Proto-Greek

Challenging Gods or Humans is a man's Virtue and is in Human nature, no matter ignorance, stupidity or Bravery, Ειμαρμενη is always ally of the challenger,

But when challenge becomes ΥΒΡΙΣ, Ειμαρμενη leaves challenger, sending ΝΕΜΕΣΙΣ and ΕΡΙΝΥΕΣ follow

Those who believe that know the language of Homer understand.
 
AND AGAIN THE STRIKES AGAIN WITH FALSE DOCUMENTS
Tell us Zeus10
from what time is that documents?

WHY YOU ?
DO YOU GET PAYED BY SOMEONE?


TELL US NOW FROM WHAT TIME- CENTURY ITS THE PHOTOS YOU POST?

ARE THEY ANCIENT GREEK?

NO, SIMPLY YOU ARE ΤΡΟΛΛΙΓΚ, KNOWING THAT ONLY FEW KNOW GREEK, AND PROVIDING PHOTOS GREEK TEXT FROM MORE THAN 2000 EXELIXIS OF GREEK,


WHY YOU POST BYZANTINE TEXTS AS ANCIENT GREEK?
DO YOU GET PAYED FOR PROVIDING WRONG INFORMATION?
OR YOU JUST ?

Why? Because this is all what we possess about "Ancient Texts", just Byzantine literature. As a matter of fact the PICTURE nr 2(previous post) was taken from a page from Venetus A, which represent the oldest known complete copy of Iliad that we possess:

2gy2jv4.jpg


Everything else we have about "Ancient Literature" is just small papyrus fragments like this one:

65akcw.jpg


which also date the same period of time.

These texts seem very similar in appearance and most of all in language to the Septuagint ones, like the one I brought in the PICTURE Nr-1(previous post) Esdras in the Codex Vaticanus .
or this other one:
Codex Sinaiticus, a manuscript of the Christian Bible written in the middle of the fourth century, contains the earliest complete copy of the Christian New Testament
26061ch.jpg

Now that I brought the references, I hope you stop doubting my integrity.
 
1) Zeus, do you believe that the comparative method is fundamentally flawed?

No, I strongly beleive in the comparative method, but I am against the "formula" used to reconstruct PIE lexicon.

2) if that is the case, how do you incorporate other Indo-European languages? How do you apply your ideas to non-Indo-European languages and language families?

I strongly beleive that beside Albanian and maybe 1 or 2 other Europian languages, 'grown up' as family-hearth languages on the first place, all other so called IE languages, are local developments of the main European Vehicular languages. Being such, they might be considered vernacular languages, only for the last 1000 years or less, and only because of gradual transformation of local religious communities to ethnic nations like they appear today.

3) do you believe into a conspiracy in the academia to cover up things?

I do beleive into a legal conspiracy, inspired by the Church clergy, especially during the Renaissance, to take the credits for the spectacular Ancient Culture, and to hide the truth of the profound cultural depression, the humanity on this part of the World went through, during the autocratic ruling of the Christianity. It was excactly these theocrats, who own the "knowledge" and for at least 1000 years offering a biased version of the History, to the public.
 
By showing papyrs and leather is not the only evidence,

Stones speak by them shelves,

Pella katadesmos is not a Papyrus made Christians monks, but the language of Ancient Makedonians

800px-Pella_leaded_tablet_%28katadesmos%29_4th_Century.JPG


400px-Pellatab.jpg


That Text is at least 6 Centuries Before Christians
Meaning that Greek were vivid and not a church Language,

All texts connect with stone Marks, with furniture Marks and even with jewells and what ever can you imagine,

A good example is that in Iliad we find a language that was almost not Spoken by Christians,
why If they facultate ancient texts, did not change vocabulary which even today can not be explained?

After that archaiological evidence I ask, do you still deny ancient Greek language?

The Bellow is the dedication of Alexander to Athena Pallas

k63220_l.jpg


It is the museum of London,
code No GR 1870.3-20.88

Is that also a church document? is that also younger than your photos in your Post?

