Lives Journal 7

Branko J. Hribovshek






The name Slovani explained by non-Slav sources


Almost all these explanations come from German historians or linguists.

The »Faustian soul« has been toiling selflessly in solitude for at least 1500 years (»die faustische Seele in grenzenloser Einsamkeit mit dem unendlichen Opfer« [31] ) to save the simple, primitive and uncomprehending Slav souls firstly from the darkness of paganism, then to culturally assimilate them, save them from communism, to raise them up and lead them to a bright future in which they would happily serve the Faustian soul and earn their daily bread. It has also been infinitely selfless in attempting to liberate us from all worldly burdens by attempting to take them upon itself and manage them.

We may admire its unbounded Faustian yearning and aspiration for the top –its home is on the highest all governing top and has to be only there (»Die Einsamkeit der faustischen Seele vertraegt sich nicht mit einem Zweierlei der Weltmaechte« [31] ) - in many German history books. Germania is said to have once stretched far into Ukraine [32], but the uncomprehending Slav soul wonders: how can that be – why not as far as the Bering strait or at least a little farther than the Ural mountains? After all »Celtic« mummies have been found in Siberia. And where the Celts lived, there were also the Germans – the Slav should learn from Austrian history books! For anything that may be faintly connected with the Slavs a simple Celtic solution is offered.

The simple Slav soul cannot of course understand these noble acts of the Faustian soul. The latter wanted to regain what it had always possessed and what the Slav vagabond (which probably fell from the sky) had taken away from it .

For the uncomprehending Slav souls this »Drang nach Osten« was nothing more than violence, murder, killing, robbery, subjugation and domination. The Slav souls have only themselves to blame for their incomprehension. If in their fellahin subordination they were to surrender to those who had taken their fate into their own hands and served them humbly, then there would not have been so many dead. However, as the Slavs did not give in – they even tried to imitate the Faustian soul and resist it – they had to take responsibility for the consequences, i.e. for the Faustian hatred (»...die gesamte Kriegsgeschichte kennt den nationalen Hass als das vornehmste Mittel, historische Entscheidungen einzuleiten...« [31] ). These consequences were not so bad for the Faustian soul [33] – most of the dead were inferior Slav souls; no more than collateral damage so to speak.


For the Slav soul the German »Volk von Dichter und Denker« was always »das Volk von Richter und Henker«; and it was like this already long before the Second World War.


On its path to self-realisation, on its upward journey, the Faustian soul developed into a democratic soul – it fulfilled itself in the international community amongst its equals (»internationale Gemeinschaft«) and together with them »conquered« communism, and now continues to nourish Slavophobia. The Faustian soul has been expanding for centuries – and continues to expand – war, plundering and enslavement all over the planet [31].

It advises benevolently the whole world that democracy and human rights are what it stipulates; it self-sacrificingly teaches all how to achieve this and how to be happy. No, it did not take on »die Fellachenideale – den Pazifismus«. Pacifists are »vom Standpunkt der wirklichen Geschichte aus betrachtet ... minderwertig ... der Abfall ... Ihr Erfolg (der Fellachenideale) bedeutet die Abdankung der Nation innerhalb der Geschichte ... zugunsten anderer.« [31]. This is how the democratic spirit campaigns only for pacifism of others, including the Slavs, but not for itself of course!

The Faustian, now democratic soul, wages war together with its equals for peace, democracy, human rights and against terrorism. Terrorism being everything that is not in its interest. It has freed itself of prejudices against the term revolution, which was once a very impolite word. It has painted over its shameful red with joyful colours and is offering it all over the East as the sole solution for the world.


The Slavs simply cannot develop into Faustian souls (with the exception of minor Balkan attempts), although the democratic spirits continue to accuse them of aggression and expansionism. Faustianism does not suit the »peasant peoples« (»den Fellachenvoelker«) at all; that is why one must intervene on time. If necessary, the superior nations will protect the »fellahin«! It is a fact that almost all the European wars in the past thousand years have been led by western Europeans amongst themselves and against the East – not counting the incursions and occupations by the Huns, Magyars and Turks – and have thus written history [34].


Partiality and double standards are also evident in the evaluation of historical sources.


To the already mentioned criticism of Jordanes we may also add the attitude of German historians to his works. In their opinion Jordanes makes »inappropriate« mention of the Slavs: doubt is expressed regarding the credibility of Helmold, the accounts of Orbini and Nestor are rejected, Veles’ books are said to be a forgery etc.

However, the works of »Tacitus« are very obviously forged [36]. German historical treatises make no mention of this at all (»Tacitus’s« Germania is one of the pillars of German history) and if they mention Bracciolini who »discovered« Tacitus’ works, they accuse him of being unprofessional.

Evidently, it is almost superfluous to say that the anti-Slav propaganda never ceased. It is enough to gently scratch the European whitewashed surface for racism and hatred of the Slavs to immediately become evident [35].


Only in this way may we understand the obstinate repetition of the fairy tales of German history (»deutscher Geschichte« [37]), which is founded on the most important falsehood: the present-day Germans are the descendants of the Roman Germans while the Slavs drifted over from the Pripet Marshes. History books from the German-speaking lands have until recently only mentioned the Slavs in passing (if at all): vagabonds from the Pripet Marshes, born to be slaves, most frequently squeezed into the equation Slawen = Sklaven.


All German and Austrian explanations of the origin of the name Slovani comply with the above assertions. While the older, nowadays only slightly modernised explanations, cling desperately to the idea of the migrations [38], more recent explanations (whose authors have realised the untenability of the affirmations they contain), utterly deny that Slavs could be autochtonous. In their opinion the Slavs are of German origin and became Slavs as a result of Christianisation [39]. One of the reasons for the wrong explanations is also due to the word sclavi being replace with slaveni and then slavi as a result of the carelessness of the chroniclers. The purpose of these new explanations is again »Drang nach Osten« [40].


The reason why I again make mention of this is because German academia completely ignores Slav academic findings, with the exception of examples such as Jeza [41], while on the other hand trying to refute or ridicule them directly, without making any mention of sources and evidence. There is solid evidence that contradicts their assertions, and yet many– including those who have written our official history – have accepted these erroneous views utterly uncritically. Admittedly this is no longer entirely the case nowadays. Especially in the English-speaking world there is greater interest in serious historical research than the science fiction of the Greater German propaganda. It is slowly being followed by the remaining western non-German speaking world.


Variations of the name Slovan, which end with nin, are supposed to be typical of names derived from place names, and especially names of rivers and streams. This explanation is very popular with those who claim that the ancient Slavs came from the Pripet Marshes.

In the desperate rush to find evidence they went to the pain of gathering several thousand names of Russian rivers and streams with the aim of finding that stream in Pripet from which the Slavs are supposed to have got their name [42,43]. We can truly describe this brainwave as »echte faustische Gedanke« – and it is particularly amusing. Its success is rather modest.

They make mention of the Russian Словутичь – a nickname for the Dnieper, and the stream called Слуя. Confirmation is supposed to reside in the Polish S³аwа and S³аwiса and the »Serbo-Croat« Slavnica. Meanwhile they are forgetting that in giving Polish and »Serbo-Croat« names they are already very far from the Pripet. We might also mention the Bulgarian Slivnica, and the Slovenian Slatina … and Sava and Savinja. So why do they not mention the largest river which has a name of the same origin – the Saale, a tributary of the River Elbe along which the Polabian Slavs once lived, nor the Salzach, the Zilja or the Sihl?

The name Словутичь obviously derives from the word slava and is only a nickname but it refers rather to a suburb of Kiev and not the River Dnieper.


All these names are supposed to be related to the Greek κλύζω (I wash) and the Latin cluō (I clean); but they forgot to mention the Serbian and Croatian slavina [12].

For more on the hydronymic question see [44].


