Four questions for those who still believe in prehistoric Slavs and other fairy tales

I won't answer on this,but you must be right.
Did u just admit or at least considered as true the idea of Albanian being a Balkan language? Wow.

Now what comes to mind is that Albanian is either an Illyrian or Daco-Thracian.

But it can't be Illyrian because you Serbs know it and it's not possible for whatever reason. But in the same time it can't be Daco-Thracian (like some fellow Serbs claim in this forum) because according to you they're Proto-Slavic languages, therefore Albanian=Slavic.
 
Taranis @ so far..
You didn't knew that Slavic /g/ can become /z/ (see above)
You mistaken the Slavic /ъ/ for /u/ (see above) after reading on wikipedia told me that is a short *u which is knowhere near the same.
You was the one claiming that *o to *a Balto-Slavic share only with Germanic
1. Phonetical similarities:
Phonetical featuresThrac.DacianAlban.Balto-Slavic"Pelasg."GermanIndo-IranianGreekPhryg.Armen.ItalicCelticHittiteTokhar.
IE o>a++++++++A +

Completely ignoring the problem of the beech and Proto-Slavic homeland,completely ignoring proffesional linguists,any counter argument you don't see and even dare call someone dogmastic.
Completely ignoring linguist proffesionalists and their distrust of something you want to tell me that is absolute truth.
Completely ignoring proffesional archeologist and historians.
I asked a river names from you,you showed nothing apart some links from wikipedia.
You relly on Wikipedia.
Apart that you know about Grimm's law,Verner's law and sound shifts,which can be learned for couple of days...
So far you showed that you know very little about Indo-European languages in general making and next to nothing about Slavic.
You showed only stubborness so far.
I think disscusion like this is useless.
"buk" ("beech") is indeed derived from bheH2ǵos, but it is a Germanic loanword.
Call it "bouk" at least like in Church Slavic.

How can it be "ethnocentrism" if the cognates in Celtic (Old Irish 'gort') and Italic (Latin 'horta') are both with *t? It is impossible to explain as having derived from PIE because the *d is wholly unexpected (it should be regularly with a *t in Slavic, just as in Celtic and Italic). In Germanic, however, from the cumulative effect of Grimm's Law and Verner's Law, you get *d (see English "garden").
Not to extend the disscusion a quick link from wikitionary not only wikipedia can help you here.
 
Taranis @ so far..
You didn't knew that Slavic /g/ can become /z/ (see above)
You mistaken the Slavic /ъ/ for /u/ (see above) after reading on wikipedia told me that is a short *u which is knowhere near the same.

Now you're intentionally misquoting me.

You was the one claiming that *o to *a Balto-Slavic share only with Germanic
1. Phonetical similarities:
Phonetical featuresThrac.DacianAlban.Balto-Slavic"Pelasg."GermanIndo-IranianGreekPhryg.Armen.ItalicCelticHittiteTokhar.
IE o>a++++++++A +

Completely ignoring the problem of the beech and Proto-Slavic homeland

I don't completely ignore the "problem" of the beech, I pinpointed you to it (it wasn't part of this thread until I mentioned it, you can go back and read the thread from the start): the Slavic word for beech is of Germanic origin. Deal with it.

As for you showing that table again, I've made my point about Pelasgian before: its a canard. There is no "Pelasgian" language, you're tracing a phantom. Yes, Indo-Iranic merge *e,o > *a, and so does Hittite mere *o > *a, but do you really think that's a common (read: linked) sound change with Slavic?

,completely ignoring proffesional linguists,any counter argument you don't see and even dare call someone dogmastic.
Completely ignoring linguist proffesionists and their distrust of something you want to tell me that is absolute truth.
Completely ignoring proffesional archeologist and historians.

I'm not ignoring them, but I disagree with them when they spout nonsense, such as Curta.

I asked a river names from you,you showed nothing apart some links from wikipedia.

I didn't get around to that yet. Blame me.

You relly on Wikipedia.
Apart that you know about Grimm's law,Verner's law and sound shifts,which can be learned for couple of days...
So far you showed that you know very little about Indo-European languages in general making this fallacies and next to nothing about Slavic.

I'm not the one who relies on Wikipedia.

You showed only stubborness so far.
I think disscusion like this is useless.

I like you too, Milan.

Not to extend the disscusion a quick link from wikitionary not only wikipedia can help you here.

