Poland, more Germanic or Slavic?

[Tomenable]

After 500 years belonging to GB most Scots still feel Scottish not British, though they speak english now.

Apparently the English / the British are rather poor in assimilating others (at least not as good in this as for example Germans).

Anyway - even before Poland existed as a state, Mazovians already spoke the same language as Polans.

So there was no language barrier, like in case of Scots and English people.

Mazovians also never had their own independent principality before becoming part of Poland, while Scots established their state long before 1707. Later they only tried to regain independence. Mazovians never had an independent realm before the 10th century.

It is actually not so certain if Mazovians even existed as a tribe (they are quite "hypothetical", no early sources mention them, IIRC). Mazovia was sparsely populated and mostly covered by dense forests in years 800 - 900. So even if Mazovians existed as a tribal community (rather than just as scattered groups of people) before Poland emerged, they were not numerous. Later Polish settlers came to that region. In the map below, green areas are forests (names of both confirmed by sources and rather hypothetical tribes are given):

This map shows situation in the 8th to the 9th centuries (at least if I recall correctly); green areas = forested areas:

http://s21.postimg.org/cf6cvbfbr/Tribes2.png

BTW: the map shows only forests, tribes and farmlands in West Slavic areas (that's why there is no green in areas of Old Prussians):

As you can see, most of Mazovia was sparsely populated forest - only along the Vistula River there were large farmlands.

But if this map shows situation from the 8th to 9th centuries, then it is possible that Mazovians emerged as a tribe a bit later.

Tribes were rather quite fluent entities - they could emerge, split, unite into new larger ones, change names, disintegrate, etc.

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

Edit:

Here is a similar map (showing forests - green, farmlands - yellow, etc.) for territory of modern Germany, in the 7th century AD:

Of course Eastern Germany was inhabited by Slavic tribes already at that time.

 

[Tomenable]

as soon as Mieszko conquered all other tribes, these tribes automatically identified themselves as Polanie/Polacy.

Why do you assume that he conquered them all? Sure, some were conquered. But some were incorporated peacefully. In some areas there is evidence of conquest (archaeologists find remains of burned fortified settlements, and signs of construction of new ones).

But in some other areas there are no signs of war and destroyed strongholds. This implies that locals agreed to unite, peacefully.

Perhaps they united against some common external enemy - maybe for example Germans, who by that time expanded eastward and in the mid-10th century already controlled the Oder River (conquering large Slavic areas between the Elbe and the Oder until years 948 - 955). Only 30 - 40 years later - in 983 - the Great Slavic Uprising defeated the Germans and the HRE lost most of its gains between the Oder and the Elbe. In the meantime Poles fought a battle (near Cedynia at the Oder) against Germans for control over Pomerania in 972.

The Great Slavic Uprising of 983: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Slav_Rising

Another possible external enemy of the Poles were Slavic tribes who lived west of the Oder, for example some of the Veleti peoples.

Maybe some of them, attacked by German crusaders from the west, migrated (under German pressure) eastward and attacked the Poles.

A so called "shift of settlement" in Greater Poland indeed took place, as if someone was pushing local people farther east:

Arrows show the directions of the movement of settlement in Greater Poland (probably around the first half of the 10th century):

In North America when Europeans expanded, they displaced many tribes which later went farther westward, displacing other tribes, etc.

For example the famous Sioux people most likely lived somewhere near Florida in 1492. And they ended up in regions like Montana!

 

[Tomenable]

Polane Ljachov means that apparently there were other Polanes that were not of Ljachov.

East Slavic Polanes - those near Kiev.

p.s.
If we go by same sound change then this is interesting piece:
Vjatichi - Ventichi...

Wends... Hmm, interesting.

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

Coming back to Mazovian identities:

However I have my big doubts that as soon as Mieszko conquered all other tribes, these tribes automatically identified themselves as Polanie/Polacy. They had their own tribal names and identity. The question is how long it took for others to change their identity to Polish? 200 years, or more? Could be 400 for Mazowsze?

