Attila and Russia in the 4th and 5th century AD

By Aleksandr Fomich Veltman

Translated from the Serbian edition

By Tomáš Spevák

tomispev@yahoo.co.uk

February 2006

(Люты 7514)

[Note: The translation of this book has never before appeared in English. This article is the first translation, in part, and an introduction to the English speaking world. For Serbian speakers, chapters VII and VIII can be found at svevlad.org.yu.]

Chapter III. The Kievans

(Quenae, Chueni, Kunae, Guni, Hunni, Όυννοι)

Attila the Hun

(406-453)

-

Ат Ила Кыянской

(5914-5961)

The Huns didn’t have to come all the way from Asia to attack the Goths, in the year 375 after the birth of Christ because they were already here. They existed in Europe for a long time, living on the banks of Dnepr where they were known to the Goths for thousands of years, that is if we are to believe chronologists of the common ancient Gothic history, and especially those of the Danes.

Huns have not only been known before the uprising against the Goths but have, according to Amianus, served as mercenaries in the Gothic army and fought against their brethren, those who started the revolt led by Bolemir.

The homeland of the so-called Huns is according to Marcianus Heraklius: “Την δε περι Βορυσθενην χωραν παραιχονοι μετα τονς Άλανους οι καλουμενοι Χοανοι” i.e.: “Around the Dnepr behind the Alans, live the so-called Huns”.

Forgive him that he never saw Huns personally, but let Amianus, describe them according to Gothic folk tales as follows:

“About the Hun people”, says Amianus, “a lot has been written in the ancient chronicles (?). The Huns live behind the Meotic Lake near the Ice Ocean (?)¹⁾ and their brutality exceed every concept. Immediately after a male child was born, they iron its face with a hot iron to prevent it from growing a beard. Because of that, they all grow up looking hideous and beardless like eunuchs. But generally they are strong, with broad shoulders and thick necks. With unusual and pruned bodies they look like two legged animals or rough beams, the kind they put on bridges. More disgusting than their human bodies are the rudeness in customs. They eat raw tasteless food and wild vegetables, together with semi-raw meat which they carry between their legs on horseback. They have no houses of their own and avoid other peoples’ houses like graveyards. They don’t even have shacks; from childhood they wander the forests and mountains. When they come to a house they hesitate to even cross the porch, even in utmost need, because they fear of being under a rooftop. For clothes they use furs and hides from wild animals (like martens and others). It is not unusual for them to wear the same dress everyday, including ceremonies, until the clothing turns into shreds. They wear hats on their heads, bent to the side. They wrap their hairy legs in sheep skin. This shabby footwear prevents them from walking freely and thus they are incapable of fighting as infantrymen, but they are well attached to their horses, which were strong but clumsy. Sitting on them, sometimes as women, they do their daily chores. They spend their days and nights on their horses: on their horse they sell, buy, eat, drink and even sleep, leaning over the rare horse’s mane. They do almost everything on horseback including business. They need no orders to charge into battle, they just follow the strongest in the crowd.”

¹⁾ This is not referred to the Torguts-Calmics, but to Tunguz, called in foreign charts Tingoeti.

Amianus does well to describe the agility of the Huns in battle charges fighting in groups or as individuals, their battle cries and noises, their skills in archery, sword handling and most importantly in using the lasso against their enemies. Amianus also describes their shacks, their wandering-ness, their cunningness and their passion for gold.

In the same description there are obvious suspicious voices of men from around the Volgan steppes, who may have participated in wars under Russian command. These voices may be real experiences with a mixture of legend from the wandering Ukrainians, who Amianus differentiates from the Alans. The Alans he concluded were the Neurs²⁾, Budins³⁾, Gelons⁴⁾, Agathyrs⁵⁾, Melanhlens⁶⁾, and generally a great number of peoples all the way to the Ganges river. According to Scholiast: “Alani lingua earunt Wilzi decuntur, crudelissimi ambrones, quos poeta Gelanos vocat” are names of the same military composition: Alans, Alaunes, Vulanes, Gelanos, Ulinzes, Wilzi - as described in Amianus’ words: “To slavery (fits the lower classes) they were not exposed, because they all are of noble birth.⁷⁾ Even to this day they choose their own leader (Ataman) who is elected for his proven military achievements”.