[7] Alexander’s letter to Chians
In 334 BCE, Alexander invaded Asia as leader (hegemon) of the Corinthian league, the alliance of Greek cities and the Macedonian king that was to fight against the Achaemenid Empire.
One of the articles of the Corinthian treaty stated that the Greek towns were to remain autonomous, and that their constitutions were to remain unchanged.
However, the Greek cities in Asia Minor were no members, and Alexander did interfere with their internal affairs, as is shown in the following letter to the people of the island of Chios.


From king Alexander to the people of Chios,
written in the prytany of Deisitheos:[1]

All those exiled from Chios are to return [2], and the constitution on Chios is to be democratic. Drafters of legislation are to be selected to write and emend the laws so as to ensure that there be no impediment to a democratic constitution and the return of the exiles. Anything already emended or drafted is to be referred to Alexander.
The people of Chios are to supply twenty triremes, with crews, at their own expense, and these are to sail for as long as the rest of the Greek naval force accompanies us at sea.
With respect to those men who betrayed the city to the barbarians, all those who escaped are to be exiled from all the cities that share the peace [of Corinth], and to be liable to seizure under the decree of the Greeks. Those who have been caught are to be brought back and tried in the Council of the Greeks. In the event of disagreement between those who have returned and those in the city, in that matter they are to be judged by us.
Until a reconciliation is reached among the people of Chios, they are to have in their midst a garrison of appropriate strength installed by king Alexander. The people of Chios are to maintain the garrison.
Remark 1:
The prytany of Deisitheos was probably in 334, but the formula “from king Alexander” is not common before the battle of Issus in 333.

Remark 2:
One of the returned exiles was the historian Theopompus.

Tod192.jpg




Is that the same time with your pappyrus you provide us?
is that text big enough to prove

i gave at least 3 Makedonian

now here is another one in the archaic writting system

THAT IS THE SAME LANGUAGE THAT HOMER USED SAME CENTURIES THAT HESIOD WROTE

Nestor%27s_Cup_Ischia_Front.jpg


NESTOR's CUP

300px-Nestor_Cup_Cumae.jpg


What is written inside cup 1000 years before the text you provide us as ancient.

So GREEK IS A LANGUAGE THAT EXISTED BEFORE CHURCH.
AND GREEK WAS SPOKEN BY COMMON PEOPLE, KINGS, SOLDIERS, FARMERS,

AND AS ARCHAIOLOGY SAY AT LEAST MILLENIUM BEFORE THE TIME YOU PROPOSE,

YOU DENY ILIAD,
DO YOU DENY THE NESTOR'S CUP ALSO?

hiding or denying evidences is not showing virtue,
 
That Text is at least 6 Centuries Before Christians

What makes you so sure about this?

Pella katadesmos is not a Papyrus made Christians monks, but the language of Ancient Makedonians

How do you know that? And what's the definition for the "Ancient Makedonians" ?
 
What makes you so sure about this?


International archaiologists acceptance, radio-carbon methods, X-rays

Maybe in order to prove your theory we must deny arcaiology, Physics, chemistry etc?

NESTOR's CUP IS A FULL TEXT translated and accepted by academics, Now plz next time you provide photos of ancient Greek text plz provide that photo also, and tell them that was written in the 'church' language, or maybeChurch in order to bias church language they creted a theocratic Linguistic conspiracy, and they write the above texts, and build the cup,


I do beleive into a legal conspiracy, inspired by the Church clergy, especially during the Renaissance, to take the credits for the spectacular Ancient Culture, and to hide the truth of the profound cultural depression, the humanity on this part of the World went through, during the autocratic ruling of the Christianity. It was excactly these theocrats, who own the "knowledge" and for at least 1000 years offering a biased version of the History, to the public.

that is the work that archaiologists do.
they shearch and excavate to find what existed before the today, and thanks to them we know more,
as you see excavations show us at least the double your pappyrs show,
cause leather (pergamene) or stone can live longer that pappyrus in wet climates.
 
