PDA

View Full Version : Sarmatians



how yes no 2
05-11-10, 00:49
this thread is closely related to thread Veneti
Veneti (http://www.eupedia.com/forum/showthread.php?t=26066)

as it is likely that Veneti and Sarmatians were very closely related tribes - something like Croats and Serbs today...


The Sarmatians (Latin Sarmatæ or Sauromatæ, Greek Σαρμάται, Σαυρομάται) were an Iranian people of Classical Antiquity, flourishing from about the 5th century BC to the 4th century AD.[1][2]
Their territory was known as Sarmatia to Greco-Roman ethnographers, corresponding to the western part of greater Scythia (modern Southern Russia, Ukraine, and the eastern Balkans). At their greatest reported extent, around 100 BC, these tribes ranged from the Vistula River to the mouth of the Danube and eastward to the Volga, bordering the shores of the Black and Caspian seas as well as the Caucasus to the south.[3]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sarmatians

clusterisation of samples

from "Geostatistical inference of main Y-STR-haplotype groups in Europe"
Amalia Diaz-Lacavaa, Maja Waliera, Sascha Willuweitb, Thomas F. Wienkera, Rolf Fimmersa, Max P. Baura, and Lutz Roewerb



In Southeastern Central Europe and the Balkans several clusters were alternatively predominant. Two circumscribed and densely sampled areas stood out from the surroundings: central Anatolia (cluster 5) and central Hungary (cluster 14). It is worth mentioning that while a genetic differentiation of central Anatolia is in accordance with previous studies [17] and [18], a reliable characterization of the not sampled surrounding areas may require further evaluation. Two clusters were assigned to large areas of the Balkan Peninsula: (1) Croatia, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Serbia, Romania, Western and Eastern Hungary, and Central Ukraine: cluster 18; (2) continental Greece, Bulgaria, and Macedonia: cluster 2. Cluster 13 was assigned to Albania and to the western area of the Balkans and cluster 11 to the Caucasus.

cluster 18 - Croatia, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Serbia, Romania, Western and Eastern Hungary, and Central Ukraine

cluster 18 groups with cluster 10 (not explicitly mentioned in text and hard to say what is it from map - colour on map could be either Moldavia with areas next to Black sea in east Romania and Bulgaria, or central-west Anatolia or part of Caucasus)
than those 2 clusters group with clusters 13 (Albania) and 5 (central Anatolia)

to me this seems to be in proof of Sarmatian-Veneti tribes originating from Paphlagonia, and Albanians as well originating from Asia minor perhaps via genetical origin from Dardani tribe...

in fact I wonder whether name Sarmatians is derived from earlier Cimmerians
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/c/c1/Map_of_Assyria.png/800px-Map_of_Assyria.png http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Map_of_Assyria.png
in fact, Eneti and Cimmerians are not the same nation, but I think they were very very closely related... perhaps Eneti are branch of Cimmerians, same as Sarmatian Venedi are part of Sarmatians and later Slavic Anti as likely originating from Sarmatians..

in fact it is not difficult to imagine Cimmerians spreading from Asia minor to east and branch of them going north passing through Caucasus and comming up on northern shore of Black sea... as it might be deduced from pattern of haplogroup I distribution in Asia
http://sites.google.com/site/thelineagesofasia/_/rsrc/1251225494370/home/I.png

today haplogroup I in Asia peaks in Zazas (Dimilis) in Asia minor... and in area called Daylami south of Caspian lake (area north of Teheran)..

Linguistic studies shows that the Zazas may have immigrated to their modern-day homeland from the southern shores of the Caspian Sea. Some Zazas use the word Dimli (Daylami) to describe their ethnic identity. The word Dimli (Daylami) also describes a region of Gilan Province in today’s Iran. Some linguists connect the word Dimli with the Daylamites in the Alborz Mountains near the shores of Caspian Sea in Iran and believe that the Zaza have migrated from Daylam towards the west. Today, Iranian languages are still spoken in southern regions of Caspian Sea (also called the Caspian languages), including Sangsarī, Māzandarānī, Tātī (Herzendī), Semnānī, Tāleshī, and they are grammatically and lexically very close to Zazaki; this supports the argument that Zazas immigrated to eastern Anatolia from southern regions of Caspian Sea.[8] Zazas also live in a region close to the Kurds, who are also another Iranic ethnic group. But, historic sources such as the Zoroastrian holy book, Bundahishn, places the Dilaman (Dimila/Zaza) homeland in the headwaters of the Tigris[citation needed], as it is today. This points to that the Dimila/Zaza migrated to the Caspian sea and not the other way around[original research?].
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zazas

I also wonder whether words Dalmatia (where is highest frequency of haplogrpoup I2a2) and Daylamites (islands of I in north Iran and Asia minor) have same root...


The Zazaki language shows similarities with (Hewrami or Gorani), Shabaki and Bajelani. Gorani, Bajelani, and Shabaki languages are spoken around Iran-Iraq border; however, it is believed that they are also immigrated from Northern Iran to their present homelands. These languages are sometimes put together in the Zaza-Gorani language group.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zazaki_language
Here I wonder whether words Shabaki and Srbi have common origin...
in fact, it we follow further spread of I in the Asia we get to Sarbans who are now one of the Pashtun tribes... however, unlike other Pastuns they seems to carry lot of I haplogroup
which is illustrated by observing perfect match between spread of I haplogroup and Sarbans
http://sites.google.com/site/thelineagesofasia/_/rsrc/1251225494370/home/I.png
http://gulf2000.columbia.edu/images/maps/Pashtun_Confederacies_sm.jpg

In fact, I would say that Cimmerians gave Zazaki, Shabaki, Sarbans, Sarmatians and among them Serbi in Asian Sarmatia in Caucasus
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/3/3e/Map_of_Colchis%2C_Iberia%2C_Albania%2C_and_the_nei ghbouring_countries_ca_1770.jpg/800px-Map_of_Colchis%2C_Iberia%2C_Albania%2C_and_the_nei ghbouring_countries_ca_1770.jpg

in fact, we can see that I have reached very far on east - deep in what is now north-west China
http://sites.google.com/site/thelineagesofasia/_/rsrc/1251225494370/home/I.png
who were those people?

