Saturday, 17 December 2016


Drawing of Rurik the first from Russian archives.
He is founder of Rurik dinasty who's name is nowhere mentioned.

Rus ,Ruser, Ruserna, Russes, Varangians, Varyager, Viking

Chronicle of Nestor, Kiev Chronicle, or Povest vremennykh let (Tale of bygone years)
which is primal source on Ruriks says that Vikings took name Russi after Kievan Rus was formed, before that they were Slavs.
German scholars presented what is known as the “Normanist theory” (because Vikings in France founded Normandy and became known as Normans). 

At this page of Nestor's Chronicle he says that Varyags renamed themselves to Russ but first they were Slavic but they were called Polyani before because they were forest cutters and they created fields but they have one language which is Slovin.

Here is same excerpt from Nestor's Chronicle in Serbian language.

Ancient Mizians and Macedonians were Slavic, Pelasgo-Trachian people were also Slavic.

Then he talks about Scythian or Scoloti and Sarmatians as Slavic people.
He also writes about change of Slavic names into Germanic like Rodovlad into Ratwald, Rogovlad into Rogowald, Svyatopolk into Zwentibold, Vladimir into Waldemar, Igor into Ingvar etc

source; Saveljev

In the chronicle of „Annali Di Moscovia 1227“
Rurik founder of the dynasty of Kievan Rus is not a Viking, but Slavic Vandal: „Unable to agree on the election of a new leader, the Russians sent the governors in Vagria, Vandal city, in the province in the past on a big voice, Vandals at that time very powerful, and to that of the same language, customs and religion as Russians, they sent them three brothers for rulers, chosen from the best and most powerful Vandals men. They were Rurik, Sinav and Truvor, Rurik gain possession of Novgorod, Sinav establish itself on the White Lake, and Truvor belong principality Pleskovija headquartered in Svortcehu.
From  German historian Baron Sigismund von Herberstein (1486-1566) ) who lived in Russia, in book: „Rerum Moscoviticarum Commentarii, Notes on the Moscovites, 1556“, also known as the „Notes on Russia“, has been universally acknowledged as the most important historical and ethnographical work on early 16th c. Russia

Manuscript-of-the-ibn-Fadlan-(10th century) where he calls Vinkings Russ.

Mauro Orbini 16th century, he states all members of Slavic kingdoms, amongst them are Suedi ,Finni, Gothi, Burgundi, Massageti, Hyrri, Daci, Prussi, Ostrogoti, Visigothi and many more including standard Slavs.

Docs from Upsalla where it is written in Slavic about Swedish kings, I wrote about this before

People that were forbiden to speak Wendish are todays Germanics.
Punishment for speaking Wendish was death penalty.
While rulers kept language for themselves.
Frederick II, Margrave of Meissen, y 1325

It was always significant to me that Slaveni call Germans Njemci which means mute (nem) to discover so many years later this unfortunate destiny of these people.
If you were to check etymology of Germanic towns you will find their painfull ancestry writen in Slavic. Like Berlin, from Berl - pond, mud, it was a marshland.

To close this article I will post Y - Dna charts of R1a haplo group which is clearly Slavic.
and of I1 and I2 which are ancestral European males, this haplo group does not appears anywhere else, highest peaks are at Dalmatia and parts of Bosnia and Scandinavia.
Both groups overlap both Germany and Scandinavia.

Special thanks to Иван Нушић / Ivan Nusic
in research of old Slavic Chronicles.

from the historian Lyudmila Gordeeva

"Russ-Vikings - The Vikings are not"

While in the movie is the movie "Viking", boil and disputes "as it really was?" Specially for the magazine "TV Program" his vision of the problem is the historian Lyudmila Gordeeva.
Neither Vladimir the Baptist, nor do any of the Rus-Rurik, the creators of the Russian state, did not belong to the tribe of predatory Scandinavians - the Vikings, their raids bedeviling Europe. The ancestors of the Rus (Russia) were Slavs, the Vikings, many centuries living on the southern and south-eastern coast of the Baltic Sea.
The centuries-old dispute
Interest to the "where there went the Russian land" goes to the far Middle Ages, commending the age-old dispute and supporters of Norman antinormanskoy (Slavophil) theories. First, Normanists believe that Rousseau led by Rurik came at the call of Novgorod to rule over them from Scandinavia, Normandy, most likely - in Sweden or Denmark. Like, Slavs-Novgorod who invited Rurik, the people were backward, incapable of independent nation-building. Hence, the very appearance of the Russian state - it is a merit of the Normans, and did not even indigenous Slavs. And because the Russians, however, are not very independent people, which is quite in need of external management.
This theory originated in the early eighteenth century through the efforts of German historians who labored on the Russian service of Mr. Bayer and F. Miller. At that time, Russia was fighting with Sweden for the Baltic Sea, and, of course, raised the question of moral rights in the Russian territory of these. The Germans were the first to realize how strengthens the right of the conqueror, if he realizes that he does not simply take someone else's land, but also returns the, originally belonged to his ancestors. They seem to be nice to know the ancient Frankish sources that with undisguised pride describes how Germans with fire and sword conquered southern and eastern Baltic, once inhabited by Slavs. Russian these materials at that time did not know their own annals - and those treated without reverence. However, when in 1749 Friedrich Gerhard Miller became in his report on "The Origin of the name of the Russian people and" argued that it was the Swedes were at the origins of the Russian state, many Russian scientists have rebelled.
Academics, which included Vasily Trediakovskii and Mikhail Lomonosov about the report, said that supposedly ungrateful Germans "in the whole speech a single case has not shown to the glory of the Russian people, but only mentioned that more that to dishonor serve can."
In normannistov direct evidence is not, but there is a great desire to put the Russian "in place" and the huge support of the German scientists who, as mentioned, have come up with this theory, and particularly reinforced it with Hitler, who was trying to prove that «Deutschland uber alles» - Germany above all, and Russian - the defective people. And because, they say, Russia, as a state secondary, dependent, shall submit to the Germans, as once the Normans. Now they have even begun to shoot a documentary about what the city and some in Russia have built us Normans, and culture - from them, and if they do not - the Russians, perhaps, would still be lived, probably, in the dugouts.
We arguments slavophiles more thoroughly. All the ancient Russian and European chronicles clearly indicate that Russ-Vikings - it is related to Novgorod Slavs, that they lived on the southern shores of the Baltic, and a visiting Novgorod Rurik was the grandson of the ruler Gostomysl pricked by his daughter. It mentions ioachim chronicle, come down to us in the arrangement Tatishcheva. Thus, we consider the most important arguments Antinormanists Slavophiles.
Russia - the Vikings of the "Tale of Bygone Years"
Referring to the ancient Russian source - chronicle "Tale of Bygone Years" (the PVL), preserved to our days on parchment in 1377, we must first of all understand for themselves: do we believe him or not. And do not act like supporters of Norman theory: that confirms their fantasies, they believe that does not correspond - reject. Their entire theory is based on the legend of the vocation PVL Novgorod Rurik to rule - this fact they trust. And the author's specific instructions on the origin of Rurik and the Rus, in their place of residence, they are neglected.
Naturally, chronicles the monk scribe Lawrence, depicting the manuscript on his name, he did not compose this document - he copied it from a more ancient sources - and this is its direct reference in the text. And we have no reason to suspect Lawrence of distorting any facts. In addition, the accuracy of the data that we can check in our time, is impressive. Because it seems to me not to trust the "Tale" we have no reason. As there is no reason to deny the existence in our country, the Rurik dynasty.
Thus, the chronicler has no doubt that the Vikings and Rus - it is one and the same people. It is as if specially for us emphasizes that Russia - this is not "other" Swedes and the Normans:
"And they went over the sea to the Varangians, to the Rus. Those Vikings were called Rus as others are called Swedes, and others Normans and Angles, and still others Gotlanders - these and these. " (Translation of all quotations PVL made an outstanding scholar DS Likhachev).
As if in anticipation of the coming of our debate, the chronicler in different places insistently repeats that Russia - not the Swedes, not the Normans and Angles, and that the Slavic and Russian people - is one: "A Slavic people and the Russian one, from the Vikings because nicknamed Rus, and was first Slavs".
In later years, the chroniclers, at times, Russ and Vikings list separately. This may indicate that these people are gradually separated. Approximately how generations of princes Shuisky, Starodub, Ryapolovskih, Obolensky, Chernigov were independent of each other, sometimes at odds, but still considered themselves descendants of Rurik. Or sort of Obolensky eventually occurred Dolgorukovs, Repnin, Shcherbatov Lykovs and others. German medieval chroniclers also unanimously confirmed belonging to the Slavic people and the ancient Prussians. And this does not exclude the identity of the Prussians and the Rus or their close relatives, which, in turn, gives every reason to late Rurikovich conduct its origin from the Prussians. It is embodied in some chronicles in "The Tale of the Princes of Vladimir", a few letters of Ivan the Terrible.
Here it should be borne in mind that the old Prussia to the XII century was the most cruel war of extermination conquered by the Germans, and the survivors of the Prussians - the Slavs were assimilated. In the end, the name of the Prussian invaders appropriated. Therefore, more recent authors call the inhabitants of Prussia Germans. However, in our time, the Prussians were masters in their own land, and Slavs still remain.
Prussia considers genus Rurik and author Piskaryovsky old chronicler, which refers to the more ancient source:
"Behold in the script of the Rurik. Summer 6369-th (861 a year), a governor named Novagoroda Great Gostomysl skonchavaet life of their own, and in the summer she began in the city of blood, and be alone mezhusobitsa prolivatisya. And convene naugorodtsov and reche them: "I give you the Council, muzhie yes send in ground Pruskuyu mudryya men and prize from Prince tamo own who were giving birth, in order to judge us in the truth."
Note, the author argues that the Novgorodians invited Rurik not rule, and as an arbitrator.
There are many other data that the Prussians and the Rus - it is one and the same, or closely related. Rousseau call Prussians some European chroniclers. They undoubtedly include both of these people to the Slavs. Sometimes these are referred to as two people are different, and this is natural, given that the documents were created after their separation. A similar version of the old Czech legend illustrates that once the ancient tribe of the Slavs went in different directions three brothers - Lech, Czech and Rus, and created their own nations.
Where are our ancestors lived - Russ-Vikings?
To find the answer, first let us turn to the author PVL, which is used and the local and European sources (in particular Byzantine "Chronicle George Armatola") and, of course, the family tradition of Rurik themselves. The origin of all Europeans, including the Slavs and the Rus, he defines as "the offspring of Japheth." Here's what the author writes more IDPs on the place of residence Vikings:
"Lyakhi same Prussians, Chud sit near the sea Viking. In this sea sitting Vikings: from here to the east - to the limits of Shem, sitting on the same sea, and to the west - to the land of England and Voloska ".
We see that the Vikings (they - rus) "sitting near the sea Viking", the same place where live Poles, Prussians and chyud (ancestors of the Estonians), that is, on the south-eastern shore of the Baltic Sea. And occupy such a vast expanse that its western border, he brings "to the land of the English". If we consider that England was then called the Danes, it turns out that the land occupied by the Vikings in South Baltic to the most current Denmark. The fact that the Slavs inhabited the southern coast of the Baltic Sea - to the Elbe (Labe in Slavic), which was the border between the Saxons and Slavs, confirmed by many European sources.
And in the east, as we see, the earth Russ-Vikings stretched "to the limit of Shem", that is, almost to the Volga, where lived the Oriental peoples. This fact is confirmed by the Muslim sources, in particular, a preacher of Islam in Baghdad, Ahmed Ibn Fadlan in his "Notes on the journey to the Volga", which he visited in 922. Near the ancient Bulgarians he found and described by Rousseau, who, unlike Bulgarians, living in tents, is already built on the banks of the Volga River and traveled home by ship. Obviously, they controlled water route "from the Vikings to the Greeks" along the Dvina River and to the east along the river Volga. Even more certainly author PVL indicates the habitat of the Vikings in the description of this famous "Road". Here we see the list of preserved until now (almost a thousand years!) The names of lakes and seas, rivers and their tributaries, countries and peoples. Chronicler accurate in their descriptions, and this only confirms that he can be trusted, and that refers to the Varangians:
"When the clearing lived alone in the mountains this, there was a route from the Vikings to the Greeks and the Greeks of the Dnieper, <...>. Dnepr also follows from Okovskogo forests and flows south and Dvina from the same timber flows, and is directed to the north and empties into the sea Varangian. From the same woods Volga flows east and empties into the sea seventy mouths Hvalisskoe (now the Caspian). Therefore, from Russia, you can swim in the Volga Bulgarians and khvalisy, and east to pass an inheritance of Shem, and the Dvina - the land of the Vikings, from the Vikings to Rome, and from Rome to the same tribe Khamova ".
Imagine such an extraordinary miracle that exists now: one little place - Ochakovo forest, which is now called the Valdai Hills, take the source of just four navigable rivers. And they flow in four opposite sides of the world: Lovat - north to the Volkhov, and through him to Novgorod to the Neva River and the Baltic Sea. At the same sea, but in the north-west flows Dvina. Volga is moving to the east to the Caspian Sea, the Dnieper - the south to the Black Sea.
In those days, when the Russian plain, there were no roads, waterways became the main link between many nations. Portage could drag ships or Struga with goods from one source of the river to another, and eventually get to the desired part of the world. This phenomenon is described by the author PVL. But the main thing in his description to us what the wish to ignore the supporters of the Norman theory "and the Dvina from the same timber flows, and is directed to the north and empties into the sea Varangian. <...> And along the Dvina - the land of the Vikings, from the Vikings to Rome. "
That is, the Dvina River and its mouth - it's the ultimate point Baltic coast on the way to the Vikings and, therefore, uniquely earth Vikings. There is not even a hint of the fact that on the way to Rome, it is necessary to climb to the north of the Baltic Sea to the Normans. Not surprisingly, during excavations in Sweden, including the ancient city of Birka, where in those days was a Swedish port, Byzantine coins - a great rarity. It is obvious that the direct route "from the Vikings to the Greeks" went mostly along the Dvina.
It is easy to figure out that chronicle Dvina river now called the Western Dvina, here it goes through Belarus to Latvia and there is renamed Daugavpils. And not far from its mouth the city of Riga, founded in 1201 by Latin Crusaders and pilgrims. My attempts to find out what was in the lower reaches of the Dvina to the occurrence of Riga, has shown that Latin preachers of Christianity in the late XII - early XIII century caught here except the Livonian tribes who did not have at that time, no cities, no fortresses, the rich Russian city-states in the led by the kings. It recounts a witness and participant in some of the events Henry of Latvia in the "Chronicle of Livonia". The author describes some pride as collected from all over Europe the Crusaders with a rare ferocity rob and destroy the indigenous peoples and tribes, burn their villages and towns.
In particular, in the "Chronicle of Livonia" has repeatedly referred to the king, "Vyachko (Vesceka)» - Vyacheslav from "Russian Kukenoysa castle", located on the right bank of the Dvina "three miles" from Riga. He writes about the battle with the soldiers, "Vsevolod king (rex Wissewaldum) of Gertsike" - Russian military fortress on the Dvina, the center of the Duchy of the same name, also located in the lower reaches of the Dvina. The fact that Russian here - ancient indigenous inhabitants of the episode tells the defeat of the Crusaders at the beginning of the XIII century Russian Gertsike castle. The author writes about it with the pride of victory his supporters-Latins:
"<...> Teutons broke them at the gate <...>. That day all the army remained in the city, attended by all the corners of his large prey, seized clothing, silver and purple, a lot of cattle; and bells of the churches, the icons (yconias), other furniture, money and a lot of good and it all took away with them, <...> while the city burned. When he saw a fire on the other side of the Dvina, the king was in great anguish and exclaimed groaning, sobbing, "Oh Gertsike, cute town! About inheritance of my fathers! On the unexpected death of my people! Woe is me! Why was I born to see the fire of my city and the destruction of my people! "
We see that the king Vsevolod, who saw as dying his hometown, exclaims that it is "heritage of my fathers", ie the place where they lived many of his ancestors, and, therefore, lower reaches and mouth of the Western Dvina was the ancient patrimony of Russian people.
The Slavs and the Rus in European sources
The first mention of our ancestors - Rousseau - found in Latin manuscripts of IX century - "Bertinskih annals", where the original is now kept in France. It tells about the life and work of the Frankish kings and emperors in the period from 830 to 882 years. In the year 839 in the city of Ingelheim on the river Rhine to the court of the Frankish Emperor Ludwig the Pious for the conclusion of the peace treaty the ambassadors arrived from Constantinople (now Istanbul) by the Byzantine emperor Theophilus. At the ambassadorial people to the Franks arrived foreigners from the people «rhos«, which had to smuggle in their homeland.