International archaiologists acceptance, radio-carbon methods, X-rays

Maybe in order to prove your theory we must deny arcaiology, Physics, chemistry etc?
NESTOR's CUP IS A FULL TEXT translated and accepted by academics, Now plz next time you provide photos of ancient Greek text plz provide that photo also, and tell them that was written in the 'church' language,

I should remind you, Radiocarbon C14 dating method, is applied to estimate the age ONLY of organic remains from the archeological sites. This method is not valid in regards to inorganic remains like stones, or even metalic artifacts like Nestor's cup.
 
I should remind you, Radiocarbon C14 dating method, is applied to estimate the age ONLY of organic remains from the archeological sites. This method is not valid in regards to inorganic remains like stones, or even metalic artifacts like Nestor's cup.

Sorry I see that you did not even trouble to search about Nestor's cup.
Nestor's cup is not a mettalic, but a clay one a pottery,, and clay is being roasted, so carbon exists in all.

Besides if I am wrong about date, then you must ask the laboratories (2 at least for rare relics)


a good start is at wiki, before search scientific more,
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nestor's_cup

search the 3rd cup.

By the way, when we speak about Greek language we do not speak a country language, but about a family, like Germanic are deutsch dutch Austrian etc
Greek belongs to the Greco-Aryan family with Armenian Aryan and Thracian (although the last is still in debate) while Albanian belongs to the same family with Germanic Slavic Baltic,
θυρα Dera Door
Αυταρ Afer ΑFTER etc

so it is impossible Greek to be originated from Albanian and the opposite, yet the common vocabulary is from colonies, immigration and the kadmeian branch of Illyrians

Eρεβος Ereb ΕREBU(semitic probably phoenician)
 
Sorry I see that you did not even trouble to search about Nestor's cup.
Nestor's cup is not a mettalic, but a clay one a pottery,, and clay is being roasted, so carbon exists in all.

Besides if I am wrong about date, then you must ask the laboratories (2 at least for rare relics)


a good start is at wiki, before search scientific more,
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nestor's_cup

search the 3rd cup.
Sorry Yetos, but clay is an inorganic material too.
 
Sorry Yetos, but clay is an inorganic material too.

yet pottery has radio carbon since it is burned to get hardened,
Paintings also are organic made by plantation, even today some colours still made by plants.

Besides I dare to declare myshelf as non master in chemistry and physics, so better ask the Museum of Lacco Ameno in ITALY.
they said the date 750 BC, not me,
so in case you believe that this is a bias evidence by theocrats then ask them how they dated 750 years before Christ.

Do you believe that Italian museums are in the same conspiracy also?

http://www.pithecusae.it/index.htm

that is the page in case you want to communicate.
 
yet pottery has radio carbon since it burned,
Paintings also are organic made by plantation,

Besides I dare to declare myshelf as non master, so better ask the Museum of Lacco Ameno in ITALY.
the said the date 750 BC, not me,
so in case yoy believe that this is a bias evidence by theocrats then ask them how they dated 750 years before Christ.

The carbon C14 is not acquired through burning. The process is described as the following:
When plants fix atmospheric carbon dioxide (CO2) into organic matter during photosynthesis they incorporate a quantity of 14C that approximately matches the level of this isotope in the atmosphere. After plants die or they are consumed by other organisms (for example, by humans or other animals), the accumulation of 14C fraction stops and the material declines at a fixed exponential rate due to the radioactive decay of 14C. Comparing the remaining 14C fraction of a sample to that expected from atmospheric 14C allows the age of the sample to be estimated.
 
The carbon C14 is not acquired through burning. The process is described as the following:

are you playing with my nerves?

