who were Slavic people?

Vedun said:
"So Slavs started migrating towards the Volga River in times before Christ."
First, there was no Christ and second, there was no major migration of Slavs, ever.

"There is no doubt that Slavs had contact with Goths, because there are Gothic loanwords in LCE (Late Common Slavic) language."

I can give you 500 Slovene words which have identical Lingual roots to Akkadian and above 300 words from Egyptian-Slovene-Punic-Sanskrit... Another example is the use of the Egyptian word KMT or "Khemet" in Croatian Slavonic & Slovenian Prekmurian, as "Kmica" (Kmitsa) which means "black" and "Kmični" as "darkened"... Egypt literally means "Black" in those 2 Slavic languages. So how would you explain it? With allegedly Vandals who came back from Africa and settled down in Pannonia and in (V)Andalusia? So your theory about some major migration from Karphatian mountains, Volga & Dnieper area (only) fails already here and language is the best indicator of this failed theory "out of 1 source only". Another indication are newest archeological discoveries in Slovenia, in region of Prekmurje. Archeologists themselves told me, there is no proof of any major migration of Slavs in 6th century and that they have found the same artifacts , which even predate the 4th century AD ("Scythians" who used same pottery already in 1st century AD) and drive a cultural correlation with the same people who "came" later, after 6th century. But those migrations are unrecognizable (from 1st to 6th century AD, there are no differences). That's why they've concluded, that those minor migrations probably happened because eastern men (probably nomads, soldiers) were seeking brides in the Pannonian basin...
Click to expand...


the goths stayed in italy, slovenia and dalmatia for over 200 years.............we expect gothic words in these areas
 
Garrick said:
For me it is interesting the link between Thracians and Balto-Slavic peoples, because there are reputable scientists who find closeness between Thracian and Balto-Slavic.

According to haplogroups Serbs (as South Slavic people) are similar to Romanians, but and Romanians spoke one version of Thracian language (they were Dacians) before they romanized and received Latin.

There are scientists who say that language of Slavic people in the South of Europe (Serbian/Bulgarian) was basis for North (East and West) Slavic people, and not vice versa.

Of course, certainly need more research about Thracian and Balto-Slavic.

Also, scientists should determine exactly haplogroups of Thracians (whether I2a, R1a, E-V13, J2, etc ...).
Click to expand...

Little is known for certain about the Thracian language, since no phrase beyond a few words in length has been satisfactorily deciphered, and the sounder decipherments given for the shorter phrases may not be completely accurate. Some of the longer inscriptions may indeed be Thracian in origin but they may not reflect actual Thracian language sentences, but rather jumbles of names or magical formulas.[5]

Thraco-Dacian in turn has been hypothesized as forming a branch of Indo-European along with either Albanian[citation needed], Baltic,[14] or Greco-Macedonian[citation needed]. No definite evidence has yet been found that demonstrates that Thracian or Daco-Thracian belonged on the same branch as Albanian or Baltic or Balto-Slavic or Greco-Macedonian or Phrygian or any other IE branch. For this reason textbooks still treat Thracian as its own branch of Indo-European, or as a Daco-Thracian/Thraco-Dacian branch.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thracian_language
 
gyms said:
Little is known for certain about the Thracian language, since no phrase beyond a few words in length has been satisfactorily deciphered, and the sounder decipherments given for the shorter phrases may not be completely accurate. Some of the longer inscriptions may indeed be Thracian in origin but they may not reflect actual Thracian language sentences, but rather jumbles of names or magical formulas.[5]

Thraco-Dacian in turn has been hypothesized as forming a branch of Indo-European along with either Albanian[citation needed], Baltic,[14] or Greco-Macedonian[citation needed]. No definite evidence has yet been found that demonstrates that Thracian or Daco-Thracian belonged on the same branch as Albanian or Baltic or Balto-Slavic or Greco-Macedonian or Phrygian or any other IE branch. For this reason textbooks still treat Thracian as its own branch of Indo-European, or as a Daco-Thracian/Thraco-Dacian branch.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thracian_language
Click to expand...

Generally I agree with you. Evidence is needed and strong facts.

It is interesting that there are scientific papers where researches find examples from which something can be done.

