PDA

View Full Version : Tomislav Sunic: “Serbs and Croats against a biological threat far worse than their recent conflict”



Guapo
03-01-2011, 01:02 AM
RIVAROL: Tomislav Sunic, born in 1953 in Zagreb, you have professed from 1989 to 1993 in various American universities where you taught political philosophy and policy of the communist countries before joining the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Croatia under the presidency of Franjo Tudjman. Polyglot, you published numerous articles texts (which can be found on the websites http://www.tomsunic.info; doctorsunic.netfirms.com) in Croatian, English, German and French, in our journal writings, including Paris and you know enough about the French political scene for citing prominent authors of our players such as Pierre Vial, Hervé Ryssen or Robert Faurisson. You publish Croatia today: a country defaults? (1), whose only title to be a provocation to the Croatian nationalists who gladly trace their state in the tenth century. Would you say what you mean by identity “default” or “proxy” and also tell us how the book has been received in your homeland?

T. Sunic: It was beautiful, once the first national ecstasy complete, praising the decisionism in politics, the fact remains that all policy decisions, a priori valid, will inevitably be modified by subsequent circumstances. And can we not be unsuccessful in Wonderland but to disillusionment or even national disaster. Croatia is now a default country since before 1990, very few Croats believed in the possibility of an independent state. Moreover, from the standpoint of international law, the independence was not feasible, and does not seem possible. Moreover, the West was for 45 years against any form of Croatian secessionism and balked at any idea of the dissolution of Yugoslavia – for geopolitical reasons that go back to Versailles and Potsdam. Even the founding father of the new Croatia, the former president, former communist, former Tito, a former anti-revisionist historian now, Franjo Tudjman in 1990 did not envisage the creation of an independent country. It was Serbia and the Yugoslav army in Croatia which propelled the globe. Given the scattered nature of the Serbs in the Balkans, their legitimate fear of facing the confédéralisation Yugoslavia and the growing population of Kosovo Albanians, Serbs Jacobin nationalism was soon to unleash a surge of Croatian nationalism – leading, following and by default, the birth of the new Croatia. In this regard, we must refer your readers to the important little book by the philosopher Alain de Benoist, We and the Other, where he dissects the suicidal nature of the small European nationalism. Although considered a joke, it is a sad truth that is still circulating in Zagreb: “We should erect a monument to Milosevic because he helped to found the new Croatia. “Can one be a” good “without being anti-Serb nationalist Croatian? Unfortunately, at present, I think not.

R. : Item just giving food for controversy: on your understanding for the “bad Serbs” which you emphasize the morphological and linguistic kinship (which reject many of your compatriots) with the Croats. Do you agree these “monsters”, the quotes are from you, victims of the terrible turmoil of the post-Tito Yugoslavia, worst bloodshed ever known in Europe since the Second World War?

TS: Contrary to what we hear, most people are more similar than they are jealous and hate. Although strong proponent of sociobiology, I think there is still work to do in terms of etiology of civil wars. We have seen an intra-white butcher at the European civil war from 1914 to 1945. While the Judeo-Christian monotheism, with its ancient impact was the main engine of the carnage among white people. But outside of our national myths inconsistent, it remains to decipher why wars within Europe are so deadly. Among Croats and Serbs, the dispute about their difference borders on the grotesque. In view of these two peoples, each appears as a transvestite in relation to the Other. Serbs and Croats certainly did not need an interpreter to understand. Moreover, it would be difficult to distinguish a Croatian phenotype is different from that of the Serbs. Certainly, there are Croats great culture that will make you exegeses on haplotypes Croatian or you speak learnedly of the difference between the words and Croatian Serbs. Still, Serbs and Croats are two old European nations that will soon face a far more serious biological threat that their recent conflict.

Tito Although most criminal Mladic and Karadzic

R. : In your book you emphasize different components of ethnocentrism former Yugoslavia who are obsessed about the hardships suffered by concealing such martyrdom concomitant of “ethnic Germans” of the Banat and Vojvodina or you insist on a dual responsibility: Communists and that “dictatorships thalassocratic” Anglo-Saxon world and Israel, who also falsified history for their own benefit. Can you clarify?

