Poles, Czechs and Slovaks around 10-15%. It ocmes from Slavs not from Balkan indigenous people
@@masterofreality5528& the rest among the south slave population is from whom? The indigenus people & perhaps other slavs.
@@jimanast3593 Your the slave, buddy. If we are slaves, then how come we conquered this much teritory in Europe? South Slavs conquered whole Balkan. They literally took it from Byzantine. Only 10-15% of South Slavs have EV-13, and 5-10% have J haplogroups, and that is higly depending on the region
Helloooo Pazardjik, Plovdiv and the rest of the Thracian valley! I miss you guys!
A lot of shitty comments, but i think your information here is spot on dude!... it's obvious that Slavs weren't "originally" natives in these regions (linguistically, physically and culturally) especially when south Slavs have a closer relation with east, west and north Slavs than Balkan antiquity itself... also the "Slavonic" alphabet wouldn't be could "SLAVonic" if not a single slav migrated into the Balkans.. obviously this was implemented for that specific purpose.. Also what's your views on those that try and debunk the Slavic migration theory?
Apparently genetic studies... Oops. Someone beat me to it.
@Gibbon Resurrected hehehe best reply
Many historians and archeologists agree with Florin Curta’s research about the slavs
Some of Florins quotes;
….Such population movements, however, cannot be defined as migration. There is simply no evidence for the idea that the inhabitants of the sixth and early seventh-century settlements in Romania, Moldova, and Ukraine were colonists from the North who migrated down to the Balkans. Nor does the idea of a “Slavic tide” covering the Balkans in the early 600s fit the existing archaeological data. South of the Danube river, no archaeological assemblage comparable to those found north of that river produced any clear evidence for such an event taking place.
Instead of a great flood of Slavs coming out of the Pripet marshes, I envisage a form of group identity, which could arguably be called ethnicity and emerged in response to Justinian’s implementation of a building project on the Danube frontier and in the Balkans. The Slavs, in other words, did not come from the north, but became Slavs only in contact with the Roman frontier.
So slav is a religious term and a name the Catholics called all the people of the slavic orthodox (pravo slaven) religion.
There is no such thing as a slav ethnicity. Slav is a religious term used by the Catholics during the eastern Roman Empire who called all the people of the slavic orthodox (pravo slaven) religion, “slavs”
How many slavic nations are there????
About 14
How many “slavs” just in Europe????
About 400 million
Are all these people from one tribe or ethnic group of people???
You have to be crazy to believe that.
How many different nations do the slavs come from???? How many different DNA’s and ancient ancestors are all these nations made of???
Are the Serbians and Bosnians, who have Illyrian blood, the same as the Macedonians who have ancient Macedonian blood??? Or the same as the Bulgars from the Volga river??? Or the Russians who are vikings mixed with ancient sarmations?????
Slavs are a slavic orthodox group of people, or people with a similar “slavic” language, including Croatians, slovenes, Polish and some others who are not slavic orthodox but speak a slavic language.
@@maugustyniak Older research considered that the high frequency of this subclade in the South Slavic-speaking populations to be the result of "pre-Slavic" paleolithic settlement in the region. Peričić et al. (2005) for instance place its expansion to have occurred "not earlier than the YD to Holocene transition and not later than the early Neolithic".[2][3][16][17] However the prehistoric autochthonous origin of the haplogroup I2 in the Balkans is now considered as out of date,[nb 1] as already Battaglia et al. (2009) observed highest variance of the haplogroup in Ukraine, and Zupan et al. (2013) noted that it suggests it arrived with Slavic migration from the homeland which was in present-day Ukraine.[22]
The research by O.M. Utevska (2017) concluded that the haplogroup STR haplotypes have the highest diversity in Ukraine, with ancestral STR marker result "DYS448=20" comprising "Dnieper-Carpathian" cluster, while younger derived result "DYS448=19" comprising the "Balkan cluster" which is predominant among the South Slavs.[14] This "Balkan cluster" also has the highest variance in Ukraine, which indicates that the very high frequency in the Western Balkan is because of a founder effect.[14
Take it
Slavs settled areas previously abandoned by the Romans and other tribes during the crises of the 5th and 6th centuries. The Balkans were specially devastated and slavs took advantage of this to repopulate the whole region south of the Danube. Slavs represented such a large percentage of the population that non-slavic areas were referred to as 'islands'. Northern Greece and even parts of the Peloponnese had a large slavic presence until the 10th century
Why would the Romans abandon lands if it was "empty" ?And why would the Slavs migrate to a unknown lands leaving their "homelands" probably changeing the way of living. When at that time a few low harvests was a death sentence.
It doesn't make sense.
You really don't know what you're talking about. Slavs raided byzantine empire and fought with them constantly. They came to agreed with them and when thry were bettayed they literally skinned alive byzantine general and burned him alive. Late, a group of 3000 pillaged and caused chaos in the Balkan
Listen there are chronicles and real history, Slavs was in Europe much earlier, capitol was in today Augsburg in 1500bc, because of that river have name after King Lech, even today. Venecia is Wenecja after Slavic tribe which create city there. You can fallow Slaws roots from middle east and they are line of Japhet son of Noa
Venezia was a region inhabited by Illyrians (according to a map I've seen).
You made it through this video without talking about the "illyrians" using pyrrhus double headed eagle as their banner. Pretty impressive
Impressive not😂 he didn't even mention the Thracians(Dardanians) either 😂 this is just about the Slaves 😂😂😂 the precious Slavs😂😂😂 not😂😂😂😂😂
@@ginaibisi777 You obviously didn't watch this video, or you weren't paying much attention, or are just trolling. 13:40 he does mention Thracians, just in case you missed it.
17:35 "Many place names today are still Slavic"
>Many MORE places would still have their Slavic (original) name had the Greek assimilatory politics of the 1920s not happened.
Biggest evidence of Slavic settlements is the fact that the Peloponnesus region was called “Despotate of the Morea” until the formation of Modern Greece.Morea derives from the Slavic term “More” for sea or ocean.
Morea is a type of tree🤦. You idiot. Read the genetic research which explains How you are wrong. And Peloponnesian Greeks are descendants of their ancient Greek ancestors.
www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=www.nature.com/articles/ejhg201718&ved=2ahUKEwi-tZ3dxtvvAhUHhv0HHeE_D6oQFjAAegQIAxAC&usg=AOvVaw0LbcKElz2Vh2GVBzfYqRsM
I am glad I opened your eyes
This explanation is not very likely. It is speculation. It is named after mulberry trees.
What a joke why on earth would you name it sea? Morea comes from morus meaning leaf due to its shape
I don't get Slavs commenting here trying to "debunk" history, it's not like Greece is going to use that as cassus belli to take back all that land. 😆
Don't you know Greeks are grouped in Greek and South Italian ethnicity by MyHeritage. Greeks are not from Balkan they are originally b6 their DNA from South Italy. Don't you remember where lived Arhimed and Pitagora. Balkan was invaded by Greeks who moved from South Italy to Balkan. Do you know that today Turkes are muslimised Greeks. They are from Anatolia and Caucasus. People read any facts about genetics to find: History is mountains of lies and rabish.
Only document that is talking about migration of Slavs is Porfirogenits one, in that document Byzantine emperior Porfirogenit uses titles that are not called that way in Romeya-Byzantia in his time, He uses words from Western and Catolic world, such ignorance is not possible for man of that position and rank in Byzantia, also he describes some events that ocured after His death, only this two are indeniable proofs that significant parts of Porfirogenits work is falcificated, by the wrong terms, that falcificator used is visible that He is from Vaticans falcificating school, Slavs never migrated on Balcan, We are from here, We migrated to north, so still oficial history is based on rough brutal falcificates.
I often wonder what happened to the romanticized population of this region during this period.
@OklopnikSilni thanks man
My grandmother and mother were born in eastern Serbia speaking a Romanian language. Their DNA show 70 percent Balkan with greek, Spanish, north African, Jewish DNA. Gedmatch says they are mostly Caucasus, middle eastern, Mediterranean. And north eastern Europe.
Linguistic, textual, genetic and archaeological evidence for the Out of India Theory of Indo European Languages
Baghpat Chariots, Weapons and the Horse in the Harappan Civilization - Dr. BK Manjul
th-cam.com/video/fZvKpjjTpgg/w-d-xo.html
Findings from the latest genetic study conducted by ASI in collaboration withe Reich Lab at Harvard using the ancient DNA from Rakhigarhi
slides at 29:00 mark
th-cam.com/video/Dio3Ep0nlv4/w-d-xo.html
th-cam.com/video/n4WFk0iEK5k/w-d-xo.html
th-cam.com/video/f0Lg1b_8N54/w-d-xo.html
th-cam.com/video/-wIu3dUsmtY/w-d-xo.html
Here are the tribes that spread the Indo European languages from South Asia to West Asia, Central Asia and to Europe
Avestan) Afghanistan: Proto-Iranian: Sairima (Śimyu), Dahi (Dāsa).
NE Afghanistan: Proto-Iranian: Nuristani/Piśācin (Viṣāṇin).
Pakhtoonistan (NW Pakistan), South Afghanistan: Iranian: Pakhtoon/Pashtu (Paktha).
Baluchistan (SW Pakistan), SE Iran: Iranian: Bolan/Baluchi (Bhalāna).
NE Iran: Iranian: Parthian/Parthava (Pṛthu/Pārthava).
SW Iran: Iranian: Parsua/Persian (Parśu/Parśava).
NW Iran: Iranian: Madai/Mede (Madra).
