Talk:House of Petrović-Njegoš
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 |
House of Petrović-Njegoš is within the scope of WikiProject Montenegro, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to Montenegro on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please join the project and help with our open tasks. | |
| ??? | This article has not yet received a rating on the quality scale. Please rate the article and then leave a short summary here to explain the ratings and/or to identify the strengths and weaknesses. | |
Contents |
[edit] House of Petrović-Njegoš
the house of Petrović-Njegoš is NOT ethnically Serb, as HRH Prince Nicholas II, confirms. Nor has it ever been. The construction of it being serb was a part of a Greater Serbia hegemonist project, which stipulated conquest and agressive negation of other SE Europe nations.
Seriously, are you the dumbest montenegrin ever; denying Petrovic-Njegos being Serb? User:Nexm0d
Abuse will never change historical facts, it will only show intellectual inferiority. Petrovic-Njegos dynasty is NOT serbian, but, of course, montenegrin. They NEVER considered themselves to be serbs in ethnic sense, but religious. In XVIII-XIX c, "serbian", "latin" and "turkish" faiths comonly denoted orthodoxy, roman catholicism and islam, respectivelly. One can find clear confirmation in, eg. writings of Peter II Petrovic-Njegos. Anyways, the heir to the montenegrin throne, Nikola, Prince of Montenegro, considers any claims of their serbian nationality as nonsense. And he should know, don't you think? We have had enough of serbs falsifying our history to meet their own political agenda. Take that historic revisionism somewhere else. Montenegro is free at last!
The best thing about the nonsense that "Serb" meant "Orthodox", which is promoted by uneducated and/or malicious independists in Montenegro (and no where else in the world), is that on one side they claim that the Metropolitan of Cetinje was autonomous and not connected with Serb Orthodox Church, and on the other hand that "Serb" meant "Orthodox"! How in the world can that be? It can't because it's a feeble construction. Just try to read the quotes given down if you replace "Serb" by "Orthodox" and you will see that there is absolutely no sense to it.
And if prince Nikola knows that he is ethnic Montenegrin, his grandfather King Nikola, about whom we talk here, also knew what he was and he stressed the fact in almost everything he wrote (again, read the quotes given down). Grandchildren don't have to be of the same nationality as their forefathers only because they have the same surname and even less does their nationality change the one of their grandparents. --Dultz 21:33, 31 October 2006 (UTC)
Highly foolish - I suggest that someone quickly reads the works of the Petrovic-Njegos members. Or best - just read the Petar II Petrovic Njegos article. They weren't Serbs? Why were they harsh Serbian nationalists then (many even pushing for Greater Serbia)? --HolyRomanEmperor 20:59, 10 June 2006 (UTC)
Utter nonsense, and offensive too. Certainly doesn't conform with NPOV standards of Wikipedia. I doubt the idea of "nationality" of a royal house is to be mentioned, as it may seem improper in most cases. The reigning house of the United Kingdom is of german ancestry, but it would be in very bad taste to place that info as significant, or indeed, relevant - although it has to be mentioned, for sure. Peter II never considered himself to be a Serb in ethnic sense, as it is blatantly clear from his writings, for all who have a 3-digit IQ. Petrovic-Njegos was the reigning house of Montenegro, not Serbia, and we can now safely say that the term "Serbian" should denote only inhabitants of Serbia and Vojvodina, as long as the latter is still a part of the only Serbian state in existence. Since living heirs of the house of Petrovic-Njegos DO NOT consider themselves to be Serbs, any further discussion is futile. Also, I believe most Montenegrins would resent the use of past tense when it comes to this family, as prince Nicholas is a living pretender to the throne, and has issue. I sincerely believe it would be about time for Serbian editors to take their paws off the articles concerning Montenegro, considering that many of them (but not all) do not hesitate to invent "facts". The most common one is the ridiculous notion of Montenegrins being Serbs (sic!), which is exactly the motivation behind these edits. It is about as acceptable as the promotion of Nazi history would be. And what's with changing the name of the language from Montenegrin to Serbian? How can this forgery be justified? One can but hope they will come to their senses - Wikipedia aspires to higher standards than these. It is not a ground to play out political frustrations, nor to promote chauvinism in such a serpentine way. Any further attempts to promote this political agenda in what should be an objective text, WILL BE EDITED BACK to the facts. And may I ask them to TRY and learn better english BEFORE they consider editing the english version of this encyclopaedia. I know they're Serbs, but even that considered, it is getting a bit ridiculous and shameful for them and just about everyone else from the region.
P.S.: HolyRomanEmperor suggested a compromise. I do not believe an honest man should compromise about truth. It is beneath any moral person.