The various different names given to ancient Russian or Ruthenian social and military classes of Slavs were turned into names of nations by ancient historians and geographers. For example people with certain customary haircuts became known as the Kosari,⁸⁾ or kosonosci (hair-wearers), wearers of the tail. People that lived in poverty or in vow of celibacy became the Sarmatian; People inhabiting Russian lands (krayine ) became the Ukrainians. Those that were free became the Volyani (Wolani) from whom came the Alani, Ulani etc.

The ancientness of the cavalry order, celebrated and dedicated to service by dressing, brings to mind the Roman ordo equester - rule of the horseman.

²⁾ Nervii, Norichi, Narovlyani, according to Herodotus they lived on the river Bug.

³⁾ Buzhani.

⁴⁾ Galichi, Galini.

⁵⁾ According to Jordanes Agazzires - Kozari.

⁶⁾ The Dnepr Mogilyani - Μελαγχλαινοι, according to Herodotus they lived north of the imperial Scythians i.e. Russians (Ροξανοι); because Herodotus’ word Russia - State (Derzhava), Grand Duchy (Velikaya Rus), is replaced with βασιλεια.

⁷⁾ In India razhdanya, they were also called radzhaputra i.e. imperial people and Arians (Aryaya) - nobles from Ar called Mars or Haro.

⁸⁾ Kosar, Kosak (kosonosni), from which derive Gusar (Hussar).

By using simple facts that are found throughout history and by dismissing the nonsensical opinions of some unknown Huns-Mongols that existed in the area between the Danube and Volga, Mr. Venelin* has cut through the Byzantine darkness and has declared that Attila’s Empire (Tsardom) was a Russian Empire. The term Huns he ascribes to the Bulgars.

Mr. Venelin’s conclusions stray from the works of Jordanes who believes the Huns are Bulgarorum sedes and from the works of other Byzantine writers who believed that up to the 10th century the Barbarians of the Danube were all Slavs. Byzantine writers considered the Scythians, Sarmatians, Huns, Bulgars, Russians, etc. to be Slavic people, in the same way as we understand the Turks, Ottomans, Mohammedans, Osmans, Saracens to be part of the Ismaelian race. The question of names, places and significance of the 4th and 5th century Huns, by northern forerunners is solved like a simple equation, while the definition of the similar unknown is in most cases important in solving many other questions.

According to the Goths, when it came to religious beliefs, the Slavs were simply infidels. According to tales and sagas as recorded in northern Gothic and Dacian history there existed an enormous Hunuland or Hundingialand⁹⁾ empire whose inhabitants were called Huni or Hundingi. In the Gothic language they were known as Hedningar, Heidnar, Chedenne, Heiden, etc, words which in Latin translate to pagans and infideles. The existing name of the people Kuenae, Gwäne, they twisted into the word Hun, Hund, to fit the Greek Κυωυ with which the antitrinitari depicted the hated symbol of Trinity with the image of the three-headed Cerberus, guard of Pluto’s realm.

While describing lands inhabited by Slavs (Suevi, Sueouni, Siuioni, Suioni), Tacitus, in chapter XLV concludes that “the people Sitones, agreeing with them in all other things, differ from them in one, that here the sovereignty is exercised by a woman” (quod femina dominatur). This however sounds quite suspicious and most probably does not refer to a woman (Kona, Kuna, Quena, Kwäna, Chona), but rather to the people Kwänen, Konae, Chonae, whose capital city, according to northern sagas, was Känugard or Kiänuborg. If we pay particular attention to the unique toponyms and peoples of Scandinavia and Bay of Finland/ Behind the sea are the Sitoni, according to Ptolemy Χαιδεινοι; along the coast are the Sudeni. In Scandia, according to Ptolemy are the Phiresii; from this side are the Pruzze. Over there are the Leuoni, here are Livi; overthere is Halandia, here is Galindia; over there Smolandia, here Suomalandia.

Doesn’t this explain the migration of parts of disappeared tribes across the sea or across the sea to the eastern coast?

⁹⁾ “Hundingialand was called the land of Saxony where the Sechi (Saxons) of the Great Lug of Germany were”. See the Helga-kwiþa Hundisbana 11, note 4: “Slavos olim et interdum Saxones postea Vindos 1. Venedos dictos, ataries nostris Hunos audiisse” i.e. “Under the name of the Huns our ancestors meant Slavs, sometimes Saxons, latter named Vindi or Veneds”. Edda Saem. index. pom. propr.

