Medieval Serbia before the Nemanjić

Jul 2017
292
Srpska
#21
So creating a narrative so that an unreliable source that misses by a full century can still be taken as fact?
Yes, because "wrong in one thing wrong in everything" is not allowed! You cannot throw away the source.

We are NOT creating the narrative. The source tells the story, not us. We are not telling the story. We are simply observing obvious mistakes and correcting them by reconciling with other sources!
 

Maki

Ad Honorem
Jan 2017
3,414
Republika Srpska
#22
It is not only wrong in one thing, the Gesta Regum Sclavorum gives us a full dynasty of rulers that never appear outside of it. It is not because of nothing that the work is considered as an extremely unreliable source by all mainsteam historians in the Balkans. It is only used by Balkan nationalists who use it to prove their "claims". Besides, Orbini was notorious for having ludicrous beliefs. He considered Alexander a Slav and believed that Slavs were Goths. And his belief in this Slavic Gothdom is the reason for his switch of Senudslav to Svevlad. He deliberately wanted to turn Alaric into a Slav. The Gesta Regum Sclavorum is also unreliable because the author explicitly states that his sources were not books and manuscripts, but oral tradition:
"Verum tamen nullus legentium credat alia me scripsisse praeter ea quae apatribus nostris et antiquis senioribus veridica narratione referre audivi."
I think I do not have to say why using oral tradition is extremely unreliable.
 
Jul 2017
292
Srpska
#23
It is not only wrong in one thing, the Gesta Regum Sclavorum gives us a full dynasty of rulers that never appear outside of it. It is not because of nothing that the work is considered as an extremely unreliable source by all mainsteam historians in the Balkans. It is only used by Balkan nationalists who use it to prove their "claims". Besides, Orbini was notorious for having ludicrous beliefs. He considered Alexander a Slav and believed that Slavs were Goths. And his belief in this Slavic Gothdom is the reason for his switch of Senudslav to Svevlad. He deliberately wanted to turn Alaric into a Slav. The Gesta Regum Sclavorum is also unreliable because the author explicitly states that his sources were not books and manuscripts, but oral tradition:
"Verum tamen nullus legentium credat alia me scripsisse praeter ea quae apatribus nostris et antiquis senioribus veridica narratione referre audivi."
I think I do not have to say why using oral tradition is extremely unreliable.

1. Your garbage about nationalism implies you are dumping on nationalists, and your political views have no place here. Nobody cares who you think are nationalists and what you think of them. We are discussing a source.

2. THE SOURCE TALKS ABOUT THE FALL OF THE ROMAN EMPIRE, ROMAN PROVINCES!!!!!! AND AGREES WITH OTHER INDEPENDENT SOURCES!!!!!

a. The decisive battle occured near Danube in Moesia
b. Goths beat the Romans
c. One of the gothic leaders was Alaric (Svevlad)
d. Spalato and the cities on the coast did not fall. Roman ruler in Spalato participated in the battle on Danube but retreated to Spalato.
e. After the battle the Goths encountered no resistance throughout the Illyricum

THESE EVENTS independent of GRS TOOK PLACE IN 395!! There was no other fall of the Roman province of Illyricum in such manner, with those facts. That is the only one. GRS describes it the same. It's consistent.

3. The source is honest. Explicitly says in the preface the chronology is a compilation of oral traditions at the time of the writing around 1200 CE. Oral tradition in Slavic language that at the time was requested to be translated and written to latin at the request of the church and it's members. There is nothing dishonest about it.


4. There could be errors. One of those errors is the starting year 495. It is an obvious error because in the history of that region there was no other fall of the Roman province from Danube by the Goths except the one in 395.
Our job was to find out which is an error, 395 or 495. Luckily, by examining other independent documents, as well as the internal consistency of the timeline of the family tree enumerated in GRS, we can find out that the year is indeed 395.
 
Last edited:

Maki

Ad Honorem
Jan 2017
3,414
Republika Srpska
#24
Alaric is NOT Svevlad. We have no primary sources that say he ever called himself Svevlad. It is Orbini's translation deliberately made to make Alaric look like a Slav.
 
