Talk:Serbian cross

Page contents not supported in other languages.
Source: Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.

Symbol

This is a very nationalist symbol in Serbia. It is used by extreme right groups, and it is quite offending for everyone not 100% Serbian. Some people consider it similar to the Hooked Cross. I think a note should be added, but I'm not familiar with NPOV stuff. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 194.78.221.49 (talk • contribs)

That's complete rubbish. That's like saying the cross of St. George is offensive, or the Sahovnica, or any other "national symbol". --estavisti 23:10, 18 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Made changes to the article. Now it's less emotive and more informative. Estavisti, I don't like it when people offend national symbols, using words like "nationalist" as a degrading term for them. That's what made me change this article. Sure, nationalist parties and groups of varying degrees of moderation or extremism will use national symbols for their groups. They may use such symbols to be considered more "patriotic" by supporters and/or possible voters. That doesn't make the nationalists necessarily any worse or better, and it certainly shouldn't make the national symbols look bad. Alan. --81.79.172.224 23:33, 11 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Alan, I can only assume you're referring to the unsigned comment I myself was replying to. --estavisti 18:32, 12 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

spray painted image

Not sure why some editors want to add the spray painted image of the cross? To me it seems inappropriate and encyclopedic as it gives a negative connotation for the cross as a street sign was (illegally) vandalized. // Laughing Man 14:55, 16 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

vandals vandalize stuff regardless of their nationality so this doesn't strike me as a a bid deal. The thing is a a depiction of the Cross spray painted on a road sign doesn't seem very relevent. I'd propose some more traditional image.
I apologise if I've caused any offence by putting up the photo. My intention was to show somewhere that I found the cross. I certainly didn't mean to imply that Serbs were all vandals or anything like that. Now that I think about it, the photo's sort of out of place (aesthetically) in the article anyway. Sorry. —DO'Neil 06:19, 3 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I'm certain DO'Neil didn't mean anything wrong. I agree that vandalised sign has no place in the article though I think that another grafitti might have. Nikola 19:29, 4 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Byzantine Cross

I have included this theory. I think it is best documented and quite reasonable.. I hope you will not be too prompt with deleating it :) Best regards. Drmiko (talk) 21:33, 5 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

references would be nice, especially as you say "best documented". --
dab (𒁳) 14:26, 9 October 2011 (UTC)[reply
]

The article as it stands can just be merged into coat of arms of Serbia#History. If the "Serbian cross" has any separate notability, the article is not aware of it. Perhaps if the symbol is used by hardcore Serbian nationalists as a standalone symbol, the article could be salvaged by adding evidence of that. I assume the "spray painted image" was an attempt at doing just that. If this cannot be substantiated, and no references of any kind are added to the article, I suppose I'm just going to merge it. --

dab (𒁳) 14:26, 9 October 2011 (UTC)[reply
]

Possible origin source

http://romaniatricolor.deviantart.com/art/CoA-Serbian-Cross-Ocilo-258495529 Intriguing... Bigshotnews 09:35, 22 January 2012 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bigshotnews (talk • contribs)

Tetragrammatic cross

The current coat of arms of Serbia has four letters beta in its corners. They're exact copies of the betas used in the Palaiologos tetragrammatic cross, in fact the whole cross is copied exactly. They're identical. It's not the letter "s" - it's beta. I suppose people can interpret it any way they want, but I really think it should be made clear what this cross is. It's a widespread misconception (because of how beta is sometimes stylized) that these are Cyrillic letters "s", and that they mean "samo sloga Srbina spašava" or some such nonsense. --

talk) 01:18, 20 October 2012 (UTC)[reply
]

You are welcomed to propose here some useful source about widespread misconception of "samo sloga Srbina spašava". None dispute the origin of this cross, but the meaning and interpretation is different question. --WhiteWriterspeaks 20:49, 20 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, as I said, one can interpret it as he likes. Maybe its four seagulls, or crescent moons ;), but what I'm concerned with is heraldry. The symbol there is a stylized beta. That isn't the "origin" of the symbol - it's what it is right now. Again I'm sure there are several popular interpretations of the symbols, but it should be made clear what they're interpreting. I'd go so far as to criticize the coverage of this subject, this isn't the "Serbian cross" - its the Palaiologan Cross. They're completely the same.
Additionally, the image in the infobox isn't quite accurate. Colors are a huge part of heraldry, and this emblem is either golden, or white on a red background. Never saw one in black.
Finally, I challenge the assertion that this symbol has actually been used as a Serbian "national symbol" since the 14 century. What actually happened, if I recall my history, is that Dusan proclaimed himself to be the Byzantine emperor, and simply used Byzantine imperial symbols. To say these were national symbols of the Serbian nation at the time when the concept of a nation did not even exist is quite extraordinary. Especially since the Byzantine Empire used the same exact symbols until the mid 15th century. --
talk) 21:36, 20 October 2012 (UTC)[reply
]
Well, this cross from the infobox is actually a version from the previous coat of arms, as it looks like that we do not actually have a stable centralised version of this cross through the ages, in the same manner as Byzantine cross. OK, leave it like this for now, i will search for a lot of sources, and try to present all versions of this, so then we should talk about this. Article is actually quite small and unfinished to talk about this... It is fact that it must be highly, highly connected with Palaiologos tetragrammatic cross, but the later usage and versions are questionable. Thanks for raising the question, i will try to expand the article, and then call you to solve the questions, thanks. --WhiteWriterspeaks 21:49, 20 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I saw versions of the Palaiologos Cross (representing the Byzantine Empire) also with betas stylized in a way that made them look like a "C" shape, even a sort of small crescent moon. I think it's simply a matter of how you stylize the beta, i.e. they seem all to have been beta on all the coats of arms, just stylized differently.
Its probably very simple. Your double-headed eagle and Palaiologos Cross probably stem from when Dušan proclaimed himself Roman emperor and started using the symbols the emperors were using at the time. In heraldry white is often interchangeable with yellow..
You know I came up on this problem talking this summer with a friend of mine from Belgrade. He's a knowledgable person (for a mere dentist :)) yet he told me that the four letters in the Serbian coa were Cyrillic letters "s", meaning "samo sloga.. etc.". I told him it couldn't be since I know the Byzantines used almost the same emblem. Not wanting to play the arrogant meddling Croat (outside Wikipedia ;) I let it go. Next I talked to a patient from Krajina about this and he said "oh the Greeks use 'B' we use 'C'..". Imo people don't know this and it needs to be clearly explained on Wiki.. --
talk) 22:40, 20 October 2012 (UTC)[reply
]
I agree on that, will try some good sources and usage, and add it here, i would also love to learn more about it, it is very interesting subject anyway... --WhiteWriterspeaks 01:10, 21 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

