Changes

11 bytes removed ,  10:11, 14 July 2019
m
Line 31: Line 31:  
The early medieval Western Balkans must have had multiple small Slavic ethnic tribes. In some cases the newly arrived Slavs lived amongst the population that was there prior to their arrival. It is my opinion that for whatever reason it appears that their history has not been recorded accurately ''or'' not recorded at all (it evolved into frontier country, 'borderland').  
 
The early medieval Western Balkans must have had multiple small Slavic ethnic tribes. In some cases the newly arrived Slavs lived amongst the population that was there prior to their arrival. It is my opinion that for whatever reason it appears that their history has not been recorded accurately ''or'' not recorded at all (it evolved into frontier country, 'borderland').  
   −
From a Greco-Roman perspective they were all identified as Slavs. Most probably based on rough linguistic-language classification. The Slavs found themselves living in a '''medieval multi-ethnic''' region;  Roman Latin-Illyrian population as well as Liburnians, Greeks, Guduscani <ref>[http://self.gutenberg.org/articles/guduscani self.gutenberg.org:] ''"It has been assumed, that they were part of the Vandals, Goths or Lombards."'' </ref>, Ostrogoths and others. It has been mention that there is an possibility that further back in time other ethnic groups were within the Slavic tribes themselves. This could explain the Persian (Sarmatian) connection.   
+
From a Greco-Roman perspective they were all identified as Slavs. Most probably based on rough linguistic-language classification. The Slavs found themselves living in a '''medieval multi-ethnic''' region;  Roman Latin-Illyrian population as well as Liburnians, Greeks, Guduscani <ref>[http://self.gutenberg.org/articles/guduscani self.gutenberg.org:] ''"It has been assumed, that they were part of the Vandals, Goths or Lombards."'' </ref>, Ostrogoths and others. It has been mention that there is an possibility that further back in time other ethnic groups were within the Slavic tribes. This could explain the Persian (Sarmatian) connection.   
    
It was the most powerful chieftains (the main political players) who left a '''mark''' on history. Taking this into account, over a period of time in the middle ages we have new '''political identities''' of Southern Slavs emerging (regionally based ''or'' names brought with them). Among these were Croatians, Narentines, Bulgarians<ref>Bulgarians also have a strong historic association with Turkic semi-nomadic tribes. It has been written that in early medieval times the Bulgar elite spoke a language that was a member of the Turkic language group. </ref>, Bosnians, Serbs (Raška) etc.  
 
It was the most powerful chieftains (the main political players) who left a '''mark''' on history. Taking this into account, over a period of time in the middle ages we have new '''political identities''' of Southern Slavs emerging (regionally based ''or'' names brought with them). Among these were Croatians, Narentines, Bulgarians<ref>Bulgarians also have a strong historic association with Turkic semi-nomadic tribes. It has been written that in early medieval times the Bulgar elite spoke a language that was a member of the Turkic language group. </ref>, Bosnians, Serbs (Raška) etc.  
7,909

edits