Uzbekistan: Iranian: Khiva/Khwarezmian (Śiva).
W. Turkmenistan: Iranian: Dahae (Dāsa).
Ukraine, S, Russia: Iranian: Alan (Alina), Sarmatian (Śimyu).
Turkey: Thraco-Phrygian/Armenian: Phryge/Phrygian (Bhṛgu).
Romania, Bulgaria: Thraco-Phrygian/Armenian: Dacian (Dāsa).
Greece: Greek: Hellene (Alina).
Albania: Albanian: Sirmio (Śimyu).
Shrikant Gangadhar Talageri
talageri.blogspot.com/2020/03/the-rigveda-and-aryan-theory-rational_27.html
Five waves of Indo-European expansion: a preliminary model (2018)
Igor A Tonoyan-Belyayev
I. Tonoyan-Belyayev
www.academia.edu/36998766/Five_waves_of_Indo-European_expansion_a_preliminary_model_2018_
Could the last name blao..jevic means valach-bla(ch)
@@mkelkar1 Not out of India but out of the Caspian steppes area. One group went into Europe and another into Iran and Northern India. Dravidian people and language is not Indo-European.
But where did the slav come from ?
If Slavs came down in the 7th century, how did they manage to pass on to the Romans 6.000 Serbian Slavic words, and the Roman Republik was founded circa 700BC.
Latin language was developing much earlier than that, until it was standardised. We are talking about at least 1.500 years gap. How did the words get to Rome from Russia? Internet, drones? Your pick.
Uuuh... As an italian I would like to know these "Slavic Words" in latin... I bet you are talking about common indoeuropean root Words since Slavic languages and italic languages like latin are indoeuropean... Slavs were around in 700 BC but nowere near the balkans
@@fedeonio555he’s mad and frustrated
A few Corrections are in order.
Firstly, there are no Eastern Roman historians attributing the ease of Slavic settlement to Justinian's plague - which was spread all over Europe (despite its popular name and the worst scenario occurring in densely populated Constantinople) and almost certainly affected Slavs. Further on, based on all archaeological findings of both the Antes and the Sclavenes, we know for a fact that equipment was standardized in the sense that every excavated grave of a Slavic warrior features chainmail and sword (fashioned in East Roman style), an ax, round wooden shield, and a long spear. Some Slavic warriors were wearing belts with buckles adorned with Avar motifs, but they were most likely spoils of war or items of trade. The only group of Slavs that have fought without armor was warbands of young warriors who've fought entirely naked (barring the red paint on their body, hair, and face) and in melee (the ones that were described as being red-haired by Procopius), and some groups of Pannonian Wends who were tributaries of the Pannonian Avars, and relying on ambushes was a part of defensive strategies, and only against hosts that were too numerous and too well-armed, like the joint Avar-Roman host that assailed Sclavene territories after Daurentius slew Bayan's envoys and refused to pay tribute to him. Aside from that, both the Antes and the Sclavenes have utilized large breeds of horses for warfare, and matter of fact, an entire host of Antean and Sclavene horsemen was dispatched to evacuate Belisarius from Italy, which proves the aforementioned.
Secondly, the Avars have only managed to subjugate the more passive parts of the Dudlebes, as well as parts of the Wends - certainly not the Antes and the Sclavenes, who were noted to have lived only under the reign of their own kings like Muzok and Mezamir (Antes) and chieftains like Radagast and Daurentius, of whom the latter was described as being the supreme chief of all Sclavenes. Procopius' early assessment of Slavic social structure was just that - an early assessment based off of early sightings of Slavic warbands that were initially considered to have been "small tribes governed by "military democracy". As interaction with Slavs intensified, he realized that the Slavs did exhibit an organized social structure, albeit admittedly, the Antes were the most centralized body of the Early Slavs, with a hereditary monarchy where one king reigned over all of the Antes, while among the Sclavenes, you've had one known supreme chieftain like the aforementioned Daurentius to whom other chieftains were subordinate, there was also a mention of Sclavene kings, like Perbundos, who led a coalition of Sclavene tribes deep into Greece. Likewise, the Avars were first invited to make a move against the Slavs by the Roman emperor Tiberius, and later on, Emperor Heraclius would invite Serbs and Croats from the distant Slavic northwest to liberate the northern provinces of the Avars and have them settle all those provinces as his vassals which he'd ennoble, which refutes any theory of the Sclavenes and Antes arriving to Southeastern Europe off of the back of the Avars. After all, the earliest Slavic raids deep into the Roman territory were accompanied by the enslavement of an estimated quarter of a million Romans in every province struck by the Slavs and the sacking and besieging of Roman cities, which were recorded as early as the first part of the 6th century - decades before the Avars were contacted by Emperor Tiberius, and before they reached the most distant part of the basin of the Danube. On top of that, the invading Sclavenes have also slain Asbadus/Asbados - the famed Roman/Gepid general, and have also annihilated his elite army, a feat which would've been impossible if the Slavs "only fought from afar", or worse, if they've "made no use of pitched organized warfare". The usage of poison arrows and guerrilla warfare was deployed only in defensive wars against a martially superior enemy - like against the combined Roman-Avar army during Maurice's campaign which was launched deep into Sclavene territories north of the Danube.
In the work of Menander Protector, we find the following excerpt: "This movement of Avars against the Slavs did not only result from Emperor's envoys and the wish of Bayan to return the courtesy unto Romans for all the gestures of friendship and help that he had received from the Emperor but also because he held great hate for them (the Slavs) out of personal sentiment as well. The Avar leader has, therefore, sent envoys to Daurentius (Δαυρίτας) himself, and to his chieftains, calling on for their submission and enlistment among tribute-payers. Dauritas and the leaders alongside him replied: "Who is, then, the man which basks in sunlight that threatens to conquer our strength? We are used to ruling over others, not to being ruled over - of that, we are certain for as long as wars are waged and swords are forged". Since the Slavs acted so haughtily, the Avars were no different in boasting. Then the scolds and insults resulted from that, being that the barbarians are of a narrow and proud mind, and the fight broke out. The Slavs, unable to control their anger, killed the envoys, as Bayan found out from another source. Because of that Bayan has long since raised accusations against the Slavs, fueling a secret hatred against them, mad for they refused him, and angry that from them he received an unforgivable insult, in the same time he thought he would do a favor to Caesar and likewise *find a rich land to plunder, for far too long has the land of Romans been plundered by Slavs, and theirs (Slavic) - never by any of other peoples*."
Thirdly, the Early Slavs seized and inhabited a massive territory that spanned from the east of Germany to the Baltic and the very distant fringes of Eastern Europe. Matter of fact, the bulk of the Sclavenes have lived on the northern shores of the Danube and were bribed by Roman authorities into maintaining that status quo, at least temporarily. Also, Slavs weren't "monotheistic", they were henotheistic. Even though Perun was their chief god, they also recognized the existence of other gods as well, hence why the Sclavenes and the Antes worshipped Perun and Veles - which also reflected their lifestyles, which were very warlike and militarized and subsided on animal husbandry, fishing, hunting, gathering and the practice of a form of agriculture that required the burning of the soil, so they weren't nomadic, but certainly not entirely sedentary either. It's also important to note that Procopius also states that the Sclavenes and the Antes shared the same customs, beliefs, and institutions. The same goes for the Wends, which is also supported by the homogeneity of early Slavic aDNA, YDNA, and language, although material culture was far more varied (depending on which culture they defeated and assimilated).
Fourthly, the role of the Avars in all of this is overemphasized, and for the following reasons:
a) As mentioned before, they were invited by the Romans to defeat and subdue unruly peoples on the Danube, like the Antes (who were Roman allies from time to time as well), and during the next century or so will be the foremost "allies" of the Romans against the Slavs, up until Heraclius invites the Serbs and Croats (Sclavene tribes) to defeat and annihilate them south of the Danube.
b) While it's true that the Avar hosts were initially the largest, they were in time overshadowed by the Sclavene hosts, which have, after realizing that the Roman authority on the Danube is no more, begun launching massive invasions that were also preludes to the permanent settling of the lands they've seized and initiated the assimilation of the peoples they've defeated and temporarily subjugated.
c) Western historians tend to make the mistake of not distinguishing the Slavs, even though primary sources from that era have noted that the Early Slavs were divided into three groups: the Wends, the Sclavenes, and the Antes, which brings us to the point of the "100 000 Slavs" that were part of the Avar host - most of them were Pannonian Wend tributaries of the Avars, while the rest were Sclavene allies who, thanks to their arrangement with the Avars, were exempt from abiding by Avar-Roman peace treaties, and would continue raiding and marauding as they pleased, which brought great displeasure to Bayan senior and junior, and the Roman emperors as well.
d) Slavs would've invaded and permanently settled the lands south of the Danube one way or the other, the involvement of the Avars has only somewhat hastened of process, and by subsequently making sure that the Sclavene tribes would form the overwhelming bulk of those who'd settle and seize the territories in question by waging exhaustive wars with the Antes. At most, the Avars were a strictly Pannonian phenomenon and were never masters of the "Balkans", which is also supported by archaeology and modern genetic studies, and given that you're made a mention of primary Roman/Greek sources, you should also know that there's not a single one of them that claims that the Slavs were migrating with the Avars, but that they were invading Southeastern Europe at the same time. You could potentially make that point for the aforementioned Pannonian Wends, but not for the bulk of the invading Slavs - who were Sclavenes and Antes.
e) Sclavenes have besieged Thessalonica five times (in 586 or 597, 604, 615, 617, and 676), and only in two of those sieges were the Slavs assisted by the Avars.
