So many butthurted people in comments. He never said that word Slav came from word slave. He said that word slave came from word Slav. Can you even understand english? And btw, thanks for video Masaman.

@Masaman

6 жыл бұрын

Thank you for clarifying. I think there's a bit of a language barrier, so I understand how people can misconstrue what was said.

@spvceghxstpvrpp3171

6 жыл бұрын

The term slave has its origins in the word slav

@DerPlusquamperfekt

6 жыл бұрын

To make it simple: First came "slav". Then came the word "slave". Not the other way around.

@spvceghxstpvrpp3171

6 жыл бұрын

slave (n.) late 13c., "person who is the chattel or property of another," from Old French esclave (13c.), from Medieval Latin Sclavus "slave" (source also of Italian schiavo, French esclave, Spanish esclavo), originally "Slav" (see Slav); so used in this secondary sense because of the many Slavs sold into slavery by conquering peoples.

@skrizovec

6 жыл бұрын

Kretek Actually the word Slav was invented in the 19 century! Before that the word was Sloven ! It means word or people with whom you can speak at a common language! So I hope you understand how much ignorant you are and how rude! ?

They say that the Eastern Romans discovered the slavs Squatting and dancing to hard bass in there villages for a ritual. Oftentimes the romans would state that these people would fight in combat with an ancient battle armor what is called today as Adidas.

@tariqboss9617

6 жыл бұрын

lol I wear all adidas

@user-vt5ep7lc2i

6 жыл бұрын

I passed out help

@ariesdk5487

6 жыл бұрын

Hahaha addidas best

@svinecomPLEX

6 жыл бұрын

хард басс денсинг! ;)

@peteratanasov6182

6 жыл бұрын

Not true! When slavs came from north in Bulgaria, they were peaceful farmers, but when they started living together whit Trace, they started learning from them how to defend with infantry, after that from Byzantium​ how to siege and from Proto-Bulgarians how to use eficialy horses and use them in Byzantium strategy.

Slavs were called Wend/vend/vind/ by their neighbors. Wend means kin, tribe. Slav is from slavic language and from "słowo" "słowianie" those who speak one language. And we called Germans "Niemcy" this word from "niemi" - it means voiceless because we could not communicate with each other.

@aleksandarmarkovic6523

5 жыл бұрын

Bravo majstore. Objasni im. Well done explain them.

@emin6156

5 жыл бұрын

South slavs call Germans "Nemci" or "Njemci" same thing ..

@dannyka6738

5 жыл бұрын

The Slavic autonym *Slověninъ is usually considered a derivation from slovo "word", originally denoting "people who speak (the same language)", i. e. people who understand each other. The word slovo ("word") and the related slava ("glory, fame") and slukh ("hearing") originate from the Proto-Indo-European root *ḱlew- ("be spoken of, glory"), cognate with Ancient Greek κλέος (kléos "fame"), whence comes the name Pericles, Latin clueo ("be called"), and English loud. The popular Italian-language (and international) salutation Ciao is derived from the word. The Byzantine term Sklavinoi was loaned into Arabic as Saqaliba (صقالبة; sing. Saqlabi, صقلبي) which is a term used in medieval Arabic sources to refer to Slavs and other peoples of Central and Eastern Europe, or in a broad sense to European slaves. The term originates from the Middle Greek slavos/sklavenos (Slav), which in Hispano-Arabic came to designate first Slavic slaves and then, similarly to the semantic development of the term in other West-European languages, foreign slaves in general. The word is often misused to refer only to slaves from Central and Eastern Europe but it refers to all Europeans and others traded by the Arab traders during the war or peace periods. The English term slave derives from the ethnonym Slav from Middle English, from Old French sclave, from Medieval Latin sclāvus (“slave”), from Late Latin Sclāvus (“Slav”), because Slavs were often forced into slavery by Muslims in the Middle Ages.

@warfighter2521

5 жыл бұрын

@@emin6156 Well Macedonians call them Germanci

@jakakraigher4389

5 жыл бұрын

@@warfighter2521 Well because macedonians are turks

A moment of silence for those who don't have slavic roots

@jemoeder51

4 жыл бұрын

Both Germanic and Slavic peoples are Indo European (Aryan) I wonder how the Nazis would think of this...

@liviussimebibi8786

4 жыл бұрын

Hello, i'm romanian 🇷🇴😗

@planeflight1202

4 жыл бұрын

@@jemoeder51 Šta ima?

@finalfrontier001

4 жыл бұрын

slavs nasty.

@thecraplordsell4575

4 жыл бұрын

Lol and why should I feel bad???

We are all brothers we should stop fighting each other,we are all from the same Slavic Tribe love you my slavic brothers!

@kx9029

3 жыл бұрын

True. We’re all brothers and sisters. Love to you bratan

@benkenobi_

3 жыл бұрын

Love from Slovakia bro

@philsman3694

3 жыл бұрын

Easier said than done though. Look at Ukrainians seeking protection from the U.S. against their “brother” Russians. Soon you will see US military bases set up in Ukraine. Then clueless gals will start hanging with GI Joes, insisting they’re their gf but only to reduce themselves to their sex toys. It’s kinda sad.

@Max-kd2gh

3 жыл бұрын

@@philsman3694 tell that to Russia

@advanced2780

3 жыл бұрын

yes balkan war in 1990's did not had to happend

"...UNCOORDINATED YET POWERFUL..." *shows clips of random gopniks doing stupid explosives for fun*

@threerabbit2227

4 жыл бұрын

_A D I D A S I N T E N S I F I E S_

@quocvietophu1627

4 жыл бұрын

*laughs in rush B*

@Ghostedwithdashiii

4 жыл бұрын

Yesss😆

@volka2199

4 жыл бұрын

Never call explosives stupid

@Lieutenant_Dude

4 жыл бұрын

Ever watch that video of a bunch of gopniks turned soldiers in Russia trying to catch bullets... and succeeding!? Yeah, one shot his pistol by the other one, while the latter tries to catch the bullets with his hands. He does it.

"Na zdrowie" to all Slavic brothers😉

@kingslavd661

3 жыл бұрын

Na zdravlje!

@kx9029

3 жыл бұрын

Na zdrowie bratan

@ondrejpapuk707

3 жыл бұрын

Na zdraví

@bulgarian_chad

3 жыл бұрын

Наздраве!

@valentineblack4223

3 жыл бұрын

На здоровье!

This video was sponsored by Adidas

@xipo3532

5 жыл бұрын

Lol

@arix2259

4 жыл бұрын

xD

@jameshender3162

4 жыл бұрын

😂

@jurex81

4 жыл бұрын

dida

@ricardoaxlrose69

4 жыл бұрын

Best comment

Just a reminder that Yugo Slavs were slaved by the Turks for 500 years and they managed to preserve their culture and national indendity as well as fight off the Turks.

@wolfieblack32

5 жыл бұрын

Yugo Slavs were slaved by the Turks for 500 years in ottoman times.if it s true or you are agree with so you must accepth this now Yugo Slavs were slaved by europan culture especially french english and german since collapse ottoman ..by saying this Yugo Slavs were slaved by the Turks for 500 years you are agree with this slav from slave ..but it is not true The correct is one is Slov, from Slovo, which means word. Thus, anybody who spoke our language was a Slov, while foreigners were Nemcy (Mutes). The name Nemcy stuck as the Slavic name for Germans, but it used to be an umbrella term for the foreigners. be smart and think again mr. markovic

@TheMack0007

5 жыл бұрын

@@wolfieblack32 Yougoslavia was made from several different countries and it was not even in start at that time. Otoman empire was stopped in Croatia so it could not invade the rest of europe. They were a lethal force at that time. Just leearn about the Suleyman the great and the Chicken they catapulted in his tent in the town Siscia. A bad sign for him. Some time after that he died.

@TheMack0007

5 жыл бұрын

Otomans did not conquer "Yugoslavia " at that time as there was no Yugoslavia ( made from severals different countries as it was after WW2 ) so this is wrong assumption. Again crooked interpreting. Yes the Ottoman empire did spred from east to half of the Croatia. But not all. Serbia ,Bosnia and Herzegovina ,Albania etc were all under Otoman empire. And most people at that time switched to islam for their well being at that time. Which still remained. On youtube everyone is interpreting stories as they fit. Just to profite from adverts,views and commenta. I am amazed how much is there mislieading info here. Pleaee pople dont think everything what you see on youtube. There are books which have to be checked from authorities about their written supstance. Please Do read.

@uber1ns4n1ty8

5 жыл бұрын

350* years give or take.

@salec7592

5 жыл бұрын

@Hist Ory Most empires didn't bother to assimilate their captive peoples - it required too much effort, produced too much rebellion, and perhaps most inconveniently for ruling elites, loaded the social pyramid with too much upstarts, threatening incumbent establishment. Truth be said, Ottomans excelled in social mobility, but at the same time moving up on social scales also required assimilation into Turkish identity and converting into Islam religion.

Sława, Slava, слава. Regards from Poland my brothers.

@matuskovac9310

5 жыл бұрын

UE gotohell Regards from Slovakia Brother Kurva in your language Kurwa

@Voinstvennyj_Kulebyak

5 жыл бұрын

Hail to Poland, brothers! Best wishes!)

@qwertyuiopasdfghjkl2556

5 жыл бұрын

Слава Славянам

@antonishedsp2036

5 жыл бұрын

Я славянский казах 🎌

@ivanmataija1623

5 жыл бұрын

Regards from Croatia brotha

I am from Romania and you are right. Our language is latin, but genetically we are closer to slavs then mediterranean people.

@slavic3225

4 жыл бұрын

True

@Userius1

4 жыл бұрын

@Random Person Romania is not as poor and disorganized as some would believe. Moldova takes the cake for that. That said, being Mediterranean wouldn't be much better, unless you mean Italy. I'm not sure the Albanians or Greeks are doing hot themselves.

@Userius1

4 жыл бұрын

​@Random Person Well seeing as how that was part of the comparison for the OP...nevermind, you can't seem to get it.

@Userius1

4 жыл бұрын

@Random Person No

@a.p1675

4 жыл бұрын

@Random Person Remember when he said that the slavs were the cannon fodder of Europe? Well Romania was i guess even more (or same) cannon fodder cause of surviving slavs and getting plaid by Hungarians for ages. So its a miracle we survived. With dignity to. Been on this ground since beginning of time. Never bothered nobody but paid for everybody. Super proud Romanian.

Amazing how for almost all western "experts" on Slavs Great Moravia simply didnt exist. Old Slavnonic language was already liturgical language besides Greek and Latin in 9. century.

@user-xd4fw5wy6m

4 жыл бұрын

You mean Slavonic ? We still use it in starover churches tho :))

@yoghurtmaster1688

3 жыл бұрын

rip Great Moravia and the first bulgarian empire

@Volnas97

3 жыл бұрын

I mean I'd understand Samo's Realm, because that wasn't really a country, but yeah, Great moravia and Bulgaria should've been mentioned.

@user-in5dl1uf5e

3 жыл бұрын

Marek Kucak Latin language was not used in the 9 century it was used till 100 AC.

@marekkucak6581

3 жыл бұрын

@@user-in5dl1uf5e Hmm. I wonder why Martin Luter took the effort to translate the bible then.

Slav is actually an incorrect pronunciation that has set roots in the west. The correct one is Slov, from Slovo, which means word. Thus, anybody who spoke our language was a Slov, while foreigners were Nemcy (Mutes). The name Nemcy stuck as the Slavic name for Germans, but it used to be an umbrella term for the foreigners.

@ChangesOfTomorrow

6 жыл бұрын

Slava and slovo derived from the same word a long time ago, thus both interpretations are correct (it initially meant to verbally glorify the gods from what I've read, so you can see how it split into two words). Both are used depending on which slavic group you are talking about.

@Shuhister

6 жыл бұрын

Actually Slava derived from Slovo in the same way as someone (something) is great because it is greeted a lot.

@dimitrijepenjaskovic9374

6 жыл бұрын

I just wanted to point out that claiming that the word Slav comes from the world slave is just flat-out wrong

@ChangesOfTomorrow

6 жыл бұрын

Shuhister, I'm skeptical about this considering how the typical slavic greeting is essentially wishing health (based on zdrave and its variations) and doesn't sound similar to neither glory (slava), nor word (slovo).

@gospaironija2762

6 жыл бұрын

Y i think slav is slavic ward so i dont know what you are talking about we call ourselfs slovani=slavic people slovan comes from slava which means glory its pegan thing in our roots like glory to our forefather.So yes you are wrong because slavic comes from the ward Slovan (in my language everyone got there own words for "us" but some words are the same in the biger Picture and everyone Will know what you mean with the word SLAVA but even more prfect is SLAVA RODU glory to our kin!) now you know the truth so dont write bs anymore.

I am Vietnamese and I love the beautiful Slavic cultures, music, languages, history and peoples. Very beautiful and good looking people.

@GreatPolishWingedHussars

Жыл бұрын

Thanks! I know it's been 3 years ago, but nevertheless. The claim is nonsense and contradicts the historical reality that the Slavs were slaves first. Incidentally, it is not at all proven that the term slave is derived from the term Slav. All the outrageous claims are just prejudices about the Slavs. In addition, many Celts and members of other peoples were enslaved by the Vikings, not just Slavs. It is absurd to also mention the Ottomans and Mongols in this context, because they were in a completely different age. By the way, Byzantines hardly enslaved Slavs, but bought slaves from the Vikings and this slaves certainly weren't just Slavs. Ridiculous and impudent, by the way, that at the beginning of the video guys that apparently are Slavs perform any nonsensical explosions with barrels. Why is such nonsense shown? Obviously the intention is to show that the people the video is about are idiots. In reality, the Slavs were the most successful and they certainly weren't a people of slaves and idiots. Because idiots and slaves would definitely not have succeeded in colonizing half of Europe. Slavic expansion began during the second century AD, and they occupied a large area of eastern Europe between the Vistula and the middle Dnieper. The Slavs slowly expanded in all directions and assimilated the neighboring cultures. They constantly sought an outlet for the population surplus. Partially they acted without violence and the Slavic peoples infiltrated foreign territories very clever by being cooperative. The Slavs became a dominant force and establishing a new socio-political network in the entire area of central and southeastern Europe. According to the historian Paul Barford, "The Spartan and egalitarian Slavic culture clearly had something attractive for great numbers of the European populations living over considerable areas of central Europe", resulting in their assimilation. The special thing about the Slavs was that they did not practice slavery! Byzantine chroniclers noted that Roman prisoners captured by the Slavs could soon become free members of Slavic society if they wished. So Slavs were the only ones who even assimilated Romans and not just captured soldiers but the population of entire conquered territories. According to the 6th-century manual of war "Strategikon" by Byzantine Emperor Maurice the Slavs were a hospitable people and did not keep prisoners indefinitely "but lay down a certain period after which they can decide for themselves if they want to return to their former homelands or to stay amongst the Slavs as free men and friends." The Byzantine scholar Pseudo-Caesarius's wrote that Slavs living by their own law and without the rule of anyone. The Slave were reported to have lived under a democracy for a long time. The 6th-century historian Procopius, who was in contact with Slavic mercenaries, reported, "The Slavic nations, are not governed by one man, but from ancient times have lived in democracy, and consequently everything which involves their welfare, whether for good or for ill, is referred to the people." The 6th-century manual of war Strategikon by Byzantine Emperor Maurice is considered an eyewitness of the Slavs and said that "the Slaves were independent, absolutely refused to be enslaved or governed, least of all in their own land." The Slavs managed to keep up their agriculture (and a rather efficient kind of agriculture, by the standards of the time). There were no nobility and no kings with the greed for more and contempt for peasant's work, as it did with the Germanic Tribes. Thus the Slavic model proved an attractive alternative ... which proved practically indestructible. Slav traditions, language, and culture shaped, or at least influenced, innumerable local and regional communities: a surprising similarity that developed without any central institution to promote it. These regional ethnogeneses inspired by Slavic tradition incorporated considerable remnants of the Roman or Germanic population ready enough to give up ethnic identities that had lost their cohesion. Slavs were so successful in the assimilation of other peoples because they weren't as barbaric as the Germanic tribes or Vikings. Slavs did not practice slavery and they didn't maraud like the Germanic vandals, for example, from which the term vandalism is not wrongly derived. That is why the Slavs were successful in colonizing and the violent and Slavery driving Germanic tribes and Vikings were not! That is why today there are very many Slavs and only very few Scandinavian descendants of the Vikings in comparison. That is why half of Europe is populated by Slavs and the descendants of the Vikings live in the same relatively small area as 1000 years ago compared to the large area of ​​the Slavs. The same applies to the descendants of the Germanic tribes, the only thing they have colonized in Europe is England and small Slavic areas in East Germany because otherwise they are where they were 1000 years ago in contrast to the Slavs who successfully colonized half of Europe.

@warningwarning8826

Жыл бұрын

An Eastern European has one of the heaviest raw totals in powerlifting (1160kg by Petr Petras) and powerlifting is much more popular in the West. Mariusz Pudzianowski (Polish) has the most world strongest man titles (5 titles) in history. Nikola Tesla (South Slav) was one of the smartest men in recent history. Slavs were very oppressed because of bad circumstances - Slavs were some of the first people attacked by Asian invaders and so acted like a shield for much of Europe. Slavs were also extremely divided and violent towards each other, which severely weakened Slavs, making them easier targets for Asian invaders.