It was already Spengler [45] and his adherents who, thinking in terms of German superiority, found Slav »humility« in the murky sound of the word nebo and Germanic »superiority« in the brightness of the word Himmel … More recently they have even come so far as to make statements such as »… die Rueckstaendigkeit der russischen Sprache … keineswegs etwas Nachteiliges ueber die Buerger der Sowjetunion besagt« [46]; they add that the Russian language is representative of all Slav languages. Slavs as the »Pluendererscharen aus dem Norden ..., die seitdem als Slawen bezeichnet werden«[47] can truly be happy that these cultured people have given them so much attention.

»Wenn man sich in Deutsch eines kraeftigen Wortes bedient, dann nimmt man die Feces ins Maul« [48]. In this vein they do not forget to mention the word сlоāса (sewer), derived from the Latin cluō (I clean), when explaining the name Slovani [49].



Let us take a closer look at the relevant related words. In the Sanskrit dictionary [50] we find:


lAlA            saliva, spit, teariness

salasala       to run [liquid], to trouble, restlessness; flood, waves; rainwater, rain

lavaNa        salt pans, salt, pickle; tasty, gracious, beautiful; overly salted

lAvaNa       salt pans, salt, salted, cooked with salt or salted

salavaNa    with salt

sulavaNa    well salted

sola             (too)cold; also having taste

soraNa       bitter and sour at the same time; also having taste


And also:


 sava            to squeeze juice from the soma plant; to pour out; nectar or honey

Asava          to distil, to decant; rum, alcoholic drink, juice, nectar or juice, nectar or the potion of women’s lips


We can see that the original meaning includes both the liquid as well as the flavour and notion of saltiness. Slovenian words that are related include liti [to pour, to cast], zaliv [bay], slano [salty], slatina [mineral water], slina [saliva]. The following words are also connected with them:


svad           tasty, sweet or pleasant; to taste with pleasure, to enjoy, to take pleasure

svAdya       tasted; sour, tasty; also salty

svard          to taste; to delight; to be pleasant


There are many derivatives that belong to this group. Related Slovenian words include svadba [wedding], sladko [sweet] and slastno [tasty], as well as variti (Serbian: to cook, to digest).

It is difficult to connect the name of the ethnicity with a liquid or with what is liquid as there is no point. It is a different case with slano [salty], sladko [sweet] and with the general okusno [savoury].

Explanations connected with the names of rivers and streams cannot be taken into account either. There are too many rivers and streams after which the Slavs are supposed to have been named. The explanation otochani [insular population], which comes from zaliv [51] [bay], is not satisfactory either – from which bay or island in the Pripet marshes? The ancient Slavs are supposed to have come to Europe via dry land. So the only remaining explanation is – slano, sladko or okusno. At least one reason why our western neighbours »liked to feed« on our ancestors (»zum fressen gerne«). Does this mean that the ditches filled with hacked up human bones which surround the circular, trench-like Neolithic constructions in Central Europe [52], do not indicate an advanced culture with special funerary customs, instead indicating only cannibalistic orgies? Perhaps this has something to do with the meaning chisti [clean] and oprani [washed] or perhaps even the exact opposite – umazanci [dirty people]? In a foreign language of course, as the Slovenian snaga [cleanliness] is related to the Sanskrit word.


snA             to wash oneself, to wash, to clean (Lat. sanitas – health)

snAna         washing, cleaning


Let us go back to liquids and sewers. Compare with *ser- , which is an ancient Indo-European root which means to run - techi (S. Rospond, [53]).


sR               to go, to run, to accelerate, to slide, to move (Lat. salire – to jump)

sraSTR       the one who secretes or unloads (water); maker, the creator (universe)

sRj              to allow to go or to fly, to unload, to throw, to pour, to throw; to erupt, to discharge, to pour out;

sara            liquid; cleaning, purgative; walk, movement; waterfall, lake, pond, etc.

sarapas       running water

saras, sarat all liquid, lake, large area of water, pond, well, swimming pool; walk, run, progress, thread

sasra, sasrut, sravat, srava     runs, currents, river; current; waterfall; urine

sravatha, sarma, srAvin         runs, currents, flees, drop, distils


From the above words it is possible to see how liti- [to pour] has developed from the original term for a liquid which in Slovenian is related to the rather coarse srati [to shit]. In the same way the words


seca, secana, seka   spraying, pouring out, soaking, [founding (metals)], discharging


related to the Slovenian sech [urine] and scati [to piss]. The meaning of the words


svid, sveda sweating, sweat, steam (to melt); (Eng. sweat, Germ. Schweiss)


confirms the common origin of all the above concepts from some ancient concept denoting liquid, taste and bodily secretions. The following words are of the same origin but Anglo-Saxon linguists make no connection with the name Slovani:


slovenly  low, vulgar, improper, later also dirty; derived from sloven – immoral woman, which probably comes from sloovin – to reprimand, scold, related to sloef – dirty, careless, with a Protogerm. reconstruction *slup-; also connected with slut, sloppy – dirty, indecent or filthy woman. The old English slaw – slow, heavy, foolish comes from the Protogerm. reconstruction *sloewaz – dull, boring (in other Germ. languages slee, sleeuw, sleo, sljor, sloev, sloe) [54]. A related word in old Polish is s³owieñ [slow, lazy], in Slovenian slab [weak, bad] and in English sleep. These terms are all related to the above listed Sanskrit words in the Latin cluō, сlоāса.



They further explain, also without giving evidence (see in [43]), that we cannot allow derivatives from the Gothic slawan, gaslawan, naslawan taciturn (for the Goths, the Slavs are taciturn, as the Germans are for the Slavs), nor from the Irish sluag – gang, army (related Slovenian words are sluga [servant] and sluzhiti [to serve]). It is also supposed to be incorrect to derive from the Greek λαός – narod [nation] etc., as would be attempts to derive from the Gothic word silba – alone or the Cimbrian (the Cimbri – the inhabitants of Wales) helw – the economy [43].


It is interesting that no-one mentions the German word schlau – cunning. Its origin points to an Indo-European reconstruction ḱlēuH- (sleuh, sluh [hearing]); the word slava [glory] also originates from the concept slishati [to hear], poslushati [13,55] [to listen]. From it comes the German popular word Schlawiner – a sly person. The words schlau, Schlawiner are therefore not thought to have anything in common with the name Slovani.


The explanations proposed by Franc Jeza concerning the supposed Scandinavian origin of the Slovenians [41] – and thereby all Slavs – cannot be accepted. His coinage solvendi (meaning that which turns to face the sun) seems too much like a »poetic inspiration«. However, this does not yet mean that the name Svenska (Sweden) could not be of Slav origin; as for the Goths, I believe they were a Slav-Germanic mixture.




The name Slovani – explanations connected with slovo, slava, svoboda


The most common explanations for the name Slovani are based on the word being derived from the words slovo [word] and slava [glory,fame], which can be found in all Slav languages.


The word slava is supposed to be the origin of the word slovo, from which the verb sloviti is supposed to come. It is from its meaning »those which speak« that the name Slovani is thought to proceed.


The following Sanskrit words are related to slava [50] (see also the table):



suzravas     famous, well-known, of, gracious, friendly

zravas         voice, cry, loud thanks; glory, good reputation, fame, reputation

zravasya     reputation, glory, prestige, noble work

sauzravasa  to have a good reputation, great praise or repute, a famous person.


Different variants give us a feeling for differences in copies of the same word as well as for close synonyms in Sanskrit. In the same way they allow us to evaluate vocal values and vocal development. The Indo-European reconstruction klēuH- [13] is supposed to mean to hear, while in Sanskrit it is the word zru.


As we can see in the table, in Slav languages the word slovo has different but mainly very similar meanings: beseda [word], chrka [letter]and slovo [word, farewell].

Nowadays in Slovenian we mainly use other words instead of sloviti for »audible communication«: govoriti [to speak], rechi [to say], povedati [to tell], izraziti [to express], bajati [to tell fairytales], klepetati [to chatter], hlipati [to gasp], gobezdati [to babble], obrekovati [to slander], ochitati [to reproach], lagati [to lie] and perhaps some others, as well as words that derive from these. Some of them are now also used in »written communication«. We should also bear in mind the Old Church Slavonic term glagoliti [to speak].

