For affiliation perhaps not, but they can profit by better understanding their heritage.
Actually it´s genetics that really matters in these studies. Without prejudice, linguistics, hydronymy etc., have their own right; writers like Tacitus, Ptolemy, who had to rely on some information ( I don´t say they wrote second-hand
they did their best. But now genetics could clear up some controversial opinions.
Genetics shouldn't be overestimated either, however. People can change their languages, but they cannot change their genes.
Because of the influence from the south it´s acceptable. That would mean the coming of a probably R1b people ( Illyrians? ) to the area of the Lusatian culture. Or perhaps of the often here mentioned Wenedians. The Dinaric influence is quite strong from
Romania through Slovakia to south-eastern Poland, could it be their heritage?
Actually, there is some interesting genetic evidence at work here: many people have noted before that there is a peak of R1b-U152 in Poland, which (in the past) defied an explanation. Now, R1b-U152 is thought to be associated with the spread of the Urnfield Culture (it's spread seems to coincide well with the cummulative effects of the Urnfield, Hallstatt and La-Tene Cultures), and as I stated before, since the older part of the Lusatian Culture is basically considered part of Urnfield, that the R1b-U152 peak in Poland may originate from this time.
"Illyrian" would seem unlikely (given how evidence for the Illyrian language does in no way spread anywhere near that far north), but there is the possibility that they spoke a distinct, wholly extinct Centum-IE language that we might consider "Proto-Celtic" or "Para-Celtic" in the wider sense. But of course, this is speculation that is very hard to test.
In the discussed area there must had been already, among others, a R1a people ( X )
from the Corded Ware culture; the I- people and the finnish population as the aborigines.
Wether the R1a people of the Lusatian culture spoke a centum language, because of the early immigration, is doubtful. There were also Balts in the area, who are clearly satem speakers.
Regarding the Centum/Satem split, it is unclear where exactly the "line" between the Satem and Centum languages, but it's clear that this line must have shifted (this actually attested on the Balkans, read below). Amongst the major branches of Indo-European, Celtic, Germanic, Greek, Italic and Tocharian are all known to be Centum languages, wheras Albanian, Armenian, Balto-Slavic and Indo-Iranic are all Satem. Both the Greek (via Mycenean Greek, the language used in Linear B) and Indo-Iranic (via the oldest Vedic texts) branches are attested from the 2nd millennium BC, meaning the split should have occured earlier. It should be noted that there's vocabulary which entered Balto-Slavic vocabulary which clearly Centum in origin (though *not* Germanic: I posted a thread in linguistics which shows East Germanic borrowings into Proto-Slavic), so it stands to reason in my opinion that the Centum/Satem line in the 1st millennium BC actually ran surprisingly eastwards. Just because people were predominantly (or, to a great share) R1a doesn't mean that they were Satem speakers. The (Proto-)Tocharians were certainly also predominantly R1a, but definitely spoke a Centum language.
Amongst the ancient languages of the Balkans, Illyrian is generally thought to have been a Centum language, but Dacian and Thracian in contrast are though are Satem languages (Dacian was, also, in my opinion, one of the main source languages of Albanian, which explains it's Satem nature).
Wheter Germanic people lived in the area of the Lusatian culture is in my opinion very doubtful. The Jastorf culture reached far eastly of Stettin but that´s a different formation.
Well, first off, let us get the chronology correct here: the Lusatian Culture spans the late bronze age into the early iron age. This is obviously too early to speak of "Germanic" languages, even Proto-Germanic, it is far more likely that we are talking about a Pre-Germanic language stage here (the ancestor language of Germanic before the major sound shifts).
HOWEVER, the
former area of the Lusatian Culture was very clearly inhabited by Germanic peoples about 500 years later. The Przeworsk Culture, which succeeded a small part of the area formerly encompassed by the Lusatian and Pommeranian Cultures, was clearly associated with the Burgundians and the Lugians. Ptolemy very clearly places the Burgundians up to the Vistula.
The Bastarners are ussually regarded as of thrako-illyrian origin.
Regarding the Bastarnae, it's the first time I have seen
anybody claim that they were "Thraco-Illyrian". There is no Thracian or Illyrian name influence that far north. Tacitus explicitly refers to them as Germanic (as opposed to the Venedi and the Fenni, which he explicitly says did not speak Germanic), though other authors refer to their language as 'similar to Celtic'.
You are probably right, I´m not a linguist to compare the North Germanic dialects with the East Germanic ones. But I suppose that the disposable texts origin from the time of the Goths and the Wandals, around 500 years later.
Well, it is possible to "time" when a certain word must have entered the vocabulary of a language, by wether it obeys to a certain sound law or not. You obviously do not know exactly when these sound shifts happened (in most cases, at least), but it's clearly possible to establish a relative order.
I think the problem of the Pommeranians can be solved more simply. To give an example: the Macedonians, who were culturally backward to the Greeks but related, got advantage over the greek states, which ended, as is known, in losing of their independence. Similar situation was with the Romans and the Etruscans.
Such combination seems frequent in other parts of the world, e.g : China and Manchuria, Japan and Korea ( maybe not the best example ), Kiewer Rus and Moscow, not to forget Prussia that became hegemon over the more developed german states.
The Lusatian culture was a loose union and it was weakened in the meantime.
I'm not sure. Be careful not to mix up the Lusatian and Pommeranian Cultures. The Pommeranian Culture is the successor to the Lusatian Culture.
