Written by Miroslav Cosovic. Translated by Petrit Latifi.

“Anyone who knows the slightest bit about medieval Montenegrin history knows that Montenegrin tribes originated from Vlach and Albanian katuns, and over time they were populated by other ethnicities.“

Many statements by Serbian public figures regarding the Serbian nation – whether made by scientists, artists, politicians, or church figures – boil down to the fact that Serbs are a blood group bound by a common origin, a group that has the same or very similar traditions, customs, a common culture, etc. Accordingly, it would be logical for this point of view to be proven from the perspective of other sciences, and not only on the basis of documents from the 19th and 20th centuries or on the basis of mythomania about Kosovo, Emperor Dušan , Marko Kraljević , the “Kosovo flight” …           

If the Serbs are one people, one clan, if they are from one root, as almost all Serbian intellectuals claim, then all Serbs should have very uniform customs, traditions, genetics. The ethnic cores of these nations have unique customs, traditions, folklore, history, genetics. I am only talking about the core of nations, because no modern nation is a pure ethnic group.

Characteristics of the ethnos: Interestingly, in the Serbian nation – in which nationalism is very strong – there is no uniformity of customs, traditions, folklore… Who, then, is the so-called “pure Serb”. Is it the Banatian who fled from Kosovo in 1690 – a descendant of medieval Serbs; are the real Serbs the inhabitants of southern Serbia – the people of Vranje and Piroć; is a real Serb, for example, some Bulatović from Montenegro who has no direct connection with Serbian history and who, let’s mention one famous politician, first registered as a Serb a year ago?

I showed in the previous text that Serbia was almost an empty land after the Second Migration of the Serbs in 1739. Then the same territory was populated from all sides of the Balkans by people who – when they inhabited it – did not bear the Serbian name. Today’s Serbs are a conglomerate of various ethnic groups who do not have much in common except the Serbian church and language created by Vuk Karadžić .

Professional and amateur Serbizers of the Balkans have noticed that they cannot possibly unite today’s Serbs into one national type, and that is why they never, never refer to sciences such as biophysical anthropology, ethnology, archaeology, genetics. Never. I am quite sure – ethnogenesis, origin and generally the ethnic characteristics of a people cannot be researched in a quality manner if the sciences I mentioned are not included in the research.

However, the Serbizers of the Balkans only quote Njegoš, Nikola and the people around them. As for Bosnia – they quote Meša Selimović and Emir Kusturica , and they refute the Croats by pointing to Med Pucić and Matija Ban . So, the Serbizers do not refer to history, no, they refer only to the last 150 years of history! Has anyone ever heard someone from the Serbizer division refer to a document by Vojislavljević, Balšić, Crnojević, and there are thousands of documents from the Middle Ages in the Kotor, Zadar, Venetian, Vatican and other archives that refer to our ancestors? Also, there are numerous medieval charters of Serbian monasteries.

The greatest quality of Serbizers is that they are persistent, they literally repeat a million times the Serbifications of the creators of the Serbian political nation from the last 150 years. Serbism is a political ideology that emerged in the 19th century, it has nothing to do with ethnicity. The modern Serbian nation was created by Dositej, Vuk, Garašanin, Sima Milutinović Sarajlija, Njegoš…

The history of academician Vlahović: Who are the inhabitants of Montenegro, let’s look at what biophysical anthropology, the branch of anthropology that studies humans based on physical evidence – such as the human skeleton, says.

Anthropologist, academician of the Academy of Sciences and Arts of Serbia, Petar Vlahović published in 2008 in the Gazette of the Anthropological Society of Serbia the article ” The Dinaric Type and Its Varieties in Montenegro ” in which he clearly described Montenegrins – as the indigenous people of the Balkans!

Vlahović writes:

“The most complete data was left by Jan (Ivan) Deniker, a French anthropologist of Russian origin, who, while traveling along the Dalmatian coast in 1880, noticed physical differences between the population of northern – mainland Dalmatia and the population of Boka Kotorska. Deniker’s classification of races is considered fundamental because he was among the first anthropologists to classify ethnic communities according to both their ethnic and biophysical characteristics. On that occasion, Deniker, based on his direct field studies of Montenegrins in Boka Kotorska, singled out and described the “Adriatic” (the name was soon abandoned) or “Dinaric” race, which entered the scientific literature under the name “Dinaric race” and was directly related to Montenegro. Deniker described the Boka people, or Montenegrins from Boka, as people of fair age, dark skin, dark hair and dark eyes, long faces with straight or aquiline noses…”

The name Dinarci was established by the Serbian scientist Jovan Cvijić , and Petar Vlahović then clearly writes that the Dinarci are indigenous people, since prehistoric times: ” According to current knowledge, the ontogenetic development of the Dinaric anthropological type begins in prehistoric times. This is evidenced by paleoanthropological material found both in Montenegro and in a much wider area that today includes populations of the modern Dinaric type…

This is confirmed by findings from the Zeta Plain and some other localities in Montenegro, including medieval populations from the Momišići locality in Podgorica. Gracilization influenced the reduction of head circumference and narrowing of the face, and brachycephalization, based on osteological material in Montenegro, can be historically traced from the Mesolithic and Bronze Ages, and then also in medieval and modern Montenegrin populations. B. Ivanović established that in Montenegrins, who are typical representatives of the Dinaric racial variety, the head index is around 83, which makes Montenegrin populations very strikingly different from other Doliho and mesocephalic population of Europe.