* “A Frenchman De Guignes was sent to China to gather statistical information for the French government. While busy studying the Chinese language he also did studies on Chinese history from which he drew notes. From all of the Mongol hordes mentioned in the Chinese records he understood one of their names as Shanyu (Xiongnu) or Huhanye which in Chinese means “cruel (evil) slaves”. The result of French negligence is linked to a foreign term, where he, instead of ‘les mouvais esclaves’ decided to translate the Chinese name Shanyu with Huns; unfortunately the name of the inhabitants of Russia during the 5th and 6th ct. according to the Greek authors, the French also call Huns! Negligent De Guignes created Mongolomania or a belief in the invasion of the Roman Empire by cruel slaves of the Chinese Empire.” - Y.I. Venelin: “Scandinavomania and its followers, or the century long research about the Varyags”

From inscriptions of Sinuta coins, Sigtuna it appears was Russian land belonging to princes most probably to those of Kievan origin. Occupying both sides of the bay near the Dnepr, Botnia and Cajania the Grand Duchies of the northern Sagas were mixed, about which more will be said.¹⁰⁾

But to better understand what the ancients meant by the land of the women when referring to the eastern Kwänaland or Hunaland, a couple of testimonies will be examined.

Olai Verelii in his notes about Hervar-Saga writes: “Hunaland ita saepius vocatur Russia in Vilkina saga. Hanc nostril etiam diu vocarunt Hunegard”¹¹⁾ i.e.: “In the Vilkina-Saga Russia is often called the land of the Huns. Also, our elders call it Hunegard”. - “Saxo Gramm. In vita Fronthonis III, Ruthenos et Hunnos pro iisdem accipit”. “The Saxon Gramaticus considers Russians and Huns as one people”. - Helmoldo, citante Stephano. not. pag. 191: “Russia est Chunigard (Conogardia, sax. Gram.), quam Adamus Bremensis vocat terram feminarum et terram Amasonum”. “Stephano, remarking on Helmoldo: Russia was called Hunigard or according to Saxon, Konogard, and by Adam Bremen land of the women or the Amazons”.

“All Slavic lands,” writes Helmoldo, “which lie to the east and are full of wealth, the Danes called Ostrogard and today they call it also Chunigard by the former Hun populace. Over there is the capital city (Metropolis) Chue”.

According to Adam Bremen, the capital city of the Russians known as Hunigard, he calls Chiven.

“The Varyags (Normans),” says Hagen¹²⁾ in his remarks in the edition of the Nibelungenlied, “called Kiev (according to Helmoldo Chué, by Sagas Kiänuborg in Känugard) Sambatas, that is, the gathering place for barks on the Dnepr.”

Mr. Shafarik, whose research has brought so much valuable material in explaining the Slav world, especially the middle ages, without denying western scientific opinion at the expense of the Svevi, doesn’t hesitate to admit that the Huns were Slavs: “Byzantine writers, Teophanus and Kedrenos, with the name Όοννοι call the Huns Slavs. Western writers, especially Beda Venerabilis (6th and 7th century), calls the Huns Slavs. In Germanic folk legends the Huni are understood to be Slav. In northern quidas the Hun heroes Jarisleifr - Yaroslav and Jarizar - Yarozhir and others, reveal themselves as Slavs”.

¹⁰⁾ “In den Nordishen Sagas auch Kiaenubord in Kaenugard, dem Östlishen untershieden, von den Kvänen in Finn-und-Lappland (Cajanien)”. Anmerk. zu der Nibel. L. F. v. d. Hagen.

¹¹⁾ Hervar-saga. Olai Verelii, Upsalae. 1671.

¹²⁾ “Die Varaeger (Normannen) nannten Kiew (Kiewn, Chué (Helm) die Hauptstadt von Chunigard. d. i. Russland; in den Nordishen Saga’s Kiaenuborg in Kaenunland) auch Sambatas, d. i. Sammeplatz der Boote, am Dnieper”.

But to come closer to the words of the interpreter, the best way it would be explained, if in the word Σεμβαταο we replace βμ with v: then it will be zavod (заводь), that is: river basin where barks can be seen. That basin-dock (заводь) was most likely adjoined to the Meeting Hall (Зборичевь). According to Vilkin Saga Attila’s capital was called Susat.

From all of that follows the most simplest conclusion, that the ancient Koueve or Kievans (Кыяне) from folk legends entered the Gothic history under the name Kwäne, Quene, Choani, Cunni, Chuni and in the end Hunni; the land of Kiev or Kievan Russia, got the name Kuenaland, Konaland, Kunaland, Hunaland, and Kiev City (город) - Kianugard, Konagard, Hunugard. But by Gothic custom to give everything their own meaning, Konagard inevitably had to be changed into the land of women, especially because according to folk tales in that devil’s land lived the Kievan witches (magas muleres of Jordanes) and performed the unholy ceremonies Rusalie.

