N1C in South Baltic - Caused by Varyag elite of Baltic Tribes?

Norvila said:
Baltic loanwords to Finnish and Saami are the best kept secret.
Click to expand...
What? :)
I can tell you a secret:
ON THE "EARLY BALTIC LOANWORDS IN COMMON FINNIC. PETRI KALLIO:
https://www.academia.edu/1103450/On_the_Early_Baltic_Loanwords_in_Common_Finnic
One more secret:
Baltic loanwords in Mordvin
http://www.sgr.fi/sust/sust266/sust266_grunthal.pdf
One more secret:
AREAL RELATIONS OF INDO-EUROPEAN LOANWORDSIN FINNIC DIALECTSVilja Oja (google it)
One more secret:
https://www.academia.edu/24412838/Proto-Finnic_loanwords_in_the_Baltic_languages
One more:
http://etalpykla.lituanistikadb.lt/fedora/get/LT-LDB-0001:J.04~2011~1367180894977/DS.002.1.01.ARTIC
(Baltic loanwords in Saami, by Blažek and Hofirkova)
More:
https://www.academia.edu/1103685/Stratigraphy_of_Indo-European_Loanwords_in_Saami
(Petri Kallio)

If you get into details, you would notice that most of authors (except for Blažek) are Finnic. And all of them acknowledge early Baltic (Balto-Slavic) loanwords into different Finnic languages. Extreme objectivity could be noticed by Mr Junttila's "Proto-Finnic_loanwords_in_the_Baltic_languages", where he disputed proto-Finnic loanwords in Baltic.

Norvila said:
Hungarians first disagree about grouping with fins.
There are Italian linguists publications also.
Click to expand...
Those are Hungarian and Italian problems :) Italians in particular have some truly strange people getting their PhDs. Mario Alinei for example.

Norvila said:
Today’s Finnish linguistic science strongly revises the Finno-Ugric language theory.
Click to expand...
Only thing they revise is the exact branching of Finno-Ugric/Uralic...
Norvila said:

Finnish linguists research the Finnish-Old Germanic relationship,
Click to expand...
Yes, how and when Pre and Proto Germanic loanwords entered Finnish language. That is what they research.

Norvila said:
or are the followers of the theory of Finnish continuity, rather than the Finno-Ugric language relationship.
http://www.magtudin.org/Maracz L. Untenability of Finno-Ugric Theory.htm
Click to expand...
Oh man...
I have seen such people. There is a number of Finnish guys on forums, who goes like this:
a) Finno-Ugric does not exist, (i.e., we are blond race not related to those Syberians...)
b) if a) fails, all Finno-Ugrics were originally blond whites from Europe, who then went into Syberia.
Something similar for some Hungarian machos too.

But you have to differentiate between people doing great science like those Finnish authors I copied and people who go after some agenda.

Kotlets to kotlets and flies to flies.
 
"The idea of a Finnic migration into Finland in the Iron Age is much older

than Thomsen. It had been presented already by Henrik Gabriel Porthan (1859:

46), the initiator of the research into the history of Finland, who actively devel-

oped his ideas by adopting an interdisciplinary approach. The idea was probably

based on a general conception of the Migration Period as a chaotic era that gave

birth to the European nations. Thomsen (1890: 151) still connected the move-

ments of the Finnic peoples with the Slavic migrations northward from about

the 8th century, and thus estimated the time of Baltic–Finnic contacts at just a

couple of centuries before them, between 0 and 500 AD. According to Thomsen,

the Baltic–Finnic contacts would have had to begin before the contacts between

Finnic and Germanic, since the Germanic loanwords have not gone through all

the same Finnic phonetic changes." http://www.sgr.fi/sust/sust266/sust266_junttila.pdf

 Fri, Jan 10, 2014

​
​
​

Roman Iron Age artifacts and other finds may significantly alter the known history of an area near the northeastern shores of the Gulf of Finland.
Two of the furnaces have been dated using AMS to between 204 BCE and 180 CE, within the Roman Iron Age period

"Some of the objects found also relate to the Migration Period and Viking Age activity in the Kymi River area," says Jäppinen, "such as a casted bronze ”triangle legs buckle”, which is the first artifact found from the Migration Period in southeastern Finland. Other artifacts are from the Roman Iron Age, and indicate a connection with Estonia and also Sweden. However, based on the asbestos ceramics found, there also appear to be connections to the inlands of Finland through the rivers."

http://popular-archaeology.com/issue/12012013/article/new-iron-age-sites-discovered-in-finland

Beginning of the Kalevala?
 