In addition, Montenegrin populations have a broad face and a large width between the cheekbones (141 mm on average) that is not observed in other Slavic and non-Slavic European populations. It is also interesting that, according to the studies of Božina Ivanović and Živko Mikić, the Dinaric complex of Montenegrins, which includes brachycephaly and a broad face, has no analogies with the morphological features of paleoanthropological series originating from Slavic necropolises from the rest of the South Slavic area, but can only be associated with medieval paleoanthropological material from Montenegro.”

History of the origin of the Dinar people: As I have written before, we are talking about a population that emerged from the darkness of prehistory and ancient times under the folk name Vlachs . In fact, the correct name for the Dinar people, the ethnic name, would be – Morlaci, as the Venetians called the Dinar people for centuries, and the word Morlak comes from the Greek Mauro Vlah = Black Vlach.

The Morlaci ( Cvijić ‘s Dinar people ) are a subgroup of the Vlachs , the Vlachs have always lived throughout the Balkan Peninsula. All modern scholars agree that the Vlachs are the original inhabitants of the Balkan Peninsula, therefore the Vlachs have no one to be other than those people whom the Romans called – Illyrians. 

The biggest confusion in our country regarding the Illyrians is that both scholars (except for a few of them) and all other people in our region have the idea that the Illyrians were one and the same people, and such thinking is a pure mistake. Those people whom the Romans called Illyrians were not one and the same people, simply, the Romans did not want to “break the head” of who is who in this area, so they called everyone Illyrians, after one single tribe. The original Illyrians mentioned in the oldest Greek sources and the people the Romans called Illyrians are ethnically different groups of people.

Petar Vlahović continues:

“Božina Ivanović connects these characteristics of Montenegrins with the Mesolithic (found on Vlasac) and early Neolithic (found on Lepenski Vir) population of the Đerdap Danube basin and thus establishes the succession of Montenegrins with the ancient population of the Balkan Peninsula…”( http://http://www.antropoloskodrustvosrbije.com/PDF/003_Petar_Vlahovic.pdf )

Therefore, anthropologists have established the succession of Montenegrins with the inhabitants of the places where Romanian Vlachs still live today (now massively Serbified).

Academic turnaround: Professor of biophysical anthropology Živko Mikić , a student at the Gutenberg University in Mainz, where he received his doctorate, says this in Blic:

 “We are descendants of the most typical Dinarides, who lived in a much wider area than the Dinaric Massif and whose development was not shaken by the great migration of peoples at the beginning of the Middle Ages, the occupation after the Battle of Kosovo…”

The article states that Mikić “examined around 30,000 skeletons dating from prehistoric times to the present day, and they are from the soil of Serbia.” So this top scientist also declares that there are few true Slavs in this region.

From the perspective of his science, Petar Vlahović undoubtedly established that Montenegrins are not primarily Slavs by origin, and therefore they can hardly be Serbs, because medieval Serbs were definitely Slavs.

That the ancient Serbs were Slavs is evident from a multitude of documents from the Middle Ages, in medieval charters the Serbs-Slovens were always separated from the natives – Vlachs and Albanians . No one from SANU, CANU, not a single historian in Serbia and Montenegro disputes that the ancient Serbs (who were destroyed by the Turks, my remark) were Slavs.

The Serbs migrated to the Balkans in the 7th century, so say both CANU and SANU. As for the anthropological differences between the Morlaks ( Cvijić’s Dinarci ) and the Slavs, they are so great that even the most ordinary laymen can easily notice them today. We all know what our people look like, for example from Banjani, Drobnjak, Njeguš, Paštrović, Grbalj, and we all know what the Slavs look like (Russians, Poles, Ukrainians…) When we think about it, even we laymen understand what Vlahović and Mikić are talking about from the perspective of their science.

This same Petar Vlahović, who has been observing Montenegrins in this area since, I quote – “the Mesolithic and Bronze Ages” (the Mesolithic began 10,000 years ago!), in his 1995 work “The Serbian Origin of Montenegrins” says that Montenegrins are Serbs?!!

Here is that work: http://www.rastko.rs/istorija/srbi-balkan/pvlahovic-montenegro.html In this article in English, Vlahović makes a hilarious stunt and explicitly claims that Montenegrins are descended from Slavs-Serbs who settled Duklja?!? He refers to the writings of the Byzantine emperor Porphyrogenitus and says that Serbs settled Duklja, although Porphyrogenitus himself does not say that anywhere!

Then, on the fictional Serbs in Duklja, he makes a new fabrication, a story about the tribal system among Serbs in Montenegro, although tribes among Serbs never existed, no Slavic tribe ever existed in Serbia.

Anyone who knows the slightest bit about medieval Montenegrin history knows that Montenegrin tribes originated from Vlach and Albanian katuns, and over time they were populated by other ethnicities.

Thus, an academician of CANU, from the perspective of his science – anthropology, clearly proves that Montenegrins are indigenous people, and by arbitrarily citing historical sources in another paper, claims that Montenegrins are actually Serbs-Slavs, although he himself certainly does not understand at all how Montenegrins can be Dinarians at one time and Slavs at another. But the fact that he performs scientific stunts, that he plays with science like a magician, is that important? Who cares? Does anyone really think that for the scientist Petar Vlahović, his science comes first? Or has politics covered everything up?

Reference

https://www.portalanalitika.me/clanak/stav-politike-vratolomije-akademika-petra-vlahovia