WHO GAVE YOU A RIGHT TO REMOVE THE POV TAG First De Administrando Imperio is an anachronistic source preserved in different contradicting editions Second what precise Dalmatia they were referring to The notion of Dalmatia changed a lot during history Until it stuck to what it is now about 300 years ago the Europe regarded basically the whole Western Balkans as Dalmatia Did the medieval authors refer to the administrative unit inside its precise borders at the specific moment what moment or to the entire region that was commonly known as Dalmatia Did the term refer to both Dalmatia inferior and Dalmatia superior in which case it would comprise not only Dioclea but most of Rascia too Moreover the fact they spoke about Serbs the same may apply to Croats too doesn t explain who the Serbs actually were The people A people One of the peoples in the area A military class The people that provided most of the military class in the area A dynasty Even today in France for example they tend to call anybody who looks a bit darker an Algerian In Italy Moroccan They often call any foreign worker from East Europe Albanian or Romanian or Pole etc depending on what group has the major public exposition at the moment If nowadays there is often such a little care to make a distinction among strange peoples let alone how much Romans or Franks bothered about it That citation only shows that there has been in existence some source of power although it s not very clear what extent of power that both Franks and Romans called Serbs And that was all they were interested in who detains the power in the region If they mention territories that in certain moment have been under rule of Serbian princes either directly or through subordinates it doesn t imply they were inhabited by Serbs It doesn t actually necessarily mean that in that period there have been any territories inhabited by Serbs at all since we don t know what the term Serbs really meant If we suppose that some land say Rascia had indeed been inhabited in part or completely by a people called Serbs and if a close relative of the Rascia s ruler ruled another land it doesn t imply the another land had been inhabited by Serbs Finally if the source say the early Serbs ended at Neretva it doesn t mean the entire Neretva was the border It means at some point somewhere at Neretva Of course Neretva may have been the border by its whole length but the source doesn t say so And even if it ended anywhere at Neretva I really don t understand what would you like to prove with that citation With only exception of the Delta and maybe the narrow strip by the river Pagania was on another side of Neretva So if they ended at Neretva it would mean they ended before Pagania Just because the secondary sources are not authored by Serbs it doesn t mean they are quality sources