@malybobek1986

Жыл бұрын

And I love your food ❤🍲

@GreatPolishWingedHussars

Жыл бұрын

The claim is nonsense and contradicts the historical reality that the Slavs were slaves first. Incidentally, it is not at all proven that the term slave is derived from the term Slav. All the outrageous claims are just prejudices about the Slavs. In addition, many Celts and members of other peoples were enslaved by the Vikings, not just Slavs. It is absurd to also mention the Ottomans and Mongols in this context, because they were in a completely different age. By the way, Byzantines hardly enslaved Slavs, but bought slaves from the Vikings and this slaves certainly weren't just Slavs. Ridiculous and impudent, by the way, that at the beginning of the video guys that apparently are Slavs perform any nonsensical explosions with barrels. Why is such nonsense shown? Obviously the intention is to show that the people the video is about are idiots. In reality, the Slavs were the most successful and they certainly weren't a people of slaves and idiots. Because idiots and slaves would definitely not have succeeded in colonizing half of Europe. Slavic expansion began during the second century AD, and they occupied a large area of eastern Europe between the Vistula and the middle Dnieper. The Slavs slowly expanded in all directions and assimilated the neighboring cultures. They constantly sought an outlet for the population surplus. Partially they acted without violence and the Slavic peoples infiltrated foreign territories very clever by being cooperative. The Slavs became a dominant force and establishing a new socio-political network in the entire area of central and southeastern Europe. According to the historian Paul Barford, "The Spartan and egalitarian Slavic culture clearly had something attractive for great numbers of the European populations living over considerable areas of central Europe", resulting in their assimilation. The special thing about the Slavs was that they did not practice slavery! Byzantine chroniclers noted that Roman prisoners captured by the Slavs could soon become free members of Slavic society if they wished. So Slavs were the only ones who even assimilated Romans and not just captured soldiers but the population of entire conquered territories. According to the 6th-century manual of war "Strategikon" by Byzantine Emperor Maurice the Slavs were a hospitable people and did not keep prisoners indefinitely "but lay down a certain period after which they can decide for themselves if they want to return to their former homelands or to stay amongst the Slavs as free men and friends." The Byzantine scholar Pseudo-Caesarius's wrote that Slavs living by their own law and without the rule of anyone. The Slave were reported to have lived under a democracy for a long time. The 6th-century historian Procopius, who was in contact with Slavic mercenaries, reported, "The Slavic nations, are not governed by one man, but from ancient times have lived in democracy, and consequently everything which involves their welfare, whether for good or for ill, is referred to the people." The 6th-century manual of war Strategikon by Byzantine Emperor Maurice is considered an eyewitness of the Slavs and said that "the Slaves were independent, absolutely refused to be enslaved or governed, least of all in their own land." The Slavs managed to keep up their agriculture (and a rather efficient kind of agriculture, by the standards of the time). There were no nobility and no kings with the greed for more and contempt for peasant's work, as it did with the Germanic Tribes. Thus the Slavic model proved an attractive alternative ... which proved practically indestructible. Slav traditions, language, and culture shaped, or at least influenced, innumerable local and regional communities: a surprising similarity that developed without any central institution to promote it. These regional ethnogeneses inspired by Slavic tradition incorporated considerable remnants of the Roman or Germanic population ready enough to give up ethnic identities that had lost their cohesion. Slavs were so successful in the assimilation of other peoples because they weren't as barbaric as the Germanic tribes or Vikings. Slavs did not practice slavery and they didn't maraud like the Germanic vandals, for example, from which the term vandalism is not wrongly derived. That is why the Slavs were successful in colonizing and the violent and Slavery driving Germanic tribes and Vikings were not! That is why today there are very many Slavs and only very few Scandinavian descendants of the Vikings in comparison. That is why half of Europe is populated by Slavs and the descendants of the Vikings live in the same relatively small area as 1000 years ago compared to the large area of ​​the Slavs. The same applies to the descendants of the Germanic tribes, the only thing they have colonized in Europe is England and small Slavic areas in East Germany because otherwise they are where they were 1000 years ago in contrast to the Slavs who successfully colonized half of Europe.

@actiallieuwisj

Жыл бұрын

thank you so much! most of my friends are east asian/southeast asian and happen to be vietnamese so thank you so much! your people are also amazing!

The problem is, that the genes of the Slavic People, are very stable on the territories of central Europe. The haplogroup R1A is present in Poland about 3000 years, so the theories about the late migration in the 7-th century are wrong.

@noraswe

3 жыл бұрын

Ye its germanic rewriting of history they say that 1. These lands were inhabited by mostly Germanic tribes, relatively in detail described by Greek and Roman historians and cartographers. They were accomplished craftsmen - manufacturing their own weapons and tools, building defence systems - a network of forts and their common culture bound with common language. The Slavs were able, according to this theory, to overcome these people not on individual basis but on mass scale to the point that these people lost their identity and took up the culture of Slavs. This could only happen if Slavs were aggressive invaders systematically murdering everybody or they were culturally superior, which cannot be said about inhabitants of swamps. 2. In 200 years the Slavs originating from beyond the shores of Vistula, conquered lands 2500 km to the west, south-west and south. More that 7 million square kilometres. They were apparently welcomed everywhere, their agricultural skills in high demand. Where did they learn this anyway if, for 200 years, they did nothing else but conquering other territories? 3. The Slavic takeover was so complete that all the original names of rivers, mountains and lands vanished, only the Slavic remained. The Germanic tribes were giving their towns and villages Slavic names several centuries before their invasion, which was documented in Ptolemy’s Geography in 200AD. He is describing many places in Germanic lands with Slavic names: Bogadion (town of god), Kalaigia (place of forging metal), Budoris (building), Menosgada (name of snake), Brodentia (Ford); there is no sign of Germanic dialects.

@sab5686

2 жыл бұрын

@PeteMaravich 744 dude it aint that deep

@fb.gg.ElDelincuente

2 жыл бұрын

Europe is based on 2 lies Greek and Roman culture , thats why they want us to think that Slavs werent here always .

@trueorstopthink4883

2 жыл бұрын

@@sab5686 I think PeteMaravich 744 comment is interesting: but there is no way of me knowing what Masaman is up to. I haven't experienced what PeteMaravich 744 went through so I'm not going to judge, but I'll keep an eye out for that sort of behaviour from Masaman. It also looks like @sab is trying to take a cheap shot at PeteMaravich 744 without trying to debate him. If you really are that smart @sab, take a shot and debate me on what PeteMaravich 744 said about the Slavs. Try to argue against his points with logical assessments on the Slavs, instead of being condescending. Let's see how well you do.

@bertramadelajdian1512

2 жыл бұрын

Genetics aren't helpful in discussing spread of cultures. Migrations in Eurasia were not like the colonisation of North America. Previous populations were assimilated, not slaughtered in order to make place for new settlers, so people with the same haplogroup in Central Europe were in different periods of time culturally Celtic, Germanic, Slavic, then in modern day eastern Germany again Germanic and in Greece hellenized without any major population flows.

Slovanem jsem byl, slovanem jsem a slovanem budu sláva našemu národu bratři!

@zeropsaft

4 ай бұрын

Ποιό απ'όλα.

@terezahs77

4 ай бұрын

Jedna etnicita, jedna společnost, jeden národ, náš rod. Sláva rodu bratři a sestry! kzread.info/dash/bejne/pGWaqbqGYdqahrw.html kzread.info/dash/bejne/Yqdksa18csiudrw.html

All my Respect to the Slavs, they didn't give up

@RikkiTheRose

6 жыл бұрын

and most of them were never slaves this video is bogus

@GrumpoDaggles

6 жыл бұрын

tyllo TY thanks

@kozjevime1

6 жыл бұрын

Slav" comes from "слава" (slavic for "honor").

@duerandaggi

6 жыл бұрын

@Hus Nope, it comes from the word SLOVO or WORD. So "Slavs" means "people of words" or those who can understand each other. In contrast, people who "don't have words" or could not be understood were NIEMCY, and similar words now mean German in several Slavic languages :-).

@duerandaggi

6 жыл бұрын

@ Random Smartass What makes you think they accepted Ottoman rule for 500 years? Do you know the history of the region? One of the many rebellions, 1594: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Burning_of_Saint_Sava%27s_relics BTW, fighting for hundreds of years for liberation is a good example of never giving up, capisci?

Helicopter was invented by a Slav. (Sikorsky) Most of the modern technology comes from ONE Slav. (Tesla)

@diadokhoi5722

5 жыл бұрын

Tesla was born in austria

@pioterosiemdziesiat

5 жыл бұрын

Tesla was Croatian ;)

@andrejvidovic1

5 жыл бұрын

Tesla my favorite Serb.

@lovepeace9727

5 жыл бұрын

Yep, first nuclear power plant was created by slav. First man and woman in space are also slavs. and etc.

@raninudisti7230

5 жыл бұрын

@@diadokhoi5722 But he was still Serbian,his father was Serbian priest.

Slavs have always showed love and respect for my country and its culture and heritage, Italy has a special bond with them. Love you all friends, from Serbians to Russians, from Poles to Ukrainians!

@GreatPolishWingedHussars

Жыл бұрын

The claim is nonsense and contradicts the historical reality that the Slavs were slaves first. Incidentally, it is not at all proven that the term slave is derived from the term Slav. All the outrageous claims are just prejudices about the Slavs. In addition, many Celts and members of other peoples were enslaved by the Vikings, not just Slavs. It is absurd to also mention the Ottomans and Mongols in this context, because they were in a completely different age. By the way, Byzantines hardly enslaved Slavs, but bought slaves from the Vikings and this slaves certainly weren't just Slavs. Ridiculous and impudent, by the way, that at the beginning of the video guys that apparently are Slavs perform any nonsensical explosions with barrels. Why is such nonsense shown? Obviously the intention is to show that the people the video is about are idiots. In reality, the Slavs were the most successful and they certainly weren't a people of slaves and idiots. Because idiots and slaves would definitely not have succeeded in colonizing half of Europe. Slavic expansion began during the second century AD, and they occupied a large area of eastern Europe between the Vistula and the middle Dnieper. The Slavs slowly expanded in all directions and assimilated the neighboring cultures. They constantly sought an outlet for the population surplus. Partially they acted without violence and the Slavic peoples infiltrated foreign territories very clever by being cooperative. The Slavs became a dominant force and establishing a new socio-political network in the entire area of central and southeastern Europe. According to the historian Paul Barford, "The Spartan and egalitarian Slavic culture clearly had something attractive for great numbers of the European populations living over considerable areas of central Europe", resulting in their assimilation. The special thing about the Slavs was that they did not practice slavery! Byzantine chroniclers noted that Roman prisoners captured by the Slavs could soon become free members of Slavic society if they wished. So Slavs were the only ones who even assimilated Romans and not just captured soldiers but the population of entire conquered territories. According to the 6th-century manual of war "Strategikon" by Byzantine Emperor Maurice the Slavs were a hospitable people and did not keep prisoners indefinitely "but lay down a certain period after which they can decide for themselves if they want to return to their former homelands or to stay amongst the Slavs as free men and friends." The Byzantine scholar Pseudo-Caesarius's wrote that Slavs living by their own law and without the rule of anyone. The Slave were reported to have lived under a democracy for a long time. The 6th-century historian Procopius, who was in contact with Slavic mercenaries, reported, "The Slavic nations, are not governed by one man, but from ancient times have lived in democracy, and consequently everything which involves their welfare, whether for good or for ill, is referred to the people." The 6th-century manual of war Strategikon by Byzantine Emperor Maurice is considered an eyewitness of the Slavs and said that "the Slaves were independent, absolutely refused to be enslaved or governed, least of all in their own land." The Slavs managed to keep up their agriculture (and a rather efficient kind of agriculture, by the standards of the time). There were no nobility and no kings with the greed for more and contempt for peasant's work, as it did with the Germanic Tribes. Thus the Slavic model proved an attractive alternative ... which proved practically indestructible. Slav traditions, language, and culture shaped, or at least influenced, innumerable local and regional communities: a surprising similarity that developed without any central institution to promote it. These regional ethnogeneses inspired by Slavic tradition incorporated considerable remnants of the Roman or Germanic population ready enough to give up ethnic identities that had lost their cohesion. Slavs were so successful in the assimilation of other peoples because they weren't as barbaric as the Germanic tribes or Vikings. Slavs did not practice slavery and they didn't maraud like the Germanic vandals, for example, from which the term vandalism is not wrongly derived. That is why the Slavs were successful in colonizing and the violent and Slavery driving Germanic tribes and Vikings were not! That is why today there are very many Slavs and only very few Scandinavian descendants of the Vikings in comparison. That is why half of Europe is populated by Slavs and the descendants of the Vikings live in the same relatively small area as 1000 years ago compared to the large area of ​​the Slavs. The same applies to the descendants of the Germanic tribes, the only thing they have colonized in Europe is England and small Slavic areas in East Germany because otherwise they are where they were 1000 years ago in contrast to the Slavs who successfully colonized half of Europe.

@igorkreep

11 ай бұрын

​@@GreatPolishWingedHussars Slavs didn't have slavery? Than what's a "krepostnoi" "krepostnoe pravo" "Крепостной" "крепостное право" That's the russian empire, and people that were krepostnoi were sold and bought. .

@GreatPolishWingedHussars

11 ай бұрын

@@igorkreep Ridiculous! You have no idea! I am writing about the time before the Slavs were infected by the barbaric ideas of feudalism with the serfdom and autocratic princes rule of the Germanic tribes. Before that, the Slavs lived in democratic societies without slavery.

@hailoweenhailoween5264

11 ай бұрын

Europeans globally need to stick together. Our numbers are diminishing. And too many non europeans are settling in our homelands.

@GreatPolishWingedHussars

11 ай бұрын

@@hailoweenhailoween5264 Yes too many non European are settling but not in all European countries. There one can see the future of Germany, for example! Children's street festival in Berlin kzread.info/dash/bejne/dK2qxbakiMvZc6g.html

It's a shame you didn't mention the Bulgarian Empires. They were quite influential, and left a massive mark in early Slavic culture.

@GreatPolishWingedHussars

Жыл бұрын

The claim is nonsense and contradicts the historical reality that the Slavs were slaves first. Incidentally, it is not at all proven that the term slave is derived from the term Slav. All the outrageous claims are just prejudices about the Slavs. In addition, many Celts and members of other peoples were enslaved by the Vikings, not just Slavs. It is absurd to also mention the Ottomans and Mongols in this context, because they were in a completely different age. By the way, Byzantines hardly enslaved Slavs, but bought slaves from the Vikings and this slaves certainly weren't just Slavs. Ridiculous and impudent, by the way, that at the beginning of the video guys that apparently are Slavs perform any nonsensical explosions with barrels. Why is such nonsense shown? Obviously the intention is to show that the people the video is about are idiots. In reality, the Slavs were the most successful and they certainly weren't a people of slaves and idiots. Because idiots and slaves would definitely not have succeeded in colonizing half of Europe. Slavic expansion began during the second century AD, and they occupied a large area of eastern Europe between the Vistula and the middle Dnieper. The Slavs slowly expanded in all directions and assimilated the neighboring cultures. They constantly sought an outlet for the population surplus. Partially they acted without violence and the Slavic peoples infiltrated foreign territories very clever by being cooperative. The Slavs became a dominant force and establishing a new socio-political network in the entire area of central and southeastern Europe. According to the historian Paul Barford, "The Spartan and egalitarian Slavic culture clearly had something attractive for great numbers of the European populations living over considerable areas of central Europe", resulting in their assimilation. The special thing about the Slavs was that they did not practice slavery! Byzantine chroniclers noted that Roman prisoners captured by the Slavs could soon become free members of Slavic society if they wished. So Slavs were the only ones who even assimilated Romans and not just captured soldiers but the population of entire conquered territories. According to the 6th-century manual of war "Strategikon" by Byzantine Emperor Maurice the Slavs were a hospitable people and did not keep prisoners indefinitely "but lay down a certain period after which they can decide for themselves if they want to return to their former homelands or to stay amongst the Slavs as free men and friends." The Byzantine scholar Pseudo-Caesarius's wrote that Slavs living by their own law and without the rule of anyone. The Slave were reported to have lived under a democracy for a long time. The 6th-century historian Procopius, who was in contact with Slavic mercenaries, reported, "The Slavic nations, are not governed by one man, but from ancient times have lived in democracy, and consequently everything which involves their welfare, whether for good or for ill, is referred to the people." The 6th-century manual of war Strategikon by Byzantine Emperor Maurice is considered an eyewitness of the Slavs and said that "the Slaves were independent, absolutely refused to be enslaved or governed, least of all in their own land." The Slavs managed to keep up their agriculture (and a rather efficient kind of agriculture, by the standards of the time). There were no nobility and no kings with the greed for more and contempt for peasant's work, as it did with the Germanic Tribes. Thus the Slavic model proved an attractive alternative ... which proved practically indestructible. Slav traditions, language, and culture shaped, or at least influenced, innumerable local and regional communities: a surprising similarity that developed without any central institution to promote it. These regional ethnogeneses inspired by Slavic tradition incorporated considerable remnants of the Roman or Germanic population ready enough to give up ethnic identities that had lost their cohesion. Slavs were so successful in the assimilation of other peoples because they weren't as barbaric as the Germanic tribes or Vikings. Slavs did not practice slavery and they didn't maraud like the Germanic vandals, for example, from which the term vandalism is not wrongly derived. That is why the Slavs were successful in colonizing and the violent and Slavery driving Germanic tribes and Vikings were not! That is why today there are very many Slavs and only very few Scandinavian descendants of the Vikings in comparison. That is why half of Europe is populated by Slavs and the descendants of the Vikings live in the same relatively small area as 1000 years ago compared to the large area of ​​the Slavs. The same applies to the descendants of the Germanic tribes, the only thing they have colonized in Europe is England and small Slavic areas in East Germany because otherwise they are where they were 1000 years ago in contrast to the Slavs who successfully colonized half of Europe.

