This article is within the scope of WikiProject Classical Greece and Rome, a group of contributors interested in Wikipedia's articles on classics. If you would like to join the WikiProject or learn how to contribute, please see our project page. If you need assistance from a classicist, please see our talk page.Classical Greece and RomeWikipedia:WikiProject Classical Greece and RomeTemplate:WikiProject Classical Greece and RomeClassical Greece and Rome
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Archaeology, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Archaeology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ArchaeologyWikipedia:WikiProject ArchaeologyTemplate:WikiProject ArchaeologyArchaeology
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Serbia, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Serbia on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.SerbiaWikipedia:WikiProject SerbiaTemplate:WikiProject SerbiaSerbia
Serbinum is part of the WikiProject Bosnia and Herzegovina, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of articles related to Bosnia and Herzegovina on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks.Bosnia and HerzegovinaWikipedia:WikiProject Bosnia and HerzegovinaTemplate:WikiProject Bosnia and HerzegovinaBosnia and Herzegovina
Well, clearly, if the city was called Serbinum, this was so because Slavs/Serbs lived there. To call its population Sarmatian is euphemism and constitutes pure anti-Slavic prejudice, based on sixth century Slavic arrival dogma. False dogma that is. 59.13.199.18522:12, 6 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
According to ancient Greek authors, Old Serbs were not Slavs, but Sarmatians. Slavs did not lived in Pannonia in this time, but Sarmatians did, so the theory that this city was named after Serbs is likely, but those Serbs were not Slavs in this time. PANONIAN(talk)10:01, 7 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Right, it would appear that proto-Slavs not only “stole” the name from non-Slavic Bulgars, non-Slavic Illyrians, non-Slavic Carni, non-Slavic Veneti, non-Slavic Boii, non-Slavic Veltae and so on, but also from non-Slavic Slavs, since ‘servus’ means the same in Latin as ‘slave’ in English, and the ethnonym Serb is just a translation of the name Slav. Think about it: non-Slavic Slavs! Science can sometimes be really amusing. To me German means German, Greek means Greek, elephant means elephant, and therefore ‘Srbin’ means ‘Srbin’. Every other explanation is born out of prejudice towards the Slavs. Perhaps you truly believe that science has proven beyond any doubt, that there were no Slavs south of the Danube in ancient times, but unfortunately you are wrong as this ancient toponym clearly shows. Similarly there was a settlement called ‘Serviodurum’ in the Roman province of Rhaetia et Vindelicia, and a town called ‘Pons Servilii’ (also called Claudanum) in Illyria, which would mean something like ‘servile bridge’, but in reality signified “a bank (breg, brijeg, берег) of a river (Drina), where Serbs (Slavs) live”, i.e. ‘Breg Srpski’.
Chances are, we would never agree on the name of this ancient Pannonian city, so I won’t comment further, bit I think you know full-well that the argument about non-Slavic Serbs is weak, yet there is no point in arguing into eternity. I meant no personal offence and wish to you a pleasant rest of the weekend. 210.109.172.17715:48, 7 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Names "Slav" and "Serb" have nothing to do with words in Latin or English - Name "Slav" derived from Slavic word which mean "word" and name Serb derived from Caucasian word which mean "man". Also, you cannot ignore the fact that ancient Greek authors mention Serbs among Sarmatians (and since you cannot prove that all Sarmatians were Slavs, you cannot prove that for Serbs either). Also, there are no hard proofs for Slavic presence in the Balkans in this time, while presence of Sarmatians is well documented in many sources. History should be based on reliable sources, not on the works of Jovan Deretić, Miloš Milojević and other so-called "historians". PANONIAN(talk)21:03, 7 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
You are right, history should be based on reliable sources. Today, 11 years after your post, we can see that Deretic was completely right. And there are many prooves that Slavs were on the Balkan from ancient time. One of them is Paleolithic Continuity Theory by famous European linguists Mario Alinei. You may think you know more than Mario Alinei, but sorry Panonian, I much more believe to Italian linguist :) Dragandragan04 (talk) 21:01, 3 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]