Furthermore, the Franks, Avars, and Magyars have only influenced the military and administrative history of the Pannonian Wends, and they're the ancestors of the Slavs of Balaton, Nitra, Great Moravia, and Slovakia, and they've never formed the bulk of the Early Slavs, but merely a portion of the Wends (the Early West Slavs). To interpret the history of the rest of the Slavs through their particularity is rather tendentious, and even ignorant of the full extent of the history of the Early Medieval Slavs, whether they're West, East, or South Slavic. Matter of fact, the bulk of the Early Slavs was made of the Sclavenes and the Antes, and the overwhelming majority of primary sources from that era were based on peaceful and hostile interaction with them. Further on, the military and administrative history of the Antes and the Sclavenes was strictly a mixture of Slavic traditions and East Roman/Greek influences, which was reflected in the First Bulgarian Empire as well, where Slavic and Bulgar tribal and administrative traditions were integral parts of the state, yet the latter would be entirely ousted by the Slavo-Roman model as early as during the reign of Boris I.
Procopius, Book V, XXVII, 134:
"(...) This exploit, then, was accomplished by the Goths on the third day after they were repulsed by the assault on the wall. But twenty days after the city and harbor of Portus were captured, Martinus and Valerian arrived, bringing with them sixteen hundred horsemen, the most of whom were Huns and Sclaveni and Antae, who are settled above the Ister River not far from its banks. (...)"
Procopius about Slavic invaders capturing and enslaving a lot of Romans:
Procopius, Book VII, XIII - describing events in the year 545 AD:
"(...) For a great throng of the barbarians, the Sclaveni, had, as it happened, recently crossed the Ister, plundering the adjoining country and enslaving a very great number of Romans. (...)"
Procopius of Caesarea:
"(...) In Illyria and Thracia, from the Ionian Gulf to Byzantine surrounding cities, where Hellas and Chersonese regions are situated, (...) the Sclavenes and the Antes, penetrating practically every year since Justinian administering the Roman Empire, were inflicting irreversible damage to their inhabitants. In each invasion, I estimate 200,000 Romans were either taken as prisoners or killed (...)"
Procopius about Roman attempts to stop the Slavic invasion:
"(...) the Empire wasn't able to find just one only man just as brave to undertake this task."
Pope Gregory I in a letter to the Exarch of Italy from the year 599:
"(...) It deeply afflicts and disquiets me the Slavic nation that menace us. It afflicts me from what I already suffer from you, it disquiets me because they have already started to penetrate into the Italic peninsula through Istria. (...)"
And according to Priscus, 610 Slavic tribes flooded into Greece.
Procopius of Caesarea:
"(...) Nay further, they [the Slavs] do not differ at all from one another in appearance. For they are all exceptionally tall and stalwart men, while their bodies and hair are neither very fair nor blond nor indeed do they incline entirely to the dark type (...)".
Procopius of Caesarea:
"(...) In more or less the same time [549 - 550] a Slavic army (...) gathered itself together and after crossing without encountering any resistance from anyone the river Ister [Danube], and later with similar ease the river Heuros, it divided itself for two parts. (...) Commanders of Roman garrisons in Illyria and Thrace fought against both those parts and even though they had already separated from each other, the Romans suffered - contrary to their expectations - a defeat and some of them fell dead on the spot, while others found salvation in escaping. (...) After all, garrisons had suffered such defeats at the hands of either one or the other of barbarian armies, one of the enemy bands fought against troops of Asbadus. He was a member of Emperor Justinian's personal guard (...) and he led a numerous and elite force of cavalry, which had been garrisoned for a long time inside the Thracian stronghold of Tdzurulon. But also, they were forced to retreat by the Slavs and most of them, shamefully escaping, got slaughtered, while Asbadus himself was captured and temporarily left alive, but soon after that the Slavs skinned him alive and threw him into a burning campfire. After that, the Slavs were plundering all neighboring Thracian and Illyrian lands without any obstacles and both of their two units captured many strongholds. (...) And those who had defeated Asbadus, later plundered, in turn, everything up to the sea coast, and captured in an assault the coastal city of Toperus (...) And they slaughtered 25,000 men, plundered everything, and enslaved all the children and all the women. (...)"
John of Ephesus:
"(...) In the third year after the death of Emperor Justin, during the reign of victorious Tiberius, the damned nation of the Slavs has risen, and marched through entire Hellas, through lands of Thessaly and Thrace, captured many cities and strongholds, plundered, burned, and robbed, seized the land and settled there with full ease, without fear, like in their own land. (...) they were plundering the country, burning it, and robbing, as far as the Great Walls [of Constantinople], and this is how they captured many thousands of cattle, as well as many other kinds of booty. (...) Until today, that is until year 584, they still continue to live in peace in the lands of the Rhomaioi, without fear and concern, plundering, murdering and burning, getting rich and highjacking gold and silver, capturing horses and plenty of weapons; and they have learned to fight better than the Rhomaioi. (...)"
Menander Protector:
"(...) About the fourth year of the reign of Caesar Tiberius Constantine, some hundred thousand Slavs broke into Thrace and pillaged that and many other regions. As Greece was being laid waste by the Slavs, with trouble liable to flare up anywhere, and as Tiberius had at his disposal by no means sufficient forces, he sent a delegation to the Khagan of the Avars. (...)"
Strategikon of Maurice:
"(...) They do not keep prisoners in perpetual slavery-like other peoples, but they demarcate for them a limited period of time, after which they give them a choice: they can return home after purchasing their freedom or stay among them as free people and friends. (...)"
“Strategikon of Maurice:
"...being freedom-loving, they are in no way inclined to become slaves or to obey, especially in their own land." (Strategikon of Maurice, ed. prep. V. V. Kuchma. SPb., 2004, p. 189)”
Jordanes:
"(...) These people, as we started to say at the beginning of our account or catalog of nations, though off-shoots from one stock, have now three names, that is, Venedi, Antes, and Sclaveni. (...) they now rage in war far and wide, in punishment for our sins (...) Though their names are now dispersed amid various clans and places, they are chiefly called Sclaveni and Antes. (...)"
Procopius of Caesarea:
"(...) Belisarius was eager to capture alive one of the men of note among the enemy, in order that he might learn what the reason might be why the barbarians were holding out in their desperate situation. And Valerian promised readily to perform such a service for him. For there were some men in his command, he said, from the nation of the Sclaveni, who are accustomed to concealing themselves behind a small rock or any bush which may happen to be near and pounce upon an enemy. In fact, they are constantly practicing this in their native haunts along the river Ister, both on the Romans and on the barbarians as well. (...)"
Abraham ben Jacob (a 10th-century Sephardic Jewish traveler from Muslim Spain):
"(...) Slavic countries extend from the Mediterranean Sea to the Northern Ocean. (...) Generally speaking, Slavs are warlike and violent, and if not for their internal discord and lack of unity, no other nation would be able to match them in strength. (...)"
And about the arrival of the Croats and Serbs (but it was much later - not during the 500’s, but during the 600’s):
Constantine Porphyrogennetos, "De Administrando Imperio":
"(...) their ancestors were Pagan Croats and Serbs, known also as White [Croats and Serbs]. Great Croatia, called also White [Croatia], until today is still Pagan, just like neighboring [Lusatian / West Slavic] Serbs [Sorbs] (...)"
And another excerpt - "De Administrando Imperio":
"(...) Therefore everyone, who would like to do research about Dalmatia, can read herein about the way how the Slavic peoples took it. The Croats with their families came to Dalmatia and found the Avars in possession of that land. After fighting against each other for some time, the Croats defeated the Avars, partially murdered them, and partially forced them to submissiveness. Since that moment the country was seized by the Croats. (...)"
“Daurentius is the first Slavic chieftain to be recorded by name, by the Byzantine historian Menander Protector, who reported that the Avar khagan Bayan I sent an embassy, asking Daurentius and his Slavs to accept Avar suzerainty and pay tribute because the Avars knew that the Slavs had amassed great wealth after repeatedly plundering the Byzantine Balkan provinces. Daurentius reportedly retorted that "Others do not conquer our land, we conquer theirs [...] so it shall always be for us.”
Daurentius (to the Avar envoy): "Who is, then, the man who basks in sunlight that threatens to conquer our strength? We are used to ruling over others, not to being ruled over - of that, we are certain for as long as wars are waged and swords are forged".
I've extracted the most relevant quotes from the primary sources and DAI, hope it helps.