We should not confuse the spelling of the Russian nation in the form of «rhos«. It is obvious that the model for this translation was the message of the Byzantine emperor, written as it was decided at that time, in the Greek language, which from the fourth century was a Byzantine state. The Greeks in the alphabet, and there is no question of letters "u" and "v". They replaced the "y" only "of w" possible for them to the letter - omega (note that it is not the letter "o"), rejecting completely the soft sign. So get the word «rwV«, which Frankish translator depicted by letters. Subsequent Frankish and German authors, closer acquainted with our people, unanimously called it "Rus» - «Rusci» or «Ruzzi» and even «Rugi».
Byzantine ambassadors arrived at the court of Louis in troubled times. His land and then were subjected to raids by robbers and pogroms by the Scandinavians - "Norman", among which were the Vikings - the Danes and the Swedes. It is clear that the appearance among the ambassadors intruders alerted the emperor, because he was afraid of spies infiltrating the enemy. After all, they could scout out the affairs of his country, which, because of feuds were far neblestyasche. Because the guests emperor reacted with great suspicion. As a result of checking, as is evident from the text, it soon became clear that his guests - not the "dew", with whom the Franks at that time, apparently, was for peaceful relations, and not just those most Swedish "of the people sveonov" with whom he fought, "investigating more thoroughly the reason for their arrival, the Emperor learned that they were from people sveonov, and decided that they are the most scouts in the country and in our own, than seekers of friendship; he found it necessary to detain them at home as long as there will not truly know if they came honestly there or not. " Thus, the first European document on Rousseau suggests that they are not Swedes. And way past Reina suggests that Rousseau lived somewhere in the near region.
Saxon Einhard, author of the famous book "The Life of Charlemagne", created between 829 and 836 years, also confirms that the Slavs in the IX century, before the conquests of the Carolingian, occupied the southern coast of the Baltic Sea to the east of the river Elbe (Labe): "From the west ocean to the east stretches a bay <...>. Around him home to many nations are given, as well as sveony, which we call the Normans own northern coast and all its islands. On the east bank of live Slavs, Estonians and various other nations. "
The same is said and Adam of Bremen in his book "Acts of the Hamburg Archbishops," written in 1070-ies: "Over the River Oder live first pomoryane (Pomerani), then the Poles, their neighbors which on the one hand are the Prussians (Pruzzi), on the other - Czechs (Behemi), and in the east - Russia (Ruzzi) ». This author also clearly separates its inhabitants to the Swedes, who live in the north, and Slavs, including Rousseau, occupying its south coast "until Russia (Ruzzia), where once again the end of the bay. So, the banks of the sea from the south are dominated by Slavs, and from the north - the Swedes (Suedi) ».
A popular source for the history of Northern Europe - "Slavic Chronicle" Gelmgolda of Bosa - covers the period from the eighth century until 1171. The author was a member of the latter part of Chronicles. He not only repeats the conclusions of Adam of Bremen, but also adds a lot of what he saw and heard:
"Where ends Polonia, we come to the vast country of the Slavs, who in ancient times by vandals, and now blames, or called ^ advanced. Of these pomoryane are the first settlements which extend up to the Odra (Oder river). Audra same - is "the richest river in the Slavic country", <...>. "At the mouth of the Odra", where it empties into the Baltic Sea, "once" is the famous city Yumneta <...>. It really was the biggest city from all populated by Slavs <...> of available cities in Europe. However, in manners and hospitality - could not find any people more worthy of respect and a welcoming [what they are]. "
Here we are faced with the fact that for two centuries the Slavs already lost a large part of its territory - from the river Elbe to the Oder. Already eliminated and destroyed many Slavic city, but still retained the memory of the ancient city Yumnete, bore the first name of Slavic Wolin, about which the German author says that it was "the greatest city of all available cities in Europe." Gelmgold in his work not only thoroughly and in detail lists the Slavic tribes, inhabiting the southern part of the Baltic Sea, including the Prussians and the Rus, but also their famous city "retro", "Mikilinburg", "Ratsisburg" (it is possible that the Slavic name of the city was Ratibor, now - Ratzeburg), "Aldenburg" (Slavic Stargard, now Oldenburg) and others.
Preachers Norman theories that tell us that the most ancient Russian, Slavic towns founded by Scandinavians would be nice to get acquainted with these old European documents. Read what the Slavs in the Middle Ages have created many cities, including Europe's largest city Wolin - Yumnetu, which was famous for its trade relations, buildings, wealth ships. The largest Slavic city in Europe! So do not teach Scandinavians Slavs to build cities, Norman Vikings their mostly destroyed during the Middle Ages rather than build.
The fact that Rousseau lived was on the south, the Slavic coast of the Baltic Sea, not in the north, and suggest other European documents. For example, in the bull and Pope Clement III (1188-1191 gg.) Archbishop of Bremen "Rousseau" was called Livonia area. The author of the XIII century, Roger Bacon in the "Great Works" writes about Levkova (Lithuania), about which "both sides" of the Baltic Sea "is a great Russo". Russian continued to live in the Baltic Sea and later - almost to the XIV century. So, in 1304, Pope Benedict IX refers in a letter to Riigen princes as "beloved sons, the men of the famous, Russian princes." Russian living in the territory of Latvia is not only present, but also in Estonia. They, along with Estonians defended themselves from the hordes of the Crusaders at the beginning of the XIII century, in the years 1343-1345 led the Russian uprising in Estonia (Rotalii and Vick) against the rule of the Teutonic Order. And even in the XIV century, after years of domination of the Germans and the Swedes in Estonia in a number of documents referred to Russian villages, for example, Rousseau Dorp near Wenden. It is possible that the ancient town of St. George's (now Tartu), founded in 1030 by Prince Yaroslav the Wise, it was built on Russian soil.
Where are the Baltic Slavs?
Where have gone the blooming Slavic city with their population? Speaking Without politeness, they are, under the banner of salvation and communion in Christian values, were seized by the Europeans, especially the Franks, the Germans. Resist the population either fled or were destroyed with unprecedented brutality, its remnants - assimilated.
First, the Franks invaded and subjugated the Saxons, who were neighbors of the Slavs - their land divided by the river Elbe (Labe). This was eloquently on many pages tell "Annals of the Kingdom of the Franks." In 758, the "King Pepin with his army invaded Saxony." The Saxons fought long and courageously fought, died. But the Franks were persistent, burned, looted, subordinated, was executed. Saxons were deported to other lands, in their place brought new peoples ...
By the end of the VIII century it was the turn of the Slavs. In 789, the Frankish king and Holy Roman Emperor (from 800), Charlemagne, "Prepare a huge army, <...> approached the Elbe <...>, and entering into the land of Wiltz, ordered to empty all with fire and sword." In the year 806, "he sent his son Charles with his army in the land of the Slavs, who are called sorbitol, and who live on the Elbe" .Uzhe to 810, Charles conceived the project capture the neighboring Slavic tribes under the guise of Christianization, which decided to set up in Hamburg archdiocese. This plan was carried out by his son Louis in the year 831.
Slavs, like the Saxons, squeezed from the Baltic states for a long time and purposefully, it's all recorded in European sources. About how the Germans seized the Baltic lands in the beginning of the XIII century, detail and colorfully tells Henry the Latvian, in his book "Chronicle of Livonia", written, according to experts, up to 1226. The author, a member of the event, talks about them with unconcealed pride: "When he came back, we have divided his army along all the roads, villages and areas of the land and began to burn and lay waste to all; all male were killed, women and children were taken captive, stole a lot of cattle and horses. "
Gelmgold of Bosa in the "Slavic chronicle" not only describes how the destroyed Slavic tribes and seized their lands, and these lands were occupied. For example, one of the German invaders, Count Adolf of Holstein, received as a gift from the king for his military exploits devastated the land of the Slavs-Wagram, located in the vast territory from the Oder to the Elbe River, issued the call to his warriors and all the participants of the crusade:
"Be the first to proceed to the promised land, occupying it, become parties to it is good, for you must belong to the best that there is in it, you are to take it from the enemy." This appeal arose countless different peoples who, taking with him a family and property, and came to vagrskuyu land to Count Adolf, to possess the land which he promised them. <...> And start populated desert vagrskaya land and increased the number of its inhabitants. <...> And left the Slavs who lived in the surrounding villages, and the Saxons came and settled here. The Slavs also gradually subsided in the land. <...> And increased tithes into the land of Slavic because flocked here from their lands Teutons to populate this land, a large, rich bread, easy by the abundance of pastures, abounding with fish and meat, and all the benefits. "
Baltic Slavs, like the Saxons, fought long and valiantly, for several centuries. But the forces were not equal - against their often disparate tribes fought the whole of Europe, led by the Roman Emperor and the Pope, who has repeatedly blessed the Crusades in the Baltic infidels. So disappeared Wends, Prussians, Vahram and other Slavic tribes and nationalities. By the mid-13th century, the Germans not only smashed or renamed ancient Slavic city, killing their people, but also tried to erase the memory of them. Some fled from their land-Slavs Vikings went to serve in the Byzantine Empire, many have gone in the direction of Novgorod, which is still one of the oldest streets of the center is named after the Prussian. Coming Rurik time with his native Novgorod just coincides with the start time of the Emperor Charles and his descendants of the famous German «Drang nach Osten». Stop this invasion could only Novgorod and Pskov to unite the Russian state.
The arguments of the Norman theory
Is not it strange that in Russia the word "Viking" does not occur? In Scandinavia, almost to the XII century is not found or the word Russ or Vikings. There was not such tribes and peoples. No trace. Although could be, for Rousseau and the Normans were neighbors fought-traded wooed. There is not found or is not a single credible document that identified the Normans and Vikings. For the first time as the Vikings «væringjar» (Wearing) appear in the Norse sagas, written in the XII century, when a Russian chronicles, it practically disappears. Moreover, they are mentioned in the stories about how the Normans went to Byzantium and entered there in the squad of «væringjar». These facts only underscore that the Normans Vikings were alien phenomenon.
No ancient source writes that the Rus - it's the Normans or the Swedes, that they lived in Skadinavii. One Byzantine mention of the fact that their warriors-Rus - it Normans can only say that they were northerners, arrived from the north. For the Greeks, all who are far away in the north, were the Normans.
On what arguments are based Normanists? In general, on the little things, which would not be worth the time you spend. Somewhere in Scandinavia found a name consonant with the name of Rurik. Somewhere - consonant with the name of the tribe Rus. However, some of their arguments still consider the case because German historians Bayer and Miller, as we see, is alive and well. How to live a thirst to put "in place" the Russian people. Although we note itself Bayer, after it shifted from academics in adjunct and lowered salary, he hastened to abandon its "Russophobian" theory and preferred to take "roksolanskuyu". A good example for the patriotic bosses!
Among the main arguments of the supporters of the Norman theory - "Annales Bertiniani where Latin sources Rus-growing nation was first mentioned, (this document we discussed above), where next to the word" growing "were" sveony "- Swedes. Although the text of these tribes are opposed, normannisty somehow believe the contrary. Maybe not read? Or see what they want to see?
More, they refer to the names of Russian ambassadors listed in Kiev agreements with Constantinople and copied in Russian chronicles. They say that they are more similar to the Swedish, rather than Slavic. But the agreement concluded at the beginning of the tenth century (in 907 and 917, respectively), when many Russ has not yet been baptized, and we do not know most of the names that have worn our pre-Christian ancestors. However, some of the names of the Slavs are preserved in the Frankish chronicles naprmer, Drahovo, Vitsin (exceeds) Trasko (Thrasco) Milidoh, Godelaib, Milegast, Tseadrag. Compare with the names of the Rus of the treaties with Constantinople from the "Tale of Bygone Years": Carl Velmid, Rula, Faslav, Velimid, Lidulfast, Stemid ... Identical names there, but a huge difference is not noticeable. And those in the other there is little known to us, the Slavic roots. Normanists trying to find the names of the contract in Scandinavia, in Sweden. We did not find, although something consonant to pick up and managed there. So after all the centuries our peoples have been neighbors, wooed, relatives, the names could be similar. For example, in the documents we find the names of the Danish king Rauric and our Russian prince Rurik, which are completely different people.
The most important proof of the "theorists Normanism" is the work of the Byzantine Emperor Constantine VII "On the management of the empire" (949 g). There he describes the "route from the Vikings to the Greeks" and the names of the Dnieper rapids leads in two languages ​​- Russian and Slavic. These names are very different. On this basis, based proof that the Rus - not Slavs. But in the Swedish language, these Russian names for the most part do not mean anything. In addition, we do not know who told the emperor about these thresholds and whether the said right. One can not deny the differences in the languages ​​of different tribes of the Slavs. For example, I recently completely stopped Ukrainians understand speech, even though it is the most akin to our nation. It is possible that there were Bulgarian word or some other Slavs living in areas adjoining to Dnieper rapids ...
