User talk:Marinko/Archive 1

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Contents

[edit] welcome

Welcome!

Hello, Marinko, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Again, welcome!  --HolyRomanEmperor 09:54, 20 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Sources

Thank you for adding those sources on the Croatian page. Not only to they lend the article more credibility, but they make for more interesting reading. Keep it up! Mad Jack O'Lantern 18:07, 20 May 2006 (UTC)

I knew "Cold Water" wasn't you. Well, technically, if we strictly follow Wikipedia policy (which I am trying to do), a person who would be on a "List of Croatians" is a person explicitly described as a "Croatian" in a reliable source. So, now that I think about it, it could include Americans, etc. (But I mean Americans described as "Croatian", not "Croatian-American" or "of Croatian descent"). People who were born in Croatia/Croatian nationals should of course be listed, as most of those would have probably been described as "Croatian" in a good source. I am aware that the list of Croatians currently has people of other nationalities, like Australians. They should probably be moved to a separate - something like "List of Croatian-Australians". Or maybe a page called "Croatian diaspora" would help with listing people from other countries. Such a page should should be linked to from the main "List of Croatians". Mad Jack O'Lantern 19:14, 20 May 2006 (UTC)
Does "List of Croatian diaspora" sound like a good title? Mad Jack O'Lantern 19:21, 20 May 2006 (UTC)
Sure, I guess we could say something like that or something similar in the page intro. Do you want me to create that page? I could do it right now, and start with adding the Americans from the American page. Mad Jack O'Lantern 19:42, 20 May 2006 (UTC)
I've created the page over at Croatian diaspora. I based it on Greek diaspora. I don't know much about the subject, so feel free (and do) add more information, etc. Mad Jack O'Lantern 19:51, 20 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Eh,

I can't believe that you didn't visit Slovenia or Serbia and Montenegro. ;) --HolyRomanEmperor 11:10, 21 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Croatianness

"Also, we should note that Croatians in the dijaspora tend to have a stronger feeling of Croatianess - partly as a result of dislocation from the motherland & partly b/c they are a minority group in the immigrant countries. croatian_quoll 19:40, 20 May 2006 (UTC)"

I guess the Croats will be all right; after all they have the Vatican behind them, that's probably why not a single Nazi or Ustasha was ever excommunicated after the genocide during WWII. In a hundred years Pavelic will probably have been canonized as a servant of the Church. Nobody believes Miroslav Filipovic-Majsterovic was ever defrocked either despite the propaganda campaign. Cam 20:07, 22 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Pagania

Your edits are, somewhat errorous - refer to the talk page. --HolyRomanEmperor 09:33, 1 June 2006 (UTC)

Hello, I would appreciate if you came to the talk page and discuss - before Thy changes were accepted. Like I said, they are slightly errorous.

P. S. There is no such thing as Croatianess. The word that you're looking for is Croatdom. --HolyRomanEmperor 18:40, 1 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] other people's comments

Please do not remove other people's comments from talk pages as you did on Talk:Neo-Nazism in Croatia. Once comments become old and irrelevant, they can be archived, but those comments were neither. Please read the Wikipedia:Talk page guidelines. --Joy [shallot] 11:18, 4 June 2006 (UTC)

I've fixed it already, it's okay now. --Joy [shallot] 13:23, 4 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Neo-nazism in Croatia

The article seems POV. I invite you to try to NPOV-ise it even more. Thank you and cheers! --HolyRomanEmperor 11:49, 12 June 2006 (UTC)

Hi,

See vandalism here. --Ante Perkovic 00:22, 13 June 2006 (UTC)


[edit] Banovac - old coin with kuna (marten) on it

Hi,

I wrote an article about banovac. It's the coin from 13th century, forged in Pakrac, and used in Croatia (and even in other countries of that time) between 1235. and 1384.

The main point is - it has marten (kuna) on it and it's the proof that name kuna isn't necessarily related to NDH money, like some greater-serbian trolls here would like other's to believe.

I'm not very good in uploading images, but I would like to upload an image of that old coin with marten on it. Could you please hep me with this? You can see the coin here: hr:image:Banovci.jpg. Please, help.

--Ante Perkovic 17:44, 12 September 2006 (UTC)

vidi ovo. Moga sam je i sam postavit :). Trebalo mi je da mi netko pomogne oko copyrighta. --Ante Perkovic 08:15, 13 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Hey, hey, hey

What Jagoda claims is that all Bosniaks (Bosnian Muslims) are of ethnic Croat origin. He also claims that Croats settled the Bay of Kotor and Bosnia and than the Serbs came in the 18th/19th centuries. That is absurd. The only posible reference to the Bay of Kotor is the biased Chronicle of the Priest of Duklja from the 1170s/1180s that sources a year of 753 and a "Red Croatia", but there is no deeper ingoing into the Bay of Kotor, nor is there any deeper explaination of the Croats. The Serbs, on the other hand, where majority in the Bay of Kotor ever since the first population censa - and there were always more Orthodoxes than Catholics over there. As for Bosnia - there is no source presented there... --HolyRomanEmperor 16:04, 14 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Re:CWofI

I appreciate the notice, but calling users to vote in such a poll is bad wiki-etiquette (there may even be rules against it), which can potentially result in a votes being disqualified. This has happened to Serb users in the past who have tried to "vote-stuff". Anyways, just a useful bit of info for the future. (What Croatians lack in numbers on Wikipedia, we make up for by tring to follow rules and procedures :) ) --Thewanderer 21:20, 14 September 2006 (UTC)


[edit] Dragi Marinko

Thanks for the back up...i needed the help.

Wiki is over run by Serb Pov on all things Croatian.

One huge mess


Jagoda 1 00:35, 15 September 2006 (UTC)


[edit] Thanks

I don't want offend anyone. If the truth offends ...not my fault.

I have nothing against Serbs at all...i just dislike Serb minority who edit all things Croat into some link with Serbia. Boscovich really takes the cake...how's he a Serb? when we all know him to be Croat/Italian. The list goes on for miles.... Not saying the Croats are innocent, but their edits are small scale and mostly based around Tesla.


Wiki should be made edit free.......the main reason people have arguments is because people are going around changing things as they see fit. One particular Serb i would say is making it a full time job to Serbanise Croats. This is wrong.

As Panonian said I NEED RAKIJA.

X Jagoda 1 03:56, 15 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Re: Medieval...

Well, the truth about the autochonousness of the Bay of Cattaro Croats (which is currently highle jeoperdized and is dying out as fast as their fellow-nationmen in Herzeg-Bosnia) stands - however, always as a minority. For instance, the only aligning is the fact that a certain part of the population was Roman Catholic - but among them, there were those with a Serbian national affilation. Aside from that, Roman Catholic Christians have never outnumbered the Orthodox Christians in the Bay of Kotor. See Bay of Kotor for more info. Additionally, I'm sure you're familiar with the (in)famous "Montenegrin question" (see Montenegrins). If we take the fact that nearly all of the populace of Boka (that which doesn't speak Croatian) speaks Serbian - and the fact that its the HQ of the Serbs in Montenegro (Herceg-Novi) and the high presence of the Serbian Orthodox Church speak a lot.

When I speak "of Bosnia", I speak "the current borders of the Republic Bosnia and Herzegovina". According to Jagoda 1, he claims that all of those territories have been inhabited by ethnic Croats, that all Croats are autochtonous, all Bosniaks Moslem convert from Catholicism to Islam and the Orthodox Serbs either simply migrated to there escaping from the Turks or are Orthodox Croats. Call me mad - but that's highly a biased opinion.

Jagoda 1 deserves no gentleman protection from you :). He/she was once known as User_talk:Evergreen Montenegro1 who has been clasified as an internet troll, vandal and POV propagator by the administrators. There, "she" classified under he. I can't really remember his/her other usernames, but there are many (all confirmed through CheckUser), and everywhere he/she classifies him/herself as a proud Aussie of Croat origin from Boka/Montenegro, claims that Slavic Muslims are ethnic Croats and vividly explain how Marco Polo himself is a Croat. Through several anonymous IPs, it also made ban-worthy remarks at the talk page of Rudjer Josip Boskovic, Nikola Tesla, etc... (everywhere making the same claim: Nikola Tesla: Serb, Ivo Andric: Croat, Rudjer Boskovic: Croat). So, that's why "she" is being attacked - and you defending "it" will only be bad for your reputation. --HolyRomanEmperor 12:21, 15 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Re: User: Jagoda 1

The autochonous Croat minority in Srem is far from being still existent - and the current Croats of Vojvodina are mostly migrants from the colonizations (or local Catholic Slavs); although their survival was highly jeoperdized in the turbolent 1990s, their community in Vojvodina is there to stay, after Vojislav Kostunica and his democratic league succeeded in making the Croatian language one of the official languages of Vojvodina and strengthen the Croat Vojvodinian community. The Croats in Montenegro had small local Croat majorities - and there is a small Croat minority HQ in Kotor in Boka today. Those Croats are vastly autochtonous (with colonization being present there as well).

The Montenegrin question is (like the Macedonian question, the Croatian question, the Eastern Question,...) a term for the modern dispute whether such a thing as a Montenegrin ethnicity exists (only Montenegrin nation - but Serb ethnicitiy). You're right with the religious mixtures - but there were a lot more Orthodox Croats and especially Catholic Serbs in the past up to the reunification).

You don't se anything radical in the claim 98% of BiH's population is ethnicly Croat in the present time? Bosnian Krajina was always unpopulated - and most Serbs lived in eastern Bosnia and Herzegovina where they are autochonous (minus some exceptions). The "Vlach theory" is applies only to Serbs in Croatia. Bosnian Krajina was populated by Serbs almost exclusivly since the 16th century (Ottoman colonization), all the way up to the Croat Operation storm 300-400 years later which pushed the Serb population to a dense more "living space" of Banja Luka. Additionally, modern research shows that there were little migrations of Vlachs - aside from normal moves that are usual; those Vlachs are more "autochtonous" than any Slav in our lands, which practicly means that those Serbs are more "autochonous" then either Croats or Bosniaks (although, only a lesser part of Serbs is of Vlach origin).

AFAIC - according to most Bosniaks here on wiki (such as User:Dado), Catholics didn't convert to Islam on a large scale. Even the most extreme propagators of the Bosniak Bosnian autochtonous origin (like Mustava Imamovic) claim that most Bosniaks are of 1st - Bosnian and 2nd - Orthodox Bosniak origin and then a minority from Catholicism. There were a lot more Bosnian Moslem Serbs than Croats always - and there were/are a lot of Moslem Serbs (whereas very little Croats). Most Bonsniaks/Muslims lived in Podrinje and Sandzak - regions that never in the history had a major Croat population - and always were mostly Serbian. One exception perhaps are the Bosniaks of West Bosnia that speak practicly the Croatian language and draw origin from the Military Frontier and/or Slavonia (and declared as Croats before the constitution of the Moslem nation) and perhaps some "islands" in the Herzeg-Bosnia region.

That's not offensive at all. :D I just used that as a reminder of the 1 dude/gal.

I understand your reaction to "bullying" - but if we're too soft towards sockpuppeteers, vandals and/or internet trolls - everything that Wikipedia stands for might be jeoperdized. They (tricksters) deserve at least a little pointer to the right way, or some critics. --HolyRomanEmperor 11:45, 16 September 2006 (UTC)

Again, rebelled Serbs have been evacuated from Croatia, not "pushed up". The evacuation was organized by rebel Serbs' authorities. Kubura 14:15, 6 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] You

That link with the history of the Croatian coat-of-arms and flag that you provided was a really shity counter to what I stated about the present Croatian flag being practically the same as the Ustasha one in WW2. The Croat who made that site thinks that the general public (non-south Slavic people) is totally ignorant when it comes to Croatian history. When I google “Ustasha flags”, I got this site that shows the official flag of the Croatian Nazi-Puppet State in WW2 (http://www.crwflags.com/fotw/flags/hr-1941.html). Listen, if I took a picture of that flag and walked down the streets of New York and asked an individual with no little knowledge regarding Croatian history what flag was on that picture, I can bet you my @#$%ing life that they would say that is or looks exactly like the flag of Croatia. THAT IS EXACTLY WHY THE !@#$ THAT CROATIAN DUMBASS DID NOT SHOW THE OFFICAL USTASHA FLAG!!!!!!!!!! He knew if he showed that flag, his site would be even shittier than it is right now! That is why he decided to show some insignificant Ustasha flag that does not really appear to be similar to the present flag of Croatia! ADMIT IT! THE FORMER USTASHA FLAG IS WHAT THE NEW ONE IS TOTALLY BASED UPON!!!!!!!!!!  !@#!!!!!

If you Croats were ashamed of your horrible Nazi past, then you would have a flag that does not resemble the official Ustasha flag of your grandfathers. That site that you used as your counter attack just proves how many different ways there are to represent your country! Why can’t the Croatian flag have the checkerboard shield and some other colour in the background instead of the red, white, and blue horizontal bars that reminds the world of Croatia’s dark past (bright past in your minds!). I guess you people like the fact that you were Nazis who mercilessly killed innocent Serbs, Gypsies, and Jews!

I’m an Italian-American and I admit that my ancestor’s country was in full cooperation with Nazi Germany. I admit that we were not with the “good-guys” and I am totally ashamed of that, unlike you people are!

You mentioned something about how Ethiopians are not taking revenge on Italy for what occurred in the Second World War. This is because they know that Italians are truly good people, which is evident through the fate of Mussolini and the position of my nation after his death. After we (Italians) killed and hung Mussolini upside down, we joined the allies. This proves that Italians are true and good at heart. If your Ante Pavelic walked down the streets of your capital unprotected, you people would offer to protect him; act as bodyguards!

I looked up the minor history of Serbia’s minor connections with Nazi Germany and laughed! Come on, how the !@#$ can you compare yourselves with that! JESUS CHRIST!!!!!!!!!!

I was also not impressed by your Bleiburg counter; acting as if that was a giant Croatian killing conducted by Serbs. You even stated yourself that many Croats were partisans. By taking a look at the Bleiburg massacre article, I learned that many Serbian fascists were also killed in this massacre. Therefore, the Bleiburg massacre was a mass killing of Yugoslav fascists (Croats, Bosnians, and Serbs) conducted by Yugoslav antifascists (Croats, Serbs, and whatever)! I will admit that most Bleiburg massacre victims were Ustasha Croats, but you can’t compare that with the number of INNOCENT Croatian Serbs that were butchered. Its like comparing a drop of water to an Ocean!!!!!!!!!!

