|
Post by givemebeer on Oct 20, 2008 16:22:49 GMT -5
you keep jumping from place to place not getting the point. I never said they all hated eachother. But its FACT Croatia conquered and ruled Bosnian land, Serbia did the same, Bosnia conquered Croatian and Serbian land, Montenegro tried with Herzegovina even later etc..PLUS the people from within fighting. there's always been conflict. you show one map and it means nothing since the maps were different every 100 years lol. precisily cuz of all the changes. on my map Bosnia is huge, on yours it dont exist. historymedren.about.com/library/atlas/blateursedex.htmalmost every map different...and only 50-100 year difference in each Thanks for posting this, I posted the worng link, my point was just what you said, they change every 100 years... I wanted to post that link to all the maps.. Meaning that said states Bosnian/Croatian/Serbian overlapped, and were even made up by the same people... And that there were no Bosnians/Croats/Serbs then, but just nobleman, who rulled over a bunch of slavic seljaks.. and that this is something that one fails to mention all the time, since godforbid it should be obvious that we are the same people, and that modern nations in the Balkans are all as one a product of the millet concept, we just forgot to get into the whole nation-states thing by language in the 1800s... Anyways, Tvrtko did not wage a war to get lands east of the Drina, those nobles just joined him, Tomislav fought against the Bulgarians... Hel Bosnians Croats and Serbs fought shouder to shoulder at Kosovo polje... well nobles from Serbia Bosnia and Croatia, what the seljaks looked at them self as, I do not know, eve Albanians were there.. So no, we have not always killed each other, this is something rather recent...
|
|
|
Post by Arthur Kane on Oct 20, 2008 16:42:12 GMT -5
The ancestors of the regionals today were those Slavic speaking seljaks. The vast majority lived a meager existence probably not even reaching 30 yrs old. Their rulers and clerics took everything from them including their dignity. These people are the ancestors of most and their descendants prefer to identify with the cult of nobility that ruled over them.
Nation-states was a European and Worldly phenomena, not just Balkan.
|
|
|
Post by givemebeer on Oct 20, 2008 16:46:36 GMT -5
The ancestors of the regionals today were those Slavic speaking seljaks. The vast majority lived a meager existence probably not even reaching 30 yrs old. Their rulers and clerics took everything from them including their dignity. These people are the ancestors of most and their descendants prefer to identify with the cult of nobility that ruled over them. Nation-states was a European and Worldly phenomena, not just Balkan. YaY.. you got what I said, but all in all they were the same poeple, and even the nobility looked at them selfs as almost the same...So taking pride in a king that made your great great great grandpa work like a slave seems insane to me, LoL
|
|
|
Post by fannoli on Oct 20, 2008 17:20:05 GMT -5
Nation-states started during late eighteenth-nineteenth and even early twentieth century. Saying that Bosnians fought Croatia during 12th century is not a correct statement as i doubt people then identified as "Bosnian" Europe 1914
|
|
|
Post by Arthur Kane on Oct 20, 2008 17:35:25 GMT -5
Most people in those days identified with their fuedal region and/or religion. A 'Bosnian' in those days was typically reserved for the few nobles and associated with a territory of land they controlled. It has little in common with modern ethnic identities.
|
|
|
Post by givemebeer on Oct 20, 2008 17:37:52 GMT -5
Most people in those days identified with their fuedal region and/or religion. A 'Bosnian' in those days was typically reserved for the few nobles and associated with a territory of land they controlled. It has little in common with modern ethnic identities. true, but the same goes for "serbs" and "croats" and, huh, must other peoples I guess
|
|
|
Post by Arthur Kane on Oct 20, 2008 17:43:30 GMT -5
All of them practically.