The stories about this land of women and Rusalke are very old dating back to before Herodotus’s time. Herodotus, who loved folk legends, described the origin of the Scythian Amazons and Sarmatians from testimonies obtained from the Goths. Homer’s Άλαζωνας, who came to defend Troy from the land of Άλυβια (or Άλυζια),¹³⁾ in Herodotus’ time were already living behind the Carpathian or Hrobatian mountains. There existed once the kingdom of White or Great Croatia (Horvatia) then became Galatia where, according to Herodotus, the rivers Tiras (Dnestr) and Hipanis (Bug) flowed.

About the movement of the Άλαζωνας¹⁴⁾ into Scythia, Herodotus says nothing, but he speaks about the movement of Άμαζωνας, after some unsuccessful wars with the Hellenes. From the Amazons came the so-called Sarmatians or Σαυροματοι.¹⁵⁾ and the land of the women became the land of the Amazons whom the Scythians call Οιιρπατα, (man-slayers), but whom history has recorded as the Hrobati or Horvati (Croatians),¹⁶⁾ and not at all noticing the Rusalke who had a notorious custom of luring men and tickling them to death.

If the Kievans were known to history as the Huns for such a long time, then their capital Kiev (Kiänugard) must have also bore the title Mother of all Cities, which from the time of Ptolemy was known as the Metropolis on Dnepr.¹⁷⁾

The ancient existence of Kiev doesn’t fall into suspicion. Having a connection between the Baltic and the Black Seas, and being near to the crossing on Dnepr which ties Europe and Asia by land, its position is on an important crossroad, ideal for the founding of a great city and an important trading centre. “The Poliani, who lived in the mountains,” say Nestor “led them by a road from the Varyags to Greece, and from Greece to Dnepr where in the upper stream they crossed to Lovat, and from Lovat to the Ilmerian lake”.¹⁸⁾

¹³⁾ In Paphlagonia. There, according to Ptolemy, behind Bithynia to the east is Γαλατια; there is the city and the bay Άμυζων (if not Άλυζον), where the Amazons have crossed. There is also the river Halis.

¹⁴⁾ In Ptolemy’s work, no doubt because of an error by the transcriber, Άλαζωνες was replaced with Άμαζωκοι.

¹⁵⁾ Srbadia. In the Cossack order the Serbian word siroma (сироматакь, сиромаштво), with the meaning of soldier, hero, celibate by vow, without a home, without family. In that meaning the words siroba, siroma, sirota are with the same meaning.

¹⁶⁾ Όρειπατες, Όρειβατες.

¹⁷⁾ According to Nestor that name was given to Kiev by Oleg, returning it to the Yuryevan dynasty of Russian nobles: “You be the mother of all Russian cities!”

¹⁸⁾ From Scandinavia and from the island of Gothland and other, water traffic was conducted on Dvina to the upper stream near Smolensk, and from Smolensk over Dnepr to Greece and Jerusalem.

The route St. Apostle Andrew the “First Called” from Hersones to Rome passed through Kiev. “And he entered Hersones near the delta of Dnepr intending to go to Rome. When he came to the Dnepr he followed it on one side and after crossing it by chance, he spent the night in a birch forest. In the morning when he woke up he said to his disciple: “do you see all of those forests; above them the bliss of God shines: it will be a magnificent city and God will build many temples there”.

According to Nestor’s accounts Kiev was founded by three brothers: Kiy, Scheck and Horiv who had a sister named Libed.

If we keep in mind naming conventions then the original name of a tribe would bear the name of its chieftain; the name of the land would bear the name of the mother, for being born on it. The names of neighboring lands would bear the name of the sister and the lands conquered would be named after the conquerors’ wives. Using this convention we should be able to find explanations for the natural borders of the Kievans, Czechs and Gorali (Horutani).¹⁹⁾

Strikowski and other writers are of the opinion that Kiev was built in 430 AD and that its inhabitants the Kivi i.e. Goryani (?) were of Hun origin. Judging by the northern legends it can be assumed that the Kievan population had something to do with the Rhine region of Hunigo (between the rivers Hunse and Emize) and also with the former Rhine region of Hunesruck (Hunnorum station) in which the city of Caub²⁰⁾ (lat. Cubae) is located.