TS Your question refers to the current judicial farce International Criminal Court in The Hague, where the alleged Serbian war criminals are tried and Croatian. But the recent crimes of war have a history far more serious. The Serb indictees Ratko Mladic and Radovan Karadzic are only small disciples of great criminal communist Josip Broz Tito, whose crimes in 1945 were never tried or convicted. It is not known in France half a million ethnic Germans suffered from 1945 to 1950, a massive ethnic cleansing in Yugoslavia, Tito. Karadzic, Mladic and so on, have simply applied the principles that were in force among the Western Allies and Tito.

An organized demonization

I find it particularly rough as Croatian travel agencies and French, or French television show of the beautiful images Croatia subtitled “a small country for a great holiday. In reality, although Croatia is certainly a beautiful part of Europe is a country where every stone breathes death, Croatia is the largest cemetery in Europe. The massacre of hundreds of thousands of Croatian soldiers and civilians – the so-called “Bleiburg” [Ed. See article by Christopher Dolbeau in the May 2010 Ecrits Paris] after the name of a small village in Austria in the south – has deeply shocked the Croatian people. Worse, the Croatian gene pool has been completely exhausted – so that one can not understand the events of 1991 to the present, without considering beforehand the names of communist killing fields. Moreover, the former darling Western, the very liberal Eduard Benes, has he not shown the right path for future Balkan cleanser, expelling 3.2 million Sudeten Germans en1945, under decrees that are still in force in the Czech Republic? Those who bear responsibility for the recent Balkan war are neither Serbs nor the Croats but their respective Communists, backed by Western liberal circles and by some divine Left. In turn, these have all demonized the Serbs and Croats – while ignoring their own genocidal past during and after the Second World War.

The immediate cause of the deadly war between Serbs and Croats is to be found in books and about Tudjman fire just before the breakup of Yugoslavia. He had, indeed, dared to touch the stories Communists and the Serbian Victimology in dropping the magic number and official Serbs killed during the Second World War by the Croatian Ustasha from 600,000 to 60,000 or even 6000! About these revisionists have subsequently caused by panic among the peasants Croatian Serb with consequences we know.

Multiracialism, interracial hate factor

R. You also insist on racial homogeneity, unique in Europe and you’re very attached, former Eastern European countries including Croatia. Do you think that uniformity is threatened by the desire for membership of your country in all the workings of the “international community” to the extent that the historical identity of Croatia is fragile?

TS Today, the term “race” is frowned upon in the West – except when it comes to real race riots like those that recently took place in Grenoble or Los Angeles. While I use the term race in a sense Volver, referring to “race mind”, knowing full well what race belonged to women sculpted by Phidias, or those that Courbet painted. Grace-fisted communist Croatia, like all the countries of Eastern Europe, today is more European than France or Germany. Multiracialism, hiding behind the hypocritical euphemism of “multiculturalism”, leads to civil war and inter-racial hatred. Serbs and Croats, still immersed in their victimology conflict, still unaware that Western Europe has long since crossed the course of the Camp of the Saints and that we Europeans, we are all threatened by a death race and culture.

The EU, hyperreal layer of the USSR

R. : For the former Soviet dissident Bukovsky, the European Union is also totalitarian in nature as was the defunct USSR and as fatal in its determination to bind the people in the same administrative straitjacket, especially economic and ideological order to deprive them of any specificity and to make a flock submitted. Do you agree with this analysis?

TS The European Union, the hyperreal layer of the former Soviet reality – if I can borrow some words from Jean Baudrillard. All these exotic wordplay such as “multiculturalism”, “sectarianism”, “diversity”, which led to a bloody debacle in the former Yugoslavia are again in vogue in Brussels. Charles V or the Savoy Prince Eugene had a vision of a united Europe is more real than all the bureaucrats in Brussels uncultivated. A glance at the ugly faces of this sub-caste European language his mannerisms, his platitudes expressed in bad French, or “broken English,” I think the old homo sovieticus postmodern and its Double.

R. : Is that why you are so critical of the Croatian political establishment now that you describe as a bunch of former communist apparatchiks and corrupt opportunist?

T. S. Certainly. They are, without exception, former Yugoslav communist apparatchiks and their offspring that are recycled in the blink of an eye brave apostles of Occidentalism and capitalism. At that time Tito, they made the obligatory pilgrimage to Belgrade to Moscow and Havana. Today, like the old sixty-eighters French, they piously go to Washington to Brussels – and of course in Tel Aviv, even if only to obtain a certificate of “politically correct”.

R. : During the match for third place in the 1998 World Cup, I was surprised to hear consumer abuse Serbian Croats (who eventually won), because … they did not mark enough goals against the Netherlands Netherlands! And last July, correspondent in Belgrade Liberation evoked closer cultural links between economic and especially Serbia, Croatia and Slovenia. This tightening is it found? And, if so, it reflects a certain disenchantment with Uncle Sam and Big Sister Europe whose countries of Eastern waited so much?

TS Given the recruitment of French footballers in the Jebel Maghreb or in the Senegalese Sahel, it is no wonder that athletes are better Serb and Croat true European. Like it or not, it is clear that today’s sport remains the one area where we can freely express their racial identity and national consciousness. As for américanolâtrie and américanosphère, which convey a certain inferiority complex among all Eastern Europeans including Croats – this mimicry will remain strong as long as France and Germany do not wake up a common block and move to Europe.

R. What future do you hope reasonably for Croatia and its neighbors?

TS Same as for France, Serbia, Germany and any other European people: total rejection of capitalism, complete rejection of multiculturalism, and awareness of our cultural and biological roots of Europe!

http://reasonradionetwork.com/images/posts/RivarolArticleOnSunic-1092pxWide.gif

http://reasonradionetwork.com/images/posts/RivarolArticleOnSunic-cartoon-272pxWide.jpg

Марко Краљевић
03-03-2011, 09:02 AM
Pure crap. If history has thought us anything, is that Serbs and Croats can not live with each other, only next to each other. Lesson learnt, hopefully. We might be genealogically close, but we belong to different cultures and backgrounds. That is the main reason why panslavism was such a disaster (including yugoslavism), there are only Eastern and Western Slavs, this also applies to South Slavs, which is only geographical term. Serbs are Eastern Slavs who share the similar vision with other Eastern Slavs.

Kanasyuvigi
03-03-2011, 08:47 PM
Serbs are Eastern Slavs who share the similar vision with other Eastern Slavs.
How do you define "Eastern Slav"?

Guapo
03-03-2011, 11:56 PM
How do you define "Eastern Slav"?

Orthodox Christianity?

Magister Eckhart
03-04-2011, 12:37 AM
Pure crap. If history has thought us anything, is that Serbs and Croats can not live with each other, only next to each other. Lesson learnt, hopefully. We might be genealogically close, but we belong to different cultures and backgrounds. That is the main reason why panslavism was such a disaster (including yugoslavism), there are only Eastern and Western Slavs, this also applies to South Slavs, which is only geographical term. Serbs are Eastern Slavs who share the similar vision with other Eastern Slavs.

If you'd put aside the religious thing you'd have less trouble. Serbs and Croats weren't slaughtering each other before Yugoslavia came into existence and then fell apart, and they had lived side by side before that. There's no real ethnic difference between them, and in reality you all speak the same language, even if you use different alphabets. The only thing separating the two is Orthodoxy and Catholicism.

Ok now I've poked the rattlesnake, let's see what happens... :D

Heretik
03-04-2011, 12:56 PM
Ok now I've poked the rattlesnake, let's see what happens... :D

No, you're just beating a dead horse. :wink

mymy
03-04-2011, 01:13 PM
There's no real ethnic difference between them, and in reality you all speak the same language, even if you use different alphabets. The only thing separating the two is Orthodoxy and Catholicism.

Ok now I've poked the rattlesnake, let's see what happens... :D

Agree 100% :thumb001:

Марко Краљевић
03-04-2011, 05:32 PM
If you'd put aside the religious thing you'd have less trouble. Serbs and Croats weren't slaughtering each other before Yugoslavia came into existence and then fell apart, and they had lived side by side before that. There's no real ethnic difference between them, and in reality you all speak the same language, even if you use different alphabets. The only thing separating the two is Orthodoxy and Catholicism.