One scientific article :

Pavel Serafimov
New Reading of the Thracian Inscription on the Golden Ring from Ezerovo
http://www.korenine.si/zborniki/zbornik07/serafimov_ezer07.pdf

The most interesting part of text is from page 180 to 182
New interpretation

In Latin alphabet, Thracian Inscription (originally in Greek):

ROLISTENE AZ NERENEA TILTEANIS KOA RAZEA DO MEAN TI LEZI PTA MIHE RAZIL TA.

Inscription written 2.500 years ago.

For author (and me) it seems quite Slavic/South Slavic (Bulgarian, Serbian etc..., according to author Old Bulgarian is closest).

1.
Rolistene

It is Thracian personal name, Rolisten. In Slavic languages (Bulgarian, Serbian, Czech...) vocative has added e.
For example:
Ivan
Vocative: Ivane
Stanislav
Vocative: Stanislave
Etc.

2)
Az

It is as Old Slavic:
(j)azъ = I (English)

In Bulgarian is: Az (in Serbian is: Ja)

3)
NERENEA
Thracian female name

It is similar as Bulgarian name Neranza. In text there are more explanations.

4)
TILTEANIS
Thracian family name

TIL + TEANIS

a)


Bulgarian, tilište: human, person (Slavic: čeljade)



In Slavic languages there are words containing "tilište", for example: in Serbian: svetilište: sanctuary.

b)
Bulgarian name Tehan; Bulgarian and Serbian name: Dejan etc.

5)
KOA

Bulgarian/Serbian: koja (j as y in English), similar in another Slavic languages

Sanskrit: kah (Eng. who), etc.

6)
RAZEA

Bulgarian verb: reža (Serbian: rezati) (Eng. to cut, to carve)
Bulgarian none: rez (Serbian: rez, recka) (Eng. notch)
Etc., similar in another Slavic languages

Here is meaning in English: I make lines, I draw.

7)
DO

Bulgarian: Do, Serbian: Do and same or similar in another Slavic languages(Eng. beside, next)

8)
MEAN

Bulgarian: men, mene, me; Serbian: mene, me, and similar in another Slavic languages (Eng., me)

9)
TI

Bulgarian: ti, Serbian: ti, and same or similar in another Slavic languages (Eng. you)

10)
LEZI

Bulgarian: leži; Serbian: leži (imperativ: lezi), and similar in another Slavic languages (Eng. lay)


11)
PTA

Old Bulgarian: Bat; (Eng. Master)
Modern Bulgarian: Bate, Serbian: Bata (Eng. brother)

12)
MIHE

Slavic (general): moj (j as y in English) (Eng. my)

13)
RAZIL

Old Bulgarian: raziti sja; Serbian: razići se; Russian:razoitis; etc. (Eng. go away)
Root: Raz has a lot of words in Bulgarian, Serbian and another Slavic languages

14)
TA

Bulgarian: tuk, Serbian: tu, similar in another Slavic languages (Eng. here)

...
In English: Rolistene, me Nerenea Tilteanis (is the one) who wrote this: lay beside me
my master, (husband) released here (in the grave).

Author concludes:

"Thracian language was nothing more but arhaic Slavic language."

(Did he conclude this too early or no let everyone judges?)
 
Yes, too early for conclusions, but it is interesting topic. I googled up and found several interpretations. Must be great job to earn one's money by deciphering ancient texts...
 
@ Garrick,

Thracian language also Scotish Mac as Muca,
this does not mean that Scotish is Thracian,
Thracian vocabulary, at least from the little we find,
cause we did not even solve the Erzerovo ring,
is among Balt Celtic Greek and !!!!! Armenian
Slavic is another case, at least for me,the roll of Scoloti in Thracian lands,
 
Garrick said:
Generally I agree with you. Evidence is needed and strong facts.

It is interesting that there are scientific papers where researches find examples from which something can be done.

One scientific article :

Pavel Serafimov
New Reading of the Thracian Inscription on the Golden Ring from Ezerovo
http://www.korenine.si/zborniki/zbornik07/serafimov_ezer07.pdf

The most interesting part of text is from page 180 to 182
New interpretation

In Latin alphabet, Thracian Inscription (originally in Greek):

ROLISTENE AZ NERENEA TILTEANIS KOA RAZEA DO MEAN TI LEZI PTA MIHE RAZIL TA.