Hey, hey, hey - that's what we do on wikipedia - we make compromises to avoid cans of worms, like we have on many articles. Please read wp:civil and assume good faith. --HolyRomanEmperor 10:33, 11 June 2006 (UTC)
Okay... But the thing is most Montenegrins are Serbs by blood, you can see the numbers of Serbs increasing in Montenegro... The Montenegrin nation is just confused. But however the House of Petrovic was and is Serb, you can't erase that, in written books and poems you find the most patriotic words - Serbdom.
[edit] Here we go:
Firstly, tell me where does it say, why do you conclude that "Serb" meant "Orthodox". Also - not a single Bulgarian, Greek or Romanian was called a Serb because of his religion - so where's the logic? --HolyRomanEmperor 10:35, 11 June 2006 (UTC)
King Nikola I Petrovic Njegos wrote: UNDER MURAD I SERB EMPIRE WAS DESTROYED UNDER MURAD V IT HAS TO RISE AGAIN. THIS IS MY WISH AND WISH OF ALL OF US AS WELL AS THE WISH OF ALMIGHTY GOD. What would this "religious empire" be? --HolyRomanEmperor 10:40, 11 June 2006 (UTC)
Danilo Petrovic Njegos said "IN FRONT OF THE TENT I'LL SERVE THE KING IF SERBDOM WOULD BE EVER UNITED AND UNITY OF SERBS REACHED or LET PRINCE MIHAILO JUST START, I'LL JOIN HIM WITH MY MONTENEGRINS TO LIBERATE THE SERB NATION, WITH ME EVEN AS AN ORDINARY SOLDIER"
Petar II Petrovic Njegos wrote: "THE SERBDOM HAS TO UNITE FIRST. I WILL, THEN, TO MY PATRIARCHATE OF PEC AND SERBIAN PRINCE TO PRIZREN. SPIRITUAL AUTHORITY TO ME AND SECULAR TO HIM, OVER THE NATION FREE AND UNITED."
Petar I Petrovic Njegos wrote: "RUSSIAN EMPEROR WOULD BE RECOGNIZED AS THE EMPEROR OF THE SERBS AND THE METROPOLITAN OF MONTENEGRO WOULD BE HIS ASSISTANT. THE LEADING ROLE IN THE RESTORATION OF SERB EMPIRE BELONGS TO MONTENEGRO."
Vasilije Petrovic-Njegos evokes Serb past with the words HOLY SERB KINGS ARISE, and adds SERB BISHOPS DO NOT SLEEP, BUT ENTIRE NIGHT PRAY TO GOD SERB EMPIRE TO RESTORE.
When the Serb Patriarchate of Pec was, under pressure of Greek clergy, banned by Turks in 1766, in the name of Serb bishops Sava Petrovic-Njegos wrote to Metropolitan of Moscow, informed him that SERB NATION IS UNDER HARD SLAVERY and therefore asked Russian Holy Synod to help the restoration of Serb Patriarchate. He also asked Russian Empress to PROTECT SERBS FROM THE GREEK AND TURKISH INTRUDING and said WE ARE READY TO PAY RUSSIA IN BLOOD.
Danil Petrovic-Njegos called himself: "DANIL NJEGOS, THE BISHOP OF CETINJE, THE LEADER OF THE SERB LAND"
Let's see what Petar II Petrovic-Njegos wrote instead of his signature in 1833 to the Epixcop of Uzhice:
- Име ми је вјерољуб,
- презиме ми родољуб.
- Црну Гору, родну груду
- камен паше одасвуда.
- Српски пишем и зборим,
- сваком громко говорим:
- народност ми србинска,
- ум и душа славјанска.
So, not even when he's says ...nationality is mine Serbian... you don't think that it's his nationality? --HolyRomanEmperor 10:50, 11 June 2006 (UTC)
When Petar II Petrovic Njegos's forces stole a Cannon from the Turks at Zabljak in 1835, he wrote:
- Црногорци кад оно витешки
- Жабљак тврди турски похараше,
- онда мене старца заробише,
- на Цетиње српско донесоше.
Although this might support your religious theory, other statements most certainly do not. --HolyRomanEmperor 10:54, 11 June 2006 (UTC)
You should read the Hermit of Cetinje, which PPII Njegos wrote in Cetinje in 1834. He starts the book as a Serb dedicating it to his Serbian kin.
In 1845, he wrote a philosophical book dedicated to Sima Milutinovic in Belgrade (the Light of Microcosm). Let me quote him from there:
Ја од тебе јоште много иштем: да поставиш у пламтеће врсте, пред очима Српства и Славјанства, Обилића, Ђорђа и Душана, и јошт кога српскога хероја: да прогрмиш хулом страховитом на Вујицу, Вука, Вукашина, богомрске Српства отпаднике - злоћа њима мрачи име Срба, тартар им је наказа малена!
