This video is dedicated to the topic of the Slavic invasion and/or migration into the Balkans during the 7th Century CE and the attendant issues and controversies.
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.
@@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!
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.
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”
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 !!
@@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.
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
I’m not sure what map in “Controversies and Problems” section should represent but it looks pretty inaccurate if representing ethnical map of western balcans in any period
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?
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.
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
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.
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 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.
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 :)
great video, the question that remains is what caused the population explosion for the slavs to be able to migrate in the first place? And how could they settle such a massive area, ie from Slovenia to Bulgaria, especially the craggy mountains of macedonia and bosnia? do you think the language just spread over time? also, what la guages were spoken in croatia, serbia, and bosnia before the slavic entrance?
I think its more a case of the byzantine empire that they were entering was severely de populated, following on from constant military campaigning and plague shenanigans, so it was less that there was a push from the slavic heartland to move them to the balkans and more the case that the desirable land and place in the Mediterranean, safe from steppe conflict was a large pull. The languages of the balkans have always been diverse but illyria would have been largely Latin speaking until the entrance of the slavs with another illyrian language similar to Albanian remaining in the background rural communities
@@cormacdonnelly365 Albanian language does not show to be indigenous in what was Illyria (i.e. modern day northern Albania, southern Montenegro and southwestern Kosovo). The Illyrian language we ignore but Illyrians'' onomatology (Agron, Gaulauros, Bato etc.) had some distinctive Greek element into it (but these names were not found in Greece, they were local to them), quite natural as they were neighbours of Greeks and could had been their tribal cousins. The Albanian language itself shows no signs of long-time cohabitation between Greeks and Latins as one would expect. The place also was not at all "remote" as it was the first Roman basis in the Balkans prior to invasion of Greece as well as later on it became a central nod in the Via Egnatia connecting Rome to Minor Asia via Greece. We learn from numerous writers that Illyrians were half Latinised, half Hellenised but the Albanian language shows none of that. On the contrary the Albanian language has the following characteristics : 1) It has no native words for anything to do with the sea but plenty of native words for mountains, rivers and lakes thus it is a language of a tribe that evolved away from the Mediterranean - Illyrians were maritime people however! 2) It has a massive foreign vocabulary and syntax influence, it is quite a mixed language just like English showing its foreign provenance with oldest loanwords from Latin, however not Classical Latin but late Roman Era Latin (interesting eh?) of the Eastern type (i.e. Danube region, Romania....) 3) Second oldest loanwords influence is the Slavic languages, Serbian and Bulgarian 4) Third oldest loanword influence is the Italian dialects, mostly of Venice 5) Last influence is Greek.... no, no ancient Greek here, but rather late medieval, early modern Greek. ... and all by magic some 10-15 years ago Austrian researchers discovered a forgotten medieval document in a Romanian monastery written in the Latin alphabet and in a language spoken in the region of western Romania back then. Unmistakenly linked to Albanian as they found! LOL! It is funny because quite many Albanians feel a connection to Romanians, these are Albanians of the Gege tribal lot (the more original Albanians since the Tosks are heavily mixed with Epirotan Greeks and appear more Mediterranean-like - Tosks automatically feel a connection to Greeks even when they do not want to openly admit it, LOL!)
