This map if not much different. There is name “Bavaria” which comes from the “Bajuwarowie/Bojowarowie” tribe
which means “warriors who create strongholds”. Letter “J” from Bojuwarowie we hear still in german name for
Bavaria which is Bayern. Name Bavaria is latin.
On the map we have also Bohemia. Its one of the latin names for Slavonics. It came from the word “Boh” (god).
It means “the land of gods”. We may compare it to name “Lech” or “Got” (Goths were living in Poland in that time).
There are also names “Pan” (Master/Lord) or “Pol”/”Polak” but Ill focus on that another time. Later this name was
changed to Czechs ,thats why on universities you have no Czech but Bohemian specialisation.
Another map showing that there was no Germany between France and Poland.
Intersting thing: Baskonia is described as Vasconia. Its important because “B” and “W” are exchangeble between languages.
And Bulgaria lies over the…Azovian Sea. Another Bulgaria in in Romania. I’m not able to say now if those are
same Bulgaries or only name similarities. There is no western Rome and eastern Rome is still an empire.
Why I dont go further? Because VI century is very important century in our history. Its when we counquered whole Europe,
and thats a subject worthy of separate article.
What was if nothing was?
Smarter people will notice that that there is a lot of countries and tribes in whole Europe except for its
Slavonic region. Slavs have their names and colour practically only next to the bourders of (former) Rome.
Our wise “historians” say that:
“There was no Poland. There was wilderness ,forests ,polar bears ,well maybe next to the Roman Empire borderlands
there was some civilisation”.
Or maybe not? All those maps were created based on the Roman ,Frankish ,English or German chronicles.
Why should they write about some tribes from Siberia if nobody ever seen them? If we would follow this kind of
thinking ,we should take for granted that whole world was depopulated and empty. Everyone was wroting about himself
and about closest neighbours which he knew and he had relations with.
But lets think about it ,why those maps were created without analigical Slavonic chronicles ,we know that there
were Arabs and Chineese but we dont know that there were Slavs? On those maps we also have Arabs only next to the sea
or to the boarderlands. Chineese also have had their chronicles. Our were all destroyed and burned not long after the
christianisation. Why? Because they consisted “devil signs”. Slavs before christianisation were not writing
in latin but normal Slavonic Runes called “Bukwy”.
All that we know about pre-christian history of Poland are rewrited chronicles ,history is also passed orally
,and what for us may be a shock for our ancestors it was obvious.
Massive erasing of Polish history happened mostly during occupations. Until then ,every Pole knew that he is a
Lechite ,Sarmatian ,descendant of Gods or “Pan” (lord) (today we call eachother “Pan/Pani” and group of Poles
we call “państwo” (GG adnotation: “lordship”. We use that name for members of the familly or for whole nation).
All remaining Polish chronicles support that ,and not only Polish ,because western also.
So where did this school version came from? Procedure is very simple. We take Polish chronicle and read:
“Bolesław made king in Gniezno”. We check German chronicle: “Bolesław made king in Gniezno”. Everything fine ,
we put this into the book. Again we take Polish chronicle and read: “Alexander Macedonian conquered Cracovia”.
We check German chronicle and nothing there. But how could there be anything if there was no Germany in 900 and
Alexander attacked Kraków 1400 years earlier? But “historians” have no problem with it. (…) But there are
two other chronicles that say thesame! (…) We erase.
In case if those maps wouldnt work (site in maintenance mode) here’s link to the original article with maps uploaded: