Torino #conspiracy #wingnut #dunning-kruger #racist jassa.org

What does this mean? Well, obviously the 6th century invading Sclavi (Slavs or Suavs) who covered, inch by inch, the territory of the Teutonic Suevi (then Suavi) were able to find a few remaining Suevi that taught the Slavs what a proper name was (the Slavic Slavs probably ate their Teutonic teachers after that – the Teutons were, of course, delicious).

Or maybe this is different, Maybe, the medieval Slavs read Caesar’s Commentaries on the Gallic War and said, let’s name our kids after the anti-Roman protagonists? That’s another highly=probably possibility.

But why not give some space to the experts. Here is an entry on Nasua fromthe Reallexikon der germanischen Altertumskunde volume 20. The entry comes from Reinhard Wolters

torino #wingnut #racist #conspiracy #dunning-kruger jassa.org

First, there is the question about what Tacitus considered Germanic. Tacitus cites nothing to suggest that we should view, for example, the Suevi as Germanic in today’s – German speaking /vaguely Nordic – sense of the word. Yet using Tacitus’ vision of the world they were labeled as Germanic. Consequently, the suggestion that the Veneti may have seemed “Germanic” to Tacitus proves only that, to Tacitus, they were similar to people Tacitus considered Germanic. The classifications says nothing about the nature of the thing Tacitus compared them to, i.e., Tacitus’ Germanics such as the Suevi. Since the Suevi, as we have argued, may well have been the same people as some or all of today’s Western Slavs (for example, the Aesti, typically viewed as Balts – who are today viewed as most similar to Slavs – are described by Tacitus as similar to the Suevi except for some language differences), the similarity between the Veneti and the Suevi does not help us to determine whether the Veneti were “Nordic” or “Slavic”. In any event, this similarity seems to be based entirely on one cultural aspect – the Venetis’ fixed dwellings which characteristic made them, to Tacitus, similar to Germanics and distinguished them in his mind from the Saramatians (who lived on wagons).

Torino #conspiracy #dunning-kruger #racist #wingnut jassa.org

Ok… let’s go with that, and then let’s review what German science tells us about the prehistory of Germania:

“Germans” lived like the much later Slavs
“Germans” were named like the much later Slavs
“Germans” had funerary rites like the much later Slavs
and now:

Germans looked like the much later Slavs*
(* note: the Germans that “looked” like Slavs are those from Poland and East Germany – as far as I know, no one has conducted similar studies in West Germany)

Combine this with the fact that there are no (zero, nada) sources suggesting any Slavic migration into Germany.

German conclusion:

Germania was occupied by Germanics only and Slavs came into Germania much later.
Notwithstanding, Tacitus and many other eyewitness accounts she implies that the Germanic population was diverse, almost multiethnic… Of course, Tacitus did differentiate the Suevi from other Germans but that could not have been Slavs we are told. In fact, she seems to think Germania was home to every type of person (but seemingly didn’t include Slavs… except maybe their biological ancestors… say, what?).

Torino #wingnut #conspiracy #racist #dunning-kruger jassa.org

Now, if you allow a digression, we would like to point out that one of the first things that surprises anyone researching pre-Slavic antiquities is that, while the suffix -mir may be Slavic, the names ending with -mer or -mar are not considered Slavic but Germanic. This should not be that surprising, however, because all Indo-European languages contain some levels of similarity. But the situation is worse than that. The suffix -mir may also be Germanic. Thus, for example, we have the Ostrogothic Pannonian Kings Theodemir, Valamir and, even, that most Slavic “sounding” Videmir. With all this we begin to question whether “Boromir” is Slavic either! (Gondor does not sound Slavic, even if Bor-o-mir does!).