@Milosh Simonovski Well that is exact. However in this case, Austrians along with Italians and Germans, each for his own objectives, had been very much anti-Serbian and anti-Greek and hugely pro-Albanian and very much supported the hypothesis of an indigenous Albanian nation coming down straight from Illyrians. These two researchers (one is not an ethnic Austrian, merely an Austrian citizen) have however proposed something else on the basis of the recently found manuscript. If you ask me, all it takes is to see the details and the nature of this manuscript. If indeed the language it was written is linked to Albanian then yes, it ties perfectly with many other elements that bind proto-Albanian speakers with the region of Romania. Let us not forget that the arrival of Slavs themselves occured under the pressure of Avars, i.e. Avars caused all those movements of tribes. And Avars originally set their basis in western Romania and Hungary (Pannonian region). However later they moved southwards, failed in their invasion of Greece (Constantinople, Thessalonica) and then their last bastion where they set up a local feudal state was in modern day North Albania, South Montenegro, Southwestern Kosovo. This was in the 9th-10th and up to 10th century AD before vanishing in the 11th century. In the 11th century we start having the first mentions of Albanians. Not saying that the Albanians were the descendants of Avars but very possibly they were just another of the tribes the Avars moved along. I.e. proto-Albanian speakers shifted places and installed in the Balkans just like proto-Slavs shifted and installed there. Of course this plot is not very popular among Albanians because they feel it "reduces" them to the same level of Slavs, Serbians and Bulgarians, i.e. as new comers and not as indigenous people. Albanians are emotionally tied to the idea of being indigenous. Yet, there is little in their language and culture to show an ancient indigenous nature of their nation. It really appears to be a recent one in the region.
@@dinos9607 Did you also hear about caucasus origin of albanians? and that they actually originate from modern day Dagestan in Russia, there is theory that they were brought up onto the balkans by Georgios Naniakos from Sicily.
The point about about the changing definition of democracy is interesting. Athenian society would never be referred to as democratic by modern societies where we assume that democracy must include universal suffrage. The connection between Dacians and Vlachs, Slav and northern Greeks/Macedonians, as well as Bulgars and Slavs is clouded in nationalism so the truth (interpretation) seems to depend more on your nationality. The proof of this is in the comments section
Do you believe that greek have slavic "Dna" to say it for everyone to understand; I know slavs are linguistic term but they had some specific genetics. Did when they assimilated in the greek culture affect the greek genetic heritage?
All are Indo-Europeans. Slavic, Greek, Italic, Germanic and Celtic people. One big European family. We can trace our langauges back to the proto-indo-european language.
@@dhu1919 Yet modern DNA research, by Western university, published in the nature magazine, finds that this was anything but the case. With Greeks From Peloponnese, Central Greece and thessaly being mostly descendents of pre Slavic Populations.
The funny thing is considering the traditional nationalist few of Turks & Greeks hating each other, because the north south Slavic arrow that went all the way down to the mid Peloponnese & the fact that like a lot of military invasions, The Osman Turks only mainly formed a military elite in Anatolia after invading. That over time the already residing Greek majority subject population assimilated to the language, culture & religion of their overlords, many pundits believe the average Anatolian Turk is more closely related to the Greeks of the Hellenistic World than contemporary mainland European peninsular Greeks are , that have the South Slav taint.
@@mickvonbornemann3824 You are out of your mind. Go read some of the genetic research by Harvard university. What you are saying is worng and inaccurate
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
2:14 I know it's not your understanding of Slavic Religion but Procopius description of it at that time but to say that it was monotheistic religion is absolutely incorrect. They were worshiping many Deities at that time, and below are just a few examples: Perun, the God of Thunder. Dzbog, the God of Fortune. Veles, the Shapeshifter. Belobog and Czernobog. Lada, Goddess of Love and Beauty. Marzanna, the Goddess of Winter and Death. Mokosh, the Fertility Goddess. Svarog, the Fire God. and I could easily mention 20+ more that we now know they worshipped before Christianity came.
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.
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...
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 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
Slavic Paganism was monotheistic? Also, could've pointed out that some of that assimilation of Slavs by Greeks came as late as post-WW2, hence Bulgarian claims to Thrace and Macedonia during WW2
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.
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.
Very nice video! Although it feels back-handed sometimes but eitherway, it's much needed. This area of history has taken a back seat so it's refreshing to see more material about it. Especially since it's in English but not some weird anti-Slavic power fantasy that some Germans made up in the 19th century. You make it considerably less biased.
Note that you mix things up about the Dacians. "Vlachs" do not necessarily come from Dacians. Vlachs are merely shepherds that speak latin tongue. They were viewed as "outsiders" and did not only inhabit modern romanian lands but were all over the balkans (even greece). The Dacians were resettled south of the Danube en masse by the Byzantines due to inability of the romans to protect these regions north of the danube. Futhermore the Dacian Kingdom covered Moesia as well. Those were same people south and north of the danube - thracians. Galerius himself comes from a place close to Serdika (Sofia) and he was Dacian (thracian).
