The charter of Alexander The Macedonian, found in the book by Orbini, 1601!

Title page of the book by Mauro Orbini from 1601.

THE CHARTER OF ALEXANDER THE MACEDONIAN

“WE, ALEXANDER, son of Phillip, King of Macedonia, Prince of the Monarchy, appointed as a creator of Greek empire, from Nataban announced as the child of the great Zeus, ruler of the Augusts, and of Bramans and of Arbonites, from sunrise to sunset, from south up until north, to the noble nation of Slavs we wish kindness, peace and health. We and our followers who will succeed us in ruling the world, because you have been consistent in faith, valiant in fights and our leaders and heroic fighters, we apportion you and freely donate you forever this whole part of the land, to North up until southern borders with Italy; and with such right, which nobody but you, must not stay long here; nor inhabit, nor live there. If, however, anyone stays longer here, may he become your slave, and his children, slaves to your children.

This Privilege is given in the new city of Alexandria, whom we created by the great Nile river, in the twelfth year of our ruling, under protection of the great god Zeus and Mars, Pluto and goddess Athens. Witnesses to this act are the noble Athleta, our treasurer, together with the other eleven princes whom we have appointed, after our death, as our general successors, considering the fact that we haven’t got any children.”

From the book “The Kingdom of the Slavs” by Mauro Orbini, published in 1601, in Pezaro.

This is Alexanders legacy to his people, the Macedonians, who became Glorious, and hence forth were also kown as the Slavjani(Slavs).

To read more about the Macedonians in Mauro Orbini’s book, please click HERE.

About these ads

46 Responses to “The charter of Alexander The Macedonian, found in the book by Orbini, 1601!”

  1. John Says:

    So, according to this author Alexander proclaimed “We, Alexander,..”. A demonstration of some seriousness and “adult” thinking, on your behalf, would be most welcome!!

  2. ammos Says:

    1. it would be wiser, to post here, not only the english transtalation, or even Orbinis transalation, but the original source

    among “….” , i supose that Orbini wasnt there, somewhere read it. where is the original text? in what language?

    i m sure, that you already know, the phrase you have Βold, does not exist.

    2. anyway, every balkan historian knows who Orbini was.

    from wikipedia :
    “Mauro Orbini ….was a Croatian writer, IDEOLOGUE and historian from the Republic of Dubrovnik (Respublica Ragusina). His work The Realm of the Slavs influenced SLAVIC IDEOLOGY and historiography in the later centuries.

    Like most Dalmatian intellectuals of his time, he was familiar with the PAN-SLAVIC IDEOLOGY of Vinko Pribojević. He made a very important contribution to that ideology by writing Il Regno degli Slavi (The Realm of the Slavs) in Italian, a historical/ideological book published in Pesaro in 1601. this UNCRITICAL history of the Slavs was translated into Russian by Teophan Prokopievich in 1723. From then on, the book exerted a significant influence on the ideas of Slavic peoples about themselves and on the European ideas on Slavs…..

    ….Even today’s historiography is often uncertain about how much truth there is in some of his writings and claims”

    (history vs idological book)

    ANYWAY, maybe silence was wiser for me. How can anyone handle ignorance. But its sad, all this lies people chose to live in.

    thanks for the hospitality, forgive my english

  3. makedonika Says:

    @John

    Yes every King of some dignity, always refers to himself in plural form, thus “We, Alexander…” should be read “I, Alexander….”.

    I hope it is adult enough for you John.

  4. Bojan Says:

    It’s funny how he (John) only comments on that particular part…

  5. Branko Says:

    Yes Jonh, “Makedonika” is correct, “WE” is Emperor’s expresson, first for the greatness and the might of the Empire, and second-expression of national (tribal-in those times) mentality of unity, which is still part of Macedonian collective national psyche, obviously laking in contemporarry Macedonian “polititians”. It is also worth mentioning that something very similar to this, but yet different, was noted in the midle of the XIX Century by the famous French Slavist Ciprian Rober, who in his texts states:

    “….before he died (Alexander) he prayed to the Gods to whatch over his (SLAVEN) GLORIOUS people of heroic hearts, for which they deserve to bear the most devine name GLORIOUS (SLAVENI). They received this name from the mouth of their King in his admiration of his own people’s heroic acts, their King, and the only known living human-God, the hero of Macedonia, also stated before he died that he curses anybody who in the future will speak bad of his GLORIOUS (SLAVEN) people, to whom he, as a prize for their heroic acts, bequested the areas stretching from Adriatic Sea, all the way to the Oceans of Etternal Glachiers, stating that entire of that land shall never live under forign rules, save the rules of the SLAVENITE (The GLORIOUS ones).” This text was published in it’s original-French, in 1852……….. (follow the analasys in message that follows).