Inscription written 2.500 years ago.

For author (and me) it seems quite Slavic/South Slavic (Bulgarian, Serbian etc..., according to author Old Bulgarian is closest).

1.
Rolistene

It is Thracian personal name, Rolisten. In Slavic languages (Bulgarian, Serbian, Czech...) vocative has added e.
For example:
Ivan
Vocative: Ivane
Stanislav
Vocative: Stanislave
Etc.

2)
Az

It is as Old Slavic:
(j)azъ = I (English)

In Bulgarian is: Az (in Serbian is: Ja)

3)
NERENEA
Thracian female name

It is similar as Bulgarian name Neranza. In text there are more explanations.

4)
TILTEANIS
Thracian family name

TIL + TEANIS

a)


Bulgarian, tilište: human, person (Slavic: čeljade)



In Slavic languages there are words containing "tilište", for example: in Serbian: svetilište: sanctuary.

b)
Bulgarian name Tehan; Bulgarian and Serbian name: Dejan etc.

5)
KOA

Bulgarian/Serbian: koja (j as y in English), similar in another Slavic languages

Sanskrit: kah (Eng. who), etc.

6)
RAZEA

Bulgarian verb: reža (Serbian: rezati) (Eng. to cut, to carve)
Bulgarian none: rez (Serbian: rez, recka) (Eng. notch)
Etc., similar in another Slavic languages

Here is meaning in English: I make lines, I draw.

7)
DO

Bulgarian: Do, Serbian: Do and same or similar in another Slavic languages(Eng. beside, next)

8)
MEAN

Bulgarian: men, mene, me; Serbian: mene, me, and similar in another Slavic languages (Eng., me)

9)
TI

Bulgarian: ti, Serbian: ti, and same or similar in another Slavic languages (Eng. you)

10)
LEZI

Bulgarian: leži; Serbian: leži (imperativ: lezi), and similar in another Slavic languages (Eng. lay)


11)
PTA

Old Bulgarian: Bat; (Eng. Master)
Modern Bulgarian: Bate, Serbian: Bata (Eng. brother)

12)
MIHE

Slavic (general): moj (j as y in English) (Eng. my)

13)
RAZIL

Old Bulgarian: raziti sja; Serbian: razići se; Russian:razoitis; etc. (Eng. go away)
Root: Raz has a lot of words in Bulgarian, Serbian and another Slavic languages

14)
TA

Bulgarian: tuk, Serbian: tu, similar in another Slavic languages (Eng. here)

...
In English: Rolistene, me Nerenea Tilteanis (is the one) who wrote this: lay beside me
my master, (husband) released here (in the grave).

Author concludes:

"Thracian language was nothing more but arhaic Slavic language."

(Did he conclude this too early or no let everyone judges?)
Click to expand...

If this translation is correct it seems baring huge similarity to slavic. Thracian might have been an offshoot of Balto-Slavic family. Surely it was located not to far away.
 
My idea about the origin of Slavs - described first in this link (in most recent post I posted a map):

http://www.eupedia.com/forum/thread...anic-or-Slavic?p=443594&viewfull=1#post443594

Here is the first version of my hypothesis on the ethnogenesis of Slavs (I also posted it on one Polish history forum, together with more extensive description - but I described it in Polish so I need time to translate - but I mostly mentioned this in this thread):

Direct link to map (its a "working" version, it took me 10 minutes to make it): http://s29.postimg.org/kusjgwefb/Slavic_Ethnogenesis.png

Slavic_Ethnogenesis.png


Since N1c did not participate (in large amounts) in ethnogenesis of Slavs, I assumed that only north-eastern Balts of forest zone cultures had large amounts of it. Dark green is the farthest extent of Lusatian culture; light green - extent of the Late Lusatian culture.

Of course haplogroups listed for each area are only dominant haplogroups.

For example, IMO Mesolithic survivors from the Pripyat Marshes had also some (but not that much) of I1 haplogroup, not just I2.