@Alex C not really. The proto Germanic word was Walhaz which meant stranger. Doesnt necessarily mean romance speaker as obviously it was as applied similarly to the Welsh. It meant what it meant then stranger compared to the locals.
@@greendalf123 I can't post links, but google "Runes from Lány". To clear few things up, I'm not saying Slavs invented runes, or there are some extensive runic inscriptions that are Slavic (as of today we have few evidence). Runes were used in limited capacity even by Germanic people. However, we do have evidence Slavs used runes for a time, probubly under the influence of Germanic people they lived with/next to.
@@greendalf123there is very little evidence for the use of pre-christian writing but we do know they did use them, read about the creation of the Cyrillic alphabet for the mention of them.
What's your views on those that try and debunk the Slavic migration theory? Do you have any idea how many people lived in the Europe that time? They spoke in one language. This means they understood each other and there was enough room for everyone, so they didn't have reason to fight. So, who migrated and from where and who fighted with who and why? The language is a key to true history.
The fact that there are so many Slavic dialects in the lands from the Baltic to the Adriatic to the Black sea meant that Slavs were expanding, and going their own way, in all directions through these lands between these 3 seas for centuries upon centuries. In the beginning before spreading out, we are talking around 1,000 BCE conservatively, they all spoke some form of universal Slavic to put it simply, they call it Proto Slavic. Then, over the centuries separated by hundreds of miles, each community developed it's own Slavic variant. Slavs are an ancient race. If you go back far enough in history, then you will see that many words in Slavic languages today are very similar to Sanskrit. Look it up, Slavic compared to Sanskrit, and you will see how ancient Slavic roots are. I found it fascinating myself.
@@robertmarks317 Slavic and Sanskrit are both "satem" languages, deriving from Proto-Indo-European groups that initially migrated more towards the east from their origin near the Eastern Black sea. It's no wonder that Slavic is similar to Sanskrit then, and it absolutely supports the notion that Slavic languages have their origin in North-Eastern Europe.
@Alex C are you listening, he said Slavs themselves are ancient, not that they were on the Balkans (but there is plenty of evidence north of Chalkidiki was always Slavic)
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).
First time seeing this video. Presentation is good but deals with only the southern (YUGO) Slavs. You are missing the western and eastern Slavs. As such you do not answer the point you mentioned in the beginning that you would concern yourself with.
That map is so incorrect 08:00 . There are a lot of Serbs in Bosnia and Montenegro and there is just 5k Albanians in Podgorica . Podgorica has got 200k people so 5k Albanians cant be majority there ...
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 ???
@Dottor Cisafrulli Its most incorrect map what i ever seen . There is no Albanians in Podgorica, Skoplje , Greece . And there are a lot a lot of Serbs in Bosnia and Montenegro . That map is only correct to you ! There are some good Albanians who know facts not like you !
@Redooo bruh its not accurate. He literally colored Serbs from Bosnia as Croats . Its like to say to Albanians from Macedonia are Bulgarians . Also Albanians are not majority in Podgorica and Skoplje . Actually West of North Macedonia is totally wrong
How do you explain the Eneti were Trojan allies and after the fall of Troy were led by the Trojan prince Antenor to the Baltic to met up with their Slavic cousins,the Venedi. They eventualy migrated to the Po Valley and became the Veneti. Many ancient Greek historians describe the Eneti as related to the Venedi from the present day Poland as far back as Homer-850 BC when he identified Veneti with Heneto-Paphlagones from Anatolia who were tall and blond people of handsome appearance.
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
Maybe you can make a video about the emergence of the Romanian people. On one hand, there were the Byzantines who called themselves Romans, but who adopted Greek as their language, on the other hand there was a population North of the Danube who didn't call themselves Romans, but spoke a Latin language.