I hope I have made myself clear. My name is Apollo Creed and I have just kicked your ass!

P.S.- don’t you dare change the subject to anything with Italy because if you do, I win. I have laid siege to your Croatia and you can’t abandon your fort during a siege!

[edit] THE ABOVE WAS BY Apollo Creed!

Apollo Creed 04:00, 17 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Late Friday Night

My next assult will come this Friday night (I have school; I have to focus on that).

By the way, your response (particularly on the flag) was weak.

Apollo Creed 20:41, 17 September 2006 (UTC)


[edit] Mazza

Zaboravi ovo na ovaj Petak...to je neki koji hoce da nervira nas i oce pravit nered...i on sam zna da to sto govori nije prava istina.

Glupi smo mi ako se misamo sa takvima i dajemo im vrime jer on sam vidi da smo svi odma se javili ...on zna sta nas muti.

nasi su za mjegovu jednu i drugu racu svetci...


Bog zna sve...

Jagoda 1 03:37, 18 September 2006 (UTC)

PS Nebi se iznenadila da on moze citat nas jezik hahaha

[edit] Several points on Montenegro

You should know what wrote Matija Beckovic - among the greatest Serbian modern writers (who is of Montenegrin patronage):

Висока горо, света помено
Колевко тврда снова меканих
Непонижена моја сирото
Окамењена српска веро ти
Благодат ми је поздравити те!

And if you see Oj, svijetla majska zoro, you may notice the original lyrics of the poem from 1863:

O, bright dawn of heroism,
Our mother Montenegro!
On your mountains,
Broke the force of the enemy.
You are the only freedom
Remained to the Serbian kin.
God will give and the Holy Mother
That everything is once returned.

Now, imagine this and plea setell me trully - the old state of Doclea's population and its rulers are refered to as Croats by many/most Byzanyine and/or papal sources. Imagine that the House of Trpimirovic, the Frangepans, the Zrinni are all Montenegrins and imagine that Stjepan Radic, Ante Starcevic, Franjo Tudjman and Boban are Montenegrins. Imagine that a large portion (or majority) of the Croat population draws origin from Montenegro; imagine that the Croatian language had always been for centuries the language spoken in Montenegro and that the Montenegrin Croat language gave the linguistic peak of works. Imagine that the Croatian language is the official language of Montenegro and that it always has been and that most/all Montenegrins speak it. Now imagine that all Montenegrins are Roman Catholics, subjected to the Archbishopric of Split and/or members of the Croatian Christian Church up to its abolishment in the 10th century. Now imagine that the House of Petrovic-Njegos were/are harsh Croat nationalists, propogating the idea of Croatian unification; image hundreds, no, thousands of poems and great works faming the Croat nation. Imagine the laws and the Constitution of Montenegro which clearly state Montenegro a Croat nation-state. Now imagine the old regal Official state anthem - and the popular anthem both celebrating Croatdom. Now imagine that the Croats are the second most numerious ethnic group in Montenegro (over 30%, right after the Montenegrins). Now imagine how Montenegro unanimously joined Croatia in the Outcome of World War I; imagine that Montenegro was/has always been the heart of the Croatian medieval state and that it remained as the last fringe of the free peoples of Croatia - ruled by neither the Habsburgs - nor the Ottomans; imagine that Montenegro fought on Croatia's side in the Yugoslav wars and imagine that the traditional name of the Montenegrin Parliament is Croat People's Assembly of Montenegro. Imagine thousands of passports/reports, etc stating nationality: Montenegrin; ethnicity: Croat; imagine only this - there is a lot that you could.

And tell me, trully - would it be a part of Greater Croatian nationalistic propaganda if the Montenegrins are disputed as actually being ethnic Serbs?
I gladly await Your reply. --HolyRomanEmperor 09:10, 19 September 2006 (UTC)

Is there a reason for your silence? --HolyRomanEmperor 22:19, 19 September 2006 (UTC)

Wait, wait, wait... Please re-read the list that I gave you - and tell me, would it be wrong to Consider Montenegrins Croats (or at least by origin). Just tell me that (and as I recall you supported 1's words of all Bosnian are ethnic Croats).

Serb state control over the territory or control by a Serbian elite? What on earth are you talking about? The greater part of Montenegro speaks the root Serbian language - East Herzegovinian dialect, spoken also in Republika Srpska and West Serbia (and Dubrovnik). The smaller part speaks an indiginous Kosovar Zetan dialect of the Serbo-Croat. Historicly, the Serbian language has been official in the constitution of 1910; and all Montenegrin works were written strictly in that language. the existence of similar or common language does not preclude separate identity as is the case with the Fins & Swedes for example. There's a problem here - Finnish is a lot more different than Swedish - and Finns don't call their language "Swedish language", but "Finnish" instead.

  • There isn't a strong Montenegrin nationality today - with every census, more and more montenegrins opt Serbian nationality instead of Montenegrin and more and more montenegrins opt the Montenegrin language and the Montenegrin Orthodox Church, rather than the Serbian language or the Serbian Orthodox Church. The only strong Montenegrin national identity exists within the current nationalistic regime and the minority of the so-called "docleano-montenegrins", which belong to a radical group that's pro-Croat orientated, support Greater Croatian nationalist ideology, xenophoby and found quasi-historical research centers such as the "Doclean Academy of Sciences and Arts". Extremists don't deserve mention.
  • In WWII - what on earth are you talking about? The so-called "Kingdom of Montenegro" was ruled by a fascist Italian Axis puppet-regime that based itself upon the extermination of Jews, Romas and the Serbian element in Montenegro. Anyone declaring openly a Serb - was dispatched to Jasenovac, Kotor or elsewhere. In 1941 the people of Montenegro raised a Chetnik rebellion, which almost managed to overthrough the Governor's regime. With the help of the Ustasha armed forces (not many montenegrins decided to collaborate and fight), Governor Sekula Drljevic either slaughtered the Chetniks or fought-off the minority to the Royal Independent State of Croatia and/or to the Kingdom of Serbia. His next move was to eradicate anyone whatsoever related to the Chetniks and/or anything Serbian, when his Ustasha, Italian and other collaborationist corps ethnicly cleansed over 10% of Montenegro's population. The fascistoid regime retreated to Zagreb, where it founded a Government in Exile after the Axis forces introduced martial control and were subsequently expelled by the Partisans; drafting there a constitution and re-writing the Montenegrin national anthem so that it could evade mentioning anything Serbian. In 1945, the People's Assembly of Montenegro declared In Montenegro live only the purest of Serbs, however, Tito responded by Montenegrins are Serbs, different from other Serbs, and a dark period of history came until it was formalized in 1946 that all Montenegrins, no matter of origin accept the Montenegrin nationality - naturally, only Serbs accepted this on large scale. It is not until 1974 that the Serbian element in Montenegro was eradicated, when the Communists mass-burned several Churches, including the personal endowment of Njegos himself.
Hope you'll respond as fast - expecially to my first question to the top. --HolyRomanEmperor 08:39, 20 September 2006 (UTC)

This is the map of the 1954 linguistic census. It was made by Croat and international experts: "The Grammatics of the Croatian or Serbian language". The pink colour show the shtokavian iekavian speakers - of whome the vast majority speaks the east Herzegovina dialect - most/all of them were ethnic Serbs (except for Dubrovnik Croats - although that again turns down to their ol' controversy of once being Serbs). If you see this map, you can see the East Herzegovina dialect alone (see the areas?). Many years ago, a new map was perfected: Narecja - notice the East Herzegovinian dialect? A minority of Croats always spoke that dialect (except that it managed to spread through Slavonia nowdays).

You note Serbian state control - just problem is, there was no such. Serbia was created in the 19th century - while Montenegro practicly never ceased to exist (really formed in the late 17th century - drawing origins from even the early 16th). The majority of the finest Serbian language works were created while Serbia didn't exist. The Constitution of Montenegro was that of an independent country, so was the national Serbian affilation of its people and religious. The only possibility that Serbia influenced is at the end of Montenegro's existence in the late 19th and early 20th centures 0 and those influence couldn't've been anything on a larger scale than normal relations between two independent states. I repeat again, all those poets, rulers, writers, Serb patriots from Montenegro come from the times when Serbia didn't exist, or when it was just a baby. Compare the Montenegrins to Dalmatians - Dalmatians are nowdays assimilated into the Croatian national being.

I'm not saying that the roots of Montenegrin national ideology and/or separatism lie in fascism - but they pass through 3 key elements: Serbian occupation, Fascism and Communism. If it weren't for those, I am almost definately sure that Montenegrins wouldn've developed any sort of independent national awareness. And yes, Sekule's Goverency over the Kingdom of Montenegro denied the existence of Serbs in Montenegro. Chetnik collaboration isn't something that can be argued - but neither is Partisan collaboration. Overall, the Partisans even committed more henious atrocities. One thing is true and cannot be erased - the Chetniks raised a rebellion in the Kingdoms of Montenegro and Serbia in 1941 subsequently to the occupation, and managed to liberate the majority of the country, with the help of the Partisans, naturally. They were expelled by Axis forces and proceeded their actions in NDH, but that's another story. Milan Nedic could not be compared to Sekule Drljevic or Ante Pavelic, since M and C existed as states - whereas Serbia was directly under German occupation. Ethnic cleansing of Serbs on a mass scale occured in Serbia, and its government had only control over espionage, its sole reason being to point out traitors and possibilities of rebellion (as well two squadrons of troops that fought gor the Axis and the Serbian Refugee center that housed 500,000 refugees from Croatia and elsewhere). Comparison between Milan and Ante or Sekule, who were real leaders cannot be done. --PaxEquilibrium 10:10, 3 October 2006 (UTC)

There were many reasons for the 2006 Montenegrin seccession. And they were good reasons. But the truth behind it cannot stay hidden. Milo Djukanovich (who was unarguably a Serbian nationalist and descendent of those very same Chetniks) used/fueled Montenegrin nationalism to save himself from jail. While the top government's official have political immunity, Republican do not - and he is the most wanted man in Italy, not to mention his other henious crimes. Milo is a desperate man, doing anything to prolongue his eat; he's buying time becaue the inevitable (jail & trial) is awaiting him. He is to be extradicted by the very same authorities that he controls - which makes him powerful enough (and now with political immunity). You should define how a Montenegrin national identity has something to do with the 2006 referendum for Independence. 300,000 ethnic Montenegrins who live in Serbia weren't allowed by the government to vote, while tens of thousands elsewhere were. The normal procedure was 66% - but Milo managed to lower it down to 55% - and the results were 55.5% - do you see how is Milo desperate? Additionally, more Montenegrins voted to stay in the Union with Serbia than to break the Union. By the way, I actually think that collaboration with the Italians was kind-of a good thing.

Please don't use "Greater Serb" - the actual term is POV. Those Chetniks are Montenegrins as well, they didn't come from Serbia or similiar. The atrocities were only on the Ustasha-Doclean side I believe - I can't remember of a single atrocity committed by Chetniks in Montenegro (but there are many committed by Partisans). I didn't say Montenegrin Independence has to do with Croatian nationalism - but the hard-line docleo-montenegrins all have their foundations in Croatian nationalism. You see, Serbian nationalism was always at large in Montenegro - there are evident examples of Croatian nationalism. Montenegro never (yet!) managed to strictly create its own national movement, because the lack of a seperate nationality. I believe that that's going to stay. +90% declared as Montenegrins in 1948. The number has been constantly fallind, and today has fallen to 40%, which is just a little more than those who declare as Serbs. --PaxEquilibrium 10:31, 3 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] And lastly

Such an example of the Montenegrin extremist minority is Jevrem Brkovic, a man exiled from Montenegro because of his nationalist beliefs, now rehabilitated by the current government. He lived in Zagreb and worked for Tudjman's cabinet and then with the help of Croatian linguistists (and a Zagreb-born Montenegrin) started to compose up the Montenegrin language, further acclaiming it's a dialect of Croatian; he subsequently became the best (and so far - only) Montenegrin writer. Once he said: U korijenima je Dukljana vrlo utemeljena hrvatska komponenta... Moji su suplemenici Piperi bili katolici do kraja XVII stoljeca, i ja vjerujem da se hrvatsko ime na ovim prostorima nikada nece izgubiti. He also demands the conversion to Roman Catholicism, importion of an independent Montenegrin heritage (language and history) on the basis of Croatian (language and Red Croatia) and demands a state union between Croatia, Montenegro and Albania; but also demanding that Montenegro "returns" Sandzak and Metohija from Serbia (most ol OldSerbia), northern Albania, Herzegovina and southern Dalmatia.

I will await your reply. --PaxEquilibrium 10:53, 3 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] New Balkan draft

Check out the new reorder of the Balkans. The West sees this as the solution to the Balkan Question. While Croatia would receive a south-western Croatian-populated part of the Federation of Bosnia and Herzegovina, Serbia and Montenegro are seen as "United Serb States" together with a part of the Croatian coastline at Prevlaka and the northern part of Kos-met; while the greater part of Metohija and Kosovo would become part of a greater Albania, together with most northwestern Macedonia. While the Serb Republic would be a component of the United Serb States, the rest of Bosnia would be an independent Republic; a state of the Moslem Bosnians. Hungary would receive a small part of Romania and Turkey a small part of Bulgaria (duh, they spared Greece - ofcourse they did). Transfers of populations are expected to create obvious ethnic lines (especially on Kosovo). --PaxEquilibrium 22:40, 6 October 2006 (UTC)

Artificially unify? But Serbo-Croat still exists, and the division is merely political. Throughout the history of the Serb-Croat peoples there has been a single language with two dialects, "recensions". Anyways, I am still wondered that you've never heard of the East Herzegovinian (spoken by mostly Serbs, and, Montenegrins apart from others) - it forms the basis of the Serbian language and later, the Serbo-Croat one. I repeat, this is the best map.

Actually, Rascia never expanded to include BiH - but was constantly in decline over there. The only exception is Prince Ceslav's move against Croatia in western Bosnia in 948. Anyways, that state wasn't a "Rascia", so it would be only fair to note that Rascia only had eastern Bosnia subjected; until it lost even that in the course of the time. Your note of expansion into Doclea is a little funny. Doclea has always been subjected 'officially to the Rascian rulers, and since Doclea had the greater importence in ruling the early medieval Serb lands than Rascia, in much more occasions did Doclea invade Rascia. But, the two states with a same dynasty, one sometimes ruling over the other and than vice-versa - all parts of inner quabbles among lesser warlords within a nation. Why aren't Serbs a constituent people of Montenegro? And I repeat, more Montenegrins was for a state union with Serbia, but this is totally irrelevant with this subject. The Dalmatian Slavic population was of non-Slavic origin and never nationally determined - but over the course of the ages, it got assimilated into the Croatian population.

What you say about Ante and Sekula on one side and Milan on the other may be correct - but still, Ante and Sekula were de facto rulers, whereas Milan had very little/no influence. And, while Ante Pavelic committed genocide, mass murder; many henious crimes, and had forces fighting outside NDH (Serbia didn't), while Milan is (practicly) "free" of crime, except fighting the Chetniks and Partisans; I think that comparison is impossible. Also I repeat, there was no government in Serbia, but direct military occupation.

Milo Djukanovic is a Miloshevich-style political demagogue - many things were thought impossible under Miloshevich (the death of freedom, human rights,...) however they were indeed true. I repeat, more Montegrins voted to stay in the union than not; and the very fact how everything in Milo's life was a very mild victory (41 out of 81 seat; 55.5% when 55% is asked) is much of a proof. Anyway, he has resigned and his days are counted. Extradiction to the ICTY and/or the Court of Roma is imminent (though his connections with the Mafia and popularity amongst the Montenegrins may stall this).

(Greater Serb) Depends how you use it. :)

Anyways - since Milo has finally resigned (and announced continuing his illegal buisiness with the Mafia - which is his undoing), peace can finally transcend to Montenegro. Perhaps the opposition will win? Also, there's little possibility of Kosovo's independence if we take the world's (especially Russia's) global opinion on the matter. it's just International Law. ;) It doesn't matter that Kosovo's independence is probably the best solution (regardless of its setbacks).

I am, although, still wondered by the fact that you consider that the Medieval Serbian state has anything to with 400 years of strong Serbian nationality while Serbia didn't exist or was still a jouvenille state. Cheers, mate. --PaxEquilibrium 13:33, 10 October 2006 (UTC)

A reporter made a best description of all 17 long years of Milo Djukanovic's political life: "Milo Djukanovic, a political demagogue - Communist, Socialist, Yugoslav centralist, Milosevic's puppet, war criminal, Croatophobe, Serbian nationalist, atheist, adherent of the Montenegrin Orthodox Church, Montenegrin nationalist, sympathizer of Croats & Albanians, Montenegrin separatist, Montenegrin linguistician, Serbophobe, greatest native opponent of Milosevic's regime, Capitalist, Democrat, military commander, criminal/mafia boss & smuggler." I think that describes his whole life.

By the way - here's an irony for you: Montenegro's Head (of State) and even the Head of the uncannonical Montenegrin Orthodox Church; even during this current montenegrin regime are Serbs. ;D) --PaxEquilibrium 21:16, 10 October 2006 (UTC)

I'm looking for the Njegos bit, but I doubt that I'll find anything other than several papers in Belgrade printing it... :S

Djukanovic has learned a lot from his mentors Momir Bulatovic and tutor Slobodan Milosevic; especially learning from their errors; but he has been using heavy brainwash-style propaganda, and mysteriously, always barely won. Every single point in Djukanovic's career was a victory, but each and every single one was a close hand - the recent elections noted 41 out of 81 seats - notice the odds? There is nothing unclear about the last elections, however mysterious scandals of forging were present at every single elections he had in the past (except the 2002).

The Head of the uncannonical MOC is a Bosnian Serb; while the Head of State is a Serbian. :)

There are various allegations regarding Milo's resignation, and it appears that there's more to it, since he had absolutly no reason to leave his post, and a very good reason to stay (diplimatic immunity). I can't spread henious rumors, but it appears that it was blackmail - he got trapped too much into the very nets which he made himself...

Actually, as we all know - to stay in power is very easy. You have all the finances at your disposal, hands free to conduct propaganda, etc... The Opposition never held any power - as Milo always had the majority. But first thing's first - how did a man such as Milo come to power in the first place? In a violent coup d'etat known as The Anti-bureaucratic revolution of Montenegro when he was implaced in their HQ in Cetinje by Slobodan Milosevic together with Momir Bulatovic and Svetozar Marovic with the sole goal to seize power in Montenegro. Undemocraticly, without elections, the "Big Three" easily overthrew the old regime (which today make the Serbian oppositional parties in Montenegro) and started to unconstitutionally draw new drafts which "temporarely overrided" the power of the National Assembly in Podgorica. Using Serbian nationalism, continous propaganda and general spread of anti-Croat national sentiment, the Three killed democracy in Montenegro in 1989/90; and that situation lasts to this very day. Although partly alive today, democracy is still dead in Montenegro. See it as Communism - it can be established only by forcible takeover and can never be stopped by normal means. Do you understand?

AFAIC, Serbia didn't exist at first in 1941 at all - it was later formed after the Chetnik+Partisan rebellion, which decided to create some form of self-government. Well, precisely - Nedic was like Petain; but whereas in NDH Croats were generally viewed as allies, Serbs in KS were seen as the occupied. For instance, in Serbia there was a Law - for every wouded German 50 Serb civilians were shot and for every killed German 100 civilians were shot. There wasn't anything similiar in NDH. Plus, Nedic housed over 500,000 Serb refugees, mainly from NDH and settled all of them. Additionally, he even made truce and an allience with the Chetniks in Serbia (Pecanac, controling south serbia and north kosovo) and never, ever sent forces that fought anywhere outside the boundries of the Kingdom of Serbia, whereas the Ustashe even fought at Stalingrad.

Actually, pro-Serbian orientation of Duklja dates before the 12th century. Doclea was traditionally subjected to the Rascian rulers early on. One of the more important Serb confederacies it was a part of is the 9th-10th century Petar's Grand Rascia. It was also a constituent part of the unified Serbia throughout the 10th century. The rulers of the two were of a same dynasty. Doclea invaded Rascia in the 10th century and annexed it. Afterwards it served as the very last remains of freedom of old Serbia, until the revolutionary 11th century during Doclea was the key of rebuilding Serbia by conquering Rascia from the Byzantines and giving it a Doclean dynasty that will rule it for a century. During that time either Rascia was subjected to Doclea or vice-versa in the pitiful plays of who will take over the leadership in the Serbian lands. This continued through to the 12th century, when Doclea was a part of a Serbian state in the coastline. Then is the annexation of Stephen Nemanya - who is himself a Doclean - in the second half of the 12th century; which you refer. --PaxEquilibrium 19:09, 11 October 2006 (UTC)

P. S. - why, yes; Serbo-Croatian's still official in Serbia. :) --PaxEquilibrium 20:57, 11 October 2006 (UTC)

Bz the way - Milo always received minority of the votes in the elections in the late 1990s and early 21st century (mainly because his policy was clear back then in the eyes of the Montenegrin populace) and the Serbian opposition got the majority. however, Milo's tactical genius ousted another victory, forming a coalition with the liberals, minority parties and even their worst archnemesis - the People's Party - forming a strong government. Their extremism was greatly reduced because of the coalitions (as can be seen in the general situation of Montenegro not been a machinery of criminal and Miloshevichism), but with DPS being the largest party, it rm the opponent parties one-by-one when they didn't need it to form governments (the People's Party was the first) and managed to climb back to its power of the nationalistic early 1990s - like I said, Milo is (regardless of what sort of a person he is) a political genius. --PaxEquilibrium 15:11, 24 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Jevrem Brkovic, Milo Djukanovic and the Doclean Academy of Sciences and Arts

Political pamphlet from 2001 of Jevrem Brković's Doclean Academy of Sciences and Arts for the support of election of Milo Đukanović's Coalition for an independent Montenegro; it depicts Montenegro as a Greater Red Croatia and hypothetical pan-Croatian unified lands (Croatia, Bosnia and Herzegovina, western Serbia's Vojvodina (Serbian Bačka and eastern Srem), southwestern "Old Serbia" (Rashka and Kosovo's Metohija) and the northern half of Albania).
Political pamphlet from 2001 of Jevrem Brković's Doclean Academy of Sciences and Arts for the support of election of Milo Đukanović's Coalition for an independent Montenegro; it depicts Montenegro as a Greater Red Croatia and hypothetical pan-Croatian unified lands (Croatia, Bosnia and Herzegovina, western Serbia's Vojvodina (Serbian Bačka and eastern Srem), southwestern "Old Serbia" (Rashka and Kosovo's Metohija) and the northern half of Albania).

Tell me, doesn't this tell you something about those dudes? --PaxEquilibrium 20:21, 11 November 2006 (UTC)

Nah, it's solely a "Greater Croatia" - this "Red Croatia" (Greater Montenegro) would be an autonomous constituent part of Croatia. How do you mean "a counterweight", when such a Croatia would include even large chunks of Serbia?

The Croatian Orthodox Church has nothing to do with any propagandist in Montenegro (actually, this is much more often suggested by the green docleo-montenegrini, rather than the white crnogorci ;). The Croatian Orthodox Church was organized and controlled by the Ustashas in 1941-1945. In 1993 Tudjman asked for its restoration publicly - I remember it myself seeing him on TV :). Tudjman was generally a supporter of the idea of Montenegrins' Croat origin (how they are "really Orthodox Croats" - I guess that's what angered them in the 1990s...). This is actually a well-known fact. --PaxEquilibrium 19:43, 13 November 2006 (UTC)

Precisely - that's what I've been trying to tell you about Jevrem... --PaxEquilibrium 11:37, 14 November 2006 (UTC)

You're right about over-extensions of "Greater Croatia" (mainly from the Serb side); that also applies to otherwise - all the way to have Serbia carefully planed to exterminate the Croatian nation. Serbia in reality only annexed eastern Slavonia, Baranya and a part of western Syrmium, calling upon almost the very same arguments (Croatia=>Croatian Banate) you mentioned: Serbian Wojwodship (those regions entered officially Serbia and were historically Serbian, unlike other - I guess they gave up the remains of western Syrmium :). --PaxEquilibrium 17:09, 20 November 2006 (UTC)

Depends what you're interested in. It was in various periods of history (although with variations, such as only western Syrmium/eastern Slavonia or Croatian Baranja, but sometimes both): 1284-1324/1325; early 15th century/1464-mid-16th century; 1526-1527; 1527-1530; 1848-1849; 1849-1860; 1918; 1921; 1918-1929; 1939-1941; 1945; 1991-1997.

These are lists of periods of the main & major Serbian statehoods over the eastern Slavonia-western Syrmium-croatian Baranya territories we're talking about. --PaxEquilibrium 14:29, 21 November 2006 (UTC)

Those are the Serbian Kingdom (Syrmian); various despotates; the Serbian Empire; the Duchy of Syrmium; the Serbian Dukedom; the Dukedom of Serbia and Tamis Banate; the Kingdom of Serbia; the Serb-Hungarian Baranya-Baja Republic; the Kingdom of Serbs, Croats and Slovenes; Kingdom of Yugoslavia; Autonomous Province of Vojvodina (in the Republic of Serbia); the Serbian Autonomous Region of eastern Slavonia, croatian Baranya and western Syrmium and the Republic of Serbian Frontier, respectively.

There are also (kind of) the UN protectorate of the tiny "Republic", as well as People's/Socialist Republic of Croatia, if we conclude that Serbs were once a constituent nation of it, like in Bosnia... but these too are not solely Serbian statehoods. --PaxEquilibrium 15:01, 21 November 2006 (UTC)

P. S. Why these frequent name-changes? :) --PaxEquilibrium 17:11, 21 November 2006 (UTC)
  • The Serbian Syrmian Kingdom included most eastern Slavonia (Upper Syrmia) as well - the King's gift of those lands is preserved. In addition, Ugrin Csak was by that time very old and in reality did not rule at all over the territories he was the local feudal lord. By 1311 (or probably earlier) he died; the majority of Slavonia became subjected to the Serbian Kingdom under Dragutin's son and successor as Ban. The Palatine of the Hungarian crown recorded the plan for the division of the neighboring lands and creation of a sort-of "military frontier", composed out of the Croatian part (Dalmatia-Bosnia) and the Serbian part (Slavonia-Syrmium-Usora).
  • I'm referring to the short-lived 1526-1527 Serbian Empire created from Hungarian soil. That Empire became the mother of "Vojvodinism" and the liberation of the peoples; its Emperor is today consider the Father of Vojvodina
  • The numerous Despotates that existed in 15th-16th century. I know that these are only "crownlands" in a foreign realm, but they are AFAIC "Serbia" itself.
  • The Duchy of Syrmium wasn't a part of the Hungarian Kingdom. It was a political entity, the rump remains of a once far greater Empire that hanged independently between the Ottomans and the Habsburgs. The center of this state was Vukovar.
  • The Serbian Dukedom (that became the basis of Serbia's plans of storming most eastern Croatia - it included Baranya and the very same rump of western Syrmium) was de jure free from the Kingdom of Hungary, only officially and only nominally subject to the Austrian Imperial crown, de facto independent.
Serbian Dukedom
Serbian Dukedom
  • The Dukedom of Serbia and Tamis Banate did include the portion of western Syrmium as well, however not the serbian Baranya (it was excluded to decrease the Serbian population) - although it de facto still governed it. It was a political entity in the Austrian Empire and not a part of Hungarian territory. The reason is completely vice-versa: such entities were forged precisely because of the drop of share of serbian populace, mainly due to the vast migrations and colonizations of the non-Serb peoples (Germans, Hungarians, Slovaks, Croats, Bunyevs, Rusyns, etc.). Syrmium wasn't a part of the Kingdom of Croatia (nor any Croatia), what many historians fail to see that Syrmium was a part of (in 1868-1918) the Kingdom of Croatia-Slavonia, not Croatia itself.
Kingdom of Serbia
Kingdom of Serbia
  • The Slavonian County of Syrmium of the Kingdom of Croatia-Slavonia in the Transleithanian (Hungarian crown) part of the Dual Monarchy of Austria-Hungary democratically voted and joined the Kingdom of Serbia in 1918, not to became a part of the State of Slovenes, Croats and Serbs (which many saw as a Greater Croatia), the newly formed Dukedom (with serbian Baranya) subsequently joined the Serbian Kingdom. The Serbian forces then occupied and annexed those regions, and the western geographical border of Baranya and today's Srijem county in Croatia became the border with the State of Slovenes, Croats and Serbs.
  • Baranya-Baja included serbian Baranya...
  • Can't see how could've all the territories of Vojvodina and Sandzak composed Croatia...
  • Baranya was a part of the Serbian portion of the Kingdom.
  • In 1941 the Axis forces occupied the region, but they were liberated and restored to Vojvodina in 1944/1945. Although the border was yet unclear and undefined, Vukovar was a part of this Serbia's entity and so was whole Baranya. At an assembly in late 1945 according to the demands of Croatian communists yugoslav Baranya was detached from Vojvodina (Serbia) and annexed to Croatia (this is just one of the numerous border changes of Serbia throughout the Communist era). --PaxEquilibrium 14:22, 22 November 2006 (UTC)

P. S. - so AFAIC, it was a part of the Serbian state, but was never a de-jure internationally recognised Croat state that was composed of Eastern Slavonia and Baranja and Srijem. :))) Like I said, the original reason was to storm Croatia through those territories, but in the end it ended to historical territorial aspirations. Ethnic definition? The Yugoslav republics were formed by neither historical nor ethnic definitions, or a combination of the two. I hope you're not referring to the Ustasha Axis Independent State of Croatia that contained eastern Syrmium. So there's nothing for what Croatia had to be compensated. AFAIC, Serbia never had any sort of compensations. In the late 1940s it had to recognize the independences of Montenegro (keeping Metohija) and Macedonia (keeping a tiny territory around Presevo), autonomies of Vojvodina and Kosovo-Metohija, and the loss of western Syrmium and serbian (yugoslav) Baranya. --PaxEquilibrium 14:22, 22 November 2006 (UTC)

It is now also facing the loss of Kosovo. :))) --PaxEquilibrium 14:23, 22 November 2006 (UTC)

Trolling? I'm sorry if you understood that. But AFAIC, Syrmia itself wasn't ever a part of Croatia itself before the formation of the Croatian Banate, when most was incorporated into it and with the formation of the Independent State of Croatia the whole. For Baranya the case is even further. The Communists incorporated it into Croatia for the first time in Communist Yugoslavia.