Those who attribute the success of the Slavic invasion and colonization of Roman territories to the Avars omit the following:
a) Serbs didn't invade in the 6th, but in the mid-7th century, and in toe with the Croats, and were tasked with exterminating all Avars south of the Danube and ruling all the provinces they’d liberate at the request of emperor Heraclius.
b) The Slavs who've invaded, conquered, and colonized Southeastern Europe were the Sclavenes and Antes, not the “Avaroslavs”, who were noted to have been Pannonian Wends, and were, aside from the Greeks/Romans themselves, also distinguished from other Slavs on that very basis by Fredegar, and were mentioned only twice in all primary Greek sources, during the Siege of Constantinople in 626, and during one of the many Slavic sieges of Thessaloniki, where Saint Demetrius states they arrived to assist the already present Sclavenes who've besieged the city, lured by promises of the city’s wealth.
c) By the time the Avars arrived at the Danubian basin at the invitation of emperor Tiberius, who had invited them for the sole purpose of waging war against the Sclavenes, Antes, and Kutrigurs, the Slavs were already invading and raiding Southeastern Europe for roughly forty years, and as deep as Southern Peloponnesus, Crete and the outer walls of Constantinople.
d) All primary sources, like Jordanes, Procopius, Saint Demetrius, John of Ephesus, Theophylact of Simocatta, and Menander Protector state that the Sclavenes and the Antes were under the rule of their rulers like Mezamir, Muzhok, Dervan/Daurentius, and Radogost, and weren't subdued by the Avars, and distinguish them from the aforementioned Avaroslavs (Pannonian Wends).
e) Attributing the success of the Slavic invasion and colonization of Southeastern Europe to the Avars is, aside from being contradictory to all primary Roman/Greek sources, since the very purpose of the invitation of the Avars was to wage war against the Slavs and the Kutrigurs, which is exemplified in the joint Avar-Roman invasion of Daurentius' realm, also a textbook example of 19th and 20th-centuries German, Italian, Greek, Hungarian and Austrian anti-Slavism designed to undermine the legitimacy of Slavic history, the geopolitical realities of Slavic territories, and to portray Slavs as a subsidiary mass of naturally subordinate peoples.
Sources: Jordanes, Procopius, Saint Demetrius, John of Ephesus, Theophylact of Simocatta, and Menander Protector, De Administrando Imperio, Sima Cirkovic, Tibor Zivkovic, Dimitry Obolensky, and Frederick Hamilton Jackson.
Modern Western interpretations of medieval sources would indicate the Slavic area as being the main reservoir of slaves in the whole period of the Early Middle Ages, beginning probably in the 6th century, and with a peak around the 10th. This preference for slaves of Slavic origin - so strong as to make Slavs the slaves by antonomasia - has been easily explained: in that period Slavic people were the only ones who were still pagan, and this detail is most important as it explains why, by choosing them, early medieval slave traders - mostly Venetian, Genoese and Jewish - did not violate the new principles of the “Societas Christiana”, introduced by Pope Gregory the Great at the end of the 6th century, according to which baptized people must be excluded from slavery. What should be noted is that aside from this being a mere theory, it is also historically and etymologically inaccurate, and unconvincing. After all, the Medieval Latin words for “Slav” and “Slave” are not etymologically related. The Medieval Latin word for “slave”, and with it, its root as well, predates the first sightings and contact of mainland European civilization with the Slavs. The evolution of the name of Slavs "Sloveni/ Slaveni" comes from PIE *klew (to hear) evolving into proto-Slavic *slovo/ *slava (word/ fame), finally evolving into Sloveni/ Slaveni (those glorious/ those who understand each other). Meanwhile, the English word for "slave" comes from the Latin word "clavis/ clavus" (a key/ nail), which bore the Latin word "inclavare" (to lock in), ultimately giving rise to the word "sclavus" (slave - "a locked one"), which most likely entered the English language, along with a major portion of Romance words, with the Norman invasion. In 1881, a proper etymology was expressed, according to which the Greek word Σκλάβινοι does not stem from the self-name of the Slavs, but from the Greek verb σκυλεύο - "to extract spoils of war", and resonates in the manner in which Slavs and other ethnicities were enslaved - as prisoners of war. The aforementioned etymologies are free of politicization, are accurate, and are firmly rooted in history and linguistics. Based on this, the self-name of the Slavs and their Modern Helleno-Latin name coincided phonetically purely accidentally (F. Kluge, Etymologisches Wörterbuch der deutschen Sprache 1881/1989/2002), and the thesis where the modern word for “Slave” is not rooted in the self-name of the Slavs, and is refuted.” (Gerhard Kobler - Deutsches Etymologisches Wörterbuch 1995, Korth Georg - Zur Etymologie des Wortes 'Slavus' (Sklave) 1970, and Daniel Scholten - Deutsch für Dichter und Denker: Unsere Muttersprache in neuem Licht, 2020). The aforementioned theory and etymology are furthered by Korth Georg, Friedrich Kluge, Gerhard Kobler, and Daniel Scholten (and Grimm’s German Dictionary).
Further on, the cognate with Sloveni/Slaveni is the word Sclavinii/ Slabini, a Latin that denotes Slavic ethnic groups. From a purely historical perspective, Greece and Gaul were Rome’s main reservoir of slaves for centuries, while the Irish were the main reservoir of slaves for their Normano-English oppressors for more than half a millennium, and before them, to Norsemen as well. Dublin was the largest slave market in Western Europe. Its main sources of supply were the Irish hinterland, Wales and Scotland, while in the Far and the Middle East, the Turkmen tribes would supply the largest portion of Eurasia with innumerable slaves for nearly a millennium. Aside from that, just during the earliest stage of the Slavic invasion of Roman territory south of the Danube (6th century), a fifth of a million Roman citizens (Procopius) were enslaved by the Sclavenes (early South Slavs) in just one Roman province, and just during a single raid, the number of their slaves kept growing as more and more provinces and their capitals fell to the aforementioned Slavs. In reality, the majority of slaves in the 6th and 7th centuries were the Christian Romans, not their Slavic captors. Granted the Slavs didn't enslave their enemies permanently, but they've enslaved them nonetheless, and in numbers that are substantially greater than the number of Slavs who were enslaved by non-Slavs during the entirety of the middle ages, and it renders the aforementioned non-Slavs as being more fitting to have their ethnonyms made “synonymous” with slavery
The Western terminology for "slave", to a certain extent, is similar in form to the self-designation of the Slavs ("Sloven", "Slavjan" etc.) Their existence served as the basis for numerous anti-Slavic statements, theories, and consecutive waves of propaganda, which have sometimes acquired the scope of genuine mythologies. Moreover, these ideas were even given an academic platform. As it happened more than once, when “not entirely” adequate premises gained an academic platform and were entrenched there since. The premise of "Slavs" is the root of words for "slaves" found a permanent foothold in Western Academia, giving rise to a series of pseudoscientific, inform, but questionable, in essence, representations and statements. The essence of these premises is that these words are related to the ethnonym of the Slavs, allegedly, "due to the fact that in the Early Middle Ages, the Slavs became objects of the slave trade, which led to the use of their ethnonym as a designation for slaves." Sometimes, it was even argued that Western Europeans, whose languages contain these words, directly, massively, and regularly turned the Slavs into slaves, and in general, other far-reaching conclusions were made, such as that the "Slavs are slaves" and the Western Europeans are "their masters."
Moreover, in the 18-19th century in Western European journalism, the idea was persistently exaggerated that even the word "Slav" itself comes from the Latin or Greek word for "slave". This was the “think tank” of an 18th-century French historian and publicist. Polemics regarding this myth and premise are found even in Dostoevsky’s "Diary of a Writer". As for the idea of the origin of the word "Slav" coming from the word for slaves - at the present time, it is not considered scientific and has long been recognized as erroneous, or even deliberately Slavophobic. The birthplace of this terminology is the ERE. In the Early Middle Ages, in the so-called Medieval Greek, the word "σκλάβος" (read as "sklavos" - "slave") appeared. Further - from the ERE and Medieval Greek, this word found its way to Medieval Latin (and from there to Medieval French) - the official, as well as international legal, political, commercial, and scientific language of Western Europe. Moreover, in different languages, it appears in different timelines. In accordance with Webster's Dictionary, the word appears in English only in the 14th century, while Webster gives an etymological origin of the basis of the premise of this stream of Slavic slaves dating back to the 10th century, specifically during the reign of Henry the Fowler and Otto I, therefore moot and chronologically off by several centuries. Thus, the direct appearance of these words in Western European languages, for reasons allegedly of the abundant trade in Slavic slaves, is excluded. Since the word has a clearly traceable and understandable history. And it did not arise in the West, but in ERE.
The word for “slave” in Medieval Greek derives from the Greek verb skyleúo - meaning “to get spoils of war”, the first-person singular of which looks like skyláo. This etymology is established thanks to the following sources: F. Kluge, Etymologisches Wörterbuch der Deutschen Sprache. 1881/1989/2002, siehe Sklave: “... zu gr. skyleuein, skylan, V. zu gr. Skylon ", Gerhard Köbler, Deutsches Etymologisches Wörterbuch, 1995, Sektion "Slaven" and Daniel Scholten, Deutsch für Dichter und Denker: Unsere Muttersprache in neuem Licht, Sklave und Slawe “. Thus, it is proven that the Greek word "sklav", "slave" - comes from the abovementioned Med. Greek word, the original meaning of which was "seized in war".This etymology, and Georg Korth’s "Zur Etymologie des Wortes 'Slavus' (Sklave)" refutes the premise that the Med. Greek and modern Western word for “slave” derived from the self-name of the Slavs. This etymology is furthered by Korth Georg, Friedrich Kluge, Gerhard Kobler, and Daniel Scholten (and Grimm’s German Dictionary). Furthermore, it turns out that the "Slavs" and all these numerous Western European "sklavas" are only homonyms. There are innumerable examples of such consonant coincidences (both within the same languages, and between words from different languages). This is a fairly common occurrence, especially among Indo-European languages. Thus, in the ERE, a new word was found and associated with the verb that means "to seize trophies of war", which was from then on used to denote slaves. At the same time, the previous word for slave, which previously meant slaves, was repurposed to denote indentured serfs attached to the land they’ve toiled.