Besides I dare to declare myshelf as non master in chemistry and physics, so better ask the Museum of Lacco Ameno in ITALY.
they said the date 750 BC, not me,
Link is bellow
http://http://www.pithecusae.it/index.htm

Are you trying to say that a museum with Italian ministry supervision, is telling us lies about the date?
Why you don't ask them their methods? If you can prove that both cup and dipylon are fake in chronology and after Christian era or at least after Alexander I will follow your theory
 
If I resume the Zeuss thoughts:
greek is a religious (forged? by whom upon what? for what purpose?) language that found good issue only in Greece? why Romans, so influenced by greek civilisation and greek religion and greek language did not retain greek language and at the contrary imposed latin language in huge territories? and why only Greek speakers of Griece and colonies made vernacular dialects of it, early enough in History? as a rule, the religious written languages remain standardized enough...
 
greek is a religious .

Greek was a religious language on the first place.

(forged? by whom upon what? for what purpose?)

Created by clergy for liturgy and religious writing.

language that found good issue only in Greece?

Absolutely not. The artifacts show us that language was spread all over Mediteranean, especially into Roman centers, like Constandinople and Rome. It was excactly these Romans who can take the credits for the creation of the so called "Greek" language, which was in use during Paleochristianity and then based on Greek replaced by another Roman invention, the Latin language.

why Romans, so influenced by greek civilisation and greek religion and greek language did not retain greek language and at the contrary imposed latin language in huge territories? and why only Greek speakers of Griece and colonies made vernacular dialects of it, early enough in History? as a rule, the religious written languages remain standardized enough..

There was no any Greek civilisation during history, let alone a distinct ethnic group. If we will trust the un reliable "Ancient Literature" we hardly can associate the mythical religious elite called Hellenes(ethnonym: Ἕλλην), to the Eastern Roman Christians called Romaioi( Ρωμαίος/Ρωμιός). The latest were not acknowledged as the inheritors of the Romans, but rather perceived to be continuation of Ancient Greeks in modern people eyes, and this is the crucial point understanding history. The ""Greeks"" have no ancienty, they are just a portion of the so called Romans, when the christianity had'nt 'gained' yet, that mistical character that has today.
 
Last edited:
There was no any Greek civilisation during history, let alone a distinct ethnic group. If we will trust the un reliable "Ancient Literature" we hardly can associate the mythical religious elite called Hellenes(ethnonym: Ἕλλην), to the East Roman Christians called Romaioi( Ρωμαίος/Ρωμιός). The latest were not acknowledged as the inheritors of the Romans, but rather perceived to be continuation of Ancient Greeks in modern people eyes, and this is the crucial point understanding history. The ""Greeks"" have no ancienty, they are just a portion of the so called Romans, when the christianity had'nt 'gained' yet, that mistical character that has today.

Tell me Zeus, could you explain us why and how your ideas are superior to, and indeed to be taken any more seriously than, the ideas of Heribert Illig or Anatoly Fomenko?
 
Tell me Zeus, could you explain us why and how your ideas are superior to, and indeed to be taken any more seriously than, the ideas of Heribert Illig or Anatoly Fomenko?

I agree to Anatoly Fomenko, who argues that the conventional chronology is fundamentally flawed. Also I agree that the events attributed to antiquity actually occurred during the Middle Ages, but I can not decide the length of time that these events really occured after. To reach a definite conclusion you must be an expert in archicecture, linguistics, archeology and historiography at the same time, which I am not, but obviously I have noticed a huge discrapency betwen conventional history and real events. One thing I know for sure, is that the history of the human race , is not the one of the "ethne-s", but that of the religion and rulers, and in this regard to talk about especially proto-Greek and proto-Latin, is senseless.
 
Greek was a religious language on the first place.



Created by clergy for liturgy and religious writing.



Absolutely not. The artifacts show us that language was spread all over Mediteranean, especially into Roman centers, like Constandinople and Rome. It was excactly these Romans who can take the credits for the creation of the so called "Greek" language, which was in use during Paleochristianity and then based on Greek replaced by another Roman invention, the Latin language.



There was no any Greek civilisation during history, let alone a distinct ethnic group. If we will trust the un reliable "Ancient Literature" we hardly can associate the mythical religious elite called Hellenes(ethnonym: Ἕλλην), to the East Roman Christians called Romaioi( Ρωμαίος/Ρωμιός). The latest were not acknowledged as the inheritors of the Romans, but rather perceived to be continuation of Ancient Greeks in modern people eyes, and this is the crucial point understanding history. The ""Greeks"" have no ancienty, they are just a portion of the so called Romans, when the christianity had'nt 'gained' yet, that mistical character that has today.


