Radoslav Višeslavić of Serbia

• Preferred Name: Radoslav Višeslavić of Serbia^{[1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8] [9]}
  
• Gender: M
  
• Religion: Slavic paganism or Christianity with note: Wikiwand: Radoslav of Serbia
  
• Death: Y
  
• FSID: KZFD-6VQ
  
• Ruling+House:+Vlastimirović+dynasty: with note: Wikiwand: Radoslav of Serbia
  
• Birth: ABT 770 in Serbia at LATI: N4.244 LONG: E0.767
  
• Nationality: Serbian
  

1. Title: Wikiwand: Knyaz
   Publication: Name: https://www.wikiwand.com/en/Knyaz;
   Note: Knyaz or knez is a historical Slavic title, used both as a royal and noble title in different times of history and different ancient Slavic lands. It is usually translated into English as prince, duke or count, depending on specific historical context and the potentially known Latin equivalents of the title for each bearer of the name. In Latin sources the title is usually translated as comes or princeps, but the word was originally derived from the Proto-Germanic kuningaz (king). The female form transliterated from Bulgarian and Russian is knyaginya (княгиня), kneginja in Slovene, Croatian and Serbian (Serbian Cyrillic: кнегиња). In Russian, the daughter of a knyaz is knyazhna (княжна),. In Russian, the son of a knyaz is knyazhich (княжич in its old form). The title is pronounced and written similarly in different European languages. In Croatian, Bosnian and West Slavic languages, such as Polish, the word has later come to denote "lord", and in Czech, Polish and Slovak also came to mean "priest" (kněz, ksiądz, kňaz) as well as "duke" (knez, kníže, książę, knieža). In Sorbian it means simply "Mister" (from "Master," Compare French monsieur from mon sieur "my lord"). Today the term knez is still used as the most common translation of "prince" in Bosnian, Croatian and Serbian literature. Knez is also found as a surname in former Yugoslavia. Etymology The etymology is ultimately a cognate of the English king, the German König, and the Swedish konung. The proto-Slavic form was кънѧѕь, kŭnędzĭ; Church Slavonic: кънѧѕь, kŭnędzĭ; Bulgarian: княз, knyaz; Old East Slavic: князь, knyazĭ; Polish: książę; Bosnian and Serbian: кнез; Bosnian, Serbian, Croatian and Slovene: knez; Czech: kníže; etc., as it could be a very early borrowing from the already extinct Proto-Germanic Kuningaz, a form also borrowed by Finnish and Estonian (Kuningas). Middle Ages The meaning of the term changed over the course of history. Initially the term was used to denote the chieftain of a tribe. Later, with the development of feudal statehood, it became the title of a ruler of a state, and among East Slavs (Russian: княжество (kniazhestvo), Ukrainian: князівство (knyazivstvo) traditionally translated as duchy or principality), for example, of Kievan Rus'. In medieval Latin sources the title was rendered as either rex or dux. In Bulgaria, Simeon took the title of tsar in 913. In Kievan Rus', as the degree of centralization grew, the ruler acquired the title Velikii Knyaz (Великий Князь) (translated as Grand Prince or Grand Duke, see Russian Grand Dukes). He ruled a Velyke Knyazivstvo (Велике Князiвcтво) (Grand Duchy), while a ruler of its vassal constituent (udel, udelnoe knyazivstvo or volost) was called udelny knyaz or simply knyaz. When Kievan Rus' became fragmented in the 13th century, the title Kniaz continued to be used in East Slavic states, including Kiev, Chernigov, Novgorod, Pereiaslav, Vladimir-Suzdal', Muscovy, Tver, Halych-Volynia, and in the Grand Duchy of Lithuania. Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth As noted above, the title knyaz or kniaz became a hereditary noble title in the Grand Duchy of Moscow and the Grand Duchy of Lithuania. Following the union of the Kingdom of Poland and the Grand Duchy of Lithuania, kniaź became a recognised title in the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth. By the 1630s - apart from the title pan, which indicated membership of the large szlachta noble class - kniaź was the only hereditary title that was officially recognized and officially used in the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth. Notable holders of the title kniaź include Jeremi Wiśniowiecki. Russia As the Tsardom of Russia gained dominion over much of former Kievan Rus', Velikii Kniaz (Великий Кня́зь) (Great Kniaz) Ivan IV of Russia in 1547 was crowned as Tsar. From the mid-18th century onward, the title Velikii Kniaz was revived to refer to (male-line) sons and grandsons of Russian Emperors. See titles for Tsar's family for details. Kniaz (Russian: Кня́зь, IPA: [ˈknʲæsʲ]) continued as a hereditary title of Russian nobility patrilineally descended from Rurik (e.g., Belozersky, Belosselsky-Belozersky, Repnin, Gorchakov) or Gediminas (e.g., Galitzine, Troubetzkoy). Members of Rurikid or Gedyminid families were called princes when they ruled tiny quasi-sovereign medieval principalities. After their demesnes were absorbed by Muscovy, they settled at the Moscow court and were authorized to continue with their princely titles. From the 18th century onward, the title was occasionally granted by the Tsar, for the first time by Peter the Great to his associate Alexander Menshikov, and then by Catherine the Great to her lover Grigory Potemkin. After 1801, with the incorporation of Georgia into the Russian Empire, various titles of numerous local nobles were controversially rendered in Russian as "kniazes." Similarly, many petty Tatar nobles asserted their right to style themselves "kniazes" because they descended from Genghis Khan. See also "Velikiy Knyaz" article for more details. Finally, within the Russian Empire of 1809-1917, Finland was officially called Grand Principality of Finland (fi Suomen suuriruhtinaskunta, sv Storfurstendömet Finland, ru Velikoye Knyazhestvo Finlyandskoye). South Slavic countries In the 19th century, the Serbian term knez (кнез) and the Bulgarian term knyaz (княз) were revived to denote semi-independent rulers of those countries, such as Alexander Karađorđević and Alexander of Battenberg. In parts of Serbia and western Bulgaria, knez was the informal title of the elder or mayor of a village or zadruga until around the 19th century. Those are officially called градоначелник (gradonačelnik) (Serbia) and градоначалник (gradonachalnik) or кмет (kmet) (Bulgaria). Bulgaria Prior to Battenberg, the title knyaz was born by Simeon I during the First Bulgarian Empire (9th-10th century). At the height of his power, Simeon adopted the title of tsar ("emperor"), as did the Bulgarian rulers after the country became officially independent in 1908. As of Bulgaria's independence in 1908, Knyaz Ferdinand became Tsar Ferdinand, and the words knyaz/knyaginya began to be used instead for the tsar's children – the heir to the throne, for example, held the title Knyaz Tarnovski ("Knyaz of Tarnovo"). Croatia knez was the monarchial title used by the medieval rulers of the Duchy of Pannonian Croatia and the Duchy of Littoral Croatia from the 7th to the 10th century, who were mostly titled as dux and rarely as princeps in Latin sources and translated as Dukes in English ones. knez was, in the Late Middle Ages, a hereditary feudal title borne by Croatian vassal noble families who were great territorial magnates of high social class (such as knezovi Bribirski (Counts of Bribir), knezovi Krčki (Counts of Krk) and knezovi Zrinski (Counts of Zrin)) and went by the title of comes in Latin and Count in English. Montenegro knjaz (књаз) was the ruler title used by the Petrović-Njegoš dynasty in Principality of Montenegro from 1852 until the establishment of Kingdom of Montenegro in 1905, translated as "Prince." Serbia knez (кнез) is a common term used in Serbian historiography for Serbian rulers in the Early Middle Ages, who were titled archon in Greek. knez (кнез) was a noble title used in the Middle Ages. knez (кнез) was a title borne by local Serbian chiefs under the Ottoman Empire. It was another name for the Ottoman Turkish rank of kodjabashi, held by local Christian chiefs. obor-knez (обор-кнез) was a title borne by elected local native Serbian chiefs of the nahiyah (district of a group of villages) in the Ottoman Sanjak of Smederevo (also known as the Belgrade Pashaluk). The obor-knez was senior chief and responsible for his district's people and was their spokesman (intermediary) in direct relations with the Pasha, though usually through the sipahi, and was in charge of the transfer of taxes levied on the villages. knez (кнез) was the monarchial title used by Miloš Obrenović in Serbia, translated as "Prince." Serbia (known as Kneževina Srbija) was de facto independent since 1817, becoming de jure independent with the 1869 constitution. The successors of Miloš used the title until 1882 when Serbia was elevated into a kingdom.
   