The only Slavs that were subjugated by the Avars were the Pannonian Wends (the rest of the Wends were either independent or vassals of the Franks), while the Sclavenes and Antes who formed the bulk of the Early Slavs, and the Slavs who've invaded and colonized Roman territories in Europe were independent, sovereign entities, and either at war with the Avars or allied with them, depending on the tribe (unlike the subdued Pannonian Wends). Based on the overwhelming majority of archaeological findings, on nearly all primary sources (like Strategikon of Maurice, Menander Protector, and Procopius, first and foremost) and the toponymy of Southeastern Europe, we know that the Slavs have played the leading role in the invasion of Southeastern Europe and that they were perceived as Rome's greatest threat on the Northern Limes, not the Avars, who in reality, were invited by Rome as their allies against the Slavs, as Menander Protector put its:
"(...) About the fourth year of the reign of Caesar Tiberius Constantine, some hundred thousand Slavs broke into Thrace and pillaged that and many other regions. As Greece was being laid waste by the Slavs, with trouble liable to flare up anywhere, and as Tiberius had at his disposal by no means sufficient forces, he sent a delegation to the Khagan of the Avars. (...)"
Crediting the Avars for the success of the Slavic invasion and colonization is first and foremost a modern, primarily German, Austrian, Hungarian, and even Greek narrative that has virtually no substantiation in history that originated in the writings of Pavel Jozef Safarik's dubious assessment of the early history of the South Slavs, and can only be attributed to ahistorical, political agendas that should be reviled and demonized in academic discourse, not adopted.
We also know that at the time, the Avars didn't dare to invade Slavic lands by themselves, yet again, based on Menander's report: "This movement of Avars against the Slavs did not only result from Emperor's envoys and the wish of Bayan to return the courtesy unto Romans for all the gestures of friendship and help that he had received from the emperor but also because he held great hate for them (the Slavs) out of personal sentiment as well. The Avar leader has, therefore, sent envoys to Daurentius (Δαυρίτας) himself, and to his chieftains, calling on for their submission and enlistment among tribute-payers. Daurentius and the leaders alongside him replied: "Who is, then, the man which basks in sunlight that threatens to conquer our strength? We are used to ruling over others, not to being ruled over - of that, we are certain for as long as wars are waged and swords are forged".
Since the Slavs acted so haughtily, the Avars were no different in boasting. Then the scolds and insults resulted from that, being that the barbarians are of a narrow and proud mind, and the fight broke out. The Slavs, unable to control their anger, killed the envoys, as Bayan found out from another source. Because of that Bayan has long since raised accusations against the Slavs, fueling a secret hatred against them, mad for they refused him, and angry that from them he received an unforgivable insult, in the same time he thought he would do a favor to Caesar and likewise *find a rich land to plunder, for far too long has the land of Romans been plundered by Slavs, and theirs (Slavic) - never by any of other peoples*."
We also know the following from the Strategikon of Maurice: "...being freedom-loving, they are in no way inclined to become slaves or to obey, especially in their own land." (Strategikon of Maurice, ed. prep. V. V. Kuchma. SPb., 2004, p. 189)”. Maurice and his successors fought primarily against Slavs, and he dedicated the majority of his Strategikon's chapters on barbarian enemies to the Slavs and the Antes, whom he and as we've mentioned before, Rome as well saw as its greatest threat to the Northern Limes.
Also, the Serbs and Croats didn't just settle Roman land but also waged war against the Avars at the behest of Heraclius, and "exterminated" every Avar South of the Danube, as Frederick Hamilton Jackson puts it: "The war with Persia in 600-614 strained the Roman resources and thus denuded the coast of soldiers, therefore the Avars and Slavs inroads ravaged as they pleased under Heraclius (610-640), who had called in the latter to drive out the Avars; Narona, Salona, Epidaurus, Burnum, and Rhizinium were destroyed. In 641 Pope John IV., a Dalmatian by birth, sent Abbot John to Istria and Dalmatia to ransom prisoners and collect relics. The Croats and Serbs exterminated the Avars in the middle of the seventh century and delivered the province, the Croats occupying the west to the river Cetina, the Serbs the east from the Cetina to Albania. De Administrando Imperio says the same:
"Therefore everyone, who would like to do research about Dalmatia, can read herein about the way how the Slavic peoples took it. The Croats with their families came to Dalmatia and found the Avars in possession of that land. After fighting against each other for some time, the Croats defeated the Avars, partially murdered them, and partially forced them to submissiveness. Since that moment the country was seized by the Croats.".
Sources: De Administrando Imperio and the Shores of the Adriatic by Frederick Hamilton Jackson.
@@numenoreaneternity6682 facinating. Do you think it is possible to get sources in thelibrary, i would really like to read more.
i read all you have written and it really sparked my interest.
Romanians, Albanians and Vlachs are the last Thracians and Illyrians
Not really! Check your DNA.
Thnx body 🇦🇱🇽🇰
@@GGTanguera No,it's correct,Romanians descend from Latinized Paleo-Balkanic populations and potentially Roman colonists,and Albanians are a Paleo-Balkanic population which still retain the language(partially latinized).Check the facts,Romanians are native and Albanians are native,everything else it's just wishful propaganda.
@@shqipemalesore2620 Have you ever heard of genetics, linguistics, ethnography, archeology, antoropology etc.? There is no material, nor immaterial artifacts that prove that Albanians lived in the Balkans before 11 century. There are no genetic, nor anthropological similarities between Romanians and Albanians.
@@GGTanguera Have you ever heard about genetics,linguistics,etc...you are literally nonsense.Tell that to the historians...
Again wrong,you don't know what you're talking about.Not a single evidence for your claim.
What is wrong with youtubers mashing up old propagandist positions that appeared prior to WWII and were never proven in any current study? Yes, the Avar-Slavic invasion in the Balkans was a big one and changed the cultural and to an extent the anthropological map of the region. However in Greece there was wholly different picture, the reason why Slavs never managed to establish a presence there.
1) Contrary to what happened in the Balkans, in Greece the Slavs failed to capture a single walled city and stuck to roaming around in bands in the mountainous regions attacking stables and farms for food and trying to establish anywhere they could all while trying to avoid the Greek militia hunting them around.
2) Slavs were enabled in doing so as above in No1 by the fact that the earlier Justinian plague had not only reduced the populations of the Empire but also caused movements around and a lot of upheaval. Yet, as said they still failed to capture a single city.
3) Byzantine writers often were writing a lot of gloom and doom in order to then praise even more their favorite Emperors that solved the solution. From what we understand the "massive invasion" of Slavs into Greece were not much more 200,000 souls in a land that then hosted easily 3 million (at normal times up to the double). Half of them established sclaviniaes (the Slavic camps) west of Thessaloniki in central-western Macedonia and the other half moved south to Peloponese. Both these Slavs NEVER occupied most of Greece as shown in the maps but rather circulated like nomads in big chunks or smaller groups raiding and pillaging farms for about a century.
4) Greek militia kept on chasing them around and gradually limiting them in specific regions in central-western Macedonia and in southern Peloponese, always in remote places. As long as they were hiding away and not raiding, Greeks did not bother about them - they often hired them as workers in agricultural activities, so it was not necessarily a constant warfare in all places - Slavs were afterall just trying to survive, they were not conquerors at any place. They worked a lot as shepherds less as farmers but they kept on being a plight as cattle thieves. For that reason they were banned from enterring in cities and they were not considered as "citizens", they were merely seen as a problem seeking solution, no pun intended, I erased the "final". Even their christianisation was not enough - they had to be taken out of Greece and be thrown elsewhere, which was largely down followingly.
5) Eventually with two campaigns in the early 9th century they were largely cleared out and in one last in the early 10th century their remains in South Peloponese were also cleared out. A great number of them were massacred (yes, call it a genocide if you like) and their remnants, mostly civilians, were transferred in Bithynia and Galatia, i.e. in central Minor Asia, funnily there where Gauls were thrown when they failed in their invasion in Greece - Medieval Greeks always honoring their ancestors and being avid readers of their history. It is a plausible hypothesis that additional extermination may have occurred during the Bulgarian raids into Greece in which Slavs naturally allied to Bulgarians, thus when the latter were losing and kicked out, their Slavic collaborators would had been dealt accordingly.
6) When Ottomans invaded Greece they found no Slavs in Macedonia, let alone in Peloponese or anywhere else. We know that since we have the full taxation archives of Ottomans of the 1400s and 1500s and the names of families in all villages and towns in Thessaloniki are Greek ones. The first Slavic names appear in the borderlines of roughly where the modern borders are (borders created by the geography - one has to see the mountains there to understand). Slavs re-enterred in Macedonia (the real one, northern Greece) really in later Ottoman times and in particular in the 18th-19th century when Ottomans had already cleared out a lot of Greeks from the region for rebelling in successive revolutions, then using Slavs as cheap workforce for fields as well as then on railway projects.
7) Onomatology of Slavic origins exists mostly in remote places of Peloponese but concerns places of no interest that were abandoned by Greeks for long periods, we don't talk just of towns and cities and mountains but really of random hills and rivers as big as your childrens' "rivers" made on the sand in the playground. LOL! A claimed 700 to 750 "Slavic names" was never successfully shown when it contained a lot of Greek-originated names while none ever juxta-posed the totality of placenames in a region like Peloponese... what? 50,000? 80,000? More than a 100,000? Plausible when talking of every little hill and "river".
Now... most importantly :
8) DNA study on modern Greeks show quasi-non-existent Balto-Slavic genetic element which goes against the theory of "Slavs being absorbed into Greek culture'. Greeks show a 10%-12% "Balkan element" but that is not Slavic, it actually is shown even by Greeks of the Bronze Age (age of the Trojan War) : Greeks always had a north Balkanic element as they used slaves from Thrace, Illyria etc. since time immemorial. To put it bluntly, Bulgarians and Serbians even if mixed populations still have a considerable percentage of their population showing some Balto-slavic influence. Greeks looking like having Balto-slavic elements? Well... you are not going to find that many! LOL! DNA testing does not lie in that sense.
