|
Post by srbobran on Dec 18, 2010 14:16:37 GMT -5
I don't know if this in DAI specifically but it is mentioned in Byzantine sources. The Serbs beat the Bulgarians twice prior to the 927-930 Bulgarian occupation of Serbia you are talking about. The first war between Bulgarians and Serbs took place between 839 and 842. According to Byzantine sources both peoples co-existed peacefully up to that moment.[1] The conflict was a result of the Byzantine policy to divert the Bulgarian expansion in their southern-western provinces.[2] After the Bulgarians took western Macedonia the Serbs thought they were threated to be engulfed by the large Bulgarian Empire. Their Knyaz Vlastimir managed to unite several Serbian tribes[3] and the Byzantine Emperor Theophilos who was officially overlord of the Serbian tribes supported Vlastimir in his attempts for unification of the Serbs and probably granted them independence[4] aiming at creating a threat to the Bulgarians. The Bulgarian Khan Presian decided to eliminate the growing Byzantine influence over the Serbs and attacked them in 839. The war lasted for three years and Presian did not achieve anything - he only lost part of his army. However, the Byzantines achieved their aim - the Bulgarian attention was diverted and they managed to cope with the Slavic rebellions in Pelopones. The war ended with the death of Theophilos in 842 which on one hand released Vlastimir from his obligations to the Emperor and on the other hand gave opportunity to the Bulgarians to attack the Byzantine Empire and annex the area of Ohrid, Bitola and Devol in 842-843.[5]After the death of Vlastimir c.850 his state was divided between his sons Mutimir, Stroimir and Goinik and the new Bulgarian ruler Boris I attacked the Serbs. He wanted to use the Serbian weakness and impose Bulgarian influence instead of the Byzantine one. However, the campaign proved to be a disaster after the Serbs defeated the Bulgarian army and captured Boris I's son Vladimir Rasate and twelve great boils.[6] To take back his son, Boris I concluded peace with the Serbs and both sides exchanged gifts.[7] There were no territorial changes but the Bulgarian ruler probably abandoned his ambitions to conquer the Serbs. However, the Bulgarians achieved part of their objectives - the Serbs rejected their alliance with Byzantium. Boris and Mutumir established friendly relations and the latter was backed by the Bulgarians in his struggle against his brothers and after Mutimir captured them they were sent to Bulgaria.[8]en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bulgarian%E2%80%93Serbian_Wars_(medieval)
|
|
|
Post by Novi Pazar on Dec 18, 2010 18:01:13 GMT -5
"i have both "Pros ton idion uion"(DAI) and Florin Curta's interesting book in pdf. who want them?" Patrino, l would be interested to read Florin Curta's book, could you pass over the pdf file to me
|
|
|
Post by EriTopSheqeri on Dec 18, 2010 19:17:43 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by terroreign on Dec 18, 2010 19:43:02 GMT -5
If I'm not mistaken thats legend for the most part and no actual sources exist to confirm this. I think I've read before that certain Albanian descended clans in Montenegro like Bjelopavlic, Vasojevic, and Kuci having started to claim blood from Serb nobility in modern times. Serbs stayed put after the battle. Each tribe, and family in Montenegro preserves their own Rodoslov, which holds record of each family member spanning back sometimes to even the 14th century. It is a fact Serbs migrated following the battle. "A large scale Serb migration north to Hungary and west to the Adriatic began soon after the defeat at the battle on the Marica River and continued with the loss at the Battle of Kosovo in 1389." books.google.com/books?id=eFVjMocptcYC&printsec=frontcover&dq=bradt+travel+guide+serbia&hl=en&ei=2lYNTcDIOJSusAPk76T0Cg&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=1&ved=0CCYQ6AEwAA#v=onepage&q=migration&f=falseVasojevici trace their origins to the Nemanjici in Kosovo, Kuci mainly to western Macedonia (Mrnjavcevic royal family), Bjelopavlici to Bijeli Pavle Dukadzinski.