@bigozimak

Жыл бұрын

Yes indeed, when exactly did the Bulgarian Empire become ours (you know Slavic) is a question that is interesting and you might know.

@cerebrummaximus3762

Жыл бұрын

@@GreatPolishWingedHussars Excuse me, but what on earth are you on about? Is this meant to be a reply to another comment?

@cerebrummaximus3762

Жыл бұрын

@@bigozimak What do you mean?

@masterchief-vd1xs

Жыл бұрын

​@@cerebrummaximus3762 yeah just ignore him. He is some fanatic polish guy trying to start a fight at every single comment. You should see him when the video is getting political or even better, has anything to do with Poland. Then he will find a way to show how great they are, especially compared to Germans 😂

A rather western point of view of Slavic history. You didn't even mention that Germans conquered Slavic territories in modern East Germany, which were previously inhabited by Slavic tribes

@manu_spawn

5 жыл бұрын

They established there to what? Be kicked again and again?

@larsonpartisan2855

5 жыл бұрын

Territories which were originally Germanic : www.ancient.eu/uploads/images/3687.jpg?v=1485681310 .

@aniinnrchoque1861

5 жыл бұрын

@@larsonpartisan2855 This is only the general consensus. Not much is known about the Veneti. It is thought that they have spoken germanic languages as Tacticus recorded no real linguistic differences as far up to the fin-ugrian boundaries as he passed through. Yet the Veneti fairly consistently held the R1a gene which is often linked to the Slavs. The unfortunate reality is that we don't know for sure what the predominant linguistic culture was before 500 AD in what is now eastern Germany and western Poland. There is a broad spectrum for speculation. And unless we invent a time machine we probably won't ever know for sure.

@adrem7613

5 жыл бұрын

@@larsonpartisan2855 Fortunately, there is science like genetics. Have a look at the layout of the Y haplogroup on the map of modern Europe and compare it with the archaeological DNA. Then we can see where the Slavic Haplogroup R1a1a dominates. Genetic tests also allow to check how long a given population lives in a given area. Looking at this data, we can see that nowadays Germany is a Creole nation. Celtic genes dominate in the west, in the north there are Old European genes. East Germans are Germanized Slavs who did not come to this land in the 6th century as 19th century German historians have invented themselves, but have lived there for several thousands years. If the Slavs came to this land only in the 6th century, why did the DNA tests show that bones dug up on the Tolense River (13th century BC) belong to the ancestors of people who live in Poland today? Genetics is a terrible science - Germans will have to re-write school textbooks.

@Userius1

5 жыл бұрын

@@adrem7613 Not only that, but even R1b Bell Beaker (first dominant Indo-Europeans in central Europe) remains end up closer to Poles and Czechs than to Germans.

Fun fact about Slavs and one of the reasons they grew so large in numbers is that they never held prisoners of war nor enslaved other peoples. Instead, they would keep the captured soldiers for a trial period and would then give them two options: 1) join the Slavs and become one of them or 2) return home with all the gear they were captured with. According to Byzantine sources Slavs were not aggressive people like the Mongols for example, but were very fearsome warriors when it came to defending their lands. In the very early stages of their migrations they were known to use guerilla tactics when fighting stronger enemies and that's how they dominated the Byzantines, for example, in every major skirmish giving them opportunities to form their own statelets in the Balkans. Similar thing happened with the western Slavs under Samo who defeated the Franks and formed a large confederation of Slavic tribes that stretched from the Baltic all the way south to the Adriatic sea. They were very sturdy and could handle both extreme heat and freezing winters, tall and strongly built. Even today you will notice that Slavs don't like to give ground to anyone and are great and hospitable people for friendly visitors but harsh and fierce soldiers to those who wrong them. Little Serbia of 4 million people pushed back the great Austro-Hungarian invasions in WW1 and was not subdued until it was attacked by three different armies. And even then refused to surrender but instead retreated to Greece to regroup. Later that same beaten and exhausted Serbian army would break the Salonica front and liberate it's country in a record time where the French generals were recorded to have pleaded the Serbian infantry to slow down because the French cavalry couldn't keep up.

@Xilaw

6 жыл бұрын

RealAlbo4life if this is a type of videos is what you consider as a reliable source then I can't imagine the poor education you get in Albania. My sources are contemporary Byzantine historians. On the contrary, Albanian biggest contribution to the world is fighting for their masters. Enjoy your empty history of being the world's biggest lapdogs.

@lukaszp7827

6 жыл бұрын

+Xilaw Good one, mate. Would you be so kind to refer me to some of your sources? I find the topic interesting and would like to dig deeper. To the other guy - if 22 000 soldiers (2-3 full WW2 divisions) is all what you need to invade and make Albania submit, then you are not in a position to be barking at anyone, ever.

@Xilaw

6 жыл бұрын

+Lukasz P czesc :) The most descriptive of the early Slavs was Procopius of Cesarea who describes them as I mentioned in my post. You could look up his work "History of Wars" where he writes about Slavs in more detail, e.g their system of governance (which he describes as a democracy), their religion, etc. Jordanes is another historian who mentions Slavs in some more detail in his work "Getica" though the main focus of that work are the Goths. Interestingly, the rulers of the Ostrogoths at that time according to him are certain "Valamer, Thiudemer and Videmer" names transliterated as Vladimir, Tuđimir and Vidomir - Slavic in origin. Other notable sources are Maurice's "Strategikon" and later period's "De Administrado Imperio" by Porphyrogenitus. Although, DAI is a very important historical source of 10th century Sclavenes (south Slavs) it has some obvious historical mistakes.

@user-kg2qe4ir2g

6 жыл бұрын

Xilaw I readet in the early middle age sourses that the scitians didnt have a prisoners from the battles for a long time--thay ask for some ransum and when nobody has given it,the scitians invite the prisoner to live with tham if he would like,or send tham at home.Nowhere i readet about slavs.(sclavas in latin and sklavos in greek,what means subbordinated).

@user-kg2qe4ir2g

6 жыл бұрын

Xilaw Nowhere in Gethica Yordanes did not mention "slavs".He write for scitians, gethas, named ostrogotes and visigots.He did not write for sclavas like some later hronicals.Where did you see that slavs?

How do people mistake Romania as Slavic it literally has “Roman” in its name

@homelessrobot

3 жыл бұрын

Because a people can have a romantic language and largely Slavic culture simultaneously. Rome covered large portions of 3 continents. It wasn't really a single ethnicity. It was a political affiliation with some cultural attachments.

@amjan

3 жыл бұрын

Language vs culture vs genetics

@dt9637

3 жыл бұрын

They are slavs, but the vatican had its fingers in the game.

@ban1176

3 жыл бұрын

They do mistake Romania as Slavic bc Vlachs talked same language as Balkan Slavs did, untill they got latin language and romanian.

@gamesmappers9740

3 жыл бұрын

Well, Romanov aslo have Roman in name

Славянски Саюз. Slawianski Sajus. 🇧🇬🇷🇺🇷🇸🇸🇮🇸🇰🇺🇦🇭🇷🇵🇱🇨🇿🇧🇾🇲🇰 Pozdraw Bratja i Sestri 🤝 the biggest and most diverse family on earth ❤️

@yig_sulovic

3 жыл бұрын

Where is Bosnia

@aleksandardamjanovic7003

3 жыл бұрын

@@yig_sulovic Bosnia is not Slavic it is muslim

@hamohamo234

3 жыл бұрын

@@aleksandardamjanovic7003 Serbs are 40% Turkic and 50% Gypsies but still in the list.

@spitfire3797

2 жыл бұрын

@@aleksandardamjanovic7003 Did you really just think being a religion is what ethnicity you are? Bosniaks are more Slavic then Serbs lol

@aleksandardamjanovic7003

2 жыл бұрын

@@spitfire3797 You are sick to replay on one year old comment. Please get help!

Slava means "glory". Also "sloviti" means "those who can speak" (они који слове, говоре). We call germans "nemci" because they could not speak our language (they are "mute")... So, the ones who can speak the same language as you can is for you Slav, Slavic... Not slave, which is "rob".

@onemanmob6756

5 жыл бұрын

The Slavs called the Germans 'Nemci' (literally - 'the mutes') because they culdn't speak their language, and they called themselves Slav/Slovak/Slavak/Slovian(in) because the were 'the people of the common word/language' (slovo), and NOT because of 'slava'/'pride'. Deriving the word 'Slav' from 'slava' is a total misconception. 'Slav' comes from 'slovo' (word/speach/language).

@salec7592

5 жыл бұрын

Well, there is a connection between the two: the fame is when people talk about you, so "slava" is derived from "slovo".

@salec7592

5 жыл бұрын

@@SteaksOnSpear Latin for "slave" is "servus". Slavs didn't appear on historian's horizon yet while Roman economy was based on slave labor. However, Slavs captured in Viking raids were allegedly earliest and most common slaves in Norman societies and that could be the etymology for slave in English.

@salec7592

5 жыл бұрын

@@XxpauldadudexXNo. "To rob" is said completely different in slavic languages. I suppose "rob" means something like "worker"

@avilion4949

5 жыл бұрын

@@salec7592 rob means slave

First of all, he didnt say we are slaves. Secondly we made damn sure we arent and he points that out. Thirdly, no true Slav would be offended by mere words. Thats the whole point of being an eastern european, not being a little butthurt bitch but a tough and proud person who overcomes all the shit that he gets and conquers hence Slava=Glory.

@Masaman

6 жыл бұрын

You got the right idea!

@yarpen26

6 жыл бұрын

Besides, even _if_ Slav came from "slave", well... so what? Half of the different ways people denote themselves would be found at the very least kind of deregatory today. "Japan" means "Rising Sun". Rising for whom? Well, the Chinese, of course. That's what the Japanese call their own country: the place in which the sun rises to shine over fucking *China.* But guess what? They don't give a crap. Similarily, how many of you will change your mind about England if I tell you that it literally means "the Land of Angels"? WIll you be like, "Damn, I used to hate these tea-drinking pricks but now that their name has such a nice ring to it, I guess I could..."?

@velorn8927

6 жыл бұрын

England comes from Anglaland wich means land of the Angles (a german tribe)

@julius43461

6 жыл бұрын

S. V. Actually Slavs are pretty butthurt when someone hurts their pride. I remember when some news reporter in the US said something offensive about Serbia, everyone were up in roars here and demanding apology from her, ridiculous I say. Sure you can joke about gays and talk about stuff that is forbidden in the west, but if you insult a Slavic nation or it's history you can expect a shitstorm. The problem is of course that merely being objective about history of a Slavic nation can get you in trouble. This is especially true with smaller nations, but I guess that's how it is with all smaller nations around the world, they can't stand any criticism at all.

@RikkiTheRose

6 жыл бұрын

tell that to the countless slavs that you dont even need to offend for them to explode in offendedness

Awesome video. Thank you for sharing!

I love people explaining word Slav in comments without actually taking in account prechristian origin of the word. All pagan Slavs were divided into clans and each clan had its Slava (Celebration) which was always dedicated a Slavic diety Perun, Svarog, Vesna etc., clans were lead by the Elderly Council , old men who very extremely conservative and were there to protect the old ways and traditions, extremely neo-phobic people. Marriage between people of two clans who celebrated the same deity if they lived near each other was not allowed because they were usually blood related. Slavs cared a lot about preventing incest (even today in every Slavic country first cousin is often called brother or sister and treated as such) also pagan Slavs lived near rivers and lakes and cared a lot about personal hygiene and Slavic women had very low mortality rates of infants which in 9 and 10 century lead to rapid population expansion of Slavic people. You can consult Enc. Britannica for references. Also more than half of population of modern Austria are germanized Slavs and most of population of Hungary are former Slavs assimilated into Hungarian nation. Autosomnal DNA tests keep surprising Hungarians and Austrians... Hungary was a melting pot of ethnic groups from the whole region. This is just so you understand why there is no physical connection between South Slavs and the rest of the Slavic people. Back to word Slav, modern day Serbs who are Orthodox Christians have family Slava (family holiday) and it is carried over from generation to generation from father to son and it is always a Saint of Serb Ortodox Church, it is syncretism of an old pagan Slavic custom and Christian religion. So Slav in prechristian terms is a member of people who have Slava holiday and thus who celebrate a specific Slavic diety as their protector and who understand each other because they share the same language.

@johnkern1878

2 жыл бұрын

I agree with the comment that most modern Austrian are Germanisized Slavic people. Back in the 8th century the Caratanian elected a leader amongst themselves who spoke Slovenian(slavic language) and was coronated for 4years near a ceremonial stone near Salzburg. The first written slavic language was Slovenian, where a manuscript is kept in a Munich museum. To be honest, I don't care as long as there are no wars. Still don't understand the logic for invading the Ukraine.

@dinkopausic6357

2 жыл бұрын

@@johnkern1878 There is no logic, only primitive emotions. Russians think they need to take care of their neighbouring nations and show them "the way", probably a blurred memory of the Soviet times. And Putin is a thief. He doesn't think long term, he just wants more. The fact that he stole the Super Bowl Winner ring from the club pres of the Patriots, in front of a room full of people, tells you everything 😂

@goxyeagle8446

Жыл бұрын

@@johnkern1878 Ukraine is a war between USA/England and Russia. It's super simple to understand

@GreatPolishWingedHussars

Жыл бұрын

The claim is nonsense and contradicts the historical reality that the Slavs were slaves first. Incidentally, it is not at all proven that the term slave is derived from the term Slav. All the outrageous claims are just prejudices about the Slavs. In addition, many Celts and members of other peoples were enslaved by the Vikings, not just Slavs. It is absurd to also mention the Ottomans and Mongols in this context, because they were in a completely different age. By the way, Byzantines hardly enslaved Slavs, but bought slaves from the Vikings and this slaves certainly weren't just Slavs. Ridiculous and impudent, by the way, that at the beginning of the video guys that apparently are Slavs perform any nonsensical explosions with barrels. Why is such nonsense shown? Obviously the intention is to show that the people the video is about are idiots. In reality, the Slavs were the most successful and they certainly weren't a people of slaves and idiots. Because idiots and slaves would definitely not have succeeded in colonizing half of Europe. Slavic expansion began during the second century AD, and they occupied a large area of eastern Europe between the Vistula and the middle Dnieper. The Slavs slowly expanded in all directions and assimilated the neighboring cultures. They constantly sought an outlet for the population surplus. Partially they acted without violence and the Slavic peoples infiltrated foreign territories very clever by being cooperative. The Slavs became a dominant force and establishing a new socio-political network in the entire area of central and southeastern Europe. According to the historian Paul Barford, "The Spartan and egalitarian Slavic culture clearly had something attractive for great numbers of the European populations living over considerable areas of central Europe", resulting in their assimilation. The special thing about the Slavs was that they did not practice slavery! Byzantine chroniclers noted that Roman prisoners captured by the Slavs could soon become free members of Slavic society if they wished. So Slavs were the only ones who even assimilated Romans and not just captured soldiers but the population of entire conquered territories. According to the 6th-century manual of war "Strategikon" by Byzantine Emperor Maurice the Slavs were a hospitable people and did not keep prisoners indefinitely "but lay down a certain period after which they can decide for themselves if they want to return to their former homelands or to stay amongst the Slavs as free men and friends." The Byzantine scholar Pseudo-Caesarius's wrote that Slavs living by their own law and without the rule of anyone. The Slave were reported to have lived under a democracy for a long time. The 6th-century historian Procopius, who was in contact with Slavic mercenaries, reported, "The Slavic nations, are not governed by one man, but from ancient times have lived in democracy, and consequently everything which involves their welfare, whether for good or for ill, is referred to the people." The 6th-century manual of war Strategikon by Byzantine Emperor Maurice is considered an eyewitness of the Slavs and said that "the Slaves were independent, absolutely refused to be enslaved or governed, least of all in their own land." The Slavs managed to keep up their agriculture (and a rather efficient kind of agriculture, by the standards of the time). There were no nobility and no kings with the greed for more and contempt for peasant's work, as it did with the Germanic Tribes. Thus the Slavic model proved an attractive alternative ... which proved practically indestructible. Slav traditions, language, and culture shaped, or at least influenced, innumerable local and regional communities: a surprising similarity that developed without any central institution to promote it. These regional ethnogeneses inspired by Slavic tradition incorporated considerable remnants of the Roman or Germanic population ready enough to give up ethnic identities that had lost their cohesion. Slavs were so successful in the assimilation of other peoples because they weren't as barbaric as the Germanic tribes or Vikings. Slavs did not practice slavery and they didn't maraud like the Germanic vandals, for example, from which the term vandalism is not wrongly derived. That is why the Slavs were successful in colonizing and the violent and Slavery driving Germanic tribes and Vikings were not! That is why today there are very many Slavs and only very few Scandinavian descendants of the Vikings in comparison. That is why half of Europe is populated by Slavs and the descendants of the Vikings live in the same relatively small area as 1000 years ago compared to the large area of ​​the Slavs. The same applies to the descendants of the Germanic tribes, the only thing they have colonized in Europe is England and small Slavic areas in East Germany because otherwise they are where they were 1000 years ago in contrast to the Slavs who successfully colonized half of Europe.

@justanotherguyful

Жыл бұрын

Slave does not come from Slav, it is simply a homonym. Slavs owned many slaves themselves and most of those slaves were Greeks. I really dont understand why there is SO MUCH anti-slavic sentiment or slavophobia in western and Mediterranean Europeans (some having some Slavic in them themselves because of Slavic expansion). Jealousy because we inhabit more than half of Europe now maybe?

I'm Russian and I thought shooting those barrels was a Latin American thing.