9) Archaeological remains also don't lie. Archaeological remains of Slavs in Greece are extremely few - and yes there was quite a lot of research on the matter by both Greek and foreign teams. At best they find a few sketchy pottery that can be labelled "Slavic" in places of no interest and that is all. It all makes reference to far smaller numbers than the "cataclysm" some imagined. Their numbers were big, 200,000 for example is indeed big and enough to cause a lot of destruction when roaming around like bandits.
6 and 7 really are very indicative and reinforce the "extermination" and "relocation" references in Byzantine texts rather than the "peaceful integration". Kind of like what happened to Gauls.
Bro great channel! Very informative and Epimethean.
po Ajnhardu franacki hronicar 9.st.
Period od 795. do 829. godine je zapisao Ajhnard. Njemu se pripisuje i taj dio koji se vezuje za 822. godinu i spominje južne Srbe:
Exercitus de Italia propter Liudewiticum bellum conficiendum in Pannoniam missus est, ad cuius adventum Liudewitus, Siscia civitate relicta, ad Sorabos, quae natio MAGNUM Dalmatiae partem obtinere dicitur, fugiendo se contulit, et uno ex ducibus eorum, a quo receptus est, per dolum interfecto, civitatem eius in suam redegit dicionem. Missis tamen ad exercitum imperatoris legatis suis ad eius praesentiam se velle venire promisit.
Ajnhard na Baljanu vidi samo Srbe neci ostake novonastale nacije 19.st .kao Hrvati i ostali !
Karlo veliki granicu prema Slovenima naziva LIMES SORABIKUS a ne Limes Slovenikus ,etnonym Srbi je stariji od etnonyma Sloveni !
You mentioned at about 16:20 that Christianity had a lot of trouble in its spread into rural areas in an earlier video. Which video is that?
You fail to mention that prior to the so called migration of Slavs from the Caucasus region, there already were civilizations in Poland. Consequently, the time period of recorded migration is not the actual period of migration. Meaning Slavs in small numbers came into the Central European location, Biskupin for example, centuries before the mass, recorded migration. These first groups numbering in perhaps a hundred or so individuals (including Lustians) setup Biskupin and other small enclaves before sending back messengers to the main civilization camps in the Caucasus and informing them about green, flat, rich pastures in the east filled with game of all kind. In addition, they told them these lands were distant enough to be out of the reach of the eastern Mongol horde. These messengers compelled the massive Slav drive east. Unrecorded Slav civilization can be traced back to approximately 800 BCE. The proof is in the archeological sites like Biskupin.
Dziękuje...great contribution!
@@joannamcdee9061 Dzięki
This is confusing and conflicts with other history with which I am familiar. I was under the impression that the Goths used to live in Poland. That they didn’t move out of there until like the fifth century. Something like that. That is when they went South into the Roman lands because they were pushed by the Huns. Are you saying that it was. Slavs who did this? As for the Mongols, they were very far away from this land. All the way in the far east. There is no record of them even in central Asia until 1221 when they started their conquering. That is 700 years after Procopius and 900 years after the Gothic wars. I do believe this is in the time of the Gokturks but, I am not sure.
@@Xochiyolotl Poland was officially established in 966, so they were there in unorganized tribal societies for hundreds of years prior. I have never come across any info about Goths being in the area.
Slavs didn't migrated in the 7th century to europe,slavs lives in europe since 8678BC.And 3322 years before,they have lived on north coast of the black sea.And i can conferm that migration of the slavs is lie,becouse if it was true,then 2.500.000 slavs would be migrating to europe.Lot of slavic history is falsification written by the nordic school in the 1890,but manny slavic truths has been discovered and perserved.And some documentaries about slavs are on spoken serbian language without english subtitle,so we unfortunately get to be uninformed.But i can recomend youtube videos,Slavs For 10700 Years In Europe,Slava True Story Of The Slavic Glory,and 6 part video Arkaim Swastika City.
This is mostly about south Slavs.... I think it should be stated in the title.....
Our comments about we don't know will change nothing now. But is very interesting to hear.
Democratic and military ranking. It means there's a lot of warlirds, elder council and it's voted or publicly decided what should be done. As a community. Slavs never really liked to have a dictator. Military was priced and voivod and knez (sort of duke) whom the units listened to. That's why it was very hard to fight them since there wasn't a central system you could bring down.
Even in Caranthania Duke was elected and wasn`t inherited. What is then for him democracy? American way of life etc. with war in last 150 years?
Hey Thersites, can i ask you how an exam you would take about this subject or the other courses about east roman history would be like?
The byzantinez didn't just add greeks to make greece more greek again, they also moved slavs from greece to anatolia and finally they also slaughtered a bunch of tribes in order to lower their numbers , the chronicles of monemvasia state how the governor of corinth killed a bunch of slavs and had the greeks resettle their former lands
The invasion/migration distinction is a modern mockery. Both are the exact same thing, actually.
So if I move to a different area I'm invading it? Sweet, I'm going to go invade my neighboring town!
Of course it isn't, although à migration can end up having similar or worse results to an invasion (live the Slavic migration) and sometimes an invasion might be less destructive than massive migrations since it only affects the elite (like the germanic invasions).
So much assumption... The author says there are no surviving texts but then you assume there are no states no identities and no leaders. There were a vast number of tribes but the Slavic identity was strog giving that it survived to this day. States were well recorded in the 9th century Balkan when Christianisation happened but there is no proof that there were no states or political organizing.
Avars are asian not slavic.
Avars are slavs . Aromanians
I can just imagine my broskis going apeshit about history, cus i'm from the Balkans. That you got 100% correct. There is no un-heated debate about history in the Balkans.
Look at the drop in temperature in Europe starting about 550CE. Very cold for the next 300+ years. They were migrating, not invading.
Hey Thersites, have you read Noel Malcolm’s ‘Kosovo, a short history’. I think it will give you some great insight on what happened with some of the indigenous and new people in the Balkans.
TheBeginning just talks about those people, Albanians, Serbs, and Vlachs. I don’t remember exactly, but I think he mentions Paleo-Balkanic people as well.
RESPONSE TO NOEL MALCOLM`S BOOK
"KOSOVO. A SHORT HISTORY"
Type this in google and read it is in english
And of course mr. Malcolm would not respond to the debate because his book is propaganda.
@@devastaterzx6906Albanians are Paleobalkanic
Dude. Its Aavars not A-vars. Sorta like u say Apple..not A-pple
We English speakers spell Deutscheland G-E-R-M-A-N-Y, so if we want spell a proper noun A-V-A-R
We will
I suggest you to stop making videos about slavs, or eastern europe in general... here every nation have their story how they are oldest people on earth and first civilisation on earth xD ... no one takes official history as true and usually claim that that is some sort of western, jewish or vatican propaganda, depending on their political stances... I suggest more videos about thracians, illiryans and scythians, as we know very little about them all, any informations would be good... also if you want to examine claims off people in comments about slavs coming from balkans or being everywhere where they are now for thousands of years, you should start from Paleolithic continuity hypothesis...
Nationalism is great! Just look at the Balkans!
You have mentioned slavs, bulgars, magyars and greeks but you have completely ignored illyrians who comprised the overwhelming majority of the Balkan populace!
As a reminder there were more roman emperors from illyria than italy!
No there was not 😂😂😂😂😂
But Bulgars and Avars in 700 AD were Turkic and not Slavic.
Did he say they were Slavic?
@@papazataklaattiranimamobsessed
As usual South Slavs prove his point about identity politics.
They're what make the rest of us embarrassed.
At the beginning you state slavs are monotheistic and then compare their beliefs to roman and Greek polytheism. ?????
note:Romania in the map of 20:40 has no connection to modern Romanian state, this Romania is the Byzantine Empire and the name was in use for the greeks till the establisment of the modern greek state, the name is still in use in traditional greek songs and also the ethnonym Roman is in use by the greeks of the east that never had the opportunity to be under the authority of the modern greek state!
Most wars were fought to gain territory , if we follow that logic we Slavs came out on top , maybe we didn't deserve it but it is what it is. ( many blunders and mistakes by our enemies )The question now is how to consolidate our gains and how to stop fighting each other.
How You explain 3000 year old Polish City in Biskupin . Wiki.
Blundering Tusk so check haplogroup R1A1 and You gona foud out
Blundering Tusk ancient bones shows slavians ar on same place like Poland up to 10 000 years. Just other countries tryied damage our history burning books etc when Poland was Under ocupation.
The fact that pyramids are in Egypt doesn't means they are made by Arabs. Many local Arabs in Egypt can have ancient Egyptians genome just because they are descendants of local people and just speak today Arabic and prey to Allah.
Alicio Desjarlais that's interesting i never know that. Mayby You right but i never Seen any evidence of this. But i'm not history man to. Just writed what i knows
There are DNA proofs that ancestors of Poles lived there for thousands of years.
7:25 wow that map is so incorrect that its not even possible to say just how much wrong is i this picture!Rebulic of Srpska not being serbian?Suuuuper big albanian ethnicity all the way to Skoplje?An enclave of serbians in hercegovina?A huge misrepresentation of Srpska Vojvodina?I like this map so much!Show me more
@TheBeginning If you did not contribute to fighting the Ottomans and make anything significant (besides skandenberg but the Ottoman empire simply walked around their territories as Skandenberg was on the defense for the whole time)
@@markobucevic8991 thnx 🇦🇱
There's a reason the old town of Skopje is full of Albanians.