The present-day Slovenian language uses the words proslavljati [to celebrate], posloviti [to say good-by, to bid farewell], sloves [reputation]. The situation is similar in other Slav languages. This means there is no special need for an additional verb for govoriti [to speak], especially as this is a pan-Slavic term. Its sole role is to distinguish Slavs from other ethnic groups.


In all the above words used in »acoustic communication« the basic word and its meaning are clear. Govoriti and rechi have the same origin, the origin of the others is also obvious, while the words hlipati and lagati are a special case as they are related to Sanskrit words. But we are interested in another:


zlAgh, zlAghA  to have faith in; to speak trustfully, to brag, to boast or be proud; to fawn upon, to flatter; to praise, to recommend, to extol, to acclaim, to be praised, glorified or extolled, to give courage, to console; greeting, wish.


In German a related word is luegen and in English to lie. The Greek logos is probably also related but I have not been able to find an Indo-European explanation.

We can therefore see that the word lagati could also be a close relation of the original word from which the word slovo possibly developed. This would mean that slava and slovo have completely different origins. However, it is interesting that the words zravas and zlAgh have a somewhat similar meaning; the emphasis on the sound, on what is »good« and general is contained in the former while the emphasis on the content, on what is »bad« and individual is in the latter.

It seems that the word as a concept for a part of language has always been more or less clear as different words were the names for different ideas and objects. We do not come across the word as a precisely defined element of grammar until literacy becomes widespread. It is clear from old documents that words were not written down separately. This shows that the present-day concept of the word is not the same as what it was originally. This is probably the reason why the Slav languages, despite being closely related and resembling each other, have different words for word. This would mean that the word slovo is a young word, as in certain cases it denotes a letter and this is only possible in the context of literacy. On the other hand the concept of slovo means that this is a very old word as it exists in all Slav languages and only later did it acquire a different but related meaning in an individual language. As we have seen, it existed already in »proto-Slav«.

As I have already mentioned, we have a large number of different words for »acoustic communication«. These words are very eloquent as it is with greater or smaller weight that they provide us with information on content and the type of speech or conversation. This is also the case with sloviti and words derived from it. Such a narrowed down meaning could perhaps only be ascribed to later development – depending on whether the first word was slovo or sloviti.


Here are two more examples from Sanskrit:


svan, svana    sound, tune, noise (of wind, thunder, water), birdsong, speech and sound (in general)


The similarity between the Croatian zvati [to call] and the Slovenian zvok [sound], zven [resonant sound], izzivati [to provoke] and poziv [call, appeal] appears to confirm Johanson’s explanation [mentioned in 43]. Perhaps there is also an indirect connection with sloviti, as there is a certain but smaller probability of such development.


We can therefore see that there are possibilities for different explanations and that for now we cannot find just one definite source. We must also bear in mind that even apparently contradictory explanations do not necessarily disprove each other.

We have already seen [4] that the synonyms, or at least partial synonyms, govoriti, rumunit [in Resian – to speak], sloviti, deuten [in Ger. – to interpret, to explain] and the antonyms Nemec [in Slov. - German (dumb)], Barbar (babbler), Tatar (stammerer) are connected with names or are even the names of »nations«, or rather groups of people who have a common language, which can be understood by all, or in some cases not.

In accordance with this [4] I believe that the name Slovani came first, i.e. is the oldest. From it developed the concept of undisturbed communication as a variant of speaking, sloviti slovansko govorechi [Slav speaking]. It is from this word that the concept of slovo comes. The consequence of this is that the name Slovani and the words sloviti and slovo have nothing in common with the words slava, slaviti, nor with words related to slishati [to hear] and the Indo-European reconstruction klēuH. Of course, there is also the possibility that the words slovo and sloviti – in this order – developed from words related to zlAgh or svan independent of the name Slovani. This would mean that the name Slovani could have developed from the word sloviti or it could be a case of phonetic rapprochement as in the case of homonyms. The verdict on which of these two different explanations is the correct one is enabled only by a precise analysis or some other semantic explanation of the name Slovani.


The word slaviti, which of course comes from the word slava, does not only mean to venerate. It also means to speak solemnly, to praise. This is also the meaning of the suffix –slav in the compound names Boguslav, Svjatoslav, Jaroslav etc. It is from these names that the short form of the name SlovaniSlav came, as the non-Slavic chroniclers were acquainted with Slav princes such as Rastislav, Mstislav, Boleslav etc, who were their political and military opponents; however, they had no better knowledge of the Slav language [56]. The influence of these names as well as so-called »akanje« [pronouncing the letter o as an a] were responsible for the eastern European form Slavjan, while the Old Church Slavonic form only knows the name with an o. This may therefore mean that the foreign name for Slavs originates from the word slava [57].


 What about the word svoboda ?


Go³¹b [58] uses Ptolemy’s name for Slavs – Sthlabenoi, Soubenoi, Stauanoi. He is particularly interested in the name Soubenoi, which he compares with the Proto-Slavic *Svobìne. He compares it with the historical form *Slovìne, which he assumes originates from the Proto-Slavic adjective svobъ. This adjective is the basis for the Proto-Slavic word svoboda or sloboda [freedom]. From variants of this word that exist in different Slav languages he created the reconstructions *svebъ and *svobъ. He proceeds to enquire what this adjective is supposed to mean. He helps himself with the Slav word svob-ъstvo, which means person, oneself. This is supported by the Indo-European reconstruction *sue/o-bho (meaning: one’s own, one’s own kind – compare with the ethnic names Suebi, Swaba) in the sense of free, member of one’s own nation [13]. This is connected with the Sanskrit sabha – words with similar meaning are zbor [assembly], sabor (in Cro. - assembly), zhupa [parish], Sippe (in Ger. - kinn). Then he attempts to explain the particle *se (*sue), which means: separate, for oneself, by the side, the Proto-Slavic svojъ and the Slovenian svoj [own]. Therefore the Indo-European word *sue/o-bho would mean: a person for oneself (actually one’s own person). Also connected is *sue/o-bho-dha  which means: all people that are related through family or marriage. This would explain the Proto-Slavic expression *Svobìne which comes from the expanded word svobìnъ whose basis is svobъ. The differentiation v-b > l-b also led to the creation of the form *Slobìne, which was then connected with the words slovo and sloviti (this is supposed to be popular etymology) and it eventually took the form *Slovìne.


Linguists reject this theory of the origin of the name Slovani as being an artificial construction.




The name Slovani – explanations with svoj (and others)


I have based the following review of already mentioned and some other, lesser known explanations and derivations of the name Slovani on Jagodzinski [51]; of course, the list also contains the explanations that have already been mentioned:

·         from the word svoj (M. Rudnicki);

·         from the Indo-European *swobho- a blood relation, relative;

·         from the alleged expression slovìni, sloveni, slovani – brothers in language; two parallels are bratanъ, sestrìnъ (L. Moszyñski);

·         from the alleged topographic name Slovy ;

·         from the Indo-European root  *kleu- current, stream, to clean or from the Slav slov-, slav-, which appears in the names of lakes;

·         from an indeterminate toponym – river or lake – called Slova, Slava, Slovje or Slavja; similar to the Lithuanian village called Šlavėnai (identical to the Slav Slovìni) by the River Šlavė ;

·         from the true names Salava, Sala, from which is derived the Polish word ¿u³awa – a dry island-like place surrounded by marshes;

·         from the Indo-European word whose root is *kleu- clean, Lat. cluo I clean, Gr. κλύζω I clean, I wash; also the Russian чисть, чища a flat clearing in a forest, free of trees and bushes; the alleged *slov- is supposed to have a similar meaning; a wiêc ostatecznie S³owianie = mieszkañcy czystych pól: citizens of pure origin;

·         from the hydronym based on the root slov-, slav- meaning talking river (O. Kronsteiner);

·         from the word for man: chlovek (slov- < èlov-), i.e. native or farmer;

·         from the word meaning nation, people; compare with Gr. λαός (lāós) < *slāwos (?);

·         from the word meaning planter, grower ; compare with Gr. λωή, λως, λουα stodo³a;

·         from the name of the mythic Slav, the ancestor of the Slavs;

·         from the word ska³a (from which comes the -k- in Latin names Sclaveni, Sclavini);

·         from the ethnonym Skolotów, the autonym of the Scythians or the name of some Scythian tribe;

·         from the Indo-European *sek- to bind; in the variant *sk-lobh- relatives; similarly *sk-eip- clan, *skeut- Scythian, Scythians etc.