Seres (Gr. Σῆρες, Lat. Sērēs) was the ancient Greek and Roman name for the inhabitants of eastern Central Asia, but could also extend to a number of other Asian people in a wide arc from China to India.[1] It meant "of silk," or people of the "land where silk comes from." The country of the Seres was Serica.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Seres

Pliny also reports a curious description of the Seres made by an embassy from Taprobane to Emperor Claudius, suggesting they may be referring to the ancient Caucasian populations of the Tarim Basin, such as the Tocharians:
"They also informed us that the side of their island (Taprobane) which lies opposite to India is ten thousand stadia in length, and runs in a south-easterly direction--that beyond the Emodian Mountains (Himalayas) they look towards the Serve (Seres), whose acquaintance they had also made in the pursuits of commerce; .." (Pliny the Elder, The Natural History, Chap XXIV "Taprobane")
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Seres

Serica, the land of the Seres, was the name by which the Greco-Romans referred to a country in Central Asia.
Ancient Mediterranean knowledge of this nation was indistinct and distorted by fables and myths. Ptolemy and Pliny the Elder present more precise descriptions. Serica was described by Ptolemy as bordering "Scythia beyond the Imaum mountains (Tian Shan)" on the West, "Terra Incognita" to the North-East, the "Sinae" or Chinese to the East and "India" to the South. This would correspond with modern Xinjiang province in North-Western China.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Serica

how yes no 2
06-11-10, 02:27
in fact, based on same haplogropup I and same self-identification of Illyrian Delmatae and iranian Daylami tribes

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/1/16/Celts_in_Illyria_%26_Pannonia.png


http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/c/ca/Dardania.png


I would conclude that at least some (if not all) of what is considered to be Illyrian tribes were related to Sarmatian-Veneti tribes by same origin. Note that again tribe name Delmatae is accompanied with tribe names like Sardeates, Serretes, Serapilli, Serdi, Scordisci...

LeBrok
06-11-10, 03:01
Damn, they sound really Italian, at least half of them. By names I would deduct that they invaded Italy and started Roman Empire. Uscana...Tuscana...Toscana? Galabri...Calabri...Calabria? And look we have Veneto on this map! That's only from fast glance.
Or maybe because Roman historians were writing the names of the tribes from other countries, that's why they sound so Italian or Latin? But this mean that they might not be correct ones or way off the original.
http://0.tqn.com/d/goeurope/1/0/4/q/1/italian-regions-map.gif

Did Bassania became Bosnia?
Did Labates invented Labat bear?
Are Thuraki...Turki?
Did Chelidoni invaded Iberia and started Caledonia, or was it in Scotland?

The point is I could be right on one of these questions. But this is like shooting the target with machine gun, sometimes you hit it, lol. You need something more than similar names to pull the right conclusions.

how yes no 2
06-11-10, 03:18
Damn, they sound really Italian, at least half of them. By names I would deduct that they invaded Italy and started Roman Empire. Uscana...Tuscana...Toscana? Galabri...Calabri...Calabria? And look we have Veneto on this map! That's only from fast glance.

I am talking about origin, and that goes beyond language and culture as those may change...
what stays is tribal names and haplogroups... and when there is a match between the two, and also in nearby areas, or areas related by historically attested migrations, it is good indication of common origin...

Uscana..Tuscana..Toscana might indeed be related since Etruscans or Tusci did have to pass through Balkans on their way from Asia minor to Italy...

LeBrok
06-11-10, 04:12
Do we have haplogroup data from South/West Poland, Normandy, and Venice area? I mean deeper clads so we could pinpoint if there are any commonalities between all 3 Veneti. It would be incredibly interesting if there is.
This is where you should start. Not trying to sound like a teacher, but I would help you if I had more time these days.
Otherwise, so far we don't have enough info to get right conclusion, even for a close guess. Baltic Veneti could be Slavic, Germanic, Celtic or Baltic tribe. Who knows, maybe a mixture of all 4.
The closest match from later history is Slavic tribe Veleti, Wieleci. East Germany area.
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/4/43/Origins_700.png (http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/4/43/Origins_700.png)

Try this link too.
http://www.theapricity.com/forum/showthread.php?t=11803

how yes no 2
06-11-10, 04:28
Do we have haplogroup data from South/West Poland, Normandy, and Venice area? I mean deeper clads so we could pinpoint if there are any commonalities between all 3 Veneti. It would be incredibly interesting if there is.
This is where you should start. Not trying to sound like a teacher, but I would help you if I had more time these days.


yes, you are right...
the way I present my ideas is wrong...
I thought it is absolutely clear that I talk about ideas and theories...
but perhaps the way I conveyed my ideas was too strong...



I mean deeper clads so we could pinpoint if there are any commonalities between all 3 Veneti. It would be incredibly interesting if there is.
....
Otherwise, so far we don't have enough info to get right conclusion, even for a close guess.
I agree, but all I could do is share these ideas on forum like this, hoping that someone who has access to more data be able to confirm or discard the suggested links..




Baltic Veneti could be Slavic, Germanic, Celtic or Baltic tribe. Who knows, maybe a mixture of all 4.
I think it is other way around...Eneti from Paphlagonia are older than Slavic, Italic, Celtic, Germanic cultures...that is why you see branches of them ending up as Italic, Celtic, Slavic.... but their haplogroups and their tribal names stayed...
and I have impression that spread of Sarmato-Veneti group and of subgroups of I haplogroup seems to be associated with smaller tribal names like Helvetti, Carvetti in Celtic areas, and Sarbans, Serbi in iranic areas... in fact, this division between appearence of Croat (Hrvati) and Serb (Srbi) like tribal names might reflect centum/satem division...