The reason why one can reject the Slavic derivation of these names is not only because they were Goths and Goths spoke an East Germanic tongue but also because the prefixes of these names – at least in the case of Theodemir and Valamir – cannot be explained in any Slavic language. (Videmir could be but, after all, they were Goths
What is the Germanic etymology of the following name: Ukromir of the Chatti or Batti (in which case he would have been Batavian)? Mind you, the sources speak of Ukromir – not of Ueckermir or of Ueckermar or, even, as the table below shows and as Dahn would have it – Ukromer.

one polish nationalist #conspiracy #racist #dunning-kruger jassa.org

Incidentally, we have no idea what language the Germanic tribes of Caesar’s or Tacitus’ time used – we are told “German” but, if you ask anyone, “how do you know that”, you get blank stares. Why? Because they do not know how to respond and the reason is that not a single shred of evidence exists that the so-called Germanic tribes – other than the Goths, Vandals, Lombards and Franks – spoke a Germanic language. But wasn’t Arminius a Germanic tribesman par excellence? The -us is a Latin ending that followed many Germanic names ending in a consonant. The -in ending is believed to be – at least in that part of Europe – a Slavic ending. But wasn’t he Hermann? No, he was Armin. And names of the sort existed later in Central Europe’s Slavic dukedoms, e.g., Prince Barnim. Unless we think that Armenia is also a German country? Armenia/Germania, hmmm… looks similar, and we are all Indo-Europeans, so why not? That’s the same logic as making Armin into a Hermann.)

torino #conspiracy #dunning-kruger #racist #wingnut jassa.org

In any event, in Germany/Netherlands there is also another River Leda. In Spain we have the town of Liedena (next to Yesa). Also, and curiously, Lada was the name for Anglo-Saxon legal “purging” rituals on which we will have more (see King Æthelred’s laws) (and, as mentioned the law of Genghis Khan was called Yassa).

There are at least two possibilities here. One is that the Germanic languages have the capacity to originate/maintain both the Led- and the Eld- versions of names (but the Slavic only the latter!). This is the same overreaching argument as in personal names – there we are told that the suffix –mir may be Slavic but it can also be Germanic. But the suffixes -mar and –mer are exclusively Germanic. In more recent times, we see the same argument applied to genetics. The European versions of the haplogroup R1a may be “Slavic”. But they also may be Germanic (or Celtic). However, haplogroups R1b and I1 cannot be Slavic and are Germanic (or Celtic)… (What all of this, frankly, suggests is that the Germans are a mix of at least three different populations, bits and pieces of whose language and genes made their way into the common pot).

Another possibility is that some of these names are simply not Germanic. This would raise another question. Which version is Germanic and which is not. As between the Eld- and the Led-, we’d say that the Led- is the not Germanic version. In that case, the question is whose language does it belong in? And could it be Slavic, Baltic or something else altogether.

Torino #conspiracy #wingnut #dunning-kruger #racist jassa.org

First, let’s look at the effect of the relative balance of power (economic, military, cultural, etc) determines how one perceives history. We have an excellent example from the German approach to the “Origin of the Slavs” question.
Second, we will look (again) at how different assumptions about history translate into different interpretations of facts that might – absent such assumptions – have resulted in entirely new theories. Here the example of the Suavi-Slavi incongruity being ignored or molded to fit preexisting notions about the past will be of interest. Another example will have to do with the heavily politicized (strange, isn’t it!?) question of the ethnic nature of the Aesti.
Third, we will look at the final refuge of the scoundrels – the redefinition of the debate. Here we have an excellent example of linguistic prestidigitation when we ask the mainstream historians and archeologists to tell us what do they mean exactly by “Slavs”.
Fourth, we will ask about the implication of answers that differ from the ones that we are regularly being served up – both in the context of German self-perception and in the context, to come full circle, of today’s status of the “European project” – a project that the Germans (but also many others) hold near and dear – at whatever price.
This view of Germans and Slavs was picked up on by the Nazis (although whole heartedly only after it become clear that Poles and Czechs would not be drawn into a crusade against the Soviet Union). It was a view whose strongest expression, therefore, occurred in times of relative German strength. Put simply, whenever Germany was strong it could define history however it liked to and exclude others from its past just as it was actually excluding others from the present

torino #conspiracy #wingnut #dunning-kruger #racist jassa.org

Politicizing Roots
Whereas before Slavic autochtonism was a stumbling block on the road to consolidation of the lands of the overstretched reformed Germany Empire, now Slavic authochtonism is a major problem for the plans laid out for Europe in general. Since, as we see recently, the party line is that anyone can come to Europe and anyone can be a European, the idea of a “native” or indigenous population is not too popular an idea.
And so, it is difficult not to notice that, beginning in the 1990s (or late 1980s even) the German juggernaut was being repurposed as a steamroller against the resurgence of ugly Slavic nationalism. Foundations and institutes were established. Scientific articles were written. And donations and subsidies were handed out to understanding individuals and various “independent” organizations all over Central Europe

