Freising Manuscripts - 9th Century Slavonic

[slovenec zrinski]

Its from a book about folk-tales (ljudsko izrochilo) written in the beginning of the 20īt century..this book is a re-issue

[Soldier of Macedon]

Thanks Zrinski, is that in the Prekmurje dialect? How do you think it looks against the Freising Manuscript, how close do they appear to be?

[slovenec zrinski]

Tis is the prekmurje dialect as it was written in the beginning of the 20īs century. The dialect isnīt written in that manner anymore. These texts are "more following the real sounds" (canīt remember the english term right now) than the written prekmurian is today.

The problem is that I do not know slovenian well enough to make comparisons. This is a moment where I do wish "the slovak" was still present on this forum

[Soldier of Macedon]

The problem is that I do not know slovenian well enough to make comparisons. This is a moment where I do wish "the slovak" was still present on this forum

Well, he is now back, so I am sure he can help us with some questions relating to this thread.

[Delodephius]

I made and uploaded this. Enjoy! :-)

YouTube - Freising Manuscript 1

[Delodephius]

I should elaborate on the term Old Pannonian. In the 9th century, during the time of Great Moravia, what is today Hungary and Austria was inhabited by Slavic speaking tribes. There was no language border between West and South Slavic languages. Slovenian as a language did not yet exist back then, but a closely related group of dialects spanned over the territory of what is today Slovenia, northern Croatia, eastern Austria and western Hungary. Because most of this territory is in Pannonia it is therefore referred to as Old Pannonian. It was very close related to Old Moravian and both dialects show the same influence from Italian, Latin and German, unlike Old Macedonian which was more influenced by Greek.

Slovenian and Kajkavian and their dialects are the only descending languages from the Old Pannonian.

[Bill77]

unlike Old Macedonian which was more influenced by Greek.b

A) What do you mean by "Old" Macedonian? Are you talking about "ancient" or a period much later.

B) Could it be the other way around, where Greek was influenced by "old Macedonian" just like the modern Greek is influenced by Turkish.

C) Would you have some example words where Old Macedonian was influenced by Greek

[Delodephius]

When I say Old Macedonian, I mean the Macedonian version of Old Church Slavonic, so the 9-11th century AD. OCS had several variants, namely Moravian, Pannonian, Macedonian, Bulgarian and Illyrian (Serbo-Croatian).

Greek influence in Old Macedonian can be seen in the large number of borrowings from Greek, mostly vernacular Greek from Macedonia. I'll compose a list later. These words were common among the educated Slavonic speakers in Solun.

[Onur]

I should elaborate on the term Old Pannonian. In the 9th century, during the time of Great Moravia, what is today Hungary and Austria was inhabited by Slavic speaking tribes.

Because most of this territory is in Pannonia it is therefore referred to as Old Pannonian. It was very close related to Old Moravian and both dialects show the same influence from Italian, Latin and German

In pre-Hungarian Panonia, Slavs was not the only one who inhabited there. Old Panonia has been ruled by Turkic Avars since early 6th century to late 9th century, around 300 years. Various Turkic and Slavic tribes constituted the people of Avaric state in there and these people were the remains, leftovers of the Huns as it was testified by the writings of that era. Avar state has been destroyed by the devout servant of Pope, Charlemagne of Franks.

And afterwards, Latins baptized most of these Slavic and Turkic people of Avar state and Franks created their new vassal state in old Panonia called it as Moravia. Generations of Moravian leaders has been raised in Frankish/Latin court. Thats the answer of why old Moravian dialects shows influence of Latin and Frankish (Germanic+Latin) languages.


You can read from here;




"Hungarians and Europe in the early Middle Ages: an introduction to early Hungarian history" by
András Róna-Tas



The only people who have been thought as the reminders of Turkic and/or Slavic Avars are the today`s Hungarian speaking Szekely people of Romania. It`s believed that Szekely people was speaking Turkic before they have been Magyarized. Also, in Hungary, their runic alphabet is known as "Szekely runes" because probably Szekely people teach it to the rest of Magyars. And today, Szekely of Romania regard themselves as the descendants of Avars and Huns.

