Autentificare
Creează cont
Sus |
Second Opinion
Folosind serviciul second opinion ne puteți trimite RMN-uri, CT -uri, angiografii, fișiere .pdf, documente medicale. Astfel vă vom putea da o opinie neurochirurgicală, fără ca aceasta să poată înlocui un consult de specialitate. Răspunsurile vor fi date prin e-mail în cel mai scurt timp posibil (de obicei în mai putin de 24 de ore, dar nu mai mult de 48 de ore). Second opinion – Neurohope este un serviciu gratuit. www.neurohope.ro |
Originea românilor - partea IV, Istoria României, românilor: anii 500-1200
5 voturi
Ultima postare: ian 27 2024 00:06, Inițiat de
Infinitty
, aug 08 2017 09:16
·
12
12
#2539
Publicat: 06 iulie 2019 - 22:43
|
criztu, on 06 iulie 2019 - 22:20, said:
Da daca ai tu dovezi ca Justinian vorbea latinejte, pune aicea dovada. Stiu ca n-ai s-o pui. N-ai mai pus o dovada de 'jde ani. Te-ai blazat dah tot... paregzamplu pentru inceput Corpus Juris Civlilis. reiese ca nu se regaseste, fiindca a fost inlocuit prin schimbare. ce se regaseste, editiile sunt occidentale, adica, ce se-ntampla. dar sperante este. https://gizmodo.com/...t-ma-1835207693 |
#2540
Publicat: 06 iulie 2019 - 22:46
|
zz_dop, on 06 iulie 2019 - 22:43, said: pai e greu cu dovedit dovezile. Editat de criztu, 06 iulie 2019 - 22:47. |
#2541
Publicat: 06 iulie 2019 - 22:51
|
criztu, on 06 iulie 2019 - 22:46, said:
Sabazius e indentificat ca zeu suprem trac iar Justinian isi trage numele Sabatius? https://en.wikipedia...,_and_Dorymedon |
#2543
Publicat: 06 iulie 2019 - 23:01
|
criztu, on 06 iulie 2019 - 22:54, said:
Tu esti total paralel pe subiecte crestine si semantica misticistica. criztu, on 06 iulie 2019 - 22:54, said: Incerci sa-i vinzi crastaveti gradinarului... deci, castravetele, care e etimologia dumnealui. Editat de zz_dop, 06 iulie 2019 - 23:01. |
#2544
Publicat: 06 iulie 2019 - 23:21
|
zz_dop, on 06 iulie 2019 - 23:01, said: nush ce sa zic. poate ca sunt eu paralel si intr-adevar ai lecturat scrieri teologhicesti tracice despre Sabazius, si stii despre ce vorbesti. Si cum vei eshi din aceasta dilema? Dupe ce criterii poti sa apreciezi tu, daca stiu eu despre ce vorbecs? A, gata mi-a picat fisa, ma provoci ca sa ma faci sa-ti explic. Tu vrei multe. Astea nu sunt cestiuni sa ti se transfere cum le da episcopii biscuitii aia rotunji de le baga mura'n gura la enoriaji na cunoajtere. Crestinismu e panteonism asa zis greco-roman, doar i-a schimbat sandalele si l-a facut din Apollo in Apollinaris. din Sabazios in Sabaoth. Ca sa discutam astea trei sa ai si tu nejte fundamente, altfel io n-am timp sa iti predau tie fundamente ca sa poti sa eshi din dilema crastavetului. [sharedmedia=core:attachments:2185168] Editat de criztu, 06 iulie 2019 - 23:22. |
#2545
Publicat: 06 iulie 2019 - 23:34
|
criztu, on 06 iulie 2019 - 21:15, said:
Aia cu stilul gotic in architectura, ce draq sa traduci? ce treaba are architectura cu ca Getic = Gotic la Jordanes, ca la 1800 nazional sozialistii sa ne explice ca stai ca sa vezi ca Gotii sunt 'poporul nemtzalau'? zilele moderne, Gothic-Kultur, omul got [ https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/7/71/L%C3%A9tain.png - Pentru incarcare in pagina (embed) Click aici ] Die Anhänger der Gothic-Kultur werden länderübergreifend als Goths bezeichnet, nu Deutsch, nu German, ci Goth, precum ungurii ii numeau pe Gepizi cu apelativul Toth (astazi sunt slovacii), iar la noi Tăuți (în ungureste Kolozstótfalu, colocvial Tótfalu) Editat de enough1453, 06 iulie 2019 - 23:39. |
#2546
Publicat: 06 iulie 2019 - 23:36
|
criztu, on 06 iulie 2019 - 23:21, said:
Astea nu sunt cestiuni sa ti se transfere cum le da episcopii biscuitii aia rotunji de le baga mura'n gura la enoriaji na cunoajtere. Editat de zz_dop, 06 iulie 2019 - 23:37. |
#2547
Publicat: 07 iulie 2019 - 00:09
|
