Мавро Орбини

У једној цариградској библиотеци очувана је повеља о привилегијама које је Александар Велики, дванаесте године своје владе, поделио Илирима, односно ''племенитом роду Словена''. То постаје сасвим разумљиво ако узмемо у обзир да су Македонци Александра Великог били заправо Словени, говорили истим језиком којим и данас говоре становници Македоније. Уопште, Македонци, Трачани и Мези говоре истим, словенским језиком. Александра Великог многи сматрају Грком, али неоправдано. Разлог тој заблуди јесте у томе што су Грци, борећи се са народима Истока, били најпознатији народ тадашње Европе, исто као што данас Грци и Турци верују да су сви европски католички народи Французи. Међутим, Московски анали изричито потврђују да су Руси, односно Московити, били истог језика као и антички Македонци, који су, поред осталих земаља, владали Египтом 276 година.

In one Tsarigrads(Constantinopel) library, there is a charter about the privilegies that Alexander the Great gave to Illyrians or " the nobel stock of Slavs" in the 12th year of his rule. Its becoming quite understandable if we know that macedonians of Alexander the Great were Slavs and they have spoken same language that todays inhabitants of macedonia speak. Alexander the Great is considered to be a Greek by many, but for no reason. The reason for that delusion lies in the fact that Greeks who fought people of east, were the most known people of the europe, the same way like nowdays Greeks and Turks belive that all european catholic people are French. Nevertheless, Moscow annals strictly confirm that Russians, or Moskovity spoke same language as Ancient Macedonians, that, beside other countires, ruled egypt for 276 years.


theres a lot more in a book that u can download here:
http://www.esnips.com/doc/c6187f89-93fd-4a85-ad21-b2ca32a6d522/Краљевство-Словена--Мавро-Орбин

its written in serbian, hopefully u ll be able to read it..pozdrav

Изменето од naemnik - 09.Октомври.2007 во 14:49

Odlichna tema na koja mozhe dolgo da se debatira. Samiot fakt deka sekoja civilizacija vo istorijata na choveshtvoto zad sebe ostava tragi.  Ako Aleksandar bil toa shto go znaeme od istorijata logichno e zad sebe da ostavil normalno najgolema trag. Ako bil grk togash sigurno ne bil Veliki (poglednete go jazichnoto podrachje na grcite), a site znaeme deka vo Evropa najmnogubrojni se onie narodi koi gi smestuvame vo grupata koja denes ja narekuvame slovenska (33% vo Evropa vo Azija ne mi e poznato).

Denes treba da mu obrneme vnimanie na otkritieto od kamenot na rozeta t.e. srednoto pismo demotkia za koe ima dokazi deka e napishano na jazikot na antichkite makedonci i edinstveno takvi zborovi se srekavaat samo vo slovenskte jazici. Bidejki od ovaa grupa na jazici nie zhiveeme na teritorijata na antichka makedonija logikata e jasna.

pajonec напиша: 1#(poglednete go jazichnoto podrachje na grcite), a site znaeme deka vo Evropa najmnogubrojni se onie narodi koi gi smestuvame vo grupata koja denes ja narekuvame slovenska (33% vo Evropa vo Azija ne mi e poznato). 2#Denes treba da mu obrneme vnimanie na otkritieto od kamenot na rozeta...