So other HGs could also be present there, but dominant ones were - IMO - M458 for "Lusatians", Z280 for "Balto-Slavs", etc.

I don't know what exactly could be the haplogroups of Old Prussians (West Balts), so I did not hypothesize this.
Click to expand...

Read also my earlier posts in that thread (before the one with map), in which I explained some particular issues.

Including posts in which I posted diagrams showing that the Lusatian Culture area was depopulated (people emigrated east).
 
Sorry, I asked in Polish thread but let's keep discussion here, as it belongs here better.
So, what time period do those borders represent? And more Baltic question - Who lived in Latvia/Lithuania then?
 
Who lived in Latvia/Lithuania then?
Click to expand...

Two groups - 1) Balts slowly and gradually assimilating Non-Indo-European N1c people, 2) those N1c people.

So, what time period do those borders represent?
Click to expand...

Roughly 6th - 3rd centuries BC (except for dark green border, which is rather for a bit earlier times).
 
I asked since it is mainstream that IE people arrived and settled for good in modern Latvia (South of Daugava) and Lithuania already 2000 BC. But ok, maybe those were some other IE folk z282*, the same haplos that are big in Karelians for example.
For the record I also believe Balts got N1C1 from Norse varyags after 500 AD. But ok, that is me and time will tell.

Also I believe I2a around that time were Balto-Slavs just like Z280. But it is possible that I2-din hotspot indeed was around that place.
 
For the record I also believe Balts got N1C1 from Norse varyags after 500 AD.
Click to expand...

So 42% - 47% of Lithuanians and 38% of Latvians are descendants of "Norse varyags" according to you... :confused:

No man, Vikings were not Napoleon's Grande Armee - they did not number hundreds of thousands of people, but just hundreds. :useless:

I noticed a funny trend in your posts (your and several other users), that you want to see Germanic influence everywhere.

It must be some huge inferiority complex that you are so desperately trying to connect yourselves to Germanic peoples.

Some users also have a funny tendency to claim that everyone who spoke a Germanic language was genetically Germanic (but on the other hand they claim the exact reverse thing for Slavs - according to them, most of Slavs were genetically just Slavicized Non-Slavs).

=====================================

BTW - Y-DNA haplogroups in Iceland (males in Iceland are in 3/4 descendants of Norse Scandinavians, the rest are mostly Celts):

43,7% R1b (U106 + Insular Celtic) + 22,4% R1a (mostly Z284) + 33,1% I1 + only 0,3% N1c

So even though now N1c is frequent among Germanic Scandinavians (and not just in Sweden!), it wasn't the case in the Viking Age.

The conclusion is simple - N1c people were assimilated (Germanized) by Germanic Scandinavians only during the Middle Ages.

This is why N1c generally did not travel with the Vikings to Iceland and to the British Isles during the Viking Age.

Rurik was genetically Non-Germanic and even if he was Germanized, then he was perhaps among the first who were Germanized.

Most of N1c in modern Swedes was absorbed by ancestors of Swedes after Rurik's times rather than before his times.
 
Oh, man. You are the one always bringing up that I want to see Baltic influence there, Germanic there, that other guys not you have inferiority complexes..., a mirror is nice and useful tool...

So, Rurik and Gediminas had common ancestor 2200 years ago. 200 BC. All N1C1 Balts (ok 90%, some are from other clades) are from that common ancestor. If Rurik (Scandinav N1C1) and Gediminas (Baltic N1C1) had common ancestor 2200 years ago, then all Balts had their common ancestor a bit later, most likely AD. One man. One man around current era was great grandfather for 40% (N1c1) Balts, a lot of men AD were great grandfathers for 40% (R1A) Balts. 1 to many proportion, that lead to 50/50. How?

one story
200 BC there was a man, who lived somewhere in Finland/North Sweden, who was ancestor of Baltic N1C1, Scandinavian/Rurik N1C1 and Spanish N1C1 (which was brought most likely by varyags there). Could he live in Baltics and be a West Balt? Let's hope so, would be a nice twist to the Rurik story :)
Somewhere later this guy from other side of Baltic Sea, actually his grandsons managed to get into Balts ruling class (as attested by Gediminas project, also Giedroits family).
Also Lithuanians lack East Asian admixture, which is present in Finns, Estonians, Swedes, etc, where N1C1 is present. It can be explained by small number of great grand dads mixing with locals for numerous generations.