criztu, on 06 iulie 2019 - 21:15, said: E fix cum fac Asenii cu Petar Gyula(pah bulgareste Dulo). Sa-ti dau mai intai una cu Ioan Asan II Asta se casatoreste cu Ana, prima sotie (dupa care scapa de ea si o trimite la manastire) copii: Maria Asanina Komnena, maritata cu Manuel Komnenos Doukas, imparat de Thessalonica intre 1230 si 1237 Beloslava, maritata cu regele Serbiei Stefan Vladislav I (r. 1234–1243) Pe urma se casatoreste cu Ana Maria, fiica regelui Ungariei Andrei II si al nemtoaicei Gertrude von Merania si sora Sfintei Elisabeta a Ungariei au urmatorii copii: Elena, maritata cu Theodor II Doukas Laskaris imparatul din Nicaea. Ca rascumparare si-a dat fiica, plus ca dota de nunta orasale Belgrad si Branicevo si tinuturile din jur. Asta ca sa inteleaga si bozgorii de pe forum cum e chestia cu Vlahii si ungurii. zz_dop, on 06 iulie 2019 - 23:36, said:
a fost uploadata dupe-un floppy? 
|
#2548
Publicat: 07 iulie 2019 - 09:56
|
enough1453, on 07 iulie 2019 - 00:09, said:
tot la floppy ai ramas? 
Screenshot_2.jpg 27,33K
17 download-uri
Screenshot_3.jpg 83,38K
17 download-uri
|
|
#2549
Publicat: 07 iulie 2019 - 10:09
|
criztu, on 06 iulie 2019 - 22:54, said:
Tu esti total paralel pe subiecte crestine si semantica misticistica. Incerci sa-i vinzi crastaveti gradinarului... 
|
#2550
Publicat: 07 iulie 2019 - 10:30
|
cleopatra00, on 07 iulie 2019 - 10:09, said:
Că tot pari matale atoateștiutor... Ce e cu misticistica asta, dom le? E un soi de mistic+cistic? Poate ne explici matale etimologia, altfel pare tainică rău de tot și e păcat. Mistica e mistere. Misterul e conceptul ca de ex. tu ai o idee de cum ar trebui sa fie organizate lucrurile. Si-mi zici si mie: sa facem asa si asa. Iar io nu inteleg, ori nu pricep. Si atunci tu, cand vezi ca eu nu pricep, cauti pe altu, si altu, pana gasesti pe unu care intelege. Si va organizati. Iar io si altii care nu pricepem ne uitam ca projtii la voi cum va construiti o chestie care noi n-o intelegem. E un turn prin care voi va inaltati la ceruri, impingandu-va in noi, cei care nu intelegem. Ne ingramaditi intr-o movila pe care va urcati, sus sus sus pe muntele lui Dumnezeu din Hiperborea, in timp ce noi, striviti in colosala structura, ne uitam la fotbal sa vedem daca se califica baietii in finala. E foarte important sa ne dati de mancare si de bautura si distractie, ca sa nu ne plictisim si sa nu mai fim productivi, caci pt a va putea ridica voi cei vii in sus, trei sa apasati pe cei ce pier in jos, altfel nu mai scapati din aceasta lume in care v-ati prabusit prin Adam. M-ai inteles? Editat de criztu, 07 iulie 2019 - 10:39. |
#2551
Publicat: 07 iulie 2019 - 10:38
|
criztu, on 07 iulie 2019 - 10:30, said:
Mistica e mistere. Misterul e conceptul ca de ex. tu ai o idee de cum ar trebui sa fie organizate lucrurile. Si-mi zici si mie: sa facem asa si asa. Iar io nu inteleg, ori nu pricep. Si atunci tu, cand vezi ca eu nu pricep, cauti pe altu, si altu, pana gasesti pe unu care intelege. Si va organizati. Iar io si altii care nu pricep, ne uitam ca projtii la voi, cum va construiti o chestie care noi n-o intelegem. E un turn prin care voi va inaltati la ceruri, impingandu-va in noi, cei care nu intelegem. Ne ingramaditi intr-o movila pe care va urcati, sus sus sus pe muntele lui Dumnezeu din Hiperborea, in timp ce noi, striviti in colosala structura, ne uitam la fotbal sa vedem daca se califica baietii in finala. E foarte important sa ne dati de mancare si de bautura si distractie, ca sa nu ne plictisim si sa nu mai fim productivi, caci pt a va putea ridica voi cei vii in sus, trei sa apasati pe cei ce pier in jos, altfel nu mai scapati din aceasta lume in care v-ati prabusit prin Adam. M-ai inteles?  Să-mi fie cu iertare, dar, dacă fac o culegere din termenii uzitați de matale, nu aș avea încredere că știi ce vorbești uneori, cu atât mai mult să prezinți și să explici alte etimologii, semantică, și tot ce îți mai dă ție acolo. Poate ar trebui început cu ... începutul. Dacă vrei să te joci, merge. De multe ori, aici e mai amuzant decât pe Fun. Funny, nu? |
