Place Names

not only a question concerning the ancient Veneti and Slavs

by Jožko Šavli

In my study Veneti, naši davni predniki (Veneti, Our Remote Ancestors, Vienna 1985), I explained the meaning of many place names which are still used today all over Central Europe, using the Slovenian (Slavic) language as a basis.  Since according to traditional history the Slavs never settled the majority of this territory, the question arose as to which people left behind these names.  Through an interdisciplinary study it was possible to find out that the people in question were the Veneti, the bearers of the Urnfield culture (after 1200 BC) and of the Hallstatt culture (after 800 BC).  They obviously spoke a language, which was close to the modern Slavic languages, particularly the Slovenian language.

The study, through which the Veneti have been given their individuality, showed clearly that the modern Slavic peoples are not an ethnic group, but only a linguistic one, and that they could not have originated from the supposed "ancient Slavs" whose homeland has been searched behind the Carpathian mountains and never found even unto today.  Thus, the "ancient Slavs" never existed as an ethnic group, and they must be regarded as an academic and ideologic construct only.

This ascertainment is very important for the correct explanation of the meaning of place names.  Still today, this explanation is appropriated in the first line by the linguists and Slavists.  They took the question under their exclusive competence, and they interpreted the meaning of the place names on the basis of linguistics only.  There may be adduced several linguistic works as example.  I have in hand the very interesting work called Die Slawen in Griechenland (The Slavs in Greece), written by Max Vasmer, the well-known German linguist and Slavist.  The work was published by the Academy of Science (Berlin, 1941).  Nevertheless, the place names examined in this study were explained mostly in the sense of the morphological forms of the superficies, i.e., after their visual appearance.

This Vasmer's work is an interesting study.  The author reveals a very great number of place names found over a territory which extends from the Epirus region of northwestern Greece and Macedonia into the Peloponnesus.  On the basis of these names the author supposes the settlements of the Slavs, which should have been carried out during the early Middle Ages.  At the same time, he decisively rejects the possibility, that the Slavs in Greece, which he supposedly individuated, have been an autochthonous people there.

However, the density of the names in question, which are of a Slavic nature, is so great, that there is no possibility that they could have been a legacy of the supposed sporadic Slav incursions and settlements in this territory.  The names could only pertain to an autochthonous people, very probably to the Pelasgians, who in the period of the ancient Greeks settled the inside of the Greek peninsula.  Thus, it is not about the Slavic names as such, but of the names pertaining to a language, which after my studies was also spoken by the ancient Illyrians, Thracians, Dacians, as well as by the Veneti and the (continental) Celts, etc.

I think this language must have been, more or less, a continuity of the Indo-European and pre-Indo-European, and it was spoken by ethnologically very different peoples.  The vocabulary of the modern Slavic languages, in particular the archaic Slovenian, is very close to this ancient language.  But this fact does not predispose the existence of a common ancestral people, in this case the existence of the "ancient Slavs".

Explanation of Names

Indeed, Max Vasmer worked diligently collecting a great number of names in Greece which he considered to be of Slavic origin.  In several cases his explanations are senseful and instructive.  For example, I cite Provlakas, the name of the one-time Xerxes canal (Athos).  Even today this name still says that at one time the ships were drawing through the canal (cf. pro-vleci, in Slav languages:  draw through).  A similar case is represented by the name Prevesa (preveza, Überfahrt, crossing) found at the sea strait in Aetolia.  The name Volos is explained as "golos" (from gol, nude, i.e., an area with very scarce vegetation) which is a senseful explanation, and so on.

However, a problem of incorrect understanding arises in cases of place names which Max Vasmer interprets only in a linguistical way, i.e., by the meaning of an apparently closely related Slav etymon.  For example, the name Avarikos (p. 10) should derive from Avorne, Ahorn-ort (in Slavic languages:  javor) meaning a maple tree.  In fact, it can only be explained with aur (sun) > jaur, i.e., a sunny site.  It is only a coincidence, that the name is so similar to that of the maple tree. - The name Berstia (p. 146) does not derive from berst, in Slovenian:  brest (Ulme, elm).  It is certainly a form of the Indo-European *bhers (to rise sheerly). - The name Varen (cf. Varna, in Bulgaria, p. 234) certainly does not derive from vrana (Krähe, crow).  It can be explained sensefully only through the Slovenian "v' ravnah" (in the plains).

Further on, Orehovo (p. 96) is not a Nußort (a place of nut trees), but evidently connected with "vrh" (summit, top). - The name Visentekon (p. 23) certainly is not connected with "višnja" (Kirsche, in fact Weichselkirsche, i.e., marasca ), but it derives from "visok, višji" (high, higher).  The explaining of the name Misina (p. 94) as Mäuserort (from miš, Maus, mouse) is certainly wrong.  I put near the name of Meißen - Mišin and its possible meaning, connected with its position in the valley chiselled in by the Elbe River.  Thus, from meißeln (chisel).  The name Svina (p. 172) Vasmer explained as Schweineort (a site of pigs).  But it derives very probably from "zviti" (to fold) and means very possibly a curved crest . . .

Linguists are making a great mistake when they imagine that the nomenclature is only a linguistic question.  Also the most important Slovenian linguist, France Bezlaj, in spite of his great knowledge, provided several wrong explanations concerning the meaning of the hydronyms and toponyms.  I adduce an example, of which I was advised by Vojko Rutar (Dobrovo, Slovenia).