  6. Branko Says:

    Before I proceed to comparatively analyze the above quoted text, I would like to remind that in Orbini’s “Kingdom of the Slavs”, under the index “M”, reader finds text about Macedonia, in which the author begins with:

    “Macedonians are Slavs…..”;

    scrolling on the other page, he states:

    “Slavs are Macedonians…”.

    To a fair minded and open reader, with basic intelligence and in no need of high academic titles, it all becomes clear. Every one, especially those who have even little bit of a knowledge of the “Slavic” Nations, and comparing stated extracts from Orbini’s work, the equation of unity as he puts it between “Slavs” and Macedonians as one people, becomes unavoidable and inescapable conclusion, which means that Macedonians are the forebearers and founders of the Slavic (tribes) Nations which today settle the exact areas as described in Alexander’s Charta, and Rober’s works. Facts that his heirs (appointed, or by blood line) effectively ruled the then known World for 276 years after his death, during which Macedonians spread throughout the territories of Macedonian, e.g. Alexander’s Empire, just testifies those assertion. It is this period of the ancient Macedonian history which was omitted at large from then B.C. historians, as well as early A.D. historians, either Hellenic or Roman ones, or those historical writtings were simply hiden from the light of the day by those time protagonists on the World’s political arena, which is the most obvious and logical conclusion. Recent findings of Macedonian scholars, of works of over 14 ancinet-Macedonian historians, covering period from few centuries before the reign of both Phillip and Alexander and probably first 2 centuries A.D. will reveal the full truth what exactly was happening in Macedonia at those times and the demographical movements of Macedonians, and don’t be surprised people did moved, compare it with British settlements of American and Australian continents. Early “catch” released, states that some of those ancient-Macedonian historians writes that the Macedonian people did overglorified their King’s deeds as even he himself stated, that those achievements would have been impossible if he didn’t had unquestioned support from all Macedonians.

    Simple conclusion which was bothering many independent historians of ancient world, and in paricular historians devoted in their studies and research to ancient Macedonian Empire and Alexander The Macedonian (Great), and any other fair minded people interested in the subject, would unlikely come to the conclusion that the mightiest Empire ever existing on the World and in the history book-Macedonia, did not had it’s contemporary scholars and historians? and that Alexander was in deed in need of Hellenic scholars and historians to note Macedonian history?-it’s a joke and self-fooling belief. Deeds of Phillip and Alexander, from any scientific view, pre-supposes the existence of highly technologically and scientifficaly developed society, and Professor Borza is right when he concludes that publicly made (meaning limited in number) known artefacts from Kutlesh (Vergina) reveal highly developped society (for that time) which at least few times, if not by far, superseeded the known Hellenic civilization.

    Compare the Slavic modern languages of today; there’s hardly need for any interpreting services, at least 55-65% when Macedonian speaks to Russian, Serb, Polish, Check, Slovak, Croat, Slovenian or Bulagarian person can be vocabulary freely understood, to the opposite, compare tongues of people (Nations) from either Celtic or Franco-German origin-they all need interpreting services, in spite of their same blood line as far as their ethnicity is concerned.
    (Continiued)

  7. Branko Says:

    Will finish this comments tomorrow, it’s getting late overhere.

  8. zhivko Says:

    Najprvo, bidejkji za prv pat se javuvam ovde, pozdrav do site Makedonci/Makedonki.

    Od “sindzhirov” na poraki gledam deka seushte mnogu od Makedoncite “dokazhuvate” deka vie ste istovremeno i “Slavjani” i Makedonci, a so toa samo im ste silno orudie na grchkata propaganda za Makedonija.

    “Pismoto” na Aleksandar vo knigata na Orbini e FIKTIVNO pismo, slichno kako i “Testamentot na Aleksandar” objaven vo knigata na Waldemar Heckel. Do sega, spored dosegashnite javni soznanija, NEMA dokument od vremeto na Aleksandar III Makedonski, ili, ako takvi postojat, togash se chuvaat vo tajnost i se nepoznati za javnosta/naukata.

    Ako dobro ste go razbrale “pismoto” na Orbini, togash kje videvte deka vo toa pismo pishuva deka Aleksandar bil car na Makedoncite, NO!!!, bil osnovach na GRCHKA IMPERIJA (kako shto vo tie vreminja mnogu od “uchenite” kako Orbini ja razbirale istorijata, shto NE e sluchaj so deneshnive istorichari, koi Aleksandrovata imperija ja poznavaat kako Makedonska spored FAKTITE, odnosno PROUCHENITE MATERIJALI), shto podrazbira deka toj i Makedoncite demek bile Grci, shto e planeti daleku od vistinata (dokazite).