This is a nice and well-presented review of the piece of Slavic history during the 7th century. However, I would like to point out a few shortcomings:
The title is misleading. The whole story is about a limited time span and it concerns the SOUTH Slavs only. There is nothing said about EAST Slavs there despite what is repeatedly claimed in the video. I think that these limitations of the presentation focus are not stressed sufficiently. One might object that in the 7th century, there were other interesting developments taking place in the Slavic world. There are (even written) sources indicating that, in the 7th century, there was the Kingdom of Samo. The kingdom unified some Western Slavic tribes in their fight against Avars and it lasted some 40 years. The sources suggest that the center of the kingdom lay somewhere in the Vienna region. It would be interesting to discuss developments taking place in other regions of the Slavic world (West, North, East). If for no other reason, as a prelude to the 9th and 10th-century events (Great Moravia, Kiev Rus, ...).
On the thumbnail: "Controversies and Problems"
That's 1500 years of Balkan history after the slavs in a nutshell
The Slavic invasion of the Balkans was Illyria's downfall and the worst. The wild Slavs leveled everything, leaving gloom and dust in their wake. Until recently, the Slawo-Serbs continued where their watch ancestors started. Not a century goes by when the Albanians are not massacred by them and atrocities are committed that are indescribable.
Shame on you for your personal teory !
The most white people are people who are very long on European Continent !
Even if the Slavs came , they are European !
And you must examine your faces as albanians and see in mayority what you are !
Real Albanians in Albania are a mixture of new commers and they look mostly like Maltese people !
I have been to Valeta and after that in Tirana and have seen the same faces .
In Kosovo and in Republic Macedonia there are diferent faces of Albanian recogniceable entity like we the Macedonians are mostly European .
It means that they are mixed by domicile European Macedonians , Slavs enlightened !
The provement you can find in the names of thoponimy from mountains Karavanki to Olimpus including Albanian thoponimus existed even today !
@Voskre Glavincevska not quite since the haplogroup majority is ev13 which is also shared by the greeks and the bulgarinaized thracians of south Bulgaria tell you the paleo balkan gene and its a north african gene who settled in balkan more then 12k years ago which is when after many years indo europeans mixed with them concluding to Illyrians greeks and thracians,today only greek and albanians being the sole paleo balkan survivors
@@voskreglavincevska3651What are you even saying?Other than all of your laughable propaganda,Albanians are a Paleobalkanic population and precede the Slavs in the Balkans,this is history.
Serbs are slavic nomads. This is clear as day and you can tell even by their haplogroup I2 and their language.
So are we done now with saying that Slav Macedonians are pure Slavs and have no relation to the area that they live in?
Wrong history. When Slavs migrated, they destroyed all Roman cities and killed dwellers to get land. Local Christian Romance-speaking dwellers were called Vlachs by Slavs and were forced to flee into the forests and mountains due to Slavs ferocity. Vlachs were spread in all Balkans and finally forced to live together with Slavs. They formed islands of Romance-speaking in newly Slavic states. Today, the Vlachs, the heirs of Roman Empire are called Romanians and Aromanians. Large communities of Romanians are today in Serbia, Croatia, Slovenia and Bulgaria. Also large communities of Aromanians are in Bulgaria, Macedonia, Greece (the greatest community), Albania and Serbia. In Bosnia and Herzegovina Aromanians were Slavicized and finally partially Islamized; today they lost the maternal language and the memory of their history.
Its not like Romans didnt kill Gauls, Ilyrians, Tracians and Iberians while making their empire...
There was no significant migration of Slavs. Some Boshianks and Croatians call Serbian people living in Croatia and Bosnia "Vlachs" when they want to offend them, not knowing that they are giving them a compliment of saying that they are an autohtone or indigenous nation. 19 Roman emperors were born in what's today Serbia, and many of them never visited Rome. Slavic people are the least aggressive, and the least organized Europeans. How come that they conquered such a vast territory and that there are no traces of "Romanesque" languages in Balkan toponyms? You are obviously Slavic: including Budapest, Berlin, Prahova, Brasov, Bihor etc. You live on an "island of Romance-speaking" people thanks to Jesuits who worked hard to change the history and divide the Slavic tribes. Please do a DNA test. You are Slavic too unless you are a Hungarian. :)
@@GGTanguera slavs did migrate back in 5th century
@@daca8395 Maybe some Slavs. I believe that the Slavs are indigenous to the Balkans. There is no historical evidence of any big migration in 5, 6 or 7 century.
@@GGTanguera but there is...
This is not accurate history stop spreading lies!!!
PERUN SLAVA DarkSkul why is it lies do you think?
Fantastic video
Were are you Shkavelli ( serbci) here ? hahahhahahahahahShkavelli occupied Illiraian- Albanian and others land Read this you SHKAVELLI. Albaninas are the oldest nation in EUROPE.
Essai sur l'origine, les mœurs, et l'état actuel de la nation albanaise - Discorso sull’origine, costumi, e stato attuale della nazione Albanese. ”
Nah..you have no.written language before the 1800s made up fairy tales
@@71N1S4 we might not have written in our language however we have in Messapic and Greek Latin languages and if we didn't doesn't mean we didn't exist 🤣 and 4500 years in Balkan before Slavs👍
Maybe it isnt what you were trying to say, but vlachs did not emerge in the 11th century, but much earlier. Vlachs are all macedonians, illirians, thracians, and dacians which were latin speakers.
The term Vlach appeared as early as the 6th century, but the people it refers to have been more or less a continuous presence in the Balkans since BC. The identity of Vlachs seems to revolve a lot around the 5th legion Macedonica.
Albanians came to the balkans with georgies manniakes in the year 1043 after christ. Albanians are originally from caucasus .
Your funny! And ignorant emebcile too...
Nice dream
Macedonia should be return to Greece.
Macedonia and Greece should be return to Albania
Nah, Albanian should moves to the middle east and leave Europe for European.
John von Shepard ahahahaha
Wrong. Greece should be returned to Macedonia. In fact, Macedonians conquered them many Times :)
@@lechthesarmatian5958 "Northern Macedonia" is located on Paeonia for the most part. The lands of the old Greek Kingdom of Macedon,its heart if you will, are entrirely within Greece. There is nothing to be taken from the slavic country to the north. The name "Macedon" is used for purely political reasons.
Really enjoy your take on history as if seems to be correct - as I travel these areas - they help me get a sense of what was going down in the past
Thanks
This is just western point of view. Some evidence are faked. Even on west they are a lot of sholars who claimed opposite. Mario Allinei, Giuseppe Sergi etc.
9 th century, "muslims" in Bosnia??? Not only, "MUslim" isn't a language - and Albanian nor Bosnian "Muslim" are muslim : no Torah, no Evangile following Matthew - even less the deseappeared of the Ebonites or Nazoreans... - not the christian Arab apochryphe of the childhood of Jesus, nor the -Arab - Qoran, which seems to require at least a few Aramean to understand that "the Kitab is the Book, and the Coran ... another one... talking of the Coran -Aramean - progressively transmitted by the angels, and the Book, given to the Prophets of the jews and the christians... Even present translations in general confuse Nas.r ( Ebionite?,Hebrews ) and Rumi ( Roman... , Byzantium ). But in present times the say they are muslim. Crusaders killed and thougth they were christians. The pope Nicolas V did accept murder , loothing and slavery at condition to baptise the victims, and he thought he was a christian; Now Belgium has a minister ( governement ) thinking he is a lesbian male, euh, ex-male. If you want to ...maybe you are a cabbage ? Or a pumpkin ? So okay, the can believe that they are muslim. Bit still in the 9 th century, there were no muslim in that part of Europe. There were in Spain , and buying slaves by Pippin the Short, Charlemagne ( the Frankish loother , that the church of Rome wanted to restaure the Empire, so the crowned him "Emperor", but he did allways demand they call him as he called himself, King of the Frankish... and he did decieve the church, parting his property under his boys as three different legacies . There was NEVER a Empire of Charlemagne in his own mind! Church fixes the administration, he goes to looth...Kind of Attila , and the church made the legend, giving some weigth to Rome, rival of Constantinopolis...
Meanwhile, Arab "muslims , t buy slaves , under Pepin and Charlemagne went to ... Arles, Verdun, Valenciennes, Metz , Mainz,... and Abasside goldpieces walked untill Skandinavia... BUT no Muslim , even not fake, in Balkans in that time. At least,no people pretending to be "muslim" and being "a tribe" in Bosnia...
Allso, the Italic population wasn't murdered yet...she had to remain untill beginning 20 th century ,before the genocide by Croats and Slovenians...
So, propaganda for one or another warmonger of de 21 century? Non-sense...but bloody.
St. Tit formed the apostolic ortodox church in Dalmatia in the first century, do 500 years of Christianity in the Balkans before the Slaves "came" to the Balkans. So Tracians, Tribals, Dalmatians natives are Christian then the Slaves "came" asymeleted them back to paganism to baptise them again late to Christianity.
Makes no sence, but don't know must be a western value.
Interesting but what’s the annoying beeping sound? Sounds like a computer game 😅
those notifications are really annoying and distracting. otherwise good video
The Balkans is essentially a big jar of multicolored jelly beans that too many passers by have shaken up and maybe added more beans. And, each bean has a self-professed expert who can absolutely never be wrong.
