Early South Slavic History

Share this video on

What's Hot

What's New

Top Grossing

Top of the Chart

Recommend

Bulgarian empire mapping : Your channel is simply amazing and very underrated

Kings and Generals : What a great video!

Hell ArcheR : See? No bosniaks, no macedonians, no montenegrins. NO FAKE NATIONS.

THOT ДЕСТЯОJEЯ : Notice how bosniaks were almost never mentioned since they are just religiously converted serbs and croats

Paul Ferrer : There are not any ETHNIC "Montenegrins," "Bosnians," or "Macedonians." The "Montenegrians" are Serbs; the "Bosnians" are descendants of Islamized Croatians and Serbs; and the "Macedonians" are Bulgarians. Greetings from an American descendant of ETHNIC BULGARIANS from the REGION of Macedonia!

Mza : I wonder if our ancestors also wore Adidas tracksuits?

Emil Penkov : There is no such thing as a Bulgar-macedonic slavic language. Use the term 'Bulgarian language' instead.

Luka Protulipac : This is first video I saw about south slavs without making Serbs or Croats angry.

Quark Samurai : Macedonians were of mixed serbian bulgarian heritage.While montenegrins were always regional Serbs.

Canadian Syrup : The Balkans and around are like a family. Serbia and Croatia are the parents, Slovenia, Montenegro, Bosnia and Macedonia are children, while Bulgaria is a cousin. Serbia - A dad who was often drunk, and assaulted his kids and wife, while now he is normal, improves his wage and wants to improve relations with his family who hates him. Croatia - Very hot, married to Serbia, but was seen hooking up with Germany and other EU members while Serbia was drinking. Now she stays with the family, and goes often to work in the city(EU). Slovenia - The oldest child, he went young to the city (EU) and visits his family in the rural areas once in a week. Bosnia (Bosniaks) - While Serbia was drinking, he also hooked up others without noticing. He hooked up with Ottomans and made Bosnia. Now Bosnia wants kinda to move to Turkeys house but can't. Bosnia (Serbians and Croatians) - Serbia and Croatia adopted two more children - Republic of Srpska and Herzeg-Bosnia. Srpska wants to be like dad, and Herzeg-Bosnia like his mom. Montenegro - The lazy elderly son/daughter. Macedonia - Macedonia is the child who hated Bulgarians (its dad), so it went for adoption. It was adopted by the Yugoslavia family, but it kinda regrets it. Dome DNA tests show it is connected to Serbia and Albania too. Bulgaria - The cousin of Serbia (from Russia's line). They argue about land, argue about the Macedonia thing, but now don't care about anything. Kosovo - Serbia hooked up with Albania too. Both want it. Vojvodina - A child of Serbia, who has more than 3/4 Serbian genes, a bit of Hungarian genes, and others are just random. Albania - A stranger Serbia had sex with while drunk. Bad move. Greece - Serbia saw a person in church, and they started talking really much. Now they are best friends. Serbia visits Greece every summer, and helps a bit with money. Cyprus - Greece brother Romania - Just like Greece, the only thing is that Romania wants to join the family for some reason. Hungary - A stranger Austria - Is where Slovenia and Croatia work. Kinda a distant cousin with Croatia. Italy - They are related to Romania. They always wanted to steal Slovenia and possibly Croatia from the family. Moldova - Romania's sister Ukraine - Russia's little brother who hates his elder one so much. Turkey - A stranger, who wanted to kidnap all of the Balkans, but ended up having sex with Serbia, and had sex with Albania for a short period, before they went on their ways.

George DRWHO : Nice Video it shows again and clearly that the so called Macedonians are actually Bulgarians. The real Macedonians were and are always Greek.

Mihail Nikoloff : 12:15 There is NO such thing as ''Bulgaro-Macedonian language''!? It is Bulgarian language, macedonian is merely a dialect of the Bulgarian and was created artificially by the Communist regime in 1945. Get your facts straight!

zarni000 : Great video: just some corrections. Bulgars were not nomadic as they were described to have had towns built of stone. Pliska - which was their first major settlement in the Balkans was monumental and far from a settlement of nomads. The capital was huge for the times and built of stone. The remains can still be seen. The architecture was also in stark contrast to the greek (byzantine) one which was mostly based on bricks. Secondly there was no "macedonian brothers" at the time . Although these have been artificially separated due to political reasons in the 20th century bulgaria proper and macedonia were the same people at the time you are discussing. In the 9th century Ohrid and Preslav Literary schools both developed the cyrillic and worked to spread the Bulgarian language (old church slavonic) and were the same culture and nation.