    “Slavjanskite” jazici, ne se nishto drugo, osvem MAKEDONSKI, po koren, spored dosegashnite dokazi.

    Mnogu povazhno za Makedoncite da ja prouchat sopstvenata istorija e da prouchuvaat od drevnite pisateli kako Arrian, Polybius, Plutarch i tn i denesnite istorichari za toj period, kako shto se Borza, Badian, Heckel i tn, otkolku da si gi sechat istoriskite koreni so promocija na fantomskite “Slavjani” (bez nikakvi nauchni dokazi za nivniot pochetok i jazik) i podocnezhnite slavjanisti kako Orbini.

  9. Branko Says:

    Se slagam so tebe Zivko, delumno; ne se raboti za promoviranje ili negiranje na “Slavjanstvoto” vis-a-vis Makedonstvoto. Kako sto i samiot se slozuvas deka osnovata na slavjanskite jazici e makedonskiot jazik, togas po site znajni naucni zakonitosti mora da postoela silna rodovska vrska pomedju drevnite Makedonci i “Slavjanite”, t.e. Venetite, i ova duri go tvrdat denes i samite Slovenci, a i Rusite se otvoraat na moznosta deka se ili Makedonsko pleme ili pak se vo srodstvo so Makedoncite preku Venetite, a za koi se smeta deka, ako tocno go razbrav slovenecot na emisijata na Milenko, deka se srodni ili isti so Pelazgite i Brigijcite kako etno-geneza na Makedoncite; kako i da e ponatamosnite istrazuvanja ce utvrdat. Edno e sigurno, a toa e deka imalo cvrsta rodovska povrzanost.

    Vo kolku prevodot na Orbini, t.e Dekretot na Aleksandar e tochen, shto veruvam deka e, tamo tochno stoi deka e i osnovach na “Grckata Imperija”, no pred zborot “osnovac” stoi “appointed as…”, vo prevod “naznachen za osnovach na…”; sto najverojatno poteknuva od togashnite religiozni pogledi i mnogubostvoto, odnosno kako “nason javeno”. Imeno fact e deka togasnite Grcki drzavi vojuvale so Persijcite daleku pred doadjanjeto na Filip i Aleksandar na vlast i odredeni mitovi se formirale ushte togash.

    Spekulativno, bi bilo kako sega ajde da zememe na Putin deka mu “se sonilo” ili Sv. Ilija i Nikola mu velaat odi i spasi ja Makedonija, effektot na paganizmot i silata na togasnoto veruvanje vo bog(ovi) bilo mnogukratno pogolemo odkolku denesnata sila na religioznite veruvanja. Ova uste povece sto ako Helenizmot bil pagansko dvizenje, t.e. religija, a ne nacionalnost, kako sto tvrdat Grcite, togas toa znaci deka postoela religiozna povrzanost so niv vo toa vreme, kako i denes preku pravoslavieto. Sto ce bide ce vidime, no bitno e sto nasite dejci ne se site zaspani i seto ce izleze na povrsina.

    Pozdrav

  10. Branko Says:

    Spored moe cvrsto mislenje, so toa sto samiot toj vo Povelbata istaknuva deka e “naznachen kako kreator na Grchkata Imperija”….samo po sebe svedochi deka negovata, a i drzavno-Makedonskata uloga vo formiranjeto na “Helenistichkata Liga” ne e rezultat na nitu negova slobodna volja, a nitu rezultat na drzavno-Makedonskata officijalna politika, tuku kako nekakvo moranje ili nametnuvanje. Od 1991 pa navaka, se gleda deka modernata Makedonska politika izobiluva so prifacanje na nametnati resenija.

  11. Branko Says:

    Inaku, nikoj od drevnite istoricari, a i od ponovite, ne pisuvaat nisto za drevno-Makedonskite odnosi so togasniot “sever”, se se vrti okolu Grcija i Persija, sto znaci Makedonskiot jug i dalecniot jugo-istok. Vo kolku Povelbata e vistinita, sto veruvam deka e, pri bidejci e otkrien nesto povece od 3 veka pred Orbini da ja napise “Kralstvoto na Slovenite”, toa iznesuva na povrsina skoro frapanten fakt deka Makedoncite imale ogromno poznavanje na zemjopisot-geografijata, taka da od denesen aspekt avtomatski se nametnuva prashanjeto od kade takvite skoro sovrsheni soznania vo toa vreme?

