Illyran literature suggestions

[Mello_]

On 6/27/2020 at 2:49 PM, Antioch said:

Hi,

I want to learn more about Illyrian history. Do you have suggestions for which books I can read to learn more about this subject?

Thanks 

Best books are about specific Illyrian tribes since term Illyrians is umbrella for different tribes. Dalmatians were different from Histrians for example. And Liburnians were different from both. Thats why peeps divided Illyrians on lets say 4 catgegories. One were more Celtic others didnt have Celtic features etc.

[Mello_]

On 6/30/2020 at 8:14 PM, Antioch said:

I already have a copy of Aleksandar Stipcevic's ''Iliri.'' Looking forward to read it! 

In my opinion, nationalism is a big problem for Croatian, Serbian, Bosnian and Albanian historians. They often try to write history to legitimize their own nation, state and territory. For example both Serbs and Croats highlight that the Bosnian people are either - originally - Croats/Serbs. Therefore Serbia and Croatia have the ''right'' to split Bosnia and Herzegovina between them (like Milosevic and Tudjman agreed). Bosnians - on the other side - highlight the Bosnian Kingom, and that they have a right to an independent Bosnia and Herzegovina. They even use Stecci as evidence of Bosnia's original borders (and some ultra-nationalists even dream to have these borders in the future, just as some Serbs and Croats do). 

The problem here is that the people who lived - let's say - medieval times, didn't have any understanding of the word ''nation'' like we do today. Often there were the same ethnic groups living at one territory. Nationalism only gets important in the 19th century, especially with the modern state. In other words, nationalism is most probably a ''modern phenomena.'' Nationalism is therefore a problem, because it makes it harder to write real and objective history. You get blind, and focus on one narrative; to prove that ''your nation'' has the right to a territory. This is perhaps the reason why the history of the Balkans is still unknown. It is additionally confusing because it has been manipulated for such a long time - and even continues to be manipulated today. 

You as historian who can read Croatian Bosnian and Serbian then should know about book Na klizištu povijesti which is literature in University of Zagreb, University of Zadar and University of Sarajevo. That said alone debunk your theory about nationalism among historians about Bosnia since book speaks about history of Bosnia. Croats and Serbs didnt agree to split Bosnia and I dont know why you bring Milosevic and Tudjman into it. Why not mention Izetbegovic work in which he wanted to create Islamic republic of Bosnia? Leave politics and modern history when you speak about middle ages and especially Illyrians.

 

And in the end history of Balkan is very well documented. Ofc in some periods you have small amount of sources on some more. 

I will be honest with you. I dont believe you are historian. And I believe you are either Bosniak or Albanian. So I will be quick. Albanians have nothing with Illyrians. Bosniaks also. As for Croatian paws over Bosnia dude...cmon. Dont get there. You will got yourself embaressed. I will just say that you read about Hrvoje. To me with King Tvrtko greatest figure in Bosnia history. Read DAI. Ofc Im not Daist. But dude...Serbs were in Bosnia from "day one". Croats were in Bosnia from "day one". That doesnt mean that Bosnian didnt exist man. What you see of Bosnia today is modern creation same nationalism as you said. Lol

Bosnia before was far smaller. Croatia was bigger. Did you ever heard about Ottomans dude? Did you heard about Turkish Croatia in todays Bosnia? Livno in DAI was among oldest Croatian settlements. So please...go elsewhere with this story how history of Balkan is in fog so Bosniaks or Albanians might have been Illyrians. 

Sorry if you dont think that but being member of historum.com I saw many times where threads like this goes. Serbs and Croats are nationalist. History of Balkan is foggy. Hey Illyrians are Bosniaks and Albanians. In your story Serbs were only in today Serbia. Cmon. Take example of Tesla. Etc. Ok I skip century but you know very well where Im going with all this.

Just saying. If you go there. Stop please.

If you desire to speak about history of Bosnia in middle ages I would really like to have someone to talk about it. 