#2552
Publicat: 07 iulie 2019 - 10:44
|
cleopatra00, on 07 iulie 2019 - 10:38, said: Ești amuzant. cunoasterea e intelegere care se naste in ceruri. intelegerea nu stie nimeni sa explice cum se intampla, de-aia ii zice revelatie. revelatia e o chestie care se optzine in solitudine. restu e gargara, din grex - greci. Editat de criztu, 07 iulie 2019 - 10:45. |
#2553
Publicat: 07 iulie 2019 - 17:13
|
criztu, on 06 iulie 2019 - 18:09, said:
1. Justinian nu era latinofon. 2. Ti-am mai explicat: Petrus Sabatius Justinianus. . 4. Justinian cand reface orasele devastate de "slavii" din balcani, denumeste orasul Serdica (unde s-a nascut) in Triaditsa, iar cand vin "bulgarii", acestia o redenumesc Sredets insemnand Miercurea - ex. Csik Szereda(Cic Sereda) = Miercurea Ciuc. Sriada = miercuri in bulgara. Szerda = miercuri in maghiara. Adica, Serdica e o aproximare in latina pt Serditsa. n hai, sa te ajut putin. Quote HOW JUSTINIAN BECAME A SLAV: THE STORY OF A FORGERY Was Justinian a Slav? There is not a wisp of evidence that he was. Yet a great many distinguished scholars, Slavs and non-Slavs alike, have held that the great Byzantine emperor was of Slavic origin. Indeed, this conviction st'll lingers on in some quarters to this day. How did this claim gain currency? As far as Western scholarship is concerned, it all began in 1623 when Nicholas Alemannus, curator of the Vatican Library, published his edition of that vicious indictment of Justinian’s reign, the Anecdota or Secret History (Arcana Historia) by Procopius of Caesarea. In his otherwise valuable commentaries Alemannus offered some totally new facts about Justinian and his family, for example: that the young Justinian was held as a hostage in Ravenna at the court of Theodoric the Great, and that Justinian’s mother was opposed to his marriage with Theodora. Most interesting, for our purposes, was the assertion that Justinian was known among his own people as Upravda, which meant Justice in his native tongue; also that his father’s original name was Istokus, and that his mother and sister bore the name Bigleniza, for which the Latin equivalent was Vigilantia. Alemannus repeatedly cited as his source for all these curious facts a Life of Justinian by an Abbot Theophilus, who was allegedly Justinian’s tutor.1 Alemannus did not say 1 where he found or read this work, nor did he offer any information about it. He did not even mention what was later to become the central issue, that the family names which he ascribed to Justinian and his kin could be nothing else but Slavic. Either out of indifference or because of their ignorance of the Slavic languages. Western scholars missed this point for nearly two centuries. Most were more concerned with the other biographical facts which Alemannus attributed to Theophilus, and what discussion there was focused on Theophilus’s identity and the mysterious Life of Justinian rather than on the linguistic derivation of the names Upravda, Istokus, and Bigleniza. Those scholars who quoted these names in their works did so without ever reaching the inevitable conclusion that the names were Slavic. For example, in 1731 a German biographer of Justinian and Theodora, J. P. Ludewig, cited both the name Upravda and its correct meaning, which he took from Alemannus, and then he concluded rather inconsequentially that Justinian may have been of Illyrian, Macedonian, Bulgarian, or Thracian stock—none of which meant Slavic in Justinian’s time.2 In his Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire Gibbon was guilty of an even more spectacular non sequitur. “The emperor Justinian,” he wrote with admirable judgment, “was born near the ruins of Sardica (the modem Sophia), of an obscure race of barbarians, the inhabitants of a wild and desolate country, to which the names of Dardania, of Dacia, and of Bulgaria have been successively applied.” Then, unw’lling to