  12. zhivko Says:

    Se’ dodeka se bavime so “slavjanstvoto” kje bidime samo vo situacija na “odbrana” okolu makedonskiot identitet, bez razlika kakvi “dokazi” se upotrebuvaat.

    A bre, zoshto nie da dokazhuvame koi sme i shto sme i vechno da se stavame vo pozicija na “odbrana”, i da im go otstapuvame prostorot za napad na nashite dushmani, koga mnogu lesno (so nebrojni, kristalno chisti dokazi) mozhime da bidime postojano vo “napad” za nivnoto poteklo i za nivnite lagi za vrskite so Makedonija/Makedoncite. Neka, za primer, kako najprvo, deneshnive “Grci” objasnat zoshto Filip 5-ti Makedonski gi smeta za negrchki nekolku narodi od teritorijata na “klasichna”, stara Grcija. A ova e napishano od niven istorichar od toa vreme, Ahaecot Polibius, a istoto e (pokasno) “potvrdeno” (prepishano) vo kniga na Rimjanecot Livius. Vakvi slichni primeri so koi mozhime da gi tolchime nashite negatori-komshii se nebrojni i se chudam zoshto postojano se stavame vo pozicija na “odbrana”.

    Za grchkite lagi okolu nivnite rodbinski so drevnite Makedonci, dovolno e da gi tolchime samo so citatot na renomiraniot istorichar Waldemar Heckel koj vo 2004, vo negovata kniga “Alexander the Great – Historical texts in translation” (Aleksandar Golemiot – Istoriski tekstovi vo prevod”, na stranica 7 go dava “zakluchokot” za Makedoncite i Grcite. A toj glasi: “Jasno e od postoechkite Aleksandrovi istorichari deka izgubenite izvori napravile jasna razlika pomegju Grcite i Makedoncite – etnichki, kulturno i jazichno – i ova mora da bidi tochna reflekcija na deneshnite viduvanja.” (za onie koi sakaat da go vidat originalnit tekst, eve ja veb sajt adresata: – http://books.google.com.au/books?hl=en&id=3mGLvw94GAMC&dq=waldemar+Heckel&printsec=frontcover&source=web&ots=qOArg2dOZ5&sig=eFGQfUvdVUg2cBkKYaOQQ7e9yjo#PPA7,M1)

    Ushte ednash kje naglasam, NAJVAZHNO e Makedoncite so nebrojnite dokazi da DOKAZHUVAAT za NEPOSTOECHKITE vrski na nashite negatori-komshii so Makedoncite, bilo toa od drevnite vreminja ili od poskoro, a so toa nashite dushmani kje se stavat vo pozicija na NODBRANLIVA “odbrana”, odnosno mat pozicija, namesto segashnava sprotivna situacija. No za zhal mnogu mal e brojot na Makedoncite koi shto podlaboko ja prouchile makedonskata istorija, osobeno drevnata.

    Se prashuvam i za kolkumina gi imaat prochitano knigite na Dimitris Litoksu za grchkata antimakedonska borba (voglavno preku nivnite Andarti) od vtorata polovina na 19-ot i pochetokot na 20-ot vek, odnosno za grchkoto nasilno pogrchuvanje na makedonskoto naselenie vo toa vreme, i knigata na Gjorgji Radule, naslovena “Petnaesette lagi na bugarizmot”. Ovie dve knigi i’ ako malechki, so nivnite sodrzhini imaat ogromna tezhina koga stanuva zbor za lagite na nashite komshii-predatori i treba da se prevedat barem na angliski i da se rasprostranat na Internetov.

    Tolku za sega od mene.

    Pozdrav do site nashi,
    Zhivko

  13. makedonika Says:

    @Branko

    You have posted some very interesting information, please continue your above postings on the Orbini connection.

  14. Goran Says:

    Koga edna drzava osvojuva druga, ne go menuva imeto vo ime na porobenata drzava. Koga Aleksandar Makedonski gi porobil juznive sosedi vo bitkata kaj Kajronea, tie prifatile da se borat na stranata na Aleksandar, protiv Persijcite. Aleksandar sakal da go osvoi togasniot poznat svet, a juznjacive bile prvata pomala precka za nego. Nikade ne pisuva deka tie se osvojuvaci na svetot tuku MAKEDONIJA. Znaci ako juznive sosedi bile porobeni od MAKEDONCITE vo nikoj slucaj nemoze nie da go nosime nivnoto ime, demek Filip gi obedinil site grci(no nikogas toj ne se narekol grk). Svetot pocnuva od Makedonija!!!
    Pozdrav do site MAKEDONCI kade i da se.