|
|
|
Post by andromeda on Dec 18, 2010 22:22:35 GMT -5
I don't know if this in DAI specifically but it is mentioned in Byzantine sources. The Serbs beat the Bulgarians twice prior to the 927-930 Bulgarian occupation of Serbia you are talking about. The first war between Bulgarians and Serbs took place between 839 and 842. According to Byzantine sources both peoples co-existed peacefully up to that moment.[1] The conflict was a result of the Byzantine policy to divert the Bulgarian expansion in their southern-western provinces.[2] After the Bulgarians took western Macedonia the Serbs thought they were threated to be engulfed by the large Bulgarian Empire. Their Knyaz Vlastimir managed to unite several Serbian tribes[3] and the Byzantine Emperor Theophilos who was officially overlord of the Serbian tribes supported Vlastimir in his attempts for unification of the Serbs and probably granted them independence[4] aiming at creating a threat to the Bulgarians. The Bulgarian Khan Presian decided to eliminate the growing Byzantine influence over the Serbs and attacked them in 839. The war lasted for three years and Presian did not achieve anything - he only lost part of his army. However, the Byzantines achieved their aim - the Bulgarian attention was diverted and they managed to cope with the Slavic rebellions in Pelopones. The war ended with the death of Theophilos in 842 which on one hand released Vlastimir from his obligations to the Emperor and on the other hand gave opportunity to the Bulgarians to attack the Byzantine Empire and annex the area of Ohrid, Bitola and Devol in 842-843.[5]After the death of Vlastimir c.850 his state was divided between his sons Mutimir, Stroimir and Goinik and the new Bulgarian ruler Boris I attacked the Serbs. He wanted to use the Serbian weakness and impose Bulgarian influence instead of the Byzantine one. However, the campaign proved to be a disaster after the Serbs defeated the Bulgarian army and captured Boris I's son Vladimir Rasate and twelve great boils.[6] To take back his son, Boris I concluded peace with the Serbs and both sides exchanged gifts.[7] There were no territorial changes but the Bulgarian ruler probably abandoned his ambitions to conquer the Serbs. However, the Bulgarians achieved part of their objectives - the Serbs rejected their alliance with Byzantium. Boris and Mutumir established friendly relations and the latter was backed by the Bulgarians in his struggle against his brothers and after Mutimir captured them they were sent to Bulgaria.[8]en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bulgarian%E2%80%93Serbian_Wars_(medieval)I like you Serbobran. You seem like a reasonable guy. This is an O.K description and this is written in Chap 32 of the DAI but the Bulgarian losses were not that deep ( all things considered really) and Symeon almost obliterated Serbia a short while after anyway. Serbs did have their battles though. [glow=red,2,300]nd since Bulgaria was beneath the dominion of the Romans *** when, therefore, that same Serbian prince died who had claimed the emperor's protection, his son ruled in succession, and thereafter his grandson, and in like manner the succeeding princes from his family. And after some years was begotten of them Boïseslav, and of him Rodoslav, and of him Prosigoïs, and of him Blastimer; and up to the time of this Blastimer the Bulgarians lived at peace with the Serbs, whose neighbours they were and with whom they had a common frontier, and they were friendly one toward another, and were in servitude and submission to the emperors of the Romans and kindly entreated by them. But, during the rule of this same Blastimer, Presiam, prince of Bulgaria, came with war against the Serbs, with intent to reduce them to submission; but though he fought them three years he not merely achieved nothing but also lost very many of his men. After the death of prince Blastimer his three sons, Muntimer and Stroïmer and Goïnikos, succeeded to the rule of Serbia and divided up the country. In their time came up the prince of Bulgaria, Michael Boris, wishing to avenge the defeat of his father Presiam, and made war, and the Serbs discomfited him to such an extent that they even held prisoner his son Vladimer, together with twelve great boyars. Then, out of grief for his son, Boris perforce made peace with the Serbs. But, being about to return to Bulgaria and afraid lest the Serbs might ambush him on the way, he begged for his escort the sons of prince Muntimer, Borenas and Stephen, who escorted him safely as far as the frontier at Rasi. For this favour Michael Boris gave them handsome presents, and they in return gave him, as presents in the way of friendship, two slaves, two falcons, two dogs and eighty furs, which the Bulgarians describe as tribute. A short while after, the same three brothers, the princes of Serbia, fell out, and one of them, Muntimer, gained the upper hand and, wishing to be sole ruler, seized