let well enough alone, Gibbon added a footnote which is a linguistic calamity. “The names of these Dardanian peasants,” he volunteered, “are Gothic, and almost English: Justinian is a translation of uprauda (upright); his father Sabatius (in Graeco-barbarous language stipes) was styled in his village Istock (Stock);... It is difficult to ascertain who first called attention to the specifically Slavic origin of the names Upravda, Istokus, and Bigleniza. Certainly this fact was known by the beginning of the nineteenth century, for on November 24, 1809, the Slovenian Jernej Kopitar, who was an official Austrian censor for Slavic languages and an avid patron of Slavic culture, wrote from Vienna to the famous Czech Slavist Josef Dobrovsky that “Emperor Justinian’s family was all Slavic.”4 5Encouraged by Gibbon, whose comparison of Upravda to upright he cited with an exclamation point, Kopitar ventured the opinion that “Belisaurius also sounds Slavic.”4 Kopitar was, by virtue of both his official position and personal contacts, an excellent reflection of learned Slavic opinion of his day. It is important to note that German scholars were among the first in the nineteenth century to support the claim of Justinian’s origin. In 1823 J. S. Vater wrote an article on “The Present State of the Serbian Church” in which he observed, “The interest in the past of the Serbian nation is heightened by the fact that Emperor Justinian the Great ... undoubtedly belonged to them.”6 of Vuk Karadzić’s Short Serbian Grammar, “Probably Emperor Justinian himself was of this 'South Slavic’ origin.”7 Vater indicated that he knew of Theophilus’s Life of Justinian through Alemannus. As for Grimm, it is quite possible that he was influenced directly by his Slavic contacts. The Slavic scholar whose public support of the theory of Justinian’s Slavic origin carried the most weight with Western European scholars was the Czech Pavel Josef Safarik. It was in 1837 that his monumental work on the early Slavs, Slovanské starozitnosti, first appeared. There Šafafik stated that, on the basis of information given by Justinian’s tutor Theophilus (who, Safarik solemnly assures his readers, died in 534 A. D.), he found reason to conclude that Justinian came of a Slavic family.8 9Being in Czech, this claim did not get much attention from non-Slavic scholars. However, when the second volume of the German translation came out in Leipzig in 1844, under the title Slawische Alterthiimer, Safarik’s argument broke through the linguistic barrier. Western scholars now learned from a Slavic scholar of unimpeachable reputation that “Iztok (sol oriens)" was a Slavic equivalent to the Thraco-Phrygian^name Sabbatios or Sabbazios. Apparetly Safarik did not know what to make of Bigleniza. As for Upravda, Safarik was not only able to confirm Alemannus’s report that the name meant Justice, but he identified it as Slavic . The Czech scholar thereupon reached a deduction which went beyond the question of Justinian’s ethnic origin, namely: since Justinian was a Slav, and since he was born in Upper Macedonia, ergo the Slavs must have settled south of the Danube before the end of the fifth century, that is, much before the date scholars generàlly assigned to their migration into the Balkans.8 Other Slavic scholars joined the chorus. Some were rather restrained and indirect, as, for example, A. Kunik, who wrote about Justinian in a Russian journal in 1854, “Despite his Slavic origin, this Byzantine emperor (565) was so imbued with his dignity as a successor of the Roman caesars that he ordered his code to be compiled in the Latin language and even called this language his father tongue (πάτριος φωνή).” Five pages later Kunik again asserted cautiously, “Though it is now reliably known, on the one hand, that Hellenized Slavs sat on the Byzantine throne, and that a part of the Byzantine Empire, especially in Europe, was occupied