 

Edited July 7, 2020 by Mello_

[Mello_]

On 6/30/2020 at 4:40 PM, Helen of Annoy said:

 

Croatian right wing prefers Iranian theory, simply because it distances us from other Slavic nations. Personally, I'm convinced ancient Hrvati really had very much to do with Iran, but do they originate from that gene pool or just made a stop in that area while moving slowly towards Europe... I don't know. I don't want to hijack the thread, just making it generally a bit clearer what's my opinion on the subject. 

Croatian right wing use it not because of distance from slavic but because guy who was 1st to proposed idea was shot by Serbian secret police in time when even Einstein spoke and wrote about how Croats suffer under Serbian centralism. 

 

So guy who proposed Iranian theory was assassinated by Serbian secret police. So..its handy to use Iranian theory.

Croatian right wing to separate from others Slavic in Balkan need to highlight that were the only one with Slovenes called Mitteleuropa trough history. That they are med. country. Difference between countries in Balkan are so obvious that Pozzi work from time when Iranian theory was born explain it like nobody bussiness. I mean Croatia did have hard core renessaince period. Did Bosnia and Serbia have it? No. Croatia beside being med.country was always part of west world. From Latin script and Rome to ....well you know more than I do.

Edited July 7, 2020 by Mello_

[Unusual Tournament]

1 hour ago, Mello_ said:

Two early Slavic experts were conviced that Serbs are just one tribe of Croats. Cuz in Porfi work DAI it is written that Serbs came beside Hungary from Boiky. And even today in Ukraine you have micro etnos Lemkos Boiki and Hustuls. All of them with Rusyns are considered by many as leftovers of early Croats. By Ukranian , Canadian, Russian and etc historians.

Also DAI called Serbs nothing but Slavic slave in Byzantine empire. So it might be true. 

Imho I belive that Serbs and Croats were different tribe since they came to Balkan as formed ethnos.

Personally, I believe both are Slavs that have been influenced by different cultures and Christian denominations. They probably moved into the region at different times also. You can add the Bosnians into the mix too. The Slavs as a whole have been a mix of different tribes that lived between the Caspian Sea and central present day Russia. So even though all are Slavs not all are identical much like the earlier Germanic tribes and the Greek tribes that filtered into Europe at different times and with their own differences.

Edited July 7, 2020 by Captain Risky

[Unusual Tournament]

57 minutes ago, Mello_ said:

You as historian who can read Croatian Bosnian and Serbian then should know about book Na klizištu povijesti which is literature in University of Zagreb, University of Zadar and University of Sarajevo. That said alone debunk your theory about nationalism among historians about Bosnia since book speaks about history of Bosnia. Croats and Serbs didnt agree to split Bosnia and I dont know why you bring Milosevic and Tudjman into it. Why not mention Izetbegovic work in which he wanted to create Islamic republic of Bosnia? Leave politics and modern history when you speak about middle ages and especially Illyrians.

 

And in the end history of Balkan is very well documented. Ofc in some periods you have small amount of sources on some more. 

I will be honest with you. I dont believe you are historian. And I believe you are either Bosniak or Albanian. So I will be quick. Albanians have nothing with Illyrians. Bosniaks also. As for Croatian paws over Bosnia dude...cmon. Dont get there. You will got yourself embaressed. I will just say that you read about Hrvoje. To me with King Tvrtko greatest figure in Bosnia history. Read DAI. Ofc Im not Daist. But dude...Serbs were in Bosnia from "day one". Croats were in Bosnia from "day one". That doesnt mean that Bosnian didnt exist man. What you see of Bosnia today is modern creation same nationalism as you said. Lol

Bosnia before was far smaller. Croatia was bigger. Did you ever heard about Ottomans dude? Did you heard about Turkish Croatia in todays Bosnia? Livno in DAI was among oldest Croatian settlements. So please...go elsewhere with this story how history of Balkan is in fog so Bosniaks or Albanians might have been Illyrians. 

Sorry if you dont think that but being member of historum.com I saw many times where threads like this goes. Serbs and Croats are nationalist. History of Balkan is foggy. Hey Illyrians are Bosniaks and Albanians. In your story Serbs were only in today Serbia. Cmon. Take example of Tesla. Etc. Ok I skip century but you know very well where Im going with all this.

