Roman Historians on Serbs

[Bosniensis]

The term "Triballians" appears frequently in Eastern Roman and other European works of the Middle Ages, referring exclusively to Serbs.

Some of these authors clearly explain that "Triballian" is a Hellenic synonym to "Serbian" and that Triballi were a Thracian tribe that received influences from Celts, Scythians and Illyrians.

(Author of this thread as well as TA community agrees that Serbs have a lot of Southern admixture and DNA therefore that previous statement is agreeable)

Niketas Choniates (famous Roman historians in Emperors Court) (or Acominatus, 1155–1215 or-16) in his history about Emperor Ioannes Komnenos: "... Shortly after this, he campaigned against the nation of Triballians (whom someone may call Serbians as well) ..."

or the much later Demetrios Chalkondyles (1423–1511), referring to an Islamized Christian noble: "... This Mahmud, son of Michael, is Triballian, which means Serbian, by his mother, and Greek by his father." or Mehmed the Conqueror when referring to the plundering of Serbia.

(Again, it is a well known fact that Mara Branković (Serb) is a mother of first Islamic Emperor of Constantinople Mehmed II)

In the 15th century, a coat of arms of "Tribalia", depicting a wild boar with an arrow pierced through the head (see Boars in heraldry), appeared in the supposed Coat of Arms of Emperor Stefan Dušan 'the Mighty' (r. 1331–1355). The motif had, in 1415, been used as the Coat of Arms of the Serbian Despotate and is recalled in one of Stefan Lazarević's personal Seals, according to the paper Сабор у Констанци. Pavao Ritter Vitezović also depicts "Triballia" with the same motif in 1701 and Hristofor Zhefarovich again in 1741.

With the beginning of the First Serbian Uprising, the Parliament adopted the Serbian Coat of Arms in 1805, their official seal depicted the heraldic emblems of Serbia and Tribalia.


So there goes the Myth about Slavic migrations on Balkans and that Serbs are foreigners on "Albanian territory of Nish etc..."

Because Serbs are Thraco-Illyrians with Scythian influence from Poland and Ukraine.

[Colonel Frank Grimes]

Slavic migrations to the Balkans is not a myth. It occurred centuries before anything you posted.

What you did get right is that Serbs are a blend of incoming Slavs and the people already living there.

[Bosniensis]

Slavic migrations to the Balkans is not a myth. It occurred centuries before anything you posted.

Slavic migrations are not Myth, people migrate every day. But the fact that Thracians, Illyrians were more numerous is also the fact.

As this Dr. in video explains in 2 minutes:

[Colonel Frank Grimes]

Slavic migrations are not Myth, people migrate every day. But the fact that Thracians, Illyrians were more numerous is also the fact.

As this Dr. in video explains in 2 minutes:

I don't know which is the more dominant ancestry. Although obviously Slavic culture (language) was the most dominant.

I don't know this man's credentials. Typically I don't read (or in this case watch) people who are of the same ethnicity as the subject they discuss unless I know they have a great deal of respect in the international community.

[CommonSense]

They referred to Bulgarians as Mysians, Hungarians as Paeonians, Tatars as Scythians and Turks as Persians. It was their custom to refer to foreign peoples by the name of the tribe who in antiquity inhabited the territory where the mentioned people now reside. You should be careful when trying to draw a conclusion based on that.

[Mingle]

They referred to Bulgarians as Mysians, Hungarians as Paeonians, Tatars as Scythians and Turks as Persians. It was their custom to refer to foreign peoples by the name of the tribe who in antiquity inhabited the territory where the mentioned people now reside. You should be careful when trying to draw a conclusion based on that.

Small correction. Bulgarians were called Moesians and Hungarians would have been called Pannonians not Paeonians. Paeonians were the pre-Slavic people of Vardar Macedonia. Also, in the case of Pannonia (and probably some others), it was used as simply a regional identity. The Roman province of Pannonia was named as such by Romans (meaning "swampy") and doesn't correlate to any specific tribe of that name. In the case of Tatars and Scythians, I think the terms Tatar and Scythian were more flexible historically and didn't always correctly correspond to Turkics or East Iranics. Even Hungarians were called Scythian before IIRC. Also, the term Tatar comes from the name of a Mongol tribe.

[Dick]

Autosmal dna aside, it's obvious with today's genetic testings that Southern Slavs are spawns of invaders from the north that are not indigenous to the Balkans so yeah, Dr. Bosniensis wouldn't be alive today if it wasn't for some Slav. Same goes for Dr. Jovan Deretic who is R1a. End of this stupid theory and story.

[CommonSense]

Small correction. Bulgarians were called Moesians and Hungarians would have been called Pannonians not Paeonians. Paeonians were the pre-Slavic people of Vardar Macedonia. Also, in the case of Pannonia (and probably some others), it was used as simply a regional identity. The Roman province of Pannonia was named as such by Romans (meaning "swampy") and doesn't correlate to any specific tribe of that name. In the case of Tatars and Scythians, I think the terms Tatar and Scythian were more flexible historically and didn't always correctly correspond to Turkics or East Iranics. Even Hungarians were called Scythian before IIRC. Also, the term Tatar comes from the name of a Mongol tribe.

Bulgarians were called Mysians, I'm certain of that. Yes, part of the region they live in was called Moesia in antiquity, while Mysia was in Asia Minor. However, we mustn't forget that the Byzantines and other people of that age weren't all knowing and that there were some terms they tended to mix up:





Same thing regarding Paeonia and Pannonia, except this mix-up originates from authors way back during the time of the Roman Empire:

[Thanas Django]

This used to be a yearly thread but Bosniensis elevated it to a bimonthly status.

[Vlatko Vukovic]

E1b among Serbians - native Balkanite
I2a - mainly invaders (perhaps not originally Slavs, but still included in Slavic migrations)
R1a - Balto-Slavs in general (in this case Slavs), that's clear
R1b - perhaps some Celts?
N2 - unique branch in world which is just presented among Serbians?

I think that's something like that.