Romania comes from the word "Rum". Which is the word Muslims used for "Rome". When Muslims invaded the Balkans they pushed "The Romans"(Bulgarians, Greeks, Serbs) to the north across the Danube so people concentrated there and formed fiefdoms like Wallachia, Moldova etc. They weren't even remotely Latin but rather Slavic, which is shown by their culture of the time. But "Romanians" back then got pinched between Muslim and Catholic empires and since they were Europeans and not Arabs they settled for adopting of Latin culture in exchange for some safety against Muslims. Thats how you got Romania, the land of Romans that are relatives to Serbs, but speak Latin.
@@Nista357 Many toponims in Romania have meanings in Sanskrit you frustrated slav'. Beside romanian is got thousands of Dacian words. You bulgars and serbs adopted even names of body components from us. Kur'( penis) from romanian cur'( but) from latin ,culus' Named wrongly , buzet'( cheek) from Dacian ,buza( lips) Only we have , magar'( donkey) and , ogar' ( greyhound) both with suffix ,gar' You are dark, but there are many kinds of dark genres for nations just like blond genres too. Romanians indeed look Latin about 40% There is a district romanian/ latin fizionomie like that of Iuliana Tudor or Paula Medrea Bianca Andreescu as well as blond Andreea Esca and others. Guys like Ernest Maftei or Florin Piersic, Ilarion Ciobanu have 0 % slavo/ balcanic features. You're just frustrated with yourself That all.
@@nestingherit7012 I'm not frustrated at all, maybe you are? I really don't know how does that make sense when Slavs had states since 6th/7th century and Romania emerged in 19th...
@@nestingherit7012 Bro... In history Latins invaded the Balkans, not the other way around so the only ones who could be "stuck with the language they don't like" are Romanians, since Latin does not originate from the Balkans...
The Germanic people were not pushed by the slavs. The germanic moved to South and West Europe due to the fall of the Roman Empire. Then slavs inhabited the empty lands of goths and ostrogoths
@@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.
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
Well, there are some interesting facts that we need to say too: 1. If we talk about DNA and Y haplogroups all modern-day Slavic countries have between 40%-70% of R1a and I2a haplogroups in total that are considered Slavic(specific branches of these haplogroups) with Bosnia, Belarus, and Poland with almost 70%. Even if we compare modern-day autosomal DNA it is very similar, especially between east and west Slavs(it is a huge amount of land mass much bigger than the Balkan). So genetics undoubtedly confirmed that we modern-day Slavs are descendants of one "nation" which originated in western Ukraine. 2. Linguistics undoubtedly confirms what genetics says too. Slavic tribes have word that they used to distinguish themselves from other ethnicities- SLOVENI which means the understandable ones, similarly, they called Germans-NEMCI which means muted ones. SLOVO means to speak, word. SLAVA means glory.
Mina SLOVO means letter And Slavic population from the Adriatic to the Black Sea have mostly I2a haplogroup genetics It is interesting that Skandinavian population has mostly I1a haplogroup genetics
@@greendalf123 point is that the whole euroasian steppe has R1a and R1b, if the Slavs came from the steppe to the Balkans why isn't R1 haplogroup dominant gene
@@milansimonovic8267 Haplogroup doesn't equal ethnicity. I2a is found in all Slavic nations at notable levels. A bottleneck means that when a group of Slavs left their homeland, they may have been predominantly males carrying haplogroup i2. Or, the haplogroup R1a individuals may have died to myriad circumstances which let i2a heavy individuals repopulate. What you WANT to look at is the autosomal DNA. What you find in early Balkan populations is (firstly a lack of both R1a and I2a haplogroups) a vast lack of north-eastern (balto-slavic) DNA. When you look at MODERN south Slavic populations with autosomal DNA you see that they have anywhere from 50%-60% north-eastern European DNA, which did NOT exist in the Balkans in the Roman era or prior.
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.
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.
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.
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.
Same classical crap from western sholars (especially German). Germanic tribes were last in Europe. For Slavs is eveidently - christianity dogma - first will be last and last will be first.