the other two and handed them over to Bulgaria, keeping by him and caring for only the son of the one brother Goïnikos, Peter by name, who fled and came to Croatia, and of whom we shall speak in a moment. The aforesaid brother Stroïmer, who was in Bulgaria, had a son Klonimer, to whom Boris gave a Bulgarian wife. Of him was begotten Tzeëslav, in Bulgaria. Muntimer, who had expelled his two brothers and taken the rule, begat three sons, Pribeslav and Branos and Stephen, and after he died his eldest son Pribeslav succeeded him. Now, after one year the aforesaid Peter, son of Goïnikos, came out of Croatia and expelled from the rule his cousin Pribeslav and his two brothers, and himself succeeded to the rule, and they fled away and entered Croatia. Three years later Branos came to fight Peter and was defeated and captured by him, and blinded. Two years after that, Klonimer, the father of Tzeëslav, escaped from Bulgaria and he too came and with an army entered one of the cities of Serbia, Dostinika, with intent to take over the rule. Peter attacked and slew him, and continued to govern for another 20 years, and his rule began during the reign of Leo, the holy emperor, of most blessed memory, to whom he was in submission and servitude. He also made peace with Symeon, prince of Bulgaria, and even made him god-father to his child. Now, after the time that this lord Leo had reigned, the then military governor at Dyrrachium, the protospatharius Leo Rhabduchus, who was afterwards honoured with the rank of magister and office of foreign minister, arrived in Pagania, which was at that time under the control of the prince of Serbia, in order to advise and confer with this same prince Peter upon some service and affair. Michael, prince of the Zachlumi, his jealousy aroused by this, sent information to Symeon, prince of Bulgaria, that the emperor of the Romans was bribing prince Peter to take the Turks with him and go upon Bulgaria. It was at that time when the battle of Achelo had taken place between the Romans and the Bulgarians. Symeon, mad with rage at this, sent against prince Peter of Serbia Sigritzis Theodore and the late Marmaïs with an army, and they took with them also the young prince Paul, son of Branos whom Peter, prince of Serbia, had blinded. The Bulgarians proceeded against the prince of Serbia by treachery, and, by binding him with the relationship of god-father and giving a sworn undertaking that he should suffer nothing untoward at their hands, they tricked him into coming out to them, and then on the instant bound him and carried him off to Bulgaria, and he died in prison. Paul, son of Branos, took his place and governed three years. The emperor, the lord Romanus, who had in Constantinople the young prince Zacharias, son of Pribeslav, prince of Serbia, sent him off to be prince in Serbia, and he went and fought, but was defeated by Paul; who took him prisoner and handed him over to the Bulgarians and he was kept in prison. Then, three years later, when Paul had put himself in opposition to the Bulgarians, they sent this Zacharias, who had previously been sent by the lord Romanus the emperor, and he expelled Paul and himself took possession of the rule over the Serbs; and thereupon, being mindful of the benefits of the emperor of the Romans, he broke with the Bulgarians, being not at all wishful to be subjected to them, but rather that the emperor of the Romans should be his master. And so, when Symeon sent against him an army under Marmaim and Sigritzis Theodore, he sent their heads and their armour from the battle to the emperor of the Romans as tokens of his victory (for the war was still going on between the Romans and the Bulgarians); nor did he ever cease, like the princes also that were before him, to send missions to the emperors of the Romans, and to be in subjection and servitude to them. Again, Symeon sent another army against prince Zacharias, under Kninos and Himnikos and Itzboklias, and together with them he sent also Tzeëslav. Then Zacharias took fright and fled to Croatia, and the Bulgarians sent a message to the 'zupans' that they should come to them and should receive Tzeëslav for their prince; and, having tricked them by an oath and brought them out as far as the first village, they instantly bound them, and entered Serbia and took away with them the entire folk, both old and young, and carried them into Bulgaria, though a few escaped away and entered Croatia; and the country was left deserted. Now, at that time these same Bulgarians under Alogobotour entered Croatia to make war, and there they were all slain by the Croats. Seven years afterwards Tzeëslav escaped from the Bulgarians with four others, and entered Serbia from Preslav, and found in the country no more than fifty men only, without wives or children, who supported themselves by hunting. With these he took possession of the country and sent a message to the emperor of the Romans asking for