Re: [sig] Book of Veles and the Zorya
- In a message dated 8/2/2000 11:48:11 AM Central Daylight Time,
> In Russian mythology (according to the Book of Veles)we
> there are three potent female deities - Zorya Utrennia, Zorya Dnevnaia and
> Zorya Vechernia. Their names mean - "Morning sunrise", "Noon sunrise" and
> "evening sunrise".
> They allegedly mated with sons of Orei and produced the Slavic nation as
> know it.And once again, I need to caution all those who are doing historical research
-- these books are not sources of historical information. They are made up,
and I am annoyed that they continue to be passed as historical fact. There is
no historical data about Russian paganism, or Slavic, beyond vague
information about a variety of minor magical creatures. The consensus at this
time is that Slavic paganism was a shamanistic/agrarian system with no
structured Pantheon similar to Greek, Roman, Egyptian, or any other system.
The indirect information about Slavic beliefs and rituals hints at some
rituals that involved dancing and music, and more specific information coming
from questions one parish priest asked of his superior, such as "should the
bride be allowed to slice the cheese" -- a direct reference to something we
encounter in much later sources about wedding rituals. However, "slicing the
cheese" and other tidbits don't paint a picture of Russian paganism, just a
few spots of color on a blank canvas.
- Hello, Predslava!
<..And once again, I need to caution all those who are doing historical
>-- these books are not sources of historical information. They are made up,I just want to make a couple of points here:
>and I am annoyed that they continue to be passed as historical fact..>
first of all, neither the book itself nor any of its interpreters suggest
that the Book of Veles is a history textbook. It cannot be even labelled
"chronicles". It is a collection of sacred writings of one of the religious
sects of ancient Slavs. Would you consider studying history from the Bible
or Bhagavat Gita?
And secondly, it is very easy to dismiss the book just by calling it a fake.
But shouldn't it be proven to be a fake then? Why don't we get one of those
historians to point us out the errors and abnormaliies that would render it
But this hasn't been done. Some of the critics don't even bother to read the
source itself, being convinced that it's a fake from the start. I'm not
saying it's authentic, but until the serious research is done on that book
it should remain inconclusive.
Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com
On Thu, Aug 03, 2000 at 11:43:07AM -0400, serguei plonski wrote:
. . .
> first of all, neither the book itself nor any of its interpreters suggest
> that the Book of Veles is a history textbook. It cannot be even labelled
> "chronicles". It is a collection of sacred writings of one of the religious
> sects of ancient Slavs. Would you consider studying history from the Bible
> or Bhagavat Gita?
The claim is that the Book of Veles is a literary fake, not a
> And secondly, it is very easy to dismiss the book just by calling it a fake.
> But shouldn't it be proven to be a fake then? Why don't we get one of those
> historians to point us out the errors and abnormalities that would render it
> a fake?
The Book of Veles is one of a class of romantic fakes, like the
Osian cycle of Scotland. I seem to recall a similar work from 19th
century Czech literature. The case against this class of work rests
on the following grounds
1) Lack of _any_ indication of such information in the period
between the supposed composition of the work and its
publication. Thus for the Book of Veles there is a complete
absence of evidence for the survival of Slavic paganism into
medieval and modern times.
2) Lack of an original manuscript. This is a very important
consideration. If you found an old, hidden manuscript that
had such important information would you lose track of it? Even
if it were disintegrating, you would keep the pieces.
3) Simply reading the handwriting of an old manuscript is
difficult. The average person who is used to reading printed
books would need the assistance of a palaeographic specialist to
decipher most old manuscripts.
4) The language is anachronistic. This doesn't just involve
grammatical forms and word usage, but also style which can
change significantly in the course of only a century. As an
example, pick up a book published in 1910 or 1920 and compare
the style to that in a current English book.
Waclaw von Pressburg Veritas liberabit uos