Talk:Pre-Christian Slavic writing

Renaming suggestion

This really, really, really needs to be renamed to "pre-Christian Slavic writing" or "Slavic runes".

"Pre-Cyrillic Slavic writing" is meaningless from the beginning (the Glagolithic alphabet is older) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.149.222.160 (talk) 05:11, 1 July 2008 (UTC)

the Glagolitic alphabet was introduced by Cyrill and as such isn't "pre-Cyrillic". --dab (𒁳) 14:28, 1 July 2008 (UTC)

I propose to move this page to 'Slavic runes' for these reasons: One, "pre-Christian Slavic writing" is not intuitive and will rarely be searched. Two, both 9th century references to possible Slavic writing stronlgy imply carving (i.e. runes). Three, the Russian wikipedia article is named precisely that, so there'll be at least some standartization between the various wikipedias. Dennv. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.149.222.160 (talk) 00:44, 2 July 2008 (UTC)

what on earth is "carving (i.e. runes)" supposed to mean?

Lots of alphabets are "carved" without being referred to as runes. And lots of runic sources are from manuscript tradition.

The Russian article is called ru:Проблема дохристианской письменности у славян, which is reasonable. Cherty i rezy could be another possibility, because this article is in fact just about this single expression in Hrabar: Note how this article isn't actually about anything.

It is about a hypothetical thing for which there is not actually any evidence.

Such content as we have here could easily be merged into Chernorizets Hrabar. --dab (𒁳) 11:28, 10 August 2011 (UTC)

Agreed, cf. the Czech article cs:Předkřesťanské slovanské písmo, which also translates as "Pre-Christian Slavic Writing". The assumption that there once was a kind of unified Pre-Christian Slavic Writing is hotly debated among Slavic nationalists. Apart from the two medieval mentions, which can only serve as indirect evidence of something that might not have been a full-fledged writing system after all, there is nothing that would prove its existence. --Pet'usek ^{[petrdothrubisatgmaildotcom]} 20:36, 14 September 2011 (UTC)

This could be actual runes

Maybe these two sources actually refers to runes since both Goths and Vikings where active in large parts of Slavic countries. It would not be unlikely that the Slavs would use the runes for their own language. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 41.202.225.145 (talk) 14:38, 13 March 2011 (UTC)

Novgorod Inscription

Here is another strong possibility of Slavic pre christian writing using "Gothic Viking runes"; the Novogorod inscription. Instead that the message follows the Slavic language, nobody of arrogant and ignorant linguists tried to solve the message, which is in Slavic: http://www.arild-hauge.com/arild-hauge/ru-rune-novgorod1-1.gif

"KHNIAZ TB MLR " - "PRINCE (KNEZ or KNIAZ); Tb as shortened for "to biet, budet (to be) ... and two roal hands, probably representing a royal symbol and between probably a rune for this prince or leader. So the question goes, were Varangians really Swedish Vikings(Jarls). Probably not at all...

Or this inscription from Latvia; http://www.arild-hauge.com/arild-hauge/ru-rune-daugmale-1.gif "RUNAR PISAR" "writer of runes" By Volkun

Evidence from etymology

It is unclear from the section text is this an evidence for or an against against, and actually could be easily turned either way. So that it does not look like an evidence of anything after all.

Unless the chapter is rewritten in a more clear way it might be better just to remove it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dime (talk • contribs) 16:12, 9 January 2020 (UTC)

I just found this article (https://www.jstor.org/stable/4207635) and it's summary could somebody better understanding etymology then me include to the article. Dominikmatus (talk) 22:28, 12 February 2021 (UTC)

Vandalism

This article was vandalized by the editor Moraskulk with a page completely copying mine. I had to temporarily block it. Noraskulk (talk) 06:49, 21 October 2020 (UTC)

English translation of Vita Cyrilli quote?

It would be nice if we could get it translated. I've looked for Old Church Slavonic online translators and have had no luck. Google's translate does nothing useful, either. Gamle Kvitrafn (talk) 16:41, 15 February 2022 (UTC)

@Gamle Kvitrafn: “But, having convoked an assembly, the Emperor summoned Constantine the Philosopher, and made him listen to this matter. And he said: I know you to be weary, Philosopher, but there is need for you go there; for no other can set these matters right like you. But the Philosopher answered: Yet though I be both weary and sick in body, I will go there with joy, if they have letters in their language. And the Emperor said to him: My grandfather and father and many others looked for this, but they did not find it, so how can I find it? But the Philosopher said: Then who can write speech on water and earn himself a heretic’s name?” Vorziblix (talk) 11:51, 23 February 2022 (UTC)

Wonderful! How relevant to the article do you guys think this is? I think it would be nice to include it. Gamle Kvitrafn (talk) 01:36, 26 February 2022 (UTC)

This translation is correct. But I would include the note that writion on the water means doing something needlessly. Dominikmatus (talk) 11:24, 21 March 2022 (UTC)

Runes

Winicjusz Kossakowski claims he discovered "Slavic Runes", which he identifies as Slavic writing. I am a Green Bee (talk) 13:56, 19 December 2022 (UTC)