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

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

But this study is in reference to migration of eastern Galindians (Golyad') who settled in what's today western and south-western Moscow. There was also settlementd of Prussian refugees in the 13th century on territories in what's today Lithuania and Belarus after Teutonic invasion. This migration is attested in chronicles.
 
We both understand "в первые века нашей эры" means beginning of the 1st c AD, not 13th AD.
It scientists noticed movement eastward talking about Novgorod - Moscow area, migration to the direction of Estonia-Finland or East-North could have a chance also I suppose.

Dr. Santeri Juntila is a "new star" in the Baltic - Finish linguistic. Abstract in his PhD defended in spring 2016 starts with:
"The old layer of vocabulary of Baltic origin in Finnic, or the Baltic loans in Proto-Finnic, was described by Vilhelm Thomsen in his monographs from 1869 and 1890. Altogether over one thousand Finnic words have been associated with this layer of loans in various sources."
https://helda.helsinki.fi/handle/10138/158777
 
We both understand "в первые века нашей эры" means beginning of the 1st c AD, not 13th AD.
It scientists noticed movement eastward talking about Novgorod - Moscow area, migration to the direction of Estonia-Finland or East-North could have a chance also I suppose.

Dr. Santeri Juntila is a "new star" in the Baltic - Finish linguistic. Abstract in his PhD defended in spring 2016 starts with:
"The old layer of vocabulary of Baltic origin in Finnic, or the Baltic loans in Proto-Finnic, was described by Vilhelm Thomsen in his monographs from 1869 and 1890. Altogether over one thousand Finnic words have been associated with this layer of loans in various sources."
https://helda.helsinki.fi/handle/10138/158777



It's not about Finnic languages having old layer of Baltic loan-words and newer layer of west Baltic loan-words. Older layer of Baltic loan-words were obtain during migration of Baltic Finns from Volga-Oka towards the shores of eastern Baltic. It's about finding hydronyms on what's today Karelia and Finland to support your idea about the presence of Lithuanians or Balts living on territories of present day Finland and Karelia. Novgorod region has Baltic hydronyms as per Vasiliev, but this region is not part of Karelia or Finland. Makeev stated there are Baltic hydronyms ending with -as and -is suffixes in Karelia but he also suggested that the issue about this type of hydronyms is not settled. Some Finnish and Russian linguists didn't agree with Makeev suggesting such hydronyms can be Finnic in origin. I referenced the dictionary of hydronyms from Vologda region showing that hydronyms ending with -as and -is are Finnish.

Two scholars living in the 19th century which you often reference suggested that the could be Baltic settlements in Finland. But they didn't do linguistic analysis of the hydronyms as per the source you've quoted. I doubt there was an expedition to collect hydronyms of small rivers, creeks and waterways in Finland and Karelia in the 19th century. Makeev was among the first who organised expeditions in Karelia in 1950s. All those two authors of the 19th century stated is that during the migrations of people around Europe some Balts could settled in Finland.

---

Galindians were first mentioned by Ptolemy who lived in Alexandria having never visited north-eastern Europe. In those times north-eastern Europe was a world away Alexandria. Later, scholars presented different maps showing the tribes described by Ptolemy. Let's assume Galindians (western Galindians) lived in Prussia. Modern scholars assumed that tribe Golyad' first attested in the 11th century in eastern Slavic chronicle were descendants of western Galindians and they migrated in the 4AD or earlier settling in what's today western Moscow region and Kaluga region. Golyad' (eastern Galindians) are associated with the Moshchiny (Мощинская) archaeological culture dated to 4AD-6AD: https://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/Мощинская_культура

Hydronyms cannot be dated accurately. So scholars associated Golyad' (eastern Galindians) with the Moshchiny archaeological culture dated from 4AD. During linguistic analysis it's often difficult to separate Slavic and Baltic hydronyms due to common origins of the languages let alone to separate west Baltic and east Baltic hydronyms. Let's assume Golyad' spoke western Baltic language and there are west Baltic hydronyms in aforementioned region. How does all this help to prove your idea there were Lithuanians or western Balts living in Karelia or Finland?
 
Last edited:
I think problem is in "national science" mentality i.e. territory > tribe > nation > country.
Common approach is - mono linguistic tribe lived in the territory and evolved to the nation>country.
But in the reality many languages were spoken in the same territory by different social classes.
After "spring of nations" it was common to search for the roots of the "nation" and protect from others by denying other views to the facts.
F.e. there are number of publications stating Fino-Ugric language group is artificial and languages has nothing in common.
But Finish scientists take this as an attack to the national pride.
If someone ask them about loanwords they react the same.
It went to the new level after 90-ties in Russia.


