TLR attempts BADLY defending CRO's claim to Serb lands......The quotations of TLR are taken from a PM he sent me in which he refused an open debate on the matter. Why he refused will become obvious:
1. European Maps
Quote:From: The Lone Rabbit
To: highduke03
Subject: Re:you finally lost it didn't you? ;-)
As a history student , you know that we barely any ACCURATE historical maps contemporary to the time period of the Dark Ages . Most of the maps created of the regions during the 700s were actually illustrated in the 1800s , a period where Serbian nationalism was very strong and Croatian nationalism was having two very conflicting ideologies .
What does Serbian & Croatian nationalism have to do with the western cartographers who worked on the 30+ historical maps of Europe I presented? Klovnu jedan; you’ll say anything.. Second, just because we barely any ACCURATE historical maps contemporary to the time period of the Dark Ages, it does not mean that they can’t be constructed based on the historical writings contemporary to that period. In fact, that is how the 30+ historical maps I quoted were drawn. That is how all historical maps are drawn. They were not drawn arbitrarily on whim. The western cartographers who carefully drew the maps certainly didn’t manipulate the borders of Croatia.
2. De Administrando Imperio (950 AD) vs. The Chronicle of the Priest of Duklja (1197 AD):
Quote:From: The Lone Rabbit
To: highduke03
Subject: Re:you finally lost it didn't you? ;-)
And then the LPD , no matter how controversial , the document still exists and predates the DAI . So you do the thinking. I have to work now.
Yes, I must do the thinking for TLR, the klovn. Why am I not surprised? The LPD is Ljetopis Popa Dukljanina or Chronicle of the priest of Dukja. Chronicle of the priest of Dukja does NOT predate De Administrando Imperio, as the fantasy-klovn TLR delusionally believes.
"De Administrando Imperio is a scholarly work from ca. 950 by Byzantine emperor Constantine VII. Its name is translated as On the Administration of the Empire and was meant to give his successors advice on running the ethnically-mixed empire..."[1][2]
TLR is just a confused klovn. Here is what historians conclude about Chronicle of the Priest of Dukja:
The Chronicle of the Priest of Duklja is a medieval chronicle originally written around 1172-1196.
Historians have largely discounted it, in spite of the fact that the Chronicle contains material on the early history of the South Slavs (in particular the Serbs and Croats). The work talks of the Slavs as a peaceful people imported by the rulers of the Goths, who invaded the area in the 5th century, but it doesn't attempt to elaborate on how and when this happened. This information contradicts the information found in the Byzantine text De Administrando Imperio.
The Chronicle also mentions one Svetopeleg or Svetopelek, the eighth descendant of the original Gothic invaders, as the main ruler of the lands that cover Croatia, Bosnia and Herzegovina and Serbia. He is also credited with the Christianization of the people who are Goths or Slavs — a purely fictitious attribution. It also relegates Serbia to a province of Croatia. These claims about a unified kingdom are probably a reflection of the earlier glory of the Moravian kingdom. He may also have been talking about Avars.
The priest's parish was located at the seat of the archbishopric of Duklja. According to Bishop Gregory's late 12th century additions to this document, this Archbishopric covered much of the western Balkans including the bishoprics of Bar, Budva, Kotor, Ulcinj, Svac, Skadar, Drivast, Pulat, Travunia, Zahumlje.
Further, it mentions Bosnia (Bosnam) and Serbia (Surbia) as the two Serbian lands, while describing the four southern Dalmatian duchies, Pagania, Hum/Zahumlje, Travunia and Doclea (most of today's Herzegovina, Montenegro, as well as parts of Croatia and Albania) as Croatian lands, a description rather inconsistent with other historical works from the same period.
Various inaccurate or simply wrong claims in the text make it an unreliable source. This work is, as the majority of modern historians think, mainly fictional, or wishful thinking.
TLR has just admitted that much of the case for Greater Croatian claims to Dalmatia and Bosnia rest on LPD a document described as “inaccurate or simply” “wrong unreliable source” and “fictional, or wishful thinking”. Yet even LPD is not kind to Greater Croatian interests. LPD mentions Bosnia (Bosnam) and Serbia (Surbia) as the two Serbian lands.
