#429243

Anonymous

This is nothing new, over the last century especially, and incredibly even now, pseudo-historians, revisionists, or just plain kooks still go around inventing all kinds of fiction histories, usually because of personal/nationalistic agendas, visions of grandeur and having nothing to do with real events or history. This Serb guy Jovan I. Deretić is a perfect example of what I’m talking about. (Google his name at http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Main_Page for a laugh) Bizarre and ludicrous fiction based on…nothing really, just personal made up drivel by obsessed fiction writers. Absolutely detached from reality and linear history. Sadly, guys like this even have followers. They do nothing but just make fools of themselves. (Any name, place, topography beginning with the letter or having the letter “s” in it is related to ancient serbs? pfff, as if. lol, jesus was a serb? etc)

Anyway, after reading a bit more, I definitely think the Book of Veles is mostly fabricated. Like I said, some portions were borrowed from known early sources, the early European history in central and eastern Europe, but as for the rest everything we know and DNA evidence proves the exact opposite. During communist times especially plenty of fabricated histories and warped ideas started popping up. If there’s one thing I know it’s that anything that was written by any “scholars” from communist ruled countries should be very suspect and thoroughly examined. That’s because many times the historians had to follow official party views or things would happen, all kinds of political agendas and invented ideas from that era.

Even Kievan Rus’ history has been tampered with for political reasons, it isn’t really the Russian Primarily Chronicle as some publishers publish, but rather Tale of Bygone Years by Nestor the Chronicler, it is not a “Russian history” or history of Russians, but rather of Kievan Rus’. Ukrainian descendants of the Rurikid dynasty are considered its only true heritage and them as the successors, The Russian view, “resting largely on religious-ecclesiastical and historical-ideological claims and on political-juridical theories was formulated in Moscow between the 1330’s and the late 1850’s, and views the Principality of Moscow as the sole heir to the Kievan Rus’ civilization. But one has to remember that Kievan Rus’ and it’s early leaders were not Russians, nor even Slavic. The Grand Duchy of Moscow created in the 14th century (moved from Kiev) and early Czars could not possibly represent and usurp the whole legacy of the Rurik dynasty and Kievan Rus’ history because they are just one branch of the dynasty. This is the Ukrainian view, that their heritage lies with the original Kievan Rus’ Rurik dynasty line and not the later Muscovy cadet branch. The Belarusians also have rights to their own history and claims, because they were various East Slavic tribes that were only conquered by Ivan the Great in the 11th century, so they are not Russians either. (However the Serb historian mentioned near the beginning would beg to differ and insist that they are all serbs, even the Varangians)

These are all reasons why everything read or “discovered” has to be thoroughly examined, studied and not just taken at face value.

(To find out more about how all Slavs, Russians, Swedes, ancient Romans, Greeks, Moses, Jesus, Virgin Mary, Dracula, Adam and Eve etc are really Serbs… http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Jovan_I._Deretić)

Slavorum

8 User(s) Online Join Server
  • ca$hbunni
  • Fia
  • slovborg
  • Tujev
  • kony97
  • Lucifer Morningstar