Brutal answer from Serbia: Dear Croats, it's been scientifically proven

Serbs know what happened in 1867, even 1389, but don't know what happened in July 1995.

Poor Croats, instead of sticking to scientifically proven facts, they are reduced to remind of "july 1995", when they only with foreign help managed to bomb civilian refugee treks...

I feel sorry for all those Marios out there...

"He emphasizes that in order to resolve the issue of the status of old Dubrovnik in a valid, well-argued and nationalistic fervor way, it is necessary to start from the stated, verified scientific knowledge."

There is no issue, except according to some quasi-historians, who are getting too much attention as is.

"The basis for such an answer is contained in the fact that there are Serbian and Croatian factors of the entire ethnic, linguistic and literary identity of old Dubrovnik, so because of that mixture it is most accurate to state that this literary-historical phenomenon belongs to both national literatures."

There is no evidence for such a mix. Sure, I can point to German loan words in Dutch literature and claim it's really German literature, that doesn't make it true. And it doesn't qualify as research either.

Agreed on the scientific angle. The genealogy of Dubrovnik is a good place to start in that respect. Except it's pretty clear and contradicts the unfounded claims, which is likely why it's ignored in the first place. I'm not sure why the Serbian government supports these marginal characters in the first place. Not to mention it's bizarre and tone-deaf to claim the literature of a city you tried to destroy not so long ago.

Serbs know what happened in 1867, even 1389, but don't know what happened in July 1995.

Poor Croats, instead of sticking to scientifically proven facts, they are reduced to remind of "july 1995", when they only with foreign help managed to bomb civilian refugee treks...

I feel sorry for all those Marios out there...

"He emphasizes that in order to resolve the issue of the status of old Dubrovnik in a valid, well-argued and nationalistic fervor way, it is necessary to start from the stated, verified scientific knowledge."

There is no issue, except according to some quasi-historians, who are getting too much attention as is.

"The basis for such an answer is contained in the fact that there are Serbian and Croatian factors of the entire ethnic, linguistic and literary identity of old Dubrovnik, so because of that mixture it is most accurate to state that this literary-historical phenomenon belongs to both national literatures."

There is no evidence for such a mix. Sure, I can point to German loan words in Dutch literature and claim it's really German literature, that doesn't make it true. And it doesn't qualify as research either.

Agreed on the scientific angle. The genealogy of Dubrovnik is a good place to start in that respect. Except it's pretty clear and contradicts the unfounded claims, which is likely why it's ignored in the first place. I'm not sure why the Serbian government supports these marginal characters in the first place. Not to mention it's bizarre and tone-deaf to claim the literature of a city you tried to destroy not so long ago.