1) Bishop is misleading here. Said Diocese was bishopric from 1219 till 1346. Period we are talking about is 1690-1851.
2) Forgive my miopy, but there is no eagle here:

[img width=700 height=560]http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/e/e8/Flag_of_the_Prince-Bishopric_of_Montenegro.svg/750px-Flag_of_the_Prince-Bishopric_of_Montenegro.svg.png” />

I thought the "vladika" or by an act of the muitopolit (although in that I do not understand). Mittropoliti have excelled flag Crnojevića by announcing that their successors in office.

Yes this is the flag of troops, not ruler banner

No it is not. 58 years is not "centuries" and its just short part of history of Montenegro.

Every ruler has his banner and he was a king or a prince or another nobleman. Indeed Montenegro has existed for centuries before the Turks recognized as an independent country.

He does. Just its red cross on white banner.

Yet the flag with a cross flag troops. They were previously with nothing but paint the frame, initially red with white frame, then white with red frame. Mitropoliti have your banner stand out at the monastery where he was the banner Crnojevića golden double-headed eagle on a red.

It is not of course, but it fatures in it. Montenegrin military banner was called crusader-banner, (крсташ барјак). Such abnner was featured in Serbian songs.

You have the idea that these songs dreamed up in the eighteenth-nineteenth century when it was necessary at all costs to prove that Montenegrins there.
Actually the first cruiser flag was hoisted in Takovskom  uprising.

Really? We had songs recorded in XV (recorded from Serbian refuges in Neapolitan Kingdom) and XVI century (recorded by Croatian writer). Anyway, do you have some proof for your quasi-scholary alegations?

Are you sure you are in Naples were Serbs?
Croat wrote Serbs song?
Too unbelievable.

Montenegrins sang them for centuries. Quite convinently many of said poems were composed by Montenegrins.

Montenegrins were singing songs about his battles and heroes, others did not either.

First Cross is Christian symbol, and it is pretty normal to be used by Chrsitian bishop. As far for the rest, Christian armies used crosses on their banners centuries before emergence of Islam. Not to say that your logic does not validate my claim. 

I said it a religious, Christian symbol. Be sure that the crosses were used long before the advent of Christianity, not just Islam. Islam appeared in the seventh century, then no coat of arms or flags. Cross introduces the wholesalers in European symbology with the Crusaders.

Ok, lets repeat some basic things:
Where do you see Eagle on this flag?
[img width=700 height=560]http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/e/e8/Flag_of_the_Prince-Bishopric_of_Montenegro.svg/750px-Flag_of_the_Prince-Bishopric_of_Montenegro.svg.png” />

But this is the flag of troops. Metropolitan your banner stands at a monastery in Cetinje.

No. We dont know how first flag of Serbia looked a like. Serbia existed 15 centuries ago. First described flag was just red and blue.

that I expressed myself wrong. The first modern flag of Serbia was a red-white-blue.
Before the fifteenth century, we do not know what that flag is mentioned. Mention only the red and blue colors. Whether it is a royal banner or military flag, nobody knows. In any case, neither the national nor state flag. They then do not exist.

You find it funny, scholars find it fact:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Turkish_constitution_%28Serbia%29

Well if that's a fact.


Yes I get it now. Of course I knew that the rulers of Serbia were not able to do anything that you obtain the consent of foreign powers.

It was not Sultan who switched anything. Flag allready existed before.

I know that, but it is also a fact that it is the sultan gave the Serbs.

It cant be something devised by Ottoman Sultan then.

Sultan was not sure kretor and flags, but the supreme authority which is introduced into service.

Narod je za svoje potrebe koristio isključivo zastave sa krstom, kasnije vladarski baner sa dvoglavim orlom i lavom. Pomenuo sam izvještaj generalne ispekcije Crnogorske vojske.
Repeating some claim in different language does not make that claim right. Who testifies, when, in what manner, where we could read his testimony.

I understood that it sought. Check the report Modjo general inspection of the Montenegrin army, 1913.

Sorry, but you really need to improve your English. And yes, policeforces do carry weapons. Good morning.

The gendarmes did not carry any weapons? I thought that in addition to infantry and cavalry and artillery had, and even armor.
Good luck you.

Gendarmerie was by defintion originaly heavy cavalry. :D But its not my point. If you use Gendarms without artilery cabvalry, machine gunns, it means that fighting is on lower intensity.

Indeed they were fighting low intensity.
Not blo fronts or trench battles, I do not know to use artillery. Basically it comes to plundering incursions into villages and unreasonable killing an unarmed population.

We have rebells themselves who speak about 50 of them killed. On other hand they dont speak about 6000 killed, 150 families and 300 villages. So you first need to prove something happened, before accusing none-existant Serbian Government for that.
I mean reproduce testimony of survivors, archeological evidents for evicted villages, mass graves, orders for commiting of mass murders, anything of it would be legitimate argument for discussion. But I am affraid you are just repeating accusations without any proof.


There was no Serbian Government then.
PS construction troops occupying army is meaningless in English. Try to rephrase, please.
Anyway, occupation army was of few thousands person, waste majority being locals.

The proclamation of the Yugoslav Army, Serbian army, she herself proclaims the army of occupation. It was commanded by General Staff of the Serbian Army and sovereign Serbia.
I did not know that the majority of occupational Serbian army was made up of locals or natives (probably Montenegrins).

You said few lines ago they were mocking that flag.

People made fun of that flag. Greens are like to enter into Yugoslavia as an equal entity, and therefore emphasized the last flag of an independent Montenegro.

According to Constitutuion of Montenegro, before 1918, and Greens themselves there was no Montenegrin nation. They saw themselves as Serbs.

Of course, the ruler of Montenegro was played under the dictates of the great powers, as well as the rulers of Serbia. The problem is that Montenegrins themselves njiesu thought so.

I told you,, my friend, that I couldnt understand your sentence I quoted. That hard to understand your English is bad?

My English is no, this is guglov translator.

Well, there was constant political fight. As far as rebellions, we are speaking about weeks, day and months at best. Not about large scale fights. And keep in mind that capital punishment was suspended just for Montenegro, not for rest of country. In either way, your argumentation is invalid per se.

She was a constant struggle for sure. there are some actions insurgents and largely repersalije occupiers. but not only about Montenegro. Is not there a rebellion in Macedonia, and Bosnia was not quiet at all times, and perhaps elsewhere.

Do you really think you are now telling the truth about KSHS / KJ? Do you really think that modern historiography mostly grain of truth about the immediate past and Yugoslavia?
Obviously you cant.

I agree there