There are no speculations. In the time Hungary ruled Slavonia directly from 1225 to 1467, this one time it was in Serbian hands. --PaxEquilibrium 14:53, 22 November 2006 (UTC)

That's what I've been trying to tell you - western Syrmia (most eastern Slavonia) weren't a part of the Croat medieval state. That's just like the Greater Serbian demands for Krajina (although Greater Croat demands in this case, won). Why mention 1992? I already mentioned 1939 being the first time, so there's no need to mention all the latter you mentioned. Over a thousand years? I think you're slightly overestimating. Then again, with interruptions, there are also centuries-old relationships with the Serb state. :)

The Truine Kingdom in reality did not exist, before 1868's real unification of Croatia and Slavonia. It was only titular (and Srijem was a part of such Kingdom of Slavonia in 1745-1848 solely). I can't agree "ethnic lines"; a large number of Serbs was left in the Croatian side - a lot of Croats in the Serbian Vojvodinian side. Actually, Serbs had relative majority in the area (historically, they had it - they lost it over the ages due to hyper ad hoc switching to Yugoslav nationality upon the rise of nationalism in Croatia [MASPOK, HDZ], although severely decreased, they still had relative majority [but in a lot of parts Croats mostly lived]). Yet again, I repeat - Serbia's attack and occupation was only disguised by "temporary occupation" and "protection of Serb people" (although the latter could've been applied in a way) for plain historical territorial aspirations (ethnic, like in Bosnia's case, wasn't even questioned at all. --PaxEquilibrium 15:23, 22 November 2006 (UTC)

Serbs were "switching to Yugoslav" nationality? Yeah, wright. That was case among the Croats, mostly at those in mixed marriages, that were in military service, or from other ideological grounds. Kubura 10:46, 24 November 2006 (UTC)

..., Serbs had relative majority in the area...they lost it over the ages due to hyper ad hoc switching to Yugoslav nationality upon the rise of nationalism in Croatia [MASPOK, HDZ]... I've read this once more. Pax, is this a joke? Serbs allegedly "switched" because of rise of Cro-nationalism? Because of maspok? What does that mean? That those "Serbs" weren't really Serbs, and that something woked up Croathood in those "Serbs"? And please, don't use the word "nationalism" here. In English and in generally, in anglo-literature, that word has kind of negative conotation. In former realsocialist block (not "communist" block ), that word could have also positive conotations, meaning also "romantic nationalism". Croatian spring/maspok were romantic national movements. Kubura 14:13, 6 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Ethnic/historical

Of course they weren't. For differents part of the country different years were used (1878, 1910, 1918, 1939, 1941) and they were semi-ethnical - for example, trying to grasp one nation, but totally leaving large chunks of the other nation in that "nation-state" of that state (supporting a single ethnic group - such was evident in the Croatian case; or Slovene). --PaxEquilibrium 16:52, 22 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Re:

I don't understand what you tried to say explaining the notion of Medieval Slavonia. You didn't say anything I don't know or dispute... However, I'll have to remind you of one thing - modern (and pre-modern) Croatian historiography considers that Kingdom as Kingdom of "Croata-Slavonia", but that usage has mostly remained POV. Solely because it not only reflects that Croatia was allegedly equal to Hungary and in a state union, put endorsing it at the first place also drawing how it was the main part. Slavonia was annexed by Tomislav by 924, and it never had a Banate status in the Croatian medieval state. In 1027 Slavonia became a Hungarian-influenced Banate that was in the 1070s incorporated by King Peter Cresimir IV into Croatia; the Ban becoming the Ban of Croatia (supreme adviser, second in crown) and later even succeeded the crown.

Well, the Principality of Pannonia... (by the way, note that usage of "Pannonian Croats", justifies the usage of "Narentine Serbs" and "Zachlumian Serbs") It is very doubtful that the very eastern Slavonia was a part of their realm, because we do not have sufficient (or got no) information. One thing is wide-known, and only that thing: in the first half of the 9th century, Syrmium was indeed a part of the Pannonian Principality; at that time it was populated mainly (or largely) by Serb immigrants from the valley of Timok (descendants of the slavic "Timokians"; allegedly expelled with the Bulgarians' conquests that found refuge in Syrmia).. but official historiography records (while Serbian historiography claims that Prince Liudevit ruled only the most western fringe of Srem) that those territories were subsequently lost and never returned. However, other thesis (Croatian historiography mostly) have discovered another historic line. Although Croatian historiography claims that Srijem was never lost, it's more likely that it was subsequently returned. In that form it notes that as such it entered by 924 the Croatian kingdom with Tomislav's annexation of Slavonian Pannonia. The thesis (however still very questionable, considering its modern [perhaps even original] research) argues that Syrmia was conquered in the 927 Bulgarian attacks on Croatia (the border on the end of geographical western Srijem).

Although I do not consider liberation & unification plans of Serbia's claims on "Old Serbia" and Bosnia, as well as the triune croatian kingdom, many (excluding me) call these "Greater Serb" and "Greater Croat" ideologies, so that's why I used that... I guess I didn't even really want to write it myself. Also have on your mind that not in the Triune Kingdom, but a year later (1868) was it united with Croatia-Slavonia, and yet again I repeat - that isn't Croatia itself. And there you see that repeating "excluding Baranja", which became related to Croatia for the first time in 1945 with its separation from Serbia's Vojvodina and annexation to Croatia. Also, note that many Yugoslavs (self-identified mainly in fear, but also national solidarity) were Serbs. Accordingly, over 40% of the region we're discussing about were ethnic Serbs; although surely seconded after Croats, the Croats weren't really in such a major numerical superiority (almost equal).

Surely overall Baja was connected to Hungarians in every way - but it was (and especially its slavic part) was connected to Serbs, much more than Croats. Also, I must warn you that that's simply a croatian opinion of national superiority over the Serbs in the Monarchy (what Vojvodina and Slavonia was to Serbs, Croatia was to Croats). It's mainly based on the feeling of "historicism", arguing that the other people (and their entity) is "not autochtonous enough". That's the present opinion of B-H towards RS and Serbia towards Kosovo. However, that has nothing to do with the regions we're referring to.

Well, the AVNOJ borders could've been ethnic easily - but I do not say that it would've been good (although most surely better than nowdays). Actually, this was the decision made for eastern Croatia's border. Slavonia's most eastern border became the border with Serbian Vojvodina; Baranya was initially a part of Serbia's Vojvodina, but according to Croatian communists' pleas was detached and annexed to Croatia. The only remaining issue was Srem. Both sides made serious arguments regarding this. However, it was decided that as a neutral solution, the precise frontline of the 1944-1945 Syrmian front to be adopted as the border (that which was in NDH Croatia's and the liberated part Serbia's).

Please note what you wrote. Croatia and Montenegro had losses, but also compensations; but you wrote that every group had gains and losses, writing how Serbia got to keep.... Serbia suffered around 40%-50% territorial & rights losses, but had no gains at all (whereas Croatia and Montenegro had territorial losses and gains, and Slovenia only the latter). It was obvious that the AVNOJ borders damaged the Serbs mostly. An interesting thing as well, is that the vast majority of Serbs was outside the Republic of Serbia, a situation not applied to any other constituent republic.

I agree. However, it was expected that border disputes erupt after Tito's death, considering their instability, lack of definition, and practical unnatural side of it. --PaxEquilibrium 14:25, 23 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Croatia and Serbia

Croatian Banate
Croatian Banate
Republic of Croatia
Republic of Croatia

Here, compare Croatia.

Kingdom of Serbia
Kingdom of Serbia
Republic of Serbia
Republic of Serbia

Now compare Serbia.

Do you see? --PaxEquilibrium 18:59, 23 November 2006 (UTC)

That Kingdom of Serbia from 1918. includes Kingdom of Montenegro, that Serbia occupied (that same year). How did you got Syrmia there (part of Croatia then)? And Macedonia? Do you think that Macedonians became part of Kingdom of Serbia (and Bulgaria and Greece) by their own will? Or you consider them as "southern Serbs"? Compare the pre-Balkan wars Serbia. Kubura 08:07, 5 December 2006 (UTC)

Well... Vojvodina and KosMet got autonomies, whereas all the suggestions of autonomies within Croatia were soundly refused. The Communists made it look like the Autonomous Province of Vojvodina joined the Republic of Serbia within a Democratic Federal Yugoslavia, instead of it being its integral part liberated from the Axis occupiers (a historical concoction). It had a large amount of autonomy by the formation of the Socialist Republic of Yugoslavia, when in the end, by special drafts (which fueled Hungarian nationalism greatly - Croatian territorial aspirations to Vojvodina were present only in the very beginning of the second Yugoslavia), it became (by 1974 fully - having Presidents with equal powers as the Presidency if Serbia) de jure a republic, defined as such, with Serbia having no authority over it (same as with Kosovo) - the greatest inner political autonomy the world had ever seen. Kosovo was only a region with slight autonomy, and it grew to that status of Vojvodina and practically the same status as Serbia itself (sic!). The very fact that Serbia's communists wanted to return refugees to Kosovo (over 100,000 non-Albanians) and that Tito banned them, freezing the situation created by a neighboring Axis Albania and banning the return of any refugee to Kosovo at all, while it was said in the clarification simply because of being colonist, idolizing the Albanian nation as the only and native nation of Kosovo, and all others as "foreign immigrants". In the case of voting for the expulsion of ethnic Germans of Vojvodina, no consensus was reached - yet that thing happened; the Regional Assembly of Kosovo and Metohija passed a decision on the abolition of the Region's autonomy, stating that it has nothing against the rest of the Free People of Serbia, wanting to live in the same state - but Tito vetoed this decision, stating that they did not decide what was in their best interests. All this happened immediately after World War II, while the Province and the Region had no factual autonomies at all. The growth of Albanian nationalism in Kosovo led to the 1980s to a mass-scale rebellion wanting to officially recognize Kosovo as a full-right constituent yugoslav republic, separate from Serbia. Tito quelled the riots (that even had an anti-Serb character) in blood leading a covert war, hiding it from the eyes of the world (like Milosevic two-three decades later, just a lot more successfully and not so aggressively like he), and blamed that it is the Serbs' complains about their mistreatment that caused the Albanians to rightfully rise against the authorities (again, sic!). Kosovo was restored to Serbia in 1990 (or 1989), and it stayed in that way, almost always embroiled in conflicts, for ten years - and that Serbian province is under UN administration from then to present-day. It is mostly considered that the Communists indeed wanted Vojvodina and Kosovo to become parallel constituent republics, but feared of the very strong Serbian nationalism (that escalated like a hungry dog tied to a tree for weeks that has finally bitten through his chains in the 1990s), so the slow process of detaching Vojvodina and Kosovo from Serbia was undertaking.

NDH was an illegal unrecognized state; just as RSK shouldn't be referred to in that way, so shouldn't be Croatia. Actually, there's a cross-reference on Serbia's damage yet again - the Communists referred to the Croatian Banate for Republic of Croatia's borders, not wanting to connote Croatia with the Ustashi Independent State of Croatia - whereas they shockingly used Nedic's puppet "Kingdom of Serbia" as a founds for the Republic of Serbia, many understanding that Serbia itself is a continuation of that fascist installation (and what's more important, territorially reduced).

I'd also like to note that Serbia was not "motherland" to Serbs, like Croatia was to Croats, irrespective to its name. Whereas the Croats in Croatia efficiently fought for their national rights (as seen in the constitutional changes in 1947, 1963, 1974 and 1990 - the very slow process of "nationalization" or "croatization" of Croatia), Serbia has always remained a Citizen-state, and while in Croatia Croatian linguistics was being pushed, Serbia remained more Serbo-Croatic. Additionally, considering the very lack of function of Serbia as a state (compared to other republics, especially Croatia) - Serbs never saw Serbia as their "national state", and not even today (while Croatia is considered the Croat people's homeland). Actually, that's the very reason for the nationalist Serbian "touchy" response of the Prechani - Serbs generally saw Croatia and Bosnia-Herzegovina as the countries where they were recognized as a people, which are their nation-state and where they are free and belong... leading to serbian rebellions, wars and RSK & RS. The other way around as well, the (in)famous "Serbs have Serbia" sentence was used to denote the "non-belonging" of Serbs to those places (Bosnia and Croatia).

Well, I don't look to view any side. Just the plain fact that it was detached from Serbia and the Serbian communists forced to sign recognition of its independence in the first seats of AVNOJ and during the formation of the second Yugoslavia. The taken away independence in 1918 was a result of the actual reason of existence of Montenegro (fulfilling its goal) and general will of the people in Montenegro.