He refers to the ancient Medieval Serb heroes. --HolyRomanEmperor 11:00, 11 June 2006 (UTC)
He wrote in 1847 in Vienna the Mountain Wreathe (the famous Gorski Vijenac). Let me quote him:
диже народ, крсти земљу, а варварске ланце сруши, из мртвијех Срба дозва, дуну живот српској души.
and
Плам ће вјечно животворни блистат Србу твоје зубље, све ће сјајни и чудесни у вјекове биват дубље.
In 1847 he wrote False Tsar Stephen the Little - published in 1851. Let me quote: "Весели се праху Немањића, Немањића и Гребљановића, јер ће ваше круне засијати како јарко сунце на истоку, знамена се ваша развијати над велике ваше развалине, потећи ће крваве ријеке од нечисте крви агарјанске, опрат Србу љагу са образа. Отворте се, витешке гробнице, сама славо, само прибјежиште по Косову српскијех јунаках, ево зоре на ваше брегове да нам општу обасја светињу и аманет наше народности. Сад пропојте, Високи Дечани и лијепа лавро Студенице, свети спомен из вјечне читуле за слободу падшим јунацима. Здружите се, громи и потреси, земљи српској друго лице дајте, е нечистом ногом окаљата."
As for his Svobodijada published posthumously in 1854 in Zemun: "Савјет мајке, оца - д'јете ка природно к себе прима; ђе год витез особити по косовском тужном боју од Српкиње породи се којег Турство не уграби, сваки кућу, оца, мајку - све остави, па побјеже у савито крвљу гњездо, ђе свободе искра сјаше."
Then he cries in the same work for the disappearence of the Serbian Empire: "Дај ми пјеват славна дјела отачаства бранитељах, њих јунаштва казат фална од нестања српског царства, који крвцу како воду вјечно лише, и сад лију, за обрану и свободу непрестано боје бију; који рода славу бојну сачуваше и дигоше испод ногах варварскијех хуком сјајна оружија."
and then there he continues about the Kosovo serbian heroes: Дај ми пјеват славна дјела отачаства бранитељах, њих јунаштва казат фална од нестања српског царства, који крвцу како воду вјечно лише, и сад лију, за обрану и свободу непрестано боје бију; који рода славу бојну сачуваше и дигоше испод ногах варварскијех хуком сјајна оружија.
One interesting thing in the Mountain Wreath is that PP II Njegos considers the Montenegrins heirs to the Serbs that were banished from Kosovo: "Што утече испод сабље турске, што на вјеру праву не похули, што се не хће у ланце везати, то се збјежа у ове планине да гинемо и крв проливамо, да јуначки аманет чувамо, дивно име и свету свободу."
PPIINjegos also wrote in 1834 in Cetinje A Serbs thanks the Serbs for honour. There he refers to the Catholic Serbs of Kotor - so where's your Orthodox theory then? --HolyRomanEmperor 11:35, 11 June 2006 (UTC)
And PPIINjegos's work from 1846, Belgrade - is a very interesting matter for this subject: "The Serb Mirror" --HolyRomanEmperor 11:36, 11 June 2006 (UTC)
PPIINjegos also wrote to Ilija Garasanin regarding the unification of all Serbs - claiming that nowhere greater Serbs than in Montenegro are. --HolyRomanEmperor 11:38, 11 June 2006 (UTC)
Another work of PPIINjegos, Кула Ђуришића * Чардак Алексића is also interesting on this subject. You might want to read it. --HolyRomanEmperor 11:39, 11 June 2006 (UTC)
[edit] King Nikola
I will upload here his works... --HolyRomanEmperor 11:41, 11 June 2006 (UTC)
If I may add here excepts from an open letter by the exiled Prince Michael (Mihailo) Petrović-Njegoš dealing with the infamous tearing down of Njegoš's mausoleum on Mt Lovćen at the beginning of 1970s. He starts with
- "Nijedan srpski rodoljub ne može biti ravnodušan..." - Not one Serb patriot can stay indiferent...
continues with no less than
- "Grob vladike Rada u spomen-kapeli na vrhu Lovćena je srpska nacionalna svetinja." - The grave of bishop Rade in the memorial chapel on top of Lovćen is a Serb national sacred thing
further goes with
- "Vječni pokoj najvećeg srpskog pjesnika i mislioca do sada su se usudjivali da remete samo dušmani Srpstva, u danima srpske tragedije." - The final rest of the greatest Serb poet and thinker up till now dared to ruin only the foes of Serbdom, in the days of Serb tragedy.
and concludes with
- "(...)Njegoš je želeo da njegovi zemni ostaci prebivaju na visinama, na vrhu Lovćena, stožer-planine Crne Gore i slobodnog Srpstva kroz vjekove." - (...) Njegoš wanted that his earthly remains repose in heights, on top of Lovćen, the centre-mountain of Montenegro and free Serbdom through the centuries."
This shows that even when exiled Petrović-Njegoš family didn't stop considering themselves Serbs. --Dultz 23:39, 5 October 2006 (UTC)
You are proving my point. You yourself quote: "Petar I Petrovic Njegos wrote: "RUSSIAN EMPEROR WOULD BE RECOGNIZED AS THE EMPEROR OF THE SERBS AND THE METROPOLITAN OF MONTENEGRO WOULD BE HIS ASSISTANT." Obviously, in this romantic idea, Russian emperor would be the emperor of Serbs, because in this period, when south-slav languages didn't even have a consistent grammar, "serbian" MEANT "greek orthodox", it was an equivalent term. You can find an abundance of other examples: Peter I wrote a letter to the russian admiralty, asking the empire not to halt its actions against the Ottomans, claiming Russia should never "abandon other Serbs", i.e. "other" implying Russians are considered to be "Serbs" as well. Peter II, on the other hand, writes in "The Mountain Wreath", through the character of Vuk Micunovic (Mitchunovitch): "Ne, vladiko, ako Boga znades ! Kakva te je spopala nesreca teno kukas kao kukavica i topis se u srpske nesrece ? Da li ovo svetkovanje nije na komu si sabra Crnogorce da cistimo zemlju od nekrsti ?" etc, etc, etc. Obviously, there is a clear difference made between serbian misfortunes and free Montenegrins, who are not concerned with those calamities. I suggest you read some of the authoritative literature about the subject, such as the works of dr Rotkovic, a historian and member of Montenegrin Academy of Sciences and Arts, and others. Reading the original literature written prior to Karadjordjevic dictatorship and anschluss of 1918 might be an eye-opener for you. DO NOT PRESUME we are not familiar with our own history or literature (I certainly knew all your quotes by heart) - it is the political (mis)interpretation of montenegrin history that bothers us, especially when it is presented to international audience. Historic revisionism is not acceptable by any standards, especially by an encyclopaedia that aspires to be taken seriously. Serbian Academy of Arts and Sciences (known as Serbian Royal Society at the time) INVENTED the idea of Montenegrins being Serbs, as an intellectual support to vicious imperialistic Karadjordjevic actions against Montenegro proper and against the royal house this article is about. It took advantage of kinship and of the meaning the term "serbian" had in previous epochs. "Nationality" is a notion that gains importance and credence with MODERNITY and enlightenment, something both Montenegro and Serbia of this period were practically untouched by. This is why people who converted to other faiths (Roman Catholicism, Islam), were automatically not considered to be Serbs anymore. And you failed to see the main point: Petrovic-Njegos is a STILL EXISTING family, with an actual pretender to the throne, HRH prince Nicholas, a direct descendant of the king. This is an article about the family itself, and since they certainly consider themselves to be Montenegrin and NOTHING else, who are you to convince them they're Serbs, whether exclusively or in addition? King Nicholas' grandson and the head of the House of Petrovic-Njegos, the oldest royal house in this part of Europe, is saying he is NOT a SERB and neither are his kinsmen, and you're the one to tell him he is? It is a display of breathtaking arrogance, and that's putting it mildly. As I've previously said, Montenegrins have no doubt about who they are, and members of the Petrovic-Njegos dynasty certainly have no such doubts. The only ones who seem to have a problem are Serbs. Again: do NOT use Wikipedia in order to misrepresent history and affirm your own political agenda, it is DISHONEST and plain ugly. Please stop this edit war immediately. Btw, HolyRomanEmperor seems to be highly misinformed - or I at least wish this was the case - it is certainly better than intentional misinforming. Wikipedia article on Coat of arms of Montenegro , edited by him/her, even made this claim: "The Coat of Arms of Montenegro have been passed in the run up to the Montenegrin independence referendum, 2006.", although it was, indeed, adopted 13 years prior to this referendum. So there is a history of falsification, which we should not look upon kindly, nor may we keep assuming good faith when faced with persistent attempts to edit genuine information and place falsehoods in order to further a political agenda. I sincerely believe such people should adopt a "hands-off" policy when it comes to articles concerning Montenegro. Either that, or cool their heads and behave rationally. No-one really benefits from misrepresentation of history - Montenegrins know exactly who they are (myself being one of them) and cannot be fooled or forced to change their ethnicity from Montenegrin to Serbian. Petrovic-Njegos dynasty has an especially bitter experience with this attempt of alienation. Montenegro is, finally, free and independent again and Montenegrins will never consider themselves to be Serbs, Croats, Turks, or whatever. Deal with it.
