Continuity of our people from the old days up to today was not in question, and it was part of the scientific discourse until the end of the XIX century. Therefore, up until that period everyone knew that south Slavs were actually Illyrians. However, after the Illyrian name, crest with a crescent moon and tri colour were banned by the emperors decree, by Germanic-Hungarian political decision the progeny of the ancient Illyrians were declared as Albanians, and south Slavs all of a sudden became “settlers from Carpathians”.
Ancient Illyrians
Since long we are aware that Bosnia and Herzegovina represents an ancient land with its tombstones, with its ancient people, which surprised Europe with its unexplored world once it was occupied by Austro-Hungary in 1878. For the first time, entire Europe was aware that on the territory of BiH there was a unique cult, anthropological and national space which possesses the most imposing and the oldest megalithic culture in whole of Europe. The occupying force did not like this, it actually presented them a large problem: size and hoariness of our culture made Western Europe inferior, and their civilizations mission absurd. This is why a systematic plan of twisting historical facts was put into place, which was an easy task taking into consideration the pretty bad military, economic, demographic but also educational condition of the people living in BiH at that time.
Map of Bosnia and Herzegovina - Stećci
The greatest historical lie which brought the greatest suffering in the Balkans is the one about the influx of Slavs to this area, this myth started with systematic destruction of the Illyrian people and their ancient culture. Slavs were therefore always unsophisticated and primitive people, and their name comes from the word “servant, slave”, these people in reality don’t have structures nor cultural achievements, and they were always to the “civilized” and colonial Europe a symbol of barbarism and primitivism, to which we can attest to today. Namely, when we would performs a poll across Italy, Germany, France or Britain on the topic of Slavs we could hear some pretty unpleasant comments and judgements, which is a result of traditional belief but also ranking of European peoples, civilized– western and primitive – eastern peoples.
Until the beginning of the Austro-Hungarian occupation of Bosnia and Herzegovina the theory of the great immigration was not seriously considered until the ruin of the Illyrian movements happened, this is best described by the historian Bogoslav Šulek (1816-1895). According to him, first the immigrants were of the same birth as the Illyrians, and second they could not outnumber the Illyrian aboriginals which inhabited the entire Yugoslavian area, and even further than that. Dr. Tibor Živković (1966-2013) also confirmed that during the VI and VII century only a couple of thousand people migrated and not hundreds of thousands, this Serbian historian of the newer generation estimated that during that period the part of immigrated people among the aboriginals did not exceed 3%.
Croatian historian Dr. Neven Budak similarly concludes that the older historiography mistakenly believed that the ancient aboriginals were deported and exterminated in large numbers, with a minority staying in mountainous regions, coastal areas and islands. According to him, modern research in various areas proved that aboriginals survived in greater numbers than was previously presumed. Bosnian historian Đuro Besler also claims that 85% of the ancient inhabitants stayed. Vladimir Dvorniković in his Magnum opus “Characterology of Yugoslavs” recognises an “ancient Illyrian” in humans of the Dinaric karst.
Stećci – Illyrian tombstones
After inventing lies that Illyrians are actually Slavs another lie begins, it places the emergence of tombstones, the ancient monuments of the Illyrian culture, into the middle ages, since Western Europe cannot tolerate the fact that in BiH there is proof of the existence of the oldest culture on European soil. Implications of discovering tombstones in the XIX century is that the European roots and continuity of existence belongs to our culture, which is in fact very logical: whoever opened an ancient atlas knows that it is nowhere stated that the European culture was begotten in Berlin, London, Vienna or Paris. To prevent further political and geopolitical implications of this cognition, the truth had to be buried under the deposits of twisted narrative.
