(BEING CONTINUED FROM 22/05/12)
Another reason for the absence of Glagolitic documents between the 12th Century BC and 1st Century AD could be the insufficient search. At the beginning of the 20th Century nobody had suspected that in Bulgarian soil there would be found 6000 years old objects like Karanovo seal and Gradešnitsa tablet. Neither had anyone thought that on the Bulgarian territory there would exist examples of Linear scripts. But in the second half of the 20th Century objects inscribed with Linear A  and Linear B script  p. 3 were found in different places in Bulgaria. In 2006 the archaeologists Ovcharov found a tablet with script 7000 years old  p. 15.
It is very hard to determine when exactly the proto-Glagolitic writing system was created.
Judging by the fact that Glagolitic of 9th Century AD has the most matches with Linear B, it can be said that the most ancient form of Glagolitic script began to emerge around 18-16th Century BC and was further developed through the ages by various Slavic tribes.
If around 15th Century BC the Old Slavs from South-Eastern Europe used proto-Glagolitic characters, they were probably syllabic just like those from Linear A and Linear B.
In later times the writing system was developed and the characters, instead of representing syllables as in the proto-Glagolitic, assumed the value of single sounds. Such a process is explained very well by Chudinov  p. 500.
After the ascendancy of the Greeks and Romans in the lands between Danube and Aegean Sea the ancient script could be maintained only in the territories between Danube and Caucasus, inhabited by Sarmatians, Scythians and Thracians (Sinti and Meoti lived in 1st Century AD on the eastern shores of the Black Sea).
The journey of Cyril to the Pontic steppes (dominated in his time by the Khazars) would allow him to come in contact with the Glagolitic-like runes and most probably those runes become the inspirational source for the Glagolitic. Before that moment Cyril couldn’t have known about the existence of script resembling Scytho-Sarmatian runes (like the ancient Aegean Linear scripts), because to the best of our knowledge the Greek scholars of 9th Century AD were not aware of the Minoan and Mycenaean writing system.
The reason for Cyril to choose the writing system of the Sarmatians, Scythians and Northern Thracians was perhaps because their speech was closest to that of the Slavs around Thessalonica. We know that the Thracian tribes Sinti inhabited Southern Thrace
and Aegean region in antiquity  (VII fragment 36, 45, 45 a), but another branch of Sinti occupied the eastern shore of the Black Sea -IV-28, (that region was ruled by the Khazars in the 9th Century AD). Except the Sinti also Moesians (equated numerous times with Old Bulgarians) occupied different territories: Asia Minor, Northern Bulgaria and Southern Rumania. It is said that Alexander the Great had defeated Moesians and forced them to migrate northwards  ( Homatian, cited by Zhivkov).
Because of its isolation (far from Greeks and Romans) the language of these ancient Slavs (who lived northwards of river Danube) would have remained less contaminated.
The isolation would have allowed them to preserve also the archaic script, which after a long development was well adjusted to the peculiarities of the Slavic speech. Cyril would have needed only to perfect this writing system so that it would be useful to all the Slavs.
Thanks to his high education and travels in the lands occupied by Slavs, Cyril would have the acumen, which would allow him to forge a common Slavic script having an ancient tradition.
Present explanation of the origin of the Glagolitic alphabet is quite different from that created by Taylor and his contemporaries, because in the time they finished their research (Taylor – 1880, Jagić – 1884, Vondrak – 1893, Fortunatov – 1890) the Aegean scripts were still not yet systematized and deciphered. The sound value of the Linear B signs became known at the end of the 1950s and beginning of the 1960s. The 20th Century writers Nahtigal (1941) and Kiparsky (1964) were not specialized in Aegean scripts and couldn’t have known about the form and sound value similarity between the Linear scripts and
Glagolitsa. The authors, who studied the Glagolitic script were ignorant of many other very important facts:
1. That Scytho-Sarmatian runes of 1st-3rd Century AD resemble very much the Glagolitic letters  p. 48-59. That information became available in the 21st Century (2006).
2. That in deep antiquity the Greeks considered Scythians and Sarmatians one ethnos  II, 2.1-2 and Procopius testifies that Sarmatians were a branch of great family of Thracian Getae  III, II, 2-8, who were identified as Slavs (Tsenov  p. 14, citing
3. That Sarmatians had the same anthropological base as the Old Bulgarians  p. 50. and the same Bulgarians were defined as belonging to the Slavic ethos by anthropologists in the 1930s  p. 170.
4. That Scythians were considered as ancient Slavs for centuries by the scientists of the Tsarist Russia  p. 154. (Unfortunately after the October Revolution these works were suppressed).
5. That Thraco-Pelasgians had their own script long before the Trojan War (D. Siculus,cited in ).
6. That Linear scripts of the Aegean region were influenced by the Neolithic script of the Balkans, Table 3.
7. That the Thraco-Pelasgians were creators of the Minoan culture  p. 219.
8. That Thracian personal names and theonyms are found in Linear A and Linear B inscriptions.  p. 17-21, not to forget the ethnonym ENETIJO  p. 543.