Were those varyags? Were those Goths? Was he a (assimilated by Balts or not) Finno Ugric tribe chieftain from Baltics whose sons established clan in Sweden? I dont know :)

another story
There was a Finno-Ugric tribe that lived East side of Sea. It was ruled by great chief, who had many kids. Later part of kids went other side of Sea (ancestors of Rurik, Iberian clades), but most part of kids got Baltified and by this they became ruling elite of Balts. In the process their East Asian admixture dissappeared and their language was changed to Baltic :)
 
I post the rest of it in "Poland" thread because here my post doesn't show up:

http://www.eupedia.com/forum/threads/29632-Poland-more-Germanic-or-Slavic/page10

Oh, man. You are the one always bringing up that I want to see Baltic influence there, Germanic there
Click to expand...

Did you look in the mirror? No? So let's refresh your memory:

On 03-11-14, 07:34 you wrote:

http://www.eupedia.com/forum/thread...anic-or-Slavic?p=443448&viewfull=1#post443448

Based on what I read from you, Slavic identity is strong in you. You tend to assign things to Slavs whenever in grey area
Click to expand...
 
OK, now it should work immediately:

after 500 AD.
Click to expand...

According to historian Peter Heather Scandinavians had no technology for sea travel before the 8th century (700s) AD.

Rurik and Gediminas had common ancestor 2200 years ago. 200 BC.
Click to expand...

Source please. I found different info here:

http://eng.molgen.org/viewtopic.php?f=24&t=844&start=40

N1c-VL29 - common ancestor 3700-4300 years ago, Volga region
N1c-L550 - common ancestor 3300-4000 years ago, east of Pskov
N1c-L1025 - common ancestor 2500-3000 years ago, pre-Baltic (south of the Baltic Sea)

a man, who lived somewhere in Finland/North Sweden,
Click to expand...

Source for this location?

lso Lithuanians lack East Asian admixture, which is present in Finns, Estonians, Swedes, etc
Click to expand...

East Asian admixture in these groups is from Sami people (Lapps) who came from East Siberia recently (shortly BC or in early CE).

I asked since it is mainstream that IE people arrived and settled for good in modern Latvia (South of Daugava) and Lithuania already 2000 BC.
Click to expand...

Balts migrated to the Baltic coast in two waves - first were West Balts, and that was long BC.

Second wave were East Balts, and that migration was much later - rather in the CE (AD).

But ok, maybe those were some other IE folk
Click to expand...

First you were arguing with me against the existence of extinct "Venedic" (or other name) IE language group in Poland, but now you have no problems with accepting that some unknown extinct IE group existed in Lithuania and Latvia since 2000 BC, before arrival of the Balts? Really double standards.

If Rurik (Scandinav N1C1) and Gediminas (Baltic N1C1) had common ancestor 2200 years ago, then all Balts had their common ancestor a bit later, most likely AD.
Click to expand...

I don't get why this should be the case - why allegedly Balts should have their common ancestor later?

Another thing is that common ancestor of Rurik and Gediminas lived much earlier, not 2200 years ago (see above).

Estimates of common ancestor always have a large margin of error, by the way - it depends on how long was each generation.

And don't call Rurik's subclade Scandinav because you don't know where he was born (even if he lived in Scandinavia for some time), there are many possibilities. Maybe he was born south of the Baltic Sea, some Viking came and for example kidnapped him as a child because he and his wife couldn't have own biological children, transported him north of the Baltic Sea, where they raised him in their own culture. Etc., etc.

Another possibility is for example that the Vikings were a multi-ethnic group. Etc., etc.

Nestor's story in Primary Chronicle is that quarrelsome Russian tribes wanted to unite under a single political leadership, but they decided to invite Rurik to help them because they were unable to choose which of their own chiefs was going to be the supreme ruler.

According to Nestor, Rurik was elected to the throne by tribal leaders / tribal nobles of those federated tribes.

===============

I figured it out - only posts with links need moderator's approval.