07fd0a67bff2355c976afbccd774b7a3.jpg

Only issue we have is with IE tribes accepting the Uralic peoples, you even question our existence.
We are still here and not going away, just live with it.
 
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


Lol, Tacitus and the Fenni, here is this BS again, "Finn" as an ethnonym is an IE (Baltic?) loan but that went right past you.

Btw, Swedish "nation" was largely invented after 1200 AD on many different occasions.
 
"Finn" as an ethnonym is an IE (Baltic?) loan.
Finn would be German loan. Balts a) lack "f" sound in native words; b) have never called Finns Finns, we used sāmi for Baltic Finns (as in Sāmsala - sāmi island/Saaremaa).
 
Finn would be German loan. Balts a) lack "f" sound in native words; b) have never called Finns Finns, we used sāmi for Baltic Finns (as in Sāmsala - sāmi island/Saaremaa).

That is also a loan if related.


My dissertation shows that Proto-Germanic, Proto-Scandinavian, Proto-Finnic and Proto-Sami all date to different periods of the Iron Age. I argue that the present study along with my earlier published research also proves that a (West-)Uralic language – the pre-form of the Finnic and Samic languages – was spoken in the region of the present-day Finland in the Bronze Age, but not earlier than that. In the centuries before the Common Era, Proto-Sami was spoken in the whole region of what is now called Finland, excluding Lapland. At the beginning of the Common Era, Proto-Sami was spoken in the whole region of Finland, including Southern Finland, from where the Sami idiom first began to recede. An archaic (Northwest-)Indo-European language and a subsequently extinct Paleo-European language were likely spoken in what is now called Finland and Estonia, when the linguistic ancestors of the Finns and the Sami arrived in the eastern and northern Baltic Sea region from the Volga-Kama region probably at the beginning of the Bronze Age. For example, the names Suomi ʻFinlandʼ and Viro ʻEstoniaʼ are likely to have been borrowed from the Indo-European idiom in question.

https://helda.helsinki.fi/handle/10138/135714
 
The earliest eastern Slavic chronicle compiled around 1113 in Kiev has the following terms for Finnic people.

Yam' or Yem' derived from Finnish jäämit . It was applied to some people of Fennoscandia most similar to those living in Häme.

Sum' derived from Suomi. Finns in south-western Finland.

Vod' - Votia; Ves' - Vepsi; Liv' - Livonians

Chud' was a collective term for Vod', Ves', Sum', Yem', Liv', Karelians.

Lop' - Saami.

In other chronicles, Karelians - Korela.

In short Baltic Finns of Finland and north-western Russia, Estonia and Latvia were differentiated . Common collective term for them was Chud'.

I cannot recall a specific term for Estonians. They would have been known as Chud'.

-----


Tacitus referred to some people as Fenni.


Tacitus wrote

"I hesitate to classify Peucini peoples, Veneti and Fenni to the Germans or Sarmatians. However , the Peucini, whom some call the Bastarnians, behave as Germans in regards to speech, lifestyle , habitat and housing. They all live in mud, while their nobility is in a state of idle. They [Peucini] uglify themselves through intermarriages as Sarmatians do. Veneti learned a lot from the morals, as they walk around forests in robber gangs between Peucini [Bastranians] and Fenni. However, they [Veneti] should rather be referred to the Germans, because they build houses, wear shields, and they have an advantage in fitness and speedy infantry. All this distinguishes them [Veneti] from the Sarmatians who are living in the wagon or on horseback. "(Tac. Germ.)

"Their [Fenni's]food is grass; their clothes are animal skins; their bedding is ground. They hunt using bone arrowheads."(Tac. Germ. 46)


Veneti lived between Pecuni (Bastrians) and Fenni. Fenni could be people in north-east that led hunter-gatherer's life style 2,000 years ago. They don't necessarily have to be ancestors of Estonians or Finns. The term Fenni could have been transferred to Finland by Latin and Germans later. Although linguistic connection between Fenni and Finland terms is disputed.
 