There has been much research in archaeology, linguistics, population genetics and other disciplines done since Porthran and Thompsen expressed their opinions in mid and late 19th century. What's a point of posting dated studies and studies based on the facts obtained during research of 20th century? To find some sources, even they are of the 19th century, so as to support your opinion there was a Baltic migration into Finland based on " on a general conception of the Migration Period as a chaotic era". ?

Roman artifacts found in Finland, Sweden , Estonia were brought by the Vikings . They traveled to Byzantium, Persia, western Roman empire trading and pirating those places. Swedes , Karelians, and other people in Finland traded. Apart from Curonians, Balts were not sea-farers or river-farers.
 
Can you indicate new linguistic publications that refer to these archeological finds?

Porthan and Thomsen "estimated the time of Baltic–Finnic contacts between 0 and 500 AD and during Migration period".
Jan 10, 2014 "Two of the furnaces have been dated using AMS to between 204 BCE and 180 CE, within the Roman Iron Age period...Some of the objects found also relate to the Migration Period"
Why Porthan and Thomsen should be outdated if the recent archeological finds matches their timing of the Baltic loanwords?
 
S.Finland finds fits furnaces C14 dates in Žardė forthhill near Klaipėda - 420 BCE+160-60.
So new guys with metal technology appeared in SE Baltic about the same time.
 
Norvila said:
Can you indicate new linguistic publications that refer to these archeological finds?

Porthan and Thomsen "estimated the time of Baltic–Finnic contacts between 0 and 500 AD and during Migration period".
Jan 10, 2014 "Two of the furnaces have been dated using AMS to between 204 BCE and 180 CE, within the Roman Iron Age period...Some of the objects found also relate to the Migration Period"
Why Porthan and Thomsen should be outdated if the recent archeological finds matches their timing of the Baltic loanwords?
Click to expand...



I posted above. See the article presented by archaeologist Lang of Tartu University at the conference of Finno-Ugric studies last year in Finland. He was cross-referencing linguists stating the contacts between Balts and proto-Finns were ancient 2,500 years ago on territories between present day Estonia and Moscow. See the bibliography of the study for modern linguistic studies.

As to the formation of Proto-Finnic, it is important to keep in mind that the South-Western Passage served at the same time as a contact zone of Finno-Ugric and Baltic settlements (the so-called Upper-Oka, Dnieper-Dvina, and Striated Pottery cultures). If the Finno-Ug rians moved(together with their pots) in this passage, their language could have adopted Proto-Baltic loans on their way to the west. Certainly they could have absorbed some Baltic loans already in the Oka–Moscow region earlier, before moving out, as linguistically argued by Parpola (2012: 155). However, as they then still were hunters rather than farmers, it does not explain so much the loans in the sphere of agriculture (as exemplified by Vaba 2011: 751, 753 and Junttila 2012). Thus, they had to adopt a big share of Baltic loans later when moving westwards, or as also argued by Santeri Junttila (2012: 261): “we could look for the contact area somewhere between Estonia in the west and the surroundings of Moscow in the east, a zone with evidence of Uralic settlement in the north and Baltic on the south side”.
Click to expand...

Formation of Proto-Finnic – an archaeological scenario from the Bronze Age / Early Iron Age by Valter Lang, University of Tartu, Estonia. Finno-Ugric congress , 2015.
http://www.oulu.fi/sites/default/files/content/CIFU12-PlenaryPapers.pdf

---

Arvistro posted several studies too.

Possible contacts between 0-500AD between Baltic Finns and Balts were those of Curonians, Semigalians, Latgalians and Livonians and possibly other Finnic of northern Pskov region and south-eastern Estonia. What you are trying to prove are the linguistic contacts between Finns and Karelians and the Balts. There is no evidence of extensive linguistic contacts occurring between 0-500AD.
 