So even for the half-Russian, half-Bosnian Croat TLR - De Administrando Imperio & Chronicle of the Priest of Dukja & The Frankish Chronicle state that Bosnia is a historic Serb land.
Chronicle of the Priest of Dukja lists Montenegro, Dalmatia and Hercegovina as Croat lands, BUT it is discreditted by international historians. De Administrando Imperio lists Dalmatia [3][4][5] , Montenegro [6] and Bosnia [3] as Serb lands in 955 AD and The Frankish Chronicle list all of Illirik_ as Serb lands in 814 AD [7]. Both ARE accepted by historians. These 30+ maps I presented [8][9][10] all also identify B&H and Dalmatia as historical Serb lands because they are based on the correct historical documents contemporary to the period.
3. The Croatia spin on De Administrando Imperio:
Quote:From: The Lone Rabbit
To: highduke03
Subject: Re:you finally lost it didn't you? ;-)
What really matters is information we have of the time period we are discussing , actual historical recordings. The DAI first talks about Croats and then Serbs . Its very clear that the DAI only mentions the Croats as defeating the Avar holdings in contemporary Croatia & BiH and then goes on to say the Croats possesed Dalmatia , Illyricum , and Pannonia . Serbs were still turning back from Macedonia trying to decide what to do.
During the lifetime of the Emperor Heracleus (died 641 AD)[13], Croats defeated the Avars while Serbs were in Macedonia. Serbs then wanted new land, and Heraclius gave them new land west of the Drina. TLR is confused about the time frame. TLR thinks that it was some later Emperor, not Heraclius, who gave the Serbs land in BiH & Dalmatia and at some later date, too. He's wrong, as are all klovnovi:
i) "Travunia (Terbounia) and Konavli are united. Its inhabitants originate from unchristened Serbs, who lived there since the archont that fled from unchristened Serbia to Emperor Heraclius[13]. The archonts of Travunia have always been subject to the archont of Serbia. Populated cities in Travunia and Konavli are: Travunia, Vrm, Risan, Lukavete, Zetlivi." [5]
ii) "The Zahumljani (Zachlumoi) that now live there are Serbs, originating from the time of the prince (archont) who fled to emperor Heraclius[13]" [4]
iii) "[...] these same Serbs decided to depart to their own homes, and the emperor sent them off. [...] And since what is now Serbia and Pagania and the so-called country of the Zachlumi and Terbounia and the country of the Kanalites were under the dominion of the emperor of the Romans, [...] therefore the emperor [Heraclius][13] settled these same Serbs in these countries" [3]
iv) "Christian Serbia comprises the following cities: Destinik, ČernavusK, Međurečje, Dresneik, Lesnik, Salines, in the 'župa' of Bosnia: Katera and Desnik".[14]
Quote:From: The Lone Rabbit
To: highduke03
Subject: Re:you finally lost it didn't you? ;-)
What really matters is information we have of the time period we are discussing , actual historical recordings. The DAI first talks about Croats and then Serbs. Its very clear that the DAI only mentions the Croats as defeating the Avar holdings in contemporary Croatia & BiH and then goes on to say the Croats possesed Dalmatia , Illyricum , and Pannonia . Serbs were still turning back from Macedonia trying to decide what to do.
As I showed above, TLR is also confusing who was there FIRST to defeat the Avars (Croats) - with who ended up moving there just a few years later (Serbs) within the lifetime of the same emperor Heraclius who contracted the Croats to defeat the very same Avars[13].
Quote:From: The Lone Rabbit
To: highduke03
Subject: Re:you finally lost it didn't you? ;-)
The chapters that mention the Serbs in Red Croatia ( Duklja , Zahumlje , etc) come after the battle with Bulgaria and Croatia are mentioned in which the Croats defeated the Bulgarians on the Drina and then proceeded to take in Serbs and Serbs even settled in Croatian land . Then your towns of Katera and Desnik are mentioned and later the Byzantines give praise to their servents the Serbs by designating them Zahumlje and Travunja .
Obviously, TLR has no sources because all this is nonesense anyway. This Croatian version only works if you discount the sections I quoted above which are from Chapters 33 - 36. Croatian and 'Bosniak' historians do not acknowledge these chapters as being true. Neither could TLR because the sections I quioted above prove that Serbs moved into Dalmatia and Bosnia before 641 AD.