1#

The problem of the Thracians: a new hypothesis The reconstruction of the prehistoric context in which the Thracians slowly emerge has been attempted several times, and lastly by Hoddinott (1981), but in my opinion without noticeable novelties. Even the most recent discoveries, in fact, confirm what we alread know: the Thracian power is just one of the many manifestations of the new stratified societies and of the new elites of a military and superegional type which characterize Chalcolithic and Bronze, and the formation of which was triggered by the incursions of the k*rgan groups and their successors, coming from the Asiatic steppes. In the new PCT vision, this twofold, but in itself meager result produces the following commentary: (A) we must keep in consideration that the immediate neighbors of the Thracians ancestors – whoever they were – were these intrusive k*rgan groups; and (B) in the light of the equation of the k*rgan people with the Turkic group, the existence of the Turkic Thrace of historical times, the Turkic original character of the Bulgarians, and the so many aspects of the close relationship bwetween Anatolia, the Agean Sea and the Balkans become much more relevant than we have suspected until now (see chapter III of Alinei 2000). A single example: the typical shape of the sica, the national weapon of the Thracians (a knife with a curved blade and a sharp point, similar to a zanna di cinghiale (cp. Plinius H.N. XII 1: “apri dentium sicas”, and see the illustration in Rich 1869), used by Thracian gladiators in Rome, is typical of centro-Asiatic metallurgy. Another commentary is triggered by Hoddinott’s conclusion, which identifies the earliest sure manifestation of the Thracians in the Bronze Age Carpatian culture of Otomani-Wietenberg (in Transylvania, Hungary, Eastern Slovakia). According to the most recent research, this culture represents a continuation of the Baden and Vučedol cultures, and through the latter, is connected to the steppe cultures (see above and cp. for example DP s.v. Vučedol). In the light of the preceding remarks, then, on one hand we could conclude that also Thracians underwent the same Turkic influences as most other Southern Slavic languages; on the other – as both Baden and Vučedol in the framework of the PCT can be read as Slavophone cultures, we could advance the hypothesis that the Thacianas were a Slavic group, which would have been subject to stronger Turkic influences than the other Slavic languages, and eventually extinguished. A final remark: Herodotus, as is known, describes the Thracians as the most numerous people after the Indians. Mallory comments that it is a “sad irony” they “have left no modern descendant of their language” (Mallory 1989, 72). But is it really so? First of all, if it is hard to admit that a numerous people might completely extinguish, it is even less likely that this pre-existing people would have left no traces in the archaeological record. And since, as we have seen, the demographic explosion of the Slavs must be placed in Neolithic, we could then advance the hypothesis that Thracians was the name that Herodotus gave to the Slavs, owing to the fact the Thracians were one of the most powerful and representative elites of Slavic speaking Eastern Europe, seen with Herodotus’ inevitably colonialist eyes. In a first approximation, then, the Thracians would appear to be a Southern Slavic geo-variational group, out of which came a Bronze age elite, first dominating then extinguished. This hypothesis could be further developed and refined in the light of the results of research on the Thracian language which, with the caution due to the scarcity of materials, can be so summarized: (1) Thracian is an IE satem language, like Baltic and Slavic; (2) as discovered by Trubačev (see above), Thracian place names show a surprising similarity with the Baltic ones; (3) in some cases, however, Thracian affinities seem stronger with Slavic: the Thr. place-name suffix -dizos e -diza, for example, to which the meaning of ‘fortress’ has been attributed on the basis of the comparison with Gr. teĩkhos ‘wall’ (IEW 244), has a much closer counterpart in the metathetic forms of OSl. ziždoã, zydati ‘to build’ zydŭ, zidŭ ‘wall’, than in the Baltic ones (also methatetic), meaning ‘to form’. And the vocalism of the Thr. river name Stry¤mōn and place name Stry¤mē seems closer to Pol. strumień ‘brook’ and OSlav. struja ‘stream’ than to Latv stràume ‘stream’ (IEW 1003). The most plausible hypothesis would be then that Thracian was a conservative type of Slavic, still preserving Baltic features and spoken by a peripheral group of Southern Slavs, somehow parallel to the Northern peripheral Balts (following the geolinguistic well-known rule, according to which the center innovates, and the periphery preserves).

http://www.continuitas.com/interdisciplinary.pdf

and for Macedonia it is written:

Thracians, Illyrians, and Epirotæ are settled even at present on the sides of Greece. Formerly the territory they possessed was more extensive, although even now the barbarians possess a large part of the country, which, without dispute, is Greece. Macedonia is occupied by Thracians, as well as some parts of Thessaly; the country above Acarnania and Ætolia, by Thesproti, Cassopæi, Amphilochi, Molotti, and Athamanes, Epirotic tribes. (7, 7, 1)

2# Rozeta Stone prevodot ima greshka vo Metodologijata ili Pristapot kako se deshifrirani Zborovite.  Teshko e da se objasni, no za zhal Greshka e. Treba da se zaboravi toa.




Изменето од naemnik - 11.Октомври.2007 во 10:26

you are the one presenting  funny theory u r the 1 to proove it

Pseudoscientific theories

Two university professors in electrical engineering from Skopje, operating under the auspices of the government funded Faculty of Electrical Engineering in Skopje and presented to the official Macedonian Academy of Sciences and Arts, are claiming that the "Demotic" script is, in fact, a text related to the "old Slavonic Macedonian language" and is Ancient Macedonian. This contradicts all mainstream interpretations of the Stone and the mainstream scientific evidence that Ancient Macedonian was not a Slavic language and, not least, that Slavic speaking peoples did not reach the Balkan peninsula until the 6th Century CE.


I guess they got their 15 minutes of fame.

If they were serious about their 'discoveries' they would have published them and let the linguistic community criticise their work. Until their work is 'out there' and examined it's less than worthless.

naemnik напиша: filibe напиша: Pseudoscientific theories If they were serious about their 'discoveries' they would have published them and let the linguistic community criticise their work. Until their work is 'out there' and examined it's less than worthless. Alinei: http://www.continuitas.com/workgroup.html hey a bunch of unserious guys Curta: http://www.amazon.com/Making-Slavs-Archaeology-Cambridge-Medieval/dp/0521802024 Oxford, bunch of Idiots have a nice time disputing them

Не им давај вакви линкови на Бугарите бидејки ке земат да се објаснуваат со Бугарите дали или не се во право

filibe напиша: http://www.continuitas.com/workgroup.html Quote me one of these gyus supporting this theory And read what Slovak thinks about this particular translation on the rozeta stone.Cause whith this translation aside all u have is wishful thinking

are you dumb or desperate or you dont read what I post you.......

I already said 3 times at least that Slovak is right about the assertion on Roseta Stone........ So whats your problem....... 

I agree that Roseta Stone attempt is inaccurate but that does not mean that the outdated Slav Theory is true


Изменето од naemnik - 11.Октомври.2007 во 12:49