Another argument for this theory is the link to the Chronicle, which says that, well, for the prince of Novgorod "went beyond the sea." But from the place where the Novgorod, Sweden - the same "Zamora", as well as the southern coast of the Baltic Sea. Moreover, the chronicle is often described as having quarreled with Novgorod, princes fled to Varangians or Vikings to call them for help. For example, to Varangians "ran" the future Baptist of Rus Prince Vladimir. Naturally, on horseback, and not on the ships because of Novgorod get to the sea is not so simple. And if you look at the map, we can see that to get to Sweden or Norway, which hosted the Vikings on horseback from Novgorod, and on ships, it would be at that time is very problematic. A genuine Vikings - they really were relatively close. And the mention of the ships in the Novgorod chronicles of the time something is not there.
With regard to the phrase "went beyond the sea," that it was decided at the time to say, if the path can be done not only at sea, but also on foot along the coast. "Beyond the Sea" it was for the people of Kiev to Constantinople, although it can be reached by land. "Beyond the Sea" in Russian often meant simply - "far". When, for example, in 1390 he married Grand Prince of Moscow Vasily I of Moscow to Sofia - daughter of Grand Duke of Lithuania Vytautas, who fled with his family from the Troubles "to the Germans," the bride "is shown byst to Moscow from Zamora." (Simeon chronicle). Those "Germans", where "ran" Vytautas, were located in what is now Latvia, just where the Vikings were Russian fortress and lived before.
The mention in the annals of German - is one more argument Normanists. Like, in some later sources write that Rurik prinёl "of German", and not from the Vikings. And what can the chronicler or scribe to write the chronicles in the XIV century and later on the south coast of the Baltic Sea, including those of the former Slavic Prussia, if there is already more than two hundred years, the Germans settled? How to write it, to make it clear where he had come Rurik? Of course "of the German"! Not from the Swedes! And this is another strong argument inconsistency Norman theory, because the Russian chroniclers from the most ancient times, perfectly distinguished the Germans from the Swedes, England and other nations.
There is a reference to the excavation, they say, in the excavations are common things Scandinavian, and Russian - Scandinavian terms. But our lands are Byzantine products! And Oriental coins. And in our speech - Greek, Italian, Turkish, German, Arabic and other words. It says only that the Rus-Slavs traded and interacted with all its neighbors. Hence the words of others, weapons, money, and jewelry.
The ancestors of the Rus-Vikings
Where did such a strong and numerous Slavic people - Russ, Russ, Russian, which for a historically short time, from a seemingly small tribe, so grew and settled in the vast space? This is despite the endless wars of extermination, which were against them from the West Europeans and Turks from the east !? Partially, we have already answered this question, referring to the Russian and European documents. But there is another important source, which is any more accurate chronicles or charters. This source - our old neighbors. Oh, they know about us and our past is much more than we think. This applies to the neighbors, the peoples.
For example, before the Franco-Germans won in the IX century, a large and powerful nation once the Saxons, they had before V century, partly to seize and colonize the south of Britain, to assimilate the Angles. Thus, there were the Anglo-Saxons, keeping in centuries alien name. And how do you think the neighbors called the Germans have won once in VIII - IX centuries Saxony? Estonians called «Saksamaa» Germany, and the Germans themselves - «sakslased». The Finns call this country «Saksa», and residents - «saksalaiset». Though there has been more than millennia, during which the country called Germany, «Deutschland», and though there are still living those ancient Saxons, not the Germans. And Prussia in nearly a thousand years the memory of the peoples existed since disappeared and the ancient Prussians themselves and their Slavic language. Firm folk memory.
So what does this strong neighbor remembrance of us, Russian? And that's what. The oldest of our neighbors - the Finns call the Russian «Venäläinen», and Russia, Russia - «Veneman», «Venäjä». Other immediate neighbors - Estonians Russian name «Venelane», and the country - «Vene», «Venemaa» (Russia, Russia). Even Karelians call us «Veneä» (Russia).
Strange, is not it? After all, the word Russ, Russian, and Russian "venelane" or "vein" - well, nothing! Who is this "vein", where it came from?
Seeking the answer to this question, we have to admit that the term "cava" leads us to the name of a powerful and numerous Slavic people, who lived sometime in Central Europe and on the shores of the southern Baltic Sea - to the Wends. For people, who mentioned in his writings more ancient historians: Herodotus, Pomponius, Tacitus, Ptolemy and others, placing wends-Slavs in the vast expanses of Central Europe and the Baltic states - from the eastern shores of the Vistula river - to the northern Carpathians and the Lower Danube.
In determining the relationship of the Rus-Slavs Wends agree all the ends - and where they live, and links the various chronicles and thoughts of the ancient chroniclers.
About wends that there Slavs, mentioned not only the Byzantine and Oriental sources, and medieval Europe, calling them not only "Wends" but Wendy Vinita, ^ advanced and even Windows.
Here is how this nation of VI century Gothic historian Jordan in the book "Getica" (551): "We left them prone [Alps], descending to the north, from the birthplace of the Vistula River, is located on the immense spaces populous tribe Veneti. Although their names are now changed according to different genera and localities, yet mostly they are called sklavenami and Antes. " As you can see, Jordan says the process of dividing the Slavic Wends to the various tribes.
The fact that the Slavs and Wends - nation report without exception, medieval European sources. For example, the author of "The Chronicles of Fredegarda" writes that in the year 623, "a man by the name itself, the franc comes from Sanz, along with other merchants went to the Slavs, known as Venda <...>. 630 <...> This year, the Slavs (or Wendy as they call themselves) have killed and robbed a large number of merchants in the Frankish kingdom itself, and so began a feud between itself and Dagobert, King of the Slavs. "
Six centuries after long and bloody wars with the Romans and the Germans, Wends are pushed to the east and north Europe. But they continue to occupy almost the entire southern Baltic countries to the east of the Elbe. Even in the XII century, the author of "Slavonic chronicles» XII century Gelmgold captures them as residents of the vast country in the north of Europe: "Where ends Polonia, we come to the vast country of the Slavs, who in ancient times by vandals, and now blames, or ^ advanced, called. " Speaking about the numerous Slavic tribes of the southern Baltic, Gelmgold not forget to note that they all belong to the ancient people ^ advanced - wends: "These are the tribes ^ advanced scattered through the countries, regions and islands of the sea."
About wends there is extensive literature from the Middle Ages, ending with the latest research. The fact that the indigenous people of the southern Baltic Wends were just show themselves the conquerors of the land - the Germans, who for centuries until recent times was called Slavic Wends (Wenden, Winden). And if you want to distinguish between the old local village in the conquered lands from new, German, called them venedskimi - «windich or wendich».
Why Europeans ignore this information? What gives us the knowledge that among other peoples of the Rus and Prussians were also Wends - Slavs? At least the fact that the Germans claim to the former Prussian land as their "patrimony" is untenable.
Where I lived Rurik?
In 844, the Frankish chroniclers report conquests the Frankish King Louis "for the Elbe against the Wends" and the death of the Vendian king (rex) Gostomysl. Moreover, "The Annals of Fulda" call him King "Obodrits are plotting treason, and subdued them. this people Gostomysl King died. " "Annals of Xanten" call it the king of the Wends, slightly distorting the name: "King Louis came up with the army against the Wends. And one of their kings died there by the name of Gostimusl ". "Annals of Hildesheim" (Hildesheim) referred to the aim of the campaign of King conquering the Slavs: "<...> has come to the land of the Slavs, killed their king Gestimula and subjugated the rest."
Despite some differences in the spelling of the name of the deceased King Gostomysl, it is clear that we are talking about one and the same leader and his kingdom, which the authors at the same time called Slavic, Vendian and obodritskim. There can be traced clearly as a great nation divided wends different parts, keeping in mind the neighbors, all three of their tribal names. Obodrits - Union of Slavic tribes living in the lower reaches of the river Elbe (Labe). The largest of the city was Rerik - Baltic Sea.
Why do I have so much attention is paid to Obodrits? Because many pointers to the origin of Rurik are just here, to the banks of the Elbe, to the west of modern Mecklenburg. After all, the name of the deceased King obodritskogo Gostomysl very rare, and in the sources found only in two cases: in the stories of the Frankish writers of his death in the year 844, and in the Russian chronicles. In Ioakimovskaya Rurik he was named the grandson of a Gostomysl pricked by his daughter. In Piskaryovsky Chronicle - Novgorod warlord who advised Novgorod invite Rurik to rule, "in order to judge us in the truth." It is possible that we are talking about the same person. Russian chronicler after so many years could confuse something in the source, transfer the activities of King Gostomysl from the banks of the Elbe River in the Volkhov. But he remembered the main thing - the name and the family ancestor of Rurik, his advice to his grandson go home mother pricked.
King Gostomysl died in 844 year, but Obodrits continued to fight not only with the Franks, but also with the Normans. In 862, according to the Annals of Fuldenskih, Obodrits revolted, and the Frankish king again "led an army against Obodrits and forced them Tabomysla Duke, who raised a revolt, obey him."
It Vendian uprising took place just at the 862 th year, when Prince Rurik with all his native went to reign in Novgorod. We see that the ruler Obodrits chronicler calls no longer king, but only a duke, as a person subordinate and dependent. Who was the Duke Tabomysl Rurik? Uncle? Father? Big Brother? That we do not know. It is clear only that at home, where as a vassal of the rules of his elder relative, because of the endless wars of conquest neighbors, Rurik had no prospects for a decent life.
The assumption about the origin of Rurik and his Russian tribe on the banks of the Elbe study confirms the Mecklenburg genealogical texts, spent more at the end of the XVI century German scientist, notary J. von Chemnitz. Mecklenburg City, as already mentioned, is on the lands of the ancient Wends-Obodrits. Some of the descendants of the nobility Wend survived in the harsh battles and remained in their possession, bringing the oath Frankish King and paying him tribute. They even formed Mecklenburg ducal dynasty, which lasted until 1917, the revolution itself. These descendants wends not only to remember their roots, but also led the chronicle, which tells about the ancestors. They are something, and studied the notary J. von Chemnitz. He established the names of most obodritskih rulers, from the seventh century. And, too, I found in the documents of King Gostomysl name and the names of Prince Rurik and his brothers Siwar and Truvor. Although these sources are not considered reliable, they still further confirm that the Russian princes Gostomysl and Rurik - not fictitious persons. And we have every reason to believe that the founder of the ruling dynasty in Russia - Rurik was a Slav, wends from the southern coast of the Baltic Sea, and more precisely - from the banks of the Elbe. And Novgorod was invited to reign in Novgorod his kinsman-Slav.
The Danish king Rauric and Russian prince Rurik
We can not ignore another argument, which led supporters of the Norman theory, though in many European chronicles Prince Rurik is mentioned specifically as a Danish-king or the king. Indeed, in many annals found similar name: Rauric. About the Danish king (konung) Rauric and his fate, there is an extensive literature. Often it is referred to as the robber, who organizes the attack on the Frankish and Slavic lands, robbing, burning towns and villages, takes captive citizens. And this image does not coincide with the image of the Slav Rurik, who supposedly establishes the procedure to the Novgorod lands, builds cities.
Here's how it talks about "Chronicon on the accomplishments of the Normans in the French", "King of the Normans Rauric directs against Louis in Germany on the Elbe River, six hundred ships. The Saxons, hastened to meet them when the battle was accomplished with the help of our Lord Jesus Christ is the winner. Having gone there, they will attack and capture a city Slavs. In the same year, returning to the sea on the passed [before] the bed of the Seine Normans plunder, ravage and burn down all the areas bordering the sea. "
King (konung) Rauric most often acts as a navigator, to move on the sea or rivers in the courts. Novgorod chronicles of the time silent navigation. That Rauric and Rurik - different people is the fact that quite often the first mentioned in European sources, and after 862 years, when the Russian Rurik already reign in Novgorod. For example, in the 873 year Rauric "gall of Christianity", entered the service of the Frankish King Louis: "Louis, the eastern king convened a meeting in Frankfurt <...>. Likewise came to him Rauric, bile Christianity, moreover, to [him] the ship were taken numerous hostages, and it became a subject of the king and swore to serve him faithfully. "
It is hard to imagine that having sworn to serve the Frankish King Louis, konung Rauric, leaving their ships immediately moved to work part-time in Veliky Novgorod.
Slavic Rurik died in 876 year. About Danish Rauric, as already dead, in 882 reports "Chronicon of accomplishments in the French Normans." He probably died shortly before this date at an advanced age (it is believed that he was born about 810 years). On the basis of all the facts, it is unlikely that the Dane Rauric rules at the same time in the kingdom of the Frisians - Jutland - in the north-eastern edge of Europe, and, in the representation of the peoples of the time, on the other side of the world - in Novgorod. Yes, and elders have managed to throw in Novgorod and his infant son, Igor.
We should not confuse that historians of different ages show different residence wends Slavs, including Russ. Obviously, Polabian Wends - Obodrits, Rus - the first of the Baltic Slavs came under the Franco-German roller machine. For hundreds of years they are either destroyed or assimilated or supplanted the east. And to the XII century historians caught wends-Rousseau only on the east coast of the Baltic Sea. But the same Franco-German car up to a year for many centuries painted all movement wends-Slavs, including Rousseau, their names, place of residence, business and exploits. And because of this, we can know their roots and their heroes, rejecting Russophobic theory of "enlightenment" of the Russian people by aliens - the Swedes, or someone else.
Lyudmila Gordeeva,
historian, writer