Just saying. If you go there. Stop please.

If you desire to speak about history of Bosnia in middle ages I would really like to have someone to talk about it. 

 

Just to add. IMO the Bosnian identity is the newest of the South Slavs. To me it relies heavily on Ottoman Turk Islam. It’s a newer construct. Not to offend but all countries are constructs of outside influences. The most noticeable meeting point between three dominate cultures and religions of the region.
 

Having said that I wanna touch upon a little know Croatian fact. It has a reasonable minority of Italians on it coast line. The Serbs also have sizable Hungarian and Albanian minorities also. Basically the former Yugoslavia was a stew of ancient and newish peoples heavily spiced with Slav. It’s why the region has add so many wars and i predict the region has some growing and shrinking pains until the borders settle along ethnic lines. Especially Serbia, Albania and Bosnia. 

[Unusual Tournament]

On 7/1/2020 at 4:42 AM, Helen of Annoy said:

And that's why I wish everyone was in the EU. No hard borders, no need to throw hysteric fits over them. So we can focus on more constructive things than burning each other's houses every few decades. 

And there I go off topic. Sorry. 

Good luck in your research! 

Me too Helen. Let nature take its course and put nationalism to sleep. Better people view themselves as European first. That’s my thinking anyway.

[Helen of Annoy]

@Captain Risky

My quote function is not working for some reason. Either I need a new mouse, either UM needs a maintenance  

Anyway, I just wanted to add to your add that Bosnians are old too. They were Bogumili, their genome is the usual mixture with a lot of indigenous, Illyrian if we will, and they found themselves between the - unfortunately hostile - Catholic and the Orthodox. So they allied with Ottomans. They even had bula (decree) from the sultan where they're accepting Islam, but are exempt from the alcohol ban and women from covering. It explains a lot. They also fought for their rights against Ottomans, because they were aware they're not Turks and they wanted their own rule. Etc. 

The worst mistake in our history was hostility against Bosnians, as a part of disorganized defence against the Ottoman invasion. And instead of finally fixing that catastrophe, 1990's happened the way they did. *bangs head against the wall* 

Another reason why we absolutely need the EU. I'm so tired of turbo-nationalist freaks who fill any gaps in their plans with hatred. And their plans consist mostly of gaps, so it's mostly hatred they offer. 

 

[Mello_]

1 hour ago, Captain Risky said:

Just to add. IMO the Bosnian identity is the newest of the South Slavs. To me it relies heavily on Ottoman Turk Islam. It’s a newer construct. Not to offend but all countries are constructs of outside influences. The most noticeable meeting point between three dominate cultures and religions of the region.
 

Having said that I wanna touch upon a little know Croatian fact. It has a reasonable minority of Italians on it coast line. The Serbs also have sizable Hungarian and Albanian minorities also. Basically the former Yugoslavia was a stew of ancient and newish peoples heavily spiced with Slav. It’s why the region has add so many wars and i predict the region has some growing and shrinking pains until the borders settle along ethnic lines. Especially Serbia, Albania and Bosnia. 

Errr...sorry but I must disagree. Maybe its language barrier but reasonable minority of Italians on the east coast of Adriatic never existed. Period.

 