his support and succour, and promising to serve him and be obedient to his command, as had been the princes before him. And thenceforward the emperor of the Romans continually benefited him, so that the Serbs living in Croatia and Bulgaria and the rest of the countries, whom Symeon had scattered, rallied to him when they heard of it. Moreover, many had escaped from Bulgaria and entered Constantinople, and these the emperor of the Romans clad and comforted and sent to Tzeëslav. And from the rich gifts of the emperor of the Romans he organized and populated the country, and is, as before, in servitude and subjection to the emperor of the Romans; and through the co-operation and many benefits of the emperor he has united this country and is confirmed in the rule of it. [/glow] ^^ Pretty epic story although probably very exaggerated at some points ( sort of like the Bible). I don't believe there were only '50' men left in Serbia unless Serbia was smaller than even the most critical historians believe. I don't think Serbia was made desolate but it was hit pretty hard. Eventually Tzeslav pulled an old switcheroo on the Bulgarians and pleaded for aid from the Emperor to rule in Byzantium's Name. From this point on the Serbs were recognized subjects of the Emperor unlike the Croats and Bulgarians ( which is probably why they get rewarded handsomely with land that they don't necessarily occupy). But all things considered aligning with Byzantium was probably the right move considering Serbs were crunched between Croats and Bulgarians and the Bulgarians , obviously , threatened them the most.
|
|
|
Post by plisbardhi on Dec 18, 2010 23:53:14 GMT -5
Albanians do that too, its a highland clan thing. I do expect you to say its Serbian but its really not since other Serbs don't have that tradition. Church records don't count, I'm talking about actual clan members who learn and recite it orally.
If it was a major fact you would be able to find concrete sources other than a Serbia travel guide. Lol
The Vasojevic are related to Gashi I believe, don't have time to look that one up right now. The Kuci are descend from Berisha, the oldest Alb clan meaning the one clan that didn't have memory of migration. They were the most recently Albanian and used to admit this along with speaking Albanian. Bijeli Pavle Dukadzinski simply means Pal Bardhi from Dukagjini (pure Albanian zone in the north), totally Albanian as you seem to be admiting but in your own language.
There was no reason for Albs to make this stuff up back then when this was recorded a hundred years ago. Our people were always very ancestor conscious. The other clans of Montenegro most likely descend from the original Slavicised inhabitants, since if anything they record that they came from Hercegovina or somwhere very near. It just happens that clans that descend from Albanians now claim royal Serb heritage from comparively far lands like Macedonia lol.
Why didn't we claim any clans that don't claim "royal" origins for themselves today? Think about that one for a while.
|
|
|
Post by terroreign on Dec 19, 2010 0:38:43 GMT -5
As I said, the purest Serbs are from Montenegro, Raska/Kosovo and Hercegovina regions...so what the Serbs of Serbia do or not do is irrelevant. These Rodoslovs are not kept by the church as far as I know, but by the tribe/family elder. It's written by an unbiased author, plenty other sources say the same thing The "Gashi" descend from Hercegovina, a Serb named Gaso/Gavrilo. There goes your Albanian-origin idea lol. The Old Kuci as well as the Drekalovic trace their origins to the Mrnjavcevic royal house of Macedonia during Dusan's Serbia. In their Rodoslov's Serbian names go all the way back. The Albanization of a portion of the Kuci was relatively recent in comparison to the history of the Kuci. Leader of the Kuci, Marko Miljanov actually cited that the Albanians of the Kuci, Gruda and Hoti celebrate Serbian Slava and considered themselves one with the Serbs. Bijeli Pavle was a Kosovo prince, of the Dukadjin region, 'Dukadjin' was simply the 'land of Duke Djin", most probably an old Vlach duke. Pavle's brother, Aleksandar, would go on to compose a set of laws to tame the restless Albanian hordes that came to settle in his land, known as the 'Kanun' (Canon). Sure albanians are little saints George Bush learned first hand when he visited the pleasant town of Tirana Many other Montenegrin tribes trace ancestry to royal houses, my father's (Krivosije) trace ancestry to the Orlovici house and the Moracani to Kosovo knights. If you take into account the historical context of the time, and that Royal families had the most power and influence, it's the most plausible that these families would be the ones to lead migrations into free areas and would have the means to set up tribal organizations. Because they're not close to the Albanian border lol ;D
|
|
Kralj Vatra
Amicus
Warning: Sometimes uses foul language & insults!!!