Of all the above explanations only the first two are important. It is quite incredible that linguists did not even take them into consideration. I summarise freely from sources [51]:


Rudnicki derives the name from the Indo-European root meaning swój, w³asny (Polish), in Slovenian svoj and lasten (both meaning one’s own). He also mentions the Polish expressions swój < *swojo-, siebie < *sebh-, sobie, osoba < *sobh-, sibī < *sebh-; the Greek spheĩs (reflexivum indirectum 3 pl.) and < *sbhejes; Engl. self < *selbh-; Welsh: helw - property, economy (others reject this, see above). He concludes by explaining the name Slovani as one’s own people, acquaintances, our, one’s own, close relations. Grimm himself is supposed to have been the first person to set such a hypothesis concerning the origin of the names of nations. 


I also add *slov- (nashi ljudje [our people] – J. Otrebski [59]), similarly also E. Rzetelska-Feleszko for Slovince [60]. These works were not particularly welcomed by the academic world.

The literature under [44] also includes a critical review of various explanations for the names Slovani and Veneti; explanations for the names of individual Slav nations can also be found under [58].

A task that remains to be accomplished is to find a word in Sanskrit that is related to the name Slovani, as linguistics with its usual procedures has not yet come up with a satisfactory explanation.




Sklavi and Slovani


Those who claim that our ancestors crawled out from the Pripet marshes to be enslaved by the »cultured nations« usually also believe that we acquired our name from the word for a slave – sklavi etc., as an exonym of course. There are similar claims that the Slavs were enslaved and sold on to such an extent that the Slav endonym became the word for a slave in the concerned languages. The latter claim has a certain foundation as the Slavs, especially the northern and eastern ones, were Christianised relatively late. Until such time as they became Christians, they were considered by »Christian« nations, and especially by the Germans, to be without rights. That is why they murderd, robbed and enslaved them under the pretext that they were »spreading the word of God«. [56]


The origin of the word for slave in Slav languages is clear, while ancient expressions for this concept in Western European languages are not known at all. In most Indo-European languages the word for a slave is derived from the word sklave. Exceptions include the Slav languages, of course, as well as Welsh, Cornish and Latvian, and the languages that border the Slavs such as Estonian, Finnish and Turkish.

The fact that most Western European nations use this expression or a similar one for slaves, may mean that trade in Slav slaves was very »well developed« or that a similar term for a slave had existed before and it was not until later that is became linked to the name Slovani. Such a possibility is supported by the fact that the »internal« arrangement of Western European tribes was distinctly hierarchical, patriarchal and based on inheritance, so slave ownership was something normal. However, the Slavs lived differently, there were no inherited positions, there was equality between the sexes, true democracy with elected leaders, and slavery was even considered expressly undesirable [61]; this is why words for slave in Slav languages differ as slave ownership amongst the Slavs only developed later, perhaps at the time they became Christians when a new political system accompanied the new faith.


Why then should these Western European nations not have acquired a word for slave until they came in touch with the Slavs, i.e. only after the Slavs were supposed to have run in from the Pripet marshes? Perhaps the Slavs had always been Europe’s enslaved population?

Let us consider the words suzhenj, rob (in Cro., Serb. - slave), rab (in Rus. -slave), otrok (in Cze. - slave) etc. [62]. All these expressions are derived from the word for prisoner, labourer and also relative. The Slovenian word suzhenj is supposed to be derived from the expression s uzhetom – tied up [13], prisoner. We therefore have enough words not to need a new one to designate a person that is tied up or a prisoner. I cannot help but think of the explanation: so zhena [(as) woman], i.e. someone who, also being a relative, has a position similar to women in patriarchal societies, but this was probably first the case amongst the ancestors of the Slovenians under the »progressive« western influence.


From Sanskrit [50]


zliku           servant, slave, addict; deviant;

zli =            zri [50];

zliS             to stick together, to attach, to stick to (Engl. cling to);

zri               to lay down, to insert, to attach to, to turn to; (Germ. lehnen, Engl. to lean);

ku               as a prefix (?) it denotes disintegration, annulment, imperfection, distress, triviality, hindrance, reprimand, contempt, culpability;

kU              to make noise, to shout, to groan, to chirp, to complain (Cro.), to buzz.



This is therefore someone who has characteristics meaning together, very connected with bad; there is an evident semantic and phonetic resemblance with the word zlikovec [rascal]. Other Sanskrit expressions that have a similar meaning have sounds that are so different that they cannot be taken into account to explain the word sklavi. They are derived from the word


dAsa          enemy, demon, savage, barbarian, infidel, slave, servant.


Of course, sklavi is supposed to be derived from the name Slovani or vice versa [npr. 55]. This is a popular explanation in western treatises which is borrowed from ancient chronicles and sources. These explanations do not make it clear why and how sl- came to replace skl- or vice versa. Most of the explanations state that ancient Greek does not have sl- , so the Greeks are supposed to have placed a k or a t between the s and the l. We may of course ask ourselves why these two letters and why predominantly k. They could just as easily have inserted a vowel or any other consonant. As for the possibility of a reverse derivation we may ask ourselves why the Slavs should have left out the k or some other letter.

We have already mentioned that Lozinski proposed a working hypothesis according to which the forms of the name Sklaveni and the Arab term Saqlaba are of the same origin. The Greeks also knew the Scythians as Skot, and the Scythian province was located entirely on (present-day and former) Slav regions; the Persian name for the Scythians is Saka. This name was adopted by the Hindus, the same can also hold true for the Arabs [63]. Both the Byzantines and the Arabs probably mixed up the name Slovani, which was completely foreign to them, with the name for Scythians as the Slavs also lived in the land, which the Byzantines and the Arabs called Sak. That is the origin of the Greek k, which became the Latin form sclavus, and this short form originates from the names of Slav princes.


Is it possible that the word for a slave in western Indo-European languages existed already before these nations became acquainted with the name Slovani and perhaps even resembled it, so that it replaced that name without any difficulty?

Let us take a look in Sanskrit and search for words that have the prefix sk or sak, and if possible that also have an l.

There are Sanskrit words that have the prefix sk- , however, none of them would be appropriate as the name of an ethnic group.


skambha    plug, support, pillar, a point that supports the universe

skand         to jump, to hop around, to start, to spit (Lat. scando, scala)

skandha     shoulder, branching out, corps, quantity, amount, composition, part, military division, king, prince etc.


There are even more that have different meanings but for the most part they are related to the ones listed above. The latter word (skandha) could come into consideration, but it lacks important consonants, so the question remains open.


Words having the prefix sa(k)- paint a wholly different picture:

sakala         assembled, divisible, material, having all parts, complete, completely, total, all;

(related to the Slovenian célo [whole])

kalA            small part, each individual part, time interval, an »element« of the human body, origin; kal [germ, seed]  and chlan [member], chlen [link, artickle] are related.


Compound word together with jana :


sakalajana  each person, everyone

sakalajananI   mother of all


It is evident that the Slovenian vse [all], vsak [every] etc are related to the Sanskrit word saka- . The word sakalajana can also be explained as being a close relation to the word for vse ljudi [all people] or for vsi [all].