If I were you, I would not rely on wiktionary (I for one don't).
 

Now you're intentionally misquoting me.



I don't completely ignore the "problem" of the beech, I pinpointed you to it (it wasn't part of this thread until I mentioned it, you can go back and read the thread from the start): the Slavic word for beech is of Germanic origin. Deal with it.
Maybe other way around,even apart that hypothetical "Gothic" sorry if it hurts invented ;)
As for you showing that table again, I've made my point about Pelasgian before: its a canard. There is no "Pelasgian" language, you're tracing a phantom. Yes, Indo-Iranic merge *e,o > *a, and so does Hittite mere *o > *a, but do you really think that's a common (read: linked) sound change with Slavic?

It was about *o to *a sound change you said such thing doesn't exist in Thracian but only Balto-Slavic and Germanic share it,scroll your comments,Pelasgian is totaly irrelavant here.

I'm not ignoring them, but I disagree with them when they spout nonsense, such as Curta.
He is right if he annoys you,i feel that :D


If I were you, I would not rely on wiktionary (I for one don't).
Still you can see PIE is with *d,above all you can read many such toponyms from ancient times with *d instead.
All Germanic borrowings.
 
Maybe other way around,even apart that hypothetical "Gothic" sorry if it hurts is invented ;)

Biblical Gothic is not an invented language (just like Old Church Slavic, yeah?), the assertation alone is silly. Nor are the names of East Germanic tribal leaders from the Migration Period (or earlier recorded Germanic names) invented. Again, if you had an understanding of sound laws and how they work (notably, the Neogrammarian hypothesis and the concept that sound laws are 'exceptionless'), you would come to the same conclusion as I do. There is a general agreement that Proto-Slavic borrowed heavily from Germanic over a greater period of time, notably before the *a > *o shift occured.

It was about *o to *a sound change you said such thing doesn't exist in Thracian but only Balto-Slavic and Germanic share it,scroll your comments,Pelasgian is totaly irrelavant here.

Is it? The fact that the author you're citing, Duridanov, does take it into account as a valid Indo-European language is a reason for me not to take him seriously.

He is right if he annoys you,i feel that

I'll be honest: he entertains me in the same way that Vennemann or Wrexler entertain me.

Still you can see PIE is with *d,above all you can read many such toponyms from ancient times with *d instead.

I don't get what you're saying there.
 
Has it crossed your mind that I actually might enjoy hanging out on Eupedia, and that there are people who actually enjoy reading this? (y)
I do, I do.
 
Biblical Gothic is not an invented language (just like Old Church Slavic, yeah?), the assertation alone is silly. Nor are the names of East Germanic tribal leaders from the Migration Period (or earlier recorded Germanic names) invented. Again, if you had an understanding of sound laws and how they work (notably, the Neogrammarian hypothesis and the concept that sound laws are 'exceptionless'), you would come to the same conclusion as I do. There is a general agreement that Proto-Slavic borrowed heavily from Germanic over a greater period of time, notably before the *a > *o shift occured..

Is the name Wulfilas attested anywhere?
 
Is the name Wulfilas attested anywhere?

Is the name "Jesus of Nazareth" attested in then-contemporary sources? I find the idea that Gothic was an invented "romantic" language invented by German nobility in the 1600s, and I'm actually quoting Milan right now, its all pretty ridiculous:

There were two at least Bulgarian historians i know about Asen Chilingirov and Julija Dimitrova,writing on Getae and Goths recently.

According to Julija,haven't read the book entirely a Longobardic runes are used in the "Biblcal Gothic",Chilingirov say that the paper is altogether a forgery of 16th,17th century,see Gothicism among Germanic nobility,this is Codex Argentus,Biblical Gothic;

If you and Milan are going into the direction of the "history is a lie" vibe, I have two addresses for you: Heribert Illig and Anatoly Fomenko. Pick whichever of the two you like, but don't be surprised that the two have radically divergent ideas.
 
Is the name "Jesus of Nazareth" attested in then-contemporary sources?
Why do you change subject? The names attested are Ulfilas, Orfilas etc.
That's one example of weird Germanic etymology and was the result of romantic nationalism.
Βesides, 'Little Wolf' isn't a very appropriate name for a bishop.
 