20%
Posts: 9,814
|
Post by Kralj Vatra on Dec 19, 2010 3:56:24 GMT -5
The Serbs never *really* beat the Bulgarians in the DAI. At best it was a draw. Chap 32 even states that the Serbs fled to the protection of Croatia , the Croats won a small spat with the Bulgarians on the Bulg-Cro border ( somewhere around the Bosna and Drina rivers) for them and let them rebuild their homes. You are a liar. Anyways, sorry, actually it is chapter 32 and not 30. Here we go: The ENGLISH xlation is VERY favorable of the bulgos: Here we go: (Presiam of Bulgaria) "ου μονον ουδέν ήνυσεν αλλα και λαόν αυτού πλείστον απώλεσεν" is translated to: "he not merely achieve nothing, but also lost very many of his men" whereas it should be precisely: "not only he achieved nothing, but also lost MOST of his PEOPLE"
πλείστος = most (not just many) and λαός=people (not only "men")
(anyone who knows Greek in here (unfortunately i dont have many greek friends in here to do a verification) can easily verify that. Pages 154 and 155 and 156 describe in detail this victory of the Serbs against the Bulgarians. (how many dogs were given as gift (2), how many woolen coats (80), etc... Now, about chapters 30,30,31, Curta believes that ONLY chapter 30, was NOT written by Porfyrogenitos, but by another author, later. I am not suggesting that DAI should be perceived like a silver bullet or smt (the begining of ch.32 about the serb shoes is just laughable), i just want to cancel the snake's argument about DAI not refering to Serbian victory over the Bulgarians. Andromeda, you are a certified liar.
|
|
Kralj Vatra
Amicus
Warning: Sometimes uses foul language & insults!!!
20%
Posts: 9,814
|
Post by Kralj Vatra on Dec 19, 2010 4:20:03 GMT -5
But where are these 'extensive sources? List of sources based on eye-witness VS possible contact VS second hand info: "Making of the Slavs" -> page 71 (#17 sources in total) List of sources of 6th-7th cent by accompanied time-spans: "Making of the Slavs" -> page 72 (#14 sources in total) Chronology of sources: "Making of the Slavs" -> page 73 (#26 sources in total) cheers PS You say you have read some of "Florin Curta", but my impression is that you dont have read his basic books. Anyway i would prefer him over Fine, since a) he is balkanian (Fine is not) b) comes from a country with huge slavic heritage (Fine does not) c) he knows many of the local languages (i dont know where Fine stands on this, but the odds are for Curta here as well) However, there are still many facts that Curta is completely ignorant about. E.g. the bulgarian toponyms in Crete, the great campaign by the Romans-Byzantines against Crete in 961, which IMO is one of the most important events of the late 1st millenium, etc.... Also the "weird" case of Epiros and south albanian is not even touched by him.
|
|
Kralj Vatra
Amicus
Warning: Sometimes uses foul language & insults!!!
20%
Posts: 9,814
|
Post by Kralj Vatra on Dec 19, 2010 4:28:45 GMT -5
OMG ur so cool it would just be funny if they were Bulgarian in origin though. lol. I cant find a way that SERV-eika or SERB-IANA could be bulgarian, but anyway my imagination and creativity are peanuts in comparison to yours, i guess.