I have no intention in redrawing borders that cannot be drawn in the first place. My "dream" to call it, would be a highly decentralized unitarian state (where districts would have the powers similar to that of Vojvodina nowadays). I can't debate it, since AVNOJ borders cannot be drawn. And do you know what happens when impossible is done? It has dire consequences. Those very same borders are the causes of the Yugoslav conflict, especially considering that they were national (inner-nations and pushing of "solidarity" through endorsements of nationalism of every single ethnic group). The borders (in general) were very unnatural - see what happened to Croatia. The only way Croatia is in peace is without the Serb, but the national identification of "territorialism" binded itself to the territories of Croatia. The insanity goes in circles even worse across controversial Bosnia, Serbia and even Macedonia. I guess that federal units should've had the status of SAO krajina or Bosanska Krajina or the Croatian Community of Herzeg-Bosnia or Vojvodina and Kosovo during early second yugo... never more. But what seems best would be if every people had cultural autonomy, but none had that disgusting political territorial autonomy, that the autonomy based itself on learning the national language in schools, history, traditions, religion... and not governance and power... that we have overlapping regions, and not clearly split borders that only divide people (for instance a "Serbia" from Macedonia to Krajina and a "Croatia" from Istria to Syrmia/Bay of Kotor, a "Hungaria" in all of Vojvodina, a "Wallachia" in today's western Serbia, etc.). All the standards applied to the western countries... in the Communist age people didn't understand that these things were AFAIC, the very causes of the nationalistic problems, only feeding the monster as a temporary solution - and then without Tito to balance it, what would cruel, heartless machines of war and destruction do, other that kill, kill and kill... Do you understand? --PaxEquilibrium 15:34, 24 November 2006 (UTC)
  • I'm not sure. The Regional Assembly, as I said, has voted to keep Kosovo in Serbia, and Serbia alone (without autonomy), but it has to be taken into consideration that most members (of which more than half were Albanians) were Titoist communists and veteran Partisans from liberating Kosovo from the Albanian fascist armed forces and the subsequent Albanian national uprising that last from months centered around Djakovica (the Albanian directorate ordered every male Albanian from 16 to 60 to take arms and defend the Great Unified Albania in 1944-1945), and considering that the Serbian language was their mother tongue, I think that their decision must've been affected by those factors - you just fought for the "good guys" against your own nation (the "bad guys") and won; would you go with your real "enemy" then?
  • I'm not referring to "national" differences - but state (Serbia, not "Serbs"). And no, the decision was tried to be boycotted, but the outcome was never large. It was 'always based on the decision of the Hungarian minority, partially supported by other minor Vojvodinian political figures - Tito pushed that based on minority's decision. Why do you think was there (totally unlike on Kosovo and in Croatia) such a large relief when almost unitedly the Assembly passed the decision of returning Vojvodina to its old limited autonomous status in 1990?
  • You misunderstood. Serbia has always had a high feeling of Anti-Serbian Sentiment from the "Prechans", and that feeling still remains today. Aside from that, Serbia wasn't constitutionally/legally defined as the Serbian people's state - AFAIC, it wasn't defined in any way "Serbian" at all - it only happens ("accidentally") to have gotten its name from that people and that people making the largest ethnic group in that political entity. The legally "Serbian" constituent republics were Croatia, Bosnia-Herzegovina, Macedonia and to an extent Montenegro. I repeat, that's the main reason - Serbs were nativized' to Croatia and Bosnia, which indeed became their nation-states both legally and in their eyes.
  • To note that Croatia can't function as a multi-ethnic community is a very POV, erratic and false opinion. What I meant, is that the borders are those that ruined the Serbo-Croatian feeling (aside from the lack of a common enemy - in case you didn't notice, they were always together when they had a common enemy - and decided to spend their aggressive parts of themselves on turning against each other, when there's no one left to fight - a gruesome and violent truth). --PaxEquilibrium 15:11, 25 November 2006 (UTC)

"...in Croatia Croatian linguistics was being pushed, Serbia remained more Serbo-Croatic"? What? What was "Croatic" in Serbia? Whome are you fooling? Have you forgotten how Croatian language tradition was being pushed away?
"AVNOJ borders are the causes of the Yugoslav conflict"??? Are you serious? Do you know what you've just said. I can't believe it. Greaterserbianist greediness was the cause of war. Greaterserbian predators that thought they would have an easy prey.
"...that we have overlapping regions, and not clearly split borders that only divide people (for instance a "Serbia" from Macedonia to Krajina..." What "Krajina"? No "Krajina" region existed in Yugoslavia ever. Your POV again. You're supporting the idea of dismembering of Croatia and you're spreading that idea on Wikipedia.
"Serbian" constituent republics"??? (CRO, BiH, MKD, MNE) What are you saying? You considered those republics as Serbian prćija? And you wonder why Yugoslavia has dissolved and why nobody wanted a partnership with Serbia?
"Serbo-Croatian" feeling"? When and where that feeling ever existed?
Where do you live? Get a life. Kubura 08:07, 5 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Link to spamming site

Hi, Marinko,

In a comment you made to Talk:Neo-Nazism_in_Croatia you left a link to (croatiahis dot com). Perhaps you didn't know that this site is a fake to hide links to porn sites. I suggest you remove the link from the post, as it'll be indexed by search engines and help the spammer by elevating its page rank.

—R. A. C. 23:04, 28 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Re: Bad Web Link

"I have deleted the link from the discussion page. However, it will still exist in the history - will this still be a problem? How do I delete it from history?"

You can't edit the history of Wikipedia, but I think it's not indexed by search engines. Don't worry.

—R. A. C. 15:17, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Montenegro

Amfilohije Radovic was just crowned Archbishop of Tzetigne by the Synod in Cetinje. This ended the cold ecclesiastical war between SOC and MOC in Serbian favour - with MOC finding itself without supporters. Amfilohije talked to the Montenegrin President in the midst of negotiations for the new Constitution, who assured him that the Serbian language will remain the official language of the Republic of Montenegro. --PaxEquilibrium 14:55, 3 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Boka

What do You think about the separatist Bocca movement? --PaxEquilibrium 19:24, 21 December 2006 (UTC)

Ne samo Hrvati, no i Srbi (heh, jedna rijetka slucajnost ocito ;). Regionalna vlast zahtjeva neku vrstu autonomije (ne teritorijalne, bilo kakve), uziva podrsku u Parlamentu kod srpskih partija. Oni koji se zalazu tvrde da je Boka sasvim zasebni kulturno-povijesno-zemljopisni dio Crne Gore, pa da se zato mora i ostvariti autonomije (koju navodno vecina Bokeljana podrzava). Za vrijeme referenduma za neovisnost Republike Crne Gore taj pokret je isao u dva pravca: slobodna volja sam Boke da se izrazi je li za neovisnu crnogorsku drzavu, ili da ostane uz Srbiju. --PaxEquilibrium 18:40, 22 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Your edits

You reverted bbc link, then your brought it back, be sure what you are doing, will you, anyways, what part of croatia r u? Reply here...

Wow, how is life in Japan, how is weather, where were you born, I was born in Indiana, but lived few years in croatia. Do you know a great deal on Balkan history?

[edit] re: wikiproject

Marinko, I removed the "anti-Serb bias" in the subpage -- it was not noticed (as it was a previous consensus similar to your opinion and the page was deleted) and to quite frank with you, I believe centrx's edit caused more confusion as this should have been deleted right away instead of this. Now the project mirrors other similar Wikiprojects (see also WikiProject Bosnia and Herzegovina, WikiProject Croatia, and WikiProject Montenegro ). I hope now this is more clear and will cause you reconsider you opinion. // Laughing Man 21:15, 3 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Ljetopis popa Dukljanina

Sjecam se da si trazio cijeli tekst, pa evo ti ga (hrvatska verzija).

[edit] LPD

U ime Boga svemogućega tvorca neba i zemlje.


I. Kraljujući cesar u gradi basiliji cesarstva, u vrime u ko se bihu prosvitlili blaženi muzi Jerman biskup pristolja kapitulskoga i pristolja Kanužije (Sabinb) biskup, i tolikoje počtovani i blaženi muž Benedik blizu gore Cicilijanske pribivaše, na lit gospodnjih trista i pedeset i sedam, i tada iziđe niki puk i mnoštvo ljudi od istoka, ki se zovihu Goti, ljudi tvrdi i golemo ljuti prez zakona kako divji; kim ljudem bihu gospoda tri bratinci, ki bihu sinove kralja Sviholada, kim bratincem biše ime: prvomu Bris, drugomu Totila, tretomu Stroil.

II. Bris, koji biše najstariji, umrši otac njih, sede na pristolje i misto očevo, i poče gospodovati. Totila i Stroil a tada uzgovoriše oni dva: „Pomislimo kako s pomoćju brata kralja Brisa i mi da bismo gospodstvo i visoko ime dobili". I tako sa svitom i s voljom kralja Brisa, brata svoga, skupista vojsku utom veliku i pojdosta od svoje didine, i najprvo pridosta na kraljevstvo ugarsko i kralja pobiše i obujaše kraljevstvo. I potom toga pojdoše naprida i pridoše u Trnovinu s mnoštvom veličini vojske. I izvidivši toj kralj dalmatinski, koji pribivaše u čudnom i velikom gradu Solinu, posla posle i listove kralju istrijanskomu, da bi skupio u pospih svu moć svoju i da bista oba pošla protiva tim zgora rečenim, i silam njih zajedno otimati se. I takoj oni, oba rečena kralja, skupiše velike vojske i oba zajedno s voj[s]kami stase se i pojdoše silnim vojskam suprotiva Gotom i sritosta se, i stase blizu i suprotiv njim. Svaki dan po osam dan meju sobom skaramučahu s velikim jedne i druge strane vitezi i hrabrimi ljudi manjšine, zašto se mnogo tvrdo i nemilostivo b’ijahu, jere i subliz šatori jednih i druzih bihu. I tako osmi dan krstjane i rečeni pogane oružaše se i opraviše na rečenu rvanju, i počeše boj osmi dan meju sobom, pokli se stase s jutra prija tri deri po večernjoj biše se tvrdom i nemilostivom rvanjom jednakim bojem meju sobom, s mnoštvom mrtac jedne i druge strane, ne znajući se do togaj vrimena, komu bi se mogajo veće bojati, zašto nijedna od stran ne ustupaše, i biše viditi, da su boj počeli, zašto jednih i dražih živi dohojahu na misto ubijenih. Dali u jedan čas, tomu nitkor ne sumnjeće, nere po volji onogaj, komu nitkor ne more reći, zašto takoj učini, oni Goti nemilostivi dobiše, je da si kroz niki grih, koji tada u krstjaneh pribivaše; i prez izma bi pobijena strana krstjanska i ubijen bi kralj istri[ja]nski i mnogo tisuć krstjani po dobitju bi pod mač obraćeno i vele Hrvat bi pobijeno. Da, kralj Dalmacije s malo vitezi smrtnom ranom ranjen ubiže i bi prinešen u slavni i čudni grad Solin, u kom gradu bi za veće dan općeni plač i tuga neizrečena.


Potom toga svak čas restiše moć i vojska Totile i brata mu Stroila i puk njih čudnim zakonom. I toj vidivši, da biše veće od reda mnoštvo i vojske, zazvaše barune i poglavice, i k tomu se dogovoriše i svit vazeše, da bi seimile vojske razdiliti. Izjediniše [se] nato ovamo: sve ča bihu vazeli pogani, rasuše i požgaše, da ne mogu ljudi ni dobit ki uzrok, u svoje vratiti se. I vaze Totila vojsku svoju i pojde i rasu Istriju i Akvileju, i projde kako munja paleći i gradove rasipljući, i priđe u Italiju, na lit gospodnjih trista i sedamdeset i osmo, čineće čudne i tvrde rvanje s Latini. Da, ništar manje ništar mu se ne mogaše suprotiviti, jere božija volja biše komu biše. I projde k Ciciliji, obujamši u Italiji i požgavši i razasapši mnoge grade, i ulize u otok Cicilijski. I potom malo vrimena živi i onde svoj konac učini, kako mu biše rekao sluga božiji Benedik. Utom Stroil, brat njegov, s vojskom svojom vaze kraljevstvo od Ilirije, a to jest sva zemlja ča jest s ovu stranu Valdemije deri de Polonije. I on tvrdimi rvanjami i s nemilostivimi boji sve obuja, jere nitkor suprotiviti se ne mogaše. I priđe u Bosnu, i slize u Dalmaciju i rasu primorske grade: Dalmu, Narun i bogati i lipi Solin, i grad Skardon, i mnoge slavne grade položi na zemlju. I ne bi mu za dovoljno; posla sina svoga, koga jure imiše, i s njim vojske, da bi obujal i donju zemlju i zagorsku. A tomu sinu biše ime Sviolad. I otpravi sina s mnoštvom vojske. I mejutim razumivše cesar iz grada cesarstva, da je Stroil poslal sina s mnoštvom vojske u donju i u [za]gorsku zemlju, a on da je ostao u Prilivitu, a to je u Bosanske strane, i posla cesar izviditi, ist[in]o li je Stroil razdilil Vojske. Istino izvidivše povidiše cesaru, i cesar sabrav vojske i pojde na Stroila, ki Stroil vidiv vojske, skupi svoje i pojde k rvanji, jere biše slavna srca i tilom jaki i ognjen junak. Ki nere kako srdit lav noseće se i bi od veće ran obranjen, ke ne hajuće, da, od krvi ostavljen a od ran sprežen, pade s konja uteć nemoguće; i dospiše ubiti ga. A njegovi vidivše toj, u big obratiše. I mnogo od njih skupivši se počeše tvrditi [se]. I obraniše se. I cesarova vojska robi zemlju i vrati se bogata u Cesargrad s velikom slavom vesela.

III. Potom toga slišavši Sviolad, sin Stroilov, zdviže se s vojskami što brže može, za osvetiti smrt oca svoga, da jure cesar što [je] ktio, biše učinio i pošao. I on, vidivše da jest učinjeno i da ne more [ništar] opraviti, zavede zemlju i poče na očevo misto gospodovati. I gospodujuće imi sina i postavi mu ime Silimir. I bi kraljevstvo njegovo Bosna i Valdemin deri do Polonije, tako primorsko kako i zagorsko kraljevstvo. I tako toj gospodujuće, mnoge hudobe i progonjenja i zlobe krstjanom i nepravde činjaše, navlastito koji u primorskih gradih pribivaju. I tako drugonadese[to] lito gospodstva njegova umri.