OK (message to moderators): please do not approve those earlier duplicate posts.
 
BTW - check when did common ancestor of R1a subclade L260 live. He lived later than your common Baltic N1c ancestor, IIRC.

And this single L260 guy is ancestor of ca. 6,6 million (ca. 17,2%) of people in Poland alone, not including these in other countries.
 
1. For 2200 years old common ancestor I took info from familytreedna Rurikid project description. You can google and check up the exact text.
They might be wrong in their statement though. And if they are, then I need to reevaluate situation.
 
As for Scandinavia:

Helena Malmström, "Ancient DNA Reveals Lack of Continuity between Neolithic Hunter-Gatherers and Contemporary Scandinavians":

http://www.ucl.ac.uk/mace-lab/publications/articles/2009/Malmstrom_CB09_PWC_Mod_Scan.pdf

Through analysis of DNA extracted from ancient Scandinavian human remains, we show that people of the Pitted Ware culture were not the direct ancestors of modern Scandinavians (including the Saami people of northern Scandinavia) but are more closely related to contemporary populations of the eastern Baltic region. Our findings support hypotheses arising from archaeological analyses that propose a Neolithic or post-Neolithic population replacement in Scandinavia.
Click to expand...

The oldest sample of I1 haplogroup identified so far is from a Neolithic LBKT site in what is now Hungary. So maybe indeed it is not native to Scandinavia but came there from the south. But I think there are still so many gaps in data that these are all just more or less probable speculations. It is obvious anyway that I1 people lived outside of Scandinavia already in Neolithic times. But whether some people with this group lived also in Scandinavia at that time is another question.
 
Tomenable said:
Balts migrated to the Baltic coast in two waves - first were West Balts, and that was long BC.
Second wave were East Balts, and that migration was much later - rather in the CE (AD).
First you were arguing with me against the existence of extinct "Venedic" (or other name) IE language group in Poland, but now you have no problems with accepting that some unknown extinct IE group existed in Lithuania and Latvia since 2000 BC, before arrival of the Balts? Really double standards.
Click to expand...
Would you be so kind as to point to my post where I disagreed to extinct IE languages or language group in Poland before using big words?
As a matter of fact I totally agree there might be a lot of now distinct local dialects/languages in Poland BC that are extinct now. Most likely they were border cases for Celtic/Germanic influence on West Baltic-ish (after all Z282 son Z284 got Germanized, M458 was in the middle between Z284 and West Baltic languages of Z280).
As to now distinct IEs before East Balts in Latvia/Lithuania. You can guess three times what their IE language would sound like if closest IE people to them were West Balts on the South West and East Balts on the South East.

Tomenable said:
I don't get why this should be the case - why allegedly Balts should have their common ancestor later?
Another thing is that common ancestor of Rurik and Gediminas lived much earlier, not 2200 years ago (see above).
Click to expand...
L550+ is common for Rurik and Gediminas. L550+ has son L1025+ (that was thought to be South Baltic until recently), and L1025+ had son M2783+ (M2783+ is South Baltic, M2783- is FennoScandian). If L550 age is X, then M2783 age is less than X, or you disagree?
So Rurik's clade which is represented in Russian Princes and West Finland/North Sweden had son clade L1025+ that is represented same area as Rurik's clan, except not in Russian Princes. L1025 had son M2783 that is represented in all Baltic N1C1.

As to Rurik himself, he was Norsified most likely Quen. Apparently 40% of Balts and best known Baltic nobles (Gediminids/Jagellons, Giedroits, also most likely Radvilas) come from Quens clan that branched off from main Quens. How and when depends on age estimates for L550, L1025 and M2783. Your estimates were from 2013. Same forum has estimate from Michal around 2400 years for L550 dated August 2014, he said it might also get older subject to new findings. But it is still work in progress, they are cross comparing and working to get better results.
Anyway 500 BC Baltic ancestor M2783 most likely was not born yet. According even your estimates his dad - not literally dad - the very first L1025* (which is now found in Fenno Scandia) was dated 500-1000 BC. I am quite confident the very first M2783 did not speak Baltic either. It took time for this lad to establish his clan which was then absorbed by Balts.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

This thread has been viewed 149221 times.

Back
Top