We cannot reliably say that this word is the original source from which stems the name for slaves, although it is connected with persons, with people. However, we can explain it as being related to the name Sklavani. The names Skiti and Saka are perhaps also derived from relations of the word sakalajana. The consequences of this are important; the word could be an endonym of the Proto-Indo-Europeans meaning all people ; this would be an ethnic group from which all Indo-European nations later emerged.


This is how we have a parallel with a much more recent example. The name Teuton comes from tous – all, just like Allemands – all people.


The following words from Sanskrit:


sarva          whole, full, all, each, containing many types, many, various, diverse, joint, in all parts (including in puzzles),


related to zdravo [healthy] (in Lat. salvus) and


sarvajana    every person, everyone in a crowd (everybody).

The meaning of sarvajana is almost the same as that of sakalajana, probably due to the close relatedness of the word saka- with the word sarva-, both of them appearing in compound words, but it could also be a case of variants in the Vedas or in Sanskrit dialects.


Perhaps the Latin servus is also related to them as servant, soldiers and slaves are ordinary peopleevery person, each, in plural meaning the same as the present-day ljudstvo [people], puk [in Croat. - people], gesinde [in Ger. - all family clan with servants], folks, raja [in Turk., Serb. - folks]

This could mean that a similar word for a slave may have always existed in Indo-European languages and that it finally came to mean the same as the name for Slavs.

O. N. Trubachov is also of a similar opinion based on the Indo-European *servo-, which means whole, complete, namely with the definition all people for the name Srb [64].




Meanings of the name Slovani


The following Sanskrit words are particularly interesting [50]:

sva              one’s own

svaj             to embrace, to seize, to encircle, to roll or to wrap

svaja           born to oneself, one’s own, related

svajA          born to oneself


svajana       a member of one’s own people, relative, relation, one’s own


svajanaya, svajanAya   to be related, similar, to become a relative

svajanman one’s own

svAjanya    relations, kin

svajAti        of the same kind; member of one’s family or caste


We immediately recognise our related word svoj-, and also ovoj or zavoj. Its original meaning is related to something which contains (something).

The second part of the compound word svajana is interesting:


jana            (to create), a living being, man, person, clan; people, subjects etc.

jAna           birth, origin, birthplace.

This second part of the compound word is also related to the word

janI            woman, wife, birth.


It is evidently the closest relation to our zhena [wife,(woman)] . From it also stems the word

janya          belonging to a clan, family or the same country, member of a nation.


The derivative svajana is undoubtedly related to the name Slovani (compare also the form Slavjani ) both in terms of sound as well as semantically. This means the explanation for the name Slovani is actually very simple: it means one’s clan (birth, origin, descent, race), one’s nation.


Therefore the name Slovani really is ancient and is in fact probably one of the oldest. Perhaps it was originally an endonym for all Indo-Europeans; the Slavs preserved it just as they more or less preserved their languages. The other explanations outlined above, which are less likely, also bring us to the same conclusion.[78]

This confirms the explanations of M. Rudnicki, J. Otrebski and E. Rzetelska-Feleszko, although they have only in part explained the meaning of the name. Linguists have probably not adequately accepted their explanations due to the use of the problematic Indo-European roots *slov- and *svoj- (?), as the asterisk denotes an artificial reconstruction. 


It is also worth taking a look at how the letter v becomes an l, or more precisely sv- becomes sl-. In order to do this let us take a look at the following Sanskrit words:


svaka          one’s own, my own, a member of one’s own (a relative), kinfolk, relation, friend, relatives, friends

svastha       one’s own, healthy, independent

svasti          good, happiness, success etc.; greeting: hi, have a good time!

svabhAva   birthplace; one’s own state of being

svAbhAvya independent, one’s own nature, one’s own feature/peculiarity

svabhU       independent

bhU            to be, to become


They all remind one of svak, svastika [in Serb. - Brother-in-law, sister-in-law], biti [to be] and the related svoboda [freedom], which is sloboda in some other Slav languages. Let us remember the aforementioned word svad, which is related to the Slovenian words sladko [sweet] and slastno [tasty].

The differences and transitions of j into zh, dzh, dj or ð are not linguistically problematic – e.g. rojen and rodjen etc.






The origin of names shows that differentiating between oneself, one’s family, our relatives, our clan, our tribe and people I understand or not, who are of the same religion or not, exists since time immemorial and can be traced from names [4].

This rule also holds true for the name Slovani.

A summary can therefore contain the following findings:


·         The name Slovani comes from a close relation of the Sanskrit word svajana meaning relative or relation.

·         The short name Slav (exonym; Slave, Slawe etc.) is derived from personal names such as Rastislav, Boguslav etc., which are compound words containing the word slava (meaning slaviti – to venerate, to acclaim ).

·         The name Sklaveni, Saqlaba etc.: the alternation of sl- into skl- could have come about for a number of different reasons; it is partly the effect of the names Skit (Gr.) or Saka (Pers.); the influence or exchange with the close relation, the Sanskrit word sakalajana (every person, everyone) with the meaning all people, also close is the word sarvajana (every person, everyone from a multitude,[everybody, each]) meaning ordinary person, each person, each member of a nation (in the sense of puk, Gesindel, folks, raja) and also suzhenj.

·         The short name Sklave (foreign designation; Sclavo, Sklawe etc.) came about as a result of the influence of the name Sklaveni on the short form Slav and became the Latin term for slave which was then adopted by others. Similarity with any other word meaning slave (related to the words sakalajani or sarvajani) remains an open question.

·         The names Enetoi, Veneti, Wenden, Windischi etc. are derived from the name Slovenec, which in turn is derived from the name Slovan, prehaps indirectly with the verb sloviti, similarly to the example peti – pevec. We have confirmed this with a probability calculation which showed that all the other official explanations are practically unfounded.


In the light of these discoveries we must also consider their effect on the explanation of Slav ethnogenesis. What can we conclude on the basis of the above? The connection between the name Slovani and the Sanskrit word svajana shows that the name is very old.

We can date it to at least the 2nd millenium BC, perhaps even further, as Sanskrit originates in this period. This also independently confirms the information provided by Homer and Herodotus. Obviously, the reproach remains that the name as it roughly exists in its present-day form has only been known since the first centuries AD.

However, ancient sources mention a number of small non-Slav nations that existed much earlier [65].

How can we explain this?

As I have already said [4], the nations mentioned in ancient sources are for the most part only large families, tribes or some tribal alliance [66]. This also holds true for the Slavs or, more correctly, the Proto-Slavs; the finding proceeds directly from estimates of population density in those times [67]. Those ethnic groups (e.g. the Veneti), which are specifically mentioned as being large nations, are actually closest to the present-day idea of a nation. Such nations did not biologically die out as could have happened with smaller ones, instead they became better known and could thereby be called a different name by their neighbours. The occurrence, or better, mentioning of a nation in antiquity is mainly connected with military importance – it is actually a reflection of the danger that a certain nation represented for the chronicler’s environment.


The information that merchants had concerning other »nations« is superficial as it did not come directly from the source; e.g. it was the report of one merchant to another when neither of them had ever travelled to the places concerned. We must also not forget that in the case of most of these »nations« that appear in the reports of the chroniclers, it is not always the right »ethnic« group, i.e. the group that is bound by family relations, that speaks the same language and has the same customs. More frequently it is only an armed group of robbers and looters which has subjugated the local population and has given the territory in which it is active the appearance of a kind of state structure. It may later have been assimilated into the subjugated population, its language was lost but the name remained; such examples include the Langobards, the Bulgarians, the Gepids etc. This is obvious also from the geographical situation and the duration of movement of the »migrating« peoples: these are almost exclusively the frontiers of the known ancient world (other information only includes later explanations that have been expanded to cover remaining fields). The movements made by »entire« nations in a few years show that food and other provisions could only be acquired by robbing the local population – the natives.


We can therefore confirm Tomazhich’s idea [7], that the name Slovani is much older than its first mention in ancient chronicles. The Slavs lived in democratic village communities and so they initially did not have any large organisation, which would enable them to rapidly summon greater military power, and they therefore had neither adequate equipment nor tactics when attacked by looters.