IV. I osta na njegovu mistu gospodovati sin njegov Silimir, ki, ako i poganin biše, sa svakim s mirom i z ljubavju živiše, čineći jednako pravdu. I vele krstjane ljubljaše i ne dadiše progoniti jih. I naredi s njimi, da mu budu davati dohodak. I tako opet napuni zemlju hrvatsku. I počinu za njega zemlja i za njegova gospodstva krstjane u miru pribivaše. I imi sina i bi mu ime Bladin. I kraljeva Silimir lit dvadeset i jedno, i umri.

V. Bladin, sin njegov, zauja gospodstvo i poča na očevo misto gospodovati redom i s putom oca svoga Silimira. I Bladin kraljujući tako, imi sina i bi ime sinu njegovu Ratimir. I ta, kako ulize u znanje, poče kazati se vele ohol i mimored suproć svakomu okoran. Budući jošće otac u gospodstvu, izlize niki puk s mnoštvom prez čisla tja deri ispriko rike velike, ka se dii velija. Ki puk izvede žene i dicu i vojsku; s njimi gredihu i s' sobom nosahu sve imanje svoje, ki čudnim zakonom hojahu. I ti obujaše kraljevstvo ko se zoviše Senobujija, ali prvo sve mimohojahu. Poglavica njih biše muž vrimenit, koga zovihu njih jazikom „bare", ča jest našim „cesar", pod kim biše devet dužev, ki gospodovahu i obladahu taj puk, koga biše čudno mnoštvo. Posli obujaše Sledusiju i pojdoše u Macedoniju, i nju prijaše i svu zemlju latinsku, ki se onada [za] Rimljane držahu, a sada se zovu Crni Latini, kih cesar s onimi ima mnoge rvanje.

I videće da protiva njim ne može biti, učini mir s njimi. Otaj puk tvrdo viru držaše, i tako ostaviše Latine u miru. I videći kralj Bladin čudesa togaj puka i mnoštvo veliko, i razumi da jednim jazikom govore, mnogo bi vesel i tudije spremi posle i posla k njim. Ki cica jazika mnogo milostivo i s počtenjem primiše, i u miru stase, dajući jim Bladin dohodak, kako cesar biše učinio, i utakmiše se stati pod harač. Mnogo ljubeznivo živiše, toliko veće koliko vire i jazika bihu jednoga. I ne učeše rasipati, da, počeše činiti sela i pribivališća, i napunjevati što rasuli bihu. I tvrdo učeše zemlju uzdržati, ku prijali bihu.

VI. Mejutim umri kralj Bladin i sede na misto njegovo sin njegov Ratimir, i poče kraljevati. Ki biše velmi krstjanski neprijatelj i poče mimored činiti protiva krstjanom i iskaše zatrti ime krstjansko po svem kraljevstvu svomu. I tako mnoge grade i mista krstjanska raščini, a krstjane u hlapstvo obrati. I tako primorske gradove zgara rečene, u kih se opet bihu zemljaci i mišćane skupivše [se] podvignuli za oca njegova kralja Bladina, rasu i u hlapšćinu obrati. Tada krstjane, videći se u toj tuzi i nevolji, počeše po gorah i vrsih od gor i [po] tvrjah činiti kako tko mogaše za shraniti se, dokla bog prigleda i dvigne bič poganski i dokla milostiv prigleda tolikim nevoljam.

VII. I umri Ratirnir i ne ostavi sina na njegovu misti. I stavi se [kraljevati] jedan od njegova kolina [a potom drugi]. I on umr[v]še, ne biše veće kralji togaj kolina. Ki oba nemilostivo krstjane progonjahu. I po ovih dviju, jedan za družim, druga dva kraljevaše, i ne mnogo lit živiše po dopušćenju onogaj, ki sve može. Koji svi četiri vele nepravdeni i krstjanom neprijatelji, i suprotiva njim tvrda srca [bihu], i tolika progonjenja činjahu, koliko bi [bilo] mnogo govoriti, zašto mnogo suproć krstjanom činjaše, tako ki u primorske kako ki i u zagorske strane bihu. I tako mnogi krstjane ne mogahu trpiti i množi stisnuti od nevolje k poganom se pričinjahu i k njih zakonom pristavahu. A ki u vrsih i u tvrjavah obraše i voliše trpiti onu tugu i nevolju prijimati I njih progonjenje, ko jest vrimenje, nego li u vike dušu izgubiti.

VIII. I pomanjkavše ti rečeni i nepravdeni kralji, osta sin jednoga ki bi napokonji, komu biše ime Satimir. I ta kako prija gospodstvo, poče ljubiti krstjane i ne da jih progoniti. I za njega opet poče vira procvitati i očitovati se krstjane, jere ciča straha krijahu se. I u tom vrimenu biše u gradu, ki se zoviše Tesalonika, jedan človik mnogo naučen i filosof, imenom Koštane. I taj muž biše sasvima dobar i sveta života, i u onom mistu velik meštar i velmi spametan i od ditinstva muž svet. I nadahnut duha svet[og]a, iziđe iz Tesalonike i pojde u Kazariku i onde pripovida viru krstjansku i kršćaše, ki se obraćahu, u ime oca i sina i duha svet[og]a. I na viru krstjansku obrati svu Bulgariju.

IX. I ta umri kralj Satamir i prija kraljevstvo i poča kraljevati muž dobar i pravden, imenom Budimir, koga biše meju inimi obratil rečeni božiji sluga i muž. Ki Koštane biše naučen, koji za mnogo dan pričaše se s filosofi, kojih razumom svojini dobivaše. I pojde on u Kazariku i onde dobrovoljno primiše ga, i veseljahu se gospodstvu njegovu. I onde pribiva kraljujući Sveti-puk, koji Koštane biše obratu. I tada biše papa Štipan i posla listove ka svetu mužu Kostancu zovući ga k sebi, jere slišao biše, kako pripovidaše viru Isusovu i da biše tolik puk obratio na viru Isusovu, i zato ga viditi želiše. I tako sveti muž Koštane naredi popove i knjigu hrvačku i istumači iz grčkoga knjigu hrvačku: istumači evanjelja i sve pistule crikvene, i tako staroga kako novoga zakona, i učini knjige s papinim dopušćenjem, i naredi misu i utvrdi zemlju u viru Isukrstovu. I vaze prošćenje i obrati k Rimu put svoj, koji mu pod posluh sveti zapovidin biše. I gredujuće navrati se na kraljevstvo Svetoga-puka, koga biše na viru obratio, kojih gospodovaše mudri i dobri kralj Budimir, koji po Kostancu biše naučen u viru. I razumivše kralj prišastje Kostanca, bi vele vesel i s počtenjem primi ga. I tada poče Koštane život i čudesa Isukrstova pripovidati i napuni i utvrdi kralja u viri svetoga jedinstva i trojstva božanstvenoga. I u svem kralj virova i krsti se sa svimi, ki još u kraljevstvu njegovu bihu nekršćeni. I papa kada biše poslal po blaženoga muža Kostanca, posal koji k njemu dojde, po papinu dopušćenju posveti ga za koludra. I pribivše blaženi muž s kraljem nikoliko dan, koji jure utvrjen u viri i u zakonih Isukrstovih [biše], vazam prošćenje od obraza kraljeva i onoga Svetoga-puka, pojde k Rimu.

I u to vrime bi učinjeno veselje veliko meju krstjani i svi oni, ki bihu u tvrjavah i u vrsih gorskih i ki tajahu se i krijahu se i ne povidahu se krstjane, očitovaše se, odvrg[ši] strah. I svi ki bihu progonjeni vratiše se i počeše slaviti ime Isusa propetoga. I tako kralj Svetoga-puka zapovidi svim, koji latinski govorahu, da se vrate svi u mista svoja i da podvižu i naprave gradove, koji po poganeh bihu rasuti i požgani. I tako iskaše Budimir kralj Svetoga-puka, kako bi rasute gradove sazidal i napunio. I to mu ulize u misal, kako bi za svoga vrimena opet zemlju, kako je i prvo bila, [dal] napraviti, zašto imaše mnoštvo ljudi, da, sve biše izmišano. I tako razabrati kralj odluči zemlju i ljudi, i staviti opet u prave zakone. I iskaše kako bi mogal najbolje iznajti. I natoj skupi sve starce i mudarce gospodstva svoga i poče njim od volje i odlučenja govoriti, moleći, da bi [tko] o boljemu redu pomislio i tomu da se najde način k volji i misli kraljevi. I tako stojeći nikoliko dan, nitkor ne bi, tko bi tomu umil red najti i kralju niki put ukazati od odlučenja njegova. I bi napunjen mudrosti od boga i priđe mu u misal, da posije ka svetomu ocu papi Štipanu i ka cesaru Konstantinu, oni k misli njegovoj da bi dali pomoć i da bi mu poslali brveleže stare, u kih su pisane sve zemlje i kraljevstva. I moleći rečeni kralj svetoga oca papu [i cesara], da bi s njimi poslali nikoliko i mudarci. I kada posli od kralja i Svetoga-puka k papi Štipanu [pridoše], tomu svet[i] otac bi vele vesel i dobrovoljan, cica toga novoga pitanja od dostojnoga kristjanina, ki po poslih moljaše svet[og]a oca papu, da bi ga hotil näpitati hliba nebeskoga i da ga nasladi riči božije, ku srcem željaše čuti. I k tomu svet otac dobrovoljno prigleda i posla naučena človika, a vikarija svoga, u ime svoje i svete crikve krstjanske, jednoga gardinala, komu poda u svem oblast svoju, da more dati i uzeti, svezati i razvezati. I posla drugoga gardinala i s njimi dva biskupa, a toj da imiju oni Sveti-puk kripiti u viri i pripovidati, i da jih imaju veseliti od njih dobra učinjenja, i popove učiniti i crikve krstiti i ine riči potribne krstjanom narediti.

I tako prišadše rečeni gardinali i biskupi, najdoše kralja na planini, ka se diše Hlivaj. Suproć kim izlize kralj s mnoštvom ljudi, jere čekaše jih, zač znaše njih prišastje na ove strane, i biše skupio oda svih rusagov ki pod njim bihu. I tuj odasvud dojdoše krstjane. I tako kralj sa svim mnoštvom, ko pri njemu biše, prija jih s velikim počtetijem. I tako kralj zapovidi, da vas puk zemlje njemu podložne skupi se na ovom polji. I u toj vrime dojdoše posli od c[es]ara Mihajla i oni posli s počtenjem velicim biše prijati. I budući svi skupljeni, i biše veće jazikov, i s njimi biše dobri kralj Svetoga nauka i počeše sa sjhodom za dva[na]deset dan, od kih osam dan ne govoriše negoli o strani crikveni, crikvam prigledajuće i k njim red napravljajuće i narejujuće put od spasenja. Potom toga četiri dni čtiše stare priveleže, ki bihu iz Rima prineseni, tako grčkih kako svih kraljevstvi i gospodstva jazika hrvačkoga, tako primorsko, kako zagorsko. I toj slišeći vas puk, kako spovidahu privelezi stari, po papi i cesaru poslani, od svih zemalj i kako diljahu zemlju od zemlje, i kako biše zemlja od zemlje počtovana, i puk od puka i kraljevstvo od kraljevstva, i toj sve razumi[v]še, bi vele ugodno tako kralju tako svim, ki ondi u skupu bihu. I gardinali i biskupi s voljom svega puka posvetiše kralja i potvrdiše u kraljevstvo, i svim zemljam, ke pod njim bihu, zapovidiše posluh i volju kraljevu ilostatka njegova. I potom učiniše arhibiskupe i biskupe, i posvetiše jih, i razdiliše jih po gradih onakoj, kako i prvo raspa biše bilo, i ka počtenja bihu prvo imili, da i u napridak onako bude.

I tako poslaše dva arhibiskupa: jednoga u lipi i nesrićni grad Solin, koga malo ali ništar biše ostalo, jere po nemilostive Gote biše požgan i rasut, a drugoga arhibiskupa poslaše u Duklji. I mnoge biskupe razdiliše po mistih i podložiše jih pod posluh rečenih arhibiskupov, toliko pod svakoga. I tako mnoge crikve, ke bihu zatvorene, uzdvignute biše. I narediše biskupom i arhibiskupom, da se svete crikve. I postavi kralj zagovor velik svim mistom, da svaki brani crikvu i crikvene stvari, i da bi ne smio nitkor posiliti crikvu ni redovnika u ničemur i da nitkor nima suproć njoj moći ni slobošćine, razmi njih poglavica, što su arhibiskupi i biskupi. I tko bi protiva tomu učinio, to je učinio suprotiva kralju i kruni, ča jest suprotiva svemu kraljevstvu.

I tako crikvene i duhovne stvari prvo naredivši, potom toga po rečenih brveležih razdili zemlje i stavi jim mejaše i tolikoje meju gradi i županij'. I naredi gradovom i mistom zakone i običaje, i razdili vode i naredi gradovom i mistom dohodak. I svim zemljani mejaše položi[v]še i sve naredivše, što je s ovu stranu gore k moru, prozva Primorje, [a što je meju rikami], ke ishode iz gor od zapada sunčenoga i pristaju u veliku riku Dunaj, onoj zvaše Surbiju. I Primorje razdili na dvoje počamše od mista grada ki po poganih bi razrušen, ki se zove Dalma, gdi sa sjhodom biše, deri do mista, ko se zove Valdemin. Od Dalme do Valdemina prozva Hrvate Bile, što su Dalrnatini Nižnji. I još od mista Dalme do Bandalona grada, ča se sada zove Drač, dotla prozva Gornju Dalmaciju i to[li]koje Surbiju, ča jest Zagorje. I tuj na dvoje razdiliše: počamše od gornje strane Drine, ča jest na zahod sunčeni do gore Borave, a toj prozva Bosnu, i od Drine do Lipa prozva Rasso, ča je Raška zemlja.