@pabloolsiewich7268

6 жыл бұрын

Degenerator Nah, our stereotype is drink a lot of coffe and cocaine (i am latin american)

@Elitecommando501

6 жыл бұрын

I'm Mexican and we drink alot of beer like our Russian comrades lol

@freekmulder3662

6 жыл бұрын

And the Irish, Germans, Scots, Scandinavians, Dutch, Czechs etc. almost all of Europe drinks a lot

@ingridp4457

6 жыл бұрын

Degenerator and we always thought it was a Russian thing

@vdagr8795

5 жыл бұрын

@@ultragamer4960 u cuban?

On a personal note that I think you missed. Slavic nations produce the best foods in all of Europe.

@valiumk.9489

5 жыл бұрын

I don't know if it's the best, but oh my, your Pljeskavica is perfect!!!!! 😁

@Userius1

4 жыл бұрын

@Long duk dong You must be mistaking this with French cuisine.

@Userius1

4 жыл бұрын

@Demy Troy Borscht? Pierogi? That's just two. I could name a ton of excellent Polish pastries and foods that blow boring old Italian pasta and salad or American hot dogs out of the water in terms of nutrition density and taste. If you can't handle a nice plate of sauerkraut and sausage, that's your problem.

@GGTanguera

4 жыл бұрын

Not to mention strong family values, genuine hospitality, beautify children, scientific and athletic achievement etc.

@burn_out

4 жыл бұрын

Iron Ox Italian and French food is 100 times better

thanks for for the information man, very informative

I am likely Germanic+Celtic, but I acknowledge and recognize the greatness, strength, spirit and intelligence of the Slavic peoples.

@Userius1

3 жыл бұрын

@margaret Everyone's manipulated. There's no ethnic condition to how easily someone gets influenced by something. That would be the first I ever heard of that "science".

@TigerCarpenter

2 жыл бұрын

you better :P

@GreatPolishWingedHussars

Жыл бұрын

Thanks! I know it's been 2 years ago, but nevertheless. The claim is nonsense and contradicts the historical reality that the Slavs were slaves first. Incidentally, it is not at all proven that the term slave is derived from the term Slav. All the outrageous claims are just prejudices about the Slavs. In addition, many Celts and members of other peoples were enslaved by the Vikings, not just Slavs. It is absurd to also mention the Ottomans and Mongols in this context, because they were in a completely different age. By the way, Byzantines hardly enslaved Slavs, but bought slaves from the Vikings and this slaves certainly weren't just Slavs. Ridiculous and impudent, by the way, that at the beginning of the video guys that apparently are Slavs perform any nonsensical explosions with barrels. Why is such nonsense shown? Obviously the intention is to show that the people the video is about are idiots. In reality, the Slavs were the most successful and they certainly weren't a people of slaves and idiots. Because idiots and slaves would definitely not have succeeded in colonizing half of Europe. Slavic expansion began during the second century AD, and they occupied a large area of eastern Europe between the Vistula and the middle Dnieper. The Slavs slowly expanded in all directions and assimilated the neighboring cultures. They constantly sought an outlet for the population surplus. Partially they acted without violence and the Slavic peoples infiltrated foreign territories very clever by being cooperative. The Slavs became a dominant force and establishing a new socio-political network in the entire area of central and southeastern Europe. According to the historian Paul Barford, "The Spartan and egalitarian Slavic culture clearly had something attractive for great numbers of the European populations living over considerable areas of central Europe", resulting in their assimilation. The special thing about the Slavs was that they did not practice slavery! Byzantine chroniclers noted that Roman prisoners captured by the Slavs could soon become free members of Slavic society if they wished. So Slavs were the only ones who even assimilated Romans and not just captured soldiers but the population of entire conquered territories. According to the 6th-century manual of war "Strategikon" by Byzantine Emperor Maurice the Slavs were a hospitable people and did not keep prisoners indefinitely "but lay down a certain period after which they can decide for themselves if they want to return to their former homelands or to stay amongst the Slavs as free men and friends." The Byzantine scholar Pseudo-Caesarius's wrote that Slavs living by their own law and without the rule of anyone. The Slave were reported to have lived under a democracy for a long time. The 6th-century historian Procopius, who was in contact with Slavic mercenaries, reported, "The Slavic nations, are not governed by one man, but from ancient times have lived in democracy, and consequently everything which involves their welfare, whether for good or for ill, is referred to the people." The 6th-century manual of war Strategikon by Byzantine Emperor Maurice is considered an eyewitness of the Slavs and said that "the Slaves were independent, absolutely refused to be enslaved or governed, least of all in their own land." The Slavs managed to keep up their agriculture (and a rather efficient kind of agriculture, by the standards of the time). There were no nobility and no kings with the greed for more and contempt for peasant's work, as it did with the Germanic Tribes. Thus the Slavic model proved an attractive alternative ... which proved practically indestructible. Slav traditions, language, and culture shaped, or at least influenced, innumerable local and regional communities: a surprising similarity that developed without any central institution to promote it. These regional ethnogeneses inspired by Slavic tradition incorporated considerable remnants of the Roman or Germanic population ready enough to give up ethnic identities that had lost their cohesion. Slavs were so successful in the assimilation of other peoples because they weren't as barbaric as the Germanic tribes or Vikings. Slavs did not practice slavery and they didn't maraud like the Germanic vandals, for example, from which the term vandalism is not wrongly derived. That is why the Slavs were successful in colonizing and the violent and Slavery driving Germanic tribes and Vikings were not! That is why today there are very many Slavs and only very few Scandinavian descendants of the Vikings in comparison. That is why half of Europe is populated by Slavs and the descendants of the Vikings live in the same relatively small area as 1000 years ago compared to the large area of ​​the Slavs. The same applies to the descendants of the Germanic tribes, the only thing they have colonized in Europe is England and small Slavic areas in East Germany because otherwise they are where they were 1000 years ago in contrast to the Slavs who successfully colonized half of Europe.

@Blidden

4 ай бұрын

Hitler didn’t feel that way . He hated the Slav people and tried to eliminate them

Slavic pride

@starmaker75

6 жыл бұрын

Da

@gustavoslavic6859

6 жыл бұрын

...worldwide

@ultragamer4960

6 жыл бұрын

The 5th Estate Same

@deutschewalder3368

6 жыл бұрын

Slavic Power, not pride.

@The_Custos

6 жыл бұрын

CanYouFindTheWay patriotism is chosen. 😂

Kinda weird that the Bulgarian empire wasn't mentioned, the place was pretty big for a while

@ieb994

6 жыл бұрын

Abc Defgh which is very consistent with what I said.

@arthurmorgan1960

2 жыл бұрын

so was the serbian HEHEHEHEHEHE

@cerebrummaximus3762

Жыл бұрын

Yeah, also the Cyrillic alphabet begun there.

@cerebrummaximus3762

Жыл бұрын

I feel like the Bulgarian empire is hugely underrated. I have several supposedly "world History books" at home, which go in intricate detail about obscure tribes, but not one features Bulgaria, even the ones which talk about Slavic tribes/Kingdoms (which isn't many btw). Which is weird... Bulgaria was huge for quite a while, twice, invented Cyrillic, and set Christianity as a Slavic religion in stone. So I am curious about why it often gets forgotten.

@GreatPolishWingedHussars

Жыл бұрын

I know it's been 4 years ago, but nevertheless. The claim is nonsense and contradicts the historical reality that the Slavs were slaves first. Incidentally, it is not at all proven that the term slave is derived from the term Slav. All the outrageous claims are just prejudices about the Slavs. In addition, many Celts and members of other peoples were enslaved by the Vikings, not just Slavs. It is absurd to also mention the Ottomans and Mongols in this context, because they were in a completely different age. By the way, Byzantines hardly enslaved Slavs, but bought slaves from the Vikings and this slaves certainly weren't just Slavs. Ridiculous and impudent, by the way, that at the beginning of the video guys that apparently are Slavs perform any nonsensical explosions with barrels. Why is such nonsense shown? Obviously the intention is to show that the people the video is about are idiots. In reality, the Slavs were the most successful and they certainly weren't a people of slaves and idiots. Because idiots and slaves would definitely not have succeeded in colonizing half of Europe. Slavic expansion began during the second century AD, and they occupied a large area of eastern Europe between the Vistula and the middle Dnieper. The Slavs slowly expanded in all directions and assimilated the neighboring cultures. They constantly sought an outlet for the population surplus. Partially they acted without violence and the Slavic peoples infiltrated foreign territories very clever by being cooperative. The Slavs became a dominant force and establishing a new socio-political network in the entire area of central and southeastern Europe. According to the historian Paul Barford, "The Spartan and egalitarian Slavic culture clearly had something attractive for great numbers of the European populations living over considerable areas of central Europe", resulting in their assimilation. The special thing about the Slavs was that they did not practice slavery! Byzantine chroniclers noted that Roman prisoners captured by the Slavs could soon become free members of Slavic society if they wished. So Slavs were the only ones who even assimilated Romans and not just captured soldiers but the population of entire conquered territories. According to the 6th-century manual of war "Strategikon" by Byzantine Emperor Maurice the Slavs were a hospitable people and did not keep prisoners indefinitely "but lay down a certain period after which they can decide for themselves if they want to return to their former homelands or to stay amongst the Slavs as free men and friends." The Byzantine scholar Pseudo-Caesarius's wrote that Slavs living by their own law and without the rule of anyone. The Slave were reported to have lived under a democracy for a long time. The 6th-century historian Procopius, who was in contact with Slavic mercenaries, reported, "The Slavic nations, are not governed by one man, but from ancient times have lived in democracy, and consequently everything which involves their welfare, whether for good or for ill, is referred to the people." The 6th-century manual of war Strategikon by Byzantine Emperor Maurice is considered an eyewitness of the Slavs and said that "the Slaves were independent, absolutely refused to be enslaved or governed, least of all in their own land." The Slavs managed to keep up their agriculture (and a rather efficient kind of agriculture, by the standards of the time). There were no nobility and no kings with the greed for more and contempt for peasant's work, as it did with the Germanic Tribes. Thus the Slavic model proved an attractive alternative ... which proved practically indestructible. Slav traditions, language, and culture shaped, or at least influenced, innumerable local and regional communities: a surprising similarity that developed without any central institution to promote it. These regional ethnogeneses inspired by Slavic tradition incorporated considerable remnants of the Roman or Germanic population ready enough to give up ethnic identities that had lost their cohesion. Slavs were so successful in the assimilation of other peoples because they weren't as barbaric as the Germanic tribes or Vikings. Slavs did not practice slavery and they didn't maraud like the Germanic vandals, for example, from which the term vandalism is not wrongly derived. That is why the Slavs were successful in colonizing and the violent and Slavery driving Germanic tribes and Vikings were not! That is why today there are very many Slavs and only very few Scandinavian descendants of the Vikings in comparison. That is why half of Europe is populated by Slavs and the descendants of the Vikings live in the same relatively small area as 1000 years ago compared to the large area of ​​the Slavs. The same applies to the descendants of the Germanic tribes, the only thing they have colonized in Europe is England and small Slavic areas in East Germany because otherwise they are where they were 1000 years ago in contrast to the Slavs who successfully colonized half of Europe.

The term "Balkanization" has nothing to do with Yugoslavia. It comes from the dissolution of the Balkan part of the Ottoman Empire in the 19th century.

@GGTanguera

4 жыл бұрын

It's yet another English term that puts other people down and guest makes them feel superior. They "balkanized" Middle East, Asia and Africa, filled their museums with stolen history and goods, but they are civilized and the Balkan is not. Balkan is the cradle of the world civilization and they can't take it!

@Userius1

4 жыл бұрын

​@Random Person They didn't. They said that it's the cradle of civilization (Which is debatable. The neolithic Europeans didn't perform any grand feats to put them above contemporary Mesopotamians or Indus Valley peoples). Anyone saying the Balkans are civilized now has a real problem though.

@absurdoom1410

3 жыл бұрын

@Random Person Well, "civilized" West is going through process or project of "arabization" and it will be done soon. So, I guess we will be the same. Oh noo, wait! There will be no white people in the west, they will all blend in multicultural-new world-sharia law brown. We are not the same after all and never will be.

@slavenskazajednica7912

3 жыл бұрын

@@GGTanguera Exactly. Lying western propaganda should never be trusted because it was assembled around liea glorifying western colonialist culture and degrading everyone elses.

@GGTanguera

3 жыл бұрын

@@Userius1 It's so easy hiding behind pseudonims, isn't it? When you commenting on the Indus valley people are you aware that modern day Slavs understand Sanskrit vocabulary more than most Indians. Also its well known fact that most Brahmans carry R1a haplotype. All evidence suggests that "Indo-Europeans" came to India, they are not from India.

Fun fact, the Austrians greeting with "Servus" which is the Latin word for slave. I found another explanation that Slawe origin from "Slovo" meaning Word or "who speaks" while "Niemec" , describing of germanic tribes means Silent or "who can't speak (same langugage)". This sounds much more reasonable.

@matusmotlo3854

3 жыл бұрын

Yeah... he wasn't saying Slavs started calling themselves slaves, that would pretty ridiculous. Foreigners started calling slaves "slaves" because many Slavs were taken as slaves by the Greeks (and later Muslims), as they weren't Christian. Oh the great civilized Judeo-Christian world some conservative elements like to talk about, so egalitarian :)

@roza2939

3 жыл бұрын

@@matusmotlo3854 Of course, I'm terribly sorry. When did the Greeks take the Slavs into slavery? In addition, in the Greek language, the word slave sounds very different.

@matusmotlo3854

3 жыл бұрын

@@roza2939 "The English term slave derives from the ethnonym Slav. In medieval wars many Slavs were captured and enslaved, which led to the word slav becoming synonym to "enslaved person". In addition, the English word Slav derives from the Middle English word sclave, which was borrowed from Medieval Latin sclavus or slavus, itself a borrowing and Byzantine Greek σκλάβος sklábos "slave," which was in turn apparently derived from a misunderstanding of the Slavic autonym (denoting a speaker of their own languages). The Byzantine term Sklavinoi was loaned into Arabic as Saqaliba (صقالبة; sing. Saqlabi, صقلبي) by medieval Arab historiographers. However, the origin of this word is disputed." If the word slave derives from Medieval Greek, they probably did take them as Slaves. Honestly though, I'm not blaming the Eastern Romans. The Slavs invaded their lands and often murdered all Greeks and Latins in the towns they captured and took the women, Slavs entirely deserved it.

@roza2939

3 жыл бұрын

@@matusmotlo3854 The Latin sclavus is derived from the Latin clavis (key).

@matusmotlo3854

3 жыл бұрын

@@roza2939 Of course.

*Sława! Slava! слава!*

@l5475

6 жыл бұрын

Kacper slava славянский brat

@EmperorWasas

6 жыл бұрын

Slava!

@user-ef9zw8xg3k

6 жыл бұрын

Kacper SLAVA BRAT!!!!!!

@kacper8403

6 жыл бұрын

;)

@usel7226

6 жыл бұрын

Sláva

Brilliant: Hungarians come from a word Hungry meaning hungry, so how did the Hungarians go from hungry to Conquerors…

@jorgeptolemy5999

5 жыл бұрын

Bitching at Austrians

@ErickTosar

5 жыл бұрын

How did this good chanel goes from quiality content, to stupid fucks commenting shit?

@hristinatrajkovska8772

5 жыл бұрын

Haaa

@LukaPavlovic1

5 жыл бұрын

@anonym Arpads conquered land from Bulgarians

@markopodganjek845

5 жыл бұрын

Hungary came from word hun. You know the Atila the Hun?

A good take. Thank you!

Russian linguist and self-taught historian here. I can see the discussion in the comments and have an opinion on that topic. The word Slav most probably originated from the word slovo (слово), meaning "word". So Slavic people are the people who spoke the word (common language, people who could be understood). As an opposing term there's a nemec (немец), meaning "mute", or the one who doesn't speak the common language. Nemec means German in most Slaviic languages, but there are numerous records of other Western Europeans being cold nemci (немцы), like Swedes, Austrians, Dutch etc. The word slave comes from Germanic root (in German slave is sklav). Sklavins are one of the ancient Slavic tribes. During the Early and High Middle ages Slavs were fighting nomadic tribes ever so often. Most Slavs were Christians by late 10th century, which prevented them from selling their captured enemies as slaves. But most nomadic peoples of Eastern Europe and Asia were pagans which allowed them to do so. Slavic women were beautiful and Slavic men were strong, so they were in high demand in North Africa, Middle East and even in Western Europe. Thus, the word "slave" indeed came from the word "slav". But that was just a coincidence and there's nothing degrading about it. Thank you for your attention

@TL6pNbG8

4 жыл бұрын

The word słowo and sława were probably originally the same, pronounced "sławo". The ancestral reconstructed Indo-European form was 'kleu'. Some linguists presume that the proto-Slavic language lacked the vowel 'o'. This may be confirmed by the example of the Byelarussian language, peripheral to other Slavic languages, which frequently has 'a' in places where other Slavic languages, like Polish, have 'o'. So the Slavs may have called themselves "Sławeni". This could be rendered by Greeks as Sclavenoi (Sclaveni). This does not mean that all the Slavs called themselves "Sławenin" or similar as the Byzantine sources clearly differentiate between two major groups known to them: the Sclavini and the Antes. They were known to them also under other names like Suobenoi, Venedi, Sporoi. Not all the slaves sold to the Muslim countries mus have been of Slavic ethnicity, and probably were not, as selling even family members into slavery was quite common in older times (see biblical Jacob) also in the Caucasus. Even the Romans sold other Romans, they were in conflict with, into slavery. At some time the Slavs were the most numerous and their name just stuck as a generic one in countries neighboring their lands in the west. There was also a psychological motive, as those nations feared the Slavs who frequently waged wars on them. Even the Italian word "cravatta" (necktie) originated from Croatian "Hrvat" (Croat) as it was the Croatian soldiers, who first used them.

