This article is within the scope of WikiProject Serbia, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Serbia on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.SerbiaWikipedia:WikiProject SerbiaTemplate:WikiProject SerbiaSerbia articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Middle Ages, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the Middle Ages on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Middle AgesWikipedia:WikiProject Middle AgesTemplate:WikiProject Middle AgesMiddle Ages articles
Latest comment: 3 months ago1 comment1 person in discussion
@Shadow4ya, please provide a more reliable source of this statement. This claim is from the website of the Hilandar monastery, where it is not supported by evidence from the linguistic material of the fragments or information gleaned from the scientific literature cited there. Moreover, the studies of Jagić, Grigorovich, Sreznevsky, Karsky, as well as the study of Kulbakin mentioned as source here and on Hilendar's website, do not contain similar findings about the origin of the fragments. What these researchers have in common is that they define the sheets as an ancient Cyrillic monument of the Old Church Slavonic language, without defining it as Bulgarian, Serbian or of other specific Sought Slavic origin. If you have other reliable sources available to support this claim with evidence from the linguistic material of the monument, please cite them. Otherwise I suppose we should change it to Old Church Slavonic manuscript. Thank you in advance. Nauka (talk) 15:43, 4 August 2024 (UTC)Reply