If we pay attention to Nestor’s words, he says: “there was a forest around the city (of Kiev) in which they (brothers-inhabitants) practiced hunting; they were wise and cunning; from them the Poliani, the Kievans are  to this day.”

According to Jordanes the “Hunnuguri were known for their trading of marten fur with Hersones”.

From this we can deduce that the Hunnuguri are the Hunugards.

According to Tacitus, the warrior elite nobles and war bands spent their winters hunting wild game and collecting taxes on furs. According to Constantine Porphyrgenitus “With the coming of November Russian nobles left Kiev with their war bands and spread to other cities which they called Γυρω (gorod=city). They went to the land of the Δερβανων (Drevliani), Δραυγουβιτων (Dragovich), Κριβιτζων (Krivichi), Σερβιων (Serbs i.e. White Serbs) and other loyal Slavs and spent the winter there (hunting and gathering taxes). When the ice on the river Dnepr melted, in the month of April, they returned to Kiev and together with their kin (who had gathered in the forests of the Krivichi and Lenchani and were coming down to Kiev) took the usual trip to the lands of Greece to trade their furs, wax, honey and deserters (prisoners) in exchange for textiles (silk or gold fabric), gold, wine and Greek fruit.”

According to Nestor “Near Kiev there was a crossing to the other side of the river Dnepr,²¹⁾ that is why they think that Kiy was just a common conveyor. If he was a conveyor he would have gone to Tsari Grad; but he ruled over his kin (i.e. he was a Kievan prince). When he went to Tsari Grad, to which emperor I do not know, but I know, according to sayings, that he received great honors from the emperor”.²²⁾

¹⁹⁾ Name of the Kievan landholdings of Shchekovitsa remains in the name of Shchekovitsa or Czechovitsa in the upper stream of the river Visla and its confluent Dunavets.

²⁰⁾ Between the rivers Lohn (Logana F) and Vetter. There did live the Chaubi.

²¹⁾ On the mentioned road from Germania to Hersones and towards Asia.

²²⁾ Mr. Schletzer considers these sayings about Kiev and the Kievans as mere fables, but the ancient sagas which compose the history of Germany are also fables.

“While returning from Tsari Grad, he (Kiy) spotted a nice piece of land on the Danube, where he built a small city (a small fortress) to which he intended to move together with his family, but the local population opposed him, but none the less the Danubians still call this place Gradishte Kievats”.

If during Nestor’s time the Danubians knew of a land on the Danube ruled by the Kievans or the historical Huns, then without a doubt Jordanes must have known about it. About Kiev the Hun town, he says: “The Ostrogoths (banished by the Huns in 376 AD across the Danube) lived in three separate regions ruled by three brothers princes, Vidimir, Todomir and Velemir”.²³⁾

“Velemir settled on the lake (Pelso, Pleso; Slavic pleso=lake), Todomir between Scarniunga and Aqua-nigra (Schwarzbach), and Vidimir’s realm was between their lands. Attila’s sons, considering them their subjects, white slaves from the lands ruled by the Huns, attacked the lands of Velemir, but so that his brothers wouldn’t know. Velemir, even though with a small force, resented their attack, destroyed their main forces and they ran into that part of Scythia which lies on the Danube and is called Hunnivar”.

Hunivar, meaning Hun town, castle, obviously derived from the name Kiev-gradts,²⁴⁾ thus is difficult to locate, but according to some it may lie on the Danube delta. From a military and commercial stand point, this was a very important place for the ancient Russians. Being located on the waterways between Kiev and Byzantium, Kievats must have been located on the waterway between Kiev and Byzantium; during the war, on the Danube delta, it was the common joining place for land troops which went through Besarabia (Belo-Serbia i.e. White Serbia) with the naval forces. Up until the 18th century (according to old maps), along the Danube near Novi Kiliy, were the towns Vara and Belgrade (Bialigrad);²⁵⁾ in Dobrudzha region, and Preslaviza, where: “Sviatoslav and his nobles sat in Pereslavits, taking tributes from the Greeks”. – “Here”, Sviatoslav said, “is the center of my land; from Greece I receive tribute in gold, textiles, wine and various fruits; from the Czechs and Ungars I receive tributes in silver and horses, and from the Russians in furs, wax, honey and slaves”.