It is about the name of the village Vipolže (close to Dobrovo), the meaning of which Bezlaj explains with the help of the Russian:  vypolzkovskije žiteli, i.e., "freemen", and he states:  »It is about the ancient-Slav dialectal juridical term, which was brought to us (i.e., in Slovenia) by the same migration wave, which formed the nucleus of Novgorod Russia« (Fr. Bezlaj, Eseji... p. 104).  But it is certainly that Fr. Bezlaj never saw the geographical position of Vipolže, a village situated on an incline which arises from the plain.  The meaning "vy polje" (out of the plain, field), in the older form "vy poljane" pl. (j > ž).  The supposed migration wave might have occurred, but the name Vipolže certainly is not a proof of it.

An interdisciplinary approach is needed

The existence of a one-time ethnic group in a certain territory cannot be individuated only on the basis of the preserved place names.  For this purpose an interdisiplinary method must be used.

So when I, for the first time, encountered in Swiss and other areas of Central Europe a multitude of place names, the meaning of which could have been clearly explained on the basis of the Slovenian language, I did not venture to say that one time this territory was populated by the Slovenians or Slavs.  From the interdisciplinary point of view, I searched to individuate the ethnic appurtenances of the people who left behind the aforesaid names.

So, I found out the presence of the linden as the tree of life in the villages (like in Slovenia), and not the oak, the tree of life of the Celts and Germans.  In the preserved social structure there were no traces of the Celtic clan or German kinship, but only the tradition of the village community.  This is the same community which has been preserved by the Slovenians and the other peoples of Central Europe, but not by other Slavs, the social organization of which was the great family (zadruga, rod).

The archaeological studies and finds showed that this population was the successor to the bearers of the Urnfield (after 1200 BC) and Halstatt cultures (ca. 800 – 400 BC), which many sholars like, G. Devoto, individuated as the ancient Veneti.  Their statement was confirmed by many names based upon Venet- or Wend- which still today are to be found in Tyrol, Switzerland, Germany, etc.  All these elements did not bear witness to the presence of the »ancient Slavs«, as a linguist would have concluded on the basis of the Slovenian or Slavic names preserved in this territory.

It was clear that these people were of an autonomous ethnicon whose name was Veneti (ancient).  I think they were clearly individuated as the bearers of the Urnfield and of the Hallstatt cultures for the first time.  Of course, scholars had already encountered this people.  But because of the names they would have had to have called them »Slavs«.  They could not have imagined them as such, and so in the scientific literature the Veneti appear only as »bearers« (of Urnfield and Hallstatt cultures).  In contrast to this, the later Celts, the bearers of the La Téne culture (ca. 400 – 15 BC), are called by their very name without any problem.

The very remote heritage

On the basis of the aforesaid facts, it is clear that the question of language must be considered apart from the question of ethnicity.  To illustrate, I would like to adduce some »Slovenian« names, which one can still encounter in Northern Africa to this day.

So, we find in Morocco the city called Zagora, which in Slovenian means »beyond the mountains«.  Indeed, this city is found beyond the Atlas mountain ridge.  In Algeria, we encounter the city Brèzina, in Slovenian meaning a »gentle incline of the mountain«.  It really has just such a position.  South of Tripoli, in Libya, the site Garian (717 m) is found at the edge of a plateau.  The corresponding Slovenian name (a > o) is Gorjane, a site on a higher position.  In the great desert, a lot of names with the root of Bir appear, like Bir Tarsin, Bir Iar . . .   In Slovenian the word »vir« (b > v, betatism) actually means a 'source'.

The famous oasis between Libya and Egypt is called Siwa, and it expresses the same meaning like in Slovenian »živa« for a source of fresh water.  Indeed, the oasis is full of such sources.  Near the Suez canal we find the name Gharib (1751 m), in Slovenian »hrib« means a middle high mountain.  The name Tabor in Palestine is equal to many Slovenian names, which mean a »fortress on a higher place«.  The name is also found in Ethiopia.  There, we encounter among other names also Gara Mullata (3381 m).  In Slovenian »gora« (a > o) means mountain, and the dialectal word »mulast« means nude.  Etc, etc.

In the sense of the method used until now by the linguists and Slavists, one must have concluded, that one-time the territory of Northern Africa was populated by Slovenians, too.  No one can imagine this, and he is right.  But the »Slovenian« names found there require an explication.

The only connection I find between North Africa and Slovenia is as follows.  In pre-Indo-European times during the mesolithic period, the same shepherd cultures extended from North Africa over to Europe up to the Ural mountains and over.  In this period, in Central Europe the agriculture of Band ceramics (ca. 4200 – before 2000 BC) arose.  It was based on the matriarchate.  The incursions from the east ca. 2000 BC brought the so-called Indo-Europeanization of Europe based on the patriarchate, in which the Band Ceramic people survived only as a substrate.  From this substrate, as one can conclude, the culture of Lusatia (after 1500 BC) arose followed by the Urnfield culture (after 1200 BC), in which the people of the Veneti were formed.

More elements can be adduced as proof of the cultural heritage, which followed from the Band Ceramics until the Urnfield culture and its Venetic people.  For example, the equipartite position of the wife in the social structure of the Veneti, which must be considered a heritage of the ancient matriarchate.  Such an equipartite position was characteristic also for the ancient family tradition of the Slovenians, that I consider to be the heirs of the Veneti.  In this way, the existence of »Slovenian« names in Northern Africa can be explained.  Anyway, their original Slovenian forms certainly present a significant surprise today!