No one can prove this but i also believe that genetically Balkanic but linguistically Latinic, today`s Romanians are the result of these late Avaric and Moravian period. I believe the Latin like speaking Wallachians and Vlachs were formerly Avaric and/or Moravian people and they have been assimilated linguistically by the Franks/Latins, soon after their religious conversion. This is my theory tough but this shouldn't be impossible either.

[Delodephius]

You obviously have a dislike for western Europeans and Catholicism. I wouldn't say you are being objective. You also use the term Latins and Latinic and Frankish to refer to western Europeans, which is not part of the standard vocabulary of the Indo-European institutions. It only points to your eastern bias and as such it cannot be taken seriously. Furthermore you demonstrated earlier you do not have appropriate knowledge of ancient Indo-European languages. I wouldn't consider anything you say as truthful even if I wasn't familiar with the subject at hand.

[Onur]

What i wrote above was about 5th century AD and there was no such a thing as French, British, Dutch, Slovak at that time. There was Latins, Franks, Saxons, Goths etc. but you probably have no idea about that since you accuse me with being "anti-western European, anti-catholic" just because i use the terminology of 5th century.

Also, most of the things i wrote above are facts (except my own theory about Wallachians). I also presented quotes from books but probably you didn't like what you read, so you object without presenting a proper reason. You dont even tell me what you object? You deny the christianization policy of Rome during Charlemagne`s era or the existence of ~300 year old Avaric kingdom in old Panonia, just before the foundation of vassal state of Moravia?

Actually, it doesn't matter much, what you consider either since like you said, it`s obvious that you are not familiar with this subject at all. Besides that, i don't need to have full knowledge of all Indo-European languages just to learn this issue and comment about it. I know French and English, both medieval and current standard dialects, Turkish, some Turkic dialects and a bit of Latin as a phd student in medieval European, Balkan history and thats enough for my current needs.

[Risto the Great]

Onur, please keep contributing your thoughts to this thread. I am always interested to read your perspective and you certainly do not exhibit any notable characteristics of racism in my opinion.

[Onur]

Thanks RTG but i didn't even understand what i wrote was offensive and anti-catholic. Every religious leaders tries to convert people to their own religion, muslims muslimize and christians christianize and as you know, that was pretty much norm in medieval era. When i point out the christianization policy of Rome, that doesn't mean that i condemn that. This was just a medieval norm, nothing else. I condemn this if this is still being done in 21th century by any religious community but i am not that primitive minded to condemn something happened in medieval era.

You know, i wrote here b4, about how stupid is the Serbians for performing memorial every year for their fallen prince in 14th century and condemning today`s Turkish people for that. Why should i do the same stupidity and condemn catholics of medieval era?


As for the case of Frankish king Charlemagne in 8th century, he was best known with his non-stop wars against various pagan people and his harsh policy against them with the backup from Pope during his reign. For example, he was the one who converted all Anglo-Saxons to christianity but it`s very well known that he massacred 1000s regular people who refused to be converted to christianity. Then he also did same to Avars and Slavs. I don't know, hearing this might hurt the feelings of some people who dreamed about his own people seeing the vision of Jesus and became a christian at that moment but that wasn't always the case. Mostly, this has been done by the power of sword, not by the power of light. That was the case for the muslims too.

[makedonche]

Onur
Thanks for the information, and please do keep posting, if I disagree with what you write i will present my opinion and my references to back it up! It seems you can't enlighten those who do not wish to be enlightened!

[Soldier of Macedon]

He isn't anti-Catholic, but I don't think I have ever read anything positive about western Europe coming from Onur, and very little negatives about how the Ottomans treated their subjects. I'm happy to stand corrected if otherwise, but I can see how a certain perception may be drawn. In that regard, I guess we can all be a little guilty sometimes. Having said that, Slovak could do with some improvement where it concerns his communication with others.

But this discussion should not be about personalities, it should be about content, specifically the Freising Manuscripts. It is not the right thread to be discussing the ratio of Slavs and Iranic/Turkic peoples in Pannonia, which, in any case, would be heavily in favour of the former. Slavs didn't need to settle in Pannonia as they were already there, whereas Iranic/Turkic peoples did settle.