The genetic picture has come into peoples attention only recently the video was made most likely prior to the genetic discoveries that were made or rather properly publicized. Hell according to genetics the autochtonus theory of slavs seems correct and there was no invasion, slavs simply existed and remained but most likely began a period of potential interaction and expansion that was notable in the 6-7th centuries. (there is also heated debate about slavic writing, more nad more sources are appearing now that mention slavic writing, and the absolute mental gymnastics used to tow the current theory is astounding.)
@@boguslav9502 Well of course genetics suggests people never migrated, because regular people do hardly migrate. Cultures however do migrate, rulling classes migrate, warriors migrate, and it's those that brough slavic languages and cultures towards the Balkans.
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 ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-fZvKpjjTpgg.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 ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-Dio3Ep0nlv4.html ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-n4WFk0iEK5k.html ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-f0Lg1b_8N54.html ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE--wIu3dUsmtY.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_
The endonym of Croats in their language is: Hrvati. In historical sources Hrvati are mentioned in Nestor's Chronicle for period of events in 9th and 10th century as one of 9 important tribes in area of Kievan Rus state (tribes mentioned by Nestor in territory of todays Ukraina, Belarus and western parts of todays Russia are: Polani (around Kiev, not Polani in territory of Poland), Severani (sever meaning north), Derevliani (probably in region of Polesie, id est todays Pripiat region in southern Belarus, because "drevo" means tree, as well as word "les" in some modern Slavic dialects and languages (les in Slovenian is wood), Radimichi (large tribal confederacy encompasing todays eastern Belarus, parts of northern Ukraina around river Uzh and to Chernigov city, and even parts of Russia), Viatichi /around Oka river, deep in todays western Russia, city Orel/, Hrvati (mentioned usually after Radimichi and before Duliebi/Voliniani, whatgives their location probably between modern city Zhitomir to Rovno/Rivno to Ternopol and to Lavov/Lviv; Duliebi/Voliniani, Ulichi, Tivertsi). Other Croats are mentioned for the period of 10th century in todays northern Czech in some Latin documents as: Chrouati et altera Crouati. Also, Croats are mentioned in Latin documents for 10th century living in "pagus Crouati" in todays southern Austria (modern region Kärnten, Carantania in documents from 8th and 10th century); also many toponyms in Carantania in period from 16th to 18th century bore names as: Crowati, Chrouati etc., with many names that are identical to placenames in northern Dalmatia and Lika region in modern Croatia (there is good historical article by historian Stjepan Antoljak on the subject of Croatian toponyms in southern Austria between Drava and Mura rivers. So, historicly through written documents we have Croatian ethnonym (in form: Hrvati, Chrouati, Chroati, Croati etc.) attested for 10th and 9th century from central-western Ukraina, in northern Czech (even little settlement in eastern Germany), in southern Austria and of course, in modern Croatia and Herzegovina and some western parts of modern Bosna, during the 9th and 10th century. Against Hrvati in Ukraina there was last mention for year 993 when ruler of Kiev, Volodimir, launched the military campaign, as Nestor of Kiev/Kiiv writes: Ide Volodimer na Hrvati...hrvatskija vojna (goes Volodimer against Croats.. Croatian war). During the census in 19 century in imperial Russia there was only cca. 17 000 people enlisted by nationality as Horvati, in western Ukraina (Galich region). The next what connects Hrvati in modern Hrvatska (Croatia) with populations in Ukraina is ikavian Slavic language(words in modern Ukrainian and in traditional Croatian as: rika /river/ versus reka in Srbian or "rijeka" in standard Croatian, in Polish:rzeka; tilo vs. telo, and tijelo (body), ciało in Polish; vitar (wind) versus vetar in Srbian and vjetar in standard Croatian
19:45 That isn't correct there are still Greek cultures in Bovesia and Salento, where they speak Greek that is possibly from to Doric Settlers, and they have a unique culture. They have two dialects under italiot Greek called Griko.
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.
Very good summary of the issues and controversies. However, could have been more complete if you would have cited some theories about the slavic origin. Available in English is a book of a Romanian professor (Florin Curta - The Making of the Slavs) who argues that slavic "invasions" is a creation of Procopius and other historians willing to hide to their contemporaries the fact that Byzantine Empire was incapable of protecting its norther frontier. the settlement was in most cases peaceful (although fighting did occur) which enabled the quick symbiosis with Romanized population. He also argues that the term slav is un umbrela term form several populations more or less distantly related. He does not issue any theory about the actual origins of the Slavs. You could have also mentioned the theory according to which the Slavs originate in the free Dacians (carpi and costoboci and also the Chernyakhov culture) from northern Carpathian region. this latter theory (unsupported by most Romanian historians) may explain many loopholes in the Romanian and Bulgarian ethnogenesis.
Well, most of what the good professor Curta tries to say can not only be disputed, but literally laughed at. The very fact that this man presents himself as an "expert in Slavic history", while his theories can be debunked by banal enumeration of those rare records and archaeological finds, makes the matter ridiculous. What kind of peaceful migration could it be if the Byzantine sources state, quite precisely, the enslavement and murder of over 200,000 natives by Slavic invaders in just one wave of attacks (this is a huge number for that time and even if it is exaggerated, it tells us about at least how the Byzantines experienced these "peaceful migration"). Also, Thessaloniki was besieged at least 6 times and the surroundings were completely devastated. Salona on the Adriatic was completely burned down, and Sirmium fell at the very beginning of the invasion. These were some of the most important cities of the Eastern Roman Empire. These incursions and attacks lasted for about a hundred years, and only then did mass settlement begin. To me, it seems like a fairly strategically thought-out conquest. After they completely drove out the Avars in the 7th or 9th century (this is still debated) and settled the areas of Byzantium in which they penetrated, the Croats and Serbs, we can almost say- received recognition of their own conquest in the form of a "vassal relationship". So, Byzantium recognized the territory they occupied with the payment of a certain tribute. The Croats gained full independence and formed the first kingdom already a hundred years after the establishment of the recognized territory they inhabited, and soon it was the same with the Serbs. The Bulgarians had a slightly more complicated history, but they even managed to become the worst enemy of Byzantium. That "peaceful settlement of the Slavs" may have taken place in Curta's Romania (although I don't understand then why the Dacans took refuge in the mountainous parts of later Wallachia) but everything south of that was quite brutal. After only 100 to 200 years, all mentioning of the Thracians and Illyrians, peoples who inhabited those areas perhaps even a thousand years before, is lost. As for the theory of "free Dacans", you don't need to be a professor of history to understand the basis of that theory, which in principle even has some basis, but not in the way that Curta interprets it. Although the origin of the Dacans has not yet been clarified, there is every chance that they have a common origin with the Illyrians and that they were once Baltic tribes that migrated to the south. The Baltic and Slavic tribes have a common "ancestor" - the so-called Balto-Slavic group of peoples. The real term for the Slavs is actually not Slav, but slOven (that's why today we don't have SlAvenia and SlAvakia, but SlOvenia and SlOvakia) The Slavs had their own tribal names for themselves, but they called other peoples who spoke the same or similar languages "SlOv(jan)s" (those who know words, speakers), so then it is easily possible that the Illyrians and Dacans were also considered Slavs. This would also explain the sudden "disappearance" of the Illyrians. Maybe they didn't disappear at all, but accepted the name of the newcomers.
@2:06 if you are sayinɡ they had a Monotheistic reliɡion around a liɡhtninɡ ɡod named Perun then how could it be like norse or ɡrekko-roman polytheisism? One is a belief in one sky diety and the other is a believe in many ɡods. If anythinɡ, assuminɡ you are correct in describinɡ slavic beliefs, it's more like Tenɡri from early Turkic and Monɡolic beliefs.
lazarus921 you should read more carefully, I'm not linkinɡ slavic beliefs to turkic. I'm drawinɡ into question how it could be like a polythesitic reliɡion and be a monothesitic reliɡion. But by all means you ɡo ahead and correct the mistake that was never made.
Good work, as always. I've enjoyed your video but I have one thing to point out which you neglected, probably due to it not being your main subject of research. Nevertheless, I think it is important to point it out here. You have mentioned in your video that the Dacians, after having to deal with the Slavic invasion/migration, retreated into the mountains and stayed there up until the 11th century when they reemerged as Vlachs. For the overall romanic people who survived the fall of the Roman Empire and kept speaking latin (combined with influences of their native tongue) this is true, romanic people south of the Danube were overwhelmed by the Slavic migration and were forced to retreat into the mountains where they adopted, to a certain extent, the Slavic identity, even though groups of Aromanians and Megleromanians remain to this day, and they are identified as a distinct group of people, who talk a dialect of the modern Romanian language, so your point in this case is not entirely invalid. As for the Dacians, or, to better call them at this point in time, Daco-Romans, your point is not so valid. There are 2 reasons for this: The first one is that the Slavs didn't settle in so large numbers in modern day Romania and so didn't have such a predominant role in the politics and life of the Romanian space at this point in time. Actually, being fewer in number, the Slavs ended up being assimilated by the local population (being interested and attracted by the wealth of Eastern Rome, they were more interested in going to the south of the Danube, this explaining why they didn't end up assimilating the local population, because they weren't so numerous in order to do so) , so from this point of view it wouldn't be so justifiable for the Daco-Romans to retreat into the mountains and remain there for centuries, not being so pressed by the Slavs. The second reason has to do with the impracticality of such a course of action from the native population. It was and still is a trend in historiography to state that once the Slavs penetrated this space, the local population retreated into the mountains almost immediately. This however would mean that the Daco-Romans wold have to change their lifestyle almost over night: being moutain people, they could not grow crops (at least not at the same scale and efficiency as before) and could not grow animals as before, due to the more limited resources in space, food and time, winter there coming sooner and lasting for more months than at a lower altitude. One could say that they started to retreat at lower altitudes once winter arrived, but that would place them into conflict with the Slavs. Due to these difficulties, it is far more likely that the Daco-Romans did not adopt the mountain lifestyle which your video implies they did end up adopting and that they actually coexisted with the Slavs. This is supported by archeology and some modern Romanian historians. Otherwise, great video! I've learned some important things about the Slavs while watching it.
The point of difficulty of switching from lowland to highland lifestyle overnight is interesting. I have an anecdotal example: Friends family is from South of Serbia, where 200 years ago few families from Montenegro settled abandoned Villages in the mountains. What sets them apart from the surrounding villages is that they are all goat herders, industry that they have broth from rocky mountains of Montenegro, while the area being more suited for large cattle herding and other types of agricultural professions. It far from a bad idea. I guess goats love it there and the business is good. But 200 years ago those families did not settle in a new area and adapt to the local resources. Their idea was "this is what we know, this is what we will do". So how woul lowland farmers adapt to the mountains in one generation? Perhaps there were already highland Daco-Roman societies that were not included as much by the changes in the lowland demographics.
Genetics say that romanians are more slavic than bulgarians and less then serbs or croats. So there were many slavic people in Danube region and in the begining a part of protoromanians retreat not in the mountains but on higher altitudes or big forested areas, so slavs will dominate the plains around rivers. Later as there was no important slavic administrative or religious institutions north of the Danube romanians assimilated the slavs, but in the south of Danube most of them were assimilated by slavs. Why slavs will not have powerfull kingdooms north of Danube, because of still big movements of different tribes like avars, pechenegs, cumans, magyars and the sametime distance from Bizantine lands as a model and influence for an organized governement.
Daco-Romans? Romans were occupiers in Dacia, for nearly 200 years so why would Dacians adopt the occupiers' language? Slavs in the Balkans are descended directly from Dacians, Thracians and Illyrians - there was no Slavic invasion, no evidence at all for this. Rumanians had a Slavic language until Austro-Hungary latinized it 200 years ago, they even used Cyrillic. Finally, genetics of Serbs and Rumanians are exactly the same - how do you explain this?