P.S.: You didn't even offer a compromise, really. You could just as easily claim this family is montenegrin / Argentinean and claim a compromise has been reached. Furthermore, you also edited category of "montenegrin nobility" (which needs work, granted), to "serbian nobility". And you call that a compromise? Your edits will be deleted. Please come to your senses and devote your attention to topics you have a deeper understanding of. I am sure there are plenty of those.
P.P.S.: Actual spelling of "recognized" is "recognised", at least in standard British English, but I will not bother correcting other mistakes. I'm mentioning this one b/c I used it in this reply.
P.P.S.: I consider this reply to be clear and convincing enough. I will not engage in this futile discussion furthermore, but any falsehood concerning Montenegro or its royal house will be edited in good time.
[edit] Point-counterpoint
Firstly, this "Serb Empire" planned by Petar I Petrovic Njegos - which would be ruled by the Russian Czar - completly denounces your theory of orthodox=serb. Additionally, please refer to the Episcop's article - you will see that this Serb Empire was to be composed out of Montenegro with the Hills, the Bay of Kotor, Dalmatia, Herzegovina, Bosnia and the neighbouring Ottoman territories of Spuz and Zabljak. The capital would've been Dubrovnik. He says that Episcopates must be created so that Catholic and Moslem Serbs become Orthodox, so that all Serbs will be united under that religion. --HolyRomanEmperor 11:57, 12 June 2006 (UTC)
You misjudged that sentence - the other Serbs refers to non-Montenegrin Serbs (i. e. Serbs outside of Montenegro - in Bosnia, Herzegovina, the Belgrade Pashaluk, etc.). --HolyRomanEmperor 11:58, 12 June 2006 (UTC)
Your (talking to the annon) words like "Karadjordjevic dictatorship" and constant insults about alleged "forging of montenegrin history" are actually saying a lot more about you instead of me.
...and lastly, you have either purpously ignored what I wrote, or simply didn't consider it relevant: Petar II Petrovic Njegos wrote in 1834 in Cetinje A Serbs thanks the Serbs for honour - dedicated to the Catholic Serbs of Kotor. This doesn't support your theory. Apart from that, you ignore most important quotations of this same Njegos: ...nationality is mine Serbian... - not even this is sufficient? Also, PPIINj considered the Montenegrin descendents of the Heroes of Kosovo (i. e. Serbs). --HolyRomanEmperor 12:02, 12 June 2006 (UTC)
Although I think that it is possible that Nikola II is no longer a self-declared Serb - I think that you should present something to support this (maybe it isn't correct). --HolyRomanEmperor 12:04, 12 June 2006 (UTC)
And finally, you aggressivly say that Serbs should pawns off Montenegrin articles - which is pushing a heavy Montenegrin nationalist agenda. (also, please read WP:PA) Let me tell you some facts:
- at least half of the current montenegrins are ethnic Serbs
- only in Montenegro they form well over 30% of its population
- most montenegrins speak the Serbian language
- in Montenegro (where this language is official, by the way) alone, almost 65% of the population speaks this language
- and lastly, most montenegrins are adherents of the Serbian Orthodox Church
So, you are utterly being POV here, mate. :) --HolyRomanEmperor 12:12, 12 June 2006 (UTC)
You constantly talk about "forging" - and yet it appears, that the other side is the one that is forging. For instance - here, have one other proof:
This is the Code of Prince Danilo Petrovic-Njegos of Montenegro and the Hills, made in the 1850s. let me quote: Although there is no other nationality in this land except Serb nationality and no other religion except Eastern Orthodoxy, each foreigner and each person of different faith can live here and enjoy the same freedom and the same domestic right as Montenegrin or Highlander.
Very interesting how this supports the alleged "Orthodox" theory. --HolyRomanEmperor 12:17, 12 June 2006 (UTC)
I will use this moment to add:
This is the Kingdom of Motnenegro's Code of Laws from 1914 - here's in english:
"A country’s total population, united under a state’s jurisdiction, makes up a people in the political sense, irrespective of whether or not it stems from a common tribe. Thus for example, we say ‘American People’, which implies all citizens of the United States disregarding different ethnic origins. That can also be applied to the French, German, Russian people and so on. Therefore, the concept of a ‘people’, in the political sense, does not overlap with that of ethnicity because the former is far more inclusive that the latter.
When it comes to the people of our fatherland, we could never utilize the term ‘Montenegrin people’ in an ethnic context because the Montenegrins are ethnic Serbs and a Montenegrin ethnicity does not exist. Aside from that, within Montenegro’s borders reside citizens of non-Serb ethnicity, yet this does not prevent them from belonging to a political Montenegrin people.