Last edited:
Colleagues,
Please check the map of archaeological cultures https://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/М...83ра
All cultures has changed in 5th c AD. That was the Migration period, before was Constantine religion change, climate change, Crisis of the Third Century, also known as Military Anarchy or the Imperial Crisis https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crisis_of_the_Third_Century
Around 400AD 14 legions were disband https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Roman_legions
14 legions with families and support personnel could reach up to half million people.
Plenty of reasons to leave Roman Empire.
East Baltic was known as place with no kings from Tacitus and good place to hide or settle therefore.
Swedish scientists notice rapid increase in settlements during Migration period.
It would be strange if other territories South or East of Baltics wouldn't be affected.
Total change in habits was noticed by Wulfstan in 891 to those known in Greece and Dacia .
I think it proofs migration here.
 
Colleagues,
Please check the map of archaeological cultures https://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/М...83ра
All cultures has changed in 5th c AD. That was the Migration period, before was Constantine religion change, climate change, Crisis of the Third Century, also known as Military Anarchy or the Imperial Crisis https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crisis_of_the_Third_Century
Around 400AD 14 legions were disband https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Roman_legions
14 legions with families and support personnel could reach up to half million people.
Plenty of reasons to leave Roman Empire.
East Baltic was known as place with no kings from Tacitus and good place to hide or settle therefore.
Swedish scientists notice rapid increase in settlements during Migration period.
It would be strange if other territories South or East of Baltics wouldn't be affected.
Total change in habits was noticed by Wulfstan in 891 to those known in Greece and Dacia .
I think it proofs migration here.

People from Northern Europe served in the Roman Auxilia, it continued with the Byzantines, other than that your theory has no base in reality.
 
Did anyone read a book? - Ancient Hillforts of Finland: Problems of Analysis, Chronology and Interpretation with Special Reference to the Hillfort of Kuhmoinen
ISBN 9519056971, 9789519056975
 
Check documentary about V.Toporov. http://infa.lt/3654/vladimiras-toporovas-lietuviai-laike-ir-erdveje/
35:00min he tribute the book В. Л. ЯНИН. НОВГОРОД И ЛИТВА: ПОГРАНИЧНЫЕ СИТУАЦИИ XIII-XV ВЕКОВ

That states "Baltic place names are massive around Novgorod and down to the Moskow" already in 13-15c. Means they appeared much earlier.

On other hand indicated only several viking place names in Russia - 6 Dneper river rapids. http://www.viking.no/the-viking-heritage/the-viking-linguistic-heritage/placenames-in-russia/

What language spoke vikings in Novgorod then?
 
Some interesting stuff
"As we do not see Y-haplogroup N in any of the male samples from Lithuania and Latvia dated as late as 230 calBCE we propose that this element was brought into the genepool of the more southern region of the Baltic coast after the Late Bronze Age."
http://biorxiv.org/content/biorxiv/early/2017/03/03/113241.full.pdf
The Genetic History of Northern Europe
A.Mittnik et al.
 
Not sure I follow. What is minority view?

/
For the record I do not believe any more N in Balts was caused by Varyags :) However not seeing N in Kivutkalns, and having persons in Kivutkalns that are like modern Balts except for extra farmer genes, makes stuff very complicated to understand Baltic N.
 
Not sure I follow. What is minority view?

/
For the record I do not believe any more N in Balts was caused by Varyags :) However not seeing N in Kivutkalns, and having persons in Kivutkalns that are like modern Balts except for extra farmer genes, makes stuff very complicated to understand Baltic N.



It arrived later.

What is more, since the genetic variation of contemporary Estonians cannot be fully explained by these events, further research will be needed to reveal the subsequent demographic events that brought Y chromosome hg N onto the shores of the Baltic Sea and changed the autosomal variation of the people living in this area.
http://biorxiv.org/content/early/2017/03/02/112714.full.pdf+html
 
I'm not sure if this thread has died or moved on but it was a fascinating read. I was interested in what made Arvisto abandon his original hypothesis as it appeared to construct a storyline which did not conflict with known facts? Also, if the debate regarding NIC1 in Baltic areas has moved on I'd be grateful for a heads up as to where.

My interest is somewhat selfish as a N1C1-L550-M2783-L551-N-Y17696 male whose ancestral line traces back to the Lvov/Lviw area in the far SE.Poland/W.Ukraine region for a least 400 years. I'd be fascinated to hear peoples opinions on whether this state of affairs is most likely due to those ancestors having remained stationary while the different nation states sprang up and fluctuated around them, whether it might have been due to mass migrations in historical times or even earlier related to known events....
 

This thread has been viewed 115393 times.

Back
Top