Last edited:
This is excerpt from Kallio:
"Although many Fenn(o-Ugr)icists speak of Proto-Baltic loanwords, there did not necessarily even exist any Proto-Baltic stage, but it was already Proto-Balto-Slavic that simultaneously split up into at least three dialects, namely West Baltic ( > Old Prussian), East Baltic ( > Lithuanian and Latvian), and Slavic. Thus, unless the concepts of ‘Proto-Baltic’ and ‘Proto-Balto-Slavic’ are considered synonymous, we should in fact talk about Proto-Balto-Slavic loanwords. According to the most realistic estimations (e.g. Kortlandt 1982: 181), the splitting up of Proto-Balto-Slavic took place around 1000BC,which also fits the traditiona lFenn(o-Ugr)icist datings of these loanwords"

However Kallio finds two layers of Baltic loanwords:
1) from Balto-Slavic (the earliest)
2) from "North Baltic" (some dialect close to West Baltic)

"Even though my analysis of the material was anything but detailed, we may arrive at the conclusion that the “Early Baltic” loanwords in Finnic consist of the two chronologically different layers: while the earlier stratum corresponds to Kortlandt’s Proto-Balto-Slavic stage (1989: 43-46) the later one represents an otherwise unattested Balto-Slavic dialect, whose phonological system was approximately the following [].
While the consonant system strictly corresponds to the Proto-Baltic stage by Christian Stang(1966:88-113), the vowel system (even including diph-thongs) in turn reminds me of the Pomesanian dialect of Old Prussian (see e.g. Levin 1974: 5, Kortlandt 1998: 115)! Therefore, no matter what we think about Eino Nieminen’s Old Curonian hypothesis, he might after all have been on the right track that the source language of the “Early Baltic”loanwords was indeed West Baltic rather than East Baltic. Even so, at least I still prefer the safer concept of ‘North Baltic’ just in case."

I hope they continue deeper research into these matters, such as comparison of semantics of Balto-Slavic vs Early Baltic.
 
Colleagues,
I think we should lean back and agree on basic.
We all have our own views to the history that up to us to revise.
There are several history hypothesis and that's OK.
The Probability Theory states "probability has only positive values between 0-1" i.e. there is no such thing that "can't happen". Only the probability value differ.

So there was Porthan and Thomsen theory from 19c stating Baltic loanwords came during 200BC-700AC or during Roman-Migration ages. It's confirmed by recent archeology finds.

Then during the "Europe nations spring" and after WWII some national scientist decided to invent history of the nation way back to the Bronze age and earlier.
I've posted about Cheushesku Dacian aspirations before. That happened in all communist countries incl. Finland.
We still have some academics here in Lithuania with high national aspirations that deny even classification "Roman - Migration - Viking age" replacing with various stages of "formation of Baltic tribes".
The theory of the "Fins met Balts in Siberia or Volga-Oka 1000BC and got loanwords" has number of shortcomings. It's missing archeological evidences.

The rest of the Europe incl. Swedes don't needed to "invent the nation", starts their history from 600AC.

BTW there are interesting new finds from Migration age in Krants, Konigsberg (Zelenogradsk, Kaliningrad) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gxuEmSnLon0

Also please check Tacitus Germania about Fenni tribe . http://www.perseus.tufts.edu/hopper/text?doc=Perseus:text:1999.02.0083:chapter=46
 
Last edited:
Norvila said:
So there was Porthan and Thomsen theory from 19c stating Baltic loanwords came during 200BC-700AC or during Roman-Migration ages. It's confirmed by recent archeology finds.
Click to expand...
What recent archaeological finds prove that Baltic loanwords describing primitive agriculture came 200BC-700AD?
 
Norvila said:
The Probability Theory states "probability has only positive values between 0-1" i.e. there is no such thing that "can't happen". Only the probability value differ.
Click to expand...

It follows from one the Kolmogorov's probability axioms that an event that cannot occur has probability of 0. You've just written about values of probabilities.