Ok now I've poked the rattlesnake, let's see what happens... :D

The "offside" between Serbs and Croats goes much deeper into past than mere Yugoslavia times, as the matter of the fact it goes back to 17th century, when Serbs settled depopulated parts of then Hungary which was itself part of Austrian Empire in that time on the border with Turks. Vienna's court in order to protect its newly gained lands from Turkish incursions needed buffer zone and people in it. Therefore, in military frontier Serbs were given autonomy and rights to their own land in exchange for military service against Turks, and were only responsible to government in Vienna. In the same time Croats were generally serfs obliged to work on the lands of different landlords. And serfdom in Austria was abolished in mid 19th century.

Croat joined Yugoslavia only as intermediate step towards their own state. Plus they needed Serbian army to protect their interests in Dalmatia, more accurately eastern Adriatic coast which was promised to Italy for entering WW1 on the side of Entente for which Italians indeed had right since it was part of Venice for centuries.

So in the end it isn't merely religious thing, as it is more cultural thing. I am not advocating hatred, just stating the simple empirical truth that Serbs and Croats can't do together. Expecting different outcome from the same premises is the definition of lunacy. Hopefully we learnt that lesson.

poiuytrewq0987
03-05-2011, 09:10 AM
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/archive/2/22/20100114001224%21Greater_Serbia_in_Yugoslavia.png

Joe McCarthy
03-05-2011, 09:21 AM
I've read a couple of Sunic's books, including Homo Americanus, where he basically blames America's Puritan legacy for the US being a 'threat' to Europe. It's not altogether different from the kind of stuff we see on boards like this, though unlike most neo-Nazi types, Sunic is literate, and I must say I share his admiration for Vilfredo Pareto.

Monolith
03-05-2011, 01:09 PM
If you'd put aside the religious thing you'd have less trouble.
To what end exactly? To acquire some more political power? Or maybe to create a larger economy of scale? Very few people actually care about these things.


Serbs and Croats weren't slaughtering each other before Yugoslavia came into existence and then fell apart, and they had lived side by side before that.
Right. You might want to check your history books again. :laugh:


There's no real ethnic difference between them, and in reality you all speak the same language, even if you use different alphabets.
If you had the bare minimum of knowledge pertaining to Croatian and Serbian languages and cultures you wouldn't even think of writing this sentence. :D


The only thing separating the two is Orthodoxy and Catholicism.
Absolutely wrong.

No, you're just beating a dead horse. :wink
Yep, like many other ignorant Westerners.

The "offside" between Serbs and Croats goes much deeper into past than mere Yugoslavia times, as the matter of the fact it goes back to 17th century, when Serbs settled depopulated parts of then Hungary which was itself part of Austrian Empire in that time on the border with Turks. Vienna's court in order to protect its newly gained lands from Turkish incursions needed buffer zone and people in it.
It's even older, since the ancestors of those Serbs, then Vlachs, served as Ottoman auxilia for centuries. Much like the Catholic Vlachs from Croatia (they referred to themselves as 'Vlasi v Hrvatih'), who were Croatized relatively early and adopted Croatian chakavian speech and personal as well as family names (such as Viganj Dubravčić, Toma Roščević, Matijaš Vukić etc.), the Vlachs from the Ottoman conquered territories were mainly Orthodox and thus were incorporated into Serbian ethnic corpus, via Slavonic liturgy and interaction with ethnic Serbs, which can be seen from the fact that they occasionally referred to themselves as 'Rasci'. Yes, they were invited by the Austrians on the soil of what would later become Croatian Military frontier, but only after centuries of terrorizing the native populace they will eventually live amongst. For this reason, they were seen as intruders and were hated by the native Croats.


Croat joined Yugoslavia only as intermediate step towards their own state.
The Illyrian movement envisaged all South Slavs united, preferably under Croatian leadership. Hence the standard languages of Croatia and Serbia. They have very similar dialectal basis, with this particular dialect (ijekavian neo-štokavian) chosen as a literary language regardless of the fact that it was/is originally spoken by a minority of people, in both Croatia and Serbia. In Serbia the dipthong ije was replaced with more common e though.


So in the end it isn't merely religious thing, as it is more cultural thing. I am not advocating hatred, just stating the simple empirical truth that Serbs and Croats can't do together. Expecting different outcome from the same premises is the definition of lunacy. Hopefully we learnt that lesson.
I can agree with this.