|
|
donnie
Senior Moderator
Nike Leka i Kelmendit
Posts: 3,389
|
Post by donnie on Dec 19, 2010 5:12:45 GMT -5
Here's what a Serbian author has to say;
a ime Bijeli Pavle naèinjeno je prema albanskom uzoru. Po jednom albanskom predanju, Leka Dukaðin je imao sina Nikolu od kojega potièu Miriditi i Šaljani, i sina Bijelog Pavla od kojega vode porijeklo Bjelopavliæi i Gašani. I sami Bjelopavliæi prièaju da su Bijeli Pavle i Gaš (Gavrilo) bili braæa, sinovi Leke Dukaðina, a isto predanje imaju i Gaši. U "Zemljišniku skadarskom", iz 1416. godine, meðu albanskim imenima nalazi se i Pali Bard. Kako primjeæuje Šobajiæ, kod Albanaca se uz imena èesto upotrebljava atribut bard - bijeli, pa je prema tome Pali Bard - Bijeli Pavle. I u jednom mletaèkom izvoru iz XVII vijeka spominju se Bjelopavliæi pod imenom Palabardi (Palabardhi). Iako su neka bratstva u Bjelopavliæima, po predanju, starinom iz "latinskog Dukaðina", zbog njihove pravoslavne vjere, koja je oèito kasnije primljena, Šobajiæ ih je smatrao Srbima.f116
Why if they trace their origins to the same root would they be called "Old" and "New" Kuci? Unless some other variable is at work, which is a fact .. namely that the Drekal clan actually claimed descent from Skanderbeg, not the Mrnjavcevici.
Old toponyms like Bankeqi, Bardhanj, Koci, Fundina etc testify to the contrary, not to mention old sources that speak of "Chuzzi Albanesi" (Bolizza, 1614).
Old Montenegro is pretty close, not to mention these people had the tendency to migrate. For example the Ceklin clan of Old Montenegro claim descent from Kelmendi.
I wont comment on the rest of your attempt to violate and rape history.. just correcting certain details.
|
|
ioan
Amicus
Posts: 4,162
|
Post by ioan on Dec 19, 2010 5:13:47 GMT -5
Tnx for the great info andromeda. As it is obvious from the text, it was Croatia, Bulgaria and Byzantuim that played most important roles at the time on the Bolkans. Serbia was a compilation of jupans that fell under the influence of the three and depending on the period was dominated by one of the three.
|
|
|
Post by Novi Pazar on Dec 19, 2010 7:36:41 GMT -5
^ Quick to jump in here Ioan and praise a liar!. You are a scum bag.
|
|
Kralj Vatra
Amicus
Warning: Sometimes uses foul language & insults!!!
20%
Posts: 9,814
|
Post by Kralj Vatra on Dec 19, 2010 7:45:58 GMT -5
^ Quick to jump in here Ioan and praise a liar!. You are a scum bag. Ioan has given the term "Delusion" a new meaning. Some new word must be invented just for him.
|
|
ioan
Amicus
Posts: 4,162
|
Post by ioan on Dec 19, 2010 7:48:35 GMT -5
A liar? For you a liar is someone who is posting the direct source. is it because it paints the serbs in not so great light? remember u quote it quite often but you dislike seeing it posted.
|
|
|
Post by plisbardhi on Dec 19, 2010 8:46:48 GMT -5
Lol Gjin the Vlach duke. Nice try Krivaj.
|
|
Kralj Vatra
Amicus
Warning: Sometimes uses foul language & insults!!!
20%
Posts: 9,814
|
Post by Kralj Vatra on Dec 19, 2010 8:54:47 GMT -5
A liar? For you a liar is someone who is posting the direct source. is it because it paints the serbs in not so great light? remember u quote it quite often but you dislike seeing it posted. i copied directly from the book, and also offered a more accurate translation. But even in the wrong published english xlation it is evident that Serbs kicked your asses. It is in front of your face, moron, how can you avoid it? You are gifted.... with idiocy!!
|
|
ioan
Amicus
Posts: 4,162
|
Post by ioan on Dec 19, 2010 9:52:47 GMT -5
since when are you the most qualified WORLDWIDE translator from byzantine Greek? No thanks, I will (as all sane people should) depend for the translation on proffesor, not some hacker influenced with proserbian propaganda by wify.