You have had and still have Italian minority in Istria. In Dubrovnik if you read Harris, Konrad  or even Marmont memoirs you will see thats BS. Marmont stressed out that people in Dubrovnik ( no matter they were connected with Italian Ancona as Croatian Rovinj Zadar Split Hvar Korcula etc. ) hated above all Italian flags. Im mean Venetian republic and Republic of Dubrovnik were rivals. Zadar or Zara on italian was capital of Venetian Dalmatia. Even capital of Napoleon Illyrian province. That said French called Croatian language Illyrian lol. Anyway when Venitians loose Zadar there were 10% of Venetians in city. Just to add that Venetians used Holy crusaders to ruin Croatian catholic city. Thats the reason why Pope didnt blessed Crusade. Crusaders wanted to go on Crusade but didnt have ships. Ask Venetians. They respond if you destroy Croatian Zadar we will provide ships. In town you could hear quote"Croatian" songs. Elite of Zadar went on Biograd. Town near Zadar. Thats why Italians even today call it Zara vechia. Old Zadar. Ofc you have people with identity crysis. Like on island Solta. Where people spoke Croatian but declared themselves as Italians etc.  But all the time you have had Croatian pirates like Neretvians, Kačići and Uskoks. You have rebellions on Hvar island when Matija of Hvar wants to expell Venetians. You also have Arabs who tried to invade but were stopped by Croats. Normans who did invade. Bulgars who were stopped by Croats. Franks who were stopped by Croats. Serbs who were stopped by Croats. They even expelled Avars etc. Croats were rulers of east Adriatic sea.

 

 

[Unusual Tournament]

42 minutes ago, Helen of Annoy said:

@Captain Risky

My quote function is not working for some reason. Either I need a new mouse, either UM needs a maintenance  

Anyway, I just wanted to add to your add that Bosnians are old too. They were Bogumili, their genome is the usual mixture with a lot of indigenous, Illyrian if we will, and they found themselves between the - unfortunately hostile - Catholic and the Orthodox. So they allied with Ottomans. They even had bula (decree) from the sultan where they're accepting Islam, but are exempt from the alcohol ban and women from covering. It explains a lot. They also fought for their rights against Ottomans, because they were aware they're not Turks and they wanted their own rule. Etc. 

The worst mistake in our history was hostility against Bosnians, as a part of disorganized defence against the Ottoman invasion. And instead of finally fixing that catastrophe, 1990's happened the way they did. *bangs head against the wall* 

Another reason why we absolutely need the EU. I'm so tired of turbo-nationalist freaks who fill any gaps in their plans with hatred. And their plans consist mostly of gaps, so it's mostly hatred they offer. 

 

Just to add to your add  a change in cultural and religious identity for a nation or group is such as easy thing. Example. After the fall of last Western Roman emperor, and before the arrival of the southern Slavs, present day former Yugoslavia was a religious battleground not fought with armies but with money, imperial honours and excommunication. Legions would switch allegiances between Rome and Constantinople and so did churches. One Christmas a village church would be saying prayers and blessings for the Eastern Empire the next for he Western. The point I’m talking about is we talk about the Illyrian identity but is it any different to the Balkan one? Both seem to been melting pots for the flavour of the day. As much as the Balkans in the last 1000 have been Europe’s immigrant neighbourhood so Illyria was to the Greco-Romans. 
 

to use an analogy, it’s like saying that New York is a Dutch city. It was once then became English, American with a majority Irish, Jewish, Italian, Black, Hispanic and so forth. The predominant language is English and genetics say otherwise. 

[Mello_]

Back to languages. When Croats came from Poland/Ukraine they didnt have names for sea stuff. Like fish. So they took names of Romanized Illyrians. Or some Goths names. Cuz of Ostorogoths. So for example fish Orada. Many Croats think its their name. But its Romanic word. Read: Not Italian. Cuz Orada they also say in Catlonya Spain and Portugal. Or something similar. Example of Italianism in Croatian is Barba. Which means  Uncle on Venetian. Anyway flora and fauna is fine example how Croatian is full or Romanic words. Like Ugor fish is called Angula. Etc. Also in today Croatia you had now extinct language called Dalmatian. Link between Romanian and Italian. It was Ronanic language. Not Italian. For example on island Rab people spoke Dalmatian till 16th century. Etc. 

 

Sorry. Not reasonable minority of Italians. Thats Musollini wishfull thinking.

Edited July 7, 2020 by Mello_

[Unusual Tournament]

2 minutes ago, Mello_ said:

Errr...sorry but I must disagree. Maybe its language barrier but reasonable minority of Italians on the east coast of Adriatic never existed. Period.