Guapo
03-05-2011, 02:10 PM
Why intruders? Vlachs are indigenous to the Balkans, teh troo Illyrians. Give them back their land Slavic intruders!

Monolith
03-05-2011, 08:24 PM
Why intruders? Vlachs are indigenous to the Balkans, teh troo Illyrians. Give them back their land Slavic intruders!
Many Croats and Serbs descend from these indigenous natives. I suppose you already know they were called Vlachs, but were not Romance speakers, which suggests their gradual cultural and linguistic assimilation by a more prestigious group, considering their language was completely Slavic by the time they moved to Croatia, with only some personal names and maybe a part of their pre-Slavic lexicon remaining.

Guapo
03-05-2011, 08:57 PM
Many Croats and Serbs descend from these indigenous natives. I suppose you already know they were called Vlachs, but were not Romance speakers, which suggests their gradual cultural and linguistic assimilation by a more prestigious group, considering their language was completely Slavic by the time they moved to Croatia, with only some personal names and maybe a part of their pre-Slavic lexicon remaining.

I dont think many descend from them. More like a fairy tale.Well where I'm from, Vlachs are Romance speakers and refuse to be assimilated into serbian culture to this day.
http://www.fotosuzi.com/arhiva/starisvilajnac2/ss10/Resava_karta-hi.jpg

Magister Eckhart
03-06-2011, 08:18 AM
To what end exactly? To acquire some more political power? Or maybe to create a larger economy of scale? Very few people actually care about these things.

I think a unified front against the Mohammedans is by and far more desirable than slaughtering each other over sectarian idiocy.


Right. You might want to check your history books again. :laugh:

I think you'll find that the history of the area is rather clear that when Croats and Serbs did kill each other, they were under Habsburg and Ottoman banners-- those who lived alongside one another within what is today Croatia and Serbia have historically not been violently hostile to one another.


If you had the bare minimum of knowledge pertaining to Croatian and Serbian languages and cultures you wouldn't even think of writing this sentence. :D

You only need a bare minimum of knowledge to know that it's pretty much true-- your ethnicities have nothing to do with blood, they're entirely invented from religion and dialects of the same language. You're both the same ethnically speaking.


Absolutely wrong.

You're right, I forgot the childish chauvinism rooted in less than a century of propaganda from people like Tito, the Chetniks, the Nazis, and a few others.


Yep, like many other ignorant Westerners.

That's ironic, considering that you're a Westerner yourself if you're a Croat, and most of the "Easterners" (i.e. Serbs) seem willing to meet me at least half-way on this one, if not agree with me outright. I have to say you surprise me--I was always under the impression that it was the Serbs who were the chauvinists latching onto irrational hatred of their fellow Serbo-croats because of how much Libre complains about "genocide" and "atrocities", but here I see a Serb (Guapo) willing to work with the historical reality of the region, and Croats denouncing me. I'm really unpleasantly surprised at the whole thing, since it rather puts a damper on my own anti-Serbian feelings.


It's even older, since the ancestors of those Serbs, then Vlachs, served as Ottoman auxilia for centuries. Much like the Catholic Vlachs from Croatia (they referred to themselves as 'Vlasi v Hrvatih'), who were Croatized relatively early and adopted Croatian chakavian speech and personal as well as family names (such as Viganj Dubravčić, Toma Roščević, Matijaš Vukić etc.), the Vlachs from the Ottoman conquered territories were mainly Orthodox and thus were incorporated into Serbian ethnic corpus, via Slavonic liturgy and interaction with ethnic Serbs, which can be seen from the fact that they occasionally referred to themselves as 'Rasci'. Yes, they were invited by the Austrians on the soil of what would later become Croatian Military frontier, but only after centuries of terrorizing the native populace they will eventually live amongst. For this reason, they were seen as intruders and were hated by the native Croats.

From what I've heard the Vlach are as foreign to Serbia as the Albanians in Kosovo, and are a Romantic people-- the Serbs and Croats being Slavs. This makes a great deal of sense considering that the Vlach (Wallachians) are the ancestors of contemporary Romanians (or so I've been told by quite a number of anti-Turk Romanians), and Romanians are certainly not a Slavic people, though they have Slavic influence.