Sory?

if you ever read Christian saints you will see that the termination Ελλην was a word simmilar to religia illicata,
Ellhn in Byzantine was synonym of not Christian,
If you search about Scythopolis and Theodosius etc they genocide millions of Greeks in order to establish Christianity.
East Roman Empire, how the citizen could be named?
2 options
1.) Greeks Ελληνες that meant Death
2.) Romans ρωμιοι that means acceptance of Christianity and emperror

so all citizen under roman empire were Ρωμιοι,
but were they?
the answer is no,

lets look at this video


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vd6hJ5YKOp0




it even follows Pythagoreian armony of 1/2 1/3 1/4

In south Italy Latin is the primary Church language,
How come these people speak Greak and the one of the 2 Doric dialects still alive?


the best reply to you is this video

[video=youtube;UcAYP4irSyQ]http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=UcAYP4irSyQ[/video]


as you Pontic Greeks speak simmilar with Hellenes Ελληνες of 6th-7th century BC
while that language is not Hellenistic but more old,
in the Biblical and Christian Greek infinitive drops to 1 while these people have 4 and Homeric had 6
the usage of Aorist sends us at least 600 years before the translation of 70 to Hellenistic

they name them shelves Roumans Ρουμαικα cause in that land a terrible Saint name Basileios from Ceasareia who even dare to challenge Jullian as Apostate and probably murder him as some Historians say when he was in fight against Persians

Yet some ancient Greek custom survive to them as The momogeroi μωμογεροι which is known to every ancient Greek as festivals dedicated to God Komos or Momos Κωμος, after him comedy has its name,

youtube;mnikI0kAYzs]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mnikI0kAYzs&feature=related

As you see these festivals later in Greece become Dionysus Fests but not in them,
and the strange is that existed in Thracians Phrygians even to Kallash

besides take a look at all ancient Greek dances, they have 1 common,
that is the hit on the ground,
from all the word 3 nations hit the Ground,
1. Zulu
2 Laz Kurds and the rest Aryan
3 Greeks
why? ask Κουρητες.

SO IF GREEK WAS A CLERGY LANGUAGE, HOW COME MITHRIDATES PEOPLE SPEAK A LANGUAGE BEFORE THE GREEK OF EAST CHURCH? in FACT OLDER THAN THE KNOWN THETRICAL DRAMAS?
WERE THEY LEARN IT? IN SCHOOLS?
in UNIVERSITIES?


IN 1821 the head of Greek revolt Υψηλαντης

si1.jpg


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alexander_Ypsilantis

in order to decide the name of the new state had a problem with church,
church wanted to name the state after Byzantines as Rome Ρωμυλια etc
Ypsilantis was expelled by all East Churches and was burried in Wienn cause he ramed it Greek Eλληνικον.
after the language and customs of the local people.

What I wonder is that Greek still are spoken in Ucraine Georgia Turkey Egypt were the Church does not Speak Greek,
WHY?

why people in South Italy still speak and sing in Greek and not in Latin which is the Church language
there?


only 1 answer

GREEK or ΕΛΛΗΝΕΣ Were, are (and will be?) a nation and not a religious class or a sum of believers.

If Greek was a clergy language?

How Do you explain that Greek is Spoken in Ucraine Russia Georgia France Egypt and South Italy? where the church speaks Russian Georgian Latin etc???
 
Yetos, I think you are struggling a bit to come up with a clear and rational opinion, and very often what you write just supports my thesis.
 
ZEUS I THINK you just make my day again

1. WHY YOU NEVER ANSWER MY QUESTIONS?

2) HOW DO YOU EXPLAIN THAT GREEK PEOPLE SPEAK GREEK WITH FORMS ANCIENT THAN THE GREEK SPEAKING CHURCH DOES?