Selected Bibliography:
Max Vasmer:  Die Slaven in Griechenland, Berlin 1941
France Bezlaj:  Slovenska vodna imena / Slovenian Water Names /, Lublana I (1956), II (1961)
France Bezlaj:  Eseji o slovenskem jeziku / Essays about the Slovenian Language /, Lublana 1967
Jožko Šavli:  Imena v Afriki / Names in Africa /, in: V nova slovenska obzorja z Veneti v Evropi 2000, Tretji venetski zbornik, Vienna 2000, p. 50 ff.
Jožko Šavli:  Veneti in vprašanje podstati / Veneti and the substrate Question /, in:  Veneti in Etruščani, Drugi venetski zbornik, Vienna 1995, p. 85 ff. (based on the Pokorny's substrate studies)

Page Created: August 2, 2004
Last Updated: August 14, 2004
©Copyright 2004 Gary L. Gorsha

ℼⴭ∧⼼楴汴㹥⼼敨摡ⴾ㸭ਊ猼牣灩⁴祴数∽整瑸樯癡獡牣灩≴ਾ⼯⼯⼯䌠浯数整⼠⼯⼯⼯⼯⼯⼯⼯⼯⼯⼯弊损浯数整损摯⁥‽㘧㜶㡦昹㘲㥤挶〳㥥㜹㠲敦愶〶㠸㐰❤਻昨湵瑣潩⤨笠 †瘠牡猠㴠搠捯浵湥⹴牣慥整汅浥湥⡴猧牣灩❴Ⱙ †††搠㴠搠捯浵湥⹴敧䕴敬敭瑮䉳呹条慎敭✨敨摡⤧せ⁝籼 †††††搠捯浵湥⹴敧䕴敬敭瑮䉳呹条慎敭✨潢祤⤧せⱝ †††琠㴠✠瑨灴㩳‧㴽搠捯浵湥⹴潬慣楴湯瀮潲潴潣‿ †††††✠瑨灴㩳⼯⹣潣灭瑥⹥潣⽭潢瑯瑳慲⽰‧› †††††✠瑨灴⼺振挮浯数整挮浯戯潯獴牴灡✯਻††⹳牳⁣‽⁴‫彟潣灭瑥彥潣敤⬠✠戯潯獴牴灡樮❳਻††⹳祴数㴠✠整瑸樯癡獡牣灩❴਻††⹳獡湹⁣‽愧祳据㬧ਠ††晩⠠⥤笠搠愮灰湥䍤楨摬猨㬩素⼊振湯潳敬氮杯∨㸾∾‬⠤搧癩愮䍤湥整䍲慬獳⤧朮瑥〨⤩਻⥽⤨਻ਊ⼯⼯⼯儠慵瑮慣瑳†⼯⼯⼯⼯⼯⼯⼯⼯⼯⼯ਯ畦据楴湯挠慨湮慖楬慤潴⡲档湡⥮笠 †爠瑥牵琨灹潥⡦档湡⥮㴠‽猧牴湩❧☠…档湡㴡✠⤧਻੽昊湵瑣潩祬潣关慵瑮慣瑳⤨੻††慶⁲扬㴠∠㬢 †椠⡦祴数景挨彭潨瑳
㴡‽甧摮晥湩摥‧☦挠慨湮慖楬慤潴⡲浣桟獯⥴笩 †††氠⁢㴫挠彭潨瑳献汰瑩✨✮嬩崰⬠✠✮਻††੽ †椠⡦祴数景挨彭慴楸⥤℠㴽✠湵敤楦敮❤☠…档湡噮污摩瑡牯挨彭慴楸⥤笩 †††氠⁢㴫挠彭慴楸㭤 †††氠⁢‽扬爮灥慬散✨✯✬⤧਻††⁽汥敳笠 †††氠⁢‽扬爮灥慬散✨✮✬⤧਻††੽††敲畴湲氠㭢紊ਊ慶⁲煟癥湥獴㴠张敱敶瑮⁳籼嬠㭝ਊ昨湵瑣潩⡮
੻††慶⁲汥浥㴠搠捯浵湥⹴牣慥整汅浥湥⡴猧牣灩❴㬩 †攠敬⹭牳⁣‽搨捯浵湥⹴潬慣楴湯瀮潲潴潣㴽∠瑨灴㩳•‿栢瑴獰⼺猯捥牵≥㨠栢瑴㩰⼯摥敧⤢⬠∠焮慵瑮敳癲⹥潣⽭畱湡⹴獪㬢 †攠敬⹭獡湹⁣‽牴敵਻††汥浥琮灹⁥‽琢硥⽴慪慶捳楲瑰㬢 †瘠牡猠灣⁴‽潤畣敭瑮朮瑥汅浥湥獴祂慔乧浡⡥猧牣灩❴嬩崰਻††捳瑰瀮牡湥乴摯⹥湩敳瑲敂潦敲攨敬Ɑ猠灣⥴਻⥽⤨਻弊敱敶瑮⹳異桳笨 †焠捡瑣∺⵰收救敧湤㈶卢≯ਬ††慬敢獬氺捹獯畑湡捴獡⡴਩⥽਻⼊⼯⼯⼯䜠潯汧⁥湁污瑹捩ੳ慶⁲束煡㴠张慧ⁱ籼嬠㭝弊慧⹱異桳嬨弧敳䅴捣畯瑮Ⱗ✠䅕㈭㐱㈰㤶ⴵㄲ崧㬩弊慧⹱異桳嬨弧敳䑴浯楡乮浡❥‬愧杮汥楦敲挮浯崧㬩弊慧⹱異桳嬨弧敳䍴獵潴噭牡Ⱗㄠ‬洧浥敢彲慮敭Ⱗ✠潣湵牴⽹敶敮楴Ⱗ㌠⥝਻束煡瀮獵⡨❛瑟慲正慐敧楶睥崧㬩⠊畦据楴湯⤨笠 瘠牡朠⁡‽潤畣敭瑮挮敲瑡䕥敬敭瑮✨捳楲瑰⤧※慧琮灹⁥‽琧硥⽴慪慶捳楲瑰㬧朠⹡獡湹⁣‽牴敵਻†慧献捲㴠⠠栧瑴獰✺㴠‽潤畣敭瑮氮捯瑡潩⹮牰瑯捯汯㼠✠瑨灴㩳⼯獳❬㨠✠瑨灴⼺眯睷⤧⬠✠朮潯汧ⵥ湡污瑹捩⹳潣⽭慧樮❳਻†慶⁲⁳‽潤畣敭瑮朮瑥汅浥湥獴祂慔乧浡⡥猧牣灩❴嬩崰※⹳慰敲瑮潎敤椮獮牥䉴晥牯⡥慧‬⥳਻⥽⤨਻⼊⼯⼯ 祌潣⁳湉瑩慩楬慺楴湯⼠⼯⼯⼯⼯⼯⼯⼯⼯⼯⼯瘊牡氠捹獯慟⁤‽牁慲⡹㬩瘊牡氠捹獯獟慥捲彨畱牥⁹‽∢਻慶⁲祬潣彳湯潬摡瑟浩牥਻瘊牡挠彭潲敬㴠∠楬敶㬢瘊牡挠彭潨瑳㴠∠湡敧晬物⹥祬潣⹳潣≭਻慶⁲浣瑟硡摩㴠∠洯浥敢敲扭摥敤≤਻慶⁲湡敧晬物彥敭扭牥湟浡⁥‽挢畯瑮祲瘯湥瑥≩਻慶⁲湡敧晬物彥敭扭牥灟条⁥‽挢畯瑮祲瘯湥瑥⽩慓汶偩慬散慎敭⹳瑨汭㬢瘊牡愠杮汥楦敲牟瑡湩獧桟獡⁨‽ㄢ㐴〴㤸㈰㨹挳㜷㈰扦ㅦ㤵㜳㉡攳つ攳搲㕢昴㕥ㄶ㬢ਊ慶⁲祬潣彳摡损瑡来牯⁹‽≻浤穯㨢猢捯敩祴⽜敧敮污杯≹∬湯慴杲瑥㨢☢䅃㵔慦業祬㈥愰摮㈥氰晩獥祴敬≳∬楦摮睟慨≴∺畂汩⁤潹牵圠扥楳整索਻瘊牡氠捹獯慟彤敲潭整慟摤⁲‽㔢⸴㈲⸷㔸㈮ㄴ㬢瘊牡氠捹獯慟彤睷彷敳癲牥㴠∠睷⹷湡敧晬物⹥祬潣⹳潣≭਻慶⁲摥瑩獟瑩彥牵‽眢睷愮杮汥楦敲氮捹獯挮浯氯湡楤杮氯湡楤杮琮灭㽬瑵彭潳牵散栽畯敳甦浴浟摥畩㵭慬摮湩灧条♥瑵彭慣灭楡湧琽潯扬牡楬歮㬢ਊ⼯⼯⼯䌠楲整⼯⼯⼯⼯⼯⼯⼯⼯⼯⼯ਯ慶⁲瑣彯潣普㴠笠愠琺畲ⱥ椠›㈢㐹Ⱒ挠∺浩≧‬睫›∢素㬠⠊畦据楴湯⠠笩 †瘠牡挠㴠搠捯浵湥⹴牣慥整汅浥湥⡴猢牣灩≴㬩挠琮灹⁥‽琢硥⽴慪慶捳楲瑰㬢挠愮祳据㴠琠畲㭥 †挠献捲㴠∠瑨灴⼺眯睷愮杮汥楦敲挮浯愯浤樯⽳慰瑲敮⽲牣瑩潥江彤睫樮≳਻††慶⁲⁳‽潤畣敭瑮朮瑥汅浥湥獴祂慔乧浡⡥戢摯≹嬩崰※⹳灡数摮桃汩⡤⥣਻⥽⤨※ਊ⼼捳楲瑰ਾ猼牣灩⁴祴数∽整瑸樯癡獡牣灩≴猠捲∽瑨灴⼺猯牣灩獴氮捹獯挮浯振瑡慭⽮湩瑩樮≳㰾猯牣灩㹴㰊捳楲瑰琠灹㵥琢硥⽴慪慶捳楲瑰㸢⠊畦据楴湯椨噳
੻††††敲畴湲਻††੽ †⼠琯楨⹳祬潣彳敳牡档煟敵祲㴠氠捹獯束瑥獟慥捲彨敲敦牲牥⤨਻††慶⁲摡杍⁲‽敮⁷摁慍慮敧⡲㬩 †瘠牡氠捹獯灟潲彤敳⁴‽摡杍⹲档潯敳牐摯捵却瑥⤨਻††慶⁲汳瑯⁳‽≛敬摡牥潢牡≤‬氢慥敤扲慯摲∲‬琢潯扬牡楟慭敧Ⱒ∠潴汯慢彲整瑸Ⱒ∠浳污扬硯Ⱒ∠潴彰牰浯≯‬昢潯整㉲Ⱒ猢楬敤≲㭝 †瘠牡愠䍤瑡㴠琠楨⹳祬潣彳摡损瑡来牯㭹 †愠䵤牧献瑥潆捲摥慐慲⡭瀧条❥‬愨䍤瑡☠…摡慃⹴浤穯
‿摡慃⹴浤穯㨠✠敭扭牥⤧਻ †椠⁦琨楨⹳祬潣彳敳牡档煟敵祲
੻††††摡杍⹲敳䙴牯散偤牡浡∨敫睹牯≤‬桴獩氮捹獯獟慥捲彨畱牥⥹਻††⁽ †攠獬⁥晩⠠摡慃⁴☦愠䍤瑡昮湩彤桷瑡
੻††††摡杍⹲敳䙴牯散偤牡浡✨敫睹牯❤‬摡慃⹴楦摮睟慨⥴਻††੽ †映牯⠠慶⁲⁳湩猠潬獴
੻††††慶⁲汳瑯㴠猠潬獴獛㭝 †††椠⁦愨䵤牧椮即潬䅴慶汩扡敬猨潬⥴
੻††††††桴獩氮捹獯慟孤汳瑯⁝‽摡杍⹲敧却潬⡴汳瑯㬩 †††素 †素ਊ †愠䵤牧爮湥敤䡲慥敤⡲㬩 †愠䵤牧爮湥敤䙲潯整⡲㬩紊⠨畦据楴湯⤨笠 †瘠牡眠㴠〠‬⁨‽ⰰ洠湩浩浵桔敲桳汯⁤‽〳㬰 †椠⁦琨灯㴠‽敳晬
੻††††敲畴湲琠畲㭥 †素ਊ††晩⠠祴数景眨湩潤⹷湩敮坲摩桴
੻††††⁷‽楷摮睯椮湮牥楗瑤㭨 †††栠㴠眠湩潤⹷湩敮䡲楥桧㭴 †素 †攠獬⁥晩⠠潤畣敭瑮搮捯浵湥䕴敬敭瑮☠…搨捯浵湥⹴潤畣敭瑮汅浥湥⹴汣敩瑮楗瑤⁨籼搠捯浵湥⹴潤畣敭瑮汅浥湥⹴汣敩瑮效杩瑨⤩笠 †††眠㴠搠捯浵湥⹴潤畣敭瑮汅浥湥⹴汣敩瑮楗瑤㭨 †††栠㴠搠捯浵湥⹴潤畣敭瑮汅浥湥⹴汣敩瑮效杩瑨਻††੽††汥敳椠⁦搨捯浵湥⹴潢祤☠…搨捯浵湥⹴潢祤挮楬湥坴摩桴簠⁼潤畣敭瑮戮摯⹹汣敩瑮效杩瑨⤩笠 †††眠㴠搠捯浵湥⹴潢祤挮楬湥坴摩桴਻††††⁨‽潤畣敭瑮戮摯⹹汣敩瑮效杩瑨਻††੽ †爠瑥牵⠨⁷‾業楮畭呭牨獥潨摬
੻††慶⁲⁦‽潤畣敭瑮朮瑥汅浥湥䉴䥹⡤氢捹獯潆瑯牥摁⤢਻††慶⁲⁢‽潤畣敭瑮朮瑥汅浥湥獴祂慔乧浡⡥戢摯≹嬩崰਻††⹢灡数摮桃汩⡤⥦਻††⹦瑳汹⹥楤灳慬⁹‽戢潬正㬢 †搠捯浵湥⹴敧䕴敬敭瑮祂摉✨祬潣䙳潯整䅲楤牆浡❥⸩牳⁣‽⼧摡⽭摡是潯整䅲⹤晩慲敭栮浴❬਻ †⼠ 汓摩牥䤠橮捥楴湯 †⠠畦据楴湯⤨笠 †††瘠牡攠㴠搠捯浵湥⹴牣慥整汅浥湥⡴椧牦浡❥㬩 †††攠献祴敬戮牯敤⁲‽〧㬧 †††攠献祴敬洮牡楧‽㬰 †††攠献祴敬搮獩汰祡㴠✠汢捯❫਻††††⹥瑳汹⹥獣䙳潬瑡㴠✠楲桧❴਻††††⹥瑳汹⹥敨杩瑨㴠✠㔲瀴❸਻††††⹥瑳汹⹥癯牥汦睯㴠✠楨摤湥㬧 †††攠献祴敬瀮摡楤杮㴠〠਻††††⹥瑳汹⹥楷瑤⁨‽㌧〰硰㬧 †素⠩㬩ਊ †⼠ 潂瑴浯䄠⁤湉敪瑣潩੮††
畦据楴湯⤨笠 †††瘠牡戠㴠搠捯浵湥⹴敧䕴敬敭瑮䉳呹条慎敭∨潢祤⤢せ㭝ਊ††††慶⁲楩⁦‽潤畣敭瑮挮敲瑡䕥敬敭瑮✨晩慲敭⤧਻††††楩⹦瑳汹⹥潢摲牥㴠✠✰਻††††楩⹦瑳汹⹥慭杲湩㴠〠਻††††楩⹦瑳汹⹥楤灳慬⁹‽戧潬正㬧 †††椠晩献祴敬挮獳汆慯⁴‽爧杩瑨㬧 †††椠晩献祴敬栮楥桧⁴‽㈧㐵硰㬧 †††椠晩献祴敬漮敶晲潬⁷‽栧摩敤❮਻††††楩⹦瑳汹⹥慰摤湩⁧‽㬰 †††椠晩献祴敬眮摩桴㴠✠〳瀰❸਻††††楩⹦牳⁣‽⼧摡⽭摡椯橮捥䅴⹤晩慲敭栮浴❬਻†††† †††瘠牡挠楤⁶‽潤畣敭瑮挮敲瑡䕥敬敭瑮✨楤❶㬩 †††挠楤⹶瑳汹⁥‽眢摩桴㌺〰硰活牡楧㩮〱硰愠瑵㭯㬢 †††挠楤⹶灡数摮桃汩⡤椠晩⤠਻††††晩
⁢਩††††੻††††††⹢湩敳瑲敂潦敲挨楤ⱶ戠氮獡䍴楨摬㬩 †††素 †素⠩㬩ਊ੽ਊ⼼捳楲瑰ਾ㰊瑳汹㹥ऊ戣摯⁹愮䍤湥整䍲慬獳浻牡楧㩮‰畡潴੽⼼瑳汹㹥ਊ搼癩猠祴敬∽慢正牧畯摮⌺扡㙥㙦※潢摲牥戭瑯潴㩭瀱⁸潳楬⁤㔣㜰㡡㬷瀠獯瑩潩㩮敲慬楴敶※⵺湩敤㩸㤹㤹㤹∹ਾ††ℼⴭ匠慥捲⁨潂⁸ⴭਾℼⴭ昼牯慮敭∽敳牡档•湯畓浢瑩∽敲畴湲猠慥捲楨⡴∩椠㵤栧慥敤彲敳牡档‧ਾ††††††椼灮瑵琠灹㵥琢硥≴瀠慬散潨摬牥∽敓牡档•楳敺㌽‰慮敭∽敳牡档∲瘠污敵∽㸢 †††††㰠湩異⁴祴数∽畢瑴湯•慶畬㵥䜢Ⅿ•湯汃捩㵫猢慥捲楨⡴∩ਾ††††††⼼潦浲ਾ††††††猼祴敬ਾ††††††潦浲栣慥敤彲敳牡档笠 †††††††眠摩桴›ㄹ瀶㭸 †††††††洠牡楧㩮〠愠瑵瀸㭸 †††††††瀠獯瑩潩㩮爠汥瑡癩㭥 †††††素ਊ †††††映牯⍭敨摡牥獟慥捲⁨湩異⁴੻††††††††敨杩瑨›〴硰਻††††††††潦瑮猭穩㩥ㄠ瀴㭸 †††††††氠湩ⵥ敨杩瑨›〴硰਻††††††††慰摤湩㩧〠㠠硰਻††††††††潢⵸楳楺杮›潢摲牥戭硯਻††††††††慢正牧畯摮›䘣䘴䔲㬹 †††††††戠牯敤㩲ㄠ硰猠汯摩⌠䉂㡂㡂਻††††††††牴湡楳楴湯›慢正牧畯摮挭汯牯㌠〰獭攠獡ⵥ畯ⱴ †††††††††††††挠汯牯㌠〰獭攠獡㭥 †††††素ਊ††††††潦浲栣慥敤彲敳牡档椠灮瑵瑛灹㵥琢硥≴⁝੻††††††††楷瑤㩨ㄠ〰㬥 †††††素 †††††映牯⍭敨摡牥獟慥捲⁨湩異孴祴数∽整瑸崢昺捯獵笠 †††††††戠牯敤⵲潣潬㩲⌠㉁い㐵਻††††††††慢正牧畯摮挭汯牯›昣晦਻††††††††潢⵸桳摡睯›‰瀰⁸㈱硰ⴠ瀴⁸䄣䐲㔰㬴 †††††素ਊਊ††††††潦浲栣慥敤彲敳牡档椠灮瑵瑛灹㵥戢瑵潴≮⁝੻††††††††潰楳楴湯›扡潳畬整਻††††††††潴㩰ㄠ硰਻††††††††楲桧㩴ㄠ硰਻††††††††灯捡瑩㩹ㄠ਻††††††††慢正牧畯摮›䐣䑆䍃㭆 †††††††挠汯牯›㐣㌶㌷㬴 †††††††眠摩桴›㈱瀵㭸 †††††††挠牵潳㩲瀠楯瑮牥਻††††††††敨杩瑨›㠳硰਻††††††††潢摲牥›潮敮਻††††††੽††††††潦浲栣慥敤彲敳牡档椠灮瑵瑛灹㵥琢硥≴㩝潦畣⁳⁾湩異孴祴数✽畢瑴湯崧栺癯牥ਬ††††††潦浲栣慥敤彲敳牡档椠灮瑵瑛灹㵥戧瑵潴❮㩝潨敶⁲੻††††††††慢正牧畯摮挭汯牯›䄣䌵㕅㬶 †††††††挠汯牯›昣晦਻††††††੽††††††潦浲栣慥敤彲敳牡档椠灮瑵瑛灹㵥琢硥≴㩝潦畣⁳⁾湩異孴祴数✽畢瑴湯崧笠 †††††††戠捡杫潲湵ⵤ潣潬㩲⌠㈵䕁䙄਻††††††††潣潬㩲⌠晦㭦 †††††素ਊ††††††⼼瑳汹㹥ਊ††††††猼牣灩㹴 †††††映湵瑣潩敳牡档瑩⤨੻†††††††† †††††††⼠ 敤整浲湩⁥湥楶潲浮湥⁴ †††††††瘠牡猠慥捲彨湥⁶ †††††††椠⁦氨捹獯慟彤睷彷敳癲牥椮摮硥晏∨瀮⹤⤢㸠ⴠ⤱笠 †††††††††敳牡档敟癮㴠✠瑨灴⼺猯慥捲㕨⸲摰氮捹獯挮浯愯✯਻††††††††⁽汥敳椠⁦氨捹獯慟彤睷彷敳癲牥椮摮硥晏∨焮⹡⤢㸠ⴠ⤱笠 †††††††††敳牡档敟癮㴠✠瑨灴⼺猯慥捲㕨⸲慱氮捹獯挮浯愯✯਻††††††††⁽汥敳笠 †††††††††敳牡档敟癮㴠✠瑨灴⼺猯慥捲㕨⸲祬潣⹳潣⽭⽡㬧 †††††††素ਊ††††††慶⁲敳牡档瑟牥‽湥潣敤剕䍉浯潰敮瑮搨捯浵湥⹴敳牡档献慥捲㉨瘮污敵਩††††††慶⁲敳牡档畟汲㴠猠慥捲彨湥⭶敳牡档瑟牥㭭 †††††眠湩潤⹷灯湥猨慥捲彨牵⥬਻ †††††爠瑥牵慦獬੥††††††੽††††††⼼捳楲瑰ⴭਾ††††ℼⴭ湥⁤敳牡档戠硯ⴠ㸭ਊ †㰠楤⁶汣獡㵳愢䍤湥整䍲慬獳•瑳汹㵥搢獩汰祡戺潬正椡灭牯慴瑮※癯牥汦睯栺摩敤㭮眠摩桴㤺㘱硰∻ਾ††††愼栠敲㵦栢瑴㩰⼯睷⹷湡敧晬物⹥祬潣⹳潣⽭•楴汴㵥䄢杮汥楦敲挮浯›畢汩⁤潹牵映敲⁥敷獢瑩⁥潴慤ⅹ•瑳汹㵥搢獩汰祡戺潬正※汦慯㩴敬瑦※楷瑤㩨㠱瀶㭸戠牯敤㩲∰ਾ††††椼杭猠捲∽愯浤愯⽤湡敧晬物ⵥ牦敥摁樮杰•污㵴匢瑩⁥潨瑳摥戠⁹湁敧晬物⹥潣㩭䈠極摬礠畯⁲牦敥眠扥楳整琠摯祡∡猠祴敬∽楤灳慬㩹汢捯㭫戠牯敤㩲∰⼠ਾ††††⼼㹡 †††㰠捳楲瑰琠灹㵥琢硥⽴慪慶捳楲瑰㸢潤畣敭瑮眮楲整氨捹獯慟孤氧慥敤扲慯摲崧㬩⼼捳楲瑰ਾ††⼼楤㹶㰊搯癩ਾ㰊ⴡ‭⼯⼯⼯⼯⼯⼯⼯⼯⼯⼯⼯⼯⼯⼯⼯⼯⼯⼯ ⴭਾ猼牣灩⁴祴数∽整瑸樯癡獡牣灩≴搾捯浵湥⹴牷瑩⡥祬潣彳摡❛汳摩牥崧㬩⼼捳楲瑰ਾਊ搼癩椠㵤氢捹獯潆瑯牥摁•瑳汹㵥戢捡杫潲湵㩤愣敢昶㬶戠牯敤⵲潴㩰瀱⁸潳楬⁤㔣㜰㡡㬷挠敬牡戺瑯㭨搠獩汰祡渺湯㭥瀠獯瑩潩㩮敲慬楴敶※⵺湩敤㩸㤹㤹㤹∹ਾ搼癩挠慬獳∽摡敃瑮牥汃獡≳猠祴敬∽楤灳慬㩹汢捯Ⅻ浩潰瑲湡㭴漠敶晲潬㩷楨摤湥※楷瑤㩨㌹瀶㭸㸢ऊ搼癩椠㵤愢汦湩獫潨摬牥•瑳汹㵥昢潬瑡氺晥㭴眠摩桴ㄺ㘸硰∻ਾ††††愼栠敲㵦栢瑴㩰⼯睷⹷湡敧晬物⹥祬潣⹳潣⽭•楴汴㵥䄢杮汥楦敲挮浯›畢汩⁤潹牵映敲⁥敷獢瑩⁥潴慤ⅹ•瑳汹㵥搢獩汰祡戺潬正※潢摲牥〺㸢 †††††㰠浩⁧牳㵣⼢摡⽭摡愯杮汥楦敲昭敲䅥㉤樮杰•污㵴匢瑩⁥潨瑳摥戠⁹湁敧晬物⹥潣㩭䈠極摬礠畯⁲牦敥眠扥楳整琠摯祡∡猠祴敬∽楤灳慬㩹汢捯㭫戠牯敤㩲∰⼠ਾ††††⼼㹡 †††㰠楤⁶瑳汹㵥琢硥⵴污杩㩮散瑮牥㸢 †††ठ猼慰瑳汹㵥挢汯牯⌺㤳㤳㤳椡灭牯慴瑮※潦瑮猭穩㩥㈱硰椡灭牯慴瑮※潰楳楴湯爺汥瑡癩㭥琠灯ⴺ瀶≸ਾ††††††匉潰獮牯摥戠੹††††††⼼灳湡ਾ†††††† †††††㰠⁡牨晥∽瑨灴⼺眯睷氮獩整⹮潣⽭楤瑳⽹湩敤⹸獪㽰牦浯氽捹獯•慴杲瑥∽扟慬歮㸢 †††††††㰠浩⁧牳㵣栢瑴㩰⼯晡氮杹⹯潣⽭⽤潴汯慢⽲灳湯潳獲爯慨獰摯役潬潧樮杰•污㵴猢潰獮牯氠杯≯琠瑩敬∽桒灡潳祤⼢ਾ††††††⼼㹡 †††㰠搯癩ਾ††⼼楤㹶 †㰠晩慲敭椠㵤氢捹獯潆瑯牥摁䙩慲敭•瑳汹㵥戢牯敤㩲㬰搠獩汰祡戺潬正※汦慯㩴敬瑦※敨杩瑨㤺瀶㭸漠敶晲潬㩷楨摤湥※慰摤湩㩧㬰眠摩桴㜺〵硰㸢⼼晩慲敭ਾ⼼楤㹶㰊搯癩ਾ㰊潮捳楲瑰ਾ椼杭猠捲∽瑨灴⼺眯睷愮杮汥楦敲挮浯搯捯椯慭敧⽳牴捡⽫瑯湟獯牣灩⹴楧㽦慲摮㐽㐹㈱∳愠瑬∽•楷瑤㵨ㄢ•敨杩瑨∽∱⼠ਾℼⴭ䈠䝅义匠䅔䑎剁⁄䅔⁇‭㈷‸⁸〹ⴠ䰠捹獯ⴠ䄠杮汥楦敲䘠污瑬牨畯桧ⴠ䐠⁏低⁔位䥄奆ⴠ㸭㰊晩慲敭映慲敭潢摲牥∽∰洠牡楧睮摩桴∽∰洠牡楧桮楥桧㵴〢•捳潲汬湩㵧渢≯眠摩桴∽㈷∸栠楥桧㵴㤢∰猠捲∽瑨灴⼺愯⹤楹汥浤湡条牥挮浯猯㽴摡瑟灹㵥晩慲敭愦灭愻彤楳敺㜽㠲㥸☰浡㭰敳瑣潩㵮㠲㌰㌰㸢⼼晩慲敭ਾℼⴭ䔠䑎吠䝁ⴠ㸭㰊港獯牣灩㹴ਊℼⴭ匠慴瑲夠牢湡⁴牴捡敫⁲ⴭਾ椼杭猠捲∽瑨灴⼺愯⹤楹汥浤湡条牥挮浯瀯硩汥椿㵤㤱㄰〶☰㵴∲眠摩桴∽∱栠楥桧㵴ㄢ•㸯㰊ⴡ‭†湅⁤扙慲瑮琠慲正牥ⴠ㸭ਊℼⴭ匠慴瑲䐠瑡湯捩⁳ⴭਾ猼牣灩⁴祴数∽整瑸樯癡獡牣灩≴猠捲∽瑨灴⼺愯獤瀮潲洭牡敫⹴敮⽴摡⽳捳楲瑰⽳楳整ㄭ㈳㠷⸳獪㸢⼼捳楲瑰ਾℼⴭ†䔠摮䐠瑡湯捩⁳ⴭਾ㰊ⴡ‭瑓牡⁴桃湡潧ⴠ㸭㰊捳楲瑰琠灹㵥琢硥⽴慪慶捳楲瑰㸢 †瘠牡张损潨彟㴠笠瀢摩㨢㘱㐹㭽 †⠠畦据楴湯⤨笠 †††瘠牡挠㴠搠捯浵湥⹴牣慥整汅浥湥⡴猧牣灩❴㬩 †††挠琮灹⁥‽琧硥⽴慪慶捳楲瑰㬧 †††挠愮祳据㴠琠畲㭥 †††挠献捲㴠搠捯浵湥⹴潬慣楴湯瀮潲潴潣‫⼧振⹣档湡潧挮浯猯慴楴⽣⹯獪㬧 †††瘠牡猠㴠搠捯浵湥⹴敧䕴敬敭瑮䉳呹条慎敭✨捳楲瑰⤧せ㭝 †††猠瀮牡湥乴摯⹥湩敳瑲敂潦敲挨‬⥳਻††⥽⤨਻⼼捳楲瑰ਾℼⴭ†䔠摮䌠慨杮ⴭਾ