Red Fox Emperor : Good job on the research. As a Bulgarian that is studying currently advanced History of the Balkans I can confirm that most of this is correct keep up the good work.

Erik K. : Nice video. It is clear, that FYROM ("Macedonians) are Bulgarians and they have nothing to do with Greeks. It is also clear the culture of this regions from Zagreb to Skopje, being so long under influence of Turks, and nothing to do with western culture (just take into account their music).

Dragomir Yankov : Great Video...and really accurately presented the Bulgarian part

Johnny Sins : The video is really good however the Bulgars weren't as few as Some people think . The 12 myths in the Bulgarian history by Bozhidar Dimitrov (the most famous and the best Bulgarian historian) How does a nomadic, wandering, primitive tribe have the resources (in sheer quantities of steel) to arm itself enough to be the scourge of the century, sowing fear into the hearts of every army that has ever encountered it, including that of the Eastern Roman (Byzantine) Empire?How slow must Asparukh’s tribe have been in order to have fled the Dnieper basin in 665 and to only arrive at the mouth of the Danube in 680? The distance between the two rivers is some 250 km, giving the nomadic band of refugees an average speed of 40 metres per day – a fifth of the speed of a tortoise.How did Asparukh envision establishing a state in Moesia, which had for centuries been a well-defended part of the powerful Byzantine empire if he had at most 20 000 at his disposal?How is it possible for a refugee band of 20 000 (which could send forth 6000 warriors at most) to present such a threat to the Byzantine emperor that he would march against them himself, abandoning Constantinople to the real danger of Arabs, Persians, Franks and Seljuks, at the head of 50 000 men?Why did Constantine IV include his (extremely expensive and vulnerable to storms) royal fleet in the campaign against the Bulgars if they were only 20 000 people? The Byzantine fleet was typically only used when the heart of the empire was in grave danger. It has only been deployed against Bulgaria four times: against Asparukh, against his son Tervel in 705, in the time of Constantine V in 776 and against Simeon of Bulgaria (during the Golden Age of the Bulgarian Empire) in 917.If by some miracle the Bulgaro-Slavonic alliance managed to defeat Constantine’s army once and to settle South of the Danube, why did Constantine not redouble his efforts to expel them the following year? The Danube was considered a vital line of defence (a limes) for the Byzantine empire, and it had been regained at considerable effort and expense every time it had been lost previously.From whom did the roving Bulgars learn engineering and construction in order to build their first capital, Pliska, in the Moesian plains? Pliska was a huge city, built of rectangular stone blocks, distinct both from the Byzantine style of construction (which used bricks and mortar) and of the Slavonic style (which was confined to dugouts and wooden huts)?Why did the Slavonic tribes accept the Bulgars as their rulers if they outnumbered them so much and could have easily slaughtered them to the last man? How does a nomadic, wandering, primitive tribe have the resources (in sheer quantities of steel) to arm itself enough to be the scourge of the century, sowing fear into the hearts of every army that has ever encountered it, including that of the Eastern Roman (Byzantine) Empire?How slow must Asparukh’s tribe have been in order to have fled the Dnieper basin in 665 and to only arrive at the mouth of the Danube in 680? The distance between the two rivers is some 250 km, giving the nomadic band of refugees an average speed of 40 metres per day – a fifth of the speed of a tortoise.How did Asparukh envision establishing a state in Moesia, which had for centuries been a well-defended part of the powerful Byzantine empire if he had at most 20 000 at his disposal?How is it possible for a refugee band of 20 000 (which could send forth 6000 warriors at most) to present such a threat to the Byzantine emperor that he would march against them himself, abandoning Constantinople to the real danger of Arabs, Persians, Franks and Seljuks, at the head of 50 000 men?Why did Constantine IV include his (extremely expensive and vulnerable to storms) royal fleet in the campaign against the Bulgars if they were only 20 000 people? The Byzantine fleet was typically only used when the heart of the empire was in grave danger. It has only been deployed against Bulgaria four times: against Asparukh, against his son Tervel in 705, in the time of Constantine V in 776 and against Simeon of Bulgaria (during the Golden Age of the Bulgarian Empire) in 917.If by some miracle the Bulgaro-Slavonic alliance managed to defeat Constantine’s army once and to settle South of the Danube, why did Constantine not redouble his efforts to expel them the following year? The Danube was considered a vital line of defence (a limes) for the Byzantine empire, and it had been regained at considerable effort and expense every time it had been lost previously.From whom did the roving Bulgars learn engineering and construction in order to build their first capital, Pliska, in the Moesian plains? Pliska was a huge city, built of rectangular stone blocks, distinct both from the Byzantine style of construction (which used bricks and mortar) and of the Slavonic style (which was confined to dugouts and wooden huts)?Why did the Slavonic tribes accept the Bulgars as their rulers if they outnumbered them so much and could have easily slaughtered them to the last man?