However, despite all frauds and historical rigging, gradually enlightenment in scientific circles began and extensive research of various archaeologists and experts confirm that the origin of tombstone dates back to the ancient time even prehistory. Thoughts about prehistoric origin of tombstones was shared by an Austrian geologist and researchers Heinrich Sterneck which as an Austro-Hungarian officer-geologist researched mineral wealth of Bosnia and Herzegovina and found various necropolis’ in the field. He thought that the tombstones most certainly belonged to the ancient times, since they were usually located on Illyrian piles or in their vicinity and that they’re old as the Illyrian burial mounds. The other researcher Alexandar Sapieha spoke about tombstones as very old monuments which resemble Egyptian and Parthian ones. German archaeologist George Wild had an interesting claim, namely the tombstones in Bosnia represent the old European cultural heritage, and that some symbols such as lilies (which are symbols on the Bosnian crest) stems from the ancient times, often as tombstones, that various types of crosses are pre-Christian and were known in the ancient culture, and Christianity adopted them at a later period, giving them Christian interpretation.
Yet, the best proof that tombstones were not built in the middle ages are the dimensions and weight of a large number of tombstones. There is no technological context which would place the practice of breaking off of 32 ton megaliths and their transportation of across great distances. Anyway, why would someone do such a thing, and not use such technology in building other structures. Kemal Čolak from Sarajevo calculated that for the construction of such a megalith which is located in Pavlovac near Sarajevo, one would need to break off a cuboid of 40 tons. A logical question can be posed, where would one find such a quarry, and what tools were used for such a purpose. It is especially interesting to mention that some locals claimed that the monument is located on the former training grounds of JNA, and that the army removed all other monuments from that location, but they didn’t have the necessary machinery to remove this one. What did the man from middle ages use to move it? With that, in the dark middle ages, times of wars, fratricide and crusades against Arian Christians, time of famine, poverty and survival, there was no time for erecting hundred thousand monuments, nor the time for laborious and long transportation and great embellishment of the monuments. Was it done in the middle ages, such a powerful and technically advanced civilization would easily fend off attackers and conquer entire Europe.
There are numerous arguments which testify that tombstones cannot be from the middle ages, though in the middle ages they were used, partially inscribed and ornamented. Here are some of them:
1. Official science until the end of the 19th century considered tombstones to be prehistoric monuments.
2. It was noted that the symbols on the monuments were tied to ancient civilizations, especially Egyptian and Parthian.
3. There are no known folk tales which speak of construction of monuments in the middle ages. However, there are numerous ones which place the process far in prehistory.
4. There are no inscriptions about the building of monuments amongst the ancient people from Dubrovnik, and it is known that the agents from Dubrovnik recorded anything which was of the smallest interest. Such inscriptions are not known in other archives of Dalmatia and Italy.
5. In heaps under the monuments we see a continuation of burials from the 20th century BCE up until the 20th century.
6. Tombs from the middle ages on necropolis’ are located near tombstones or underneath stone switches, i.e. smaller tombstones, which proves the continuity of burial from prehistory, but not their medieval origin.
7. From around 100 000 tombstones, and there were more, only 6000 of them are ornamented, and a smaller number contains various crosses which were pre-Christian and familiar in ancient times. Yet if we persist that they’re actually Christian symbols, we’re talking about a number which is smaller than 1%. The possibility of Christians avoiding cross symbols when ornamenting is simply absurd.
8. In the middle ages in Dalmatia, Bosnia and Serbia numerous wars were waged, mostly crusades against Arian Christians, during this time social-economic conditions were not ripe for erection of megalith necropolis.
9. Depiction of ancient pillars of a temple in numerous megalith monuments additionally confirms the pre-historical origin of tombstones.
10. Layers of humus on monuments which are today underground are between 30 and 80 cm, while on Roman monuments they are between 15 and 30 cm, which rather points to the Bronze age and not the Middle Ages.
11. That burial under tombstones and under a mound was a custom from the Bronze age is depicted through the verses from the Iliad and Odyssey in which burials of cremation remains are mentioned, bodies in a heap on which a tombstone was placed.
12. Tombstones are also mentioned in the Old Testament, which also points to the Bronze and Iron age.
Illyrian god Vidasus on stećak