|
|
Patrinos
Amicus
Peloponnesos uber alles
Posts: 4,763
|
Post by Patrinos on Dec 19, 2010 15:05:56 GMT -5
However, there are still many facts that Curta is completely ignorant about. E.g. the bulgarian toponyms in Crete, the great campaign by the Romans-Byzantines against Crete in 961, which IMO is one of the most important events of the late 1st millenium, etc.... Also the "weird" case of Epiros and south albanian is not even touched by him. re to malaka... you are ridiculous pyrrocki...you think that the whole world must share your insanity....and wild imagination... ;D ;D Guys we know Pyrrov...he is an illiterate malakas...who base his knowledge in wiki and youtube... and the first 10-15 pages of a book...after he discovers that the author is ignorant and not proper for a huge mind like pyrros'..... the example with the translation above of the noun "laos" is a great example...since pyrrov thinks like he reads a Greek newspaper of 2010...and the words must have the same meaning always... because modern greek "laos"(λαός) is used mainly with the basic meaning of the ancient "laos" which is "people"... (more rarely with the meaning with the "crowd") Pyrrovik forgets that there are dictionaries out there available for any one... but as it seems...pyrros don't even know them... Lets see what the greatest and most valuable Dictionary of ancient Greek that by Liddell-Scott writes:
|
|
|
Post by andromeda on Dec 20, 2010 0:49:47 GMT -5
The Serbs never *really* beat the Bulgarians in the DAI. At best it was a draw. Chap 32 even states that the Serbs fled to the protection of Croatia , the Croats won a small spat with the Bulgarians on the Bulg-Cro border ( somewhere around the Bosna and Drina rivers) for them and let them rebuild their homes. I quoted already pretty much Chapter 32 of the DAI describing the history of festivals and fights between the medieval Serbs and Bulgarians. What did I lie about? Chapter 32 already covers all this which I already posted. Keep up with the thread. And I guess you could call it a victory...I mean , according to the story the Bulgarian leader had his son kidnapped and ransomed by the Serbs. Bulgarians made peace to spare some lives. Point is that Serbs were caught in a precarious position. They hadn't by this time organized as well as the Bulgarians and Croatians and their survival depended on courting Croats , Bulgarians , and especially winning favor with Constantinople. Serbs mostly killed each other according to these stories and tried to forge alliances with neighbors for that reason. O rly?We know that. Virtually the whole thing was recorded by Porphy but he probably only authored Chapter 32-37 with the possibility of concluding 31 since there seems to be a huge time shift there. However , authors like Fine ( Curta's associates in many cases) believes that the last chapters were the youngest ones. They are clearly contemporary to the 10th century and not the 7th which would make Chap 30 and at least part of 31 older. Hey , don't get your panties all twisted up. It's what he said and that's how he viewed the Serbs. The Serbs were the Byzantine's 'chosen' people to represent them in an area controlled largely by two groups that weren't enslaved to them ( the Bulgarians and Croats). For your relief it can be argued according to the DAI that the Serbs won a couple victories , either by sword or espionage, but it chronicles a saga , particularly in 32 where the Serbian despots are the stars, in which the Bulgarians end up completely obliterating the Serbs , almost to the point of extinction ( I think its exaggerated but this is what it says) and the only people to survive are protected by Croats and Greeks ( actually it doesn't suggest that the Bulgarians wanted to slaughter the Serbs as a people , rather just subjugation of them - since almost everyone else made a hobby of controlling these Serbs) It finally ends with Tzeslav ( A Bulgaro-Serbian noble empowered by Symeon initially) turning his back on his Bulgarian master , fleeing to Constantinople , then coming back to his empty country under a 'Greek banner.' Tzeslav became the ruler of the Serbs according to Byzantium and all the Serbs rallied to him although hardly any were in Serbia proper but now lived in Croatian and Bulgarian lands ( that Symeon had scattered) , hence a logical explanation for the sudden Serb vassalage of land outside Rascia like southern Dalmatian and Herzegovian dutchies ( most definitely Croat first) as well as Serb vassalage in lands east of Rascia ( most definitely Bulgarian first). I'm not making this up , I'm just quoting a historical source . And while that source has its flaws , it is currently the most detailed account of happenings in the early medieval Balkans. Personally I'd love to find a near original copy of the De Regno Sclavorum so it can stand a lone from the Chronicle of the Priest of Dioclea ( Ljetopis Popa Dukljanina).
|
|