"Understandably, Serbian historians accept these claims, while others especially Croatian and Bosniak historians consider that the chapters 33-36 are emperor's concoction, stemming from the fact that he tried to extend the region of Serbian ethnicity-motivated by the fact that Serbs, unlike Croats, accepted Byzantine suzerainty. It is, however, unlikely that he would insert propaganda in a work written for his son, who must have been given true facts in order to rule successfully".[14]
Conclusion:
Croat claims on BiH and Dalmatia rest on the following:
1. Accepting Chronicle of the Priest of Duklja (1196 AD) as a main credible piece of evidence even though it has been discreditted by international historians.
2. Refusal to accept Chapter 33 - 36 of De Administrando Imperio (955 AD) even though they are internationally accepted but relying on other parts that describe Croatia favourably in the 10th century.
3. Refusing to consider the Frankish Chronicle (814 AD)[7].
TLR, please explain whu hercegbosna.com manipulated maps of Croatia to make them look like Western-made maps [15] and could you also explain why Bosnian Ban Matej Ninoslav and the Kotromanic kings of Bosnia make no reference to Croats, only Serbs, in their scanned medieval documents on parchment which have been scanned in their original [16]
cheero:
This post is no very much about TLR as it is about the complete discreditting of Croat claims to BiH. TLR is just a favourite whipping boy of mine.
At the time, I needed TLR's support to help send URLs on which I posted arguments against AAdmin's bezzare racial ideas after Aadmin banned me under the false pretext that I 'insulted' him. TLR didn't want to be part of it but said that he would post the information in his name. He did this for one of my compositions but I asked him not to do it and he complied. I looked foreward to collaborating with TLR and I'll still co-operate with him when we have a common cause.
But when it comes to BiH and Dalmatia, he doesn't have his facts straight at all. He's been unmasked in this post. His mistakes, as I quoted him here, are: asserting that LPD is older than DAI & The Frankish Chronicle when both are centuries older than LPD; relying on LPD despite the fact that it is internationally discreditted; refusing to accept the fact the fact that it was Heraclius moved the Serbs from Macedonia into BiH and Dalmatia before 640AD; refusing to accept Chapters 33 - 36 of De Administrando Imperio; refusing to face the facts that the available medieval parchmented documents of every Kotromanic king and the Ban Matej Ninoslav make references only to Serbs as the only ethno-tribal unit under their rule - and refusing to admit that hercegbosna.com manipulated maps of Croatia to make them look like Western-made maps, which is obvious.
All these points are very well referenced here with 16 reference points. Each single reference point may contain one source, but 1/2 out of 16 reference points may contain up to 5 to 15 sources. We are talking about 40+ sources in this post all together, most of which are historical maps and referenced on-line encyclopedia articles. In fact, I've ordered a copy of DAI translated by Gyula Moravczik. It's a special order and may arrive in two months. When it does, the klovn will get another lesson from SCANNED PAGES of DAI and from Moravczik.
He's been unmasked as a fool and a liar as well as a manipulator. Not just that, but the whole basis for Croat claims on Bosnia to which the Klovn adheres has been unmasked and referenced as unprofessional and consists of:
1. Accepting Chronicle of the Priest of Duklja (1196 AD) as a main credible piece of evidence even though it has been discreditted by international historians.
2. Refusal to accept Chapter 33 - 36 of De Administrando Imperio (955 AD) even though they are internationally accepted but relying on other parts that describe Croatia favourably in the 10th century.
3. Refusing to consider the Frankish Chronicle (814 AD)
Re: cheero:
TLR has nothing to say...and rightfully so. Major props to you Highduke
CCCC Stize Vojvoda! Zivela Srbija! CCCC
xmarkox Registered User
Posts: 37
(12/28/05 11:28 pm) Reply
Re: cheero:De Administrando Imperio lists Dalmatia, Montenegro and Bosnia as Serb lands in 955 AD
OK we will give you Dalmatia and Bosnia but we have to demand our historical lands all away from Persia to White Croatia and all away from White Croatia to Adriatic
Email This To a Friend
Topic Commands
Click to receive email notification of replies 
Click to stop receiving email notification of replies