9. That the people, who in the deep antiquity migrated to Crete must have come with large dug-out canoes (similar to those used by the modern Macedonians at lake Prespa) p. 91.
10. That in the Neolithic times such dug-out canoes were in use in the territories of the Venetic people, who inhabited the region between the Alps and the Adriatic sea.  p. 79.
11. That the Slavic Macedonians are genetically closer to the Cretans than the Greeks 
12. That in the Old Venetic lands (Padua) Glagolitic-like signs existed in 5th Century BC as can be seen from a Venetic inscription PA 28. (The sign resembles the Glagolitic letter Ž (Život) . Also signs from Villa Nova pottery  p. 57 resemble Linear A
signs , Table 3.
And last, but not least – the linguistics proves about the ancient Slavic migration. In the beginning of the 20th Century, R. J. Conway discovered interesting parallels between Venetic and Eteo-Cretan language  p. 125. Hrozny discovered connections between the Cretan toponyms and toponyms from the lands of the Thraco-Pelasgians as well  p. 219-220.
Not being aware of so many important details, the scientists who studied Glagolitsa in the19th and 20th Century based their claims on insufficient and very limited data, that is why they failed to discover the true origin of the Glagolitic alphabet.
The resemblance of 33 Linear A characters (20 in form and sound, 13 only in form) and the resemblance of 32 Linear B characters (23 in form and sound and 9 only in form) with characters from the Glagolitic script is not just a remarkable coincidence, but one of the many pieces of information, which are confirmations for the presence of the Slavic people in South-Eastern Europe in the deep antiquity. Although driven out of their lands, those Old Slavs retained their script and even developed it in the new abodes – further in the North (the lands between east shore of Black Sea and Caucasus), away from their adversaries.
The “creation” of the Glagolitic alphabet in the Middle Ages was only a rewriting, a kind of renaissance. Most probably Cyril choose the runic script of the North Thracian tribes because their speech was preserved unspoiled by foreign influences.
Hopefully, further research will provide us with more data about the real age of the Glagolitic alphabet. Ancient manuscripts, or artifacts inscribed with Glagolitic characters would show the developing of that peculiar Slavic script. Good hope gives us the discovery of the so called Copper Book, inscribed with signs from different ages: Vinca, Linear A, Glagolitsa . This peculiar object is with certainty not the only one, which will be found in the Slavic lands.
What we have today isn’t little. We have not the whole story, but even the fragments are convincing testimony for the high level of the culture of our ancestors – the Old Slavs.
I’m very thankful to Prof. Dr. A. Perdih, who guided me through all the difficult moments during creating this paper. I wish to express my appreciations to the reviewers for their constructive criticism and good advices. I’m also thankful to Emma for her unconditional support, to Iva and Dimiter,who helped me to find important historical sources.
1. V Babič, Učbenik stare cerkene slovanščine, Filozofska fakulteta Univerze v Ljubljani, Oddelek za
slovenistiko, Ljubljana 2003, pp 33-36
2. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chernorizets_Hrabar – Aug. 2007
3. H Lunt, Old Church Slavonic grammar, Mouton & Co., Printers, The Hague, 1996, p. 16
4. G Tsenov, Praotechestvoto i praezika na Bulgarite, Heliopol, Sofia, 2005, p.p. 47-48 (Г. Ценов,
Праотечеството и праезика на българите, Хелиопол, София, 2005)
5. S Rjabchikov, Preliminary report on the Proto-Slavonic writing system: http:/www.public.kubsu.
ru/~usr02898/sl27.htm – Aug. 2007
6. I Ivanov. M Minkova (ed. I. Karajotov), Ortografichna analogija mezdu glagolicheskite bukvi i
sarmatskite runi, po materiali ot mogilata Roshavata Dragana, mestnosta Chatalka, Starozagorsko,
Izvestija na muzeite ot Jugoiztochna Bulgaria, Burgas, 2006, p. 48-59.