In period 1079 - 1138 Płock in Mazovia was the de facto capital city (or at least one of a few most important political and cultural centres) of Poland. So I guess by that time they already fully identified with Poland. The same refers to the Slavic population of Silesia, who identified with Poland. For example Archbishop Jakub Świnka (died in 1314) was from a Silesian family, though he migrated to Greater Poland.

In case of early elites in each region they were partially from loyal locals and partially "imported" from Greater Poland.

Dukes of Pomerelia - even though later became independent - were a dynasty descended from Polish governors of the region.

And was it uniform transition or it happened first in ruling elite, and in peasants much much longer?

Rather the latter (first in privileged classes and in ruling elite).

The ruling elite is as a rule (though maybe there are some exceptions) the first to be assimilated. Or if they refuse to be assimilated, then they cease to be the ruling elite and are replaced by other - more loyal, more willing to collaborate - people. Peasants usually are the last to become fully assimilated (see East Germany or Austria, Slavic language survived for the longest time among peasants*).

Local dynasty of Slavic origin ruled Mecklenburg until 1918, yet by then for many centuries they were German-speaking.

*Same in Prussia - Baltic language survived longer among Old Prussian serfs than among the privileged, free classes of Old Prussians.

The free classes of Old Prussians (about 20% - 30% of them) were chiefly those who did not violate the Treaty of Christburg (1249) and collaborated with the Teutonic Knights & with crusaders against other Prussen. They were later rewarded for their help (after the conquest and Christianization). The remaining 70% - 80% were seriously disadvantaged (they had the lowest status of all classes and sub-classes in the Teutonic Order's State - they had it worse than immigrating German, Polish or Lithuanian peasants who settled in Prussia). There were even instances in Teutonic Prussia when disadvantaged Prussians pretended to be Lithuanians, in order to get better opportunities.

"Lasset Prussen Prussen bleiben" (or "Lasset Preussen Preussen bleyben") - "Let the Prussians be the Prussians" - a slogan from the Synod at Elbing in 1427 - was not a call to preserve Old Prussian culture, but a call to preserve laws discriminating against those people.

 

[Sile]

East Slavic Polanes - those near Kiev.



Wends... Hmm, interesting.

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

Coming back to Mazovian identities:



In period 1079 - 1138 Płock in Mazovia was the de facto capital city (or at least one of a few most important political and cultural centres) of Poland. So I guess by that time they already fully identified with Poland. The same refers to the Slavic population of Silesia, who identified with Poland. For example Archbishop Jakub Świnka (died in 1314) was from a Silesian family, though he migrated to Greater Poland.

In case of early elites in each region they were partially from loyal locals and partially "imported" from Greater Poland.

Dukes of Pomerelia - even though later became independent - were a dynasty descended from Polish governors of the region.



Rather the latter (first in privileged classes and in ruling elite).

The ruling elite is as a rule (though maybe there are some exceptions) the first to be assimilated. Or if they refuse to be assimilated, then they cease to be the ruling elite and are replaced by other - more loyal, more willing to collaborate - people. Peasants usually are the last to become fully assimilated (see East Germany or Austria, Slavic language survived for the longest time among peasants*).

Local dynasty of Slavic origin ruled Mecklenburg until 1918, yet by then for many centuries they were German-speaking.

*Same in Prussia - Baltic language survived longer among Old Prussian serfs than among the privileged, free classes of Old Prussians.

The free classes of Old Prussians (about 20% - 30% of them) were chiefly those who did not violate the Treaty of Christburg (1249) and collaborated with the Teutonic Knights & with crusaders against other Prussen. They were later rewarded for their help (after the conquest and Christianization). The remaining 70% - 80% were seriously disadvantaged (they had the lowest status of all classes and sub-classes in the Teutonic Order's State - they had it worse than immigrating German, Polish or Lithuanian peasants who settled in Prussia). There were even instances in Teutonic Prussia when disadvantaged Prussians pretended to be Lithuanians, in order to get better opportunities.