For the ancient looters they did not therefore represent a »serious« enemy to begin with [61]. However, under pressure from the looters, the Slavs began to form military alliances amongst themselves and to put up resistance; they were also joined by some mercenaries coming from the ranks of their opponents, e.g. the Byzantines, and from these they learnt the latest military tactics and sometimes carried out counter-attacks. In this way they began to represent a direct military threat for the »culturally progressive« ethnic groups and the Slav name acquired a certain meaning for chroniclers.

Samo’s Empire also came about through the need for defence against Germanic raiders.


According to Alinei’s theory of continuity [68] and the archaeological finds of Danubian cultures, [69] Slav literacy dates far back to the Neolithic Era. Etruscan, Retian, Venetian and Phrygian inscriptions have been successfully deciphered with the help of Slav languages [70]. Obviously, we cannot say in all these cases that these were Slavs, they were rather Proto-Slavs and the ancestors of the present-day non-Slav nations, but whose languages were even more closely related to those of the Slavs due to the close interrelatedness of all Indo-Europeans at that time.

(Proto) Glagolitic and (Proto) Cyrilic were also two much older Slav alphabets and we only ascribe them to Sts. Cyril and Methodius [69].

How can we then explain that after the Venetian and Phrygian inscriptions we have nothing more recent until the time of Sts. Cyril and Methodius and the Freising Manuscripts?

The answer to this question is not particularly difficult. Let us think only of the fate of the Carantanians or the Retri and the Arkons. The latter two are much more recent but we know for certain that the statues of deities in their temples bore inscriptions [56]. It seems quite incredible that, with the exception of these inscriptions, there are no other written documents, especially any with religious content. The invaders probably destroyed everything, more out of hatred and greed than religious zeal.

The »Germanic« runes actually originated from Venetian scripts [71]. Let us remember the reports of Abraham ben Jacob [67] concerning the wealth of trade in the Slav regions. A well-developed system of trade can not have been without a form of orthography. His report on the Russian rune [69] also testifies to older – pre-Cyrillic and pre-Glagolitic – Slav alphabets. They wrote on tree bark and small wooden boards [72]. None of this was preserved, except some examples in Kiev's Laura.

Western Europe, which considers itself to be the heiress of ancient cultures and the bearer of Christian virtues, would not possess most of its ancient sources had it not been for the mediation of Byzantium which it helped destroy. Arab translations of predominantly Greek works were translated into Latin by translators in Toledo, i.e. the Jews in Muslim (Moorish) Spain. We can hardly imagine all the things that disappeared when the old libraries were burned down in Alexandria, Byzantium (including iconoclastic destruction), in the Kremlin (the library of Ivan the terrible) etc. There is no need to mention who most of the arsonists were and what religion they followed.

Just as with the Retri and the Arkons, and later also in America and elsewhere, Christianisation was an excuse for conquering, looting, killing, enslaving and destroying the culture of the local population. Of course, we cannot blame foreigners alone for all this. Disputes within nations and states also helped bring about ruin; e.g. the Kievan Rus’, or the conflicts between the Lusatians. Adopting the new faith was also responsible for the destruction of the previous cultural wealth as proof of true religious fanaticism. An example of such a mindset is Thietmar [73]; he was more terrified of the old form of Slav pagan worship than all the killing, looting and wars he described.


We can say without a shadow of a doubt that as a result of Christianisation the Slavs lost almost all of their previous cultural heritage.


A Slav culture on new, Christian foundations was enabled by Sts. Cyril and Methodius because they were Slavs (of course, Western sources deny this fact). They were more or less on the right »political wavelength«, but were nevertheless persecuted by the German-speaking authorities.


We cannot ascribe their fruitful activities only to religious zeal, but they are also the product of the ancient Slav culture in new circumstances. The general literacy of Novgorod [75], especially in times in which writing was considered to be a feminine or monastic activity and most of Western Europe was illiterate, did not appear overnight. It was the inheritance of the ancient Slav literacy by a nation that had been neither Christianised nor conquered by foreigners, so no-one succeeded in destroying the foundations of their culture.


What can we conclude from the explanations of the name and ethnogenesis of the Slavs in the works of local and foreign linguists and historians?


The following facts and contradictions are characteristic:


·         All linguists believe that no conclusions concerning the ancient homeland of the Slavs may be reached from hydronyms, but they nevertheless keep mentioning the »wet, damp and fluid« etymology of the name Slovani as stemming from some hydronym [74].

·         Linguists are not convinced about their own methods: for the most part they only bear in mind the »reconstructed« roots of words, but which they themselves do not believe, although they are sometimes very close to the truth (Otrebski, Rudnicki, Rzetelska-Feleszko); that is why they like to adopt foreign explanations.

·         Proto-Slavic and the Slav language are supposed to have come about »much later« than the Germanic or Celtic languages, having borrowed words from far and wide, although they are more closely related to Sanskrit than the ones from which they are supposed to have developed.

·         They talk about the disintegration of the Indo-European community, which was covered the whole continent and further afield, and for part of this community, more specifically the Slavs, they are looking for their »original homeland« in some narrow region that does not become obvious until »much later«.


·         Geographical, plant [75], animal and similar names are supposed to indicate the ancient homeland of the Slavs. Failure is supposed to be indicated by the fact that each group of appellations leads to a different geographical region [76]. But in fact this indicates success as the Proto-Slavs were settled all over the European continent and the broad field in which their names can be traced only confirms this.


·         Foreign explanations of the name and ethnogenesis of the Slavs are evidently biased military-political propaganda and not true academic findings. This propaganda is aimed at their own non-Slav, western subordinates, that they were and if necessary will in the future again be ready to »defend« themselves against the inherited Slav enemy, who had in the past already »stolen« Europe from them. It is also a case of excusing their own historical »sins«. Such prejudices against the Slavs are deeply rooted in the mindsets of average Westerners, especially German-speaking ones [77]. Even nowadays, the fundamental attitude of Western politics vis-a-vis the East stems from these prejudices, and the same is the case for Western media reporting on the regions that are considered to be the (European) East.


Finally let us turn to our France Preshern. Najvech svetaMost of this world is clear. The use of the verb slishati (slishi) - to hear meaning to belong (belongs) is the German manner of expression and may have been used on purpose. The foreign appellation also fits – otrokom Slave - children of Slava; Slava in the meaning Glory; together they form a political statement. 


June 2007





Sources, literature and references:


[4] B. J. Hribovshek: Imeni Raetia in Schwyz, Revija SRP, sht. 75/76, 77/78, Ljubljana 2006, 2007;

Edicija Pogum: Branko J. Hribovshek, IMENI RAETIA IN SCHWYZ, Ljubljana 2006

[7] Shavli J., Bor M., Tomazhich I.: Veneti, Editiones Veneti, Wien, Boswell 1996

[12] see [7] p. 321

[13] M. Snoj: Slovenski etimoloshki slovar, Mladinska knjiga, Ljubljana 1977

[31] This and following citations are from O. Spengler: Der Untergang des Abendlandes, Beck, Muenchen 1998, p. 238, 241,761 etc.

On European politics in H. Saña: Das vierte Reich, Rasch u. Röhrig, Hamburg 1990, H. Saña: Die Lüge Europa, Rasch u. Röhrig, Hamburg 1993

[32] comp. Goebbels: »Some lies are to big for not to believe them

[33] On almost everyday reflection on holocaust, the western media almost regularly keep silent of Slav victims; eg. Arno Plack: Hitlers langer Schatten, Langen-Müller, München 1993

[34] We Slovenian were the good example already thousand years ago (prim. Helmold: »Charinthi …, homines divino cultui dediti, nec est ulla gens honestior et in cultu Dei et sacerdotum veneratione devocior«), as we are nowadays »Musterknaben« in Europe. The first Slovenian schools were not possible to found until the Napoleon's rule, appr. two hundred years ago, as the »cultured« Germans did not allow them earlier, even the use of the Slovenian language was in some places forbidden. Even sixty years ago we were by the same »cultural Westerners« massively deported and murdered. Even nowadays we and our minority are seriously molested in Austria and Italy (actually there were terrorist attacks in nineties on our national minority in Austria), the police naturally could never find the culprits. European institutions do not bother for the rights of both Slovenian minorities, but they loudly promote the right of any non-Slavic minority – save they are not violated by a certain »international community«.