7. G Bakalov, P Delev, A Stamatov, A Fol, Podbrani Izvori za Bulgarskata Istoria, Tangra, TanNakRa,
Sofia, 2002, p. 50 (Г Бакалов, П Делев, А Стаматов, А Фол, Подбрани Извори за Българската
История, Тангра, ТанНакРа, София, 2002), p.21, p.50
8. Inscriptions in the Minoan Linear Script of Class A (ed. W C Brice, from the notes of A Evans
and J Myres), Oxford University Press, London, 1961
9. http://proel.org/alfabetos/copto.html – Aug. 2007
10. S von Reden, J Best, Auf der Spur der ersten Griechen, Woher kamen die Mycener?, DuMont
Buchverlag, Köln, 1981, p.p. 49-51
12. http://www.omniglot.com/writing/vinca.htm -date of last insight- Oct. 2007
13. http://www.prehistory.it/ftp/winn.htm -date of last insight- Oct. 2007
14. J Šavli, M Bor, I Tomažič, Veneti –First Builders of European Community, Editiones Veneti, Wien,
1996, p. 513
15. K Porozhanov, Obshtestvo i darzhavnost u trakite, Studia Thracica 6, BAN, Sofia, 1996 (K
Порожанов, Общество и държавност у траките, Студиа Тракика 6, БАН, София, 1996)
16. http://www.ziezi.net/sotiroff.html#4 (ref.nr.54) – Aug. 2007
17. V Georgiev, Trakite i tehnija ezik, BAN, Sofia, 1977, p.p. 157-192 (В Георгиев, Траките и техния
език, БАН, София, 1977)
18. B Hrozny, Ancient History of Western Asia, India and Crete, Artia, Prague, p.p. 219-220
19. G Herm, Die Phöenizier, Econ Verlag, Düsseldorf, 1974, p. 61
20. Muzei I Pametnitsi na Kulturata v Nova Zagora ( katalogus), Meditsina i fizkultura, Sofia, 1983
(Mузеи и паметници на културата в Нова Загора, Mедицина и физкултура, София, 1983)
21. V Duruy, The World of the Legendary Greece, Leon Amiel Publ.Edition Minerva, Geneve, 1975,
22. J Chadwick, Linear B en verwante schriften, Fibula/Uniboek, Houten 1990, p.p. 33-54
23. J Chadwick, The Mycenaean world, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge 1976, p. 27
24. Herodotus, Histories, Wordsworth Editions Limited, Hertfordshire, 1996, V-59
25. O R Gourney, The Hittites, Richard Clay & Company, Ldt Bungay, Suffolk, 1964, p. 128
26. http://www.croraina.com/thracia/ovchaorov/index.html – Aug. 2007
27. A Fol, K Jordanov, K Porozhanov, V Fol, Ancient Thrace, Balkan Press, Sofia, 2000
28. J Dimitrova, Napipvat choveshko zhertvoprinoshenie varhu plocka s pismenost na 7000 g., 24
Chasa (Bulgarian newspaper), 4 Augustus, 2006, p. 15. (И Димитровa, Напипват човешко
жертвоприношене върхуплочкасписменостна 7000 г. 24 Часа, 4 август, 2006 стр. 15)
29. V A Čudinov, Zagadki Slavjanskoi Pismenosti, VECHE, Moskva, 2002, p. 500 (В А Чудинов,
Загадки Славянской Письмености, ВЕЧЕ, Москва, 2002)
30. Strabo, Geography VII, Harvard University Press, London, 1995, fr. 36-45a
31. D Homatian, cited by E Zhivkov in: http://www.ziezi.net/sotiroff.html#8 -Aug. 2007
32. Strabo, Geography II, Harvard University Press, Cambridge, 2000, II, 2.2-1
33. Procopius, History of the wars, Harvard University Press, Cambridge, 2000, II-2-5
34 G Tsenov, Krovatova Bulgaria i pokrastvaneto na Bulagrite, Zlaten Luv, Plovdiv, 1998, p. 140 (Г.
Ценов, Кроватова България и покръстването на Българите, Златен Лъв, Пловдив, 1998)
35. A L Mongait, Archaeology of USSR, Penguin Books Ltd, Harmondsworth, Middlesex, 1961, p. 154
36. J Chadwick, Documents in Mycenaean Greek, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 1973, p. 543
37. R W Hutchinson, Prehistoric Crete, Penguin Books Ltd, Harmondsworth, Middlesex, 1962, p. 91
38. Steps into the Past – Treasures from the archaeological collection of the National Museum of Slovenia.
39. A Arnaiz-Villena, K Dimitroski, A Pacho, J Moscoso, E Gómez-Casado, C Silvera-Redondo,
P Varela, M.Blagoevska, V Zdravkovska, J Martın, HLA genes in Macedonians and the sub-
Saharan origin of the Greeks, Tissue Antigens 2001, 57, 118–127; cf.: http://www.makedonika.
41. R J Conway, Annual of the British School at Athens, year 1902, p. 125
Povzetek Izvor glagolice Glasovna in oblikovna podobnost 20 glagolskih črk z 20 znaki linearne pisave A (črtne pisave A)
in 23 glagolskih črk s 23 znaki linearne pisave B (črtne pisave B), kot tudi oblikovna podobnost
dodatnih 13 glagolskih črk s 13 znaki linearne pisave A (črtne pisave A) in 9 glagolskih črk z
9 znaki linearne pisave B (črtne pisave B) pomenijo, da je treba prestaviti začetek ustvarjanja
glagolskih znakov iz 9. stol. po Kr. v približno 18. stol. pr. Kr. Podobnost glagolskih črk z
venetskimi črkami iz 5. stol. pr. Kr. in s scito-sarmatskimi runami iz 1. do 3. stol. po Kr.
nakazuje prehod od črtnih pisav v 2. tisočletju pr. Kr. do srednjeveške slovanske pisave. Tako
cerkvena slovanska pisava kot tudi stare pisave egejskega področja imajo svoj skupni izvor v
neolitski pisavi na Balkanu – v nekdanjih slovanskih področjih.
BY Pavel Serafimov
(TO BE CONTINUED )