torino #wingnut #conspiracy #racist #dunning-kruger jassa.org

Second, how do we know that the original Slavs were only R1a folks? In fact, how do we know that R1a is “the” Slavic gene? After all, what if Slavs were I or R1b before, say, the Hun or Avar invasion making the “Slavic” y-dna, the dna of Avars or Huns… And how that was “infused” into Slavic women, we leave for you to picture.

Third, some R1a is found in Scandinavia and that R1a is different – mostly – from the “Slavic” one. Consequently, that R1a is a portion of R1a has been effectively ceded to the Nordics… But, by focusing on R1a, the “Slavologists” have also effectively ceded all R1b and I and other “haplogroups” to Nordics/Celts. Suddenly, the quest for “purity” resulted in 90% of all types of dna on the continent not being true “Slavic”. In effect the Nordic/Celtic “side” is able to claim 100% of R1b, 100% of I and a significant chunk of R1a… R1b and I are just given up without a fight…

But this is ridiculous. It may well be that various “African” and “Asian” haplogroups are definitively not Slavic. However, if someone carries a R1b or I haplogroup, why should that person not be viewed as Slavic? We are all for advocating blood relations between the Slavs but even we admit that – at some point in the past – there must have been a kernel of a community from which the Slavs arose and it is not at all clear that that kernel was constituted solely out of R1a…

torino #conspiracy #crackpot #dunning-kruger #racist jassa.org

They encounter those Suevi or proto-Suevi that live on the border of today’s Germany and France, subdue them or assimilate them and press on. Why? Because the good stuff is in the South – the Sun, the beaches, the women, the really fast chariots with spoilers – in other words, civilization. The process takes hundreds of years as the funnel keeps sending forth new hordes always southwards. Whatever Suevic tribes existed in their path become Germanized; others become the Suevi of Tacitus retreating beyond the Rhine; yet others retreat westwards towards Bretagne.In a way Europe and the Slavic lands are cloven asunder by these northern invaders (though, again, the “cleaving” can be left aside if we forgo the Veneti of Bretagne but we are not yet ready to do so, so let the cleaving go on).

Eventually, these new mixed peoples – let’s call them Galls – make it to the Alps and push around them on both sides. A kind of Thor’s Hammer forms with the handle reaching up to Scandinavia but the head of it pressed against the Alps. Finally, the Galls begin to raid Italy just as Rome rises.

Torino #conspiracy #dunning-kruger #racist #wingnut jassa.org

So much for the extent of the assumed displacement. It must have been the greatest and the most absolute of any recorded in history.”

“It must also have taken place with unparalleled rapidity. By supposing that the assumed changes set in immediately after the time of Tacitus, and that as soon as that writer had recorded the fact that Poland, Bohemia, and Courland were parts of Germania, the transformation of these previously Teutonic areas into Slavonic ones, began, we have a condition as favorable for a great amount of changes as can fairly be demanded. Still it may be improved. The last traces of the older population may be supposed to have died out only just before the time when the different areas became known as exclusively Slavonic; an assumption which allows the advocate of the German theory to stay that, had our information been a little earlier, we should have found what we want in the way of vestiges, fragments, and effects of the antecedent non-Slavonic aborigines. Be it so. Still the time is short. Bohemia appears as an exclusively Slavonic country as early as A.D. 625. Is the difference between these areas and the time of Tacitus sufficient?”

“Undoubtedly a great deal in the way of migration and displacement may be done in five hundred years, and still more in seven hundred; yet it may be safely said that, under no circumstances whatever, within the historical period, has any known migration equalled the rapidity and magnitude of the one assumed, and that under no circumstances has the obliteration of all signs of an earlier population been so complete.”