Thursday, 27 October 2016

Ancient Macedonian is Slavic language / common words

Slavic etymology of "abarkna" - "αβαρκνα
BRKOVI - mustache
BRKAT - man with mustache

Slavic etymology of Stobi
ŠTAP - cane ,wooden stick, walking stick
UŠTAP - full moon
STUP - stone or wood pillar
STUBE - stairs
STEPENICE - stairs
STOPA - foot
STABLO - tree trunk (sta oblo - stand round)
root word STA - stand vertical

(also mentioned as: Stoboi; in modern Macedonian: Стоби)

Stobi – an ancient city in Paeonia, later conquered by the Macedonians. The archaeological site has been located in the present-day region of Gradsko, near Demir Kapija, in central areas of the Republic of Macedonia. This city was first mentioned by Titus Livius, in his writings about the victory of Philip V of Macedonia against the Dardanians in 197 BC.

The name of Stobi in ancient Paeonian-Macedonian means „post," „pillar", and is connected with the Old-English „staff,“ or „staeff“ (which meant - a long stick used for carrying), Irish „sab“ (shaft), Old-Church Slavonic „stoboru“ (pillar) and many others. 
Proto-Indo-European root of all of these words, is – „STEBH" (mеаning – stem, post, to support, place firmly on, fasten)…

In the modern Macedonian language, we have the word STOLB / „столб“, meaning – PILLAR, GRIP, LEVERAGE. We also have the noun STEBLO / „стебло“, which means – STEM, TRUNK, SHANK, STALK…

In the Republic of Macedonia, historians and archaeologists have located two more cities with similar names: Stybera (near Prilep) and Astibo (first mentioned by Polien in 3rd century BC, located at modern-day town of Štip, north-eastern Macedonia). 

Stybera (originally called Stubera) was placed near present-day city of Prilep (south-western Macedonia). Strabo and Livy tell us that in 200 BC the Roman army fighting Philip V of Macedonia, turned from Herakleia and came to Stubera. Eventually, Strabo mentions the city as the Macedonian base during Perseus' struggle with the Illyrians in 169 BC.

Ancient Macedonian Gods: LEIVINO

The Greek propagandists often claim that the Macedonians and the Hellenes believed in same gods, and therefore – they were „the same people”. Leivino, the Macedonian god of wine is just one of the many examples that expose those Greek lies.

Leivino is the Macedonian equivalent of Dionysus, according to the Hellenic lexicographer Hesychius. Dionysus, the ,,Hellenic” god of wine, grape harvest and pleasure, on the other hand, was actually of Thracian origin (Herodotus, History, 2:49, 52, 143-146).

By hearing, or reading the name of Leivino today, an average Macedonian would instantly recognize two Macedonian words. First one is the verb LEE / лее, which means „to pour", „to scoop" or LEJ / ЛЕЈ - its imperative form. The second one is VINO / вино, which means WINE. That’s just a theory. There might be another explanation of which we don’t know and would like to hear about. We don’t claim anything, but it’s still worth mentioning and considering.

The word WINE / VINO sounds similar in many languages, because it is Proto-Indo-European. The Ancient Phrygians used to call it – OINIS. The modern Greek word for WINE is KRASI / κρασί.