The Illyrian movement envisaged all South Slavs united, preferably under Croatian leadership. Hence the standard languages of Croatia and Serbia. They have very similar dialectal basis, with this particular dialect (ijekavian neo-štokavian) chosen as a literary language regardless of the fact that it was/is originally spoken by a minority of people, in both Croatia and Serbia. In Serbia the dipthong ije was replaced with more common e though.

So you admit it's all the same language; now, we know it's the same ethnicity so we're pretty much left with religion and contrived "identity" as the principal dividing factors here.

poiuytrewq0987
03-06-2011, 08:56 AM
I've noticed Croats tend to be holier than thou and always refuse to admit guilt or fault on some matters and blame everything on Serbs for every misery they experience.

Heretik
03-06-2011, 09:00 AM
Ja sam primijetio da ti ne znaš ni riječ srpskoga ali pametuješ ovdje i soliš svima pamet. :dunno:

Monolith
03-06-2011, 11:48 AM
I think a unified front against the Mohammedans is by and far more desirable than slaughtering each other over sectarian idiocy.
I don't care about the Muslims. Mind you, I don't dislike the Orthodox Christians at all. I consider them the only true Christians, alongside Catholics.


I think you'll find that the history of the area is rather clear that when Croats and Serbs did kill each other, they were under Habsburg and Ottoman banners
..which is quite different from your earlier claim that Croats and Serbs started killing each other way later.

You only need a bare minimum of knowledge to know that it's pretty much true-- your ethnicities have nothing to do with blood,
In that case the Croats themselves can't be called an ethnicity since our particular regional groups are so drastically different that it's obvious even if your main instrument is the naked eye. :D :laugh: And they're supposed to be of the same blood as the Serbs, who are also heterogeneous. It's no quantum physics, we're similar Slavic peoples, like any other neighboring nations of the Slavic world.

they're entirely invented from religion
Invented? Both Croats and Serbs have their own traditions, histories, collective memories, cultures, languages etc, i.e. all the requirements to form their identities. To say that all the differences were invented some thousand years ago borders lunacy.

and dialects of the same language.
Wrong again. Croats use three different dialects; štokavian, kajkavian and čakavian, out of which štokavian is the only one shared by Croats and Serbs, while Serbs use štokavian and torlak. The latter is usually classified as Serbian štokavian, but sometimes as a separate dialect. It supposedly arose as a product of incomplete Slavicization of the paleo-balkan people native to the area, and it exhibits many traits also encountered in other languages of the Balkan sprachbund. The level of differentiation between Croatian dialects is significantly higher than the one usually encountered in other Slavonic languages, making them either highly divergent dialects or closely related languages. Along with Slovene, Croatian and Serbian are usually subsumed under the term West South Slavic. So you might want to add another dimension to your neat oversimplification.

You're both the same ethnically speaking.
In that case you're using a very lax meaning of the term 'ethnicity' I'm not familiar with.


You're right, I forgot the childish chauvinism rooted in less than a century of propaganda from people like Tito, the Chetniks, the Nazis, and a few others.
Yeah, also aliens. And Jews.

That's ironic, considering that you're a Westerner yourself if you're a Croat
That term is usually used here in Croatia to describe a person who lives west of here and usually goes with the adjective 'arrogant'.


I have to say you surprise me--I was always under the impression that it was the Serbs who were the chauvinists latching onto irrational hatred of their fellow Serbo-croats because of how much Libre complains about "genocide" and "atrocities", but here I see a Serb (Guapo) willing to work with the historical reality of the region, and Croats denouncing me.
History is not determined by some consensus. There's only true and false. Guapo is ok I guess. He used to post quite interesting things but he's too lazy nowadays. Kudos for Anthropological traces of Slavic presence in Kosovo and Metohia.


I'm really unpleasantly surprised at the whole thing, since it rather puts a damper on my own anti-Serbian feelings.
I don't care.


From what I've heard the Vlach are as foreign to Serbia as the Albanians in Kosovo, and are a Romantic people-- the Serbs and Croats being Slavs.
Nope. They were many remaining Romanized natives remaining in what are today Croatia and Serbia after the collapse of the Western Roman Empire. They were eventually assimilated but left a considerable genetic impact.