Well, this is a theory that is produced and forced in the West to decrease the importance of Slav nations. Some archeological and genetic researches and some historical documents prooves, that there was no Slavic migration, they were always on Balcans (old name is Hem) and from the Danube basin, they fled to the north. Also, there were ethnic groups Thracians, Illyrians, Vlachs, ... they were all just Slavic tribes. This theory has a lot of holes...
Illyrians and vlachians were never Slavs, on the contrary a lot of modern southern Slavs are just assimilated illyrians and thracians who adopted the slavic language
This is the reason behind the DNA similarities between modern day "slavs" and the ancient people of Balkans
Maybe slavs are just the result of these people (illyrians, thracians, dacians, sarmatians) mixing with another linguistic group. Maybe uralic-turcik
Maybe slavic languages are not that ancient
@@cv4809 why not? they could had been proto-slavs
@@freesbee5326 illyrians are today albanians, i’ve read so many books
@@aquord3351 please..stop misinformation
We don’t like leaders cause we know how much it sucks to have to be lead so we like freedom!
I bet Napoleon read Maurices advice about attacking slavs in the winter.
spoilers ahead NO HE DID NOT!
Maurice? Was he a general during french revolution?
@@freesbee5326 Maurice was Emperor of the Eastern Roman Empire in the late 6th century.
@@elusiveeagle8597 yeee I know ..I was mocking the commenters.
Maurikios was his name cause he spoke greek. Maurice is the rendering in english cause everyone wants to make a character as his own..nationalism !
And ..sorry to correct you.
He was the emperor of the only roman empire..byzantine or eastern was the proper continuation..
The western part was a wannabe roman empire and that is the starting point of competition between western and eastern christianity
@@freesbee5326 yes you're right, he was the de facto Emperor of the Roman Empire, or whatever its boundaries were at the time.
Its hard to get things 100% correctly, because one needs to know with who one is communicating with, in regards to historical knowledge.
The endind of Maurikios reign is one of the most tragic episodes of of Byzantine history.
Peace!
Rush 🅱️yzantium.
Basil II wants to know your location
Perfect
Any video about slavic origins the comments turn into a shitshow
Literally... I have went through a couple of videos of this type, and now I am left with an identity crisis even though I did a DNA test. XD
Weil sie alles verfälschen, und mit allen Mitteln hindern möchten, das Wahrheiten herauskommen
Far as proper academic circles in the Balkans go, no one really disputes the migration. Some might argue on the extent of it, one side favoring a mass-migration view and another claiming that it was more limited in scope (i.e. only an elite warrior class), but the historical sources unequivocally state that the event(s) happened.
Those who dispute the migration are populist pseudohistorians who prey on the lowest common denominator's sensibilities, actual academics don't refute proper sources. And as of late we've got genetics more or less confirming that a large scale migration took place around that time, putting the final nail in the "autochthonist" school of thought's coffin.
True. But too bad there are still people who believe these autochthonists and even genetics won't convince them since they claim it's a Vatican-Vienna-Berlin propaganda.
Exactly. The Pseudo-Macedonians are excited with Florin Curta's nonsense.
The noises are very distracting. ...otherwise, engaging.
Haha all my neighbors are cutting grass or metals so I’m glad I can hear the voice 😂
Slavs don’t like leaders cause we know how much it sucks to be bossed around 👌🏼👍
You all need a Slavic Union and need every person between ages 15 and 40 to get some military training. You keep getting your asses kicked in wars. I am American - 25% Slav- and wish you'd unite the way the EU has. Russia, stop being a bully and work as a team.
@@wynnhorton1208 man thats straight up bs,we are best fighters in europe hand to hand combat shooting tanks you name it,we need more unity and less corrupt leaders
"Something thats emotionally charged". No shit lmao, just look at the comments
Reading comments by Southern Slavs and Eastern Slavs on TH-cam I feel like we, the Western Slavs, are very peaceful and rational people. ;)))
We are indeed, but that’s because our circumstances are better. We don’t have to fight anymore really unlike Russians and Balkan Slavs
@@IhaveBigFeet cuz u are not slavs, slavs are war tribe and fight is in their blood
simple as that
Catholicism and germans made you weak...or...just Obedient.
Wife commands and wives follow the parroch's will which follows vatican.
What wife says is law otherwise no hanky-penky for little Pawěłczkscyťz !
East slavs technique was to focus on vodka.
Balkaners solved the problem with slap-and-shut-the-faak-up
Now they are evolved and need no more these ways..
There is porn on internet and everybody has an android phone
@@freesbee5326 replace weak/obedient with civilized and you got it right
@@cv4809 civilized could mean many things. Usually when someone points hardly on this argument he/she is an imperialistic lover, a conservative, a racist and so on, from roman times. Everybody pretend his own culture to be better and so superior to others.
I personally prefer a good big hearted man than an obedient one. An obedient that probably keeps all his frustration inside which could easily develop into who knows which kind of paranoia..into a pedophile, a bigot, a far right one or even worst a nationalist/patriot such a soldier !!
Becouse Swamps are fertile and numerous Slavs are most Numbered Ethnic group and living in bigest territory.Imagine how many Chinesse would be today if they lived in swamps...
Swamps & Hoes 😁
Thank you so much for this amazing video. I am from the Balkans, Macedonia to be precise, and you did a great analysis on this complex historical issue.
You also were spot on in identifying the biggest problem of the balkans today, and that is FACING REALITY.
It is hard to achieve that in the Balkans, to renounce the national myths of pureness ecc and instead work together towards creating a better and more stable europe. But we are getting there, it's not that we don't wanna get there, its not like we are not trying. Its just that this is a complex world we live in xD Sadly, I have to say, the power disbalance between eastern and western Europe is not making these problems easier to solve. Because eastern Europe grows more divided and less willing to cooperate internally precisely because they rely too much on the west. Ultimately, this hinders the east's ability to solve its own issues.
Great video, have a nice day.
Procopius mixed few things up. There is a supreme god in slavic religion (Svarog/Svarod), but he does not interfere nor hold supreme power. Perun is not supreme god. Most honorable in dome places (especially ones who honor st. Elyjah the most today), but not supreme one. Serbs mostly prefer Scetovid, and Russians Dazhdbog/Dajbog.
What reading would you recommend on this topic
Well, you were right about one thing for sure: judging from the coments, you just can't get balkan people to agree on annything on this subject.
you can't get any slavs to agree :D
Nuno dos Santos
There is no such thing as a slav ethnicity. Slav is a religious term used by the Catholics during the eastern Roman Empire who called all the people of the slavic orthodox (pravo slaven) religion, “slavs”
How many slavic nations are there????
About 14
How many “slavs” just in Europe????
About 400 million
Are all these people from one tribe or ethnic group of people???
You have to be crazy to believe that.
How many different nations do the slavs come from???? How many different DNA’s and ancient ancestors are all these nations made of???
Are the Serbians and Bosnians, who have Illyrian blood, the same as the Macedonians who have ancient Macedonian blood??? Or the same as the Bulgars from the Volga river??? Or the Russians who are vikings mixed with ancient sarmations?????
Slavs are a slavic orthodox group of people, or people with a similar “slavic” language, including Croatians, slovenes, Polish and some others who are not slavic orthodox but speak a slavic language.
@@WatchmanofMKDN it's a linguistic group actually,since people from east of Russia to Macedonia speak pretty much the Same language
These people had a common origin and later on expanded
Constantine V according to where SLAVS came from, they would have the R1a haplogroup.
Us Macedonians and most others of the Balkans have the original Balkan i2 Y haplogroup.
If our ancestors migrated there, we wouldn’t have the i2 oldest DNA in the Balkans.
And how can slavs be the same people when their are different origins such as R1a and i2 ???
@@WatchmanofMKDN modern Macedonians may no be genetically Slavs but you are linguistically and culturally assimilated by Slavs
17:09: assimilation is hard to Thrace? :)
Please do more such videos about slavic history. Like you can see in commentaries, in our part of Europe is lack of "cold eye" sight in this subject and lack of basic knowledge. Decades of communistic propaganda replaced scientific discussion.
oh yeah cold blooded rational history is just too much for some people
You are not right, this is not 'cold eye' version of slavic history, it is geraman XIX century propaganda. decades of comunism was another propaganda, both Russian comunists from XX century and German nationalist from XIX century claim the same that Slavs came from east in VI century, but this is not true, Slavs live here much much longer. Slavs are direct dscendants of Lusatian culture or even older. There are strong evidences for that (Slavs are in Central Europe much much longer than V century) and all chronicles can be explained with this version, the idea Slavs came late from east is base only on one week clue and misunderstanding how people behave when climate changes. there is no evidence for the migration. The slavs just came everywhere in Europe becausee they were here almost always and they suddenly prosper because of climeta change or maybe some inventions. Only thee name Slavs is new the people itself are old.
Slavs were known before as Dans. People living from Baltic to Egypt.
Its not just the south slavs and albania. Its also us, the hungarians and also romanians and slovakians that are like this. I am quite frankly sick and tired of all this bulls*** going around especially online! Makes me wish all of us wouldn't exist in the first place! But i suppose theres nothing we can change about this now.
@@tiami3886 Oh, for fuck's sake... lol )))
Ethnic map of Bosnia is very wrong, Serbs were majority in most areas. Also west part of Montenegro and others part of it were Serbs majority. My mother used to work in Statistic Institute of Yugoslavia so I have Census book at home. Serbs were majority in about 40% of Yugoslavia , but when communists made national republics, they didnt put all Serbs in Serbia republic