2. Title: Wikiwand: Archon
   Publication: Name: https://www.wikiwand.com/en/Archon;
   Note: Archon (Greek: ἄρχων, árchon, plural: ἄρχοντες, árchontes) is a Greek word that means "ruler," frequently used as the title of a specific public office. It is the masculine present participle of the verb stem αρχ-, meaning "to rule," derived from the same root as monarch and hierarchy. Ancient Greece In the early literary period of ancient Greece the chief magistrates of various Greek city states were called Archon. The term was also used throughout Greek history in a more general sense, ranging from "club leader" to "master of the tables" at syssitia to "Roman governor." In Roman terms, archontes ruled by imperium, whereas Basileis ("Kings") had auctoritas. In Athens a system of three concurrent Archons evolved, the three office holders being known as the Archon Eponymos, the Polemarch, and the Archon Basileus. According to Aristotle's Constitution of the Athenians, the power of the king first devolved to the archons, and these offices were filled from the aristocracy by elections every ten years. During this period the Archon Eponymos was the chief magistrate, the Polemarch was the head of the armed forces, and the Archon Basileus was responsible for the civic religious arrangements. After 683 BC the offices were held for only a single year, and the year was named after the Archon Eponymos. (Many ancient calendar systems did not number their years consecutively.) Although the process of the next transition is unclear, after 487 BC the archonships were assigned by lot to any citizen and the Polemarch's military duties were taken over by a new class of generals known as strategoi. The Polemarch thereafter had only minor religious duties. The Archon Eponymos remained the titular head of state under democracy, though of much reduced political importance. The Archons were assisted by "junior Archons", called Thesmothetes. After 457 BC ex-archons were automatically enrolled as life members of the Areopagus, though that assembly was no longer extremely important politically at that time. Under the Athenian constitution, Archons were also in charge of organizing festivals by bringing together poets, playwrights, actors, and city-appointed choregai (wealthy citizen patrons). The Archon would begin this process months in advance of a festival by selecting a chorus of three playwrights based on descriptions of the projected plays. Each playwright would be assigned a choregos, also selected by the Archon, from among the wealthy citizens who would pay all the expenses of costumes, masks, and training the chorus. The Archon also assigned each playwright a principal actor (the protagonist), as well as a second and third actor. The City Dionysia, an ancient dramatic festival held in March in which tragedy, comedy, and satyric drama originated, was under the direction of one of the principal magistrates, the archon eponymos. The archon eponymos remained the titular head of state under democracy, though of much reduced political importance. Byzantine Empire Byzantine historians usually described foreign rulers as archontes. The rulers of the Bulgars themselves, along with their own titles, often bear the title archon placed by God in inscriptions in Greek. Inside Byzantium, the term could be used to refer to any powerful noble or magnate, but in a technical sense, it was applied to a class of provincial governors. In the 8th and 9th centuries, these were the governors of some of the more peripheral provinces, inferior in status to the themata: Dalmatia, Cephalonia, Crete and Cyprus. Archontes were also placed in charge of various naval bases and trade stations, as well as semi-autonomous Slavic-inhabited areas (sclaviniae) under Byzantine sovereignty. In the 10th–12th centuries, archontes are also mentioned as the governors of specific cities. The area of an archon's jurisdiction was called an archontia (ἀρχοντία). The title was also used for the holders of several financial posts, such as the head of the mint (ἄρχων τῆς χαραγῆς), as well as directors of the imperial workshops, arsenals, etc. The title of megas archon ("grand archon") is also attested, as a translation of foreign titles such as "grand prince." In the mid-13th century, it was established as a special court rank, held by the highest-ranking official of the emperor's company. It existed throughout the Palaiologan period, but did not have any specific functions. Archons of the Ecumenical Patriarchate of Constantinople From time to time, laity of the Orthodox Church in communion with the Patriarch of Constantinople have been granted the title of Archon to honor their service to Church administration. In 1963, Archons were organized into a service society dedicated to St Andrew. This Archon status is not part of the Church hierarchy and is purely honorary. See http://www.archons.org/ . An Archon is an honoree by His All Holiness the Ecumenical Patriarch, for his outstanding service to the Church, and a well-known, distinguished, and well-respected leader of the Orthodox Church (at large). It is the sworn oath of the Archon to defend and promote the Orthodox Church faith and tradition. His main concern is to protect and promote the Holy Patriarchate and its mission. He is also concerned with human rights and the well-being and general welfare of the Church. As it is a significant religious position, the faith and dedication of a candidate for the role are extensively reviewed during consideration; the candidate should have demonstrated commitment for the betterment of the Church, Parish-Diocese, Archdiocese and the community as a whole. Gnostic Archons In late antiquity some variants of Gnosticism used the term Archon to refer to several servants of the Demiurge, the "creator god," that stood between the human race and a transcendent God that could only be reached through gnosis. In this context they have the role of the angels and demons of the Old Testament. The Egyptian Gnostic Basilideans accepted the existence of an archon called Abraxas who was the prince of 365 spiritual beings (Irenaeus, Adversus Haereses, I.24). The Orphics accepted[citation needed] the existence of seven archons: Iadabaoth or Ialdabaoth (who created the six others), Iao, Sabaoth, Adonaios, Elaios, Astaphanos and Horaios (Origen, Contra Celsum, VI.31). The commonly-called Pistis Sophia (or The Books of the Savior) gives another set: Paraplex, Hekate, Ariouth (females), Typhon, and Iachtanabas (males). Ialdabaoth had a head of a lion, like Mithraic Arimanius and Vedic Narasimha, a form of Vishnu. Their wrathful nature was mistaken as evil. The snake wrapped around them is Ananta (Sesha) Naga (mythology). Other uses "Archon" is also used in Modern Greek colloquially, as άρχοντας (archontas) to someone that holds a form of status, or power. The term is used within the Arab-speaking Copts in church parlance as a title for a leading member of the laity. Various fraternities and sororities use the title of archon or variations on it.
   
