Talk:Dalmatian Italians/Archives/2008/October
 | This page is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Merger proposal
No need for two articles on the same subject. Blatant content fork. Comments? AlasdairGreen27 (talk) 15:36, 11 July 2008 (UTC)
- Keep.--88.81.169.138 (talk) 15:44, 11 July 2008 (UTC)
- This is not a vote, I just said that I'm in favor of the merge. Even if it was a vote, you could not participate since you are just another sock of User:Brunodam. In either case, what do you care? I wrote the vast majority of this, anyway... --DIREKTOR (TALK) 15:49, 11 July 2008 (UTC)
- Which one is the fork? --DaQuirin (talk) 22:30, 25 October 2008 (UTC)
- It was Italian cultural and historic presence in Dalmatia. It's been merged into this article without any objections. AlasdairGreen27 (talk) 22:34, 25 October 2008 (UTC)
- Which one is the fork? --DaQuirin (talk) 22:30, 25 October 2008 (UTC)
Several things
Again, this article must be part of article Italians in Croatia.
Second, someone tells the history of ancient Rome as history of Italians. Why that or those users don't try to push the same story with France, Romania or Spain?
What's that "Dalmatian dialect of Croatian language"? This is complete lack of knowledge on the matter.
"actual political rule over the province often changed hands between the Republic and other regional powers, namely the Byzantine Empire, the Kingdom of Croatia, and the Kingdom of Hungary.". No, children. In early medieval times, Croatian littoral and hinterland was always under direct rule of Kingdom of Croatia which had its seats in littoral settlements: Solin, Klis, Biaći, Podstrana, Šibenik...
In certain periods of time, Croatia was the vassal of Byzantium. Also, Byzantium controlled the theme of Dalmatia (not whole Roman province); in a periods of time when Kingdom of Croatia was stronger and more independent and influential in international policy, Byzantium granted the right to those cities to Kingdom of Croatia.
Kingdom of Hungary never controlled nor had under its direct rule any part of Croatian Littoral. Though, after 1102, two Kingdoms became united through the person of the King, personal union.
After a successful campaign of conquest, Venice controlled part of Croatian Littoral. At that time, the Doge of Venice also had the title "of Croatia".
"More and more Slavs (Catholic and Orthodox) were pushed into Venetian Dalmatia, to escape the Ottomans. This resulted in an increase of the Slavic presence and culture in the cities". Slav presence kept its usual percentage. Again, we have problems with Italian expansionists who simply cannot tell the word "Croat"; instead, they always use some amorphous "Slav", in order to evade the use of word "Croat". No to the previous problem. Plague decimated the population of cities. Influx of population from neighbourhood to cities is world-wide regular process. Last but not the least, the cities were kept alive thanks to the influx of population from neighbourhood, otherwise the population 'd suffer from genetic erosion. Kubura (talk) 07:49, 30 October 2008 (UTC)
- "actual political rule over the province often changed hands between the Republic and other regional powers, namely the Byzantine Empire, the Kingdom of Croatia, and the Kingdom of Hungary.".
- This is correct, Kubura. De jure, the Dalmatian cities were always a part of the Byzantine Empire, while de facto rule shifted throughout the period.
- "More and more Slavs (Catholic and Orthodox) were pushed into Venetian Dalmatia, to escape the Ottomans. This resulted in an increase of the Slavic presence and culture in the cities"
- It is very hard to apply the modern national distinctions of between Serbs, Croats, Montenegrins, and Bosniaks to the Middle Ages. --DIREKTOR (TALK) 12:32, 30 October 2008 (UTC)