Anthony Ambrozic, B.A., LL.B.
Barrister and Solicitor
8 LaFayette Place
Jan. 21, 2004
Dear Mr. Jagodzinski
I am in receipt of your correspondence of Jan. 5th with Mr. Anton Skerbinc on Gary Gorsha's website Re the Veneti.
I respond by sending you complimentarily 3 books dealing with epigraphic remains and toponymy stretching from ancient Anatolia in an arc all the way to Armorica.
I disagree with much of what you claim, but what is to my mind most glaring is the following on P. I : "They (Bor & co.) have trumped up that the texts cannot be understood with the help of Latin and other non-Slavic languages. And finally, they have trumped up that the texts can be deciphered with Slovene (double error: generally ancient texts cannot be deciphered with modern languages/dialects)."
I challenge you to show me where any one of my 100 decipherments could have been accomplished by means of the Latin (excepting, naturally, the few words of the encroaching langue d'oc in ancient Gaul) or, for that matter, any other non-Slavic language.
The double error, in fact, is yours when you so cavalierly claim that ancient texts cannot be deciphered with modern languages/dialects. How can anyone deny that the Latin of Caeser and Cicero cannot to a substantial degree still be made out by comparison to the Italian or Spanish of today! Portuguese, French, and Roumanian would also qualify. Even the approximately 60% of the Norman French inherited by the English language would go a long way to this end.
I do not comprehend the inconsistency of your logic in denying the same possibility of decipherment of "Venetic" inscriptions by recourse to Slavic antecedents.
c.c. Anton Skerbinc
Page Created: February 16, 2004
Last Updated: February 16, 2004
ｩCopyright 2004 Gary L. Gorsha