Jul 2017
292
Srpska
#25
Alaric is NOT Svevlad. We have no primary sources that say he ever called himself Svevlad. It is Orbini's translation deliberately made to make Alaric look like a Slav.
No, that is incorrect. Svevlad IS Aleric, it is a literal translation and there is no room for negation. Furthermore, we are dealing with same events in time and space. And on top of that the source explicitly and honestly tells us that it speaks from Slavic oral tradition.

And in the end, it was NOT Slavic oral tradition to call the work Kingdom of the Slavs (Regno de Gli Slavi), to celebrate the Slavs, to boost themselves. The Slavic oral tradition is the Booklet about Goths (Knjizica o Gotima). The LATIN name for it, what the latins, the romans, called it was Kingdom of the Slavs. In other words, the Slavs and much less Orbini who merely republished it did not say Slavs were Goths. The Latins did that, they called the Goths in Slavic tradition who sacked Rome Slavs.

Were they Goths or Slavs? Yes, they were, both! It was a Great Moravian Kingdom!
 
Last edited:

Maki

Ad Honorem
Jan 2017
3,414
Republika Srpska
#26
No, that is incorrect. Svevlad IS Aleric, it is a literal translation and there is no room for negation. Furthermore, we are dealing with same events in time and space. And on top of that the source explicitly and honestly tells us that it speaks from Slavic oral tradition.
Except nowhere in the Gesta Regum Sclavorum does it say that this Svevlad (or Senulat as called there) sacked Rome. The only thing we know about him is that he attacked Christians in the Dalmatian coastal cities and that he ruled for 12 years before being succeeded by Silimir. That is all. Italy isn't even mentioned. Rome isn't mentioned at all.

Were they Goths or Slavs? Yes, they were, both! It was a Great Moravian Kingdom!
The name Great Moravia first appears in the DAI and there it starts with Sviatopluk. Frankish annals start with Mojmir. No source ever connects Moravia to the Visigoths.
 
Jul 2017
292
Srpska
#27
No source ever connects Moravia to the Visigoths.
There is a timeline connection regarding fall of the Roman empire connecting Goths and Moravians, going from 950 in De Administrando Imperio, to 600 and time of Svetopluk in Slavic oral tradition, to 400 and time of the very fall of the Roman Empire in Illyricum and French Gaul.
Whether Moravian kings are Visigoths or Ostrogoths or neither comes down to whether the rulers of Moravia are offsprings of Balthi or Amali according to Jordanes or neither, and that distinction is irrelevant. Moravians are Goths.


GOTHS ARE SLAVIC AND GERMANIC PEOPLE

According to Jordanes, in the decades preceding the fall of the Roman provinces, before 395, there was a great military alliance to the east of the Roman empire, bordering it, all the way from Germany and stretching east into Russia and south to Black Sea and Thrace, led by one gothic leader, All Ruler, Hermanaric, in alliance with others.

Jordanes also tells us that the All Ruler, Hermanaric, was in a family union with some leaders of Roxolani who killed or incapacitated him over some family dispute. Roxolani are Slavic.

That military alliance was composed of Slavic and Germanic people. Jordanes says the alliance included Antes, Venetes, etc. Everything that existed there in Scythia.

That large military alliance prior to the fall of Rome we call Goths.


GOTHS CONQUERED ROMAN PROVINCE ILLYRICUM ONCE AND FOR ALL

Goths took over the province of Illyricum between 375 and 395 CE. The main source is Ammianus Marcellinus who was a contemporary and described the Battle of the Willows, and later battles of Adrianople and Constantinople.

Ammianus (Contemporary perspective, year 382-395): Events of 376-382: Goths (Fritigern, Sueridas, and Collias as rulers) broke through from the north, invaded, Moesia near Danube and then Thrace, beat the Romans at the Battle of the Willows, Adrianople, and then attacked Constantinople where they failed, then plundered the rest of Greece.
Regarding the battles, after the initial skirmishes and fights during the invasion, Emperor Valens from Constantinople requested roman reinforcements from Gaul and Sirmium prior to the battle. Military general from Sirmium failed to participate, retreated, but his troops were taken over and lead to the battle by the roman general from Gaul.
From then on, after the Goths defeated the Romans, the Goths ruled from Thessaloniki to the Alps, all Illyricum.
(Ammianus died around 400.)

Jordanes (German perspective, oral tradition, year 600): Events of 376-382: After Hermanaric the All Ruler died, the Goths (Fritigern, Alatheus, and Saphrac as rulers) broke through from the north, invaded, Moesia near Danube and then Thrace. There were fights over food, and other fights with Romans.
Fritigern plundered Greece. Alatheus and Saphrax retreated back to Pannonia. (During this time the Vandals, another Gothic group, from the north invaded Gaul, another roman province)
Following their military success, the Goths in the Balkans entered military peace agreement with Romans -- they kept their territories. Roman emperor Theodosius agreed to pay them tributes to keep peace and alliance.
After death of Theodosius in 395, Alaric, the new unified All Ruler, invaded Italy, going unobstructed through Illyricum. He went as far as Sicily and died in Calabria.
From then on Goths ruled Illyricum. There are Sarmatian south of Sava, there is Theodoric's family in Pannonia, etc.

De Administrando Imperio (Roman perspective, oral tradition, year 950): Events After 300 and death of emperor Diocletian: The Avars, also called Slavs, dwelt outside Roman territories, east of Danube. After some roman troops killed off some Avars (Slavs) there on the other side of Danube, the Avars (Slavs) built up a military awaiting the roman troops' attack, and roman units were sent from Salona to suppress the build up.
The Avars (Slavs) defeated the Romans. Some Roman troops retreated to Salona. Then, the Slavs studied Roman movement, took on Roman insignia, and unobstructed in roman clothing reached Salona and coastal cities. From then on they ruled the Dalmatia.


Regno de gli Slavi (Slavic perspective, oral tradition, year 1200): Describing fall of Roman province Dalmatia, After death of Svevlad, the All Ruler, the Goths (Ostroilo and Totila, sons of Svevlad who also had a third son Brus who stayed behind to rule his father's realm) broke through from Hungarian lands (Pannonia), from the north into Trnovina which is in Moesia near Danube (town of Veliko Trnovo).
Romans sent troops from Salona and Istria to suppress the build up. The Goths defeated the Kings of Dalmatia and Istria. King of Istria died, and the King of Salona retreated back.
After the battle, Ostroilo and Totila divided the troops.
Ostroilo conquered all of Dalmatia and stopped in Prevalitana (Todays Montenegro, around town of Skadar). He sent his son Svevlad north to conquer the rest of Illyria (presumably to Pannonia). Roman emperor of Constantinople sent troops to Prevalitana to defeat Ostroilo, and they did and killed him. His son Svevlad hurried back to Bosnia to beat the Romans but found no roman troops, they had retreated. From then on, Svevlad ruled all Illyricum, from town of Bar along the coast to Valdevina, and north to Poland.
Totila meanwhile invaded Istria, then Itally, all the way to Sicily where he died.
Svevlad, the All Ruler, ruled in Illyricum for 12 years, and was succeeded by his son Zelimir (interestingly translated to Gothic is Fritigern also mentioned by Ammianus and Jordanes). From then on the Goths ruled the Illyricum.
(Also, interesting to note about Totila and Ostroilo: Tot is what the Hungarians call Slavs, and Ostroilo is a name reference to Ostrogoths, Austria, in other words a German. So the names Totilo and Ostroilo in Slavic tradition of events can be read as a Slavic ruler and a German ruler rather than actual names of persons.)

MORAVIANS - The Rulers of Illyricum

De Administrando Imperio (Emperor's testimony, year 950): GREAT MORAVIA is the old land of SVETOPLUK. It has been carved up recently by invaders. What is left of it is, south of Belgrade and Trajans bridge (Carpathians) down to Bulgaria; and Pannonia west of Sirmium.

Regno de gli Slavi (Slavic tradition, year 1200): Events of 600 CE: Svetopluk is a successor of Svevlad, the Gothic rulers who sacked Rome, and he divided his kingdom in 600 into duchies Serbia, White Croatia, and Red Croatia.

Gregory of Tours (German tradition, year 550): Events following fall of Rome, 400: Merovech started Merovingian dynasty in France, or Belgium, in that area.

Jordanes: (German tradition, year 550-600): Events following fall of Rome, after 400: The Goths ruled France, Italy, Gaul, Belgium, Spain, in alliance with Roman rulers. And of course they ruled in previous Gothic kingdoms in Germany and Scythia and Illyricum.



CONCLUSION

Moravians are Goths. There was only one fall of the Roman empire in Illyricum, not two, three or ten. The Goths took over the Roman province of Illyricum once and for all, they were Germanic and Slavic people. And their kingdom in Illyricum subsequently was Great Moravia. The Goths not only took over the Illyricum but the rest of continental Europe. Moravian name is thus tied to Goths not only in the Balkans but also in France where Merovech ruled in the wake of the fall of the empire.

Whether individual rulers of Moravian kingdoms came from Amali or Balthi side, or neither, whether they are Germanic or not, are details that are unimportant before we reconcile sources. We do not know whether Alaric is a German or a Slav. We just know by his name that to Germanic people he is All Ruler, Alaric, and in Slavic tradition he is Svevlad, All Ruler as well.
From the Alaric, Svevlad, All Ruler who ruled in all of Illyria after the fall of Rome sprung a Gothic kingdom, the Great Moravia, of which Serbia was eventually in 600 by far the largest duchy.
 
Last edited:

Maki

Ad Honorem
Jan 2017
3,414
Republika Srpska
#28
Your narrative is well and good, but you really have no sources to back it up with. Your only source is an unreliable piece of work whose very own text you had to ignore in order to fit your narrative. The Gesta Regum Sclavorum starts during the reign of Anastasius I, it literally says that in the very first words of the text. Now you want me to just move it a 100 years back because that is the only way your narrative can work. That is not interpreting the sources, that is making the sources fit a certain version. And you also made claims that are not even supported by the GRS. You claimed it says that Svevlad sacked Rome. It doesn't. You also use names to support your theory, except your names are inaccurate. Name Svevlad appeared in Orbini's publishing of the GRC in the early 17th century, so over a 1000 years after the events it describes and a 1000 years after the life of Alaric. It was originally Senulat. Zelimir is actually Selimir, which makes your connection to Fritigern inaccurate. It is not just these two. There are a ton of supposed rulers in the GRS and we have no other sources that mention them. Orbini also claimed that Alexander the Great dealt with the Slavs, so should we accept that as well? Of course we shouldn't.

Your Moravia theory also doesn't hold water. The name Moravia first appears in the early 9th century and the epithet Great it received from Constantine VII. No source connected Moravia to Alaric and the Visigoths, which is something I think sources at the time wouldn't miss. Alaric wasn't exactly a nobody. The first ruler of Moravia we know of is Mojmir. The only mention of any predecessors is in a letter from Bavarian bishops to the Pope from around 900. And it only says Mojmir had predecessors, it does not name them (A.P. Vlasto, The Entry of the Slavs Into Christendom: An Introduction to the Medieval History of the Slavs, pg. 20). Once again, someone would have noted Moravia's connection to the early Goths and yet nobody did. That's because there is no connection. Byzantine sources do not mention it, Frankish sources do not mention it. There is also an issue of religion. GRS calls these early Gotho-Slavic rulers pagans. But the Goths weren't pagans at the time. They were Arians. And yet the GRS does not use the term heretic, but pagan. There are also other inconsistencies. The GRS claims that the Bulgarians were Christianized during the reign of Zvonimir, yet no other sources talk about a Bulgarian ruler named Zvonimir. The ruler that Christianized Bulgaria was called Boris. Situation is not better in Moravia. If the Moravians are descendants of the Goths, why were they still pagan? Why would they need to be Christianized?

Your claim that the Goths conquered Illyricum once and for all is also wrong. In fact, not only did the Romans recover lost territories in the Balkans, they conquered the entire Ostrogothic Kingdom. And we have sources describing later events that talk about Slavic attacks on Illyricum. In fact, Byzantine sources from the 6th century say that the Slavs were on the other side of the Danube and that they, along with the Huns and the Antes raid Byzantine territory (V. Ćorović, Istorija Srba, pg.8). If they were part of the Gothic states, why were they outside its territory? In fact, Procopius mentions Slavs as a part of the Byzantine army fighting against the Ostrogoths (T. Živković, Forging unity: The South Slavs between East and West : 550-1150, pg. 51). For example, during the battles around Ostia. Byzantine sources also note clear differences between the Slavs, Byzantines and Goths and the differences in their battle styles (ibid). So, we can see that they clearly considered Goths and Slavs separate.
 
