The first part of presentation is about the find in Biskupija near Knin. The grave was found by our early archaeologist fr. Lujo Marun, but unadequate methods were used. It was a very rich find, the body was dressed in multiple layers, with threads of gold. He had a hat, slippers and the same equipment like in Bojna grave. A stone fragment was found with "DUX GLO..." inscription, probably "glorious duke". Old hypotesis was that was the body of duke Branimir, but newer is that it could have been duke Trpimir. The 19th century excavators failed to bring a camera with them, also the robes dissolved in contact with the air, and locals later smashed the bones and some finds dissapeared, for example Byzantine coins. The presenter makes a hypotesis about Constantine V golden coins, why they were found in both graves. He's not fond about Avar Hring hoard hypothesis, because he thinks there would have been different kinds of coins. He also notes that at the same time the church of Saint Donatus was built in nearby Zadar which was huge undertaking, so there could have been some kind of financial connection. He asserts that the gilded spurs found were a mark of princely rule. He muses about pendants found in both graves, what could they mean, maybe they were also some kind of princely symbol.

The Bojna prince is equal in status like that "glorious duke" in Biskupija. There is no question that the one from Biskupija was a Croatian ruler (my note: because Dalmatina is the origin of Croatian state/kingdom and plenty of finds confirm that).

He mentions this:

Quote Originally Posted by ph2ter View Post
The sentence from Constantine Porphyrogenitus' DAI which says: - "From the Croats who came to Dalmatia, a part split off and took rule of Illyricum and Pannonia. They too had an independent archon, who would maintain friendly contact, though through envoys only, with the archon of Croatia" could be reference to the country of this prince (although this sentence was disputed, because there isn't any other source which can confirm this).
Illyricum and Pannonia probably here designate a country located north of Dalmatian Croatia which in 10th century got incorporated into Croatian kingdom.
Constantine Porphyrogenitus described "counties" which comprised Croatia, mentioning river Vrbas (lat. Urpanus) as an eastern border. He muses about the term "Illyricum and Pannonia", what that meant for the writer of DAI. That term in full could mean a space from Slovakia to Greece, which he thinks is impossible, so the current thought is that Croats took only parts of Illyricum and Pannonia.

This Pannonian prince supposedly sent gifts to Dalmatian one, which could mean that he was his underling.

In fact, he says, there was a duchy between Sava and Drava rivers who was subordinated to the Frankish Empire, but he thinks that the Bojna duke did not rule that duchy but something else completely, maybe a part of Croatia proper, or an independent duchy.

He comments that in "Historia Salonitana" two church councils were mentioned in Split/Spalatum and three Croatian bishoprics, among them a northern one in Sisak/Siscia. That means that at that time, that is already 10th centurx, Croatian ruler (at that time a king) ruled a part of Pannonia.

Then there is a white flash or blob on the screen which shows the borders of Croatia. :p

In conclusion, we can't know who this prince is, but he was in some connection with Dalmatian Croatian duke, because his grave is ornamented identically. This one from Bojna was certainly a Croat as the one from Biskupija. If he was of an equal rank or less, who knows.