@remamili

3 жыл бұрын

The word slave came from medieval latin. Schiavi was a word used for Slavs, Croats, who were kept as slaves mostly in the Republic of Venice.

@reyter01

3 жыл бұрын

Citizen, you must have been swilling a lot of vodka before you came out with this nonsense. You think slavery came about in the middle ages? Or they had it before that but didn't have a work for it?

@remamili

3 жыл бұрын

@@reyter01 Slavery didn't came around in the middle ages, it existed before but the word "slave" did.

@reyter01

3 жыл бұрын

@@remamili Thanks for the tip. Isn't that precisely as I alluded to? Is the vodka-soaked citizen saying slavery existed before the middle-ages (which it did. It has existed since the dawn of civilization and probably before) but there was no name for it? Or that it has existed since the middle-ages?

It's a shame Yugoslavia couldn't stay together, or at least split peacefully.

@sokosokolowski2823

6 жыл бұрын

Louis Hypothetical * ghgym* German plot *ghgym*

@kostam.1113

6 жыл бұрын

Due to nature of Yugoslavia and dumb borders, it was just impossible. That is why USSR was superior since it was able to dissolve mostly peacefully, although there were also problems. Czechoslovakia was best example, since it was made out of only 2 nations with clearly defined borders.

@sokosokolowski2823

6 жыл бұрын

Kosta M. Also the Slovaks come from Czechs and even today they are mostly the same

@kostam.1113

6 жыл бұрын

Czechs and Slovaks had clearly defined borders, so their split was peaceful. Not to mention that both countries respected each other and never went to war unlike Balkan Slavs.

@kostam.1113

6 жыл бұрын

Not even borders were clearly defined, that is why things like Liberland exist between Serbia and Croatia. Post 1945 borders were extremely shitty benefiting almost nobody, it was classical Divide and Rule tactic done by Tito.

Sława Wam, Bracia Słowianie!

Very brief but excellent summary. Thank you.

Slav: Now that we acomplished all this, what now? Other Slavs: Let's fight each other. *Greetings from Bosnia my brothers*

@Donald_Trump_2024

2 жыл бұрын

поздрав брате Србине

@Boznaniac

2 жыл бұрын

@@Donald_Trump_2024 I tebi pozdrav jarane.

@Donald_Trump_2024

2 жыл бұрын

@@Boznaniac одакле си пријатељу, увијек жељан упознати нове пријатеље

@Boznaniac

2 жыл бұрын

@@Donald_Trump_2024 ja sam iz Bosne. Roden sam u Tesliću. Odaklen si ti inace?

@Donald_Trump_2024

2 жыл бұрын

@@Boznaniac ја сам исто из Босне, из Семберије, али живим у Србији.

Excellent video, thanks.

The Slavs are a great people.

@pangutovskiy1659

5 жыл бұрын

Without "a" because PeOPle

Awesome thanks for that excellent video

The information is superb and informative

3:19 - Talking about Poles fighting Mongols and showing a picture of Teutonic Knights (mortal enemy of Poles) fighting Mongols :D

"Slava" on all slavic languages means "Glory" NICE TRY JEWS regards, SIR.BIJA

@TinoButko

5 жыл бұрын

NuclearAssault LOL! Did you even watch the video? The origin of the word 'slave' is derived from 'Slav', due to the enslavement of Slavs by foreign conquerors throughout history, not the other way around. The first documented reference to the Slavs by that name is by the Byzantines in the 6th century under the name 'Sclaveni', which was way before the word slave in its current definition was even formed.

@pranavmisra155

5 жыл бұрын

Yes Vida popularized it worldwide with the 'Slava Ukraine' video,I think.

@adameric8457

5 жыл бұрын

NuclearAssault damn someone is mad

@annahag6722

5 жыл бұрын

Milos Simic The word "slav" (צלב=cross , referred to Christian cross) is a relatively new word for a description of captured people in european languages . Christians, usually captured by muslim pirots, who described captured Christians as "those who have a cross on their chest" . The word "Christians/christianity" didn't exist those time. More common Old English words for captured people were þeow (related to þeowian "to serve") and þræl (see thrall). The old word in east european languages for captured people : Russian rab, Serbo-Croatian rob, Old Church Slavonic rabu, are from Old east european *orbu. But in Europe we already used to use the word "slave" for captured people which i think is incorrect and even offending since the the word "slav" reffered to Christianity .

@idalmkqly866

5 жыл бұрын

what jews did ? sorry i didnt understand u.......

thanx---i learned A LOT about this part of the world which is quite complex.

You kinda forgotten Great Moravia. You know, the first purely Slavic country (because Bulgaria was first) from 883 to 907 the ancestor to Bohemia/Czechia. Not Kiewan Rus, Not Poland, but Moravia was the first

@Volnas97

3 жыл бұрын

@Saint Stalin I mean, it was country, smashed between Franks and Magyars between which they had to switch allegiences, so no side would gain too much power over them. That makes fact that they even existed and held territory for so long respectworthy.

@matusmotlo3854

3 жыл бұрын

Not the ancestor to Bohemia. The core Moravian territories were modern-day Moravia and Western/Central Slovakia, Bohemia was only a part of the kingdom/principality for 5 years before deserting to the Germans again in 895 after Svatopluk and the old Moravian ally Bořivoj were dead. Traitors you could say :)

@krakendragonslayer1909

2 жыл бұрын

Moravia was Second. Slovenia was first

@obrnenydrevokocur9344

2 жыл бұрын

@@matusmotlo3854 A butthurt mountain-Magyar detected, opinion rejected.

@alengrm7488

2 жыл бұрын

Greater Moravia wasn’t the first Slavic country. If anything, Samo’s kingdom which comprised of Slovenes(known as Caranthanians at the time), Slovaks, Moravians and Czechs was the first. But than again, that was a union Caranthania(ancestors of Slovenes) did exist from 658 to 828 tho

Final note on Slav. Typical Polish names: Bronislav, Wladyslav, Mieczyslav, Czeslav, Stanislav. All of them end with slav - from Slava = Glory. Just this simple example shows that Slav-ic has nothing to do with Engish slave. No one would ever create names like that for themselves! The meaning of them is also clear: Broni-slav (Bronic - means to defend) meaning he was glorified for defending something. Wlady-slav (Wladac - means to rule ), so he was glorified for being a great ruler, Mieczy-slav (Miecz - means sword) so, he was glorified for skillfully using his sword etc. One would hope this issue should've been solved long time ago.

@TL6pNbG8

4 жыл бұрын

You forgot about the names born by Slavic kings and princes, like Tomislav of Croatia, Boleslaw of Bohemia and Poland and Yaroslav of Kievan Rus.

@ehanoldaccount5893

3 жыл бұрын

Yeah thats cause slave came from the word slav, not slav from slave mate.. you’re validating his point..

@thijsvandenberg7843

3 жыл бұрын

I think the english word 'slave' came from the word 'slav', as most English people saw them as slaves, because of serfdom.

@roboticceltic2388

3 жыл бұрын

@@thijsvandenberg7843 The English word is simply a Greek word but ultimately a Slavic word. Byzantines called them slaves.

@odido171

3 жыл бұрын

@@thijsvandenberg7843 You're so stupid you don't know what you're talking about! Slavic people are the greatest fighters in the world and they have always been dominating people. Slavery denomination has nothing to do with slavic people. Just go to the psihyater stupid head.

Interesting video and great to learn more about my Slavic heritage 😊🇵🇱

@GreatPolishWingedHussars

Жыл бұрын

I know it's been 4 years ago, but nevertheless. The claim is nonsense and contradicts the historical reality that the Slavs were slaves first. Incidentally, it is not at all proven that the term slave is derived from the term Slav. All the outrageous claims are just prejudices about the Slavs. In addition, many Celts and members of other peoples were enslaved by the Vikings, not just Slavs. It is absurd to also mention the Ottomans and Mongols in this context, because they were in a completely different age. By the way, Byzantines hardly enslaved Slavs, but bought slaves from the Vikings and this slaves certainly weren't just Slavs. Ridiculous and impudent, by the way, that at the beginning of the video guys that apparently are Slavs perform any nonsensical explosions with barrels. Why is such nonsense shown? Obviously the intention is to show that the people the video is about are idiots. In reality, the Slavs were the most successful and they certainly weren't a people of slaves and idiots. Because idiots and slaves would definitely not have succeeded in colonizing half of Europe. Slavic expansion began during the second century AD, and they occupied a large area of eastern Europe between the Vistula and the middle Dnieper. The Slavs slowly expanded in all directions and assimilated the neighboring cultures. They constantly sought an outlet for the population surplus. Partially they acted without violence and the Slavic peoples infiltrated foreign territories very clever by being cooperative. The Slavs became a dominant force and establishing a new socio-political network in the entire area of central and southeastern Europe. According to the historian Paul Barford, "The Spartan and egalitarian Slavic culture clearly had something attractive for great numbers of the European populations living over considerable areas of central Europe", resulting in their assimilation. The special thing about the Slavs was that they did not practice slavery! Byzantine chroniclers noted that Roman prisoners captured by the Slavs could soon become free members of Slavic society if they wished. So Slavs were the only ones who even assimilated Romans and not just captured soldiers but the population of entire conquered territories. According to the 6th-century manual of war "Strategikon" by Byzantine Emperor Maurice the Slavs were a hospitable people and did not keep prisoners indefinitely "but lay down a certain period after which they can decide for themselves if they want to return to their former homelands or to stay amongst the Slavs as free men and friends." The Byzantine scholar Pseudo-Caesarius's wrote that Slavs living by their own law and without the rule of anyone. The Slave were reported to have lived under a democracy for a long time. The 6th-century historian Procopius, who was in contact with Slavic mercenaries, reported, "The Slavic nations, are not governed by one man, but from ancient times have lived in democracy, and consequently everything which involves their welfare, whether for good or for ill, is referred to the people." The 6th-century manual of war Strategikon by Byzantine Emperor Maurice is considered an eyewitness of the Slavs and said that "the Slaves were independent, absolutely refused to be enslaved or governed, least of all in their own land." The Slavs managed to keep up their agriculture (and a rather efficient kind of agriculture, by the standards of the time). There were no nobility and no kings with the greed for more and contempt for peasant's work, as it did with the Germanic Tribes. Thus the Slavic model proved an attractive alternative ... which proved practically indestructible. Slav traditions, language, and culture shaped, or at least influenced, innumerable local and regional communities: a surprising similarity that developed without any central institution to promote it. These regional ethnogeneses inspired by Slavic tradition incorporated considerable remnants of the Roman or Germanic population ready enough to give up ethnic identities that had lost their cohesion. Slavs were so successful in the assimilation of other peoples because they weren't as barbaric as the Germanic tribes or Vikings. Slavs did not practice slavery and they didn't maraud like the Germanic vandals, for example, from which the term vandalism is not wrongly derived. That is why the Slavs were successful in colonizing and the violent and Slavery driving Germanic tribes and Vikings were not! That is why today there are very many Slavs and only very few Scandinavian descendants of the Vikings in comparison. That is why half of Europe is populated by Slavs and the descendants of the Vikings live in the same relatively small area as 1000 years ago compared to the large area of ​​the Slavs. The same applies to the descendants of the Germanic tribes, the only thing they have colonized in Europe is England and small Slavic areas in East Germany because otherwise they are where they were 1000 years ago in contrast to the Slavs who successfully colonized half of Europe.

Happy to hear someone educated nice video thank you

Very accurate and good video on most misunderstood Group of people

As a romanian, I'm pretty sure we have some slavic genes as well, it's impossible to live in the sea of slavic people and not be affected by them. Pretty sure we mingled with each other at some point in time and exchanged bodily fluids...I mean...genes lol. I'm pretty sure even though I took no DNA test, that I have some slavic blood in me. I don't know how it makes me feel really, not proud, but not ashamed either, I'm a mixture of the old native Dacian population, Romans, Slavs and some other genes that made it into Romania through conquest, like the huns, mongols, tatars, turks etc. And this doesn't bother be at all. What bothers me is that fellow romanians started mingling with gypsies...you know the travelling indians, and started taking some vocabulary and behaviour from them while they are a very closed "culture" with no desire to assimilate anywhere, and that is not ok in my books.

@janu2997

6 жыл бұрын

How did that happen? Everybody in the Balkans hates gypsies, they're completely isolated among the surrounding populations.

@giant_cIit

6 жыл бұрын

Ingenius3 You re right, Romanians look more like Slavs than Romans, I often visit Timisoara (from Belgrade) and I feel like Im still in Serbia. Everything looks same, people, buildings, public transportation...I also noticed we have a lot of common words... Btw, I LOVE ROMANIA!

@user-kg2qe4ir2g

6 жыл бұрын

BGDboy90 All in the balkans axept greek are thracians--dacians,misians,getians,odrisians,tribalians,besians, serdians,ilirians a.t.c.Tracians can not disapear, thay was named slavs to the historicals in 19 century.Had you not ask yourself how the greeks did not disapear, but all trakian evaporate in several years and thay come some slavic tribes who jump over the territory from the Karpats to the Danube and settled in south of Danube to Pelopones and Little Asia how is written in the history for the slavs! I dont believe it.

@janu2997

6 жыл бұрын

Румяна Бурин It was actually an invented consesus among Austrian and German anthropologists in the 19th century. The whole story of coming magically in the 6th or so century from the Karpatians. It's based on very spurious archeological finds mangled together to fit a narrative. Because they wanted a narrative to disregard Slavic people to make it ok to forcibly germanize them. It's being heavily disputed by Anglospheric scientists who have no bone in the narrative game, but our own national academics are still under complete German narrative control so they disregard anything that goes against it. Very aggressively in some cases.

@giant_cIit

6 жыл бұрын

Румяна Бурин Ofcourse, all those tribes couldnt just wanish with no trace, I guess We (Balkanians) are a mixture of Slavs and Dacians, Thrakians, Illyrians etc. Common name for Serbs and Croats in coastal areas of the Adriatic sea was "Illyrians" until the end of XIX century, and I dont think that was just a coincidence.

You have forgotten to include the Great Moravian Empire and the Empire of Bulgaria.

@milolekic

5 жыл бұрын

We have to go back to the drawing board since the discovery of the Vinchan culture. The river Danube is the cradle of the civilisation so comments that the Celts, Galls. Germanic tribes, Vikings and what later was to be called Slavs are one people now divided by different languages. The history as it officially stands today has to be rewritten. The main problem is that many will find it difficult to accept what might be the truth and that seems to be that from the Atlantic to the Pacific from the Baltic to the Mediterranean we are mostly the same people. Are the nations and the borders but a very recent inventions. There is a fortification on the Danube built in the XV century with an inscription using a different calendar by which it would today be the year of 7528. So most people leaving in what we now call Balkan have lived there for more than 7000 years often under many different names depending on who writes about them.

@matveyn9122

5 жыл бұрын

We do not count imagined coluntries

@miroslavasparuhov2570

5 жыл бұрын

We Bulgarians are not mongoloids. Biologically we're distinct from Turkish and Central-asian people. We have been a center of south slavic culture for centuries, creating masterful artwork and literature and more importantly having saved the old church slavonic alphabet from persecution by the Catholic church. Whoever taught you history needs to return their degree. The Bulgar tribes that migrated into modern day Bulgaria might have been central-asian, but they were assimilated by the vast majority of slavs that lived and continue to live here. Educate yourself.

@Zingam

5 жыл бұрын

Your Serb propaganda is always amazing in its stupidity! We, Bulgarians, know very well that we have multiethnic, multicultural heritage and origins. There were at least 28 tribes and cultures that contributed to our identity! Only stupid pro-Soviet pseudo-scientists were putting up with the Slavic/Turkic made-up stories. The Slavic language was imposed by Boris I as the official language for political reasons. He could have chosen Greek if that served his purposes!

@folev_333

5 жыл бұрын

@djole3005 yea yea thats why everything on the balkans belongs to us

I often find myself pausing your videos in the middle just to make sure I’m subscribed lol.. Freaking outstanding man, so comprehensive thank you!

Thank you! I learned a lot.

@luphemalc

3 жыл бұрын

Ты выучил много о русских, но не о славянах в целом

@armindofontana5107

3 жыл бұрын

@@luphemalc Thanks, Artem!

Ey-Slavic brothers and Sisters are ya here with me? Сговорна дружина, планина повдига! When people are united, they could move mountains!

@nemos9856

11 ай бұрын

Monkeys strong together

@mefu3707

4 ай бұрын

Я не люблю такие идеи

We are all brothers we should stop fighting each other,we are all from the same Slavic Tribe love you my slavic brothers! Sława, Slava, слава to all slavs.