Конрад Дюселдорф : P.s The "Bulgars" weren't turkic, nomadic debatable. Also, they weren't all brothers, the ones you can be certain about are Asparuh, Bat bayan and Kotrag, the others were more likely separate warchiefs with their own war party. And Asparuh didn't exactly split or migrate to Bessarabia and the lower danube region. It is more likely that he was already in control of those regions and simply moved the political center from Phanagoria to them and then to Moesia.

mm kk : As a Croat I don't believe Croats and Serbs were that before they came to this territories we were bunch of Slavic tribes from all over the place arriving here and settling among other people who lived here and the rulers who united us formed our identity

Templar E-Z : Herodotus said that the Thracians were the second most numerous people after the indians.......

Paul Ferrer : Overall, an excellent video! However, I disagree with some aspects of the chronological coverage of the early Slavic migrations. The earliest Slavs to settle (still in small numbers) in the Balkans did so in the 580's, in the region of Moesia (modern northern Bulgaria). The second (much bigger wave) of Slavic invaders (Sclavinae and Antae) moved into Moesia, Thrace, and Macedonia, where most of them were destined to participate in the ethnogenesis of the modern Bulgarians, while others were assimilated by the Greeks. This happened between roughly 600 and 620. The third group of Slavic migrants moved into modern Slovenia during the 620's. The fourth wave of Slavs penetrated the western Balkans (to the west of the Morava River) between 640 and 660. They were the ancestors of the contemporary Croatians and Serbians. Thus, since the 600's, the border between the Serbo--Croatian group of Southern Slavs and the Bulgarian group of Southern Slavs has been the Morava River. Greetings from an American descendant of Bulgarian Slavs from the REGION of Macedonia!

ProWrestling & Ultras Croatia : Alo Srbi i Bugari, dali smo vama mandat da napravite svoje carstvo Srpsko Carstvo koje je trajalo 25 godina i Bugarsko (dva mandata) koje je trajalo od 681. - 1396., tj. 725 godina. Možete li sada dati nama mandat da mi Hrvati izgradimo Hrvatsko Carstvo najmanje 100 - 200 godina?

Hrvat 007 : Wow, great video! Very detailed and informative, thanks for your work, you earned yourself a new sub :)

Nikos Metalidis : Macedonia one and only Hellenic

Jigov : Everyhing you see Slavic, Slavonic and anything around that you should know thats a nick-name for Bulgarian. Old Slavonic language doesnt exist, that just Bulgarian language, but since many countries are based on this culture, alphabet, language and want to identify as something different, do not admit that fact. Some of them does!! Also, Slavic is not tribe, etnicity or anything material. Slavic is a cultural category of people, who use specific language and alphabet - ITS CULTURAL CATEGORY, created by the Bulgarian Tzar - Boris (852 - 889). Before that, the word Slavic do not exist. PS: In direct translation slavic (Славянин) means: A person who use the word(слово) of God - [slovo]Слово-словяни[sloviani]

Coctail Frank : Here is a message to all of the dyslexic serbs in the comments. Croats are not catholic serbs. Here is a fact. Slavs were once all one people. We are not catholic serbs and serbs are not orthodox croats. We are the two halves of the same circle. There are major diffrences between our cultures. Even before the turkinization and maygarization.

Kris Voin : Video is fake,the whole Balkan belongs to FYROM than 80,000 years.

Matija Nikolin : Goood respect from Serbia(sout Slav)😎😄😄👍😀😎👍😀😎😄

Stefan Milo : Great video man. Really thorough! Your effort really shows.

Strictly Underground Funk : Critical thinking: a bunch of nomads form a country. The Roman emperor himself leads a huge army against the nomads... The nomads humiliate the Romans, get them to recognize a new state on their territory and force them to pay annual tribute... to the nomadic coalition that's building a colossal fortified capital. Sounds legit.

DakuHonoo : now I want to play a map game, incorporating slovenia into a wendish empire ... i'm thinking eu4

Strider : North Macedonia? Really?

martin vasilevki : Overall this is a GREAT video! But there are 3 main mistakes about Bulgaria! 1 we were NOT Turkic, 2 the "Macedonian brothers" are simply brain washed Bulgarians, aaaand i forgot the third one 😂.