Why do you change subject? The names attested are Ulfilas, Orfilas etc.
That's one example of weird Germanic etymology and was the result of romantic nationalism.
Βesides, 'Little Wolf' isn't a very appropriate name for a bishop.

I didn't change the subject. I just made the point that such a general suspicion is pointless. "Little Wolf" is just as much a viable etymology as the Saint Martin "Martinus" (pertaining to Mars - a really strange name for a Christian bishop of Tours, isn't it?). Besides, if not from Germanic, where is the name else supposed to come from? The presence of an /f/ narrows it down, because Slavic languages do not have a native phoneme /f/. In the East and South Slavic languages, most words with "f" are actually derived from medieval Greek Phi (Φφ) and Theta (Θθ).
 
I didn't change the subject. I just made the point that such a general suspicion is pointless. "Little Wolf" is just as much a viable etymology as the Saint Martin "Martinus" (pertaining to Mars - a really strange name for a Christian bishop of Tours, isn't it?). Besides, if not from Germanic, where is the name else supposed to come from? The presence of an /f/ narrows it down, because Slavic languages do not have a native phoneme /f/. In the East and South Slavic languages, most words with "f" are actually derived from medieval Greek Phi (Φφ) and Theta (Θθ).

He was from Cappadocia, so even from an unattested Anatolian language. Where does 'w' come from?

I have one other example of a weird Germanic etymology:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dnieper_Rapids
Greek text: Varu'foros
Germanic etymology: Bárufors

The Greek text would have used 'μπ' if the placename started from 'b'

All of them are weird, for me but I shouldn't bother.

I should add only that Γελανδρι is a Sclavenic term in the text, and they give to that a Germanic etymology too.
 
He was from Cappadocia, so even from an unattested Anatolian language. Where does 'w' come from?

I have one other example of a weird Germanic etymology:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dnieper_Rapids
Greek text: Varu'foros
Germanic etymology: Bárufors

The Greek text would have used 'μπ' if the placename started from 'b'

All of them are weird, for me but I shouldn't bother.

Here, you are assuming that the orthographic conventions of modern Greek would have automatically applied in medieval Greek. Instead, medieval Greek just substituted /b/ with /v/ (spelled with β).

I should add only that Γελανδρι is a Sclavenic term in the text, and they give to that a Germanic etymology too.

Gelandri is a related with English "to yell" and Dutch "gillen" ('to shout').

As regards Cappadocia, I'm pretty certain that Anatolian (Luwic) languages were extinct in Ulfilas' time.
 
Last edited:
He was from Cappadocia, so even from an unattested Anatolian language. Where does 'w' come from?
I'll tell you about the "w" cause Taranis don't want,one word- imagination as many things discussed in this thread.Time of "poetry"..Orphila seem more to me like dialectal variant of Orpheus if i include imagination,religious leader- orphaned,at least such names could be found,how is Wulfila derived,what is the suffix there? Why we add "w"? To be a wolf.
 
I'll tell you about the "w" cause Taranis don't want,one word- imagination as many things discussed in this thread.Time of "poetry"..Orphila seem more to me like dialectal variant of Orpheus if i include imagination,religious leader- orphaned,at least such names could be found,how is Wulfila derived,what is the suffix there? Why we add "w"? To be a wolf.

Even if you have the pre-composed opinion that the name Ulfilas/Wulfilas somehow cannot be Germanic and that the etymology is bogus for you, it doesn't change the fact that Biblical Gothic is an authentic Germanic language that could not have been 'forged' by romanticists in the 1600s (which was your assertation). Like I said before, it is not that people in previous ages (before the 20th century) did not produce constructed languages, because they very much did (Hildegard von Bingen's 12th century Lingua Ignota comes to my mind). But to actually construct Gothic would have required a background in linguistics (which as a science wasn't developed at that point in time). Please bear in mind that the people who, for example, well-known, elaborate constructed languages such Klingon and Quenya were invented by actual linguists (Mark Okrand and J.R.R. Tolkien, respectively), and in both cases we are talking about clearly fictional languages.

So stop pretending that Gothic is an invented language. If it is, your fabled 16th century German romanticists were centuries ahead in their linguistic expertise, and they were so gifted that it happens that only the thorough analysis by South Slavic nationalists who are not blinded by Germanic romanticism can pinpoint the truth!
 
Here, you are assuming that the orthographic conventions of modern Greek would have automatically applied in medieval Greek. Instead, medieval Greek just substituted /b/ with /v/ (spelled with β).