@GreatPolishWingedHussars

6 ай бұрын

Yes We are all brothers we should stop fighting each other,we are all from the same Slavic Tribe! Just because the Ukrainians and Poles are today the enemies of the Russians doesn't mean it has to stay that way! In earlier times, Poland was at enmity with the Ukrainians and the Czechs. Today Poles, Ukrainians and Czechs are friends. There will also be friendship with Russia if common sense prevails. If one considers these future catastrophic conditions in various European countries because of the conflicts caused by the non-assimilating migrants that are increasing in number. Then the question is how will the Slavic states, which will not be affected but will be endangered, react? Today a Slavic union seems completely out of the question because a war is raging between two Slavic nations. Yes, but that will change, just a matter of time. With time, the situation can change and certain Slavic nations can find a political compensation and reconciliation. It should not be forgotten that the Polish nation and the Ukrainian nation were at war with each other 100 years ago. In the shadow of World War II there were massacres of Poles by Ukrainians and massacres by Poles of Ukrainians. That's 75 years ago! Today, Ukraine and Poland are friends, although there are still problems, but the relationship is friendly. Also Czechoslovakia and Poland were at war 100 years ago and Czechoslovakia occupied territories in Poland. Poland then brought these areas back in 1938. Today there are certain problems, but Poland's relationship with the successor states of Czecholovakia, the Czech Republic and Slovakia, is friendly. Enemies became friends, because the Czechs, Slovaks and Poles are now friends. So if these Slavic nations can be friends today, then actually all Slavic nations can be friends in the future. It's just a matter of will. So this is not the end point of understanding of the Slavic nations. There will be a Slavic Union! Only a matter of time! Today the Slavic nations are still divided but the situation in the future will be completely different. If Czechs, Slovaks and Poles could become friends, then the other Slavic nations can too! Poles and Ukrainians used to be much more hostile and today have friendly relations. At the end of the understanding there will be Slavic union! There is a sense of togetherness among the Slavs which shows that the Slavs are much more than a language family. There are various Panslavic videos on KZread like this one too. In all, most of the comments are positive and pro-Slavic. This is an example of one such Pan-Slavic vido entitled: "This Is Slavia"! Another video has the title "Slavic People" The second comment in the list by @David Trivic is as follows. "The dream of a united slavia will never die. Love all of my Slavic brothers:🇧🇦🇧🇬🇧🇾🇭🇷🇷🇸🇵🇱🇲🇪🇷🇺🇸🇮🇸🇰🇺🇦🇨🇿🇲🇰." Pan-Slavism also shows that the Slavs are much more than only a language family. Slavs feel like an ethnic group and are an ethnic group. Because this definition applies to the Slavs: An ethnic group is a grouping of people who identify with each other on the basis of shared attributes that distinguish them from other groups. Those attributes can include common sets of traditions, ancestry, language, history, society, culture, nation, religion, or social treatment within their residing area. This applies to Slavs! These common attributes distinguish the Slavs from other groups. Today a Slavic Union seems like an impossible dream. But the time of the Slavic Union will come and the Russians will be part of it too! If the western European states and Germany perish in the civil war in the fight of "native" against orientals for supremacy in this countries, the Slavs will have to come to an understanding or perish. Already today there are big conflicts in this countries of the "natives" against the orientals, although the orientals have reached until now only about 10% of the population in these countries. Only a small percentage is assimilated. Most wanted to keep their oriental identity! In fact, most of them feel superior to the natives because of their religion which also prevents assimilation. ​What's going to happen when it's 20% or 30%? Because of that there will be chaos and civil war for supremacy. Already today radicals including soldiers and police officers are already setting up weapons depots and planning armed struggle with the aim of overthrowing the government. But there are also more and more radicals on the other side. It is a fact that already today there is more and more violence from both sides with deaths. There is increasing radicalization on both sides. Muslim graves are already being desecrated today. Orientals are already being murdered today. There are already thousands of attacks on the migrant camps today. Conversely, there is already violence in the other direction including terrorism. All this happens at 10% of the population of Orientals in these countries. It is obvious that the situation will escalate completely when there will be 30% oriental population. Maybe yes even already with 20% oriental population. Due to higher birth rates and immigration, the number of Orientals in these countries will increase to this level and continue to increase. Germany and France etc. are doomed to fail! This countries will definitely not survive that! The chaos and civil war is the future of this countries! If the EU and NATO haven't gone under before then, they will doom in this chaos. In any case, the chaos for the Slavic states will also cause problems, even though that kind of population does not exist there. There will be economic losses because export markets will disappear. Of course, the EU will no longer exist. There may be refugees from these countries. There could even be border incidents. Etc. This will automatically lead to the Slavic nations moving closer together. Since there will be a long pro-Slavic campaign beforehand, the pan-Slavic idea will meanwhile also be widespread in the Slavic states. Necessary is a positive pro-Slavic spirit in the the Slavic states. Before that there will be a long-term Proslavic campaign! Then there will probably be several pan-Slavic conferences in which the Slavic nations will then also decide on the union. But the prerequisite is that there is a will to reconciliation, because today, as is well known, some Slavic nations are actually enemies and two Slavic nations are actually at war with each other. Russia will only be able to participate if Russia agrees that there are mechanisms in the Union that prevent one state from dominating. Incidentally, Russia will have no problem agreeing to this, because there will be no restrictions on the sovereignty of the participating states. Russia will also have the opportunity to pursue an independent foreign policy like the other states. But why shouldn't the states of the Union support each other in foreign policy? There are no logical reasons against such a Slavic union! Why shouldn't this Slavic union exist, from which all participating Slavic states would only benefit in very problematic times. At a time when there will be an enormous threat to the security of all these states from outside. Either the Slavic nations will be able to overcome their feuds, or they will perish. Panslavism is not about creating a Slavic superstate, but about a union of Slavic states with equal rights. I am sure that the Slavs will learn from the mistakes of the EU! There will be no attempt to establish a united Slavic state. It will be a union of equal states in which it is prevented that one dominates. It will be a union of independent states, but they will work closely together on an economic level. There will be limited political cooperation, especially in the military sphere. Because that will also be a defense alliance at the same time. By the way, non-Slavic nations would definitely not want to be in a Slavic union, because there would be an automatic assimilation process. I'm sure no nation wants to be assimilated by the Slavs. But I'm sure there will be associated privileged members. Hungary and Romania would certainly accept the invitation to become such Associate Members. Because such an associated membership would mean a lot of economic advantage, for example, access to the Slavic markets without tariffs. In any case, this would be very useful for the Slavic Union, because it would give a land connection to the southern Slavs. It could also be that Greece would also receive an invitation to such membership. However, unrest in that country would prevent that. So what will be decisive is what the situation in Greece would be like. Although an intervention could pacify the country. Another country that would be offered such an associative membership would be Kazakhstan. Kazakhstan would agree because of the large Slavic minority there. So this scenario is very likely for the Slavic nations, because much of Europe will descend into chaos and a Slavic Union is the logical consequence.

I'm slovak. So I guess I'm about as slav as u can get. We are smack in the middle of slav nations.

@namesurname8460

4 жыл бұрын

Slovakian is like universal Slavic language, every slav nations can mostly understand it. Who knows maybe you are the ancestor of all Slavs...

@Aaron.T2005

4 жыл бұрын

@@namesurname8460 We can understand a lot of what every slav nation says and vice versa. I understand a lot of Serbian because the dialect we speak is closer to Serbian and croatian since my family came from former Yugoslavia.

@Aaron.T2005

4 жыл бұрын

@THE 01000100 01000101 01000001 01010100 01001000 Nikdy som sa neučil srpsky. Moja rodina vie srpsky jak slovansky a jak to má hovoriť, žatože vo vojvodine mali srpských susedov. Niektoré slová sú Inakšý od vášho slovenského dialektu. Jak slovo "robiť." Používame toto slovo na "prácu." Moja rodina rozprava lepšy slovenski jak mne. Esče naučiem jak ti vidíš. Pekný deň!

@Aaron.T2005

4 жыл бұрын

@THE 01000100 01000101 01000001 01010100 01001000 Pol moja rodina je na canadska teraz. Zijem na canadska. Moja rodina pochádza z pivnice. (To je mesto.)

@Aaron.T2005

4 жыл бұрын

THE 01000100 01000101 01000001 01010100 01001000 Moj fárár pochadla z slovensko. Slovensko je rovnaké jak srbsko. Velice krásna. Mám len 14 rokov, ale bol by som rád, keby ma moja rodina zobrala do srbska. Aj ksem ist do slovensko. Obídvoch je dobre!

Does a video about the Slavs. Chooses "Soviet March" from Red Alert 3 as the background music. Way to start the video off right. ;)

I’m from a Celtic background! We need to take lessons from Slavs!

@taethegreat7577

5 жыл бұрын

Sad Celtic culture has been erased, god bless you!

@taethegreat7577

5 жыл бұрын

@evansdrad true like Scotland Ireland, Wales and Brittany but still allot of traditional Celtic area's have forgotten there roots

@matuskovac9310

5 жыл бұрын

Cr33p XD my ancestor was bigger bad ass as yours you celts You Celts lived in a beautiful piece of land. XD

@matuskovac9310

5 жыл бұрын

evansdrad My Ancestors was Slovaks

@robertrobski1013

5 жыл бұрын

15% of poland have Scottish blood

Good video, but why did you completely miss the history of non-Polish Western Slavs - Slovaks and Czechs? We have an interesting history from Samo's Empire, through Great Moravia, being conquered by the Kingdom of Hungary and the Holy Roman Empire later, then reemerging as Czechoslovakia and then split into Czech and Slovak republics.

@alengrm7488

2 жыл бұрын

And Slovenes, who were originally western Slavs as well but were sadly cut off by Bavarians and Hungarians

VERY informative! Thanks for posting! What program did you use to be able to talk over what you're doing on your computer screen graphics during the video? I'm still learning

My family is from Yugoslavia and Slovakia and russia! Proud to be slav and you bet I embrace it too.

Slavs be like "Look at me, I'm the conqueror now."

@Xilaw

6 жыл бұрын

As opposed to a peaceful farmer in the Ukrainian steppes. What else?

@mariantelvak8574

6 жыл бұрын

Vegeta Dbiop they all are or they wouldn’t hav any land think before u say anything and western Slavs had stronger competition than the Russian did and they managed to beat some of the worlds strongest empires the only strong empire Russia fought by themselves was China.

@tkpe3699

6 жыл бұрын

Jahha tru

@Viktor007

5 жыл бұрын

Slavs do control massive piece of land

True slavic origin is quite unknown. We have very little evidence of their amazing old traditions. We know that however they believed in the sun god. In poland some traditions like women wearing flowers on their head, and throwing them in the river, still somewhat exists, even their beautiful dresses. actually the famous christmas tree on christmas came from the slavs. When christianity was coming for Slavic cultures they couln't leave some of their old ways, and the church actually couldn't disagree. Slavs used to decorate trees that don't grow leafs in shiny objects towards winter times for they believed, it will do good as in winter the day was shorter, with less sunlight.

@linguisticallyoversight8685

5 жыл бұрын

Denisovan Cro-Magnon neanderthal in that descending order that is the archaic admixture found in modern-day Slavs if you go a couple thousand miles east and you enter Mongolia and you find more denisovan DNA if you go south from there into the Asian continent you find florensis/Hobbit people DNA in modern humans particularly of the Asiatic areas

@franol7

4 жыл бұрын

We do know so little thanks to Catolic Church who eradicated whatever they found and consider as "pagen" ,thus all remains of early slavic culture was destroyed and parished.Church made the utmost atrocious things to Slaves in the name of Jewish god . Generaly Church was building Christian churches on the spots where there were slavic pagan temples or holly spots, places of importance to Slaves .Today, digging under the churches is prohibited and politically unwise :) It is jarring sound today ,when I hear that patriotism is always connected with the believe in Jews god LOL. It means that this so callet "patriots" do not know own history:) which is pagan by nature and a christianity belief was grafted artificialy to native culture of Slaves

@mikesnow285

4 жыл бұрын

@@franol7 Very true, the true enemy is always heralded as the merciful. It changes faces often to suit it's lies.

@Userius1

4 жыл бұрын

​@Random PersonNever heard of that. In fact it's often the reverse. Steppe people lose their culture to sedentary ones. Do go on though how flower wreaths and such in Poland are somehow Tatar traditions (please show me some journal discussing this or video showing it), despite Tatars never being a significant presence this far west, except as being beaten horribly, such as at Hodow in the case of the Crimeans. As for the Lipka, they were mutually beneficial in Poland-Lithuania. I swear, you Russians are silly sometimes ;)

@Userius1

4 жыл бұрын

​@Random Person It technically is in terms of its current political affiliation to NATO and being part of the EU. So yes, it is a "western nation", although that's not something I'd like to be a part of nowadays. I don't need to explain things to a Russian though, or rather some guy from a backwater that doesn't even have a country.

Another good general history overview

I'm proud to be slavic and Celtic 🇺🇦🇮🇪 I got warriors blood 👊

@user-xf8kv3et1u

5 жыл бұрын

Celts are much cooler than Germanic. Greetings from Belarus

@futurequagmire6199

5 жыл бұрын

@@user-xf8kv3et1u yeah what's up cousin 🇺🇦🇧🇾 .

@user-zo8hs4yh2h

5 жыл бұрын

Lel Mongol

@sanadayukimura1615

4 жыл бұрын

Scrappy zohan coco nice check out book "the irish origins of civilisation"

@karaboga8825

3 жыл бұрын

@@user-zo8hs4yh2h well...

@Masaman A very informative and detailed video! good job! Can you make a video about the Latvia and Lithuania? We are too often ignored :( Even in this video you said "the baltic and slavic languages are sometimes grouped together for convenience"...

@GreatPolishWingedHussars

11 ай бұрын

Not a good job, because the claim is nonsense and contradicts the historical reality that the Slavs were slaves first. Incidentally, it is not at all proven that the term slave is derived from the term Slav. All the outrageous claims are just prejudices about the Slavs. In addition, many Celts and members of other peoples were enslaved by the Vikings, not just Slavs. It is absurd to also mention the Ottomans and Mongols in this context, because they were in a completely different age. By the way, Byzantines hardly enslaved Slavs, but bought slaves from the Vikings and this slaves certainly weren't just Slavs. Ridiculous and impudent, by the way, that at the beginning of the video guys that apparently are Slavs perform any nonsensical explosions with barrels. Why is such nonsense shown? Obviously the intention is to show that the people the video is about are idiots. In reality, the Slavs were the most successful and they certainly weren't a people of slaves and idiots. Because idiots and slaves would definitely not have succeeded in colonizing half of Europe. Slavic expansion began during the second century AD, and they occupied a large area of eastern Europe between the Vistula and the middle Dnieper. The Slavs slowly expanded in all directions and assimilated the neighboring cultures. They constantly sought an outlet for the population surplus. Partially they acted without violence and the Slavic peoples infiltrated foreign territories very clever by being cooperative. The Slavs became a dominant force and establishing a new socio-political network in the entire area of central and southeastern Europe. According to the historian Paul Barford, "The Spartan and egalitarian Slavic culture clearly had something attractive for great numbers of the European populations living over considerable areas of central Europe", resulting in their assimilation. The special thing about the Slavs was that they did not practice slavery! Byzantine chroniclers noted that Roman prisoners captured by the Slavs could soon become free members of Slavic society if they wished. So Slavs were the only ones who even assimilated Romans and not just captured soldiers but the population of entire conquered territories. According to the 6th-century manual of war "Strategikon" by Byzantine Emperor Maurice the Slavs were a hospitable people and did not keep prisoners indefinitely "but lay down a certain period after which they can decide for themselves if they want to return to their former homelands or to stay amongst the Slavs as free men and friends." The Byzantine scholar Pseudo-Caesarius's wrote that Slavs living by their own law and without the rule of anyone. The Slave were reported to have lived under a democracy for a long time. The 6th-century historian Procopius, who was in contact with Slavic mercenaries, reported, "The Slavic nations, are not governed by one man, but from ancient times have lived in democracy, and consequently everything which involves their welfare, whether for good or for ill, is referred to the people." The 6th-century manual of war Strategikon by Byzantine Emperor Maurice is considered an eyewitness of the Slavs and said that "the Slaves were independent, absolutely refused to be enslaved or governed, least of all in their own land." The Slavs managed to keep up their agriculture (and a rather efficient kind of agriculture, by the standards of the time). There were no nobility and no kings with the greed for more and contempt for peasant's work, as it did with the Germanic Tribes. Thus the Slavic model proved an attractive alternative ... which proved practically indestructible. Slav traditions, language, and culture shaped, or at least influenced, innumerable local and regional communities: a surprising similarity that developed without any central institution to promote it. These regional ethnogeneses inspired by Slavic tradition incorporated considerable remnants of the Roman or Germanic population ready enough to give up ethnic identities that had lost their cohesion. Slavs were so successful in the assimilation of other peoples because they weren't as barbaric as the Germanic tribes or Vikings. Slavs did not practice slavery and they didn't maraud like the Germanic vandals, for example, from which the term vandalism is not wrongly derived. That is why the Slavs were successful in colonizing and the violent and Slavery driving Germanic tribes and Vikings were not! That is why today there are very many Slavs and only very few Scandinavian descendants of the Vikings in comparison. That is why half of Europe is populated by Slavs and the descendants of the Vikings live in the same relatively small area as 1000 years ago compared to the large area of ​​the Slavs. The same applies to the descendants of the Germanic tribes, the only thing they have colonized in Europe is England and small Slavic areas in East Germany because otherwise they are where they were 1000 years ago in contrast to the Slavs who successfully colonized half of Europe.

As a romanian i can say i saw with my own two eyes the ferocity of slav drinking. Serbians in particular. Also very lovable people. Love from Romania!

@cameronbrown8515

3 жыл бұрын

Support genociders ?

@lucianluciannix6924

3 жыл бұрын

@@cameronbrown8515 who are you to call a entire nation like that? in your mind ...russians are still soviets, germans are still nazi, japanese are still kamikaze your stupid mentality makes me sick Romania have good relationship with Serbia so what?

@larryhall2805

3 жыл бұрын

I don't want to tell a Bulgarian that he comes a Turk!

@wtc5198

2 жыл бұрын

Mulțimesc

@Donald_Trump_2024

2 жыл бұрын

@@cameronbrown8515 уеs, genocide is based unlike cringe liberal westeners

I enjoyed this immensely, well done.