 

You have had and still have Italian minority in Istria. In Dubrovnik if you read Harris, Konrad  or even Marmont memoirs you will see thats BS. Marmont stressed out that people in Dubrovnik ( no matter they were connected with Italian Ancona as Croatian Rovinj Zadar Split Hvar Korcula etc. ) hated above all Italian flags. Im mean Venetian republic and Republic of Dubrovnik were rivals. Zadar or Zara on italian was capital of Venetian Dalmatia. Even capital of Napoleon Illyrian province. That said French called Croatian language Illyrian lol. Anyway when Venitians loose Zadar there were 10% of Venetians in city. Just to add that Venetians used Holy crusaders to ruin Croatian catholic city. Thats the reason why Pope didnt blessed Crusade. Crusaders wanted to go on Crusade but didnt have ships. Ask Venetians. They respond if you destroy Croatian Zadar we will provide ships. In town you could hear quote"Croatian" songs. Elite of Zadar went on Biograd. Town near Zadar. Thats why Italians even today call it Zara vechia. Old Zadar. Ofc you have people with identity crysis. Like on island Solta. Where people spoke Croatian but declared themselves as Italians etc.  But all the time you have had Croatian pirates like Neretvians, Kačići and Uskoks. You have rebellions on Hvar island when Matija of Hvar wants to expell Venetians. You also have Arabs who tried to invade but were stopped by Croats. Normans who did invade. Bulgars who were stopped by Croats. Franks who were stopped by Croats. Serbs who were stopped by Croats. They even expelled Avars etc. Croats were rulers of east Adriatic sea.

Mate I don’t know what nationality you are , I’m guessing Croat, but I’ve had many Croat friends. Ive meet several Italian Croats and been told that there is a sizable Italian minority in Croatia. I have heard there were even more but they left a before and during communism. Even my Croat friends agree. Eastern Croatia is a predominant Serb enclave. I think the traditional home of Nicola Tesla. Let’s not make out that Croatia is homogeneous, it’s not. No country in the Balkans is. 
 

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Italians_of_Croatia

i can tell you that Croatia had a very large Roman and Italian foot print in the past. The Balkans have seen many ethnic purges and I suspect many more to come. Croatia is no choir boy my friend. The whole region is a powder keg that has ignited one world war and changed the outcome of another. 

[Unusual Tournament]

9 minutes ago, Mello_ said:

Back to languages. When Croats came from Poland/Ukraine they didnt have names for sea stuff. Like fish. So they took names of Romanized Illyrians. Or some Goths names. Cuz of Ostorogoths. So for example fish Orada. Many Croats think its their name. But its Romanic word. Read: Not Italian. Cuz Orada they also say in Catlonya Spain and Portugal. Or something similar. Example of Italianism in Croatian is Barba. Which means  Uncle on Venetian. Anyway flora and fauna is fine example how Croatian is full or Romanic words. Like Ugor fish is called Angula. Etc. Also in today Croatia you had now extinct language called Dalmatian. Link between Romanian and Italian. It was Ronanic language. Not Italian. For example on island Rab people spoke Dalmatian till 16th century. Etc. 

 

Sorry. Not reasonable minority of Italians. Thats Musollini wishfull thinking.

More than likely what you are describing is the melting pot of Slavs with the local people. Which would have been mostly Italian and Greek speakers. 

[jaylemurph]

2 hours ago, Mello_ said:

I will be honest with you. I dont believe you are historian.

I don’t believe @Antioch ever claimed to be a professional historian — he was looking for a possible MA History thesis. He certainly seems to have found a lively topic. 

Th collective nouns for historians is an argumentation. There’s a thin line between understanding historical positions and taking sides, and it appears to this historian Antioch’s walked that balance better than others in this thread. 

—Jaylemurph 

[Mello_]

7 minutes ago, Captain Risky said:

Mate I don’t know what nationality you are , I’m guessing Croat, but I’ve had many Croat friends. Ive meet several Italian Croats and been told that there is a sizable Italian minority in Croatia. I have heard there were even more but they left a before and during communism. Even my Croat friends agree. Eastern Croatia is a predominant Serb enclave. I think the traditional home of Nicola Tesla. Let’s not make out that Croatia is homogeneous, it’s not. No country in the Balkans is. 
 