This makes a great deal of sense considering that the Vlach (Wallachians) are the ancestors of contemporary Romanians (or so I've been told by quite a number of anti-Turk Romanians), and Romanians are certainly not a Slavic people, though they have Slavic influence.
According to Osweo, the ancestors of the contemporary Romanians moved to Romania from Moesia (now Serbia).


So you admit it's all the same language; now, we know it's the same ethnicity so we're pretty much left with religion and contrived "identity" as the principal dividing factors here.
We know?

Monolith
03-06-2011, 11:58 AM
I dont think many descend from them. More like a fairy tale.
Where do you think the native Balkan component in our ancestry comes from then?


Well where I'm from, Vlachs are Romance speakers and refuse to be assimilated into serbian culture to this day.

I don't the ancestors of these Vlachs were one and the same as those who lived in Croatia and Bosnia. It's a large space and I don't think it's very likely their populations were biologically homogeneous. The fact remains that many of them did assimilate, as observed in some family names of contemporary and medieval Croats and Serbs, like Radulović, Dropulić, Marulić, as well as in personal names; Dančul, Markul, Blasul, Fečor, Bukor, Bun, Njegul etc. (by K. Jireček)

Guapo
03-06-2011, 02:12 PM
Where do you think the native Balkan component in our ancestry comes from then?

I don't the ancestors of these Vlachs were one and the same as those who lived in Croatia and Bosnia. It's a large space and I don't think it's very likely their populations were biologically homogeneous. The fact remains that many of them did assimilate, as observed in some family names of contemporary and medieval Croats and Serbs, like Radulović, Dropulić, Marulić, as well as in personal names; Dančul, Markul, Blasul, Fečor, Bukor, Bun, Njegul etc. (by K. Jireček)

Femeile romanesti place să dracu.

Guapo
03-06-2011, 02:27 PM
Btw, I think you're referring to Mavrovlachs from Adriatic coast, right?

Monolith
03-06-2011, 05:53 PM
Btw, I think you're referring to Mavrovlachs from Adriatic coast, right?
Yes, but they were native to Herzegovina and Dalmatian hinterland. There were also many others. They seemed to be equally numerous in Serbia, since there's an abundance of your medieval sources that explicitly mention Vlachs alongside Serbs, such as this one by knez Lazar: "...i kto ljubi iti iz moje zemlje u Dubrovnik, ili Srbin ili Vlah…, vsako da grede slobodno" (late 14th century).

English translation: "...and whoever likes/wants to go from my land to Dubrovnik, whether Serb or Vlach...,that everyone may go there freely"

Guapo
03-06-2011, 06:05 PM
Yes, but they were native to Herzegovina and Dalmatian hinterland. There were also many others. They seemed to be equally numerous in Serbia, since there's an abundance of your medieval sources that explicitly mention Vlachs alongside Serbs, such as this one by knez Lazar: "...i kto ljubi iti iz moje zemlje u Dubrovnik, ili Srbin ili Vlah…, vsako da grede slobodno" (late 14th century).

Dubrovnik(Ragusa) was a free republic. The Vlachs in Serbia call themselves Aromanians or Cincars, supposed descendants of Roman Legione Cinque.

Stefan Dushan's Law Code:



In a village where a Vlach or an Albanian stay, another following him shall not stay in that village. If that one stay by force, let him pay a fine and for the grass he has grazed.



A fight between villages, 50 perpers, between Vlachs and Albanians, 100 perpers. And of this fine one half to the Tsar, and one half to the lord owning the village.


This was cruel:


When a drunkard come from anywhere and attack anyone, or cut, or make someone bleed, yet not to death, to that drunkard one eye shall be removed and one hand cut off. But if a drunken man attack somebody or pull off his cap, or inflict some other shame, but do not make him bleed, he shall be beaten: one hundred strokes, that is, 100 times to be struck, and cast into prison, and afterwards be taken from prison and beaten again and released.

Also in that mediaeval law code of the Emperor Stefan Dusan, agricultural Serbian serfs were forbidden to marry Vlachs which means they sometimes did. In the tax records of the monastery of Decani in the 14th Century, Slavic Vlach and Albanian pastoral villages are both differentiated from villages of Slavic agricultural serfs, artisans, and fishermen. The social organization of the Slavic Vlach villages was intermediate between that of the Slavic agricultural serfs and that of the Albanians.