I was interested in non-Slavics in Russia, but this one is good too.

@goldenfoxa1810

6 жыл бұрын

ReconPro that would be really interesting

@robinmangala584

6 жыл бұрын

YESSSS

@NotOrdinaryInGames

6 жыл бұрын

If you want to know a couple of facts about the uralic peoples in Russia, feel free to ask.

@jubanumidia8460

6 жыл бұрын

MallarRallam like turkic

@NotOrdinaryInGames

6 жыл бұрын

Well, mostly. I don't know a lot, but I know a bit of that. Those tribes used to thrive between the gulf of Feenlend and the Ural mountains, sometimes moving as far south as the Black Sea. They were in a peaceful cohabitation with the slavs for perhaps up to a thousand years until the latter decided they must assimilate EVERYTHING and make it into Russia. Western Russia has a ton of finnic place names left (the river Moskva was Mustajoki, or "black river"), and lake Ladoga was called Laatokka.

I'm Romanian and though we speak a romantic language I still feel like i share more of the a common cultural heritage Southern Slavs, Serbs in particular, than any of the other romantic speaking countries (France, Italy etc). There are even romanian subgroups like Aromanians that have settled comfortably in Serbia. The spoken and written languages may seem like a huge difference at first glance, but a shared history, deep ties to the Orthodox church, and strinkingly similar folklore and legendry overshadow the linguistic divide. Also, a quick glance at the two countries' most abundant haplogroups makes an even stronger case for their similarities.

@borislavherak9054

6 жыл бұрын

settled comfortably? more like serbia stole timok from romanians and to this day Romanians being abused and forced assimilated not even allowed to speak their own language or have their own churches.

@gabesavin

6 жыл бұрын

Borislav Herak wow in all honesty ive never really researched a first-hand account and what i know about the aromanian diaspora in serbia has all been from articles and other reading. I know from my parents that serbs have for the most part treated romanians fairly well. In the chaos after 89 we were lucky enough to get visas to america and had to take a train through serbia for our plane from roma. The romanians working the train actually kicked us off right before reaching the serbian border out of spite or jealousy or who knows so my parents along with my grandparents and me and my sister had to walk a couple of kilometers to the serbian frontier in the snow. The serb frontiermen gave us housing, food, and blankets for a night and even managed to book our next ride free to rome. Here in sacramento the treatment had been similar. There had not yet been a romanian orthodox church in the area and the serbs, before the greeks or russians rushed to let us use their church until we managed to build our own. But i suppose it's entirely possible my family has a unique experience with them, and in any case we were never aromanians living in the FYR so we are out of touch with the situation there. You seem very well versed with the areas history, why so might i ask? As far as the serbian land grab, its south easterm europe my friend im fairly certain all our borders have moved a few kilometers so many times no one knows the actual historic boundaries any more lol. Cheers happy new year.

@thesecunts9896

6 жыл бұрын

Bulgarians my friend not only because we are neighbours but because of taken territories from Bulgaria with Bulgarian population, and I’m not complaining about that I’m just stating.

@gabesavin

6 жыл бұрын

Tony Pavko each eastern European calls the next one across a border a gypsy. We should just make it a term of endearment

@The.steppenWolf

6 жыл бұрын

Gabriel Savin Romanians have nothing to do with Slavs. Romanians are Porto Balkan people alongside Albanians and Greeks. Learn your history! Don't let religion fool you! And all Aromonians in Serbia are almost assimilated. Serbia does not recognize them, they have no schools in their native language , they are obliged to name their children with Serbian names and present themselves as "Serbs". You are stupid for admiring Serbs after what they've done to Aromonanians and above all you are ignorant because you relate Romanians with Serbs because of religion even though you are two completely different people.

Another great video. I just want to point out that when talking about the South Slavs and former Yugoslavia, you completely left out the Slovenes.

@timipotocnik1009

3 жыл бұрын

Fun fact slovenians (celjski grofje) made the last defence of beograd from turks... We failed but we tryed 😅

Когда хотел рассказать о славянах но рассказал о России

@Gummy_Sarcasm_Provider

3 жыл бұрын

Нацик

"Slav" comes from "слава" (slavic for "honor").

@tongobong1

6 жыл бұрын

no. Slava means glory.

@Jancias

6 жыл бұрын

russian*

@VendPrekmurec

6 жыл бұрын

Honor means Dika / Chast...

@redoxam

6 жыл бұрын

Hans Peters agree to disagree, ya?

@robertdoucet1207

6 жыл бұрын

He never said slav came from slave he said that the english word slave comes from the word slav

Thank you for the upload.

@dasein9980

6 жыл бұрын

Dayuum

Many sources show Rurik as the leader of the Slavic Abodrites and Ruggians, from the island of Rugen. First of all, the Slavs who settled the region of lake Ilmen (Novgorod) were related to the Slavs who inhabited an area to the southeast of Denmark, in northern present-day Germany. That tribe was called the Abodrites (Obodrichi), and they inhabited this area during the 8th and 9th centuries. The Abodrites and the Slovenes, Slavs of Novgorod, had many similarities in the area of religion, tradition, certain customs, geographic names, language, settlement layout and civilian and defensive construction, similarities that the Slavs around Kiev did not share with the Slavs of Novgorod. This theory started attracting attention in the 18th cent. The scholar and founder of the first Russian university, M. V. Lomonosov once wrote that Rurik with his family/tribe was Slavic and spoke the Slavonic language; he came from the area between the rivers Vistula and West Dvina, near the river Rusa (Neman). Russian historian V. N. Tatishchev wrote that Rurik came from Vandalia. Vandals were Slavs, and the Baltic Sea (Varangian/Vagrian Sea) was named so after the Vandal city of Vagria near Lubeck. Kromer and Bernh(g)ard were quoted by Tatishchev as saying that Venedi (Wends) or Vandals were also called Pomeranians, Varini, Abodrites, Polyabi, Vagri, Rani, etc. Helmold said that Vendi (Wends) lived between the Elbe and the Oder rivers. Strykovsky quotes from the Nikon Chronicle as saying that those who invited the Varyazi-Rus to Novgorod were also called Rus themselves. The Chronicle also says: “…Slavonic tongue and Russian are one…” There were two Rus’s: one in Novgorod and one in southwest Baltic. Rurik and his tribe spoke the same language as the Slavs of Novgorod. Gerard (George) Mercator (16th cent.) explains: “On that island, a pagan people lived by the name of Rani(ans) or Ruteni(ans), they were fierce and cruel in battle, fought violently against the Christians, to defend their idols… Their language was Slavonic or Vandalic. …” This island is Rügen [off Germany’s Baltic coast, just south of Sweden]. It is known as Arkona, the last stronghold of northern paganism. Also on the island was the port of Ralsvik, identified with Veneti. Princess Olga was called by the Germans “Regina Rugorum” and not “Regina Rusorum,” however Olga was the princess of Rusichi. Therefore Rugi and Rusi is the same name but different transcription. Rugi were also called Rusini (or Rutheni), and their country was called Rusinia (Ruthenia), as stated in the Life of Otto of Bamberg. Otto places these Ruteni in Pomerania [northwestern Poland], … calls the leader Odoacer “genere Rogus.” In Salzburg, Austria, there is a stone tablet with the inscription: “Year of our Lord 477. Odoacer, leader of the rusini (rutheni), gepids, goths, ungarians and geruls…” Thus, Rugi-Ruyani-Rane-Rutheni from the island of Rugen and the delta of the river Vistula [Oder?] are the first in line to be identified as Varyazi-Rus. This is the only Rus “beyond the sea,” and this Rus was also called Vandals-Venedi. There is no tribe by the name of Rus in Scandinavia. “Slavyania is ten times bigger than Saxony, if you include the Czechs and the Poles, who do not differ in either dress or tongue from the inhabitants of Slavyania. … The westernmost of the Slavs are Vagri, who border with the Transalbingians. Their city by the sea is Aldinburg (Stargrad). After them there are the Abodrites [to the East], their city is called Magnopolis (Velegrad)…” - Adam of Bremen, 1066. A comparison is drawn between the names Rurik-Rorik, the tribe of Reregi, Rarogi, their city Rerik, with the western Slavic god of fire, Rarog. Rarogi are described by historians as a Slavic tribe living in the first millennium A.D. in the south of Jutland [Denmark], in the land that later became Mecklenburg. A similarity is evident in the Runik Venedi inscriptions of the Slavic tribe Lyutichi (found in Mecklenburg) and that of Lyakhi (found in Poznan, Poland). The same similarity is seen in the Runes found on a cow’s rib in Novgorod as is in the images from Mecklenburg. In “Les Letteres Sur le Nord,” by Xavier Marmier/Chivilikhin, the Legend of the Calling of Rurik of the Abodrites states that the leader of the Abodrites was King Godlav, he had three sons, equally strong, brave and yearning for glory. The first was Rurik, the second, Sivar, the third, Truvar… They went in search of adventure …. They went East. … Then they came to Russia [Roos-sia]. People of this land were suffering under a tyranny and could not raise up against it. The brothers were touched by their suffering and gathered an army with which they overthrew the oppressors. After restoring peace the brothers wanted to return home to their father but the grateful people begged them to stay and rule over them in place of the old rulers. Thus Rurik received Novgorod, Sivar - Pleskov [Pskov] and Truvar - Belo-ozero. “The Genealogy of the Dukes of Mecklenburg” by Frederik of Mecklenburg, 1717, says Rurik and his brothers were sons of the Venedi-Abodrite Prince Gotleib or Godlaib, who was imprisoned and killed by Gotofreid, king of Jutland. Because the brothers were too young the throne passed to their uncles Slavomir and Trasik. Their heirs were Godomysl and Tabemysl… Later the throne passed to Mechislav III. Various sources state that Burivoi, prince of Novgorod, was at war with foreign Varyagi for a long time. He was beaten near the Finnish border and retreated. The people of Novgorod came under the rule of Varyagi [Vikings], and they sent for Gostomysl, Burivoi’s son. Prince Burivoi (descendant of Vladimir the Ancient) was the son of Abodrite Prince Vitislav and Rurik’s great grandfather. Burivoi’s son Gostomysl had a daughter, Umila (born ~ 815), who married Abodrite prince Godlav/Godoslav/Godelaib. Gostomysl was the elected prince of the Sloveni, who came from Vandalia, he ruled from Staraya Ladoga and died in 861. After his death, the people wanted to find a ruler for themselves. So they called for Rurik of the Rus. It is highly unlikely that Slavs could have invited a foreigner of a different faith to rule over them. The Danes were never called Rus. There is only one Rus on the Baltic: Rugii, who are Slavs, according to the Germans themselves. Both the Baltic and the Novgorod Rus spoke the same language and worshipped the same gods (less than ten words of Scandinavian origin can be found in old Russian). Tatishchev asks: if Novgorod is the New City, then where is the Old City? And he answers: It is Aldenburg (Oldenburg), Stargrad in Russian. In the Slavic Chronicle, Helmold writes: “Oldenburg, what the Slavs call Starigard, meaning Old City, is located in the land of Vagri on the western side of the Baltic Sea, and it is the frontier of Slavia… This city… is inhabited by the bravest men, since being located at the forefront of all Slavia their neighbors were the Danes and Saxons, and all military clashes they either started first or, if attacked, they would take the blow upon themselves.” Rurik’s wife was Yefanda, sister of the Viking Odr. It is said that a Viking prince was already in Novgorod with his warriors when Rurik was called in. As you can see, Prince Rurik was a Slav and not a Viking. Look up the Jomsviking (most fierce Vikings according to Sagas) and you’ll see that west Slavs or “Vinds” were also Vikings and made up most of the Jomsviking by 11 cent. In fact Jom is Slavic derived. If you’re not satisfied with the above explanation then I’d say the consensus now is,”In the eighth and ninth centuries there emerged a multiethnic, multilingual, unified social and economic entity represented by the maritime and trading society of the Baltic sea and transplanted by the bearers of the culture of the Mediterranean. It took more than two centuries for the multiethnic and multilingual commercial ventures of some trading companies . . . to transform this into a Christian and linguistically Slavic high culture that became Kievan Rus." Omeljan Pritsak

Great video! this video must be racking in the views again with the Russian-Ukraine conflict

The video is about slavs but no Gopniks with tracksuits squatting, drinking vodka and eating semechki. This video lacks of slavness! Where is the Cheeki Breeki?

@user-ni3rg2xf6w

6 жыл бұрын

Fuck off my people are more then just a shitty Internet meme

@cheekibreeki921

6 жыл бұрын

I'm here

@shumdan

6 жыл бұрын

Быдло и гопарей везде хватает.

@gravelroad1228

6 жыл бұрын

+רומן מיצק I don't think you're a true Slav, considering your Jewish channel name.

@gabrielsegee7940

6 жыл бұрын

Yusuf Tazim 😂😂😂

How to become a slav beginner 1-Adidas track suit 2-A bottle of vodka 3-Squat

@DRaz-di1in

6 жыл бұрын

How to become a master. -Drink Kompot -Own an AK47 -Have the a car with 3 stripes III

@threestripedbandit

6 жыл бұрын

i hate how people are making a joke of my culture

@dondeestaCarter

6 жыл бұрын

people of your culture make the joke to themselves, as long as they upload videos doing the shit above.

@TheMarcin123321

6 жыл бұрын

It's good to be able to outdrink averege Slavic girl as well. ;)

@blacksuppository

6 жыл бұрын

LOCK THE DOOR!!!

He asks what a unified Slavic people country would look like? White. They would simply be white. We are all Aryans brothers and sisters. No more brother wars! I love my people.

The word Slave in English is Greek in origin (skyleuein) And it means to plunder. There is zero connection between the word Slave and Slavs. The phonetic connection (sound) is only the result of words mutating over time and these two sounding similar. There are tons of examples!

"The reconstructed autonym *Slověninъ is usually considered a derivation from slovo ("word"), originally denoting "people who speak (the same language)," i. e. people who understand each other, in contrast to the Slavic word denoting German people, namely *němьcь, meaning "silent, mute people" (from Slavic *němъ "mute, mumbling"). The word slovo ("word") and the related slava ("glory, fame") and slukh ("hearing") originate from the Proto-Indo-European root *ḱlew- ("be spoken of, glory"), cognate with Ancient Greek κλέος (kléos "fame"), as in the name Pericles, Latin clueo ("be called"), and English loud." - from :en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Slavs

@TigerCarpenter

2 жыл бұрын

that's the best to date explanation of our blood call us SLAVES one more time and we will find you

think i’ve mentioned it before, but thank you for these videos. My family was considerably affected by ethnic cleansing in the Yougoslave region. I appreciate these history lessons 😊

@GreatPolishWingedHussars

Жыл бұрын

The claim is nonsense and contradicts the historical reality that the Slavs were slaves first. Incidentally, it is not at all proven that the term slave is derived from the term Slav. All the outrageous claims are just prejudices about the Slavs. In addition, many Celts and members of other peoples were enslaved by the Vikings, not just Slavs. It is absurd to also mention the Ottomans and Mongols in this context, because they were in a completely different age. By the way, Byzantines hardly enslaved Slavs, but bought slaves from the Vikings and this slaves certainly weren't just Slavs. Ridiculous and impudent, by the way, that at the beginning of the video guys that apparently are Slavs perform any nonsensical explosions with barrels. Why is such nonsense shown? Obviously the intention is to show that the people the video is about are idiots. In reality, the Slavs were the most successful and they certainly weren't a people of slaves and idiots. Because idiots and slaves would definitely not have succeeded in colonizing half of Europe. Slavic expansion began during the second century AD, and they occupied a large area of eastern Europe between the Vistula and the middle Dnieper. The Slavs slowly expanded in all directions and assimilated the neighboring cultures. They constantly sought an outlet for the population surplus. Partially they acted without violence and the Slavic peoples infiltrated foreign territories very clever by being cooperative. The Slavs became a dominant force and establishing a new socio-political network in the entire area of central and southeastern Europe. According to the historian Paul Barford, "The Spartan and egalitarian Slavic culture clearly had something attractive for great numbers of the European populations living over considerable areas of central Europe", resulting in their assimilation. The special thing about the Slavs was that they did not practice slavery! Byzantine chroniclers noted that Roman prisoners captured by the Slavs could soon become free members of Slavic society if they wished. So Slavs were the only ones who even assimilated Romans and not just captured soldiers but the population of entire conquered territories. According to the 6th-century manual of war "Strategikon" by Byzantine Emperor Maurice the Slavs were a hospitable people and did not keep prisoners indefinitely "but lay down a certain period after which they can decide for themselves if they want to return to their former homelands or to stay amongst the Slavs as free men and friends." The Byzantine scholar Pseudo-Caesarius's wrote that Slavs living by their own law and without the rule of anyone. The Slave were reported to have lived under a democracy for a long time. The 6th-century historian Procopius, who was in contact with Slavic mercenaries, reported, "The Slavic nations, are not governed by one man, but from ancient times have lived in democracy, and consequently everything which involves their welfare, whether for good or for ill, is referred to the people." The 6th-century manual of war Strategikon by Byzantine Emperor Maurice is considered an eyewitness of the Slavs and said that "the Slaves were independent, absolutely refused to be enslaved or governed, least of all in their own land." The Slavs managed to keep up their agriculture (and a rather efficient kind of agriculture, by the standards of the time). There were no nobility and no kings with the greed for more and contempt for peasant's work, as it did with the Germanic Tribes. Thus the Slavic model proved an attractive alternative ... which proved practically indestructible. Slav traditions, language, and culture shaped, or at least influenced, innumerable local and regional communities: a surprising similarity that developed without any central institution to promote it. These regional ethnogeneses inspired by Slavic tradition incorporated considerable remnants of the Roman or Germanic population ready enough to give up ethnic identities that had lost their cohesion. Slavs were so successful in the assimilation of other peoples because they weren't as barbaric as the Germanic tribes or Vikings. Slavs did not practice slavery and they didn't maraud like the Germanic vandals, for example, from which the term vandalism is not wrongly derived. That is why the Slavs were successful in colonizing and the violent and Slavery driving Germanic tribes and Vikings were not! That is why today there are very many Slavs and only very few Scandinavian descendants of the Vikings in comparison. That is why half of Europe is populated by Slavs and the descendants of the Vikings live in the same relatively small area as 1000 years ago compared to the large area of ​​the Slavs. The same applies to the descendants of the Germanic tribes, the only thing they have colonized in Europe is England and small Slavic areas in East Germany because otherwise they are where they were 1000 years ago in contrast to the Slavs who successfully colonized half of Europe.