“How could the displacement inferred from this utter obliteration have taken place? Was it by a process of ejection, so that the presumed immigrant Slavonians conquered and expelled the original Goths. The chances of war, when we get to the historical period, run the other way; and the first fact which we know concerning those selfsame Slavonians who are supposed to have dispossessed the Germans in the third and fourth centuries, is that, in the ninth, the Germans dispossessed them.”

Torino #dunning-kruger #conspiracy #racist #wingnut jassa.org

It has been assumed that Germanic gods were Odin/Wotan, Thor and the like. But their worship in Germany proper is attested only poorly. On the other hand, during the Enlightenment, German amateur anthropologists and folklore collectors began to write down and study local folk tales, myths and superstitions. The most well-known of this bunch are, of course, the Brothers Grimm. However, already many years before them, folklore research was well under way in Germany.

Some of the more curious discoveries in the Main include references to old German Gods. Many of these have been discarded as untrustworthy but they nevertheless merit mention. This is particularly so since – whether or not they were actual Gods – their names suggest a Slavic origin and, thus, a Slavic presence far West of the Elbe.

Such names include Germanic Krodo (perhaps related to the Polish Krotoszyn/Krotoschin?), the Sorbian Flins but also, among a number of Thuringian Gods, Jecha, Ostara, Cisa and Biel (a Sun God!) and others.

Take Lollus described usually as a Frankish agricultural God. Apparently, a statue or a figurine was discovered at some point near Schweinfurt (originally mentioned as Suinuurde in about 720 – what does it really refert to?).
The name Lollus appears also as Lullus, Loellus and Lallus.

Whether he may have something to do with the Polish Lel (or Polel) is an obvious question.

Another question is whether the name could have something to do with Tacitus’ Alcis.

Yet another question can be asked whether this has something to do with “dolls.” A lalka is a doll in Polish (as also in Slovene and among some East Slavs). Was the name “dolls” originally applied just to little idols?

torino #conspiracy #racist #wingnut #dunning-kruger jassa.org

Of course, the worship of the sun and fire was not something that we normally think of Nordic religion. Instead, we think of “eastern” religions like in this account of the Persians.
Of course, the same could be said of the Suavs who worship:

Jasion, Jutrebog, Jarowit/Gerovit likely as the “Moon”
Svarog/Svarozic or Nya as the “fire”
Dadzhbog – Dag-, Dagon – or Łada as the “Sun”
The moon is the ksiezyc which is a diminutive of ksiadz. Ksiadz (xšaça) used to mean “prince” or “ruler” (see here). Ksiezyc would thus mean “little ruler” so that much like:
“So Bulgarian and Ruthenian women when talking to little children use the word bog [God]… not only in the normal sense of the word: ‘God; holy icon; cross, but also with the meaning ‘sun‘, ‘moon‘, and ‘fire.'”

tom #wingnut #conspiracy #racist #dunning-kruger jassa.org

A major male DNA line in Rogaland is R1a-Z284 a branch of R1a that dominates the Slavic and Baltic peoples of central and Eastern Europe. R1a-z284 is found in all areas of Europe invaded by the Norsemen, Scotland, eastern England, Ireland etc. This male line would have to have originated in northeastern Germany or northwestern Poland (possibly Rugen) where there is a small number of males descended from this DNA line. So who were the early Rugi and Rani? Probably a people dominated by proto- Slavs and/or proto-Balts mixed with some Old Europeans (I male DNA lines) and possibly some Italo-Celts (R1b male DNA lines). They were on the coast of the Baltic Sea and, similar to the Mediterranean Sea coasts, would have a mixture of the various peoples who sailed there. The city of Jumne (today’s Wolin Poland not far from Rugen) was said in the early Middle Ages to be a large multi-ethnic city consisting mainly of Slavs but also Saxons, Romans and Greeks who were allowed to settle there as long as they didn’t push the Christian religion. Jumne would have been the terminus of the amber trail which ran from the Baltic Sea to Rome and thus known by the Romans and Greeks. Why were the Rugi called Germans and also Goths? There was no ethnicity test at the time so people were grouped by lifestyle, appearance, types of weapons, etc and the people in the area of Germania were generally a settled people as op