by Slavic settlements, one must, on the other hand, beware of exaggerating the influence of the Slavic element.”10 11 Other Slavic scholars were not this circumspect. In 1857 the most distinguished Croatian historian in the nineteenth century, Franjo Rački, lent his authority to Alemannus’s Theophilus, adding a few refinements of his own to Šafarik’s rendering of the Slavic names. He turned Justinian’s birthplace Bederiana into Vedrjani, and Bigleniza became Viljenica, again without any explanation as to the meaning or root of this name. Rački also took this opportunity to transform Belisaurius into the supposedly Slav Veličar.11 In 1859 the Russian Slavist Vladimir Lamanskii published two works which touched on this matter. In the first he simply repeated Šafarik.12 It was in the second he vaunted Slavic influence in the Byzantine Empire with the sweeping assertion, “The nationality which gave Byzantium several emperors—Justinian I (527-565), Justin II (565-578), Basil the Macedonian (867-886), the Patriarch Nicetas (766-780), several generals, among them Belisaurius..., many officials and men closest to the throne who wielded enormous influence (in the 6th, 9th, 10th and 11th centuries), such a nationality could hardly have played an insignificant role in the Empire.”13 14 15 In868 another Russian scholar, Aleksandr Hilferding, published a History of the Serbs and Bulgars in which he not only repeated Šafarik’s claim concerning Justinian and his family but also Rački’s Slavonization of Belisaurius (which was now refined into Velichar).1* It is germane to point out that both Lamanskii and Hilferding were not only Slavophiles but organized Panslaviste.16 In 1873 the Bulgarian scholar Marin prinov wrote a Master’s essay while at Moscow University in which he took issue with Šafarik on the date of the first migration into the Balkans. Not content with pushing the date back a century as Šafarik had done, Drinov placed the beginning of Slavic colonization there in the late second century A. D.16 Despite this difference of opinion, Drinov was glad to use the Slavic names for Justinian and his family as evidence. It would be tedious to enlarge on this list of Slavic scholars. By the last quarter of the nineteenth century in Serbian and Croatian schools, for example, Justinian’s Slavic origin became an undisputed part of the curriculum. The Serbian scholar Nikola Radojčić wrote in 1940, “I remember well the pride with which I learned in the sixth grade of high school from the textbook by Vjekoslav Klaić how the Byzantine Emperor Justin was a Slav by origin and how he was succeeded to the throne by his nephew Upravda, who as emperor became known as Justinian.”17 The author of this paper, a native American, heard the same from his father, a Serbian from Croatia. Undoubtedly Justinian’s Slavic origin was much more than an academic question with Slavs in the nineteenth century; it was part and parcel of the whole Slavic cultural and political awakening. Here was a way both to dispel one’s sense of inferiority and to get back at Westerners who had for so long ignored’ belittled, and even suppressed Slavic culture. Slavic interest in Justinian's Slavic origin is quite understandable. There is considerably less excuse for the fact that some of Western Europe’s most renowned historians equally accepted the theory. Some, like Charles Lebeau, who wrote in the first half of the nineteenth century, before it became generally known in the West that the family names cited by Alemannus were Slavic, went on simply repeating these names without realizing their implication.18 However, after Šafarik’s German edition, no Western scholar who treated Justinian could decently ignore the theory of his Slavic birth. Editat de enough1453, 07 iulie 2019 - 17:25. |
|
#2554
Publicat: 07 iulie 2019 - 17:33
|
Si acuma despre cei care au criticat teoria originii slave a lui Iustinian.