Slava svim slavenima braci i sestrama!

@Donald_Trump_2024

2 жыл бұрын

хвала брате

@GreatPolishWingedHussars

Жыл бұрын

Today a Slavic union seems completely out of the question because a war is raging between two Slavic nations. Yes, but that will change, just a matter of time. With time, the situation can change and certain Slavic nations can find a political compensation and reconciliation. It should not be forgotten that the Polish nation and the Ukrainian nation were at war with each other 100 years ago. In the shadow of World War II there were massacres of Poles by Ukrainians and massacres by Poles of Ukrainians. That's 75 years ago! Today, Ukraine and Poland are friends, although there are still problems, but the relationship is friendly. Also Czechoslovakia and Poland were at war 100 years ago and Czechoslovakia occupied territories in Poland. Poland then brought these areas back in 1938. Today there are certain problems, but Poland's relationship with the successor states of Czecholovakia, the Czech Republic and Slovakia, is friendly. Enemies became friends, because the Czechs, Slovaks and Poles are now friends. So if these Slavic nations can be friends today, then actually all Slavic nations can be friends in the future. It's just a matter of will. So this is not the end point of understanding of the Slavic nations. There will be a Slavic Union! Only a matter of time! Today the Slavic nations are still divided but the situation in the future will be completely different. If Czechs, Slovaks and Poles could become friends, then the other Slavic nations can too! Poles and Ukrainians used to be much more hostile and today have friendly relations. At the end of the understanding there will be Slavic union! There is a sense of togetherness among the Slavs which shows that the Slavs are much more than a language family. There are various Panslavic videos on KZread like this one too. In all, most of the comments are positive and pro-Slavic. This is an example of one such Pan-Slavic vido entitled: "This Is Slavia"! Another video has the title "Slavic People" The second comment in the list by @David Trivic is as follows. "The dream of a united slavia will never die. Love all of my slav brothers:🇧🇦🇧🇬🇧🇾🇭🇷🇷🇸🇵🇱🇲🇪🇷🇺🇸🇮🇸🇰🇺🇦🇨🇿🇲🇰." Pan-Slavism also shows that the Slavs are much more than only a language family. Slavs feel like an ethnic group and are an ethnic group. Because this definition applies to the Slavs: An ethnic group is a grouping of people who identify with each other on the basis of shared attributes that distinguish them from other groups. Those attributes can include common sets of traditions, ancestry, language, history, society, culture, nation, religion, or social treatment within their residing area. This applies to Slavs! These common attributes distinguish the Slavs from other groups. Today a Slavic Union seems like an impossible dream. But the time of the Slavic Union will come and the Russians will be part of it too! If the western European states and Germany perish in the civil war in the fight of "native" against orientals for supremacy in this countries, the Slavs will have to come to an understanding or perish. Already today there are big conflicts in this countries of the "natives" against the orientals, although the orientals have reached until now only about 10% of the population in these countries. Only a small percentage is assimilated. Most wanted to keep their oriental identity! In fact, most of them feel superior to the natives because of their religion which also prevents assimilation. ​What's going to happen when it's 20% or 30%? Because of that there will be chaos and civil war for supremacy. Already today radicals including soldiers and police officers are already setting up weapons depots and planning armed struggle with the aim of overthrowing the government. But there are also more and more radicals on the other side. It is a fact that already today there is more and more violence from both sides with deaths. There is increasing radicalization on both sides. Muslim graves are already being desecrated today. Orientals are already being murdered today. There are already thousands of attacks on the migrant camps today. Conversely, there is already violence in the other direction including terrorism. All this happens at 10% of the population of Orientals in these countries. It is obvious that the situation will escalate completely when there will be 30% oriental population. Maybe yes even already with 20% oriental population. Due to higher birth rates and immigration, the number of Orientals in these countries will increase to this level and continue to increase. Germany and France etc. are doomed to fail! This countries will definitely not survive that! The chaos and civil war is the future of this countries! If the EU and NATO haven't gone under before then, they will doom in this chaos. In any case, the chaos for the Slavic states will also cause problems, even though that kind of population does not exist there. There will be economic losses because export markets will disappear. Of course, the EU will no longer exist. There may be refugees from these countries. There could even be border incidents. Etc. This will automatically lead to the Slavic nations moving closer together. Since there will be a long pro-Slavic campaign beforehand, the pan-Slavic idea will meanwhile also be widespread in the Slavic states. Necessary is a positive pro-Slavic spirit in the the Slavic states. Before that there will be a long-term Proslavic campaign! Then there will probably be several pan-Slavic conferences in which the Slavic nations will then also decide on the union. But the prerequisite is that there is a will to reconciliation, because today, as is well known, some Slavic nations are actually enemies and two Slavic nations are actually at war with each other. Russia will only be able to participate if Russia agrees that there are mechanisms in the Union that prevent one state from dominating. Incidentally, Russia will have no problem agreeing to this, because there will be no restrictions on the sovereignty of the participating states. Russia will also have the opportunity to pursue an independent foreign policy like the other states. But why shouldn't the states of the Union support each other in foreign policy? There are no logical reasons against such a Slavic union! Why shouldn't this Slavic union exist, from which all participating Slavic states would only benefit in very problematic times. At a time when there will be an enormous threat to the security of all these states from outside. Either the Slavic nations will be able to overcome their feuds, or they will perish. Panslavism is not about creating a Slavic superstate, but about a union of Slavic states with equal rights. I am sure that the Slavs will learn from the mistakes of the EU! There will be no attempt to establish a united Slavic state. It will be a union of equal states in which it is prevented that one dominates. It will be a union of independent states, but they will work closely together on an economic level. There will be limited political cooperation, especially in the military sphere. Because that will also be a defense alliance at the same time. By the way, non-Slavic nations would definitely not want to be in a Slavic union, because there would be an automatic assimilation process. I'm sure no nation wants to be assimilated by the Slavs. But I'm sure there will be associated privileged members. Hungary and Romania would certainly accept the invitation to become such Associate Members. Because such an associated membership would mean a lot of economic advantage, for example, access to the Slavic markets without tariffs. In any case, this would be very useful for the Slavic Union, because it would give a duty-free land connection to the southern Slavs. It could also be that Greece would also receive an invitation to such membership. However, unrest in that country would prevent that. So what will be decisive is what the situation in Greece would be like. Although an intervention could pacify the country. Another country that would be offered such an associative membership would be Kazakhstan. Kazakhstan would agree because of the large Slavic minority there.

Thank you so much for this information. I was born in the Czech Republic in the town of Jicin which is in what used to be known as the Sudetinland. I live in the United States but I still speak a little Czech. I wish I understand other Slavic languages but I do not. Eva

Slavic love💪❤️💕💓♥️💋💪💪❤️💕💓♥️💞

SLAVA!

@AdolfStalin

6 жыл бұрын

SERBIA STRONK!!!

@AdolfStalin

6 жыл бұрын

CALIGVLA

@AdolfStalin

6 жыл бұрын

what kind of name is Caligvla Caesar....you're half degenerate, half conquerer.

@AdolfStalin

6 жыл бұрын

nah it was just my attempt at a lame joke, ofc he was last in line of the Caesars...he was also a huge POS who among other things, made his soldiers stab the water and appointed his horse as a constable.

@AdolfStalin

6 жыл бұрын

hell even Nero, his successor, was somewhat better.

He clearly stated "...the English word slave". Also, derived from Slav. He did not say that it meant Slave in the Slavic languages.

what books do you read to learn this stuff? i enjoy your channel, keep up the good work!

@krzysms6a

4 жыл бұрын

There are mistakes in the movie.

@mik823

3 жыл бұрын

That's a good question... I would also like to know which books he reads? I've never heard so much crap.

@mik823

3 жыл бұрын

The books he reads are the ones he makes up in his tiny little mind...it's called a fantasy... 😆😆😆

Only one correction. Slav comes from "slovesnost" literally meaning "capable of articulated speech". It is a very common thing for ethnonyms to mean "People" or "People who speak right" Heck, the old name for German: "Thiudisc" also litteraly means "understandable speech"

@GreatPolishWingedHussars

Жыл бұрын

Not only one correction is necessary for the video, but many corrections! I know it's been 4 years ago, but nevertheless. The claim is nonsense and contradicts the historical reality that the Slavs were slaves first. Incidentally, it is not at all proven that the term slave is derived from the term Slav. All the outrageous claims are just prejudices about the Slavs. In addition, many Celts and members of other peoples were enslaved by the Vikings, not just Slavs. It is absurd to also mention the Ottomans and Mongols in this context, because they were in a completely different age. By the way, Byzantines hardly enslaved Slavs, but bought slaves from the Vikings and this slaves certainly weren't just Slavs. Ridiculous and impudent, by the way, that at the beginning of the video guys that apparently are Slavs perform any nonsensical explosions with barrels. Why is such nonsense shown? Obviously the intention is to show that the people the video is about are idiots. In reality, the Slavs were the most successful and they certainly weren't a people of slaves and idiots. Because idiots and slaves would definitely not have succeeded in colonizing half of Europe. Slavic expansion began during the second century AD, and they occupied a large area of eastern Europe between the Vistula and the middle Dnieper. The Slavs slowly expanded in all directions and assimilated the neighboring cultures. They constantly sought an outlet for the population surplus. Partially they acted without violence and the Slavic peoples infiltrated foreign territories very clever by being cooperative. The Slavs became a dominant force and establishing a new socio-political network in the entire area of central and southeastern Europe. According to the historian Paul Barford, "The Spartan and egalitarian Slavic culture clearly had something attractive for great numbers of the European populations living over considerable areas of central Europe", resulting in their assimilation. The special thing about the Slavs was that they did not practice slavery! Byzantine chroniclers noted that Roman prisoners captured by the Slavs could soon become free members of Slavic society if they wished. So Slavs were the only ones who even assimilated Romans and not just captured soldiers but the population of entire conquered territories. According to the 6th-century manual of war "Strategikon" by Byzantine Emperor Maurice the Slavs were a hospitable people and did not keep prisoners indefinitely "but lay down a certain period after which they can decide for themselves if they want to return to their former homelands or to stay amongst the Slavs as free men and friends." The Byzantine scholar Pseudo-Caesarius's wrote that Slavs living by their own law and without the rule of anyone. The Slave were reported to have lived under a democracy for a long time. The 6th-century historian Procopius, who was in contact with Slavic mercenaries, reported, "The Slavic nations, are not governed by one man, but from ancient times have lived in democracy, and consequently everything which involves their welfare, whether for good or for ill, is referred to the people." The 6th-century manual of war Strategikon by Byzantine Emperor Maurice is considered an eyewitness of the Slavs and said that "the Slaves were independent, absolutely refused to be enslaved or governed, least of all in their own land." The Slavs managed to keep up their agriculture (and a rather efficient kind of agriculture, by the standards of the time). There were no nobility and no kings with the greed for more and contempt for peasant's work, as it did with the Germanic Tribes. Thus the Slavic model proved an attractive alternative ... which proved practically indestructible. Slav traditions, language, and culture shaped, or at least influenced, innumerable local and regional communities: a surprising similarity that developed without any central institution to promote it. These regional ethnogeneses inspired by Slavic tradition incorporated considerable remnants of the Roman or Germanic population ready enough to give up ethnic identities that had lost their cohesion. Slavs were so successful in the assimilation of other peoples because they weren't as barbaric as the Germanic tribes or Vikings. Slavs did not practice slavery and they didn't maraud like the Germanic vandals, for example, from which the term vandalism is not wrongly derived. That is why the Slavs were successful in colonizing and the violent and Slavery driving Germanic tribes and Vikings were not! That is why today there are very many Slavs and only very few Scandinavian descendants of the Vikings in comparison. That is why half of Europe is populated by Slavs and the descendants of the Vikings live in the same relatively small area as 1000 years ago compared to the large area of ​​the Slavs. The same applies to the descendants of the Germanic tribes, the only thing they have colonized in Europe is England and small Slavic areas in East Germany because otherwise they are where they were 1000 years ago in contrast to the Slavs who successfully colonized half of Europe.

I'm Mexican and always liked Slavs for some reason.

@yovanbidenovic4940

3 жыл бұрын

I mean, who doesn't? Apparently Biden but k

Mr masaman do you advertise your KZread channel on Facebook or Twitter just wondering if you did because I would love to promote you on social media

Great video. Just wish you would have spoken slower. I wouldn't have had to rewind so often! Still, great job.

I'm Slavic and i understand the ethymology, so i don't feel offended in any way and no one shouldn't feel :). Good video and keep doing a good job. I'm looking forward to see some more. Greetings from Poland.

@kimimon9057

6 жыл бұрын

Michał R. Bro You understand Russian ?

@Michu8905

6 жыл бұрын

kimi mon Unfortunately no. Polish and Russian may live in the same slavic group, but they are not similiar

@GreatPolishWingedHussars

Жыл бұрын

Wrong! No Good video and no good job! I know it's been 4 years ago, but nevertheless. The claim is nonsense and contradicts the historical reality that the Slavs were slaves first. Incidentally, it is not at all proven that the term slave is derived from the term Slav. All the outrageous claims are just prejudices about the Slavs. In addition, many Celts and members of other peoples were enslaved by the Vikings, not just Slavs. It is absurd to also mention the Ottomans and Mongols in this context, because they were in a completely different age. By the way, Byzantines hardly enslaved Slavs, but bought slaves from the Vikings and this slaves certainly weren't just Slavs. Ridiculous and impudent, by the way, that at the beginning of the video guys that apparently are Slavs perform any nonsensical explosions with barrels. Why is such nonsense shown? Obviously the intention is to show that the people the video is about are idiots. In reality, the Slavs were the most successful and they certainly weren't a people of slaves and idiots. Because idiots and slaves would definitely not have succeeded in colonizing half of Europe. Slavic expansion began during the second century AD, and they occupied a large area of eastern Europe between the Vistula and the middle Dnieper. The Slavs slowly expanded in all directions and assimilated the neighboring cultures. They constantly sought an outlet for the population surplus. Partially they acted without violence and the Slavic peoples infiltrated foreign territories very clever by being cooperative. The Slavs became a dominant force and establishing a new socio-political network in the entire area of central and southeastern Europe. According to the historian Paul Barford, "The Spartan and egalitarian Slavic culture clearly had something attractive for great numbers of the European populations living over considerable areas of central Europe", resulting in their assimilation. The special thing about the Slavs was that they did not practice slavery! Byzantine chroniclers noted that Roman prisoners captured by the Slavs could soon become free members of Slavic society if they wished. So Slavs were the only ones who even assimilated Romans and not just captured soldiers but the population of entire conquered territories. According to the 6th-century manual of war "Strategikon" by Byzantine Emperor Maurice the Slavs were a hospitable people and did not keep prisoners indefinitely "but lay down a certain period after which they can decide for themselves if they want to return to their former homelands or to stay amongst the Slavs as free men and friends." The Byzantine scholar Pseudo-Caesarius's wrote that Slavs living by their own law and without the rule of anyone. The Slave were reported to have lived under a democracy for a long time. The 6th-century historian Procopius, who was in contact with Slavic mercenaries, reported, "The Slavic nations, are not governed by one man, but from ancient times have lived in democracy, and consequently everything which involves their welfare, whether for good or for ill, is referred to the people." The 6th-century manual of war Strategikon by Byzantine Emperor Maurice is considered an eyewitness of the Slavs and said that "the Slaves were independent, absolutely refused to be enslaved or governed, least of all in their own land." The Slavs managed to keep up their agriculture (and a rather efficient kind of agriculture, by the standards of the time). There were no nobility and no kings with the greed for more and contempt for peasant's work, as it did with the Germanic Tribes. Thus the Slavic model proved an attractive alternative ... which proved practically indestructible. Slav traditions, language, and culture shaped, or at least influenced, innumerable local and regional communities: a surprising similarity that developed without any central institution to promote it. These regional ethnogeneses inspired by Slavic tradition incorporated considerable remnants of the Roman or Germanic population ready enough to give up ethnic identities that had lost their cohesion. Slavs were so successful in the assimilation of other peoples because they weren't as barbaric as the Germanic tribes or Vikings. Slavs did not practice slavery and they didn't maraud like the Germanic vandals, for example, from which the term vandalism is not wrongly derived. That is why the Slavs were successful in colonizing and the violent and Slavery driving Germanic tribes and Vikings were not! That is why today there are very many Slavs and only very few Scandinavian descendants of the Vikings in comparison. That is why half of Europe is populated by Slavs and the descendants of the Vikings live in the same relatively small area as 1000 years ago compared to the large area of ​​the Slavs. The same applies to the descendants of the Germanic tribes, the only thing they have colonized in Europe is England and small Slavic areas in East Germany because otherwise they are where they were 1000 years ago in contrast to the Slavs who successfully colonized half of Europe.