torino #conspiracy #racist #wingnut #dunning-kruger jassa.org

Whatever Remains, However Improbable

First, as we already pointed out the Romans have used the word Germania to designate an area where northern folk lived. To the Romans they would have appeared similar since the Romans judged them by their own looks, language, culture. But would they appear so similar to one another? In other words, there is really nothing to suggest that all the tribes there were similar in all respects – including language. And, even if so, we do not know what that language was.
So here we have Germanic tribes of:

let’s add Franks too.
we had Ariovistus and Veleda and Ganna and Masyus – were these Germanic names? They sound (well, “look and sound”) Slavic or Baltic or maybe Avestani but not Germanic

torino #crackpot #wingnut jassa.org

The Veneti lived in Paphlagonia. It is possible that it was the Veneti that before the Trojan War spread as “Arians” into India. This would explain the Mount Demawend, R1a in Afghanistan and the various “Venetic” names in India.

We can assume that the Veneti spoke a language akin to Slavic (names of places in Anatolia that include Prusa suggest that). But it is possible that they got Slavicized.

At some point after the Trojan War, they went over the Ister and ended up spreading their “Slavic” language (or adopting the Slavic of the autochtones they encountered) all the way up to the Adriatic. It is for this reason that the Slovene city of Ljubljana has Jason feature in its founding myth. It’s likely that Jason was in fact a Venetic fertility God that found His way into Greek myth.

The Veneti went further ending up in today’s Poland as well as Eastern Germany and Noricum/Vindelicia, today’s northern France and southern portions of Italy and even northern Spain/Portugal. And they may have reached present day Denmark and southern Sweden and perhaps even Britain.

The Trojan War has been dated to the 13th or 12th century BC. It is curious that the recently discovered remains of an ancient battle at Tollensee have been both dated to approximately 1250 BC and said to have contained dNA similar to that of present day Poles/Scandinavians but also southern Europeans. A tempting construct would see these as the “locals” and the “Venetic” arrivals.

It is possible that at this point Slavic was carved out of Baltic with the former a “Venetic” language or a mixture of Venetic and Baltic. The Veneti became Slavs – from Trieste through Noricum, possibly Suevia and up to the Baltic. The remaining Balts stayed Balts now designated Aestii.

torino #dunning-kruger #racist #wingnut jassa.org

Stralsund is a town originally founded by the Slavic Rani. It makes its first historical appearance in 1234 as Stralowe in a document issued by Vislav I, the duke of Rugia (one of those Slavic chieftains who gave in and got themselves new jobs as imperial dukes) in Charenz/Charenza.

Stralowe was clearly named after the Slavic word for arrow (*strěla). It supposedly comes from a proto-Slavic word *strěla.

Predictably, there are also those who believe that it was then borrowed into Slavic. The people who believe that are, of course, unbothered by the fact that the Slavic version appears in all Slavic languages. They are also unbothered by the fact that the Germanic languages also have:

arrow, Pheil/pil, quarrel, bolt, and others.

Were the situation reversed (many different names in Slavic but one of those also found in Germanic), most academics would argue that the Slavic word also found in Germanic would necessarily be of Germanic origin (i.e., import into Slavic). And yet, here some still argued that the Slavic came from Germanic.

This is the same reasoning as the one that:

allows for –mir to be a Slavic suffix but also lays a potential Germanic – depending on the context – claim to some appearances of it,

but reserves –mar and -mer exclusively for the Germanic sphere.

You can see where this is going, of course. Since the Germanics were the warrior group, it, of course, makes sense that they would have “invented”their own word for “arrow”. You can also use this to prove that Slavs did not know arrows until they learned of their existence from Germanics. Perhaps, in your mind’s eye, you can even see a cohort of Slavic peasants servicing a Germanic lord’s bow by quickly grinding out arrows for his upcoming campaign against the Romans, Persians or whatever else his testosterone driven brain set its sights upon. You might even try to prove that the very concept of “rubbing” became known to Slavs by way of testosterone-infused Germanics… 🙂

torino #crackpot #dunning-kruger #pratt #wingnut jassa.org

It is telling that no one has ever answered Wojciech Ketrzynski when he raised questions about the ethnicity of the Suevi.