3. Title: Wikiwand: Slavic paganism
   Publication: Name: https://www.wikiwand.com/en/Slavic_paganism;
   Note: Slavic paganism or Slavic religion define the religious beliefs, godlores and ritual practices of the Slavs before the formal Christianisation of their ruling elites. The latter occurred at various stages between the 8th and the 13th century: The East Slavs came under the sphere of influence of Byzantine Orthodox Christianity, beginning with the latter's official adoption in 988 CE by Vladimir of Kievan Rus'; the West Slavs came under the sphere of influence of the Roman Catholic Church since the 12th century, and Christianisation for them went hand in hand with full or partial Germanisation, although Great Moravia had an earlier contact with Orthodox Christianity in the 860s; from Moravia, Orthodox Christianity spread to Bulgaria and to most South Slavs. The Christianisation of the Slavic peoples was, however, a slow and—in many cases—superficial phenomenon, especially in what is today Russia. Christianisation was vigorous in western and central parts of what is today Ukraine, as they were closer to the capital Kiev, but even there, popular resistance led by volkhvs, pagan priests or shamans, recurred periodically for centuries. Even though the Byzantine Christianization firstly has slowed down the Eastern Slavic traditions in Rus', it has preserved the Slavic traditions in the long term. While local Slavic figures and myths like for example Baba Roga in Croatia were forgotten, Slavic culture could exist and even flourish in the Eastern Slavic countries. In the case of a Christian Latinization of the Eastern Slavic countries, this would probably today not the case. Also the West Slavs of the Baltic withstood tenaciously against Christianity until it was violently imposed on them through the Northern Crusades.[3] In Bohemia, shortly after the country's official Christianisation in the late 9th century, a popular anti-Christian rebellion broke out. Among Poles and East Slavs, rebellion outbreaks occurred throughout the 11th century.[1] Christian chroniclers reported that the Slavs regularly re-embraced their original religion (relapsi sunt denuo ad paganismus).[6] Many elements of the indigenous Slavic religion were officially incorporated into Slavic Christianity, and, besides this, the worship of Slavic gods has persisted in unofficial folk religion until modern times. The Slavs' resistance to Christianity gave rise to a "whimsical syncretism" which in Old Church Slavonic vocabulary was defined as dvoeverie, "double faith." Since the early 20th century, Slavic folk religion has undergone an organised reinvention and reincorporation in the movement of Slavic Native Faith (Rodnovery). Overview and common features Twentieth-century scholars who pursued the study of ancient Slavic religion include Vyacheslav Ivanov, Vladimir Toporov, Marija Gimbutas, Boris Rybakov, and Roman Jakobson amongst others. Rybakov is noted for his effort of re-examination of medieval ecclesiastical texts, synthesising his findings with archaeological data, comparative mythology, ethnography and nineteenth-century folk practices, and for having given one of the most coherent pictures of ancient Slavic religion in his major book Paganism of the Ancient Slavs and other works. Among earlier, nineteenth-century scholars there was Bernhard Severin Ingemann, known for his study of Fundamentals of a North Slavic and Wendish mythology. Historical documents about Slavic religion include the Primary Chronicle, compiled in Kiev around 1111, and the Novgorod First Chronicle compiled in the Novgorod Republic. They contain detailed reports of the annihilation of the official Slavic religion of Kiev and Novgorod, and the subsequent "double faith." The Primary Chronicle also contains the authentic text of Russian-Greek treatises (dated 945 and 971) with native pre-Christian oaths. From the eleventh century onwards, various Russian writings were produced against the survival of Slavic religion, and Slavic gods were interpolated in the translations of foreign literary works, such as the Malalas Chronicle and the Alexandreis. The West Slavs who dwelt in the area between the Vistula and the Elbe stubbornly resisted the Northern Crusades, and the history of their resistance is written down in the Latin Chronicles of three German clergymen—Thietmar of Merseburg and Adam of Bremen in the eleventh century and Helmold in the twelfth—, in the twelfth-century biographies of Otto of Bamberg, and in Saxo Grammaticus' thirteenth-century Gesta Danorum. These documents, together with minor German documents and the Icelandic Knýtlinga saga, provide an accurate description of northwestern Slavic religion. The religions of other Slavic populations are less documented, because writings about the theme were produced late in time after Christianisation, such as the fifteenth-century Polish Chronicle, and contain a lot of sheer inventions. In the times preceding Christianisation, some Greek and Roman chroniclers, such as Procopius and Jordanes in the sixth century, sparsely documented some Slavic concepts and practices. Slavic paganism survived, in more or less pure forms, among the Slovenes along the Soča river up to the 1330s. Indo-European origins and other influences Further information: Deities of Slavic religion The linguistic unity, and negligible dialectal differentiation, of the Slavs until the end of the first millennium CE, and the lexical uniformity of religious vocabulary, witness a uniformity of early Slavic religion. It has been argued that the essence of early Slavdom was ethnoreligious before being ethnonational; that is to say, belonging to the Slavs was chiefly determined by conforming to certain beliefs and practices rather than by having a certain racial ancestry or being born in a certain place. Ivanov and Toporov identified Slavic religion as an outgrowth of a common Proto-Indo-European religion, sharing strong similarities with other neighbouring Indo-European belief systems such as those of Balts, Thracians, Phrygians and Indo-Iranians. Slavic (and Baltic) religion and mythology is considered more conservative and closer to original Proto-Indo-European religion—and thus precious for the latter's understanding—than other Indo-European traditions, due to the fact that, throughout the history of the Slavs, it remained a popular religion rather than being reworked and sophisticated by intellectual elites as it happened to other Indo-European religious cultures. The affinity with Proto-Indo-Iranian religion is evident in shared developments, including the elimination of the name of the supreme God of Heaven, *Dyeus, and its substitution by the term for "cloud" (Slavic Nebo), the shift of the Indo-European descriptor of heavenly deities (Avestan daeva, Old Church Slavonic div; Proto-Indo-European *deiwos, "celestial," derived from Dyeus) to the designation of evil entities, and the parallel designation of gods by the term meaning both "wealth" and its "giver" (Avestan baga, Old Church Slavonic bog). Much of the religious vocabulary of the Slavs, including vera ("faith," right choice between good and evil), svet ("holy"), mir ("peace," "agreement of parts") and rai ("paradise"), is shared with Iranian. According to Adrian Ivakhiv, the Indo-European element of Slavic religion may have included what Georges Dumézil studied as the "trifunctional hypothesis," that is to say a threefold conception of the social order, represented by the three castes of priests, warriors and farmers. According to Gimbutas Slavic religion represented an unmistakable overlapping of Indo-European patriarchal themes and pre-Indo-European—or what she called "Old European"—matrifocal themes. The latter were particularly hardwearing in Slavic religion, represented by the widespread devotion to Mat Syra Zemlya, the "Damp Mother Earth". Rybakov said the continuity and gradual complexification of Slavic religion, which started from devotion to life-giving forces (bereginy), ancestors and the supreme God, Rod ("Generation" itself), and developed into the "high mythology" of the official religion of the early Kievan Rus'. God and spirits As attested by Helmold (c. 1120–1177) in his Chronica Slavorum, the Slavs believed in a single heavenly God begetting all the lesser spirits governing nature, and worshipped it by their means. According to Helmold, "obeying the duties assigned to them, [the deities] have sprung from his [the supreme God's] blood and enjoy distinction in proportion to their nearness to the god of the gods." According to Rybakov's studies, wheel symbols such as the "thunder marks" (gromovoi znak) and the "six-petaled rose inside a circle" (e.g.), which are so common in Slavic folk crafts, and which were still carved on edges and peaks of roofs in northern Russia in the nineteenth century, were symbols of the supreme life-giver Rod. Before its conceptualisation as Rod as studied by Rybakov, this supreme God was known as Deivos (cognate with Sanskrit Deva, Latin Deus, Old High German Ziu and Lithuanian Dievas). The Slavs believed that from this God proceeded a cosmic duality, represented by Belobog ("White God") and Chernobog ("Black God," also named Tiarnoglofi, "Black Head/Mind"), representing the root of all the heavenly-masculine and the earthly-feminine deities, or the waxing light and waning light gods, respectively. In both categories, deities might be either Razi, "rede-givers," or Zirnitra, "wizards." The Slavs perceived the world as enlivened by a variety of spirits, which they represented as persons and worshipped. These spirits included those of waters (mavka and rusalka), forests (lisovyk), fields (polyovyk), those of households (domovyk), those of illnesses, luck and human ancestors. For instance, Leshy is an important woodland god, believed to distribute food assigning preys to hunters, later regarded as a god of flocks and herds, and still worshipped in this function in early twentieth-century Russia. Many gods were regarded by kins (rod o....
   