Accordingly, in order to avoid a detrimental and often dangerous misunderstanding, one should carefully distinguish an ethnographic people from a political people. For example, the formulation ‘Montenegro is for the Montenegrins’ should be understood as opposing Montenegrins to foreign citizens, with all Montenegrin citizens, irrespective of their ethnicity, remaining equal before the State.
Montenegro’s borders encompass its sovereign territory. That area is but a fraction of what is denoted as the Serb Lands, which are inhabited exclusively or mostly by Serbs yet politically separated among several states. Two present-day independent Serb kingdoms sprung from those Lands: Montenegro and Serbia. The third portion is in Austria-Hungary and a part in Bulgaria."
You have also made continously several threats, and said that you will no longer discuss here - this is against Wikipedia's policy, if you continue the rv war without discussion, extreme measures will have to be taken (bloc from this encyclopedia). --HolyRomanEmperor 12:26, 12 June 2006 (UTC)
I restored "Serbian nobility", because that is what the Petrovic-Njegoss were. On the other hand, I removed the Montenegrin nobility category, simply because no such category exists. --HolyRomanEmperor 12:30, 12 June 2006 (UTC)
Things that additionally make you seem wrong regarding the new "orthodox"="serb" theory is the first population census in Montenegro conducted by nationality (in 1909, by King Nikola):
...and a different one for religion:
- 94,38% Eastern Orthodox Christians
- others (mostly Muslims)
Serbian nobility: Petrovic were Serbs by nationality Montenegrin nobility: Petrovic were Serbs ruling over Montenegro
You also said: ...we can now safely say that the term "Serbian" should denote only inhabitants of Serbia and Vojvodina, as long as the latter is still a part of the only Serbian state in existence.
- What on earth does this mean? It seems as if Vojvodina isn't a part of Serbia (when it is), and then it seems that it is - very confusing. Also, you didn't mention Kosovo, and yet you mentioned Vojvodina? And I have no idea what "only" means. - nor what "Serbian state" means. If by "Serbian state" you consider political factions where Serbs are in a majority - then It's Serbia (with Vojvodina) and the Serb Republic withing Bosnia and Herzegovina. However, if it's by official language - then Serbia (with both Vojvodina and Kosovo), Montenegro and Bosnia and Herzegovina (both the Serb Republic and the Federation of Bosnia and Herzegovina) are all Serbian states. However, if you consider only places where Serbs are constitutionally that state's people - then you only have the Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia (where they are a constituent people) and Croatia only (where they are a recognized minority). So, what on earth did you mean? --HolyRomanEmperor 12:44, 12 June 2006 (UTC)
Yet another thing that doesn't support your theory is a drama written by King Nikola I Petrovic-Njegos: ХУСЕИН-БЕГ ГРАДАШЧЕВИЋ Let me quote the Moslem Bosnian rebelling Bey: ":Нас ће Срба, кад се саставимо
- бити близу седам милијуна;"
These works are spoken by a Moslem Serb. He continues:
- "О владико, црногорски орле,
- ка' ти нико од нашег племена
- не зна судбу несрећних Србаља,"
So, he considered Nikola of the same "tribe" as himself - Serbian (even though he himself was an adherent of Islam. --HolyRomanEmperor 12:51, 12 June 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Annon's edits
The Annon has completly characterized my edits as vandalism - and thus completly misunderstood the meaning of the word. I suggest that he reads Wikipedia:Vandalism before making any more edits. I'm also drawing a plea here that he should discuss, and not blatantly revert everything. --HolyRomanEmperor 20:50, 12 June 2006 (UTC)
Additional note regarding the annonimous user: He continually put in the Edit summary that he gave sufficient explainations at the talk page - when the case is not so. He also threatened that all edits will be reverted to his version (as seen to the up) and that he will give no further explainations. Well - he kept that promise. :) --HolyRomanEmperor 08:48, 13 June 2006 (UTC)
The anon has registered - but he still refuses to discuss here and continues the edit war - I have no choice bu to keep reverting his edits until he comes and discuss. --HolyRomanEmperor 10:38, 15 June 2006 (UTC)
This user continually claims (still) that his long-ago given (to the up) claims are self-sufficient and refuses to explain them here (like he guarranteed that he will do it - he said that he will "REVERT BACK" without further discussions) and continues the edit war on Wikipedia. --HolyRomanEmperor 12:00, 15 June 2006 (UTC)
I see it in another light altogether. I believe YOU are the one deliberately ignoring the arguments presented, which is tantamount to refusal of discussion. My arguments anticipated yours - never made the claim of "self-sufficient", but my edits were confronted with vandalism and complete disregard for reasons presented. I have no wish to repeat myself, most of this discussion may overlap with the one given in the Talk page of Coat of arms of Montenegro --HercegOX 16:12, 15 June 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Arguments
This user also said: "The most common one is the ridiculous notion of Montenegrins being Serbs (sic!), which is exactly the motivation behind these edits. It is about as acceptable as the promotion of Nazi history would be."