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Italians_of_Croatia

i can tell you that Croatia had a very large Roman and Italian foot print in the past. The Balkans have seen many ethnic purges and I suspect many more to come. Croatia is no choir boy my friend. The whole region is a powder keg that has ignited one world war and changed the outcome of another. 

I consider myself as Dutch. Not Italian. Venetians were seen by Croats same as Ottomans. Croats hated them. It was they who tried to take their quote by Croatian King "mare nostrum".

 

Ofc Croatia was not only Croats living there. But Italians were minority same as you did have Germans in Croatia. Only part there was reasonable minority of Italians was Istria.

Edited July 7, 2020 by Mello_

[Mello_]

6 minutes ago, jaylemurph said:

I don’t believe @Antioch ever claimed to be a professional historian — he was looking for a possible MA History thesis. He certainly seems to have found a lively topic. 

Th collective nouns for historians is an argumentation. There’s a thin line between understanding historical positions and taking sides, and it appears to this historian Antioch’s walked that balance better than others in this thread. 

—Jaylemurph 

Lol

 

Edit: dude you were not on historum.com. Soon as you see Illyrian thread. Oh here cone the Albanian or Bosniak who will claim they are ancestors of them. Im too expirenced to see where this is going.

Edited July 7, 2020 by Mello_

[Mello_]

6 minutes ago, Captain Risky said:

More than likely what you are describing is the melting pot of Slavs with the local people. Which would have been mostly Italian and Greek speakers. 

Italian language didnt existed in that time. But yeah. It was melting pot. Ofc.

Edited July 7, 2020 by Mello_

[jaylemurph]

1 minute ago, Mello_ said:

Lol

Trenchant criticism. 

—Jaylemurph

[Unusual Tournament]

3 minutes ago, Mello_ said:

Italian language didnt existed in that time. But yeah. It was melting pot. Ofc.

Latin. Yes you are correct. 

[jaylemurph]

1 minute ago, Mello_ said:

Italian language didnt existed in that time. But yeah. It was melting pot. Ofc.

Depends on what you mean by “Italian.” 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Italic_languages

—Jaylemurph 

[Mello_]

2 minutes ago, jaylemurph said:

Trenchant criticism. 

—Jaylemurph

I edit my post. 

And as I remember he said that he is bacc. 

[Mello_]

Just now, jaylemurph said:

Depends on what you mean by “Italian.” 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Italic_languages

—Jaylemurph 

Toscanian was not spoke on east side of Adriatic dude. 

[Unusual Tournament]

6 minutes ago, Mello_ said:

Ofc Croatia was not only Croats living there. But Italians were minority same as you did have Germans in Croatia. Only part there was reasonable minority of Italians was Istria.

German speakers a legacy of Croatia’s annexation into the Austrian-Hungarian empire. In the grand scheme of things a recent example event not to be confused with a 2000 year old Greek, Roman and Byzantine legacy.

[Mello_]

And to proove they are ancestors of them you must first call Croats and Serbs nationalists. So guys dont listen their stories. Then tried to push idea that history of Balkan is totaly unknown. Everything is wrong. Lets rewrite history. Im not dumb.

[jaylemurph]

1 minute ago, Mello_ said:

Toscanian was not spoke on east side of Adriatic dude. 

Just cleaning up your sloppy linguistics. Or rather, trying to.

And are talking about Tuscan, the Romance dialect, Etruscan, the unrelated language isolate, or the idiolect of Arturo Toscanini, the composer?

—Jaylemurph 

[Mello_]

7 minutes ago, Captain Risky said:

German speakers a legacy of Croatia’s annexation into the Austrian-Hungarian empire. In the grand scheme of things a recent example event not to be confused with a 2000 year old Greek, Roman and Byzantine legacy.

Greeks were beaten. So no. Byzantine and Franks yes. Romanized Illyrians yes. Avars no. Etc etc.

Edited July 7, 2020 by Mello_