4. Title: Wikiwand: Radoslav of Serbia
   Publication: Name: https://www.wikiwand.com/en/Radoslav_of_Serbia;
   Note: Radoslav (Serbian: Радослав, Greek: Ροδόσθλαβος) was a Serbian Prince (Knez, Archont) who ruled over the early medieval Principality of Serbia at the beginning of the 9th century. He succeeded his father, prince Višeslav, who ruled at the end of the 8th century. Radoslav was succeeded by his son, prince Prosigoj. According to De Administrando Imperio, compiled by the Byzantine Emperor Constantine VII Porphyrogenitus, during the reign of princes Višeslav, Radoslav and Prosigoj there was no war between Serbian Principality and its eastern neighbour, the Bulgarian Khanate. Radoslav or his son was the ruler of Serbia during the uprisings (819–822) of Ljudevit Posavski against the Franks. According to the Royal Frankish Annals, in 822, Ljudevit went from his seat in Sisak to the Serbs, somewhere in western Bosnia. Under the same entry, the Royal Frankish Annals state that Serbs were controlling a great part of Dalmatia ("ad Sorabos, quae natio magnam Dalmatiae partem obtinere dicitur"). During the reign of prince Radoslav, and his immediate predecessors and successors, the process of gradual Christianization of the Serbs was still going on, starting in the first half of the 7th century and finally ending by the middle of the 9th century.
   