|
|
|
Post by givemebeer on Oct 20, 2008 17:47:50 GMT -5
Jews, Greeks and Chinese are the only "old" poeples I guess. and perhaps even Iranians and Iraqis, after all they made civlization on the banks of the Tigris
|
|
|
Post by tito on Oct 20, 2008 17:54:54 GMT -5
Jews, Greeks and Chinese are the only "old" poeples I guess. and perhaps even Iranians and Iraqis, after all they made civlization on the banks of the Tigris Today’s Jews and Greeks have ethnically nothing to do with the old Jews and Greeks. Don’t know about the Chinese and the others.
|
|
|
Post by givemebeer on Oct 20, 2008 17:57:48 GMT -5
Jews, Greeks and Chinese are the only "old" poeples I guess. and perhaps even Iranians and Iraqis, after all they made civlization on the banks of the Tigris Today’s Jews and Greeks have ethnically nothing to do with the old Jews and Greeks. Don’t know about the Chinese and the others. Guess you are right, lol... Chinese people, I do not know anything about chinese history
|
|
|
Post by Arthur Kane on Oct 20, 2008 17:59:20 GMT -5
Greeks and Chinese , not so much. Its a mistake to think the modern Greek identity has really anything to do with the Ancient Greeks. Ancient Greeks spoke ancient Greek and were connected close proximity and language but identified more with regions and city states and fought eachother more than 'foreigners' even. China, even today , is divided up into many local and independent cultures within the Chinese borders and they have been distinct for a very long time.
Jew is tricky because no one knows what it means exactly. Is Jew a religion? Is Jew a race? If I converted to Judaism tomorrow does that really make me a 'Jew?' Where the Khazars really Jews? Of course nothing about the identity, or pretty much any other identity from which moral principles are derived , is based on any kind of truth.
|
|
|
Post by kapetan on Oct 20, 2008 18:31:10 GMT -5
Nation-states started during late eighteenth-nineteenth and even early twentieth century. Saying that Bosnians fought Croatia during 12th century is not a correct statement as i doubt people then identified as "Bosnian" Europe 1914You people are taking this way toos eriosly. What I meant was Bosnian kingdom and Serian and Croatian kingdom constantly conquered new lands. I never said there some ethnic hatred. Back then religion only mattered anyway. But BTW Bosnians identified as Bosnjani as written by Ban Kulin and Kralj Tvrtko both. So yes they did have identity, weather national like american or an ethnic one is up to you what you wona belive. in ottoman empire it turned into bosniak. not important to my point though. what was the poiint of posting those maps? We know Bosnia was in austro-hungarian empire for short time. wtf? lol
|
|
|
Post by kapetan on Oct 20, 2008 18:41:47 GMT -5
Examples of what I was syaing about constant warring and conquering in the area:
The Byzantines restored control over Bosnia at the end of 10th century, but not for long as it was soon taken by Emperor Samuil of Bulgaria.
During middle of 11th century Byzantine Empire influence has been changed with the influence of Petar Krešimir IV of Croatia but with his death in 1074 Croatian control of Bosnian region had failed.
Constantin Bodin conquered Bosnia in 1082 and placed Stephen, one of his courtiers, as Prince.
After Croatia has entered personal union with Hungarian kingdom in 1102, most of Bosnia became vassal to Hungary as well.
Beginning from the 12th century, Bosnia found itself outside the control of various forces and emerged as an independent state under the rule of local bans.
Eventually, the Byzantine Empire under Manuel I Comnenus conquered Bosnia from the Hungarians in 1166 and brought the native ruler Ban Kulin (1180–1204) to Bosnia.
