Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Johnny Bravo]

The Croats were just another tribe with a ruling family, like the Serbs. At the time there was no real difference between them other than religion and the script that is used for writing.

The difference was not religion/script. There were Serb Catholics, and there were Croats who wrote in Glagolithic and Cyrillic. No one will ever know what the differences between Croats and Serbs originally were, but it seems that they were, while of the same stock, distinct identities with no loyalty nor animosity towards each other. It seems strange to me that there is really no record of any great cooperation or even involvement between Serbs and Croats after their arrival in the Balkans, even though we know that they gradually travelled, settled and moved on throughout Europe virtually side by side.

[Fritz]

Polish and Ukrainians are both Slavs (sorry just wanted to correct you before Aleks got on his gay horse), but the first statement is spot on. He wouldn't say that to me in person.

"Gay Horse"   

[Emo Aleks]

The difference was not religion/script. There were Serb Catholics, and there were Croats who wrote in Glagolithic and Cyrillic. No one will ever know what the differences between Croats and Serbs originally were, but it seems that they were, while of the same stock, distinct identities with no loyalty nor animosity towards each other. It seems strange to me that there is really no record of any great cooperation or even involvement between Serbs and Croats after their arrival in the Balkans, even though we know that they gradually travelled, settled and moved on throughout Europe virtually side by side.

The differences were purely tribal - there were other Slavic tribes who moved to the Balkans too (I must remember to look this up tonight)who were the same as the Croats/Serbs - the fact that the language that is spoken is the same indicates this - but it is these these two distinct "nationalities" that became dominant. And part of being a distinct nationaility in the modern world is having to differentiate your self from other nationalities, and this is where history is fudged.

Part of the reason that there was no "co-operation" between Croats and Serbs was that Croatia-Slavonia became tied in to Hungary fairly early, and later the Hapsburg empire.

Don't forget, that after World War One, the majority of Croats were happy to become part of Yogoslavia, so long it was a loose federation with autonomy for the various peoples within it. However the centralising, Serbian dominated monarchy quickly aliented most Croats, who then saw independence as the only way for the Croats.

[Johnny Bravo]

Don't forget, that after World War One, the majority of Croats were happy to become part of Yogoslavia, so long it was a loose federation with autonomy for the various peoples within it. However the centralising, Serbian dominated monarchy quickly aliented most Croats, who then saw independence as the only way for the Croats.

There was never popular support for unity with Serbia, Yugoslavian and Illyrian ideas were only popular among intellectuals. Average Croats had always mistrusted, if not hated, Serbs, being eastern and non-Catholic. This was heightened by the fact that the Hapsburg monarchy gave Serbs priveleges and rights almost equal to Croats for their services. This animosity was the reason for revolutionary movements all over Catholic populated parts of Yugoslavia, which is why the monarchy imposed a military dictatorship.

What should have happened is that Serbia should have taken the regions it won in WWI (Bosnia, Herzegovina, Montenegro, parts of Slavonia and Dalmatia) and left tiny Croatia and Slovenia to their own devices, most probably to be conquered by Italy.

[Emo Aleks]

There was never popular support for unity with Serbia, Yugoslavian and Illyrian ideas were only popular among intellectuals. Average Croats had always mistrusted, if not hated, Serbs, being eastern and non-Catholic. This was heightened by the fact that the Hapsburg monarchy gave Serbs priveleges and rights almost equal to Croats for their services. This animosity was the reason for revolutionary movements all over Catholic populated parts of Yugoslavia, which is why the monarchy imposed a military dictatorship.

What should have happened is that Serbia should have taken the regions it won in WWI (Bosnia, Herzegovina, Montenegro, parts of Slavonia and Dalmatia) and left tiny Croatia and Slovenia to their own devices, most probably to be conquered by Italy.

Not unity, a federation. I was a little innacurate when I said the majority of Croats wanted a federation - I should have said the majority of Croats who cared one way or the other. The reality is that most people at that time didn't give a shit one way or the other compared to their more immediate concerns of feeding and clothing themselves. Their wasn't any widepsread hatred of Serbs. The only people who felt anything one way or the other was the intellectuals yes and the wealthy (fearful of agrarian reform in any independent republican Croat state), and they wanted this federation.

And yes, the Hapsburgs liked to play one nationality off against another (they did this with Poles and Ukrainians in Galicia) but this again should only have affacted the intellectuals and the wealthy, yet didn't.

[Johnny Bravo]

Their wasn't any widepsread hatred of Serbs.

You're right, it wasn't widespread. However, in the regions which were populated by both Serbs and Croats, it was fierce. You should look up Ante Starcevic and his theory on the inferiority of the Serb "race," which inspired many Croats in the early 20th century. Ironically, his mother was Serbian..

[Emo Aleks]

You're right, it wasn't widespread. However, in the regions which were populated by both Serbs and Croats, it was fierce. You should look up Ante Starcevic and his theory on the inferiority of the Serb "race," which inspired many Croats in the early 20th century. Ironically, his mother was Serbian..

There was no doubt about the fact that some Croats were extremely evil fuckers. I mean the way that the Ustasha killed Serbs, Gypsies and Jews even horrified the Nazis because of it's brutality and how widespread it was.

[Lord Biscuit©]

Hmmm, page 5. I expected this thread to progress from religious debate to all out war by now. Do we need to organise a soccer match? 

[Fritz]

I'll bring the flares

[Thaluikhain]

"Gay Horse"   

Yeah...that was a bit weird...as for Aryans...the royal household of the Persian Empire were Aryan, and they did well for themselves, establishing a very large, tolerant multicultural empire.

[Emo Aleks]

Just following up on what I was talking about yesterday, besides the Southern Slavic Croat and Serb tribes, there was also the Paganians, Zachlumians, Terbonians and Docleans who also migrated to the Balkans in the 7th and 8th century AD. There were also the Turkic Avars, Pechenegs and Bulgars (who later became Slavicised) who the Southern Slave intermingled with in the Balkans prior to the 11th Century, as well as the Vlachs and Albanians, and with the Magyars, Szekeleys, Kuns, Ottomans and their Arab vassals intermingling later.

[Corducci Enterprises]

Who cares what you say big boy.

Sincerely

D.C.

[Emo Aleks]

Who cares what you say big boy.

Sincerely

D.C.

You do if you felt the need to respond

[Johnny Bravo]

Just following up on what I was talking about yesterday, besides the Southern Slavic Croat and Serb tribes, there was also the Paganians, Zachlumians, Terbonians and Docleans

All Serbs. Zachumlians=Zahumlje, Terbonians=Trebinje, Docleans=Duklja/Zeta (Montenegro), Paganians=Pagani, Pagan Serbs who settled in Western Dalmatia, refused to adopt Christianity and pirated Venetian ships.

[Emo Aleks]

All Serbs. Zachumlians=Zahumlje, Terbonians=Trebinje, Docleans=Duklja/Zeta (Montenegro), Paganians=Pagani, Pagan Serbs who settled in Western Dalmatia, refused to adopt Christianity and pirated Venetian ships.

No, you are just applying the name Serbs to them over 1000 years down the tracks. The Serbs were just one the tribes, the one that managed to become dominant and impose their "Serbianess" on the others. At that time, none of those tribes would have called themselves Serbs. Again, it is just something Serbian historians have imposed to justify their colonial policies.