Ancient Macedonian Word : GARKAN

According to Hesychius, GARKAN was the authentic ancient Macedonian word for – rod ог stick. It might be etymologically connected with the modern Macedonian (or, wider South-Slavic) word - гранка/ GRANKA, GRANA, which means – sprig, twig, branch…

from Oxford University Press
A book published in 2014 from historian Clifford R. Backman states that Slavs didn't displace indigenous Croats, Srbs and Macedonians but that the Avars adopted the language that was already spoken on this areas.
In short Clifford R. Backman does not dispute Illyrian herritage of named population but he combines DNA and historical evidence. As Croats, Srbs and Macedonians have indigenous I haploup group in large percentage it is certain that these people are ancient Illyrians and that Scythian tribe of Avars (not Mongolian but white mostly redish haired population arrived from Asia which was entirely Scythian meaning white, blond or redhaired) after Mongolian invasion on Xiongnu Emporium which was Scythian or Amazon in the very early begin.  Xiongnu Emporium fell around 400 AD and Avars and Huns moved westwards towards Russia and Europe in those times.
They, Avars would be that R1a component in Southern Slavic gene pool.
It is not impossible that Avars already spoke form of Slavic because Tocharians (Xiongnu neighbours) spoke very similar language to Slavic.
 (numbers are identical to slavic also kcer is cker in Tocharian and much more)
Tocharians too were redhaired or blond, there was no Mongolian mummies in Asia this old.

Monday, 24 October 2016


Shiva Lingam is exhibited in Gregorian Etruscan Museum, Vatican City.
Shiva is ancient Slavic Goddess Zhiva (life) and what you see on the picture is egg - a life.
Zhiva  is also Slavic name for Mercury or "Messenger of Gods".
And here if you remember Amazon helmets with wings which are older then patriarchal Mercury as male or angel you can get clear picture of Herstorical line.
Her Story in Slavic means KCER STVORI or Daughter Created.
Kcer is found even in Tocharian as daughter in form of Cker.
Same word is Hittite for daughter etc
This is your Hera
This is also your Korai's or Kariatides, just daughters.
Now back to Dalmatia; DOTA is HER PROPERTY that is adopted by HIM in ceremony of marriage.
It is obvious that contemporary word for Daughter stems from "property" and not by living, breathing woman.
Slavs have Dushti in late development of the language too.
Dushti use to be a title of a princess or todays Dutchess.

Shiva Sharabha
Sharabha (Sanskrit: शरभ, Śarabha, Kannada: ಶರಭ) or Sarabha is a part-lion and part-bird beast in Hindu mythology, who, according to Sanskrit literature, is eight-legged and more powerful than a lion or an elephant, possessing the ability to clear a valley in one jump. In later literature, Sharabha is described as an eight-legged deer.

There you have once again WINGED creature.

I do not consider Sanskrit heritage of India but Sclavia - period.

Vatakin in sanskrit meanings;

वातकिन् vAtakin adj. suffering from wind-disease

वातकिन् vAtakin adj. rheumatic
वातकिन् vAtakin adj. gouty

Vatika in sanskrit, meanings;

vAtika adj. produced by or proceeding from disorder of the wind
vAtika adj. mad
vaTikA f. pawn
vAtika m. juggler or conjurer
vAtika m. man of mere words
vaTika m. pawn [ chess ]
vAtika m. boaster

winds of change?
what changes with winds? Arya or air of course...
वटिका vaTikA f. under vaTaka

under attack?
many people in EuroAsian mythology are named after WINDS or Veneti, Vendi, Vandals
such are Hyperboreans or Vitar Bura (wind Bura, north wind), maybe even Hitra Bura (fast north wind)
Jugo (south wind) is named after enormously old tribe that lived on Adriatic (before arrival of Venets who were Trojan survivors) - Eugani.
Levant or Dalmatian Levanat is old form of LIVO NA - to the left as Levant is to the left looked from Adriatic. Old Dalmatian form in not NA LIVO as today but LIVO NA. (to disbelievers check Dalmatian songs sung in dialect, preferably Gan Vejan or Pelashtina)

as V or H can be ignored in old Slavic you get ATA KAN.
AT is other Slavic word for horse, today a male horse or stalion.
But if you do not want to ignore V you get Vata Kan or CHASE or HUNT in slavic is VATAnje or HVATAnje.

Kan is horse in slavic but also ZENA (as whores are horses). As was always woman compared to a donkey, horse or mule--when she conceived a male or Jesus--he rode into Jerusalem on a MULE, remember?
In english KAN is KIN or born of a mother which is to be found back in Sklavic as Angelkin - kin means hers in slavic-- is alegedly a tribe that give name to England. In reality Angel-kin is Antas kin.

Ata known today as "a father" stems from epitet of ancient Goddesses in all cultures who's full name was ANTA.
Anta pronaunced fast changes T into K as in Ankh.
Anta is full name of Sumerian sky god today known as ANU or he god.
In Egypt is was NUT.
ATA eNA is Athena.
Diana is Dea eNa.
Anahit reversal as in eN 'aTa
Juno was Diva , as Thea or Dea Ata is same title, N is always present regardless of fleating wovels.

Juno or Juturna is a Slavic Goddess not just by obvious "morning star" conotation (juturna) but also with her name JUNO as a young calf - today called June.
She give name to a Moon Luna because Dalmatians call moon Lojna and all lights Luch, Loj (cow fat) to make Kandilo-oil or fat lamp, LUSTRA for the fish scales.
And here you can see that old representation of the Moon as Holy White Cow as Moon in Rig Vedas( Rich Veda- talking words in slavic) Riga is line drawn on a tree or carved on the rock. RISati means "to draw". Remember 
Π(P) is R and this is how you get todays word PISati (to write) instead. PISati is cognate to Pishati or to piss.
I said before that writing Goddess and women out of His Story is "pissing conquest".
Word "scrive" in "latin" means TO HIDE in Slavic.

In my archives there are images and carefully selected "scientific linguist" perversions they wrote over time which I'm gonna add later.

Wednesday, 12 October 2016



prehistoric Goddess Alia,
Najran, Arabia 2500bc

Ba‘Alat Gebal,
'Lady of Byblos', was the goddess of the city of Byblos,
Phoenicia in ancient times.
Known as Ataragtis also.

Goddess Allat

A depiction of the underworld. Nergal appears at the top, leering over a top.

Goddess Allat with a lion from the Temple of Baal.

Original article;

Arab women before and after Islam: Opening the door of pre-Islamic Arabian history

Posted on May 9, 2016
 Al-Uzza, Al-Lat and Menat were amongst the commonly worshipped goddesses in pre-Islamic Arabia
By S. B. Zaki

“Islamic civilization developed a construct of history that labeled the pre-Islamic period the Age of Ignorance and projected Islam as the sole source of all that was civilized – and used that construct so effectively in its rewriting of history that the peoples of Middle East lost all knowledge of the past civilizations of the region. Obviously, that construct was ideologically serviceable, successfully concealing, among other things, the fact that in some cultures of the Middle East women had been considerably better off before the rise of Islam than afterward” (Ahmed, 1992; p. 37).

In the quote provided above, Leila Ahmed, a Harvard Divinity School scholar of Islam, highlights the reasons for the filtered version of the history of women of pre-Islamic Arabia. If you try Googling ‘Status of Women in Islam’, unsurprisingly you will be offered millions of results. A more difficult task is to find out how women have been discussed in Islamic literature over the last 14 centuries (by men, to be precise). A pattern emerges. The words ‘Status of Women in Islam’ do not appear until the early 20th century.  Before that, Islamic scholars wrote on the ‘Duties of a Muslim Woman’ or ‘Roles of Muslim Women.’

These early scholars, writers and historians nonetheless, did often show through historical examples that Muslim women must not act like the women from ‘pre-Islamic time’ (pre-Islamic Age of Ignorance). For example, when a few years after Prophet Muhammad’s death, a young Muslim woman began sleeping with her male slave stating that “I thought that ownership by the right hand made lawful to me what it makes lawful to men”, Umar Ibn Khattab, who judged the ‘matter’, sternly rebuked her and announced that she had acted “in Ignorance” (i.e., like women did in pre-Islamic time) and deliberately misinterpreted the message of the Quran. In other words, Quran does not make lawful to women what it makes lawful to men; their rights are not the same. He then banned her from ever marrying a free man (Musannaf of `Abd al-Razzaq al-Sanani in Ali, 2010). This incident was recorded and used by early scholars to show that pre-Islamic women were wrong in exercising their sexual independence and freedom and that the Islamic model of patriarchal marriage and sex was licit and superior.

