Sensational : the biblical Philistines - were they Slavic people?

Giancarlo T. Tomezzoli of Etno-Archaeological Observatory (Munich, Germany) and Reinhardt S. Stein of Universiteit Utrecht (Uithof, Holland) say in their paper* published this year that one inscription from an ostracon** made from local clay appears to have a specific meaning of: "People come in, we see" or in loose translation: "Come and see". Such a meaning has been revealed through the analysis of all the possible 27 spellings of the inscription of which one, compared with the present surviving Slavic languages, showed this specific meaning.

In conclusion, the authors of the paper say:

The inscription and the considerations developed in this article indicate that the Philistines of the ancient Ashkelon, or the Philistines in general, was a Proto-Slavic tribe or people which spoke a non-survived Proto-Slavic language, which settled in the south part of present Israel in the Iron Age, i.e. well before the VII century A.D. generally accepted period of the Slavs arrival in Eastern Europe.

The Philistines were an ancient people primarily known for their conflict with the Israelites described in the Bible. The origin and the nature of the Philistines is an enigma for the contemporary historical studies. They appear to have first settled the Aegean area and then, as a Sea People, around 1200 B.C. to have invaded and settled the south part of present Israel.

scirp.org/Journal/PaperInformation.aspx?PaperID=69428

-----------------------------------------------
*) Tomezzoli, G. and Stein, R. (2016) The Philistine Inscription 4.5 from Ashkelon (Israel). Advances in Anthropology, 6, 45-50
**) ostracon is a piece of pottery, usually broken off from a vase or other earthenware vessel

More details now on the deciphered ancient text:

It reads: [L]*IUDI PADI PA WEDIMI (* Possible lost letter on the right of the inscription)

LIUDI - Gsl. subst: people;
Bos. Люди-people; Cro. Ljudi-people; Mac. луѓе-people; Pol. Ludzie- people; Rus. Люди-people; Ser. Људи-people; Slo. Ljudj-people; Slov. Ľudia.-people; Cze. lidé- people; Ukr. Люди-people.

PADI - Gsl. verb in imp. tense: come!;
Cro. Dođete-come; Mac. Oди-come; Slo. Pojdi-come; Rus. Поди- come; Ser. Дођи-come; Ukr. Піди-come.

PA - Gsl. pre.: on, in, at;
Bos. Po-in, on; Bul. По-in, on, at; Cro. Po-in, on; Lit. po-in, on, at; Pol. Po-in, on, at; Rus. По-in, on, at; Ser. По-in, on, at; Ukr. По-in, on.

WEDIMI - Gsl. v. pres. tense, 2nd plur. pers.: we see;
Mac. видиме-we see; Bul. ние виждаме-we see; Cro. Vidimo-we see; Rum.Vedem-we see; Rus.мы видим-we see; Ser. Видимо-we see; Slov. Vidimo-we see; Cze. Vidime-we see; Ukr. ми бачимо-we see.

From the above spelling and its interpretation, the consequent translation of the inscription is: People come in, we see, or in loose translation: Come and see. Probably, the inscription was an invitation to the public to dis-cover and/or to ta ste the content of the jar.

Abreviations: Bos. Bosnian; Bul. Bulgarian; Cro. Croatian; Cze. Czech; Gsl. Generally Slavic; imp. Imperative; Lit. Lithuanian; Mac. Macedonian; Pol. Polish; pre. Preposition; pres. Present; Rum. Rumanian; Rus. Russian; Ser. Serbian; Slo. Slovenian; Slov. Slovakian; Ukr. Ukrainian; v. Verb

you seriously believe this 'translation' - man Slavs have been non-entity before about 5th century AD

They were a 'non-entity' in Central Europe according to one theory (allochtonic one). But even if they arrived and settled on the territory of the present-day Poland and Eastern Germany in that famous 6th century (500 - 600 AD), they must have come from somewhere. And they would have lived there and speak some language and thus they would have came along with this language which may be called the Proto-Slavic language today. And it is exactly this ancient language which the authors of the paper claim to be the language of that ancient Philistine inscription dating from the 12th century BC..

If that were true, it would be totally sensational from the Slavic point of view. The text could be the first ever known script of the Proto-Slavic language, but of course, more texts and among them longer ones is needed to confirm this intriguing discovery.

Ziemowit this 'translation' is simply rubbish - and if Slavs migrated into central Europe from somewhere it was from northern Ukraine (as proven by linguistic history of proto-Slavic language (borrowings from Gothic and East-Iranian (pontic) languages as well as affinity with Baltic languages)

Phillistine might have (which is rather unprobable) been an Indo-European language but definitely not Slavic

The Slavic languages are very old. Comparing written Sanskrit from the bronze age to modern Slavic languages one cannot but notice how close they were.

This truly is sensational!
"LIUDI PADI PA WEDIMI"

Ludzie podejdzcie (aby) na to (po to by/powidzieć/pozobaczyć) (zobaczyć) widzieć.

This is amasing

Intriguing to say the least. However, as a linguist, one would naturally require far greater research, evidence of actual relatedness apart from mere appearance, often times shown to be little more than coincidence!

Not to be a killjoy here, but need I remind you all that a chap named Budenz, way back in the 1880's, put forth the thesis that Hungarian, Finnish, and even Turkish were each in fact "related" languages, which turned out NOT to be the case, tempting though as it was:-)

Then there was the late, lamented "Nostratic Languages" theory. At one time in a different vein, a linguist came up with the enticing notion that somehow, if Lithuanian peasants spoke ever so slowly, more or less at a veritable snail's pace, miraculously Sanskrit speakers in far off India, could actually comprehend what the former were saying.

Turned out also to be hoax, albeit a quite convincing one at that.

Motto here as well; BE WARY.