But the remark about probabilities reminds me of a joke about blonds.

A blond was asked: What's probability of you meeting a dinosaur on the street?
She replied : fifty-fifty (1/2 to be precise)
- How?
- I will either meet the dinosaur or I will not.


We are not dealing with probabilities but facts and arguments. The authors of the 19th centuries had little information presenting their best opinions for those times.
 
I like your example :))).
We're here in the kind of genetics forum and we know all birds has evolved from dinosaurs.
Therefore probability to meet them on the street could be much higher than blond estimated. :)))

I suppose this picture better represents 50/50 probability.

vorobiev.jpg
 
Timing of the Baltic loans and placenames in the North we could imagine as the rocks washed on the shore after the storm.
We can take Roman and Migration periods as the latest storm recorded and connect rocks on the shore with latest storm.
But some "innovative scientists" states "no, no, these rocks came from the storm 1000 BC. We don't have evidences, but prof.X and Y wrote they are from distant location Z".

I haven't heard arguments against Porthan and Thomsen theory.
Suomi scientists with national aspirations just tries to reduce and split the Baltic loans to the "confirmed", "not confirmed", "early" and "late".
Baltic loanwords consists of several groups:

  • Engineering
  • Commercial
  • Family
  • Cult
The Tacitus Germania indicates Aesti were poor early farmers without soc.structure, currency and Fenni as hunters gatherers living in the woods.
Wulfstan 891AC wrotes about Esti in Trusa. He describes rich full soc. structure and funeral habits known in Greeks, Dacians. Also mentions "many castles and kings".
So no chance Aesti could transfer engineering loans 1000BC to Fenni and naturally to connect with timing of wooden hill forts along the Baltic sea and in Finland.
 
Norvila said:
Suomi scientists with national aspirations just tries to reduce and split the Baltic loans to the "confirmed", "not confirmed", "early" and "late".
Click to expand...
This is a great thing they are researching Baltic loans in Finnish and trying to categorize and time them. Scrutiny must be applied to "confirm" or "not confirm" (it is clear that if Norvila did it, without any national aspirations, he would find 10,000 of Baltic loanwords in Finnic... 9,000 of them from Lithuanian language :))

Someone has to do proper scientific research and there is no good Lithuanian/ Latvian linguist who would deal with those matters, but there are good and objective Finnish analysis.
So, by applying proved linguistic methods they had arrived at two sources:
1) early, from the stage of Proto-Balt(o-Slav)ic. Grabbed on their way to East of Baltics. Somewhere ~ 1000 bce.
2) later, from the West Baltic dialect.

So, let's wait for those "national aspirations" scientists to research this matter further and categorize loanwords into early and later and see what kind of categories relate to which stage.
 
Belarusian language has Baltic loan-words from Lithuanian. Not only loan-words but also grammar - syntax, semantics, morphology, phonetics. Lithuanian scholar Jūratė Laučiūtė published a dictionary of Baltisms in Slavic languages as part of her dissertation.

Ukrainian language has 60 loanwords, Russian - 200 , Polish – 400 and Belarusian language has over 550 loanwords. These are literary languages.

The dictionary of north-western Belarusian dialect in 5 volumes contains 1,200-1,300 Baltic loan-words.

Good article on the subject "Borrowings in Belarusian from Lithuanian: Structure, Semantics, Functioning" : http://www.biblioteka.vpu.lt/zmogusirzodis/PDF/svetimosioskalbos/2012/starcionok38-42.pdf


From encyclopedia of Belarusian language published by Belarusian State University in 1994


Благодаря балтской языковой основе (субстрату), современный литовский и беларуский языки имеют ряд общих черт в фонетике, морфологии и синтаксисе: это позиционная мягкость согласных, йотация при стечении гласных, звательный падеж, сравнительная степень прилагательных и наречий с предлогом «за», особая форма повелительного наклонения для выражения совместного действия, дробные числительные, структурно-семантическая близость некоторых местоимений, общая валентность отдельных глаголов, конструкции типа «хворому палепшала", преимущественное употребление родительного падежа с отрицанием, конструкции с глаголом «мецъ», дословное совпадение сочетаний типа «ставіць хату» и другие особенности.