I svakomu mistu postaviše mejaše i svakomu tih mist postaviše bana, a nigdi duža. I tada [narediše da] svaki tih banov i dužev budu od pup[k]orizine plemeniti i oni da učine kneze od svoga kolina. I učiniše satnike, ki satnici biše nad stotinu ljudi, i te satnike učiniše svake zemlje ljudi. I daše svakomu banu sedam satnikov, i da budu rečeni satnici z bani puku suditi, a s duži, aliti s hercezi, pet knezov i da s njimi pravo sude puku. I zapisaše časti i dohotke banom i hercegom i knezom i satnikom. I odlučiše da svaki knez prizove jednoga satnika i da nima prez rečenoga reda nijedan sud biti tvrd. I odlučiše da svaki sudac ima kralju davati treti dil dohotka, da ga poznaju za gospodina i da bude kralj svim, a oni svaki po sebi; da kralj nada svimi poglavje i starišina [bude] i da svi zapovid kraljevu trpe. I mnoge dobre zakone postaviše, ke bi mnogo govoriti. Da, ako tko hoće napuno znati naredbu ku učiniše i mejaše kudi postaviše i zemljam imena, vazmi knjige ke pri Hrvatih ostaše i pri njih se nahode, a zovu se „Metodios".

I po tom narejenju gardinali i biskupi i posli cesarovi, videće da su svaka [narejenja] narejena, od blaženoga kralja i Svetoga-puka vazeše prošćenje i odpraviše se s veličini počtenjem i dari. I posli pošadši, hercezi i bani i knezove i satnici, ki bihu postavljeni, i vas puk s voljom kraljevom razajdoše se i pojdoše domom i u svoju zemlju.

I potom blaženi kralj kraljeva lit četrdeset i miseci tri s voljom [onogaj] ki sve može. I imi u starost svoju sina. I sedminade[se]te dan umri, na devet miseca marča i pogreben bi u crikvi blažene svete Marije u gradu Dokoliji s velikim počtenjem i plačem svega puka, ki odasvuda prihajahu za mnoge dni k onoj crikvi plačuće svoga dobroga gospodina. I ditića, komu izdili ime bihu Svetolik, proslaviše za kralja i gospodina.

X. I krunjen bi i pomazan od arhibiskupov u onoj crikvi svete Gospoje, gdi otac ležaše. I ditić restuće naslidovaše zakon gospodstva oca svoga i mnogo, kako i otac, bojaše se boga, i obsluževaše zapovidi božije. I imi sina od sedamnadesete lit i sedam miseci, i izdi mu ime Štipan Vladislav. I potom ispustiv dušu umri kralj.

XI. I poče kraljevati na misto oca svoga Vladislav, sin njegov. I kraljujuće biše mnogo hrabar i kripak u životu, da, ne tiraše put oca svoga ni u gospodovanju ni u zapovideh božijih. I imi sina. I tako kraljujuće nepravdeno i suproć zapovidem božijim, pojde jedan dan u lov, jere mnogo imaše običaj loviti. I tako loveći s odlukom božijom dviže se zvir, za kom otide i nanese ga konj na jednu jamu i u nju upade, izbi se i izeše ga mrtva.

XII. l osta na misto njegovo kraljevati sin njegov, komu biše ime Polislav. I kraljujući Polislav, u to vrime biše u kraljevstvo ugarsko kralj imenom Atela. I on skupi vojske i izajde s vojskom na kralja Polislava. Biše Polislav mlad i kripak u rvanjah. I činiše meju sobom mnoge rvanje i vazda Atila, kada se b'ijahu, izgubljaše, i napokon ne mogaše [se] suprotiviti i pobiže. I Polislav ima kćer i po njoj sina dva. I kraljeva lit sedamfnajdeset i sedmonadesete lito hodeće umri slavom velikom.

XIII. I sin stariji prijamši na misto oca svoga gospodstvo, komu ime biše Sebislav. I u njegovo vrime, on kraljujući, nastupiše na njega opet oni narod Goti i obsedoše mu Skudar grad. I toj slišav Sebislav, skupi mnoštvo veliko ljudi i priđe u grad na njih šator. I ondi mnoštvo Gotij pod mač obrnuše, a mnoge pohitaše, niki pobigoše, kako vojske sasvima razbijene. I toj čuvši kralj ugarski Atila, da su Goti nastupili na Sebislava, priđe na njegov grad i popliniv i požgavše rasu ga veći dio, opet se brzo vrativše u kraljevstvo svoje. I pridoše Sebislavu glasove, da Atila jest pod gradom njegovim i brzo dviže se i pojde na njega i najde, da je popliniv i požgav pošao, zač on kako ču, da je Sebislav razbio Gote, tako što učini, Atila s onim pobiže ne smijuć čekati Sebislava. Ostavi da se opet grad načini i napuni. I potom u Sebislava rodista se dva sina, jednomu bi ime Razbivoj, a drugomu Vladimir. Kraljeva Sebislav lit dvadesetičetiri, i umri.

XIV. I ostasta dva sina njegova u kraljevstvo njegovo: Razbivoj i Vladimir. I biše stariji Razbivoj i hoti razdiliti kraljevstvo, i da bratu gornju stranu: Zagorje, ko Surbiju zovu, ča jest g Dunaju i [g] Bugare, ld se sada zovu, ča jest tja do Paunja polja, „želisis", a sebi vaze Razbivoj primorsko kraljevstvo. I oženi se Vladimir kćerju kralja ugarskoga, i bi tvrd mir meju njima. I ima Vladimir sinove i kćeri. I poto[m] Razbivoj kraljevavši lit dvanadesete, umri prez sina. I priđe Vladimir brat njegov i vaze kraljevstvo i kraljeva u kraljevstvo zagorsko lit dvadeset, a u primorsko osmo lito lito umri.

XV. I ulize na očevo misto gospodovati sin njegov i sjedini kraljevstvo, i učini opet jedno, kako i prija biše bilo. I njegovo gospodstvo ne ljubljahu Donji Hrvati i odvrgoše se od njega. I skupi kralj vojske svrhu istrijajnske zemlje i u Bosnu gornju, i pojde na nje. I oni izajdoše i dočekaše ga na polje Hlivanjsko. I onde biše meju njima tvrdo rvanje i boji, imnogokrat b'iše se i napokon bi ubijen kralj, komu biše ime Kanimir.

XVI. (??? je ????? ??????????? ??????? ????????).

XVII. I dviže se na misto njegovo sinovac njegov, komu ime biše Kristivoj. I kraljujuči u kraljevstvo ima sinove i kćeri. I kraljeva lit dvadesetitri ne svršivši, (i) umri.

XVIII. I osta na misto njegovo sin u kraljevstvo, komu biše ime Tolimir. I u vrime njegova kraljevstva prista u veselju sva zemlja. I imi sinove i umri kraljevavši lit jedannadesete.

XIX. I osta na misto njegofvo kraljevati sin njegov, komu biše ime Pribislav, koji u vrime svoje učini mnogo hudob. I za njegova vrimena uzdvigoše se zemlja; ne mogoše se trpiti hudobe ni zlobe njegove. I ubiše kralja Pribislava i tilo njegovo u riku vrgoše.

XX. I učiniše kraljem na misto njegovo Cepimira. I prijam kraljevstvo posla po bana svoga i pohitaše mnoge Bošnjane, ki bihu bili uzrok smrti kralja oca njegova. I umori jih zlom smrtiju. I u to vrime, kraljujući Cepimir, iziđoše ljudi imenom Nimci ispod zvižde i primiše Istriju i počeše ulizovati u hrvačku zemlju. I toj čuvši Cepimir kralj, skupi mnoštvo veliko i izabra izmeju njih hrabrih ljudi i učini vojske. I pripravista se obi strane k rvanji i boju, i mnogo se bista, da, Cepimir Nimce i njih mnoštvo pod mač obrati i izgna jih, i pobigoše iz sve zemlje. I posli togaj posla duž od nimške zemlje posle kralju Cepimiru, da bi dao kćer svoju za sina njegova, komu sinu biše ime Staozar. I ugodno bi kralju, jere duž biše i gospodin one zemlje, l svadba bi učinjena. I ostasta u miru i u ljubavi. I Cepimir kraljeva lit dvadeset i pet i miseci sedam.

XXI. I ostavi sina na misto svoje, komu biše ime Svetožak. I poče na misto očevo gospodovati i bi mnogo pitom i krotak gospodin i dobar kralj. I imi sina i bi ime sinu njegovu Radoslav. I za života svoga učini sina svoga Radoslava [za] kralja, i ne mnogo živi.

XXII. I osta Radoslav i naslidovatija put i dobrotu oca svoga, i bi svakom dobrotom narešen. I ima sina Seislava, ki se prozva „odmetnik", jere dviže posluh crikveni i ocu svomu iskaševazeti gospodstvo i mnoge suprotivšćine činjaše. I dobri kralj poče iskati prognati sina i [one], ki mu pomoć davahu. I skupi vojske i pojde i podstupi odmetnike i pojamši jih, jere zemlja ne ktijaše suprotiva svomu staromu gospodinu nevirno učiniti. I dobri kralj mnoge oslobodi i prosti njim sve što bihu učinili, a nike koje bihu uhitili, poda u rabotu vitezom svojim. Seislav za to na oca svoga razgnjiva se i vaze mu vas posluh i poče mu činiti malo počtenja. I Seislav odazva od dobroga kralja bana i mnoge kneze i satnike i viteze, koji za strah njegov od dobroga kralja k njemu pristupiše. I on videći da se sve boji i da mu daju posluh, odvrže se i vaze gospodstvo očevo i progna dobroga kralja oca svoga s nevirnimi Hrvati, koji vazda su bolji bili prid strahom i pitomiji pod silom, nere vladani dobrotom dobrimi. l Radoslav kralj bižeće prid sinom, jere ga sin tiraše, pribiže k moru. I onde razumi, da je sin za njim blizu i videće da ruku sina svoga ne more ubignuti, žaljaše ki ga ljubljahu, zašto množi knezi i satnici svoje ostavivši (i) sve svoje na svitu, i s njim pobigoše tja, i veće se brinjaše njimi, nego sam sobom. I videći da inuda ne mogu ujti, udriše u more plovom i priđu na konjih k jednomu kamiku, ki u more a ne vele daleko biše od kraja. I tako kralj i ki bihu s njim, ubigoše ruku nemilostivoga Seislava. I malo potom po božijem dopušćenjem mimogrediše jedno drivo, ko iz priko mora grediše, a to iz Pulje, I grediše na hrvačke strane, l tako svi počeše vapiti i zvati na drivo. I oni mornari čuvše vapaj, poslaše viditi, što biše onoj zvanje. I upitavši i vidivši što biše zgodilo se, imiše od njih milosrdje i primiše kralja i svih ki s njim bihu u brod svoj i počeše jim činiti veliko počtenje. l opet vratiše se s njim u Pulju. I od tadi se zove oni kami, kuda bihu pribigli, „Radosalj kami" dosada. I dojidrivši u Pulju rečeni kralj Radoslav pojde u Rim sa svimi.

XXIII. I Seislav, proklet od boga, videći da otac njegov ubiže u more, vrati se i uze zemlju i poče na očevo misto kraljevati. l u toj vrime biše jedan mladić Tehomil popović i taj pisaše i držaše razlog od ovac nikoga kneza ali hercega na Ugrih. I Tehomil biše vele ljubljen od svoga gospodina, jere biše mnogo jaki u životu i dobar na noge i brz vele. I kada godir ovi gospodin njegov u lov grediše, vazda ktiše, da Tehomil s njim bude. I jedan dan loveći Tehomil udri jednu vižlicu, ka se zoviše „Paluša", ku ne kteći toličma udriti, zgodi se, da ju udri po glavi u takoj misto, da ju ubi (u) to(m) misti. Cica česa Tehomil pobiže prid strahom, koji imaše od gospodina, zašto rečeni mimo sve ine pse cica dobrote ovuj vižlicu ljubljaše. I pribiže Tehomil ka kralju Seislavu i on ga drago primi. I u toj vrime ovi herceg skupi vojske na Ugrih i priđe u Bosnu i plinovaše ju i rasipaše. I čuvši [to] kralj Seislav, s velikom vojskom pojde najti ga. I najde ga na Drinskoj županiji blizu Drine rike. I sastavša se biše mnogi boji i rečeni Tehomil kako lav nosaše se i hrabro mimo inih noseći se nemilostivo siciše. I dojde na hercega, jere jure Ugri bihu potisnuti i posiče ga i pade s konja. I Tehomil priskočivši glavu mu ušice i vazam ju, ponese i prikaza ju kralju Seislavu. I toti mnogo jednih i drugih pomanjka od mača, da, veće Ugar. I onde biše mnogo cviljenje od Ugar, koji bihu uhićeni, a ki ranjeni ležahu skukahu kako prasove. A Seislav dobivše osta s velicim veseljem i poda Tehomilu župu na Drini, ka se zove Drinska županija, i da mu kćer bana raškoga za ženu i mnogo ga počtova. I čuvše žena onogaj hercega smrt muža svoga, pojde kralju ugarskomu i s plačem povidi hercega, vojvode njegova a muža svoga, smrt. I isprosi u kralja vojske za osvetiti tolike Ugre i muža svoga. I skupi kralj mnoštvo vojske, koji svi dobrovoljno gredihu na takovu osvetu, i da onoj gospoji, da ona os[v]eti muža svoga i tolike viteze ugarske pobijene. I ona, vazamše vojske, dojde u zemlju Seislavovu i najde ga brez reda, jere za nju ništar ne znaše, nere kada dojde nan šatore, jere u lovu biše. I Ugri udriše na šatore i kralja prvo nere može na konja skočiti uhitiše živa s nemalo sve blištvo njegovo, jere svi pri njem bihu. I ta žena hercegova zapovidi vitezom svojim, da svezu Seislava, ruke i noge njegove. I svezav ga obruže i po vas dan onako naružena svakomu na oči drže, a do večer, ča jest na ishodu dne, čini ga vrći u riku Savu. I tako stvoreno bi i ispunjeno na glavi njegovi proklectvo na njem učinjeno od dobroga kralja, oca njegova, zač on i vas dom njegov zlom smrtju poginuše i za[l] konac učiniše. I tako pojde po zlu Seislav, on i duša njegova.

XXIV. Po tom učinjenju slišavše dobri kralj Radoslav gore [rečenu] dostojnu smrt sina svoga Seislava i naslidnikov njegovih, zafali bogu, koji pravdeno sudi. I vrati se kralj k mistu svomu z blagoslovom svetoga oca pape. I prišadši meju Hrvate, nedostojne dobra gospodina, i zabivše sve njih učinjenje, koje suprotiva njemu bihu učinili, gospodova sve s pravdom, kako da bi ništar nigdar učinjeno bilo. I tako kraljujući imi sina i postavimu ime Koloman. I tako umri.