The mainline teaching is:

Suevi occupied most of Germania

After Suevi disappeared, they were replaced by Slavs who came somewhere from the East

Slavs have nothing to do with the Suevi because the latter were “Germanic”.

Several questions come to mind:

I. How is it possible that this giant tribal union devolved into nothing?

The Suevi of later years are:

the smallest contingent crossing the Rhine in 405/406;

the Suevi of Swabia;

the Suevi of Vannius;

The first group was small. As to the second group, German writers have went out of their way to draw an equal sign between the Schwaben and Alemanni. And yet the entry of the Alemanni suggests that the later Schwabia has as much to do with the Suevic Suavia as 19th century Prussia with 13th century one. The Suevi may well have left years before the Alemanni got there. The same claim is made about Bohemia with the Czechs taking the name of the Bohemians who had been driven out years before (or were the Czechs just coming back?).

II. How is it possible that when the “fog of war” clears, the Suevic area is entirely occupied by Slavs?

If the Suevi left the area, they did not leave it empty. And if they did then plenty of other invaders who would have kept portions of the country. But there are only Slavs.

What happened to Ockham’s Razor? Did historians leave it at home?

VIII. If the Slavs borrowed terms from “Iranian” languages, why couldn’t they have borrowed them from the Jazyges?

Because the Slavs did no live next to the Jazyges. The Suevi did. If they spoke an Iranian language, then the Danube Suevi-Jazyges connection could have provided all the materials needed.

torino #conspiracy #crackpot #pratt #wingnut jassa.org

III. How do we know that the Suevi were “Germanic”?

Because they lived in “Germania”? But so do the Turks, Poles, Portuguese, Croats, Serbs and Syrians today.

The Langobards and Angles bear Nordic names. But the origin myth of the former speaks of the far north when the Suevi were in the south. It is not improbable that they simply took over the local Suevic tribes.

The names of Suevic rulers (e.g., Ariovistus) or sorceresses (e.g., Veleda) have Slavic explanations and many sound Slavic.

IV. Why German writers insist on writing Suevi as Suebi? And Legii/Lougii as Lugii?

The sources speak of the SueVi almost exclusively so why all the effort to write Suebi? Because it sounded more like Schwaben?

Sources speak of Legii or Lougii, the German scholarship tries to use the spelling of Lugii. Is that because Lechy is a commonplace nickname for the Poles and that would suggest population continuity?

V. Why do all Slavic languages have “słaby” as “weak”?

Shouldn’t someone ask whether this may be a reference to the Schwaben, the weak Suevi that let themselves be taken over by the Alemanni?

VI. Isn’t it strange that the Suevi of the Danube suddenly become Suavi in the 6th century?

Just before the Sclavi show up the Suevi become Suavi. Curious.

But note also that the very first mention of the Suevi may already have been in the form Suavi [see L. Cornelius Sisenna]

VII. If the Slavs appear, as per their own records in Pannonia, isn’t it convenient to find the Suevi there right before?

Slavs record their beginnings in Pannonia. We know there were Suevi (Suavi) there right before the Slavs appeared. Isn’t that odd?

MARK STASIK #crackpot #racist #wingnut jassa.org

Kid gloves and a skeptics touch? Nevertheless you invite a more vigorous inquiry to dissect and analyze the other so-called “peoples” of Rome’s passing mention, especially the “presumably” germanic oddities, like the Suevi, or the Allemans or the particularly non-germanic sounding, and clearly slavic-derived Cherusci.

Wends and Vandals, and “Ostrogoths” also seem almost transparently slavic, or at the least confederational with considerable slavic elements.

This could be its own blog, since the R1a genepool has been in place in central Europe since 1500 b.c., so lots of this talk about “identity” seems so much after-the-fact politics that historians need to sober up about and finally shed the Nazi brainwash.

Europe is a Slavic continent, either because of superior fertility or because of superior delivery. Europe’s fathers are R1a, since 1500 b.c. The Romans seem a blip on the map genepool-wise. Everyone else appears just an also-ran. Is my math wrong? The Veneti appear to have spread far and wide. Mislabelled? misunderstood? over-attributed? Lots of syllables that miss the point. Europe wasn’t born in 475 A.D.