Jul 2017
292
Srpska
#29
Your narrative is well and good
It's not my narrative. The sources speak.



but you really have no sources to back it up with.
I gave you sources. Ammianus, Jordanes, DAI, Greg of Tours, Regno de gli Slavi. I will not discard sources in spite of your insistence. Sources stay.



The Gesta Regum Sclavorum starts during the reign of Anastasius I, it literally says that in the very first words of the text.
I already answered this, no need to repeat myself. I'll just reiterate, it is an obvious error in oral tradition and probably not the only one. We won't know all the errors until we reconcile the source.



The name Moravia first appears in the early 9th century and the epithet Great it received from Constantine VII.
DAI refers to 600 CE, calls it Svetopluk's land. The fact DAI is written in 950 is of no moment. Great Moravia is placed in 600.



No source connected Moravia to Alaric and the Visigoths, which is something I think sources at the time wouldn't miss.
Not necessarily. Sources refereed to rulers and tribes outside Roman empire. In different times same tribes had different names. Example is Thervingians/Visigoths. And there are countless examples.




(A.P. Vlasto, The Entry of the Slavs Into Christendom: An Introduction to the Medieval History of the Slavs, pg. 20).
That's not a source.




Your claim that the Goths conquered Illyricum once and for all is also wrong. In fact, not only did the Romans recover lost territories in the Balkans, they conquered the entire Ostrogothic Kingdom.
That is incorrect. They never recovered Illyricum.




And we have sources describing later events that talk about Slavic attacks on Illyricum. In fact, Byzantine sources from the 6th century say that the Slavs were on the other side of the Danube
Yes, but those later invasions from Scythia you are referring to were into Greece, all below Jiricek line, outside of Illyricum, and occured along the Black Sea coast. The Illyricum fell once and for all. Goths took over Europe. Later Slav attacks were on the remnants of the Roman empire below Jiricek's line from other Slavs who remained in Scythia. (I presume you are talking about writing of John of Ephesus from 6th century and such.)
That is how Bulgarian realm was formed in the 6th century, inside the remnants of the Byzantine Kingdom, below Jiricek line, outside of Illyria, in Thrace, Macedonia, Greece, etc.


ALSO

No, it is not a coincidence that Jordanes names Alaric which means All Ruller, and Hermanaric which means Universal or All Ruler, and Slavic Tradition has two Svevlads, All Rulers, and both sources call them Goths, both refer to the fall of the Roman Province Illyricum, by beating Roman troops, in Moesia near Danube, and having no resistance in taking over Illyricum after the battle, and one of Dalmatian generals retreating. And it is all consistent with the contemporary writing of Ammianus in 390's. That is not a coincidence.
It is also not a Coincidence that Jordanes and Ammianus mention Fritigern regarding same events, while the Slavic oral tradition mentions Zelimir which means "desires peace" just like Fritigern means "desires peace," and for the same group of Goths, regarding same events, fall of the Roman province Illyricum. That is not a coincidence in spite of your insistence that it is all bull.
 
Last edited:

Maki

Ad Honorem
Jan 2017
3,414
Republika Srpska
#30
It's not my narrative. The sources speak.
They do not. Even your sources do not support your narrative. If Alaric was Svevlad, I would assume the GRS would mentions his sack of Rome.


I gave you sources. Ammianus, Jordanes, DAI, Greg of Tours, Regno de gli Slavi. I will not discard sources in spite of your insistence. Sources stay.
Only the DAI and Il Regno deli Slavi mention Senulat/Svevlad and they were both written much, much later.


DAI refers to 600 CE, calls it Svetopluk's land. The fact DAI is written in 950 is of no moment. Great Moravia is placed in 600.
Svatopluk I of Moravia - Wikipedia

That is incorrect. They never recovered Illyricum.
Okay.
1557301351330.png



No, it is not a coincidence that Jordanes names Alaric which means All Ruller, and Hermanaric which means Universal or All Ruler, and Slavic Tradition has two Svevlads, All Rulers
Slavic tradition has no Svevlads, Orbini has.

It is also not a Coincidence that Jordanes and Ammianus mention Fritigern regarding same events, while the Slavic oral tradition mentions Zelimir which means "desires peace" just like Fritigern means "desires peace,"
1557301556519.png
 

Similar History Discussions