  15. ammos Says:

    branko, yes it is clear. there is a slav historian who claims that slavs are macedonians in a book he wrote back in 1600.

    and there are thousends other of any origin, who disagree.

    all the biographys of alexander published by well known univeristys, harvant , oxford librarys make clear tha alexandros was greek. and part og greek history.

    what about the wikipedia text i copypaste previusly?

    you can chose to avoid all the others, and keep for guide for your knoledge orbini or sites like macedonia org.

    the rest of the world, will not

  16. John Says:

    @makedonika:
    Please enlighten us. What are the historical sources that Mr. Orbini used to write his book?

  17. Branko Says:

    No offense intended, but appears to me that in short, Greeks onhere, and other websites..are telling this: “Well, we asked our “greek” gods to make some woodo to Macedonia and Macedonians, after the Alexander died; so the ground cracked open and they all dissapeared. Few centuries afterwards we (“Greeks”) do the same “woodo” and make “slavs” jump off he “moon” and settle Macedonia on an “freehold land”. The third “woodo”: “Greek” goods needed German quazi historian to give “historical substance” to “slav settlement of Macedonia” so that Bavarians can enlive their uthopia of the time of “antiquity romantizam”. Fourth “woodo” (of the “Greek” gods): in 1830 Bavarians (Germans), GB and France “revamped” “mitological Greece” into a “green table statehood” and in lack of any knoeledge of ancient Greek mithology and symbolicism just copy-paste Bavarian flag onto the flag of the newly formed State (just in stripes) and “inscribe” on it a Christian Cross-religious symbol. ”

    One thing is for certain-as a result of those inexistent or overspelled myths, an crazy German, which entire humanity knows him as Hitler, builds then Germany trying to replicate the might of “Greek Empire” under fals believe of Alexander’s “Greekness” and in search of the “key of the rulers”, result: we all know it. Tragically, but trully, it is beyond any doubt that his ideas survived to this day in the modern age Greece, as a “child” of one of it’s forefathers.

  18. Branko Says:

    @amos

    One more comment, by any sense of logics, one’s biography can only be deemed correct if it’s written by one’s contemporary, even then?…save to say “biographers” of few centuries post-factum.

  19. Branko Says:

    And do you Greek guys reckon that Orbini, or other writers which works does not seem to appeal to Greeks are works of “Pseudo-Macedonian scientist”, probably Tito, Commintern and Russians directed them to write that, or maybe Gligorov? For once, people…(Greeks) get to your senses….Macedonian offer for bilateral commission, inclusive of historical disputes, is still available to you, why your Government is refusing it? because the same will undoubtedly reveal for the fact to the World, that it is Greece that has falsified Macedonian history, and not vice-verca.

  20. Branko Says:

    @ammos and other Greek “friends”

    Wanna further proof? read the following:

    ” 7.3.2 The Slavic enormous expansion
    The only evidence for a great migration of Slavs in historical times that traditional scholars can possibly claim lies in a literal reading of the mentions of medieval historians, such as the Thracian Priscus of Panion (5th century), the Greek Procopius of Cesarea (6th century) and the Goth Jordanes (6th century), or those of the Church (e.g. Conte 1990, 33-34). But it is quite evident that such mentions do not point
    unambiguously to an ‘invasion’ or ‘migration’ of Slavs, but can just as simply be taken as to refer to pre-existing Slavs, the presence of which even traditional scholars now admit.

    When, for example, John of Ephesos, bishop of Constantinopolis under Justinian (527-65) mentions the innumerable raids into the Bizantine territori by “the damned people of the Slavs” he damns them because they were still pagan, and not because they are ‘arriving’! And when, in his De rebus Gethicis Jordanes describes the location of the Venedi, and writes that they inhabited the area “From the source of the Visla river and on incommensurable expanses”, he does not give the slightest indication of a recent arrival of theirs, but simply describes a statu quo. And I challenge Slavic specialists to find any indication of a recent arrival of the Slavs in their area in other medieval sources.

    Not only, but when earlier historians, living in the centuries preceding the supposed arrival of the Slavs, write that the population of the Carpatian Basin offered a drink called medos (Proto-Slavic medŭ ‘drink produced with honey”) the Byzantine ambassadors directed to the court of Attila (king of the Huns), and that a part of the funeral rituals for Attila’s death was called strava (medieval name of a Slavic funeral ritual), only a biased reader can find evidence in this for the “first infiltrations” of Slavs in the Carpatian area, especially as they seem to have left not trace of their coming! (Neustupný-Neustupný 1963, 196).