(unindent)I was discussing the same issue with Dbachmann last year[1] during the same month. The Serbian cross does derive from the Byzantine one[2], but I'm not sure if it's related to Dusan's imperial claims or if it's simply a matter of Serbo-Byzantine acculturation.--— ZjarriRrethues — talk 11:24, 21 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, very unexplored territory on wiki. Leave it to me, i will try to search for a relevant sources and materials. I suppose that i am the one "most concerning".... :) --WhiteWriterspeaks 15:13, 21 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]


The use of the tetragrammatic cross as a symbol of Serbs, and various Serbian entities, originates with its use by the Serbian Orthodox Church. So far as I'm aware, its not known whether Stephen IV Uros Dusan and the Serbian empire used the symbol, and I'd say - probably not, as at the time it was the personal dynastic symbol of the Paleologan dynasty. Then again, its possible that the cross became representative of the imperial throne as such and was therefore used by claimants such as Dusan. Some Serbian authors put forward some really stupid speculative nonsense on that... Either way, it was used by the Serbian Orthodox Church as its symbol, and therefrom comes its use as a symbol of various Serbian rebellions and entities.

Its use, and especially that of the double-headed eagle, originates from the fundamental notion present among historical Serbs, Bulgarians, and Greeks that they (being Orthodox nations/kingdoms) are each the "true" successor to the Byzantine Empire, and need to reform it by eventually taking back Istanbul (presumably amid scenes of genocide and/or ethnic cleansing of the Muslims). The Bulgarians and Serbs ofc based this on their Medieval claims to the Imperial title put forth by the rulers of the Bulgarian and Serbian empires respectively. The Serbs had least realistic prospect of achieving this, but the fundamental idea was always there (in contrast Bulgaria nearly did take Istanbul in the First Balkan War). Hence, upon proclaiming itself a kingdom, Serbia took the imperial aquila of the Paleologans as its symbol as well.. sort of "jumping the gun" on the whole "Empire" thing. And the symbol simply remained in use...

Plus, eagles were all the rage back then :). Germany, and especially Austria-Hungary and Russia, had eagles as their imperial symbols. Neighboring Austria was the patron of one Serbian dynasty of the period, Russia of the other, subsequent dynasty, and both had these really "cool" double headed eagle coats of arms. Why not use one yourself? -- Director (talk) 01:29, 5 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The fact that the firesteels aren't Serbian "C" i.e. English "S" in the ORIGIN of this symbol doesn't mean the firesteels aren't "C"s/"S"s to Serbian onlookers NOW. As an example, it is beyond doubt that the English word "reindeer" did NOT come from "rein" plus "deer", the reindeer/caribou being the only cervid mammal semi-domesticated for traction. It comes from two Old Norse words meaning "deer" and "animal", one of which SOUNDS like "hrein", but neither Old Norse word refers to reins. HOWEVER, the fact that the word did not ORIGINATE as "reined deer" has nothing to do with the MEANING of the word "reindeer" in the present time, when any speaker of English who knows anything of the Sami culture and who says the word "reindeer" is CERTAINLY, in their own mind, saying "reined deer". The Serbian cross symbol may have ACQUIRED a meaning not inherited with the symbol itself. And as long as the ends of the firesteels don't bend around far enough to touch the vertical stem, the "graph network" or whatever it is, is the same as the Serbian "C" i.e. English "S". As translations for the motto go, "Solely Solidarity Saves Serbs" is better than "Only Unity Saves Serbs" because it preserves the four-in-a-row alliteration.2603:7000:9906:A91C:1C64:8308:33BC:E2D6 (talk) 06:54, 9 May 2021 (UTC)Christopher L. Simpson[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 2 external links on

nobots
|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{

Sourcecheck
}}).

This message was posted before February 2018.

regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check
}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

Cheers.—

Talk to my owner:Online 19:58, 28 February 2016 (UTC)[reply
]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Serbian cross. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{

Sourcecheck
}}).

This message was posted before February 2018.

regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check
}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 14:42, 11 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Serbian_cross&oldid=1199629700"