Primul pe lista este Roesler, dusmanul romanilor, eroul ungurilor Quote The first public doubter of the Slavic theory was the Austrian scholar R. Roesler, who, in 1873, wrote an article on the date of the Slavic migration into the Balkans. Resting his case on the traditional view that Justinian was named after his foster father Justin, Roesler asserted on linguistic grounds that “Upiauda” was not a genuine Slavic form at all, but a fabrication. He also pointed out that Justinian’s father Sabbatios had an “ecAf thrakische" name, and that Bigleniza (or Vigleniza) was but a corrupt form of the Latin Vigilantia.30 The following year, in 1874, another Austrian scholar, W. Tomaschek, really made a breakthrough in an article on the original site of Justiniana Prima.He not only denied the authenticity of Justinian’s Slavic genealogy but traced it to the sixteenth-century Ragusan historian Luccari (Lukarević), who in turn, he said, probably got the idea from some old Slavic chronicle. At any rate, said Tomaschek, the tale is no more worthy of belief than, for example, South Slavic folk-tales which connected the Nemanja dynasty with Constantine the Great.31 Three years later, in 1877, Tomaschek again took up this question in a very learned review of Konstantin Jireček’s History of the Bulgars, attacking Šafafik sharply Other German scholars caught the scent and joined the chase, notably Krek and K. Müllenhoff, both of whom wrote in 1887.33But by that time James Bryce completely discredited the theory of Justinian’s Slavic origin by a truly important discovery. II In January 1883, being engaged in studies relating to the history of Justinian and especially to the Ostrogothic war, Bryce visited Rome. At the Vatican Library he asked to see the Life of Justinian by Theophilus. The librarians told him that others had searched before him, and in vain. Bryce thereupon looked through the manuscripts of Procopius but could find no clue. Then remembering that Alemannus had been closely associated with the Barberini family, Bryce investigated the library of the Barberini palace and, after a short search, discovered a manuscript entitled Vita Justiniani. It was on paper of quarto size and bound up with some other manuscripts in a small book. The manuscript was written in a seventeenth-century handwriting. The Vita itself consisted of nine paragraphs. Appended to it was a document entitled Explicationes, which contained fifteen notes relating to specific points in the Vita. The author of the Explicationes identified himself i n the first paragraph as Joannes Tomco Mamavich, Canon of Šibenik (Dalmatia). Bryce did not wish to publish the manuscipt until he had investigated several important questions. Was this the Vita Justiniani which Alemannus quoted, and was Theophilus its author? To begin with, the Vita and the Explicationes were written in the same ink and handwriting and on paper of the same size and quality. The Explicationes were stated to be by the person who translated what he called not the Vita itself but a “fragmentum” or abstract. This abstract was written in the third person and in a style which indicated that it was not purported to be a literal translation of the original but a paraphrase. In addition to these problems was the fact that the name of Theophilus was mentioned neither in the Vita nor in the Explicationes·, rather the original was attributed to “Bogomil, priest and abbot of the Monastery of St. Alexander the Martyr in Dardania” whom the Latins and Greeks called Domnius. Mamavich’s seventh note explained that Bogomil was an “Illyrian” word which meant “dear to God.” Apparently Alemannus took the next step himself in translating Bogomil into Theophilus. Despite these problems, Bryce concluded that this must have been the manuscript to which Alemannus referred, for all the facts which Alemannus had attributed to Theophilus were in this manuscript. True, the manuscript had certain facts not found in Alemannus, but they were, Bryce concluded, mostly facts which were in themselves improbable and which Alemannus well might have doubted. How reliable was Joannes Tomco Marnavich? Because Bryce did not know any Slavic language, he appealed for help to Arthur John Evans, curator of the Ashmolean Museum at Oxford, to the Czech historian Konstantin Jireček, and to Count Ugo Balzani. Through them Bryce discovered that Marnavich had a penchant for compiling fanciful or fraudulent genealogies and that he was a wholly uncritical person. “Whether he was also untruthful,” Bryce wrote, “we have no sufficient materials for judging.”84 Another problem was raised by the first paragraph of the Vita, which stated that the original “is kept in the library of Illyrian