    The much simpler truth is that the Slavs were there from remote times. For, again, the first mention of peoples in writing depends on the birthday of writing, and not on the birthday of peoples! In short, if such an enormous expansion of the Slavs both to the South and to the North from their alleged homeland in Middle-Eastern Europe had really taken place, the most important evidence we should expect to find would be archaeological. Which is entirely missing. Just as we miss any discussion of this point in Mallory’s book –and certainly not by accident, given the fact that Mallory is an archaeologist. I fail to see, then, how an archaeologist can advance the hypothesis of a massive expansion that involves half of Europe, and is capable of entirely changing its linguistic identity, without the slightest archaeological evidence: unless it is a curious case of
    underestimation of one’s own science.

    Another fundamental objection to this thesis lies in the fact that, following the traditional scenario, we would have to assume that this ‘great migration’ involved also the Southern Slavic area: an absolute impossibility, as we have just seen. If there has been a ‘migration’, it must have proceded from South northwards.

    A third, fundamental objection to this thesis is the contradiction between the idea of a medieval migration and the total disappearance of the presumed pre-existing
    languages. Not even modern mass migration and colonization, despite the enormous technological and cultural difference between the migrants and the indigenous people, have caused the total extinction of all autocthonous languages in the New World. The ideal of the extinction of all alleged pre-Indo-European languages because of a Copper Age IE migration is already hard enough to admit, given the same reason, plus the fact
    that research on pre-Indo-European has never produced any serious result (Alinei 1996, 2000). How can we accept such an idea for the Early Middle Ages, and for the highly
    civilized areas of Southern Eastern prehistoric Europe?

    What and where would the pre-Indo-European substrate be in Bulgaria, Macedonia, Serbia, Croatia, Bosnia and Slovenia? Unless we associate this late migration to a gigantic genocide – a phantascientific hypothesis – this hypothesis does not belong to serious scientific thinking.”…………

  21. Branko Says:

    7.3.3 The homogeneity of the Slavic languages

    Unquestionably, the homogeneity of the Slavic languages, which contrasts so strikinglywith the internal differentiation of Germanic, Romance and Celtic, for example, canonly be explained in two ways: by positing: (A) a very high degree of cultural and social stability for a very long period, or (B); a most rapid expansion of the Slavs, the tempo of which would have prevented the original Slavic language (Proto-Slavic) fromchanging in the new areas. Something like what happened, for instance, to the English language of the Pilgrims when they migrated to America, for its rapid expansion into the new continent produced much fewer dialectal differences – despite its enormous area – than, say, British English shows in the island of England.

    The traditional theory was indeed coherent with this approach, when it assumed the ‘arrival’ of the Slavs in historical times, following their ‘great migration’. This
    scenario did indeed involve a sort of blitz-invasion of most Eastern Europe, which in turn would explain the homogeneity of the Slavic languages as they are now. But in the modified scenario now current for Slavic specialists, envisaging a chronological gap of two millennia from the first ‘arrival’ in the Bronze age, and the later ‘migration’ of
    historical times, how can this argument still hold? Rather than beeing stable, the two millennia of the Bronze, Iron Age and the beginning of our era form – on the contrary –
    one of the most turbulent periods of European prehistory, protohistory and history:
    Celts, Greeks, Romans, Illyrians and other people (including Slavs themselves, if weaccept this theory!), were constantly on the war path, occupying other people’s territories, and greatly influencing their languages and cultures, as the numerous Celtic, Greek and Latin loanwords in the Slavic languages abundantly witness………”

  22. Branko Says:

    7.3.4 The demographic explosion of the Slavs, preceding their great “migration”

    Neither version of the traditional theory can provide a satisfactory answer to the twofoldquestion underlying the hypothesis of the great Slavic migration in the Early Middle
    Ages: What prehistorical or historical circumstances would have brought the Slavic people first to their demographic explosion and then to their great migration, both of which made them into the dominating population of Eastern Europe, from North to South, and the most numerous group in Europe? Neither archaeology nor history gives us the slightest piece of evidence for such events which, as we have already noticed, would have caused nothing less than the almost total disappearance of the previous populations and of their languages. Notice that we followed the traditional theory we would have to assume not only that the Proto-IE people would “arrive” with the kurgan culture from the Ukrainian steppes, in the Copper Age, while the Slavs would “arrive” in Central Eastern Europe in the Bronze Age; but also, and especially, that after their
    arrival they would multiply like ants, and would then occupy almost the whole of Eastern Europe, from the arctic area and the tundra to the shores of the Black Sea.

    Can such a preposterous thesis be in all seriousness advanced, in the 21st century, with the progress made in so many scientific fields such as archaeology, anthropology, general linguistics, and without a single piece of evidence?

    If we then also recall that the core area of the Slavs was the South and not the North – as the geolinguistic picture
    irrefutably indicates – what remains of this construction?