@@NeborodVinchanski This is just garbage. Regarding the evidence it seems you can not see it even if sticked on your face. as you talk about genetic...here is a link you could read for some evidence, but i doubt you have the capacity to understand it. www.biorxiv.org/content/10.1101/2021.08.30.458211v1.full.pdf
In my experience, Northern Greece still has a small population that is bilingual and will speak in a slavic language once they feel it's safe to do so.
@@paulinah2392 My mother's side of the family is from there. Back in the 70s and 80s slavic was more common than now. All my cousins, when I visited them, spoke both languages.
Paulina h keep living a life of being in denial lmao.. most of northern Greece still speak Slavic Macedonian but itsnbanned by the government... there are videos of the people there singing and dancing to Macedonian folk songs, but yet Greeks say they r Slav Greeks which’s makes no damn sense lol
Paulina h after 1 st ww about a million Slavs from northern Greece had been pushed away to Macedonia ( Yugoslavian) while the Turks from Kosovo, Nowadays Macedonia and some parts of Bulgaria went to Istanbul and around all over Europien parts of Turkey and Greek from nowadays europien parts of Turkey just replaces the slavs mostly around Solun (Tessalonika) That is happend from 1921 - 1925 That time Greek did very bad things
Zoran Todorovic Greece did very bad things all the way till today. No one is mentioning the mass exodus of Slav Macedonians from north Greece, and the genocide Greece did on Macedonians.... all this was happening after world war 2 as well
It is interesting that Slavs and Bulgarians are not mentioned like Slavs. Might be confusing for people now because there is to many nations out of Slavs nowadays.
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, ...).
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.
@@philomelodia 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.
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.
Damn these comments are a shitshow. Good video though man. A note that may interest you: the Croats specifically were specifically invited during this same era (edit. Earlier in the era even) of migration by the Byzantine Emperor anf willingly converted to Christianity in order to be a loyal people and buffer zone from the maby foes threatening the area (as you showed in the video)
P.S. you stirred up a lot of crap by using an unfortunate irredentist ethnic map which maybe you should have known better since you pointed out in the video too how heated the topic is, but it's also an understandable mistake and is really irrelevant to the points if your video. Again tho, thanks for the vid!
Croats came from White Croatia ( around 600 AD ) to present day Croatia , probably settled Dalmatia and Duklja at first , then helped Heraclius defeat the Avar Khanate in Pannonia thus given Pannonia as a reward i suppose.
The 7 Billionth No way Dioclea /Duklja and that whole area is Serbian land. Croats were north of there. All the rulers around Rashka, Duklja, Bosnia declared that they're Serbian. We have Croats north of those lands
Duklja / Dioclea is Montenegrin.From the Illiryan tribe of Dokleati that lived in Montenegro.When I said that Croats settled in Duklja i specifically ment Zachumlia / Zahumlje teritory that is today populated with Ethnic Croats in Bosnia and Herzegovina,Herzegovina specifically.Only later because the other piece of Duklja was in constant civil wars , the Nemanjić dynasty annexed it ,which are Serbs i think.
I read the vocabulary of the Thracians, old Balkan nation or group of tribes. They have many same or similar words as the Serbian or other Slavic languages. Thats means that we have been in contanc much earlier.
Where did you read this vocabulary? Can you share it to the rest of the world? You will be very rich if you will sell this documents because it will be the first written text in thracian we know. Let me know, ok?
@@dacicus090 You can compare similarities between Slavic language and 3.000 year old Sanskrit language. So Slavs were in India in 3000BC. But somehow Slavs didn't get to the Balkans until 700AD, even though their cradle was modern day Ukraine. Doesn't make sense.
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.
Great video. It only amplifies the asinine behaviour in the Balkans when the tribalisation went 180 degrees the opposite with the rest of the modern society. Everyone else got bigger, while in the Balkans every tribe want's their national myths to be true and separate with the rest of the people. A clear diagnose of this is: narcissism of small differences. The worst thing about it is that a regular man from Balkans is politically illiterate, and the nation is most of the time taken as some genetic property, very often not separated with religion so there are so many chances to get in conflict with anyone over anything.