Fast-forward about eleven centuries, many parts of the world that were once colonised by Muslims (which shaped the Muslim narratives about women in Islam in those centuries) were being colonised by Europeans who scorned Muslims for their backwardness and seclusion of women. This was a time when Muslim scholars had to urgently show to the world that Islam actually “raised the status of women.” There was a shift from a more authoritative and pompous scholarly tone discussing Muslim women like al Ghazali’s, that dictated to Muslim women how they should behave and obey their husbands, and the more accusatory tone of the later scholars who made excuses for Islam’s treatment of women by claiming that women of pre-Islamic time were “mere chattel” and Quran was revealed for a Muslim woman to “rescue her from the gloomy injustice of Pre-Islamic darkness.[1]”

These latter politically shaped narratives are the ones we are still reading and using. To show that Islam bettered the lives of Muslim women, a parallel history had to be created of women in pre-Islamic time where women: “were treated like slaves or property. Their personal consent concerning anything related to their well-being was considered unimportant and unnecessary to such an extent that they were never even treated as a party to a marriage contract. They had no independence, could not own property and were not allowed to inherit. In times of war, women were treated as part of the loot. Simply put, their plight was unspeakable…The practice of killing female children was rampant. The pagan Arabs used to bury alive their daughters with the fear that these girls will grow up and will get married to some men who will be called their sons-in-law.[2]”

These narratives did not only cover the “plight of women” in Arabia before Islam, but justified the invasions of lands by Muslims by extending it to “all nations of the World[3]” which necessitated that the new Islamic law be accepted as the most just system since the “advent of Islam brought profound changes to the Arabian society in general and to women in particular[4].”  In doing so, these Muslim histories do exactly what contemporary war politicians do – justify their mission by stating that “Islam liberated women[5].”

History of pre-Islamic Arabian women

More recently, several Muslim women have begun to research the lives of women in pre-Islamic Arabia. This is by no means an easy task since as when Muslims spread from Medina they categorically destroyed the old ways of life: temples, pagan poetry written on animal skins, idols of gods and goddesses etc, and Islamic history has practically no records written by women. What little we know are reports in Islamic texts, which are narrated to establish the new order, and a few archeological finds. The result is that we have pamphlets, web links and books that preach women that “Islam truly liberated women” while there is no justification for the existence of women like Khadija bint Khuwalid, Hind bint Utbah, Asma Bint Marwan, Lubna bint Hajar, Arwa umm Jamil amongst others, if the general condition of Arab women was not more than mere chattel.

Reading all the sources now available, one can see that, in the absence of a single law before Islam, lives of men and women in Arabia depended on which tribe they belonged to. Islam did lay down comprehensive law and while some women may have enjoyed more rights under Islamic law, it is certainly true that the rights of others were severely curtailed. The resultant picture that emerges is that of a deeply patriarchal form of religious law rather than one that could have been more balanced, just and equal.  Like Leila Ahmed writes us in her book (1991, p. 60):

“That women felt Islam to be a somewhat depressing religion is suggested by a remark of Muhammad’s great-granddaughter Sukaina, who, when asked why she was so merry and her sister Fatima so solemn, replied that it was because she had been named after her pre-Islamic great-grandmother, whereas her sister has been named after her Islamic grandmother.”

Furthermore, it can be argued that the ‘status’ of all women in Islam is not equal either. Islamic jurisprudence supports classism and Quran differentiates between free and enslaved women as will be seen below.

There are several ways in which Islam could have established gender equality based on the practice already available in pre-Islamic time.  That women in pre-Islamic time were used to being treated equally with men can be inferred from Hind bint Utbah’s feisty comment to Muhammad, “By God, you ask us something that you didn’t ask men. In any case, we shall grant it to you![6]” when the latter asked Hind to take his oath of allegiance which is different for women. Muslim scholars point out that some “distinguished women converted to Islam prior to their husbands, a demonstration of Islam’s recognition of their capacity for independent action[7].” However, what this demonstrates is the independence of pre-Islamic women who would have never been able to convert independently without their male kin if their independent status was not already established.


Hoyland gives several examples to illustrate that while Islamic law establishes ‘descent through the male line’, pre-Islamic Arabia also recognized ‘matrilineal arrangements’ which allowed women to choose who they wished to marry and have children with (2003, p.129-131). Muslims claim that ‘Islam gave women the right to choose their husband’, but there are instances where Muslim girls were married off by their guardians/fathers, examples of which include: Aisha being married off to Muhammad as a child (presumably without her knowledge), al-Musayyab ibn Najaba giving his newborn daughter’s hand in marriage to his cousin’s son, Muhammad arranging his cousin, Zainab bint Jahsh’s (apparently against her will prompting the revelation of 33:36, see tafsir of al Jalalayn[8]) marriage to his adopted Zayd ibn Harithah. Thus we see that if male guardians generally married off women in pre-Islamic time, the practice did not stop with the coming of Islam.

We also see Islamic law making it necessary for a woman (whether virgin or previously married) to have a male guardian give her away in marriage, for example we learn that when Muhammad married Umm Salamah she was an ‘older widow’ but what we hardly read is that she was “married to the Prophet” by her son, Salamah (Ibn Hisham, 2010, p. 793).  On the other hand, the pre-Islamic forms of unions, some of which gave authority to women in a marriage, were replaced by patriarchal order by Islam (see Ahmed, 1986, p. 667) scraping off marriages that assisted women like: uxorilocal marriage (according to Ahmed, Muhammad’s own mother had contracted this form of marriage with Abdullah ibn Abdul Muttalib), pre-Islamic form of mutah marriage (which according to Robertson in Kinship And Marriage in Early Arabia may have been the type contracted between Khadija and Muhammad since he remained monogamous), and even polyandry practiced by women belonging to matrilineal tribes.  In the words of Fatima Mernissi (2011), polyandry, which was banned by Islam, was degrading to men not women:

“Group sex marriages, where the woman could entertain relations either with a group of less than ten men or consume a limitless number of partners, degraded men to animal-like anonymity. Fatherhood, which implied that the woman limited her sexual desire to consuming only her husband’s body was a rare privilege, since children belonged to the mother’s tribe in general.”

Anonymity of the father meant a man’s role was that of a mere sperm donor and a temporary sexual object. Since the woman gave birth to a child and raised them, she took central stage position. According to Robertson (1907), polyandry as practiced in the pre-Islamic world is generally represented by Muslim writers as fornication however, he says, “where the children are not bastards, and the mothers are not disgraced or punished for their unchastity, this term is plainly in- appropriate.”


Another area where Islam changed power balance between men and women is divorce. While generally men held the right to divorce women in pre-Islamic time, there are also records that indicate that women dismissed their husbands with an equal right:

‘The women in the pre-Islamic time, or some of them, had the right to dismiss their husbands, and the form of dismissal was this. If they lived in a tent they turned it round, so that if the door faced east it now faced west, and when the man saw this he knew that he was dismissed and did not enter.’”(Isfahani in Hoyland, p. 130).

The above report dismisses the claim that it was Islam that gave women the right to divorce, which is also factually untrue since a Muslim woman cannot divorce her husband, but has to ask to be divorced by him. An option of equality would have been to make ‘divorce through arbitration’ the law for both men and women. Instead men have the full right to dismiss a wife independently even through oral pronouncement, while a woman has to ‘ask’ her husband for divorce through third party intercession (called Khul):

“Islam further restricted women’s divorce rights by leaving it only to the husband to decide on divorce. Although the practice of foregoing one’s mahr for a divorce continues to exist in Muslim countries up to now, it no longer guarantees the wife a divorce: the husband has the right to refuse a divorce even if the wife is prepared to forego her mahr. Only very limited circumstances (such as disappearance of a husband over four years, or extreme physical deformities leading to sexual impotence) entitle a wife to ask an Islamic judge for a divorce. The final decision is left to the judge, however.[9]”

This disparity has never been clearer than in modern time when Muslim men can divorce via text messages[10], while Muslim women have to wait for years to obtain a divorce[11] making it clear that changing the direction of the opening of a tent was unquestionably empowering for a pre-Islamic woman!

Bridal Price

Islam also continued the practice of ‘bridal price’ (called Mahr or Sadaq) making Islamic marriage a ‘marriage of authority.’ Mahr or Sadaq is explained in Islam (as was understood before Islam as well) as the price a man pays a woman to have sex with her (amusingly called ‘thaman al bud’a’ – ‘the vulva’s price’, by Imam Shafi; see Ali, 2006, p. 4). However, before Islam, some women were able to contract marriages with men who were obligated to live in the woman’s house. The offspring produced in such a marriage would remain with the woman and her family and the husband did not receive inheritance from the wife upon her death. Some early biographers of Muhammad claim that Khadija paid four thousand dinars to Muhammad upon their marriage which makes scholars like Robertson and Leila Ahmed to speculate that the pre-Islamic type of marriage between the two obligated Muhammad to live in Khadija’s house and remain monogamous as long as she was alive (he also received nothing in inheritance upon her death). After Islam, men were no longer required to be monogamous and allowed up to four wives and as many concubines as they can afford. Women, on the other hand, were banned from practicing polyandry. Muslim scholars explain that Islam allows men four wives (ignoring the countless concubines!) making it the only religious system in the world to restrict limitless polygyny for the first time. This we know is not true.  Over five hundred years before Islam, Hinduism had already laid down the law according to which the upper caste, Brâhmanas were allowed to four wives (Baudhayana Prasna I, Adhyay 8, Kandikka 16[12]).