XXV. I osta na misto oca gospodovati [Koloman] i onim putem, kojim se biše od dobroga oca kralja Radoslava naučio a k tomu i sam čude dobre biše. I tako s ljubvom puka I pravdom velikom kraljeva. I imi sina i postavi mu ime Krišimir. I tako nikoliko lit živivše umri.

XXVI. I osta na njegovu mistu sin Krišimir, i bi svakom dobrotom urešen i napunjen straha božijega. I kraljujuće imi sina i postavi mu ime Zvonimir. I tako živi lit trideset i jedno i umri.

XXVII. I osta kraljem Zvonimir, koji počteni kralj, sin dobroga spomenutja [kralja Krišimira], poče crikve veoma čtovati i ljubiti. I poče dobre pomagati, a progoniti žale. I bi od svih dobrih poljubljen, a od zalih nenavijen, jere ne mogaše zla viditi. I tako ne biše on za Hrvate, zašto oni ne će biti dobrotom dobiti, da, bolji su pod strahom. I za dobroga kralja Zvonimira biše vesela sva zemlja, jere biše puna i urešena svakoga dobra, i gradovi puni srebra i zlata. I ne bojaše se ubogi da ga izji bogati, i nejaki da mu vazme jaki, ni sluga da mu učini nepravo gospodin, jere kralj svih branjaše, zašto ni sam prezpravdeno ne posid[ov]aše, tako ni inim ne dadiše. I tako veliko bogactvo biše, tako u Zagorje, kako u Primorje, za pravdenoga kralja Zvonimira. I biše puna zemlja svakoga blaga i biše veće vridna ureha na ženah i mladih ljudih, i na konjih, ner i nada sve imanje. I zemlja Zvonimirova biše obilna svakom raskošom, ni se nikogar bojaše, ni jim nitkore mogaše nauditi, razmi gnjiv gospodina boga, koji dojde svrhu ostatka njih, kako pismo govori: Oči zobaše kiselo groždje, a sinovom zubi utrnuše.

Po ovi način i u to vrime zgodi se, da cesar rimski s voljom svetoga oca pape posla posle i listove svoje ovako g dostojnomu kralju Zvonimiru prošeće i moleće, kako draga brata i meju kralji krstjanskim kralja počtovanoga: „Oto te molimo i prosimo, da skupiš k sebi svu gospodu zemlje tebi podložne i svih odljiridnosti. I kada bude skupšćina, da pročtiš meju svimi ovi drugi list, koga s tvojim listom šalje se od strane naše gospodstvu vašemu moleće, kada pročte, da odgovore i da dadu nam na znanje volju svoju i odlučenje, ko učine vitezi i baruni s voljom gospodstva tvoga". I tako dobri i sveti kralj Zvonimir prijamše listove od pape i cesara, zapovidi po sve kraljevstvo svoje, da bude skupšćina, i sa sjhodom u petih crikvah u Kosovi da svaki bude do dan dvadesetipet. I prišadše vrime, da, priđe mnoštvo veliko. I legoše vojske i narediše straže. I kada dojde dan, učini slavni i dobri kralj Zvonimir otvoriti listove pape i cesara velikoga grada Rima, s voljom svetoga oca pape, koji kazahu: „Brata našega Zvonimira molimo s vlasnici i pukom zemlje i kraljevstva njegova, da bi hotil odlučiti i s nami biti zajedno s pomoću ine gospode krstjanske, koji ovake listove imaju od nas, i oni da odluče volju njih, i da nam dadu na znanje, jesu li k volji našoj pristali, ča jest z dopušćenjem božijim i sina njegova, koji jest porojen od dive Marije i muku [trpel] i krv prolio na drivo križa i na njem umoren, koja smrt bi otkupljenje svita i oslobojenje svetih otac iz limbene tamnosti. I tako z dopušćenjem njegovim i s pomoću u njega virujućih jesmo odlučili osloboditi mista, koja je za ljubav našu okrvavio i gdi je pridao duh ocu kroz muku i i trud i greb, u kom bi položeno prislavno tilo njegovo."

I toj čuvše bogom prokleti i nevirni Hrvati, ki ne mnogo prija daše pomoć hudobnomu sinu dobroga njih gospodina kralja Radoslava iz kraljevstva njegova izagnati i s oružnom rukom s nemilostivim sinom njegovim iz zemlje prognati. Tada čuvši toj nevirnici, ne daše ni listove dočtiti i skočiše ne samo da bi pristali na dostojnu molbu svetoga oca pape i cesara rimskoga, da sveta mista iz ruk poganskih izmu i oslobode, da, oni bogom kleti počeše kričati i vikati na svetoga kralja, tužeći se i vapijući jednim glasom, kako na Isukrsta Židove, da on išće izvesti njih iz domov njih i žen i diče njih, i s papom ter s cesarom otimati mista, gdi je bog propet i gdi je greb njegov. „A što je nam za to?" I nevirni Hrvati vazeše zlu misal i nepravden svit, i meju sobom zlo viče učiniše, i sebi i ostatku svomu rasap i vičnje pogrjenje. I tako počeše upiti kakono Židove vapiše na Isukrsta, kada reče poglavica: „??lje da jedan umre, nere tolik puk da pogine". I tako sramotni i nevirni Hrvati počese govoriti, vapijuće kako psi ali vuci: „Bolje da on sam pogine, ner da nas iz didine naše izvede cica boga i inim mista toliko daleko obujimati, zemlje i gradove". I ne inako, nere kako psi na vuke lajući kada idu, tako oni na dobroga kralja Zvonimira, komu ne daše ni progovoriti, nere z bukom i oružjem počeše sići njega i tilo njegovo raniti i krv prolivati svoga dobroga kralja i gospodina, koji ležeći u krvi izranjen velicimi bolizni, prokle tadaj nevirne Hrvate i ostatak njih bogom i svetimi njegovimi, i sobom, i nedostojnom smrtju njegovom, i da bi veće Hrvati nigdar ne imali gospodina od svoga jazika, nego vazda tuju jaziku podložni bili. I tako izranjen ležeće a Hrvate proklinjuće izdahnu, i pojde duh njegov, po milosti onogaj ki sve može, s anjeli veseliti [se] u vike vikom.

XXVIII. I toj slišavši kralj ugarski imenom Bela prvi, što se zbiše zgodilo u Hrvatih, priđe na pospih s vojskom golemom i vaze kraljevstvo hrvačko i požjili smrt slavnoga kralja Zvonimira. I vazam Hrvate, i zagorsko i primorsko i bosansko kraljevstvo. I imiše kralja Belu za gospodina, jere svoga bihu ubili prez krivine. I po rečenom kralju ugarskomu Hrvati biše podloženi od volje u nevolju; i od slobodnih u rabotu obrati. I bi, kako pismo govori, da zli teg zlu plaću čeka. I biše za svoj teg plaćeni oni prokleti i nevirni Hrvati krozi griha, zašto pogubiše svoga dobroga gospodina kralja Zvonimira, kako Žudiji gospodina Isukrsta. I tako prokleti Žudiji inim služe, ne imajući ni oni od svoga jazika gospodina.

Dobri kralj Zvonimir živi u kraljevstvo dokle bi ubijen, lit trideset i pet, a ubijen bi na lit lsukrstovih tisuća i osamdeset, a toj tisuća i osamdeset manje jedno.


Hello, KosMetfan continues to vandalise the Agim Ceku article.--Noah30 17:18, 15 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Friendly Gesture

As a friendly gesture of acceptance, I have stolen your 'countries' template. :D hehe

Anyway, we're going to have our tumbles, so let's just get through them and keep contributing, much like in an everyday bitter married-life situation, eh? But on a serious note, yes I do see us contributing constructively in a cooperative manner, so hopefully there will be lots of that in the future. See you there!

PS: I only have time for mini-wiki-contributions at the moment, so the Novi Sad article will have to wait. Stop The Lies 07:41, 22 January 2007 (UTC)Stop_The_Lies

[edit] NS

Ne smaraj me na mojoj strani za razgovor i ne izigravaj hipokratu, jer ja dobro znam ko si i šta si i koje su ti namere na Vikipediji (ne samo u vezi ovog članka, već generalno), i ja zaista ne znam o čemu mogu razgovarati sa jednim rasistom. A što se samog članka tiče, nemoj da gajiš iluzije da ćeš moći stanovnike grada da okriviš za bombardovanje ili da napišeš neko idiotsko "opravdanje" za to bombardovanje. Dakle, bolje odustani od svojih podlih namera pre nego kasnije, da ne bi gubio vreme na nešto što je nemoguće uraditi. Toliko... PANONIAN (talk) 03:01, 23 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Red Croatia

It's pointless to have a separate article, when we could freely reference it in the three realms where it belongs.

It's just like a bizarre "solution" they've brought up for Kosovo: Serbs in Kosovo and Albanians in Kosovo, instead of putting everything where it belongs. The same is with this Serb, Croat and Montenegrin madness released across the templates. --PaxEquilibrium 11:46, 24 January 2007 (UTC)

P. S. Did you hear about the Serbian parliamentary election, 2007? --PaxEquilibrium 11:57, 24 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Your argument with Pannonian

Just to inform ya:
1. That regime was elected by the majority of the people. Milosevic was never elected by the majority of the people. You may even compare this to the rest of the "big dudes" (Milo Djukanovic, Franjo Tudjman, Alija Izetbegovic, Janez Drnovsek,...) who indeed got the majority of the votes of the people at times. :)
2. Excuse my cynicism, but the anti-war movement had little support until NATO started bombing. iruka 08:32, 31 December 2006 (UTC) Quite the contrary. The NATO bombing affirmed Milosevic's position, and the "anti-war movement" as you call it weakened very much. It caused a bizarre "coalition government" of all 3 major political parties that had nothing in common (of which one was even democratic) to unite under the flag of Milosevic. NATO (British) even recorded that their bombings did nothing but place Slobodan Milosevic in power. --PaxEquilibrium 22:42, 24 January 2007 (UTC)

1. In most of the cases, both.

2. Milo Djukanovic did. Anyhow, the greatest part of the "lot" of them did receive sanctions from the world.

3. AFAIC, it doesn't have much to do with the bombing. It's plainly because the sheeple (didn't misspell that) finally saw how things're going. I guess Milosevic's deputies didn't really notice until Serbia's integrity itself (sanctions and Montenegrin antagonizing didn't help) was jeopardized (Kosovo). The support of the... fools (who now seem to support the Radicals) was just enough for the Democrat opposition to overpower the Milosevic machinery and establish democracy. And aside from that, 800,000 ethnic Serb refugees ethnically cleansed/exiled from Croatia, Bosnia and Kosovo affected the Serbian life (probably much more than Kosovo itself).

You didn't answer on Red Croatia. --PaxEquilibrium 14:10, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Greater Serbia

I remember a long time ago how we talked about the "Greater" Yugoslav nationalisms during world war II (when you said that Serbia was a creation of GreaterSerb pretensions just as NDH was of GreatCroat, remember?). Here's the map of the proposed Greater Serbia. Naturally, due to the Ustashas, it was refused and a "Smaller Serbia" project adopted. The creation of the "Kingdom of Montenegro" was one of the "compromises" (although NDH never abandoned its "Red Croatian" pursuits for it, it had to satisfy with officially accepting it never to be merged with a Serbian state) of the Serb/Croat demarcation. --PaxEquilibrium 15:45, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

1. There were no rounds in those in which Milosevic won - considering him forging the vote result, he forged enough to win in the first round (and all latter failed)). I did say most, didn't I? There was only one exception however: the very first presidential election for the Republic of Serbia (in 1990, when the first free elections in the Socialist Federal Republic of Yugoslavia were held). Slobodan Milosevic won 65% of the total votes among those who voted, however that is still 45% of the total electoral body. And frankly speaking, I can't blame anyone who voted for Milosevic back in 1990 (had I lived in Serbia back then, sadly to admit, I would've probably did the same thing - if I didn't abstain, which I always do). The only other exception is the 1992 Presidential election for the President of the Republic of Serbia (in the newly constructing Federal Republic of Yugoslavia). He, as a candidate of the Socialist Party of Serbia, won just barely over 50% of the voters (but only 37.5% of the total electoral body). That's all. But to conclude - we might compare that to say the elections in Slovenia and Croatia, who, despite being democratic unlike those in Serbia and Montenegro (and Macedonia to an extent), relied on waving ultra-nationalistic irredenta to bring masses to them, and comparison to those countries (especially Croatia) we might also conclude how "immature" the people was/is.

2. Then what are you trying to say at this dot? :)
Don't you mean "..whole BH and greatest part of Croatia.."? Sorry, I don't know what you're talking about. Stojanovic who??? --PaxEquilibrium 11:46, 6 February 2007 (UTC)

There weren't any "Stojanovic" or "Stojadinovic" Chetniks.

Perhaps you've got the wrong surname? --PaxEquilibrium 11:55, 7 February 2007 (UTC)

Well, there was a Yugoslavian Radical known as Milan Stojadinović that held in the Yugoslav Royal government during Viceroy regime several posts (including Premier). But I don't recall that he made a pact with the Ante Pavelić. The map deals with the original idea, not some post-WWII. Have you got something more on this? --PaxEquilibrium 23:43, 15 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Straw poll on Srebrenica massacre

As a result of persistent edit warring on Srebrenica massacre, I have proposed that a straw poll be taken regarding one of the issues involved—namely, how to title the section currently named "Alternative views". This will help us to determine whether there is a consensus on what to title this section, or at least a consensus on what not to call it. The straw poll can be found at Talk:Srebrenica_massacre#Straw poll on "Alternative views" section. I have posted this announcement to each of the 19 users who have made multiple edits to Srebrenica massacre this year. —Psychonaut 13:48, 19 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Hello, I have a question

Hey. Do you know of any good administrator which can look into few things? A certain user which goes by the name of Nikola Smolenski along with the user Paulcicero, have recently started several revert-wars (of which you may be aware) on various articles and I am wondering if there is anyone who can look into this and warn them to stop. Thank you. Tar-Elenion 14:47, 25 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Accusation

I remember how PANONIAN made an outrageous accusation how you constantly keep diminishing/deleting crimes committed against Serbs and greatly emphasize crimes committed by Serbs (especially to Croats).

I've just inspected carefully your contributions, and it seems that in a way, PANONIAN's right for every single such edit made by you.

P.S. this is not a personal question; this is a kind-of question. Please don't get offended by this. Cheers. --PaxEquilibrium 20:51, 3 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Test

Test