January 24, 2010

Why attack Slovenians in 595?

In AD 595 King Tassilo of Bavaria attacked the Slovenian state (Sclaborum provinciam) and returned home with much booty:

Common sense and historical account collide with the fabricated 'historical facts'
"And he soon thereafter invaded the province of Slavs, overpowered them, and returned to his homeland with much loot . . . "
(Paulus Diaconus, History of Langobards, IV, 7, written in 783, Montecassino, Italy)

If the Slovenians had just arrived and occupied the area in the 6th century A.D., as we are told by current official historians, how could they have had such wealth as to entice the Bavarians to plunder?

If the Slovenians had arrived to conquer the land, they would have been the aggressors, but that was not the case. The report of Tassilo's incursion clearly states that it was the Slovenians who were attacked and ransacked in their own land.
Official historians and archaeologists, particularly in Austria, have tried in every way to discover a cultural break in the eastern Alps between antiquity and the Early Middle Ages, but they have had little success because there was no such break.  For those who wish to put these ideas in perspective and familiarize themselves with the basics of Slovenian history, the book VENETI, written by the economist Dr. Joz'ko Šavli, poet Matej Bor and Prof. Rev. Ivan Tomazic, is absolutely essential.  Combining many decades of research, VENETI offers a careful study of facts essential to the understanding of our past.
For example, in Part One of VENETI, we find countless examples of uninterrupted continuity of the Venetic/Slovenian village culture.  The ravaged Roman cities in Noricum are often cited as evidence of the cutural break.  On page 130 of VENETI, Dr. Šavli discusses this problem even more convincingly.  He states: "It is fairly accurate to say that with the destruction of Noricum's cities in late antiquity, its culture perished:  but we must be careful to recognize that what perished was the Roman system, the city culture, and not the rural farming communities where nine-tenths of the population lived."  And again on page 131, he writes: "If these cities were really destroyed by Slavs [Slovenians] there must have been major battles, but official historians only tell us that the inhabitants fled into Italy and Bavaria.
If the cities were deserted, why would the advancing Slavs burn them?  Because they were barbaric and did not know the value of ready-made accommodations?  Very unlikely.  Many armies of invaders passed through Noricum:  precisely who destroyed its cities is not known.  One thing, is certain and it needs to be repeated:  The destroyed cities of Noricum do not prove the arrival of Slavs [Slovenians] at that time."
While our historians and archaeologists try to convince us of the late formation and arrival of Slovenians, the place-names of Venetic/Slovenian origin throughout Austria, northern Italy, and eastern Switzerland tell us of the presence of our ancestors in the European Alps since antiquity.  Even 1250 years of the gradual progression of the German language in Austria has not completely destroyed the Slovenian language there.
The 6th century settlement theory implies that Slovenians moved within one generation from mud huts to the founding of their state of Carantania, and the total eradication of the language of the area's "older population".  This could have happened only in somebody's imagination, and it raises more questions than it answers.

by Anton Škerbinc
August 18, 1998