5. Title: Wikiwand: Principality of Serbia (medieval)
   Publication: Name: https://www.wikiwand.com/en/Principality_of_Serbia_(medieval);
   Note: The Principality of Serbia (Serbian: Кнежевина Србија / Kneževina Srbija) or Serbian Principality (Serbian: Cрпска кнежевина / Srpska kneževina), was an early medieval state of the Serbs, located in western regions of Southeastern Europe. It existed from the beginning of the 7th century up to c. 969-971 and was ruled by the Vlastimirović dynasty. Its first ruler known by name was Višeslav who started ruling around 780. In 822, the Serbs were said to rule the "greater part of Dalmatia" while at the same time the Bulgars had taken the lands to the east, preparing to conquer Serbia. Vlastimir defeated the Bulgar army in a three-year-war (839–842), and the two powers lived in peace for some decades. Vlastimir's three sons succeeded in ruling Serbia together, although not for long; Serbia became a key part in the power struggle between the Byzantines and Bulgars (in predominantly Byzantine alliance), which also resulted in major dynastic wars for a period of three decades. Central parts of the principality were shortly occupied by the Bulgarian army for three years (924–927), until Serbian prince Časlav succeeded to liberate the land and unite several Serbian regions, becoming the most powerful ruler of the Vlastimirović dynasty. An important process during this period was the Christianization of the Serbs, establishment of Christianity as state-religion c. 869, and the founding of the first Serbian eparchy (diocese), the Eparchy of Ras. The principality was annexed by the Byzantines in c. 969-971 and ruled as the Catepanate of Ras. The main information of the history of principality and Vlastimirović dynasty are recorded in the contemporary historical work De Administrando Imperio (written c. 950–960). Background Slavs (Sklavenoi) settled the Balkans in the 6th century. The history of the early medieval Serbian principality and the Vlastimirović dynasty is recorded in the work De Administrando Imperio (On the Governance of the Empire, abbr. "DAI"), compiled by the Byzantine Emperor Constantine VII Porphyrogenitus (r. 913–959). The work mentions the first Serbian ruler, without a name (known conventionally as "Unknown Archon"), that led the White Serbs to the Southeastern Europe and received the protection of Emperor Heraclius (r. 610–641), and was said to have died long before the Bulgar invasion (680). The Serbian ruler was titled "Prince (archon) of the Serbia" (αρχων Σερβλίας). The DAI mentions that this ruler was inherited by the son, i.e. the first-born.[7] According to some Serbian authors, his descendants succeeded him, but their names are unknown until the coming of Višeslav. However, it is very likely that attempts by one ruling župan after another to subjugate his neighbours led to many conflicts and the custom of the early Slavs, whereby the ruler was succeeded by his eldest relative, not necessarily by his own son, gave rise to further conflicts. Višeslav, Radoslav and Prosigoj (circa 780–830) The time and circumstances of the first three Serbian rulers are almost unknown. The first of the dynasty known by name was Višeslav who began his rule around 780, being a contemporary of Charlemagne (fl. 768–814). The first capital of the Serbs was Ras, in Raška. The Serbs at that time were organized into župe (sing. župa), a confederation of village communities (roughly the equivalent of a county), headed by a local župan (a magistrate or governor); the governorship was hereditary, and the župan reported to the Serbian prince, whom they were obliged to aid in war. According to DAI, "baptized Serbia" (known erroneously in historiography as Raška, included the inhabited cities (καστρα/kastra) of Destinikon (Δεστινίκον), Tzernabouskeï (Τζερναβουσκέη), Megyretous (Μεγυρέτους), Dresneïk (Δρεσνεήκ), Lesnik (Λεσνήκ), Salines (Σαληνές), while the "small land" (χοριον/chorion) of Bosna (Βοσωνα), part of Serbia, had the cities of Katera (Κατερα) and Desnik (Δέσνηκ). The other Serb-inhabited lands (or principalities) that were mentioned included the "countries" of Paganija, Zahumlje and Travunija, while the "land" of Duklja was held by the Byzantines (it was presumably settled with Serbs as well). These polities bordered Serbia to the north. The exact borders of the early Serbian state are unclear. Although Višeslav is only mentioned by name, the DAI mentions that the Serbs served the Byzantine Emperor, and that they were at this time at peace with the Bulgars, whose neighbours they were and with whom they shared a common frontier. The Bulgars, under Telerig, planned to colonize Bulgaria with Slavs from the neighbouring Berziti, as the earlier Bulgar expansion had caused massive Slav migrations and depopulation of Bulgaria — in 762, more than 200,000 people fled to Byzantine territory and were relocated to Asia Minor. The Bulgars were defeated in 774, after Constantine V learnt of their planned raid. In 783, a large Slavic uprising took place in the Byzantine Empire, stretching from Macedonia to the Peloponnese, which was subsequently quelled by Byzantine patrikios Staurakios. In Pannonia, to the north of Serbia, Charlemagne started his offensive against the Avars. Višeslav was succeeded by his son Radoslav, then grandson Prosigoj, and one of these two most likely ruled during the revolt of Ljudevit Posavski against the Franks (819–822); according to Einhard's Royal Frankish Annals, written in 822, Ljudevit went from his seat at Sisak to the Serbs (believed to have been somewhere in western Bosnia), with Einhard mentioning "the Serbs, who control the greater part of Dalmatia" (ad Sorabos, quae natio magnam Dalmatiae partem obtinere dicitur). Višeslav's great-grandson Vlastimir began his rule in c. 830, and he is the oldest Serbian ruler of which there is substantial data on. Countering Bulgarian expansion (805–29) In the east, the Bulgarian Empire grew strong. In 805, khan Krum conquered the Braničevci, Timočani and Obotrites, to the east of Serbia, and banished their tribal chiefs and replaced them with administrators appointed by the central government. In 815, the Bulgarians and Byzantines signed a 30-year peace treaty. In 818 during the rule of Omurtag (814–836), the Braničevci and Timočani together with other tribes of the frontiers, revolted and seceded from Bulgaria because of an administrative reform that had deprived them much of their local authority. The Timočani left the societas (association, alliance) of the Bulgarian Empire, and sought, together with the Danubian Obotrites and Guduscani, protection from Holy Roman Emperor Louis the Pious (r. 813–840), and met him at his court at Herstal. The Timočani migrated into Frankish territory, somewhere in Lower Pannonia, and were last mentioned in 819, when they were persuaded by Ljudevit to join him in fighting the Franks. The Danubian Obotrites stayed in Banat, and resisted the Bulgars until 824, when nothing more is heard of them. The khan sent envoys to the Franks and requested that the precise boundary be demarcated between them, and negotiations lasted until 826, when the Franks neglected him. The Bulgars answered with attacking the Slavs that lived in Pannonia, and subjugated them, then they sent ships up the Drava river, and, in 828, had devastated Upper Pannonia, north of the Drava. There was more fighting in 829, as well, and by this time, the Bulgars had conquered all of their former Slavic allies. The Bulgarian Khanate (later Empire) had a general policy of expansion in which they would first impose the payment of tribute on a neighboring people and the obligation of supplying military assistance in the form of an alliance (societas), leaving them internal self-government and local rulers, and when the need for this kind of relationship expired, they would terminate the self-government of the said people and impose their direct and absolute power, integrating them fully into the Bulgarian political and cultural system. Vlastimir, Mutimir and Prvoslav (830–892) Vlastimir succeeded his father, Prosigoj, in c. 830. He united the Serbian tribes in the vicinity.[29][30] The Serbs were alarmed, and most likely consolidated due to the spreading of the Bulgarian Khanate towards their borders (a rapid conquest of neighbouring Slavs, in self-defence, and possibly sought to cut off the Bulgar expansion to the south (Macedonia). Emperor Theophilos (r. 829–842) was recognized as the nominal suzerain (overlord) of the Serbs, and most likely encouraged them to thwart the Bulgars. The thirty-year-peace treaty between the Byzantines and Bulgars, signed in 815, was still in effect. According to Constantine VII, the Serbs and Bulgars had lived peacefully as neighbours until the Bulgar invasion in 839 (in the last years of Theophilos). It is not known what exactly prompted the war, as Porphyrogenitus gives no clear answer; whether it was a result of Serbian-Bulgarian relations, i.e. the Bulgar conquest to the southeast, or a result of the Byzantine-Bulgarian rivalry, in which Serbia was at the side of the Byzantines as an Imperial ally. According to Porphyrogenitus, the Bulgars wanted to continue their conquest of the Slav lands - to force the Serbs into subjugation. Presian I (r. 836–852) launched an invasion into Serbian territory in 839, which led to a war that lasted for three years, in which the Serbs were victorious; Presian was heavily defeated and lost a large number of his men, he made no territorial gains and was driven out by the army of Vlastimir. The Serbs had an advantage in the forests and gorges. The defeat of the Bulgars, who had become one of the greater powers in the 9th century, shows that Serbia was an organized state, fully capable of defending its borders; a very high military and administrative organizational frame to present such effective resistance. It is not known whether Serbia at the time of Vlastimir had a fortification system and developed military structures with clearly defined roles of the župan. After the victory ove....
   