For the sake of truth it has to be mentioned, that any manifestation of the neo-Nazi followers in the West accompanies also the demonstration of the adversaries, of the people, who are conscious what brought the Nazi mentality in the past.

It is true that the German official circles pretty cleaned off the worst Nazi propaganda (also in history books), but their relation to the Slavs did not change essentially. The average West-European is less educated as the average East-European and he does not know properly even his own history. For such a »Westerner« there is all the same and equal from the Vienna or Venice towards the east; on his ignorance is he even proud, because it concerns something of no importance. His ignorance would be also for us of no importance, but in this way are they still educated to our enemies, so we can not ignore them.

[35] Illustrative are the German pages of Wikipedia on Slavs and Slavonic languages or eg. Die Slawen in Europa - Einleitung

( Megalomanic mentality, arrogance, »the explanations in the proper historical context«, conscious lies and the ignorance in the academic circles are evident from the dissertations, which are actually without any scientific value, see.: R. Steinacher: Studien zur vandalischen Geschichte, Diss. der Universitaet Wien,Wien 2002, ;

U. Schlott: Vorchristliche und christliche Beziehungen bei Kelten, Germanen und Slawen, Diss., Freie Univ. Berlin, 1996.

As the Austrians will never pardon Hitler to Germans, so will Germans never pardon Slavs the WWII and the whole preceeding history.

[36] see: J.W. Ross: The Annals Forged in the XVth Century, Tacitus and Bracciolini by John Wilson Ross - Project Gutenberg).

[37] »deutsche Geschichte« slowly proceeds to the chapter on Germans and Austrians, and their relation to Slavic nations in the general book of history.

[38] The real betrayal of all Germanic is the statement: »... von woher kam es (das Volk)? Es gehoert zum Anstand eines Volkes, von irgendwoher gekommen zu sein und eine Urheimat zu haben. Dass es auch dort zu Hause sein koenne, wo man es vorfindet, ist fast eine beleidigende Annahme O. Spengler [31], p. 750.

Here I have to mention the »beloved« historical thesis on the »sinchronicity« of the historical sources, according to which a certain »nation« became a historical agens only after the croniclers mentioned it. Before it is futile to discuss it as the facts are valid only after they were registered. This thesis is the surrogate for the Slavic migration theory and the substitute for some more or less official theories on the history of Slavs.

[39] H. Schroecke: Germanen – Slawen, Panorama Verlag, Wiesbaden, 1999

[40] see [39] p. 9: »...Die Bedeutung der Falschuebersetzung Sclavi = Slawen im heutigen Sinne kann ueberhaupt nicht unterschaetzt werden, sie ist eine der Hauptursachen fuer den Verlust des deutschen Volksbodens bis zur Oder-Neisse-Linie, des Sudetenlandes und der Vertreibung der dort lebenden deutschen Einwohner...«

[41] Fr. Jeza: Skandinavski izvor Slovencev, Trst 1967

[42] M. Vasmer: Woerterbuch der russischen Gewaessernamen, Osteuropa-Institut der Freien Universitaet Berlin, Berlin 1969-73

[43] M. Vasmer: Russisches etymologisches Woerterbuch, Winter, Heidelberg 1953-58

[44] H. Popowska-Taborska: Zgodnja zgodovina Slovanov v luchi njihovega jezika, ZRC, Ljubljana 2005, str. 49

[45] see O. Spengler [31], p. 921: » ...Den unermesslichen Unterschied der faustischen und russischen Seele verraten einge Wortklaenge ... njebo, eine Verneinung ...Geist, esprit, spirit ist ( / Klangsteigung nach oben), das russische duch ist ( \ Klangabsteigung nach unten).«

[46] F. Bodmer: Die Sprachen der Welt, Parkland, Koeln 1997, str.220

[47] S. Brather: Archaeologie der westlichen Slawen, Ergänzungsbände zum Reallexikon der Germanischen Altertumskunde, Band 30, W. De Gruyter Berlin, New York 2001, str. 1

[48] The German speaking own estimate on their daily talk.

[49] In one of the first books in German on the independent Slovenia is the first picture a photography of the broken WC, taken in the ruins of the Jesenice steelworks. In the new edition (Petra Rehder: Slowenien, München: Beck, 1999; str. 213: Ill.; Beck'sche Reihe; 879. Länder) is this (or the similar) picture moved on the p. 48.

[50] All Sanskrit words in this text are from: Cologne Digital Sanskrit Lexicon, T. Malten, K. Stöwe: Sanskrit, Tamil and Pahlavi Dictionaries, Institute of Indology and Tamil Studies, University of Cologne, 1997/2003; see there also vocalisation.


On the relationship of Sanskrit and Slavic languages: J. Skulj, J. C. Sharda, R. Narale, S. Sonina, The Hindu Institute of Learning, Toronto, Canada: Lexical self dating; The Indo-European language comparisons – word tables in А. В. Гудзь – Марков: Индоевропейская история Евразии – Происхождение славянского мира, Рикел, Москва 1995, str. 112

[51] G. Jagodziñski: O nazwach S³owian,;

gl. tudi Tomáš Spevák: Drugachna perspektiva na izvor Slovanov/Another perspective on the origin of Slavs

[52] J. Kovárník, R. Kvìt, V. Podborský: Europe's oldest civilisation and its rondels: the real story, , AARG 2004 PAPERS

[53] see [44] p. 77

[54] Online Etymology Dictionary

[55] W. Pfeifer et al.: Etymologisches Wörterbuch des Deutschen, DTV München 2004

[56] Eg. chroniclers: Saxo Gramaticus, Helmold Bosoviensis, Thietmar Mersenburgiensis; overwiev on

[57] J. Baudouin de Courtenay derived from these personal names the name Slovani; gl. [51]

[58] Z. Go³ab: The origins of the Slavs, Slavica Publishers, inc., Columbus, Ohio, 1992, str. 294

[59] see [44] p. 73

[60] see [44] p. 75

[61] see Flavius Mauricius Tiberius Augustus (Maurikios): Strategikon; as also: Feasting with "Kings" in an Ancient Democracy: On the Slavic Society of the Early Middle Ages (Sixth to Seventh Century A.D.) Florin Curta

[62] Petr Jandáèek: Slav - Slave zgodovina/history/Geschichte

[63] according to Lozinski [30]:

»I would like to suggest that Arabic Saqlaba was derived from Saka, the name of an Iranian population living north of the Caspian sea in pre-Christian times. Saka, from sah, sak, meaning "lord", referred to the social organization, a type later called feudal (for bibliography see Lozinski, B. P., The Original Homeland of the Purthians; Hague, 1959, pp. 29 f.). Saqlaba, possibly a compound name, might have been a survival of the earlier name Saka, referring to the same geographical region and to a similar social organization of the inhabitants, differences of population notwithstanding. The change from Saka to Greek Sklavini might have occurred by elimination of the vowel and addition of suffixes. In the same way Persian (and Arabic) sakirlat, "textle", primarily wool, became scarlatum, "scarlet" in the Latin of the Middle Ages: Hontum-Schindler, A., "The word scarlet," Journal of the Asiatic Society of Bengal, N.S., VI (1910), 265-265.«

[64] see [44] p. 77

[65] see [44] p. 63.

[66] Anyway the historical and the contemporary »political« designation (eg. citizenship) should not be mistaken for nationality (ethnic or cultural designation), which is hereditary and defined by the language and the customs from the birth. The citizenship is equalized to the nationality especially in the West.(see eg. J. Shavli: The Vends and the Slavs). This was and is the first source of the problems in all multinational (multiethnic) states, especially evident in the relations of the foregn workers and domestic people.