LeBrok
06-11-10, 04:34
I don't have any links now, but what I remember is that Veneti had pretty good metallurgical/iron industry, very nice pottery and traded amber with Romans. Then after Goth walk through, and Huns invasion, the land got underpopulated, over 90% people vanished. Then Slavs came with simpler metallurgy skills and simple pottery. All left after Veneti were river names like Wisla/Vistula.
If Wieleci/Veleti are continuation of Venety then they became slavonized.
Veneti belonged to different culture than Slavs 500 years later.

LeBrok
06-11-10, 04:43
I was trying to find subclads of Normandy but there was nothing I could find.
If Baltic Veneti where R1b/Celtic than U152 might be common marker for them and Veneti in Italy, but not for Normandy. So Veneti could explain U152 in Western Poland.
http://www.eupedia.com/images/content/U152-Myres.jpg

how yes no 2
06-11-10, 04:45
I don't have any links now, but what I remember is that Veneti had pretty good metallurgical/iron industry, very nice pottery and traded amber with Romans. Then after Goth walk through, and Huns invasion, the land got underpopulated, over 90% people vanished. Then Slavs came with simpler metallurgy skills and simple pottery. All left after Veneti were river names like Wisla/Vistula.
If Wieleci/Veleti are continuation of Venety then they became slavonized.
Veneti belonged to different culture than Slavs 500 years later.

ok, here is historian of Goth origin writing about it in 6th century (around 551 AD)


In the land of Scythia to the westward dwells, first of all, the race of the Gepidae, surrounded by great and famous rivers. For the Tisia flows through it on the north and northwest, and on the southwest is the great Danube. On the east it is cut by the Flutausis, a swiftly eddying stream that sweeps whirling into the Ister's waters. (34) Within these rivers lies Dacia, encircled by the lofty Alps as by a crown. Near their left ridge, which inclines toward the north, and beginning at the source of the Vistula, the populous race of the Venethi dwell, occupying a great expanse of land. Though their names are now dispersed amid various clans and places, yet they are chiefly called Sclaveni and Antes. (35) The abode of the Sclaveni extends from the city of Noviodunum and the lake called Mursianus to the Danaster, and northward as far as the Vistula. They have swamps and forests for their cities. The Antes, who are the bravest of these peoples dwelling in the curve of the sea of Pontus, spread from the Danaster to the Danaper, rivers that are many days' journey apart. (36) But on the shore of Ocean, where the floods of the river Vistula empty from three mouths, the Vidivarii dwell, a people gathered out of various tribes. Beyond them the Aesti, a subject race, likewise hold the shore of Ocean. To the south dwell the Acatziri, a very brave tribe ignorant of agriculture, who subsist on their flocks and by hunting. (37) Farther away and above the Sea of Pontus are the abodes of the Bulgares, well known from the wrongs done to them by reason of our oppression. From this region the Huns, like a fruitful root of bravest races, sprouted into two hordes of people. Some of these are called Altziagiri, others Sabiri; and they have different dwelling places. The Altziagiri are near Cherson, where the avaricious traders bring in the goods of Asia. In summer they range the plains, their broad domains, wherever the pasturage for their cattle invites them, and betake themselves in winter beyond the Sea of Pontus. Now the Hunuguri are known to us from the fact that they trade in marten skins. But they have been cowed by their bolder neighbors.
http://people.ucalgary.ca/~vandersp/Courses/texts/jordgeti.html

LeBrok
06-11-10, 05:04
I don't know, it is after Slavic expansion. Maybe at this time the name of Venethi left as name for the area of Poland, but there are different occupants. We know how well ancient historians were informed.

I'm just looking for culture's map, I think I found something interesting, and post soon.

how yes no 2
06-11-10, 05:13
I don't know, it is after Slavic expansion. Maybe at this time the name of Venethi left as name for the area of Poland, but there are different occupants. We know how well ancient historians were informed.

I'm just looking for culture's map, I think I found something interesting, and post soon.
Jordanes was not Roman, he was Goth, he wrote a book about Goth deeds and origin.. so I assume he knows what he talks about... and it was written in 550 AD, thus while transition from talking about Venedi/Veneti and Sarmatians to talking about Slavs was taking place...

how yes no 2
06-11-10, 05:25
this is situation in 125 AD
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/d/df/Roman_Empire_125.svg/757px-Roman_Empire_125.svg.png

look at Venedi and Sarmatians (Sarmatae, Roxolans, Iazyges, Alani, Antes, Siraci..) ...
now compare with Slavs from 6th century

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/d/d3/Slavic_peoples_6th_century_historical_map.jpg/483px-Slavic_peoples_6th_century_historical_map.jpg

and read again what Jordanes wrote in 6th century

Within these rivers lies Dacia, encircled by the lofty Alps as by a crown. Near their left ridge, which inclines toward the north, and beginning at the source of the Vistula, the populous race of the Venethi dwell, occupying a great expanse of land. Though their names are now dispersed amid various clans and places, yet they are chiefly called Sclaveni and Antes. (35) The abode of the Sclaveni extends from the city of Noviodunum and the lake called Mursianus to the Danaster, and northward as far as the Vistula. They have swamps and forests for their cities. The Antes, who are the bravest of these peoples dwelling in the curve of the sea of Pontus, spread from the Danaster to the Danaper, rivers that are many days' journey apart.

now read what Russian primary chronicle from 1113 says about Slavs...


After the destruction of the tower and the division of the nations, the sons of Shem occupied
the eastern regions, and sons of Ham those of the south, and the sons of Japheth the western and
the northern lands. Among these seventy-two nations, the Slavic race is derived from the line of
Japheth, since they are the Noricians, who are identical with the Slavs.
Over a long period the Slavs settled beside the Danube, where the Hungarian and Bulgarian
lands now lie. From among these Slavs, parties scattered throughout the country and were known
by appropriate names, according to the places where they settled. Thus some came and settled by
the river Morava, and were named Moravians, while others were called Czechs. Among these
same Slavs are included the White Croats, the Serbs, and the Carinthians. For when the Vlakhs
attacked the Danubian Slavs, settled among them, and did them violence, the latter came and
made their homes by the Vistula, and were then called Lyakhs. Of these same Lyakhs some were
called Polyanians, some Lutichians, some Mazovians, and still others Pomorians. Certain Slavs
settled also on the Dnipro, and were likewise called Polyanians. Still others were named
Derevlians, because they lived in the forests. Some also lived between the Pripet' and the Dvina,
and were known as Dregovichians. Other tribes resided along the Dvina and were called
Polotians on account of a small stream called the Polota, which flows into the Dvina. It was from
this same stream that they were named Polotians. The Slavs also dwelt about Lake Il'men', and
were known there by their characteristic name. They built a city which they called Novgorod.
Still others had their homes along the Desna, the Sem', and the Sula, and were called Severians.
Thus the Slavic race was divided, and its language was known as Slavic.
http://www.utoronto.ca/elul/English/218/PVL-selections.pdf

Noricans are Adriatic Veneti... and Russian chronicle from 1113 AD states that Noricans are identical with Slavs...

LeBrok
06-11-10, 05:27
By archaeological standards Veleti belonged to Pomeranian Culture.
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/c/ce/ArcheologicalCulturesOfCentralEuropeAtEarlyPreRoma nIronAge.png/240px-ArcheologicalCulturesOfCentralEuropeAtEarlyPreRoma nIronAge.png (http://www.eupedia.com/wiki/File:ArcheologicalCulturesOfCentralEuropeAtEarlyPr eRomanIronAge.png)
European early Iron Age cultures:
dark green - Nordic group
dark red - Jastorf culture
yellow - Harpstedt-Nienburger group
orange - Celtic groups
olive-green - Pomeranic culture
bold green - House Urn culture
light red - east-Baltic cultures of forest zone
violet - west-Baltic culture of cairns
turquoise - Milogrady culture
black - Estonic group

Interesting is that experts are not sure where Slavs are. The guess is that Milogrady culture is protoslavic.
Here is the short description of Veneti/Pomeranian culture:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pomeranian_culture

LeBrok
06-11-10, 05:39
Jordanes was not Roman, he was Goth, he wrote a book about Goth deeds and origin.. so I assume he knows what he talks about... and it was written in 550 AD, thus while transition from talking about Venedi/Veneti and Sarmatians to talking about Slavs was taking place...

I know, but the thing is when Goths landed on south side of Baltic sea around year 200 the land was occupied by Venethi. Around 400s they went south to Black sea, and somehow the land of Venethi became almost empty. When Jordanes wrote it 150 years later, the land was heavily repopulated by Slavs. Because of the fast Slavic movements and smaller/many tribes there was no one description/name for the land they occupied. Therefore Jordanes was using a common older name for this whole area, which was Venethi.
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/2/23/Chernyakhov.PNG/250px-Chernyakhov.PNG (http://www.eupedia.com/wiki/File:Chernyakhov.PNG)

Around year 400 the Veneti/Venedi/Venethi are gone, and their culture is completely gone. There is an archaeological emptiness, big nothing in Poland. Than around 500s the land gets populated again by Slavic tribes, but the culture like pottery, tools, burial are different.
If Veneti were Slavic and talked same language and lived side by side with Sclaveni and Antes, then why the heck their culture would be so different?

There is another clue. In legends Slavs are walking to their lands that they settled. We know from history and from the legend about Lech, Czech and Rus that they traveled to the destination lands, Poland, Czech and Russia. There is nothing in Polish legend that Lech fought enemy and took heir land. Nothing like this, he just walked with his guards (land is empty, no enemy, no other people) he found a tree with white eagle (oh nice sign) and he started his country there. No battles, no heroism, just land for grabs.

how yes no 2
06-11-10, 05:40
By archaeological standards Veleti belonged to Pomeranian Culture.
...
European early Iron Age cultures:
dark green - Nordic group
dark red - Jastorf culture
yellow - Harpstedt-Nienburger group
orange - Celtic groups
olive-green - Pomeranic culture
bold green - House Urn culture
light red - east-Baltic cultures of forest zone
violet - west-Baltic culture of cairns
turquoise - Milogrady culture
black - Estonic group

Interesting is that experts are not sure where Slavs are. The guess is that Milogrady culture is protoslavic.
Here is the short description of Veneti/Pomeranian culture:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pomeranian_culture
there is not necessarily a mapping between the cultures in bronze age and the ones in much later age...even associating celtics and nordics is just a speculation based on their geographical position... and some positions are just convenient for any tribe to settle them.... same cultural wave can spread among genetically and linguistically different cultures, while the tribes of same origin and language might be by set of historical circumstances divided in different cultures... so, while cultures of bronze age are interesting to study with respect to later cultures, it is important to realize that there might not be 1-1 mapping or might not be mapping at all...

how yes no 2
06-11-10, 06:01
I know, but the thing is when Goths landed on south side of Baltic sea around year 200 the land was occupied by Venethi. Around 400s they went south to Black sea, and somehow the land of Venethi became almost empty. When Jordanes wrote it 150 years later, the land was heavily repopulated by Slavs. Because of the fast Slavic movements and smaller/many tribes there was no one description/name for the land they occupied. Therefore Jordanes was using a common older name for this whole area, which was Venethi.

if the position is more or less the same, if tribal name is more or less the same, if it is very populous race, what is alternative to it being the same?

you are trying to convince me that there was a very populous tribe race, that it disappeared without trace, and that 150 years later there is another very populous race that took over the name of the first one just cause they had no name and that one sounded nice....

I would say it is against common sense...
well, let me give you two examples from recent history:
there were Russians on political maps on start of 20th century, than there were Soviets, and now they are Russians again...
there were on political maps Serbs and Croats on start of 20th century, than there were Yugoslavs, now there are again Serbs and Croats...

Dio you think that Russians from now and Russians from start of 20th century are unrelated? Or that Serbs and Croats from now and the ones from start of 20th century are unrelated?
Of course you do not...

But you think that about Veneti, just because few politically motivated historians from 2 centuries ago, without any facts, wanted to put Slavs in position of newcomers... it's a political game of autochtonous nations having more right on land than those who arrived later, game that was played in 19th century, and that is now played occasionally as well (e.g. rapid recent renaming of Kosovo Albanians to Kosovars to make them appear more autochtonous, or rapid recent renaming of Bosnia muslims to Bosniacs to make them appear more autochtonous than Serbs and Croats from Bosnia)...

however, genetics shows us that R1a is much much older in Balkan than anywhere else, and that I2a2 might origin from Balkan and nearby....

So, if:
1) Slavs are dominantly R1a and I2a2, and
2) they are only people dominantly of those haplogroups in Europe, and
3) genetics shows that those haplogroups are in Balkan and east Europe for very long time already
4) 6th century historian claims Slavs are of Venetic race
5) Slavs primary chronicle from 12th century claims the same

than what gives any credibility to 19th century politically motivated historians from west Europe and their theories that Slavs are intruders from Asia...
their ignorance perhaps? or their biased attitude?

how yes no 2
06-11-10, 06:14
There is another clue. In legends Slavs are walking to their lands that they settled. We know from history and from the legend about Lech, Czech and Rus that they traveled to the destination lands, Poland, Czech and Russia. There is nothing in Polish legend that Lech fought enemy and took heir land. Nothing like this, he just walked with his guards (land is empty, no enemy, no other people) he found a tree with white eagle (oh nice sign) and he started his country there. No battles, no heroism, just land for grabs.

you are talking about folk tales that you read on forums recently...

but Lech, Czech and Rus did move, look at Venedi and Sarmatians in 125 AD..they are not in Czech republic and west Poland... that is expansion after Suebi and Vandals moved out...also Sarmatians and Veneds are not nearly as far on east as Russian empire

but they did live in Panonia and Noricum... according to Russian primary chronicle... historic document from 12th century... which is still much closer to the source than 19th century historians....

and brothers Lech, Czech and Rus (if ever existed) probably share same R1a ancestor that was according to DNA like 4000 years ago... that common ancestor of theirs obviously origins from someone from Balkan since common ancestor for R1a people from Serbia, Macedonia, Montenegro and Bosnia is 11500 years ago... while everywhere else it is up to 4500 years ago...


according to "DNA Genealogy, Mutation Rates, and Some Historical Evidences Written in Y-Chromosome" - Anatole A. Klyosov http://precedings.nature.com/documents/2733/version/1/files/npre20082733-1.pdf

a common ancestor of the Eurasian R1a1 haplotype lived between 4,100 and 4,900 years ago. An exception is presented only in the Balkans (Serbia, Kosovo, Macedonia, Bosnia), where a common ancestor is significantly more ancient, about 11,500 years bp. This will be explored below in this section.


The obtained data suggest that the first bearers of R1a1 haplogroup lived in the Balkans (Serbia, Kosovo, Bosnia, Macedonia) about 11,600 years bp.

thus, between 3000 BC and 2000 BC spread of R1a starts from Balkans towards north and east..
and I think that I2a2 arrives to Balkans and east Europe with Veneto-Sarmatian tribes from Asia minor... (Eneti & Cimmerians) in years after Trojan war, so not before 1300 BC...
as a result you have northern layer of R1a in east Europe and than gradually more and more mixed with I2a2 as you go towards Balkan and Black sea... however, in 551 AD Slavs were culturally one unit - Veneti race that Jordanes talks about... since Veneti have absorbed R1a that was already there in east Europe... the languages probably came dominantly from R1a... I think that I2a2 might have originally spoken centum variant of IE as is supposed that Illyrians did as well and as other I haplogroups do...or actually they might have split from other I haplogroups before centum - satem split...

LeBrok
06-11-10, 06:39
Now explain 5th century depopulation and drastic change of cultures in former land of Veneti. If Veneti are Slavs then why they changed their culture to the simpler one? Who the heck made them change their traditions and arts?
Secondly the name changes you exampled are the autochthonous changes. Jordanes is a forein historian writing about foreign land. Goths "just" went through the Veneti land, and they know this land as Veneti.
Do you know country name Magyarorszag? Why foreigners call it Hungary???!!! Ah, to add a twist to it, the half of Hungary population is R1a! Now that's a history behind that, right?

how yes no 2
06-11-10, 06:47
I was trying to find subclads of Normandy but there was nothing I could find.
If Baltic Veneti where R1b/Celtic than U152 might be common marker for them and Veneti in Italy, but not for Normandy. So Veneti could explain U152 in Western Poland.
http://www.eupedia.com/images/content/U152-Myres.jpg

there is one wrong assumption in this idea
Veneti didnot live in west Poland before 4th or 5th century...
look at map from 125 AD
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/d/df/Roman_Empire_125.svg/757px-Roman_Empire_125.svg.png

LeBrok
06-11-10, 06:58
there is not necessarily a mapping between the cultures in bronze age and the ones in much later age...even associating celtics and nordics is just a speculation based on their geographical position... and some positions are just convenient for any tribe to settle them.... same cultural wave can spread among genetically and linguistically different cultures, while the tribes of same origin and language might be by set of historical circumstances divided in different cultures... so, while cultures of bronze age are interesting to study with respect to later cultures, it is important to realize that there might not be 1-1 mapping or might not be mapping at all...