Might I make a comparation, that unlike other nations that were assimilated into bigger nations in World War II - in Montenegro was otherwise. They were banned from self-declaring as Serbs. That's why a local collaboration government executed 15% of its population. Additionally, this is the first traces of a Montenegrin nation (during Nazism?) - that they are "Serbinized Croats" or "Serbs of Croatian origin". --HolyRomanEmperor 12:08, 15 June 2006 (UTC)
It IS tantamount to Nazi history, given the revisionist nature of it. Montenegro WAS assimilated into a bigger nation after World War I. After WWII, it became a federal unit within Yugoslavia. Between the two wars, Montenegrins were persecuted for any display of their national identity, as can be seen in the article: Christmas Uprising . They were banned from self-declaring as Montenegrins right after the annexation and the Petrovic-NJegos dynasty we're concerned with here was banned from returning to the country. King Nicholas died in exile, as well as the queen and princess Xenia (Ksenija). As for the collaboration gov executing people for declaring themselves as Serbs, this is a falsehood. The head of Petrovic-Njegos dynasty at the time, Prince Michael of Montenegro , was sent to a nazi concentration camp for refusing to return to the country as a puppet king. Meanwhile, chetnik collaborationists did everything to erase any mention of Montnegrin identity, which caused a civil war within the small entity, parallel to the fight of Montenegrins against the fascist italian forces. Nonetheless, Montenegrins rise against the occupator on July 13th, 1941, one of the first insurrections in occupied Europe, much as they did against the serbian occupation in the aftermath of WWI. The Montenegrin one was the first in Europe if we consider the Serbian insurrection (7h of July) consisted of one Serb killing another (Zikica Jovanovic-Spanac killed a Serbian gandarme instead of a nazi soldier). If you're looking for "first traces of a Montenegrin nation", you will find them in ancient Duklja (Dioclea). Besides, your statement is a case of contradictio in adjecto (contradiction in terms): the idea of Montenegrins being "Serbs of Croatian origin" is supposed to support the idea of a Montenegrin nation? Surely, you see what a nonsense this is. From our perspective (and that is not a POV), the idea of Red Croatia and the idea of Montenegrins being Serbs are equally offensive, incorrect and agressive. Montenegrins are Montenegrins and nothing else, just as they always where. --HercegOX 16:12, 15 June 2006 (UTC)
[edit] An external perspective
I would like to point out that, historically, the concept of "ethnicity" has not been totally fixed. In particular, the noble houses of Europe would intermarry and intermingle - for example, Maria of Romania (born in Germany) was the Queen of Yugoslavia, but she was the daughter of Marie of Edinburgh. Marrying into the local population was a time-honored technique of endearing yourself to them.
I do not wish to seem disrespectful towards Crna Gorans (is it all right to use that term, by the way? Is it more polite than "Montenegrin"? If "Montenegrin" is the preferred term, please let me know), but "Serb" and "Crna Goran" don't mean the same thing today as they did in 1697. DS 13:41, 15 June 2006 (UTC)
True, one can even make the case that nationhood in the present sense is a product of modernity and did not exist in earlier epochs (see the work of Claude Levi-Stross and other structuralists). The correct term in english would be "Montenegrins", "Crnogorci" in montenegrin, serbian, bosnian and croatian languages. "Crnogorci" is not in the least disrespectful, but may be confusing if you're using english. So, "montenegrins" is preferred. As for the noble houses of Europe - you are spot on again and I have made a similar argument elsewhere (see the talk page of Coat of Arms of Montenegro et al. One may argue the House of Windsor is of german ethnicity, but what does that mean exactly, when Germans would certainly consider them to be a foreign dynasty. As I've mentioned previously, I believe this article shouldn't contain that sort of information, as it is in very bad taste - a republican (or a BRITISH LibDem;-)) might add the info that Windsors are just a bunch of germans, alien to the british society, but if that is not POV, I don't know what is. I suspect the only reason that sort of information was placed here was to claim Montenegrin dynasty, history and nation itself as just another part of serbian history, land, nation etc. It is not only obviously untrue, but damn offensive at that. There are reasons to suspect this was done in the workup and the aftermath of the referendum of independence of Montenegro, which put the last nail in the coffin of the Greater Serbia project. However, the House of Petrovic is not extinguished and the members of this royal family consider themselves to be Montenegrin, vehemently refusing the idea of their Serbian orgin. I believe one should respect that. I've said it before and I will say it again: it is breathtaking arrogance to claim Estavisti and HolyRomanEmperor (who ever they might be in real life) know better then, say, HRH Prince Nicholas, the present head of this House and pretender to the throne. Nicholas (Nikola) clearly stated he's of montenegrin ethnicity (although currently a french subject), as cited in the biannual "Who is Who in Montenegro" (original in montenegrin: "Ko je ko u Crnoj Gori"). A copy is easily available, but I am unaware of the english version. If anyone encounters it whether online or in printed form, pls send me a message. I will edit the article accordingly. --HercegOX 16:12, 15 June 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Explanation for my edits