  23. Branko Says:

    @makedonika

    Dovolno li im e, ili uste da gi “ucam”…?? :-)

  24. makedonika Says:

    @Branko
    Uchi gi duri ti e maka…. ;)

    Mnogu odlichno pishuvash Branko, tekstovite tvoji mnogu mi bendisa…… super se!

  25. Branko Says:

    Final extract for today. Oh..before I “copy-paste” (as my Greek “friends” often please to say), dont even ask: I’ll provide you with the reference source shortly, and don’t ask me, as of Macedonian, to clarify fact’s that someone else had established, in modern law it’s called “hear-say”-refer to source’s authors if you wanna dispute ‘em? ask your Government to do it for you? If they can of course? So here it goes:

    “……The Slavic postglacial area would then form a kind of triangle, the Southern corner of which would correspond to Macedonia, the western frontier of which would pass along the Italid Dalmatia, and delimit the rest of ex-Yugoslavia, Hungary, ex-Czechoslovakia, and Southern Poland, and the Eastern frontier of which would delimit Bulgaria, Romania, Western Ukraine, Belorussia and parts of Middle Russia.

    Northern neighbors of the Slavs would be Balts and Uralic people, South-Western neighbors the Italids of Dalmatia, of the Eastern Alps and of a Po Valley much larger than now, emerging from Northern Adriatic. North-Western neighbors would be Germans, while on the Eastern side their neighbors would be Altaic and, muc later Iranian elites..”

  26. Branko Says:

    If anyone (on the Greek’s side) needs more “intelligent” explanation,?; an friendly advise (no offense intendent): GO AND SEE PSYCHIATRIST !!

  27. Branko Says:

    @ ammos

    Well, my friend, therefore Orbini, more than 4 centuries a go, knew exactly what was happening, and Macedonian invation on Persia was in effect “Pan-Slavic” campaign led and commanded by Macedonians under Alexander leadership (as what more than obviously must have been the most developed civilization in Europe and leading super-power). This from military doctrinal and strategic point of view is the only proof of successes in battles against Darius, in particular, this explains his mirraculous (Alexander’s) victory at Gaugamela, because, in spite of Alexander’s great military skills, and Macedonian’s bravery, it is humainly impossible that 45000 men, out of which some 15000 Greeks shit up their asses and deflected, can defeat an army of 600.000-1.000.000 people with only 100-1000 casualties. From this follows that Macedonians and the Slavs had a huge army which either equaled in numbers, or surpassed by far, that of Persians.

    For your further info, the ex-Wrsaw pacts Generals (joint command) after analyzing battle at Guagamela, and entire Persian campaign, and other military scholars, inclusive those of ex-Yugoslavia, came to a conclusion that, even on a supposition and reflective of a lates 70-s-80′s of last century, both Warsaw and Nato pact would join all of their forces, could not conquer almost 4000.000 square killometres of land mass in a time span the Macedonians did under Alexander.

    So, unless Alexander was trully some God in terms of his physicall powers able to bless everybody arround and pass on those powers to his 45000 men (which in all reason amounts to a fair-tale story), fact is that Greeks and Romans, and in particular Greek “historians”, and therefore you as a Greek people, is guilty of ever worst crime against humanity-falsification of history in terms of scientific facts, irrespective of Alexander’s ethnicity (as of an reasonable and unbiasedobserver point of view), and you ought to pay heavy price for your crimes.

  28. Branko Says:

    @ammos

    That above is true, or more likely than not-true, is the fact that an military bright mind as Alexander was, could not be expected to be silly and dumb to move on to conquer Persia and others, on that huge land mass, with 45000 people, even an ordinary corpolar wouldn;t hold that “strategy”.

  29. Branko Says:

    @makedonika

    abe, covek zid so glava ce turne, odkolku ovie Danjcive nesto drugo da “otvorat oko”, beter se od Gebels, nekogas se mislam da ne se Germancite i bas nekoe pleme na ovie stvarno,,,?.. :-)

  30. John Says:

    Branko,

    What is your educational level? Your comments do Not “speak” very highly of you. This is a very simple issue: If Alexander made this charter (and references to Slavs), then why No historian (see list on previous comment of mine), makes any reference to it? Why do you expect anyone to take you seriously when you utter nonsense?

  31. Piters Says:

    So vasa dozvola, ako mi dozvolite, jas bi gi koristel ovie Fantasticni naodi i na drugi forumi??

    Nemam, komentar!