If it's changing anything, it's an iron age already.
What you wrote is right, but the cultural changes can be connected to big historic events. Cutures can slowly evolve, but if there is a substantial change, it means something big happened. In case of Veneti/Pomeranian culture it just vanished completely. That's an archaeological fact, that's it, it's gone around 4 hundreds. The new culture that came, is a huge event too, and we know that it was connected with Slavic expansion, that's a fact too.
I'm baffled, why the similarities in names can give you some easy conclusions, but study of cultures and big cultural events are disregarded?

And if it comes to your last quick assumption about me reading the Lech legend just now, let me give you a clue. I'm polish.

LeBrok
06-11-10, 07:29
Oh please, it is not a map from 125AD! It was made few years ago on a computer by someone!
Do you know where I can find original? Vatican library?
You assumed, again, that this map is from long time ago, because it says on it 125AD.
And even if it was copied from 125AD map, everything outside Roman Empire is an approximation, and in many cases big approximation. Did you think the Rome send their geodetic guys to Baltic sea or other places to trace it so exactly, as we know it today? Look they even got the elevations right!

Now, this is how the real maps look like: Europe 1569
http://collections.lib.uwm.edu/cdm4/item_viewer.php?CISOROOT=/agdm&CISOPTR=855&CISOBOX=1&REC=17

Russian Empire 1757
http://collections.lib.uwm.edu/cdm4/item_viewer.php?CISOROOT=/agdm&CISOPTR=278&CISOBOX=1&REC=20
We are talking 250 years ago, not 2000 years ago. How much did the Russians knew about their own land, not mentioning their neighbor Japan?!!!

So if you show me the real map from 125AD we'll know it's a real one because it'll be really geographically screwed up. ;)

LeBrok
06-11-10, 09:03
Here we go, found it, map from 4th century.
http://pl.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tabula_Peutingeriana
click on long nerrow map at the top of the page.
Isn't it something?!

how yes no 2
06-11-10, 13:05
Oh please, it is not a map from 125AD! It was made few years ago on a computer by someone!
Of course it is not...
I made a lapse there...
what I meant is map showing state in 125 AD
and the map is of course drawn much later, but based on history records...
here is another map based on historical records that also shows that Veneti/Venedi are nowhere near west Poland before 5th centrury... in fact also in 500 AD Veleti appear there while Veneti are still southeast of Veleti... but due to proximity and similar name it may be the case that Veleti are part of Veneti....

http://www.euratlas.net/history/europe/1/entity_2750.html

my point is that Vistula Veneti cannot be that R1b - U152 simply because they were south east from the hotspot of U152 in west Poland...and there is no R1b southeast of the hotspot...

nice try though...

btw. good historical map (althoug it seems to be actually made in 13th century only, perhaps based on some older maps), I will take a look at it... it seems to capture Sarmatians there..
here is complete version
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/5/50/TabulaPeutingeriana.jpg

first interesting issue in map is that what is now Slavonia in Croatia is called Norico (look above Liburni and to east from Histria) in the map, which is some offset from Roman province of Noricum that was Slovenia of today and part north of it...
Vindobona (Wien) is somewhere quite north, which shows no interest for areas north of Roman empire...
hence from this map you will not really find position of Veneti, though you can see that Sarmatians dwell in area north-northeast of Moesia superior (Serbia/north Bulgaria) which you already know...

how yes no 2
06-11-10, 19:00
Now explain 5th century depopulation and drastic change of cultures in former land of Veneti. If Veneti are Slavs then why they changed their culture to the simpler one? Who the heck made them change their traditions and arts?

Veneti didnot change...
as I said they were just not in Poemerania at the time of the cultures you describe...they settled there only after 5th century... there lived Germanic Ruggi, Lemovi, Vandals, Goths and Scirii (Scirii lived east of Goths, west of Balts and north of Veneti, which in fact might point out to proto-Serbs of Balkans since they had to pick up somewhere haplogroup N before bringing it to Serbia ... this is not too probable though since Scirri are considered east Germanic, but than again so are Veneti...thing is to early Greek and Roman historians Germanic vs. Sarmatic was about way of living, not about origin, to simplify it it was about living in house or being nomads... than again I2a2 might have originally been Germanic as other clades of haplogroup I were

anyway, look at the map showing reconstructed positions of tribes for around 1 AD:
http://www.euratlas.net/history/europe/1/entity_2750.html


Secondly the name changes you exampled are the autochthonous changes. Jordanes is a forein historian writing about foreign land.
So, what do you want me to say that Jordanes who lived in time when that was happening has no clue what he writes about, but that you and some biased 19th century historians who had very limited access to information (e.g. I can today click few links and get to read Jordanes Gethica while for them it was not easy to get to any of the manuscripts) know what have happened...
sorry, but I don't buy that...from you speaks your bias...


Goths "just" went through the Veneti land, and they know this land as Veneti.

they didnot just went through that land...
they first lived for awhile north of those people, than they moved slowly for like 100 of years through that land, then they lived south of Veneti but among Sarmatians...among Antes as well...
so, no, saying that Antes are of Venetic race just can not be a mistake..


Do you know country name Magyarorszag? Why foreigners call it Hungary???!!!

Nearby countries actually do not call it Hungary...it's a name in english...
Name Hungary is used because kingdom of Hun left strong impression and all following invaders(Avars, Magyars) were condsidered to be of similar turkic origin... there is no similarity with Venets who were not aggressive or well organized empire with strong reputation...
in fact, it was also called Turkia... But Hungary is not called Hungary in neighbouring nations, there the name for that country is related to the name of Magyars...
and Gothi were for long time in neighbourhood of Veneti and Sarmatians (note that Antes that Jordanes says are of Venetic race were previously always counted as Sarmatians, which is in fact probably because Veneti and Sarmatians are single race)...


Ah, to add a twist to it, the half of Hungary population is R1a! Now that's a history behind that, right?
Country was obviously populated with Slavs before Magyars...
in fact you can also see that east and west Hungary actually form cluster with Serbs, Croats, Romanians, and central Ukraine... while central Hungary is cluster for itself... which indicates that Magyars have settled in central part of today Hungary and did subjugate and assimilate previous inhabitants east and west of them...

from "Geostatistical inference of main Y-STR-haplotype groups in Europe"
Amalia Diaz-Lacavaa, Maja Waliera, Sascha Willuweitb, Thomas F. Wienkera, Rolf Fimmersa, Max P. Baura, and Lutz Roewerb


Quote:

In Southeastern Central Europe and the Balkans several clusters were alternatively predominant. Two circumscribed and densely sampled areas stood out from the surroundings: central Anatolia (cluster 5) and central Hungary (cluster 14). It is worth mentioning that while a genetic differentiation of central Anatolia is in accordance with previous studies [17] and [18], a reliable characterization of the not sampled surrounding areas may require further evaluation. Two clusters were assigned to large areas of the Balkan Peninsula: (1) Croatia, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Serbia, Romania, Western and Eastern Hungary, and Central Ukraine: cluster 18; (2) continental Greece, Bulgaria, and Macedonia: cluster 2. Cluster 13 was assigned to Albania and to the western area of the Balkans and cluster 11 to the Caucasus.
cluster 18 - Croatia, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Serbia, Romania, Western and Eastern Hungary, and Central Ukraine


but judging by clustering it is due to I2a2... meaning that much of R1a might have come with Magyars..
I do not know why you expect that all people speaking uralic languages share N haplogroup... as I said, cultures and languages change, but haplogroups stay and tribal names tend to stay with majority of people...

I can imagine that Magyars were Scythian R1a tribe living in close proximity to uralic tribes of Asia and that their cultural development was influenced by uralic people... they might have had N elite, since there is like 1% of N in Hungary (which is much less than in Serbia and Bosnian Serbs or in Balts and Belarus, and Rus)

in fact, in research above, cluster 14 (central Hungary) is closest to cluster 4 which is western Fenno-Scandianvia and not to cluster of west and east Slavs or to a cluster of Finland and Baltic, which points out that Magyars might have been originally same R1a population that did settle Scandinavia, but were under domination of Uralic tribes...

how yes no 2
06-11-10, 23:45
in fact, besides showing the link between illyrian Dalamtae and iranian Zaza/Daylamites that is based on spread of I haplogroup, and beside plenty of Serb-alike tribal names, some other tribes that were often classified as Illyrians might have in fact been Sarmatians... let me explain...
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/1/16/Celts_in_Illyria_%26_Pannonia.png
In Pannonia, you can see Iazi
and explanation in text

Jasi
Jasi was the name of an Illyrian tribe[88][116] subtribe of Pannonians.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Illyrian_tribes

almost same place (pushed a bit on east by spread of Roman empire) some time later

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/d/df/Roman_Empire_125.svg/757px-Roman_Empire_125.svg.png

Iazyges

The Iazyges (Jazyges is an orthographic variant) were a nomadic tribe. Known also as Jaxamatae, Ixibatai, Iazygite, Jászok, Ászi. They were a branch of the Sarmatian people who, c. 200 BC, swept westward from central Asia onto the steppes of what is now Ukraine.[1] Little is known about their language, but it was one of the Iranian languages.

The name of the Romanian city Iaşi likely comes from the name of the Iazyges or the Jász (Iazones), who traveled through the region from the Ukrainian plains to the Carpathian Basin (Hungarian plain).

so, we have same tribal name on two nearby relations, classified by unknown scholars:
1) in pre-roman tribe as illyrian
2) in Roman empire time as Sarmatian !!!

with those matches, can we conclude that it is possible that some tribes previously considered to be Illyrians were in fact Sarmatians? perhaps real Illyrians were just south of Dardani as in this picture where position of Illyrians actually matches position of Albanians of today, while position of tribes that seems to have link to Sarmatians are in fact areas settled by Serbs, Croats and other south Slavs of today...

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/1/16/Celts_in_Illyria_%26_Pannonia.png

take a good look at position of Oseriates tribe....
it is exactly this place

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plitvice_Lakes_National_Park

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/6/6f/Plitvice_lakes.JPG/250px-Plitvice_lakes.JPG
magnificent set of 16 lakes with lot of waterfalls... really beautiful

Oseriates, right?

words for lake:
russian - ozero
Ukrainian - ozero
serbo-croat - jezero
czech - jezero
german - see
italian - lago
french - lac
greeks - λίμνη
estonian - järv
albanian - liqen

so, who do you think Oseriates are related to in terms of nations of today?

Shetop
06-11-10, 23:54
Do you realize that if what you are saying is true all professional historians that have ever existed should be considered fools for not seeing all this "obvious" stuff.

how yes no 2
07-11-10, 00:52
Do you realize that if what you are saying is true all professional historians that have ever existed should be considered fools for not seeing all this "obvious" stuff.

no, they belong to two categories:
1) biased politically motivated with agenda to push Slavs out of Europe...
2) lazy and naive repeaters of history lessons that were made by 1) ...

anyway, let me go back to Russian primary chronicle:


Among these seventy-two nations, the Slavic race is derived from the line of
Japheth, since they are the Noricians, who are identical with the Slavs.
Over a long period the Slavs settled beside the Danube, where the Hungarian and Bulgarian lands now lie. From among these Slavs, parties scattered throughout the country and were known by appropriate names, according to the places where they settled. Thus some came and settled by
the river Morava, and were named Moravians, while others were called Czechs. Among these same Slavs are included the White Croats, the Serbs, and the Carinthians. For when the Vlakhs attacked the Danubian Slavs, settled among them, and did them violence, the latter came and
made their homes by the Vistula, and were then called Lyakhs. Of these same Lyakhs some were called Polyanians, some Lutichians, some Mazovians, and still others Pomorians. Certain Slavs settled also on the Dnipro, and were likewise called Polyanians. ...

this tells us that Slavs living around Danube were pushed out by spread of Roman empire so do they went to north...

in fact, if you carefully look at this map, and try to envision what was going on, what you can see is in fact two Sarmatian tribes Iazyges and Roxolani halting further spread of Roman empire...
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/d/df/Roman_Empire_125.svg/757px-Roman_Empire_125.svg.png

Shetop
07-11-10, 01:06
no, they belong to two categories:
1) biased politically motivated with agenda to push Slavs out of Europe...
2) lazy and naive repeaters of history lessons that were made by 1) ...

Then you should write a book called "The Real History" and become a rich man.

how yes no 2
07-11-10, 01:23
Then you should write a book called "The Real History" and become a rich man.
I will not write a book because I am not historian and not genetic expert...
But as my hobby, I can write "possible history based on genetic clues" on pages of a forum, can't I?

well, correct me if I am wrong, but in my view forums like this should be used for proposing alternative views, new theories, exchanging ideas... If you find the ideas that I propose not realistic than you should point out why, that is all... use arguments, not authorities.. be researcher and not ideologist

Shetop
07-11-10, 01:26
no, they belong to two categories:
1) biased politically motivated with agenda to push Slavs out of Europe...
2) lazy and naive repeaters of history lessons that were made by 1) ...

And this is not ideology?

how yes no 2
07-11-10, 01:39
And this is not ideology?
no, that is somewhat paranoic opinion that may or may not be correct... it is my right to see it that way until proven wrong...

I just do not believe in fairy tales of big populations disappearing without trace and new big populations appearing with same names...

LeBrok
07-11-10, 03:49
lol, you cannot be proven wrong, because you're ignoring archaeological/cultural facts. I guess, just to push your agenda. You have your names and ancient historians sentence or two work on a subject, who never traveled and surveyed areas they were writing about, and used second or third hand information. You have your maps, made by (who knows who) someone, slapping labels (somewhat around there), with question marks too. On top of it, not being a geneticist you trace tribal movements all over the world, often inventing your own haplogroups number, with an attitude that no one knows better than you.
Honestly I don't mid, it's your work in progress, and I take it as such. What is killing my good humor is that your are so sure of the your logic, so sure of your hypothesis, so sure of everything you say, like it's the truth of the truths. I know you're working on it, and your passion for this is admirable, but for god sake, don't you know words like perhaps, maybe, most likely, possibly, I wonder if it's true, etc...
I would suggest that you work on something a little longer before you post it. It should make sense from historic, archaeological, genetic point of view. Then you'd know you're closer to the truth. Jumping to conclusions, with strong assurance, basing your hypothesis only on name relations and throwing at hock couple of haplogroups, is only make you look s... funny.
Other than that I love arguing, lol.

how yes no 2
07-11-10, 04:41
Jumping to conclusions, with strong assurance, basing your hypothesis only on name relations and throwing at hock couple of haplogroups, is only make you look s... funny.
Other than that I love arguing, lol.
you know the saying - beauty (or lack of it) is in eyes of the observer...

Gusar
11-11-10, 15:01
Sarmatian tribal names being confused with Illyrian tribal names hmm interesting.

how yes no 2
11-11-10, 22:59
Sarmatian tribal names being confused with Illyrian tribal names hmm interesting.

yes, and also Slavic tribal names confused with Illyrian tribal names...



http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/1/16/Celts_in_Illyria_%26_Pannonia.png

take a good look at position of Oseriates tribe....
it is exactly this place

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plitvice_Lakes_National_Park
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/6/6f/Plitvice_lakes.JPG/250px-Plitvice_lakes.JPG

magnificent set of 16 lakes with lot of waterfalls... really beautiful

Oseriates, right?

words for lake:
russian - ozero
Ukrainian - ozero
serbo-croat - jezero
czech - jezero
german - see
italian - lago
french - lac
greeks - λίμνη
estonian - järv
albanian - liqen

so, who do you think Oseriates are related to in terms of nations of today?

well, this was not all we know about Oseriates...
few centuries later tribe with identical name broke down in Roman Empire and settled in Peloponnese in Greece...
This time tribe was identified as Slavic...


The Ezeritai (Greek: Ἐζερῖται) were a Slavic tribe settled in the Peloponnese in southern Greece during the Middle Ages.
Southern Slavs (Sclaveni) settled throughout the Balkans following the collapse of the East Roman (Byzantine) defenses of the Danube frontier in the early 7th century, with some groups reaching as far south as the Peloponnese.[1] Of these, two groups are known by name from later sources, the Ezeritai and the Melingoi, both having settled on the slopes of Mount Taygetos. The Ezeritai were apparently settled in the area known as Helos (Greek for "swamp"), from which their name derives (South Slavic ezero means "lake").[2]
The Ezeritai are mentioned in the De administrando imperio of Byzantine emperor Constantine VII Porphyrogennetos (r. 945–959), who records that they paid a tribute of 300 gold nomismata. The emperor further records that they had rebelled, along with the Melingoi, during the reign of Romanos I Lekapenos (r. 920–945), but defeated and forced to pay double tribute as a consequence. They are not mentioned thereafter, except for a reference to a bishopric of Ezera in the area, dating to 1340.[3]
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ezeritai

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/0/05/Macodnian_Sklavinia.png

This might not be the same tribe. If it is not the same tribe it still clearly shows Slavic origin of the name. If it was the same tribe, logical scenario is that with spread of Roman empire the tribe has moved north, and with crisis of Roman empire it has pushed back into the Balkans...However, before it was classified as Illyrian (although with clear Slavic tribal name), later it was recognized as Slavic.... in between it was probably considered Sarmatian...

in fact, I think that all "barbarians" who were "attacking" Roman empire were in fact trying to defend their current settlements and get back to areas from which they were pushed out by the spread of Roman empire.....