Zoran Jovanovic : To je sve sada Amerika

Havik15 : Im croatian nice

MrAbagaz : Macedonian Slavic??Ohh i thought they originated from Alexandrovski the Great.....muhahahah

Zwackysa : Som časťou Srb takže toto bude zaujímavé pozerať :D

TsarSamuil : Up until just recently it was "assumed" (simply guessed with no evidence nor insight) that Ossetians were Turkish, but now the world knows they were Iranic. Why? Because they took a look at the language. Same thing with proto-Bulgarians, look at language it's certainly not Turkic but Sarmatian-Iranic. Also what is this bullshit that the Bulgar language dissapeared? Lol? Bulgarian language is a mix of Bulgar & Slavic languages. Main key words are Bulgar.

Krunoslav Mrkoci : correction! not Germanic tribes, but Celtic in area of todays Slovenia. And you even didn't mention Pannonians, inhabitants of Pannonia (todays nothern Croatia and western Hungary). You can read about Pannonians and Dalmatians in "Historia Romana" by Roman historian and soldier (equites) Patercul.

G-Rex Saurus : Would the Slavs have migrated without the Huns or the Germanic migration into the Roman empire?

THEhappyBURGER : 17:55 You mean the Bulgarians were ruling over the western Bulgarians*

ЕДИН БЪЛГАРИН / ONE BULGARIAN MАN : #МакедонияЕеБългария #MacedoniaIsBulgaria

Michael Aleksovski : Honestly, that was the best video on this subject I have ever seen! Congratulations!

Kÿå Høń : Thank you for this video! It provides the context for some of the things you mentioned in your western slavic history video while explaining southern slavic settlement in a straightforward way. I look forward to your eastern slavs video!

Bomfunk777 : History graduate here. :) According to all recent-years archaeological evidence and DNA analysis, the ancient Bulgarians (a.k.a. bulgars) are most probably of a Scytho-sarmatian (Indo-european) descend, distant "relatives" of the Persians. Graves and tombs from the early Bulgarian kingdom have been excavated and the bodies are Europoid (Caucasoid) and pretty tall (tsar Kaloyan for example - 1.90m). "Madara Rider" relief (UNESCO heritage site) has almost 1:1 analogue in ancient Persia, as well as the early pagan temples. Burial traditions, words, toponymes all have analogues in the Indo-iranian world. Early, unskilled historians in the 19-th century used some ambiguous and unclear Byzantine chronicles and a partially-broken, damaged stone-engraved text to mistakenly assume turkic origin of these people. Then they've put that in the text books and it stayed there during communism. During the years, however solid evidence and sources have been collected, suggesting that these ancient people are certainly of an indo-european origin. Early byzantine depictions and pictures of Bulgarian rulers (kings) also portrait them with European traits (google "khan Krum" and check the wiki page). History evolves over time, new evidences are collected and we can have a more clear vision over historical events and facts. :)

bd : Ракия

misteraxl1 : I'm a Serb and i can say that video is really great (and amazing that it didn't trigger neither Serbs nor Croats because those videos usually do). Just one big inaccuracy that i have to point out: Balkans weren't exactly empty. You make it look like Slavs 100% populated the area which is absolutely not the truth. Southern Slavs are the ''least Slavic'' in ethnic way, we are essentially a mix of Slavs on one side and locals on the other - main haplogroup among Serbs and Croats is the one that originated from here (''Dinaric''), with the second one being a ''Slavic'' haplogroup (the one tied to Poland and West Ukraine mostly). That's why we are a bit darker and physically different from other Slavs (we are taller, have brown hair, stronger chins, essentially we are a ''Dinaric type'' that always was living here, no matter the conquests, Slavic or other). Contrary to popular opinion, we have NO Turkish blood in us, since there is no haplogroup in our genes tied to Turks - we are dark because the original population (Illyrians, Thracians, Romans) were also darker mediteranean types. Culturally of course, we are Slavic.

Magyar Történelem : Bulgária is not slavic country but scythian. Balk or Balog a heftalita hun leader or parthian ín heftalita Empire his folk is the Balk-ar. Ár or áradat means folk too. Balks folk.

zmajooov : 15:54 A-HA! NOW WE FINALLY KNOW WHO STARTED THE WAR! -edit It's amazing how your video is unbiased, easiest sub ever, keep up the good work!

Aleksandar Kan : What about the Second Bulgarian empire ? NIce video !