[67] U. S. Census Bureau, Population Division, International Programs Center: Historical estimates of World Population


[68] M. Alinei: Origini delle lingue d'Europa, Il Mulino, Bologna, 1996, 2000; The Paleolithic Continuity Theory on Indo-European Origins; citation:

»…Also Slavic peoples and their languages existed in south-eastern Europe since the late Middle Stone Age (Mesolithic), resulting in exceptional stability of the Late Stone Age (Neolithic) cultures in the region (only they preserved the tell or mound-shaped structures), this clarifies the reason why differentiation between Slavic languages did not occur - as opposed to the theory of presumed settlement of Slavs at the beginning of the Middle Ages …

I have to commence by clearing away one of the most absurd consequences of the traditional chronology, namely, that of the "arrival" of the Slavs into the immense area in which they now live. (…) Today only a minority of experts support the theory of a late migration for the Slavs ... because none of the variant versions of such late settlement answers the question of what crucial factor could possibly have enabled the Slavs to have left their Bronze-Age firesides to become the dominant peoples of Europe …

The surmised "Slavic migration" is full of inconsistencies. There is no "northern Slavic language"; it is rather only a variant of the southern Slavic ... The first metallurgic cultures in the Balkans are Slavic ... and connected with Anatolia ... Slavic presence in the territory, nearly identical to the one occupied by them today, exists ever since the Stone Age ... The Slavs have (together with the Greeks and other Balkan peoples developed agriculture ... agriculturally mixed economy, typically European, which later enabled the birth of the Greek, Etruscan, and Latin urbanism. Germanic peoples adopted agriculture from the Slavs ... The Balkans is one of the rare regions in which a real and true settlement of human groups coming from Anatolia is proven ...«

[69] Starinski jezikovni sledovi - Lucijan Vuga, Radivoje Pesic. On the scent of Slavic autochtony in the Balkans. Radivoje Pesic; on interpretation of the old inscriptions see В. А. Чудинов: Загадки славянской писмености, Вече, Москва 2002,,; on archeological finds: Signs on Tartaria Tablets found in the Romanian folkloric art, Prehistory knowledge; on first writings: H. Haarman: Early Civilization and Literacy in Europe, Mouton de Gruyter, Berlin, New York 1996; on the explanation of the oldest signs: T. D. Griffen: Deciphering the Vincha Script, Fanad

[70] Gl. [7] ; on Phrygian inscriptions see ¥. ¥мброзић: Гордијев чвор, Пешић и синови, Београд 2004, prev. A. Ambrozic: Gordian Knot Unbound; Cythera Press, Toronto 2002.

[71] To these were ascribed also the inscriptions on the Negova helmets. In the year 1941 the German occupants wanted to rise the monument to the first »Germanic inscription« in Negova. At the moment these inscriptions are in the West ascribed to Italic, Etrurian-Venetian etc. Matej Bor's work [7] is not considered at all. It is interesting that the German historians (opposed to Danish) declared as one of the eldest »Germanic« runic inscription the inscription on the buckle of Vismosa. They transcribed it as aadagas(u) / laasauwija. Immediately are recognizable our words lasa (lasje - hair) and uvija (he/she/it envelopes), in some other transcriptions also the word viha (he/she/it turns, wraps). Danske runeinnskrifter med eldre runer

See also: Ergänzungsbände zum Reallexikon der germanischen Altertumskunde, Band 10: Runische Schriftkultur in kontinental-skandinavischer und -angelsächsischer Wechselbeziehung; M. Stocklund: Von Thorsberg nach Haithabu; hrsg. von Klaus Düwel, Berlin [etc.] : de Gruyter, 1994, str. 102; Band 15: Runeninschriften als Quellen interdisziplinärer Forschung; E. H. Antonsen: On runological and linguistic evidence for dating runic inscriptions; hrsg. von Klaus Düwel; Berlin [etc.]: de Gruyter, 1998

[72] see [69] Chudinov,,

Z. Kulundzhich: Zgodovina knjige, DZS, Ljubljana 1967, p. 150

[73] Thietmar Mersenburgiensis Chronicon, VI, chap.17: »Quamvis autem de hiis aliquid dicere perhorrescam, tamen, ut scias, lector amate, vanam eorum supersticionem inanioremque populi istius executionem, qui sint vel unde huc venerint, strictim enodabo

Nemshki prevod:

»Ueber sie zu berichten ist mir ein Greuel; doch musset du, lieber Leser, den eitlen Aberglauben und noch sinnloseren Kult dieses Volkes kennen, ich will deshalb kurz erklaeren, wer sie sind und woher sie kommen.«

Gl. tudi

F. Curta: Slavs in Fredegar and Paul the Deacon: medieval gens or »scourge of God«, Early medieval Europe, 6(2), 141 – 167,; see conclusion:

»In conclusion, Fredegar and Paul the Deacon may have been the first among medieval historians to assign Slavs a place in History. Theirs was an attitude combining interest for the origins of the Slavic gens with the perception of the Slavs as an instrument of divine punishment. It is on this basis that Helmold of Bosau, Adam of Bremen, and Thietmar of Merseburg would later construct their image of Wends.«

[74] see [44] p. 164

[75] Here even does not help the convulsive grip on bukev (beech-tree) as a rescue stalk for a proof of the Slavic homeland: SVEVLAD (M. Budimir: Problem bukve)

[76] see. [44] p. 155: »… Je mar vprashanje etnogenetskih raziskav res tako brezupno?«; on hydronym exploration see p.164.

[77] This view is by no one so precisely described as by Oswald Spengler, Nazi philosopher, with his notion of »Faustian soul«. The boasting, blown up and babbling self-praise on the own superior value, uniqueness, »the tailoring of the own history«, the yearning for the »higher goals«, their own technological achievements etc. – altogether just the mentality of an adolescent male, who tries to find his confirmation; but he is not completely convinced in himself and his capabilities, he tries to prove himself perpetually his own value, without his gang he feels himself vulnerable and forlorn, he accepts blind subordination to his gang leader. Actually is this the expression of the subconscious minority complex in the loudly declared megalomania. In the essence is exactly this Spenglerian contempt full of the »fellahin« characteristics as it strives for »panem et circenses«; it is actually the producer and the consumer of the trivial Western culture – pop culture..

[78] Addendum after the editorial end:

Q. Atkinson in R. Gray, from the University in Auckland, applied in linguistics the mathematical methods used in the genetic research (statistics of the relationship of the DNA sequences)

( ).

They took the Swadesh list of words


which should have been present in the base of all languages from their beginning, to determine the relationship of languages as well to estimate the time of their formation from their predecessors. Their findings are strongly criticized as their results are not compatible to the actual results of the glottochronology (mostly based on Germanic and Celtic languages;;

Concerning this issue, it can not be ignored the fact that according to the »laws« of this linguistic glottochronology we should not comprehend at all the Freising manuscripts with the contemporary Slovenian. But we do. Also it has to be considered the fact that the laws of the glottochronolgy follow from the relatively short time interval of development of a couple of languages, solely from the languages, whose ancient forms are known from the satisfactorily numerous written sources.

Naturally are the objections to these results partially justified, but the results themselves are pretty illustrative. Besides the technical objections is the major reproach the methods result of allegedly too ancient age of the language families' separation. But these time data well agree with the Alinei's theory of the palaeolithic continuity as well with ours – we name them accordingly – Venetic findings.

The name Slovani is factually from 6000 to 7000 years old. 



Branko J. Hribovshek, O imenu Slovani, I, II; Revija SRP, sht. 79-80/2007; sht. 81-82/2007

Edicija Pogum: Branko J. Hribovshek O IMENU SLOVANI



Authorization by Branko Hribovshek




Slovenian (gajica)

Slovenian (bohorichica)