"Lasset Prussen Prussen bleiben" (or "Lasset Preussen Preussen bleyben") - "Let the Prussians be the Prussians" - a slogan from the Synod at Elbing in 1427 - was not a call to preserve Old Prussian culture, but a call to preserve laws discriminating against those people.

Mazovians had their own lands for 400 Hundreds year, until the polish monarchy was infiltrated by the swedish monarchy, then the mazovians lost out.

Old prussians kept their langauge for over a 1000 years , it was only after the teutonic knights subdued the old baltic prussians after 60 years of war that a sizeable number of germans moved in. numbers stated: there was 130,000 old prussians left after the defeat and 20000 germans settled in old prussia after that, they came mostly from saxony and thuringia.
Most of the germans settled in coastal trading cities and set up burgher system excluding any polish people from joining. A reason for th elater teutonic-polish wars

 

[Sile]

p.s.
If we go by same sound change then this is interesting piece:
Vjatichi - Ventichi...

The Vjatichi are part of the OKA river complex of people, they live between Moscow and the Ural mountains.

 

[LeBrok]

Apparently the English / the British are rather poor in assimilating others (at least not as good in this as for example Germans).

Anyway - even before Poland existed as a state, Mazovians already spoke the same language as Polans.

On base of language Obodrites or Slovaks could have been included as Polish but they never were.

So there was no language barrier, like in case of Scots and English people.

Austrian and Germans speak same language and yet they have their own national identity.

Mazovians also never had their own independent principality before becoming part of Poland, while Scots established their state long before 1707. Later they only tried to regain independence. Mazovians never had an independent realm before the 10th century.

Do you really mean there was a tribe without a leader? There are no records, so they didn't exist?
It really doesn't matter how closely they were related to Polans. When Catalunya separates from Spain, I'm sure they would like to be called Catalans, and not Spaniards anymore.
My point is there was no common name for Polish people in Mieszko times or some time after. It is pretty much self designation term. You need to wait few hundred years till people willingly called themselves Polacy. Look how it went with Lituania. People in cities and nobles called themselves Polacy, but peasants called themselves Lietuviai. Looks like self designation, nothing more, nothing less.

It is actually not so certain if Mazovians even existed as a tribe (they are quite "hypothetical", no early sources mention them, IIRC). Mazovia was sparsely populated and mostly covered by dense forests in years 800 - 900. So even if Mazovians existed as a tribal community (rather than just as scattered groups of people) before Poland emerged, they were not numerous. Later Polish settlers came to that region. In the map below, green areas are forests (names of both confirmed by sources and rather hypothetical tribes are given):
This map shows situation in the 8th to the 9th centuries (at least if I recall correctly); green areas = forested areas:

Interesting line from Hypatian Codex.
Словѣне же ѡви пришєдшє и сѣдоша на Вислѣ и прозвашасѧ Лѧховѣ а ѿ тѣхъ Лѧховъ прозвашасѧ Полѧне Лѧховѣ друзии Лютицѣ инии Мазовшане а нии Поморѧне

 

[LeBrok]

Why do you assume that he conquered them all? Sure, some were conquered. But some were incorporated peacefully. In some areas there is evidence of conquest (archaeologists find remains of burned fortified settlements, and signs of construction of new ones).

But in some other areas there are no signs of war and destroyed strongholds. This implies that locals agreed to unite, peacefully.

What if they lost a battle away from their settlement? It means settlement survived intact. Otherwise, sure they were alliances without battles.

Perhaps they united against some common external enemy - maybe for example Germans,

Uniting against common enemy doesn't mean giving up independence.

The Great Slavic Uprising of 983: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Slav_Rising

Another possible external enemy of the Poles were Slavic tribes who lived west of the Oder, for example some of the Veleti peoples.

