Newsgroups: sci.lang
Path: cantaloupe.srv.cs.cmu.edu!nntp.club.cc.cmu.edu!godot.cc.duq.edu!newsfeed.pitt.edu!gatech!udel!news.mathworks.com!uunet!in1.uu.net!comp.vuw.ac.nz!actrix.gen.nz!kriha
From: kriha_p@actrix.gen.nz (Paul J. Kriha)
Subject: Re: Re- Alans,Ossetians, Scythians, etc.
Message-ID: <3tqqu0$10c_004@actrix.gen.nz>
Sender: news@actrix.gen.nz (News Administrator)
Organization: Kriha Consultants Pty Ltd
Date: Mon, 10 Jul 1995 09:12:32 GMT
References: <3t4d35$1h4q@usenetp1.news.prodigy.com> <3t71d9$5qs@Venus.mcs.com> <805299736snz@meden.demon.co.uk>
X-Newsreader: News Xpress Version 1.0 Beta #3
X-Nntp-Posting-Host: kriha.actrix.gen.nz
Lines: 57

In article <805299736snz@meden.demon.co.uk>,
   Stewart Robert Hinsley <Stewart@meden.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>In article <3t71d9$5qs@Venus.mcs.com> madcro@MCS.COM "Marko Puljic" writes:
>
>> on the other hand, the Serbs and the Sorbs are related peoples.
>> the word for Sorbs in Croatian is Luzhichki Srbi/Lusatian Serbs, while
>> Serbs are just Srbi. And the term or derivative of Luzhichki Srbi
>> is used by all the Slavic peoples. Hesk they even call themselves 
>> Serbs. Their main cultural organization is called
>> Macica Serpska...
>> 
>I'm not going to comment on whether the Serbs and Sorbs are related
>beyond both being Slavic - I have insufficient knowledge of this
>topic to be able to make a meaningful comment.
>
>However I should like to point out that it is dangerous to make
>assumptions as to the relationships of ethnoses based on the
>coincidence of names.
>
>Some examples where such assumptions fail follow:
>
>1) The Yao of southern China, east Africa and Venuzuela.
>2) Columbians and British Columbians.
>3) The various groups known by some variation of Welsh or Vlach.
>4) (Balkan) Albanians and Picts (Albannaich).
>5) The Galicians of eastern Europe and NW Spain.

You are right that a mere coincidence of names amounts to
very little.  However, I would like to offer a point in
favour of the Serb/Sorb's relatedness.

I don't have access to any reference books, others
may provide the relevant concrete references.
What I can offer is what I remember from my Old Slavic high
school classes. It seems, there is a well established
(centuries old) Slavic tradition of regarding all Serbians
to be releated.
In some Slavic languages there is no distinction between
Serb/Sorb. For example, in Czech: Srbsko = Serbia,
Luz^icke' Srbsko  = Lusatian Serbia.

I was also taught that the Croats were all related.
Tiny disjointed islands of White Croats in N. Moravia,
N.E. Germany, E. Poland, and Ukraine with Croats
in Croatia.

During their migration the Serbs and especially Croats
made a big clockwise sweeping movement from the Balkans
to Southern border of Denmark, from where the Croats were
later pushed East by Germanic tribes. Some of them ended
up in Novgorodsk mixing with Vikings, which gave rise to....
but that's another story.


Cheers,
Paul.