There's no such thing as Montenegrin Cyrillic, and even if there was, this isn't it; it's Vukova ćirilica. What do you mean "citation of Serb origin"? It's been show they considered themselves Serbs of Montenegrin regional affiliation, until they got kicked out of power, upon which they suddenly decided they're Montenegrins. Unless you're claiming that some unnamed ancestors were Montenegrins and not Serbs I don't see your point. If you are claiming that, all that's valid is what they considered themselves. (Read the relevant articles, they're all linked to in the article.) After all, how far back do you want to go? Ultimately, we're all African... Finally, accusing everyone who disagrees with you of vandalism, and reverting the article despite everyone's objections, makes you seem like the vandal. I've tried to accomodate your points after all...--estavisti 13:43, 15 June 2006 (UTC)
Vuk Karadzic was the first to write about the Montenegrin language - please see my answer in the Talk page of Cyrillic. It does exist, as Montenegrin can be written in both latin and cyrillic. It seems you presume "Montenegrin language" means the use of language proposed by professor Vojislav Nikcevic of the University of Montenegro (see Montenegrin language. It does not. Rules of Montenegrin language are the same as Novi Sad rules of Serbo-Croatian language of 1960, with certain caracteristics endemic to Montenegro. A fair proportion of the population speaks the language and it may only become a larger proportion still. It is introduced in schools as one of the optional "mother tongue" languages and the "Government of Montenegro" is using it in its official communiques. See the official gov site and note you may choose between english and montenegrin version of the site ("crnogorski"="montenegrin", as Estavisti knows full well). It is not the official language of the country yet - so what? Basque is not the official language of Spain, does that mean it isn't even there? Since Petrovic-Njegos is a montenegrin dynasty, what could be more natural than to have their name written in both latin and cyrillic alphabet of the montenegirn language? Do you amend the names of, say, croatian rulers to include serbian version of their name? What's the point? Why serbian, why not icelandic? Or ladino? ;-) IT HASN'T been shown - as I've explained time and again and ad nauseam, the term "Serb" in XIXth century and earlier denoted a person of Orthodox Christian faith, especially in the folk language (they used to say "srpske je vjere". Or "turske", "latinske", "chivutske", as the case may be) which eventually became the standard - see the talk page mentioned above, I have no wish to duplicate arguments when discussing with the very same people. Somehow, they didn't decide they're Montengrin when they got kicked out of power, but that was what they always were - and if they weren't how come the people suddenly "decided" they were something else and roze in revolt against the serbian army? I claim they ALL considered themselves to be Montenegrin and I can scarcely believe I even have to persuade anyone - it is such a trivial and widely known fact in Montenegro proper. All that's valid, Estavisti, is how they CONSIDER themselves (note the PRESENT tense). Read the relevant article and visit links in the page. I don't want to go back to Adam, Estavisti, I just refuse to accept a falshood as a fact, especially when such good counter-arguments were presented. And I believe you're being disrespectful towards the feelings and the identity of this important noble house. As for vandalism, I really believe what you're doing is tantamount to that. I even offered a compromise that would not offend the facts and you still deleted them. I will do the same again, hopefully you will accept there is such a thing as difference of opinion and that facts speak for themselves.
P.S.: Sorry about the typos, I'm typing this in a hurry --HercegOX 16:12, 15 June 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Change of title?
I will not edit for now, but I believe the title of this article should be amended to "House of Petrovic-Njegos", as that is the full name of the family. I presume others agree? --HercegOX 16:41, 15 June 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Silly discussion
If anyone's interested in this subject, please review this lengthy discussion: User_talk:HercegOX. --HolyRomanEmperor 16:00, 19 June 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Fair use rationale for Image:Grb petrovic njegosa.jpg
Image:Grb petrovic njegosa.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.
Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.
If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.
BetacommandBot 23:14, 13 September 2007 (UTC)