6. Title: Foundation for Medieval Genealogy: SERBIA
   Publication: Name: http://fmg.ac/Projects/MedLands/SERBIA.htm#_Toc283735280;
   Note: INTRODUCTION The only primary source evidence regarding the first recorded dynasty of rulers in Serbia is the De Administrando Imperio of Konstantinos Porphyrogenetos, probably written in the 940s. The De Administrando records seven generations of Serbian rulers belonging to the same family, whose rise to power coincided with the establishment of Bulgaria as an important regional force in the mid-9th century. There must inevitably be some doubt about the accuracy of the information recorded, especially relating to the earliest generations, given the absence of corroborative evidence, although admittedly the De Adminstrando was written only a few decades later. What is clear is that Serbia oscillated between Byzantine and Bulgarian control for much of the second half of the 9th century and first half of the 10th. If the De Administrando is to be believed, this period was marked by continual internal rivalries between the male members of the Serbian ruling family who, sometimes with Bulgarian and sometimes with Byzantine support, ousted each other and assumed control of Serbia in turn (see Chapter 1). Precise dating of the events recorded, and changes of rulers, is not possible from the limited information contained in the De Administrando. Serbia was finally overrun by the Magyars after they defeated Časlav, last Knez of Serbia, dated to [955/60]. After the defeat of Časlav, the kingdom of Duklja (based in what is today Montenegro) became the dominant Slav force in the area. The Chronicle of the Priest of Duklja records that "Bodin who [afterwards] ruled the whole kingdom [and] Vladimir with their brothers marched into Rassa and annexed it", their father assigning it to "his son Petrislav to rule." Fine dates the conquest to between 1060 and 1074. Around 1080, Konstantin Bodin King of Duklja established the brothers Marko and Vukan as joint-Župan [Lord] of Raška, the name by which Serbia was then more commonly known at the time (see Chapter 2.B). Their collateral descendants continued to rule Serbia until the mid-12th century (Chapter 2.C). After Desa Grand Župan of Serbia was deposed for the last time in 1166, Byzantium installed as Grand Župan Tihomir, brother of Stefan Nemanja (who replaced Tihomir as Grand Župan the following year). Later chronicles fabricated a descent of Stefan Nemanja from Licinius, rival of Constantine the Great, and his wife who was Constantine's sister whom they alleged was a Serb. It is more likely that Nemanja was related to the family of the Grand Župani of Serbia set out in Chapter 2.C. According to a charter written in 1198 by Nemanja himself, his great-grandfather and grandfather had "ruled the land." This statement is also found in the biographies of Nemanja written by his sons. In addition to Tihomir, Nemanja had two brothers, Miroslav and Stracimir. Miroslav was the author of a gospel, in which he names his father as Zavid. The inevitable deduction is that Nemanja's father, Zavid, was another son of Uroš I Grand Župan of Serbia (Chapter 2.C). Emperor Manuel I's choice of Tihomir as new ruler of Serbia in [1166] also makes more sense if he was closely related to the old dynasty rather than an outsider, as such a choice is more likely to have been acceptable to Serbia's leaders. Serbia developed into a major force in the Balkan region in the late 12th century under Grand Župan Stefan Nemanja. He conquered the areas later known as Montenegro (which he assigned to his eldest son) and Hercegovina, as well as southern Dalmatia, northern Albania and Kosovo. Although Byzantium regained some of the lost territory under the peace treaty which followed their defeat of the Serbs at Morava River in 1190, Serb independence was recognised. Stefan Nemanja´s son, Stefan, was crowned as first king of Serbia by a papal legate in [1217] (see Chapter 3). His descendant, Stefan Dušan, declared himself emperor (Tsar) of Serbia and Greece in 1346 after conquering large parts of Macedonia from Byzantium, his life being glorified in later epic poetry. His successors were less competent, and Serbia´s powerful position was eroded by competing claims to rule from different members of the royal family. Tsar Stefan Uroš IV shared power with Vukašin Mrnjavčević, an official at his court who was unrelated to the Nemanja dynasty and who was eventually crowned as joint ruler in 1365, his family ruling Serbia until the end of the 14th century (see Chapter 4). King Vukašin was defeated and killed in 1371 by the Ottoman Turks, and his son Marko found his power confined to a small area of Macedonia around the town of Prilep, which was annexed by the Ottomans after he too was killed in battle. Meanwhile, the Lazarovići family rose to power in western Serbia and, through a series of matrimonial alliances, was able to group the most influential local Serbian chiefs under their rule (Chapter 5.A). However, a major part of the army was slaughtered in 1389 at the battle of Kosovo, where Stefan Lazar was captured and executed. After his death, his widow submitted to Ottoman suzerainty on behalf of her son, who was granted the title despot by the Byzantine emperor. The Lazarovići were succeeded in 1427 by the Brankovići (Chapter 5.B), under whose rule Serbia was finally annexed by the Ottomans in 1459. As will be seen below, much of the information in this document has been extracted from the works of Fine. Many of the family relationships of the Serbian rulers remain to be confirmed from primary source data. Most of the present reconstruction relies on Byzantine sources. Few Serbian sources have so far been located and used in the compilation of the document. In particular, the biographies of Stefan Nemanja have not yet been found in translation into a western European language. Serbian and Bosnian charters, dated between the late 12th and late 15th centuries, are collected in the mid-19th century Monumenta Serbica. The documents are written in Serbian, but are headed by a brief description in Latin which includes some genealogical details. It is probable that more relevant information is included in the body of the documents but these have not been studied due to the language difficulty. The present-day popular perspective of Serbian history has been influenced by legends which were developed by historical writers in the 16th and 17th centuries. These relate in particular to the battle of Kosovo, and identification of the heroes and villains of the piece. In this respect, the Regno degli Slavi, first published in 1601 by Mavro Orbini a native of Dubrovnik, has been especially influential. The works of Giacomo Luccari are also relevant. The works of these two authors can hardly be described as primary sources in the true sense. It appears that much of the later genealogy of the Serbian rulers is based only on information included in such works, at least this is what appears from Du Fresne du Cange´s 1680 Historia Byzantina, Familias ac Stemmata Imperatorum, Vol. I, which includes biographies of Serbian rulers in which Orbini and Luccari are referenced frequently. Du Fresne du Cange´s reconstruction of the Serbian ruling families is inconsistent with information included in some earlier primary sources, sed in the compilation of the present document but to which it appears that he did not have access. It must therefore be considered an unreliable representation, even ignoring the question of the reliability of information included from Orbini and Luccari. Unfortunately, I have so far been unable to locate digitised versions of the works of Orbini and Luccari, available on the internet, in their original language. I have therefore been unable to highlight those sections of the reconstruction in the present document which rely solely on information from these sources and which should therefore be treated with caution. The problem of the authenticity of the source known as the Chronicle of the Priest of Duklja, which appears to be a 17th century falsification, is discussed in the Introduction to the document MONTENEGRO.
   