Source: Войніч I., Свяжынскі У. Літоўская мова. / Беларуская мова (Энцыклапедыя). Мн., 1994, с. 314.
Click to expand...



Belarusian and Polish had linguistic contacts with Lithuanian. Belarusian grammar was influnced in some way. Linguistic contacts between Lithuanian and Finnish ...That maybe difficult to prove.
 
arvistro said:
So, by applying proved linguistic methods they had arrived at two sources:
1) early, from the stage of Proto-Balt(o-Slav)ic. Grabbed on their way to East of Baltics. Somewhere ~ 1000 bce.
2) later, from the West Baltic dialect.
Click to expand...

Did Finnish authors suggest about possible western Baltic tribe that could have contacts with the Finns? Could they be Curonians travelling across the seas? Some linguists are undecided about the language of Curonians ie if it was eastern Baltic or western Baltic.
 
@Volat, will just requote myself quoting Kallio :)
Basically reminds them of WB Pomesanian dialect vowels and Proto-Baltic consonants. It might have been Curonian, but can't say with confidence.

arvistro said:
This is excerpt from Kallio:
"Even though my analysis of the material was anything but detailed, we may arrive at the conclusion that the “Early Baltic” loanwords in Finnic consist of the two chronologically different layers: while the earlier stratum corresponds to Kortlandt’s Proto-Balto-Slavic stage (1989: 43-46) the later one represents an otherwise unattested Balto-Slavic dialect, whose phonological system was approximately the following [].
While the consonant system strictly corresponds to the Proto-Baltic stage by Christian Stang(1966:88-113), the vowel system (even including diph-thongs) in turn reminds me of the Pomesanian dialect of Old Prussian (see e.g. Levin 1974: 5, Kortlandt 1998: 115)! Therefore, no matter what we think about Eino Nieminen’s Old Curonian hypothesis, he might after all have been on the right track that the source language of the “Early Baltic”loanwords was indeed West Baltic rather than East Baltic. Even so, at least I still prefer the safer concept of ‘North Baltic’ just in case."
Click to expand...
 
I heard no quotes or arguments against Porthan and Thomsen theory so far, except is "too old" for some.

Let's look at the Helsinki university page:Frequently Asked Questions about Finno-Ugrian Languages

The Bend of the Volga or Northern Central Europe?

Some scholars have proposed that Uralic languages would have been spoken far more westward, even in what is now Northern Germany and Denmark. Especially Kalevi Wiik, a professor of Phonetics, has claimed that Germanic languages were originally "Indo-European spoken with a Uralic accent".
http://www.helsinki.fi/~jolaakso/fufaq.html
So prof. Kalevi Wiik is accepted scholar.

He states in his book "Origins of the Europeans" "Baltic language was the lingua franca in Finland 1000BC".
That way Baltic loans were transferred to Suomi, Saami and others.

So let's count arguments we've:
1. 400 Baltic loans in Finish theory by Porthan and Thomsen dating them 200BC-700AC.
2. 500+ Baltic loans in Finish by K.Liukkanen dating them about 600AC.
3. Baltic language as the lingua franca in North by K.Wiik dating 1000BC
4. Massive Baltic placenames in the Russia North by Matveev A.K.
5. Baltic Russia North place names by Toporov dating I c AC
6. Massive Baltic place names around Novgorod by Vasiljev
 
Kalevi Wiik isn't renowned among scholars received many critique and many of his theories are rejected.
 
One more scientist about migration eastward from Lithuania:
Согласно археологическим (В.В. Седов) и лингвистическим (В.Н. Топоров) изысканиям, в первые века нашей эры наблюдается переселение некоторой массы людей с балтийского побережья будущих Восточной Пруссии и Литвы на земли нынешней Беларуси и Центральной России. Тогда же в последней появляется пласт западно-балтских гидронимов, отличающихся от восточно-балтских.
https://rufabula.com/articles/2015/11/26/balt-roots-of-greatrussia
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

This thread has been viewed 113558 times.

Back
Top