²³⁾ “For those who don’t know,” says Jordanes, “it is a custom in some nations to borrow forenames from one another: Romans used Macedonian, Greeks Roman, Sarmatians German, and Goths borrowed many names from the Huns”. By those remarks Jordanes tries to justify the numerous Slavic forenames used by Goths, but those names are revealed even by the proselytes of the primeval Slavs. It was the same when Russians took the Christian religion: except for Christian names, the nobles wore their own family names. Generally, without religious contacts nations wouldn’t borrow names from one another. No doubt the Goths, who inhabited Pannonia, were Slavs by origin. That is why Thomas the Archdeacon says that many mistakenly call the Dalmatian Slavs Goths, because their names are Slavic.

²⁴⁾ From the word vara=guard, varosh=guard, castle, fortress; from those come the Hungarian words Var, Varos.

²⁵⁾ Except that Belgrade is now Akerman.

Epilogue

The Past of Europe

At the end of the 18th and the beginning of the 19th century begins a new period of live interest in history of the most wide-spread stratum of the white race: the Slavs. Even though the Slavs had spread their blood-lines over the expanses of Europe and Asia and between the materialistic west and the lethargical east, they were a secret, but also a challenge. To become a secret they contributed to it themselves, because only with the coming of Christianity they truly started writing down their traditions and history, of course, seen only through the prism of a Christian monk (Nestor, Duklanin, Katlubek…) the Slavs of earlier ages were saved from oblivion thanks to their rich folk tales and legends. We must also not discount the writing of foreign authors (Jordanes, Einchard, Byzantine authors…) who helped by adding some impressions, mostly acquired from intermediate sources and from eye-witnesses, in a short time span of only a “few centuries”. There are also some, although sporadic, references found in the works of ancient historians such as Herodotus, Strabo, Pliny, Ptolemy and others. Unfortunately, most of these sources are proving to be inaccurate, twisted either by their crooked notes or by later “repairs” of renaming whole nations.

These inextricable clews moved through the Middle Age European dead-end alleyways. Individual objective testimonies hardly survived the flame of cleansing set for the pagan world. Even diplomatic testimonies, trade, peace and similar contracts, were rarely saved from the intervention of transcribers and glossators. Rare are also the references of travelers and there are few of them older than the 17th century.

With the coming of the Turkish Empire a dark veil has fallen on the whole of south-eastern and a good part of central Europe, when contact with the west and the north was cut-off for a few centuries. Only with the weakening of the Turkish Empire and opening of Peter the Great’s Russia towards the west, change came in the form of new relations and making contacts with the outside world. But that change did not bring expected results for the Slavic world. New masters replaced the old ones and the lands and peoples that were under Turkish rule exchanged one master for another.

In Russia things did not fair well either. With the founding of the St. Petersburg academy, came German scholars (philosophers, historians, etc.) who had their own idea about Russian science. Russian historiography was taken over by Bayer, Muller, Strube, Schletzer and others, thus making new interpretations in the study of Russian history. When they came across Nestor’s story, they neglected Russian chronicles, threw away folk traditions and gave his story a western spin. Western sources especially those of antiquity (Greek and Roman) became of great importance giving Russian and other Slavic historiographies a new direction. The old great masters of Russian historiography (Lomonosov, Tredyakovsky, and others) were removed, (only Tatishev was published after he passed through Schletzer’s filter), to justify a Slavophil Russian historian movement led by Lamansky, Boltina, Danilovsky and others and to which a “nationalistic” epithet was added and used as the main argument to eliminate it. In the meantime, an army of Russian historians was employed, deceived by colorful lies and under the flag of “censured” historiography, focused in government institutions and assisted from many sides, systematically destroying gifted individuals and their unreachable heights. Thus, under the knife of silence and with scissors of falsification, Venelin, Lamansky, Veltman, and so many others disappeared from the Slavic lands. Both Slavic and non-Slavic historians (Raich, Surowiecki, Lelevel, Shafarik, Klasen, Krantz, and others), because they didn’t fit into the scheme of “censured” historiography, also disappeared.

In order to destroy the Slavic “cherry” tree, food had to be prevented from going to the Slavic body from root to flower. To prevent natural reproduction bees needed to be eliminated and the flowers needed to be artificially impregnated to bear a different fruit, a fruit with a taste for those who yearned for it for millennia.

It is up to us now to protect our “cherry” tree and help it heal from the scissor and knife wounds inflicted upon it through centuries of abuse by its various gardeners the individuals, institutions and unions. It is up to us to also protect the bees so that our tree and its experience and knowledge will be passed on to future generations.

Miodrag B. Platisha