  32. Piters Says:

    Ili uste podobro, ima edna zolcna raspravija na BBC sitot, Jas bi ve pokanil na diskusija:

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereporters/markmardell/2008/04/fc8650feba4c70d891220943099e8a4af72be65c.html?page=3#comments

  33. Piters Says:

    ne sum siguren da li predhodniot post otide ili ne, vo sekoj sluccaj uste ednas Bi ve pokanil na forumot na: http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereporters/markmardell/2008/04/fc8650feba4c70d891220943099e8a4af72be65c.html?page=3#comments nad 1250 posta za nepolna nekolku dena

  34. makedonika Says:

    @Piters

    Imash dozvola, samo kazhi mi na koi forumi che gi stavish.

  35. Branko Says:

    @John

    Thank you for your comment. I’ll partially answer your question. What is my education level: TERTIARY (I’ll leave the enigma of my major to you, as it seems to me you greeks are “know all” phenomenon), another hint: part of that education reflects to defense (military) studies.

    Further to your curiosity, and in lane of one of my earlier posts-don’t ask me to clarify to you (or anyone else) the findings of another experts, or “experts”, answer to your question can only lie with those sources (historians) you’ve mentioned, and it’s appropriate you direct your querries to them (if they’re still living of course).

    My knowledge of Orbini’s “Kingdom of the Slavs” is that it was CLASSIFIED source (book), and that the full text was unraveled in either late 80′s or mid 90′s. It is known that only one part of the book (the one pertinent to Serbia only) existed in archives in Belgrade during the times of ex-Yugoslavia, more likely since the times of Yugoslavian Kingdom. I have info (from reliable sources) that more of those CLASSIFIED (yet) books will see the light of the day in a very foreseable time with more stunning revalations which definitelly goes to confirm historical correctness of Orbini’s works.

  36. Branko Says:

    @makedonika

    Нашиот, дали има можност да се постираат слики на форумов? Имам една интересна која дефинитивно го потврдува Монголското потекло на Бугарите. Исто така имам референци од делата на Донски каде тој цитира Бугарски извори во кои самите тие тврдат дека се од Турско-Татарско потекло. Незнам дали би било „политички коректно“ да ги „чепнеме“ нив малце, некако не ги „гледам“ на твојов форум?

    Поздрав.

  37. Branko Says:

    @ammos

    Your above conclusion that Orbini is Croatian is entirely wrong. He is Italian by blood line, born in Dubrovnik, who was not part of Croatia (which statehood was inexistent at that time), but an independent city-state, a like ancient Hellenic city-states, which population was over 75% of Italian descent and hardly other20-25% of others (probably most of “slavic” descent). It is known that Dubrovnik was for long time influenced by Venezzia.

  38. makedonika Says:

    @Branko

    Sliki ne mozhe da se postiraa kako sliki ama mozhesh da gi postirash kako linkovi, postiraj gi linkovite za slikite i che otvoram novi topiks za niv.

    Branko samo daj mi referensite za slikite od koja kniga se i.t.n.

    Se e vo red Branko, postiraj sho sakash, samo chukaj gi dushmanite!

  39. Branko Says:

    @makedonika

    Испрати ми ја твојата е-маил адреса, ќе ти ги пуштам на е-маил линковите.

  40. John Says:

    @Branko

    I wish you well. Please try to get some help. All these “Classified” documents you have been reading, have seriously affected your thinking (adversely).

  41. Branko Says:

    @John,

    Likewise, just keep hoping.

  42. Branko Says:

    @makedonika

    Јордане, имам карта на Македонија која е употребена во парчењето при на Букурешкиот договор. На истата јасно стои “ancient boarders”, иако несум експерт по меѓународно право, но сметам дека од тоа може да се изведе дека тогашните Европски сили, ad-hock и de-jure ја признаваат Македонската држава, т.е. границите, и покрај фактот што Македонија немала тогаш самостоен формален државен апаратус меѓутоа, според мене, признает е формално-правниот државен континент. Според оваа мапа, излегуваме се до Црно Море преку јужна Тракија. Дали да ти ја пратам?

  43. makedonika Says:

    @Branko

    Prati mi ja! :)

  44. Branko Says:

    @makedonika

    Поздрав војводо, се заќутеа некако грчињава?ч не им се бендиса муабетот? -) -)

    Поздрав.

  45. Evan Says:

    Damn!! the blog is so old already :( I had a question:
    WHAT ARE YOU GUYS ON?? IS THERE SOME LEFT FOR US?? LOL

    • Solun Says:

      You are so stoned and stupid that you don’t even know that you are stoned and stupid.
      No wonder the fake modern greece is ranked as having the lowest IQ in Europe. They spent all their time trying to convince themselves (and others) of their continuity with the ancients. LOL!!!


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

%d bloggers like this: