hm hm hm, in one interestingly informative lecture about venetians by WebsterT [1] he makes bizarre claim that venetians are byzantines i.e. “the venetians are a branch they claim of Byzantine Empire” [1][1] what altho as lecture is indeed interesting in few ways, stil coz that variable sounds like some strange unfactual observation, as we would say that greeks are phoenicians in every and by all means!, practically similar mismatch, that even became norm among mainstreamers, is the use of wrong terminology about byzant and byzantines, while they saw themselves as romei … but, yeah we can call them today even romulans, if indeed ferengi is label for jews [2][2] or iconians for macedonians [3] back to the main premise, maybe we can find some background spiritual analogy regards venetians as descendants from east, but more like spiritual hijack when venetians embraced dualism hermeticism gnosticism and whatever pagan revival that lead to the italian renaissance!, tho, that that was not per’se byzantine spirit, but expelled one from there which found nest upnorth, so, even like that cant be said that byzantines rule over all, yeah maybe thats why venetians looted Constantinople [4-666] or before that were playing it through indebting [5] finally using it for bargain with ottomans [6][6][6] or whatever from balkans as byzantine successors, all of them making belongingness to byzant and Orthodoxy by embracing its last symnbol the twoheaded eagle, tho they were usually financed by venetians or other european powers, so would be cannon fodder against ottomans eg. GeorgiaK [7] so if we see these footnotes by no means we can say Venice is successor of Constantinople, tho as I’ve pointed there is some indirect lets say aetheric flow, but that is just that, even less effective link than to say GeorgiaK is macedonian, what not just by interpretation but by documents can be tied like that, at least some of them where is mentioned even direct relation, eg. where himself GeorgiaK claim macedonian ancestry in letter to GiovanniAO [8][8][8][8] but even for such logic nowadays someone would jump and ask clean wrong nationalistic distinction, even tho as Miyak connection he is link even for modern national neighboring affiliation and common historical denominator!, thus it should be promoted by Orthodox Christian line if not else as joint historical link!, yet not just its not, but such vibe its seen as heresy for the modern nationalistic albanian mythos that dont recogonize Miyak tribe as part of its own heritage!, So, if this is problem, then what about the claim of WebsterT that the venetians were bizantines, yeah coz what exactly, nor Venice was ever diarchy, nor used koine as official language, nor had have other ties to byzant than commercial one, hm, maybe I’ve missed something, prove me wrong!, thus altho that video is very informative in various ways, yet one variable can put the lecturer in offside, coz he make such claim as he was certain by all means such hypothesis is correct!
- yep, only in the spirit of renaissance we can say Venice and Byzantium had have linkage, hm, the expelled bogomil rush of dualism from byzant to venice [9][9][9-7] i.e. what was banned in byzantine realm ended up in Venice and Genoa, particularly the most famous hermeticum in medici hands, tho there were probably many other texts along, so as result arisen evil spirit which eventually over took even the papacy [9] after what in Pisa was actually secured the first alchemical university [10][10] so, yes, we can say from byzant spill over dualism, even earlier before its fall, when bogomils were ostracized from balkans and cross over towards Alps where became known as patereni so the venetian realm became fertile soil for such occult dualistic esoteria [11][11][11] hm, but how so that went smooth among foreigners, hm, without doubt there was some aetheric link coz even before emergence of Venice, in that realm lived people from the balkan peninsula, going far back till pelasgians, which in that part of the peninsula were known as etruscans, or if we say slavic language was pelasgian recidive [12][12][12][12] then also the place got its name by one of the slavic tribes Veneti [13][13][13] thus that ethnonym without doubt points to the later toponym Venetia, still that cant be anyhow even indirect link to Byzantium, here under indirect link I am referring to eventual total pelasgian interpretation, where the byzantine rule is continuation to the earlier macedonian imperial rule, i.e. the founder of byzant was the pelasgian Constantine that before became Christian belonged to the pelasgian heliolatric cult, which turn back the imperial rule back to pelasgian vibe, which earlier was erased by romans, i.e. Rome hijacked the glorious empire of pelasgians Makedon, when ilirians and tracians along macedonians united and went on expedition through Greece in Persia and all along till India … hm, strangely interesting, that what was restored, wasnt by erasing of the roman empire as romans did earlier with the macedonian, but it was upgrade through establishing new yet genuine antipagan Christian empire in face of “byzant” [14] yet again, even seen like that, by flipping in all sides the historical echoes of reality, still we cant bring by the logicism of WebsterT any similarity between middle age venetians and byzantines!
so, why this matters, hm, if and only if revisionistic and postrevisionistic theories are not worked out completely from every possible angle, we risk the mainstream historiography never to accept even to debate such theories, what ideally would be by eTOS standardization on some local or regional if not global level [15][15] actually we can say exactly coz such debate is nonexisting, i.e. once pop up this kind of even small wrong variables, we risk by generalization mainstreamers to reject even to consider whatever debate eg. about all the unique knowhow of JPF on the matter of VipersOfVenice [16][16][16] especially problematic would be such from sleeve throws by WebsterT when all this venetian niche would need to be explored from its templar side [16][16][16] so whatever research should be more than sharp’minded, simply coz there are many forgeries, many spinned interpretations, and many unwillingness to be accepted the truth as it is!, so Respect to JPFfor all his unique thoughtfulness!, to what I can just throw broken record of suitable mosaic reasoning, altho for analysis thrown in one breath along from sleeve derived argumentation from what is available info on net, hm, think it could come useful for any researcher [17]