monks of the Order of St. Basil who live on Mount Athos .. .”85 Bryce had friends searching for it on Mount Athos and many other places, including Dubrovnik, Zagreb, Budapest, Tübingen, and Munich, but with no luck. Bryce hoped that perhaps there might be a clue in one of Marnavich’s unpublished works entitled De Caesoribus Illyricis, but nobody could find that manuscript either. It was also necessary to ascertain whether an Abbot Theophilus or Bogomil who was Justinian’s preceptor ever existed. After a diligent search of the literature of the sixth century and succeeding centuries, Bryce concluded that Theophilus was “a purely legendary personage.” Finally Bryce asked himself what was the relation between the manuscript he had found in the Barberini palace library and the document of which it was purported to be an extract. The external evidence forced him to conclude that there was no such document. However, the internal evidence led him to favor the view that Marnavich really believed “in some sort of an original which he was using, however freely.” Bryce could see no reason for Marnavich’s forging such a document. “These notices,” he wrote, “redound to no one’s credit or disredit. They prove nothing of any present interest to any party, sect, or family.” Hence he concluded that the writer of the Explicationes was “in good faith explaining names and facts which he has read or heard, but has not himself invented.”34 3 Concluzia fiind: Quote On the basis of four years of investigation, therefore, Bryce published the entire manuscript in 1887 in the second volume of the English Historical Review and proclaimed the Vita Justiniani of Theophilus a “semi-mythical and romantic” work which “in some points diverges widely from the truth of history.” He considered the Slavic names given for Justinian and his family translations from the Latin and Greek, and he regarded the entire work as a reflection of South Slavic legendry.37 Cum se vede istoria noastra, a urmasilor populatiei latinofone ai Balcanilor ne este manipulata de toate neamurile din jur: 1. unguri 2. rusi 3. bulgari 4. sarbo-croati 5. albanezi 6. greci 7. turci Pana aici se pare ca scoala germana (includ pe austrieci) a fost cea mai corecta in a ne aduce la suprafata istoria. Editat de enough1453, 07 iulie 2019 - 17:35. |
#2555
Publicat: 07 iulie 2019 - 19:08
|
enough1453, on 07 iulie 2019 - 17:13, said:
hai, sa te ajut putin.
Screenshot_3.jpg 39,1K
19 download-uri" The toupha or toufa (Greek: τοῦφα / toûpha or τουφίον / touphíon) is a kind of ornamental crest or head-dress with a plumage of the feathers, hair or bristles of exotic animals, worn in classical antiquity as a triumphal decoration. In surviving depictions, it is most often seen on military helmets and emperors' crowns. One of the most famous touphas is that which surmounted the crown or helmet of the bronze equestrian statue of the emperor Justinian I atop the column of Justinian, erected by said emperor " Editat de zz_dop, 07 iulie 2019 - 19:13. |
#2556
Publicat: 07 iulie 2019 - 19:36
|
enough1453, on 07 iulie 2019 - 17:13, said: A. Kunik, who wrote about Justinian in a Russian journal in 1854, “Despite his Slavic origin, this Byzantine emperor (565) was so imbued with his dignity as a successor of the Roman caesars that he ordered his code to be compiled in the Latin language and even called this language his father tongue (πάτριος φωνή).” fanele, boss, novelele lui Justinian sunt scrise in greaca, de unde si citezi "πάτριος φωνή" = patrios fone = spusa parintilor. adica pe romaneste "lasat cu limba de moarte de la ai batrani" sau mai modern "asa declara patriarhii" adica Fathers of the Nation. Presedintele. Tovarasul Stalin. deci parerea lu Hunik ala din nazionalizmusul sozialist din Rusia de la 1854 e fix pix. te imbeti cu pasta de pix. din Novellae de Justinian: https://droitromain....ca/N7_Scott.htm We have proposed and proclaimed it, and have caused it to be written, not in Latin but in Greek, in order that it may become familiar to all, and its interpretation be facilitated. dai copy paste la caramizi, nu le citeste nici draq. Editat de criztu, 07 iulie 2019 - 20:00. |
Anunturi
▶ Utilizatori activi: 1
0 membri, 1 vizitatori, 0 utilizatori anonimi
-
- Schimbă tema
- Limba Română
- Marchează forum ca citit
- Termene & conditii
- Confidentialitate
- Consimtamant
- Cookies
- Ajutor
© 2001-2024 Softpedia. All rights reserved. Softpedia® and the Softpedia logo are registered trademarks of SoftNews Net SRL.
Ora implicita a Forumului Softpedia este ora standard a Romaniei (GMT+2). Mai multe informatii →
⚠ Postarile afisate pe Forumul Softpedia reprezinta o opinie subiectiva a membrilor care le-au publicat si nu a SoftNews Net SRL.