Gelandri is a related with English "to yell" and Dutch "gillen" ('to shout').

As regards Cappadocia, I'm pretty certain that Anatolian (Luwic) languages were extinct in Ulfilas' time.

I am not assuming it. I know it and it is a well known fact. It is evident from the Sclavenic names. For example Οστροβουνιπραχ /οstrovuniprax/, 'v' written with 'β'.
'b' written with 'μπ' is not at all a modern convention.

Γελανδρι /jelanðri/ is a 'Sclavenic' term in the text and means ήχος φραγμού, not a term used by Rus, so even if you want to propose a Germanic etymology (I recognize that it's easy to do it) it has nothing to do with the Rus.
It would have been a Germanic term used by Slavs and nothing more than that.
 
Even if you have the pre-composed opinion that the name Ulfilas/Wulfilas somehow cannot be Germanic and that the etymology is bogus for you, it doesn't change the fact that Biblical Gothic is an authentic Germanic language that could not have been 'forged' by romanticists in the 1600s (which was your assertation). Like I said before, it is not that people in previous ages (before the 20th century) did not produce constructed languages, because they very much did (Hildegard von Bingen's 12th century Lingua Ignota comes to my mind). But to actually construct Gothic would have required a background in linguistics (which as a science wasn't developed at that point in time). Please bear in mind that the people who, for example, well-known, elaborate constructed languages such Klingon and Quenya were invented by actual linguists (Mark Okrand and J.R.R. Tolkien, respectively), and in both cases we are talking about clearly fictional languages.

So stop pretending that Gothic is an invented language. If it is, your fabled 16th century German romanticists were centuries ahead in their linguistic expertise, and they were so gifted that it happens that only the thorough analysis by South Slavic nationalists who are not blinded by Germanic romanticism can pinpoint the truth!
What I wrote then was what other claim and I haven't even read them,that much I am interested in that,maybe if I does one day can say their arguments, for my claim sorry if I was being provocative, so are you.What I can bring in question or know more for example about origin of South Slavs written in Dioclea by priest in 12th century or bit later,for some reason the book he call is the book about Goths or known in Latin as regnum Sclavorum and he don't make difference between them,written in Latin,whether is true or not,he wrote a bit extensive history which doesn't agree with what we know.
 
Last edited:
I am not assuming it. I know it and it is a well known fact. It is evident from the Sclavenic names. For example Οστροβουνιπραχ /οstrovuniprax/, 'v' written with 'β'.
'b' written with 'μπ' is not at all a modern convention.

I disagree. As I said, the letter Beta (Ββ) was indeed pronounced as /v/ in the Middle Ages, but in spelling convention, people would just substitute /b/ as "v" (β). The convention to spell /b/ as 'mp' (μπ) is a modern convention. One example that comes to my mind, even if it is from (very) early Byzantine Greek, would be Procopius (in his Gothic War, book 1, chapter 15), who spells Ravenna as Rabenna (Ραβεννα) and Benavente as Benebenton (Βενεβεντον). For the latter, it would be intuitive (from the perspective of modern Greek) to render both Betas as "v", but in the name Benavente, the first Beta clearly represents a /b/, and the second represents a /v/. If you find one example where a /b/ in a foreign name is rendered /mp/ in medieval Greek (closer in time to the Volga route), please show us.

Γελανδρι /jelanðri/ is a 'Sclavenic' term in the text and means ήχος φραγμού, not a term used by Rus, so even if you want to propose a Germanic etymology (I recognize that it's easy to do it) it has nothing to do with the Rus.
It would have been a Germanic term used by Slavs and nothing more than that.

And here I thought we were talking about Varangians (i.e. Norse). Also, stop applying the phonology of modern Greek (Gamma as /j/) retroactively to medieval Greek. It doesn't work that way.
 
Last edited:
Why the Catholic church called our Glagolitic script a "heretic gothic script".
The Roman Catholic church in it's fight against Slavic language in church usage, Dalmatia gathering of bishops 1059;

They said that the Gothic letters were invented by some heretic Methodius, who in this very Slavic language wrote many false things against the teachings of the Catholic faith; because of this, they say, he was God's judgment punished with demise.