3) HOT DO YOU EXPLAIN THAT?

[video=youtube;j_moKVDN2YA]http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=endscreen&v=j_moKVDN2YA&NR=1[/video]


THE WORD IS MIROLOYIS in TURKEY Y in TURKISH IS Γ GREEK G LATIN SO MIROLOWHIS AS SOUND
ANCIENT GREEK ΜΟΙΡΟΛΟΓΕΙΣ MIROLOGIS- MIROLOWHIS

THE WORD MOIRA AND MOIROLOI DOES NOT EXIST IN CHURCH, IN BIBLE AND IS CONSIDERED RELIGIA ILLICATA AND FORBIDEN
HOW COME THESE PEOPLE KNOW IT IF THEY LEARN GREEK FROM CHURCH?

HOW COME THESE PEOPLE KNOW GOD KOMOS-MOMOS (ΚΩΜΟΣ- ΜΩΜΟΣ) SINCE THEY LEARN GREEK FROM CHRISTIAN CHURCH?
DID CHRISTIANS ALSO TEACH THEM ANCIENT GREEK GODS?

ANSWER THAT ZEUS10
AT LEAST GIVE US A CLEAR ANSWER TO THAT PHENOIMENA

1 How come Greek are spoken in Georgia a non Greek land and a non Greek church, and how come in Italy a Latin speaking church.
2. If Greek is a religious language how come people speak with ancient forms closer to Homeric than the Hellenistic2 and Byzantine?
3. If People learn Greek or Rumeika from Christian church how come they know ancient GreeK paganistic dances and names? isn't that oxymoron?

REMEMBER THAT MOST OF THESE PEOPLE ARE NOT CHRISTIANS BUT MUSLIMS FOR CENTURIES,
SO IN THEIR TEMPLES THEY HEAR TURKISH and ARABIC FOR CENTURIES.


HOW DO YOU EXPLAIN THAT GREEK ARE SPOKEN TO PEOPLE WHOSE CLERGY LANGUAGE IS NOT GREEK?

4.) If GREEK WAS FORCED TO PEOPLE BY CHRISTIANS AND BYZANTINES? WHY SERBS BULGARIANS ETC DID NOT LEARN GREEK? WHY ANTIOCHEIAN ORTHODOX CHRISTIANS DID NOT LEARN GREEK?

I think all evidences and question are not sharing your thesis,
Text older than you provide,
Speaking people that do not share the Church language,
paganistic names and dances that are forbiden by church or Islam,
Linguistic forms older than church language surely show us that history is correct and greek was and is a vivid language spoken by the descendants of the proto-speakers.


Sorry until now you have proved nothing.
simply you just told us that you deny all academic and scientific results and methods,
you haven't show us a prove of your thesis, neither in linguistic neither in archaiologicical evidence, so I can not follow you.
Deny for deny, remind me those writers who claim global conspiracy to sell books

I wonderin your Post no #18 the photos of the pappyrus how old are they?

are you sure they are from 17 century? who dated them?
 
So Romans never knew Greeks nor Hellenes? I lack classical latin History to answer this question already answered by serious historians... they knew only an indetermined population in S-E Europe that, spite being under Roma's foot, keep scrupulously speaking a religious language come from ??? a previous I-E religious jargon??? forged when??? upon what???
very good trick, the vainquished population give its language to the rulers elite, this elite that spent its time to change the name of greek gods? and by spirit of contradiction took after christianity (from Greeks?) and then reverse to latin language? or there was nothing as greek gods and Romans forged greek names for their own gods???
for the few I know the religious languages are former ethnic languages that take a "frozen" form and as a whole never survive among the people: look at semitic hebraic that was abandoned by Jews before being artificially took again (very rare occurrence in History), look at church latin, "frozen" form of late latin, that was abandoned too, finally... look at sanskrit that never become a vernacular: religious frozen stantardized languages need vulgar language, first, not the contrary
I think this at first intersting thread is coming to give me headache! I go to bed!
don't do nighmares!
 

This thread has been viewed 47641 times.

Back
Top