7. Title: Wikiwand: Vlastimirović dynasty
   Publication: Name: https://www.wikiwand.com/en/Vlastimirovi%C4%87_dynasty;
   Note: The Vlastimirović (Serbian Cyrillic: Властимировић, pl. Vlastimirovići / Властимировићи) was the first Serbian royal dynasty, named after Prince Vlastimir (ruled c. 831–851), who was recognized by the Byzantine Empire. The dynasty was established with the Unknown Archont, who ruled during the reign of Emperor Heraclius (610–641). The Vlastimirović dynasty ruled in Serbia until the 960s, when some Serbian lands were annexed, by the Byzantine Empire. History Slavs ravaged Eastern Roman territories beginning in 518, and had by the 580s conquered much of the Central Balkans. Archaeological evidence in Serbia and Macedonia point that the Serbs reached the Balkans between 550–600, as much findings; fibulae and pottery found at Roman forts point at Serb characteristics. One of the fundamental sources for the early Serbian history is the work of Byzantine Emperor Constantine VII Porphyrogenitos (913–959), De Administrando Imperio. In eight chapters, the settlement of Serbs and their early history is described up until the reign of the author. The 32nd chapter, with the sub-chapter On the Serbs and the lands that they currently inhabit, gives a short note on the origin of the Serbs, their homeland, and continues with the history of members of the oldest ruling family of the Serbs. Early rulers Main articles: Višeslav of Serbia, Radoslav of Serbia, and Prosigoj of Serbia The progenitor, according to Porphyrogenitos, was the prince (unnamed in sources and this designated as the Unknown Archon) that led the Serbs to Southeastern Europe during the reign of Heraclius (610–641). The author gives the early genealogy: "As the Serb Prince who fled to Emperor Heraclius" in the time "when Bulgaria was under the Rhōmaíōn" (thus, before the establishment of Bulgaria in 680), "by succession, his son, and then grandson, and so on, of his family rules as princes. After some years, Višeslav is born, and from him Radoslav, and from him Prosigoj, and from him Vlastimir." The time and circumstances of the first three rulers are almost unknown. It is supposed that Višeslav ruled in c. 780, but it is unclear when Radoslav and Prosigoj would have ruled. When the Serbs were mentioned in 822 (the oldest mention of them) in the Royal Frankish Annals ("the Serbs, who control the greater part of Dalmatia"; ad Sorabos, quae natio magnam Dalmatiae partem obtinere dicitur) one of those two must have ruled Serbia. Dalmatia, in the antique period, stretched from modern-day Dalmatia far into the hinterland, northwards close to the Sava river, and eastwards to the Ibar river. Višeslav's great-grandson Vlastimir began his rule in c. 830, and he is the oldest Serbian ruler of which there is substantial data on. Vlastimir, Mutimir and Pribislav Vlastimir united the Serbian tribes in the vicinity. The Serbs were alarmed, and most likely consolidated due to the spreading of the Bulgarian Khanate towards their borders (a rapid conquest of neighbouring Slavs, in self-defence, and possibly sought to cut off the Bulgar expansion to the south. Byzantine Emperor Theophilos (r. 829–842) was recognized as the nominal suzerain (overlord) of the Serbs, and most likely encouraged them to thwart the Bulgarians. The thirty-year-peace treaty between the Byzantines and Bulgarians, signed in 815, was still in effect. According to Constantine VII, the Serbs and Bulgarians had lived peacefully as neighbours until the invasion in 839 (in the last years of Theophilos).[9] It is not known what exactly prompted the war, as Porphyrogenitus gives no clear answer; whether it was a result of Serbian-Bulgarian relations, i.e. the Bulgar conquest to the southeast, or a result of the Byzantine-Bulgarian rivalry, in which Serbia was at the side of the Byzantines as an Imperial ally. According to John B. Bury, it was not unlikely that the Emperor had a part in it; as he was in war with the Arabs, he may have pushed the Serbs to drive the Bulgarians from western Macedonia, which would benefit them both, hence Malamir's action. V. Zlatarski supposed that the Emperor offered the Serbs complete independence in return. According to Porphyrogenitus, the Bulgarians wanted to continue their conquest of the Slav lands - to force the Serbs into subjugation. Presian I (r. 836–852) launched an invasion into Serbian territory in 839, which led to a war that lasted for three years, in which the Serbs were victorious; Presian was heavily defeated and lost a large number of his men, made no territorial gains and was driven out by the army of Vlastimir. It is believed that the Serbs held out in their hardly accessible forests and gorges, and knew how to fight in the hills. According to Živković, it is possible that the Bulgarian attack came after the failed invasion of Struma and Nestos in 846 (see below): Presian may have collected his army and headed for Serbia, and Vlastimir may have participated in the Byzantine–Bulgarian Wars, which would mean that Presian answered to a direct Serbian involvement. After the victory over the Bulgarians, Vlastimir's status rose, and according to Jr. Fine, he went on to expand to the west, taking Bosnia, and Herzegovina (Zahumlje). Vlastimir married off his daughter to Krajina, the son of a local župan of Trebinje, Beloje, in c. 847–48. With this marriage, Vlastimir elevated the title of Krajina to archon. The Belojević family was entitled the rule of Travunija. Krajina had a son with Vlastimir's daughter, named Hvalimir, who would later on succeed as župan of Travunia. Vlastimir's elevation of Krajina, the practical independence of Travunija, shows, according to Živković, that Vlastimir was a Christian ruler who very well understood the monarchal ideology that developed in the early Middle Ages. Soon after 846, with the end of the thirty-year-truce, Malamir (or Presian) invaded the regions of the Struma and the Nestos, and Empress-Regent Theodora (r. 842–855, the wife of Theophilos) answered by attacking Thracian Bulgaria. A brief peace was concluded, then Malamir proceeded to invade Macedonia.[9][8] The Bulgarians also imposed rule on the Morava region, the frontier region between Serbia and the Bulgarian Khanate. The Byzantines were also active in the hinterland of Dalmatia, to the west of Serbia; the strategos of the cities of Dalmatia came into conflict with Frankish vassal, Croatian Duke Trpimir in 846 or 848, in which battles the strategos was defeated. The defeat of the Bulgarians, who had become one of the greater powers in the 9th century, shows that Serbia was an organized state, fully capable of defending its borders; a very high military and administrative organizational frame to present such effective resistance. It is not known whether Serbia at the time of Vlastimir had a fortification system and developed military structures with clearly defined roles of the župan. Prince Mutimir (ruled c. 851–891), the son of Vlastimir, managed to defeat the Bulgarians once again in 834–835, also capturing the son of the Bulgar Khan. The Serbs and Bulgarians concluded peace, and the Christianization of the Slavs began; by the 870s all Serbs were baptized and had established the Eparchy of Ras, on the order of Emperor Basil I. The remaining years, were marked by internal dynastic wars. In 892, prince Pribislav Mutimirović was overthrown by his cousin, prince Petar Gojniković. Petar, Pavle, Zaharija and Časlav Prince Petar Gojniković was recognized by the Bulgarians, now the greatest power in Southeastern Europe, although the peace was not to last; the Byzantines had sent an envoy to Serbia promising greater independence in return of Petar leading an army against the Bulgarians. A Bulgarian ally, Mihajlo Višević, who had seen a threat in Petar during the latters conquering of Bosnia and Neretva, heard of the possible alliance and warned the Bulgarian Khan, who later sent a protege, Pavle Branović, to rule Serbia. In the meantime, Zaharija Pribislavljević is sent by the Byzantines to take the Serbian throne, he is however captured by Pavle and sent to Bulgaria. Pavle is now approached by the Byzantines, thus Zaharija is indoctrinated by the Bulgarians. Pavle plans an attack on Bulgaria, but Khan Simeon is warned, and dispatches Zaharija with an army, promising him the throne if he defeats Pavle, which he did. Zaharija soon resumed his Byzantine alliance, also uniting several Slavic tribes along the common border to revolt against the Bulgarians, several Bulgarian generals were beheaded, their heads sent to Constantinople by Zaharija as a symbol of alleigance. In 924 a large army led by Časlav Klonimirović, the second cousin, is sent by the Bulgarians which ravages Serbia, forcing Zaharija to exile. Instead of instating Časlav, the Bulgarians annex Serbia 924–927. Prince Časlav took the throne in 927, with the death of the Bulgar Khan, and immediately made alliance with the Byzantine Empire. Eastern Orthodox influence greatly increases and the two maintain close ties throughout his regn. He enlarged Serbia, uniting the tribes of Bosnia, Herzegovina, Old Serbia and Montenegro (incorporated Pagania, Zahumlje, Travunia, Konavle, Bosnia and Rascia into Serbia, ι Σερβλια). He took over regions previously held by Michael Višević, who disappears from sources in 925. The De Administrando Imperio describes his realm: the shores of the Adriatic Sea, the Sava river and the Morava valley as well as today's northern Albania. The written information about the first dynasty ends with the death of Časlav. Aftermath The Catepanate of Ras is established between 971–976, during the rule of John Tzimiskes (r. 969–976). A seal of a strategos of Ras has been dated to Tzimiskes' reign, making it possible for Tzimiskes' predecessor Nikephoros II Phokas to have enjoyed recognition in Rascia. The protospatharios and katepano of Ras was a Byzantine governor named John. Data on the katepano of Ras during Tzimiskes' reign is missing. Byzantine military presence en....
   