In the South with our supposed "Christianization" that is coming in the Orthodox faith new alphabet was invented,that is the Cyrillic one derived from Greek generaly,with couple letters from other alphabets,and the Glagolitic one fail out of usage.
There is no generaly agreement who invented this alphabet or on what is based? however Methodius and Cyril are credited with it's invention whether or not why will their disciples only one generation after them invent a Cyrillic alphabet?
By Croatian legend even St.Jerome used to write with it,which is dismissed today.

The "heretic" script from a church in Zagreb,Croatia.
800px-Glagolitsa_Zagreb.jpg

Early examples;
Bascanska_ploca.jpg

ZografskiyKodeks.png


I hope i can learn this alphabet one day,good for the Croatian and Czech churches, if im not mistaken there is still used.
 
Goths and Getae who were they?
The early authors;
Jordanes,Isidore of Seville, Orosius, Philostorgius, Procopius,Yeronim Claudius etc thought that this people are the same,their name is variation of one and the same;
Jordanes who was Goth himself give them Getae (Thracian) history.

Even much later authors about creation of Gothic alphabet;
According to 17th century scholar Carolus Lundius (sv) Ulfilas created the Gothic alphabet based on the Getae's alphabet, with minor alterations. Carolus is quoting Bonaventura Vulcanius' book, De literis et lingua Getarum sive Gothorum, (Lyon, 1597) and Johannes Magnus, Gothus, Historia de omnibus Gothorum Sueonumque regibus, Roma, 1554, a book in which it has been published, for the first time, both the Getic alphabet, and the laws of the Getae legislator Zamolxis.

Zalmoxis bear in mind a Getae god mentioned since Herodotus.

Let's quote now Theophylact Simocatta,one of the first authors that had contact with Sclavenes;
As for the Getae, that is to say the herds of Sclavenes, they were fiercly ravaging the regions of Thrace.
These, therefore, encountered six hundred Sclavenes who were escorting a great haul of Romans, for they had ravaged Zaldapa, Aquis, and Scopi, and were herding back these unfortunates as plunder; a large number of wagons held the possessions they had looted. When the barbarians observed the Romans approaching, and were then likewise observed, they turned to the slaughter of the captives. Then the adult male captives from youth upwards were killed. Since the barbarians could not avoid an encounter, they collected the wagons and placed them round as a barricade, depositing the women and youth in the middle of the defence.The Romans drew near to the Getae (for this is the older name for the barbarians)

The earliest history written about South Slavs by a priest in Dioclea(12th century) starts this way;

Since you ask me, my beloved brothers in Christ and respected priests of the Archdiocese of Dioclean church, and several of the gentlemen, and most young people in our city, who enjoy not only listening to and reading about the wars, and of the wars themselves, as it is already the custom for young people the booklet on the Goths, which is called in Latin Regnum Sclavorum, in which are described all their acts and wars, recompile from Slavic alphabet to Latin, forcing my own age, and driven by fraternal love, I have tried to oblige your request. Still not even one reader should think that I wrote anything other than what I have heard from our fathers and ancient lords that is transmitted as a true saying.


Why in ancient times there was so much "confusing" and miss understadings,while we in more modern times came to understand everything about "our" ancestors?
 
That is to say a religious wars-oppression,for no reason the bishop's wasn't captured by Narentine pirates in Dalmatia;
known for their piracy, so they are today known as the Neretva pirates.

Already by the middle of the 7th century – in 642 – the Sclavenes dispatched from the Dalmatian coast towards Italy and invaded Siponto at the Gulf of Monte Gargano. Afterwards, raids in the Adriatic increased rapidly, until Sclavenes became the most fearsome threat to safe travelling.
By the second half of the 9th century the Narentines had long been trying change their lifestyle from piracy completely. Despite that, the Narentines kidnapped the Roman Bishop's emissaries that were returning from the Ecclesiastical Council in Constantinople in the middle of March 870,until Eastern Roman Emperor Basil I of the Macedonian dynasty finally pacified them with a naval military attempt, after which he reunified the whole of Dalmatia under Imperial Byzantine rule.

These Narentani defeated a Venetian fleet in 887, and for more than a century exacted tribute from Venice itself. In 998 they were finally crushed by the doge Pietro Orseolo II., who assumed the title duke of Dalmatia, though without prejudice to Byzantine suzerainty.— Encyclopedia Britannica, 1911


 

This thread has been viewed 80537 times.

Back
Top