I’d sure love to hear some input about “Suevi” (slavs) in Iberia with a capital named “Braga” (Prague??) and some good arguments why “Cossacks” didn’t also occur in 100 A.D. or 200 A.D. or 300 A.D.

This might be the egg nog talking, but Merry Christmas, and thanks for this excellent, excellent website.

BORIS #conspiracy #crackpot #wingnut jassa.org

You seem to have bought the Vatican nonsense of the Serb & Croat migration from Belarus or wherever.

Serbs are native to the Balkans. Poles, Czechs, Russians, etc… all independently state they came from Serbia.

There is literally ZERO evidence for the 7th century Slav migration theory. Absolutely none. It’s based on a single Vatican forgery from the 16th-17th century, credited to Emperor Constantine VII Porphyrogenitus, which states something like “…and then I allowed the Slavs to settle there.”

Not only is there no evidence for it, but it is both logistically and logically impossible.

The genetic, archeological, written, anthropological, behavioural and cultural evidence for Serbs being indigenous to Europe is overwhelming.

Why did the Vatican decide to erase the Serb name from external records? As revenge for Despot Branković not recognising the Pope in the 15th century, and thusly having other Orthodox kingdoms pull their recognition as well, having already sent their respective recognitions.

The Albanians are from modern day Azerbaijan. They were brought over to Serbia by the Byzantine General George Maniakis via Arabia and then Sicily in the 11th century, and were allowed to stay to raise livestock for the Serb royalty.

Dalimil’s Chronicles are correct if you study actual history, not the German-Vatican propaganda that you find in schools.

DEJAN #crackpot #wingnut jassa.org

First of all that assertion is crap. Matter of fact I pointed out to one of your equally upset Croat brethren that Servium was a city in the Balkans many years before any Slavs were registered suggesting a more ancient European presence for the Serbs (and frankly Croats probably too) – perhaps tied to the Jazyges. Second, keep conspiracy theories – whether regarding the “Vatican” or Azeri Albanians or whatever – out of this.

As mentioned in Chronicles language is Serbian for all Slavs. And it, indeed started from Balkans, from Vinča civilization centered around present day Belgrade.

This was a cradle of European civilization from more than 7000 years ago. Language was proto-Slavic or Serbian that was with migration spread through Russian steppes all the way to India where it was known as Sanskrit.

BTW Dalimil Chronicle starts with chapter
1. Babylonian Tower, Serbian (Babilonska Viež, Srbove) – Story about how Serbs have built a tower in Babylon aiming to reach for heaven and were punished by God to be dispersed and for Serbian language that was universal at the time to be changed into many languages including Greek and Roman/Latin.

torino #crackpot jassa.org


An interesting question arises as to why the lands previously occupied by the Suevi (but later Suavi) were subsequently occupied by the “Sclavi”. A curious coincidence. Per Tacitus, Semnones claimed to have been the most ancient of the Suevi. Some 19th century historians identified some of the Suevi with the later Slavs. To explain the tribal name Semnones, they pointed to the Slavic words for the “Earth”:

zem (Slovak) země (Czech) ziemia (Polish) zemlya (Russian etc.)

But it says Semnones not Semones comes the objection. Not to worry. The manuscripts do not agree upon the correct spelling and Semones does indeed appear more than once. To support this view, those historians invoked the Semnonian passage in Tacitus and its preoccupation with the Earth:

No one enters it unless bound with ligatures, thus professing his subordination and power of the Deity there. If he fall down, he is not permitted to rise or be raised, but grovels along upon the ground.

Whether there is enough to suggest that the Semnones viewed themselves as born of “the Earth” is debatable. However, another interesting coincidence comes to light when we take a look at where scholarship locates the Semnones:image

Fast forward eight hundred years and we find the following tribe, or at least the name of a local province that refers to a tribe, in the same area:


The word is clearly Slavic. Did the Slavs merely “repurpose” a local Teutonic name? Possibly but, if so, why not repurpose the names of the Burgundians, Goths and others that at some point occupied what was later Slavic territory? We’ll likely never know the answer but the above is suggestive to say the least.

torino #dunning-kruger #pratt #wingnut jassa.org

IX. How is it that all these tribes turn out to be Slavic?

Although the word “Slav” – in that form – does not appear before the 6th century, many of the tribes which we call Slavic do appear before the 6th century:






Legii (Lugii)




probably most of the Veneti and others

The common explanation is these were “Slavicized”. But this is strange. After hundreds of years of Germanization the Slavic Sorbs persist till this day. If the Slavs really Slavicized all these Germanic tribes they did so extraordinarily quickly.