Thus, there were other religious systems before Islam that restricted polygyny and similar models must have been available for Muslims to adopt including an equally satisfying monogamous model that could have been established as the preferred model for both sexes by ending the practice of  ‘thaman al bud’a’ which reduces the significance of a woman to that of purchased goods. This is not pointed out in modern Islamic discourses, which have started to call Mahr/Sadaq a ‘sweet gift’ rather than “vulva’s price.” Mahr is interchangeably used with Sadaq in Islamic discourses although the former was paid, in pre-Islamic time, to the male guardian of the bride, while the latter was given to the bride. After Islam, although it remains as the payment that gives a man “the right to enjoy the women’s private parts” (Sahih Bukhari – Volume 7, Book 62, Number 81), Mahr or Sadaq is directly given to the bride and becomes her property.  However, because a man buys a woman’s vulva through Mahr (Quran, 4:24), she must remain monogamous and faithful to her husband; if she is not, he can take the Mahr back (Quran, 4:19). If he no longer wants her, he may divorce her and let her keep the Mahr since he has already ‘gone into’ what he paid for (Quran, 4:20-21).  If a woman wants a divorce, she returns the Mahr so she can be “released/freed” (“tasrīḥun” – Quran, 2:229).  This is a clear model of patriarchal marriage of authority where the woman’s vulva is purchased and she must request to be “released”, which Islam established as the standardized model bringing it from pre-Islamic time while abolishing all other models, some of which placed women at an equal footing or in a more favourable position.

Social roles pre-Islamic women played

Being wives and mothers was not the only roles women played in pre-Islamic time.  Women commissioned inscriptions, made offerings to their gods in their own right, acted as administrative officers, took up their deceased husbands’ overloardship, and constructed public buildings and tombs (Hoyland, p. 132; also see Al Fassi, 2001, p. 48-55) leading historians to claim that the last activity indicates a ‘considerable degree of financial independence (Ibid).’  Ahmed also explains that, “Jahilia women were priests, soothsayers, prophets, participants in warfare, and nurses on the battlefield. They were fearlessly outspoken, defiant critics of men; authors of satirical verse aimed at formidable male opponents; keepers, in some unclear capacity, of the keys of the holiest shrine in Mecca; rebels and leaders of rebellions that included men; and individuals who initiated and terminated marriages at will, protested the limits Islam imposed on that freedom, and mingled freely with the men of their society until Islam banned such interaction” (1992, p. 62).

Furthermore, Muslims claim that in pre-Islamic time during “times of war, women were treated as part of the loot. Simply put, their plight was unspeakable[13].”  But that very well continued into Islam:

Narrated Buraida: The prophet sent Ali to Khalid to bring the Khumus ([one fifth] of the booty) and I hated Ali, and Ali had taken a bath (after a sexual act with a slave girl from the Khumus). I said to Khalid, “Don’t you see this (i.e. Ali)?” When we reached the prophet I mentioned that to him. He said, “O Buraida! Do you hate Ali?” I said, “Yes” He said, “Do you hate him, for he deserves more than that from the Khumus.” (Sahih Bukhari 5:59:637). Also see Sahih Bukhari 7:62:137; Sahih Bukhari 5:59:512; Sahih Bukhari 5:59:459.)


Similarly, “Muslim writers on the subject of inheritance often state that Islam instituted inheritance and property rights for women, something that they were presumably deprived of in pre-Islamic Arabia. This is simply false and in contradiction to many statements in the Muslim hadith itself[14]” for we read about the wealth Khadija had inherited and owned. We even read about Sulafa and Hubba – two women who were entrusted with being the Keepers of the Key of Kaaba, something that never happened after Mecca was attacked and Muslims subsequently occupied Kaaba – women never became the successors who could become the Keepers of the Key. We now know (through the study of none other than a Meccan Muslim woman) that “women were able to inherit and also to bequeath inheritance to whom so ever they wish (sic). The fact that women were those who bestow rights to their close relatives demonstrates their legal power of ownership and inheritance” (Al Fassi, 2001, p. 55).


In modern Muslim circles, we also see assertions that veil is liberation from sexual attention, that it is a feminist choice that ‘dignifies a woman’ because before Islam women used to roam around naked. This is not entirely true. Classism existed in the pre-Islamic Arabian society. The upper class, free women would cover their bodies, even faces, because their “sexuality and reproductive capability belonged to one man” (Ahmed, 1992, p. 12) – this continued into Islam. Women belonging to the working class and those who were slaves did not cover themselves; in fact, slaves were not allowed to cover their bodies and were punished if they tried to behave like free women – this too continued into Islam:

Umar hit the slave women from the family of Anas ibn Malik, when he saw them covered and said, “Uncover your head, and do not resemble the free women.” – Abd al-Razzaq al-Sanani (d. 211 AH/826 CE) in Al-Musannaf

Based on such incidents “jurists in the following centuries allowed Muslim slave women to pray without a head covering, and walk topless in public. The slave woman’s awrah — the legally delineated area that must be covered in order to avoid sin — became the same as the man, from the navel to the knees.[15]” Renowned historian, Ronald Segal’s book, ‘Islam’s Black Slaves’, gives specific details of how throughout Muslim history classism has existed with free women and slaves treated differently just like in pre-Islamic times (2001, p. 13-65).


Female infanticide in pre-Islamic times is another point Muslims use to claim that women were “rescued from the gloomy injustice of Pre-Islamic darkness.” It is certainly true that Quran categorically bans infanticide and ended the practice very quickly, at least in Arabia (Quran, 6:151: 17:31). However, the practice was never widespread anyway and Quran clearly bans the infanticide of boys and girls, not just girls. Tribes that practiced infanticide did not discriminate between sons and daughters. Some tribes killed their children as a way to appease their gods. Muhammad’s grandfather, Abdul Muttalib, had sworn to his highest god, Allah, that he would sacrifice a son if he had ten. He was then required to sacrifice Abdullah (Muhammad’s father) whose name was cast by divination arrows but was saved by a female soothsayer’s consultation (Ibn Ishaq, p.66-68). Poorer tribes would kill their children from fear of poverty.  There was one tribe, Tamim, in which some men would kill their daughters as they were always warring with other tribes and were afraid that their daughters would be captured and turned into concubines.  However, while Quran prohibits killing children and refers to the fear and sadness associated with the birth of a daughter (16:58-59), it never banned capture of women in wars and their subsequent enslavement and concubinage.  Strangely, renowned Muslim scholars like Ibn Khaldun and Ibn Sina justified capture of Africans as slaves commenting that “the Negro nations are, as a rule, submissive to slavery” since they have characteristics that “are quite similar to those of dumb animals” (Ibn Khaldun cited in Segal, 2001: 49).  Similarly, al Idrisi is cited as commenting on a desirability of Nubian concubines: “Their women are of surpassing beauty. They are circumcised and fragrant-smelling…Of all the black women, they are the best for pleasures of the bed” (Ibid, p.50). Thus, we see that while degradation of women as enslaved concubines could have been banned by Islam, which was a fear out of which the Tamim tribe would kill their daughters, it not only continued the practice but was justified by the early Muslim scholars.


Two arguments are being made in this essay: 1] the condition of women in pre-Islamic Arabia depended on which tribe they belonged to – not all women were mistreated, in fact some were far more empowered before Islam than afterward…these reports all exist in Muslim sources; 2] Islam did not choose the more women-empowering pre-existing cultural mores to lay down laws regarding women. It appears that the Islamic laws related to women, while striving for some form of compassion for women, are consistently formed in ways to benefit men, and the focus of many of these laws has been to satisfy the almost obsessive interest of Islam in paternity. Muslim gender equality activists argue that early male scholars deliberately misinterpreted the Quran, but their entire premise is based on the belief that Islam universally improved the situation of women who lived in the gloomy, unjust, pre-Islamic darkness. Without this naïve supposition (that we have seen is a false belief), their entire argument crumbles to dust.  Some Muslims have already begun to realise this:

“I have become only further convinced that if Muslim women are to come fully to terms with cases in which the Qur’anic text lends itself to meanings that are detrimental to them, we must begin to confront those meanings more honestly, without resorting to apologetic explanations for them, or engaging in interpretive manipulations to force egalitarian meanings from the text. Furthermore, I have also come to believe firmly that we must begin to radically reimagine the nature of the Qur’an’s revelation and divinity.” – Hidayatullah (2014, p. viii).

As more and more historians reconsider the condition of pre-Islamic women, it will become exceedingly difficult for Muslim scholars to defend the supposed gender egalitarianism in Islam without radically reimagining the nature of the Qur’an’s revelation and divinity.


Ahmed, L. ( 1986). Women and the Advent of Islam. Signs, Vol. 11, No. 4, pp. 665-691. University of Chicago Press
Ahmed, L. (1992). Women and gender in Islam. New Haven and London: Yale University press
Al-Fassi, H.A. (2007). Women in Pre-Islamic Arabia, British Archaeological Reports (BAR) Archaeopress, Oxford
Ali, K. (2010). Marriage and Slavery in Early Islam. Cambridge: Harvard University Press
Ibn Ishaq. (2010). Sirat Rasul Allah – The Life of Muhammad. Translated by A. Guillaume. Karachi: Oxford University Press
Hidayatullah, A. A. (2014). Feminist Edges of the Qur’an. New York: Oxford University Press
Hoyland, R. G. (2001) Arabia and the Arabs – from the bronze age to the coming of Islam.  London and New York: Routledge
Mernissi, F. (2011). Beyond the Veil: Male-Female Dynamics in Muslim Society. London: Saqi
Robertson, S. W. (1907). Kinship And Marriage In Early Arabia. London: Adam and Charles Black
Segal, R. (2002). Islam’s Black Slaves: The Other Black Diaspora. New York: Farrar, Straus and Giroux