8. Title: Foundation for Medieval Genealogy: RADOSLAV
   Publication: Name: http://fmg.ac/Projects/MedLands/SERBIA.htm#_ftnref9;
   Note: RADOSLAV. The De Administrando Imperio of Konstantinos Porphyrogenetos names "Rodosthlabus" as son of "Boisesthlabus." m ---. The name of Radoslav's wife is not known. Radoslav & his wife had one child: a) PROSOGOJ. The De Administrando Imperio of Konstantinos Porphyrogenetos names "Prosegoes" as son of "Rodosthlabus." m ---. The name of Prosogoj's wife is not known. Prosogoj & his wife had one child: i) VLADIMIR . The De Administrando Imperio of Konstantinos Porphyrogenetos names "Blastemerus" as son of "Prosegoes." Knez [Prince] of Serbia.
   
9. Title: rootsweb > McCain-Clark Ancestors and Cousins: Radoslav of Serbia
   Author: Sources: Title: Wikipedia, The Free Encyclopedia Publication: Name: Name: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Main_Page;; Repository: Name: Internet
   Publication: Name: https://worldconnect.rootsweb.ancestry.com/cgi-bin/igm.cgi?op=GET&db=johncmccain&id=I79758;
   Note: ID: I79758 Name: Radoslav of Serbia 1 Sex: M Title: Knez of Serbia 1 Note: From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia: Radoslav (Serbian: ?, Greek: ?) was a Serbian Knez who ruled over the Serbs from 800 to 822, he succeeded his father Višeslav I who united the Serbian tribes, resulting in the formation of Raška (Rascia, modern Serbia) in the 8th century. His son Prosigoj took over the rule in 822. Father: Višeslav I Marriage 1 Spouse Unknown Children Has Children Prosigoj of Serbia