But then why preserve the names of the original tribes? Elsewhere, when a small group of conquerors (Bulgars, Rus) take over a tribe quickly, they may become Slavicized but they keep the name and impose it on the rest of the population. If the group were larger, wouldn’t it be even more likely that they would have imposed their names on the various peoples in question?

X. If the above tribes could have been Slavicized, why not the Suevi?

Historians are ok with pointing out connections between Germanic and Slavic tribes. At least so long as theses tribes are small and insignificant. No one has suggested a Slavicization of the Suevi. It seems that that would make too many uncomfortable.

XI. And why if one can derive the name Slav from the name of a river, that river cannot be Solawa?

We know why. Because, we are told, the Slavs came from the East.

Solawa is particularly problematic because not only could its name be used etymologically to derive the name of the Slavs but it also occupies the region where the ancient authors found the river Suevus. That river, in turn, is associated with the Suevi and so the circle closes.

torino #dunning-kruger #pratt #wingnut jassa.org

XII. Was Grimm wrong in claiming that “Suevi” and “Slavs” Are Cognates?

Jacob Grimm was an excellent linguist. Yet his claim of the two words being cognates is almost embarrassingly swept under the carpet. Brueckner called it “unfortunate”. Curiously, Brueckner did not say that Grimm was wrong (presumably because then he’d have to explain why).

XIII. Why are so many the ancient German river names ending in -awa? and place names in -owa?

XIV. What do the Niemcy have to do with the Nemetes and the Slavs with the Suavi?

There is the old theory about the Slavic word for Germans – Niemcy – being a reference to the Niemcy not speaking Slavic (i.e., the “mutes”) and the Slavs being people of the “word” (slovo), i.e., being the ones who do speak a mutually understandable language. And yet, this theory seems to be based on nothing and to be based on a Volksetymologie.

At the same time the Nemetes just so happened to live right next to the Suevi.

XV. How can Suo-vene/Sla-vene have nothing to do with Vene-ti and nothing to do with Sue-vi either!?

There is a description of a Slav linguist conference where one of the participants raised the Suo-veni and Vene-ti link. The reference to this event goes on to explain that it was quickly explained to the overly curious linguist why he can’t be right. This recollection was brought up by the author of the book presumably to discredit any similar notion.

Yet the remarkable thing is that the book never says what the explanation given to the linguist was!

torino #conspiracy #wingnut jassa.org

Politicizers of the Past

Here is a quote from 1991 (when the fear of Eastern European nationalism filled the pants of most academics who studied the area). Published, we kid you not, by a German (Austrian, but that’s a fake country always on the brink of not being around in a few years) who decided to apply the training he received on deconstructing German nationalism (indeed the concept of the German nation which still exists, barely) to other European nations. An individual well-schooled in criticizing his own people might find no trouble in criticizing other “lesser” (this time as regards their sensitivity/multiculturalism/spirit of tolerance) peoples when called upon to do so. And this proves true here.

He thinks our nationalism could be just like his so now that his people have stopped killing us, he thinks it’s time to start to lecture us. He says:

“existence of Romans, Germans or Slavs in the 5th or 7th centuries became important arguments in an endless series of national struggles…”

There it is – he is saying history should be a tool of current politics, to ensure the Slavs do not cause another holocaust… wait, what!? So, if in fact you come across claims that the Veneti are not Slavs or that something “definitely is not Slavic” or similar stuff, take them with a grain of salt, because the person may just be an ideologic propagandist who tailors his work to fit his preconceived political needs.

Not with a tinge of irony we note that in the 19th century the Slavic-Veneti connection was questioned by German nationalists – now it seems the very existence of Slavs prior to some period is being questioned by German “citizens of the world”. Someone asked whether we thought this individual was a covert German nationalist. We do not think so. Sincere lunacy though is no less problematic.