Kulin was first notable Bosnian ban, and he led Bosnia successfully to a war in 1183 together with its Béla III of Hungary, Prince Miroslav of Zahumlje, and Serbian ruler Stefan Nemanja. This war eventually liberated Bosnia from Byzantine rule, but it returned it under the Hungarian crown. The rest of Kulin's rule peaceful for Bosnia, and so the period of Kulin's reign has ever since been remembered as the Age of Peace and Prosperity. In 1189 Ban Kulin issued the first written Bosnian document written in native Bosnian Cyrillic (Bosancica), where he described Bosnia's statehood and referred to its people as Bosnians (Bošnjani).
etc...
|
|
|
Post by malsor4life on Oct 20, 2008 19:05:47 GMT -5
^ You forgot about the wars Boshnjaks have waged on Albanians !
|
|
|
Post by tito on Oct 20, 2008 19:11:30 GMT -5
^ You forgot about the wars Boshnjaks have waged on Albanians ! Bosniaks and Albanians have spilled blood together from Vienna to Persia for about 400 years. And as soon as we become Nato nations we will spill blood together again.
|
|
|
Post by Arthur Kane on Oct 20, 2008 19:25:25 GMT -5
How much blood have you split? You're talking out of your a$$ and will willingly send 'your people' as cannon fodder for some political agenda.
|
|
|
Post by kapetan on Oct 20, 2008 19:46:17 GMT -5
^ You forgot about the wars Boshnjaks have waged on Albanians ! which are.....
|
|
|
Post by coke&broke on Oct 20, 2008 20:43:59 GMT -5
The only Albanians with a strong dislike of Bosniaks are those primitive Catholic Malesor mountain apes who shudder at the utterance of the words Muslim/Islam.
There is no reason why any secular Albanian should hate Bosniaks as a whole. Of course there are a few rotten apples in every ethnic group, but the majority of Bosnians I have come across have been friendly and hospitable.
|
|
|
Post by meltdown711 on Oct 20, 2008 21:49:17 GMT -5
Its generally true, Catholics in the north are generally the most backwards and also the most religious of groups in the country.
Although I would say that in Albania, the feeling towards Bosnians is neutral. People generally dont know anything about Bosnia and have a hard time distinguishing it from the rest of the Yugoslavs.
|
|
Demonel
Amicus
I am Jack's regained insanity.
Posts: 833
|
Post by Demonel on Nov 1, 2008 18:21:31 GMT -5
Don't talk abput things you know nothing about. Tvrtko did wage a war to get lands east of the Drina. In the Spring of 1370, Tvrtko led Bosnia's nobility to a war against Prince Nikola Altomanoviæ. Negotiations were initiated already in the Summer. In Serbia Nikola's power was rapidly decreasing and that of the House of Mrnjavèeviæ rapidly increasing. Tvrtko negotiated with Serb King Vukašin Mrnjavèeviæ to marry a cousin, the daughter of Grgur II Šubiæ to Vukašin's son, Young Serb King Marko. Marko was Orthodox Christian, so the Pope wasn't supportive of the marriage and Vuk had mettled around the affair, so Tvrtko gave up of the idea. In 1371, Tvrtko prepared a joint offensive against Nikola Altomanoviæ with two Serbian noblemen, Vukašin Mrnjavèeviæ and Ðurað Balšiæ. The move was stopped as the Mrnjavèeviæ brothers attacked the Ottoman Turks at the famous Battle of Marica. The Serbian Emperor Stefan Uroš V himself died very soon. Tvrtko sought help in the remaining Serbian lords that still didn't recognize supreme Ottoman rule. He forged an alliance with Lazar Hrebeljanoviæ, the Prince of Moravian Serbia. The decisive conflict was in 1373. Ban Tvrtko raised his army and the Hungarian King sent a thousand pikeman under Srem's Ban Miklós Garai. Tvrtko attacked from the west, while Prince Lazar attacked from the east. Very soon, the two armies met at Užice, where they forced Nikola Altomanoviæ to surrender. Nikola was blinded and banished to a monastery, while his demesne was split. Tvrtko gained the Upper Drina area and the Lim area with Mileševa as well as Gacko. Konavle, Trebinje and Draèevica; other lands in which was Tvrtko interested, were seized by Ðuraš Balšiæ of Zeta. The other lands were given to Prince Lazar.
|
|