At this time there were wars every 5 years or so.
http://pl.wikipedia.org/wiki/Konflikty_zbrojne_w_historii_Polski

No wonder Poland had 5 time less folks per sq km than Holy Roman Empire. A little bit more peace came later after unification of Polish Lithuanian Commonwealth. One war every 25 years or so.

 

[LeBrok]

In period 1079 - 1138 Płock in Mazovia was the de facto capital city (or at least one of a few most important political and cultural centres) of Poland.So I guess by that time they already fully identified with Poland.

Strong assurance you have, lol. I think you really really want them to identify as Poles. Just make sure you don't write new history.

The same refers to the Slavic population of Silesia, who identified with Poland. For example Archbishop Jakub Świnka (died in 1314) was from a Silesian family, though he migrated to Greater Poland.

That's 320 years after Mieszko unification, so why not.

In case of early elites in each region they were partially from loyal locals and partially "imported" from Greater Poland.

yes, that's why we know less about what locals wanted. Seems more like Piast regime than partnership of tribes.

Rather the latter (first in privileged classes and in ruling elite).

The ruling elite is as a rule (though maybe there are some exceptions) the first to be assimilated. Or if they refuse to be assimilated, then they cease to be the ruling elite and are replaced by other - more loyal, more willing to collaborate - people. Peasants usually are the last to become fully assimilated (see East Germany or Austria, Slavic language survived for the longest time among peasants*).

Local dynasty of Slavic origin ruled Mecklenburg until 1918, yet by then for many centuries they were German-speaking.

*Same in Prussia - Baltic language survived longer among Old Prussian serfs than among the privileged, free classes of Old Prussians.

Agreed, nationality is a slippery beast.

 

[Tomenable]

Mazovia was very sparsely populated in the 10th century.

Existence of Mazovians as a tribe is hypothetical (according to Leszek Moczulski, "Narodziny Międzymorza" - link below):

Moczulski writes that the idea that names of provinces originated from tribes is misleading. Name "Mazovia" isfirst attested in the late 11th century.

There are theories that this name originated from rebellious cup-bearer of Mieszko Ii (Maslaw), from hypothetical Piast governor Mazoch or Mazos, or from type of soil (mazia):

http://www.gwarypolskie.uw.edu.pl/i...sk=view&id=505&Itemid=16&limit=1&limitstart=1

Masław (Latin: Meczzlavus) was the cup-bearer of Polish duke Mieszko II, who betrayed his suzerain:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Miecław

Mazia was an old name for a type of clay soil very common in some parts of Mazovia (for example near Płock).

Mazoch / Mazos was a Slavic name (today rather a surname - for example: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jan_Mazoch).

 

[Tomenable]

LeBrok:

Existence of Mazovians as a tribe is rather hypothetical (according to book "Narodziny Międzymorza" by L. Moczulski - link below):

http://books.google.pl/books?id=FY_u2_TUiFoC&printsec=frontcover&hl=pl#v=onepage&q&f=false

Moczulski indicates that the idea that name of the province - "Mazovia" - comes from a tribe who allegedly lived there, is misleading.

The earliest known example of name "Mazovia" (describing a region, not a peoples) is from the late 11th century.

There are other theories about the origins of the name of this province. For example it could originate from the old term "mazia" or "maź" (which is a type of clay soil that is widespread in many parts of Mazovia, for example near Płock). Another theory is that it comes from rebellious cup-bearer of Polish duke Mieszko II and governor of this province, a certain Masław or Miecław (Latin: Meczzlavus):

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Miecław

Initially Meczzlavus was a cup-bearer of Mieszko II and the governor of Masovia. However, an internal crisis and a pagan reaction led to the exile of Mieszko II and rule of Bezprym. This weakened the Piast overlordship over Masovia.

Next theory is that it originated from a personal name Mazoch or Mazos (who could be e.g. another Piast governor of the region):

http://www.gwarypolskie.uw.edu.pl/i...sk=view&id=505&Itemid=16&limit=1&limitstart=1

Mazoch is still a common West Slavic surname - for example this Czech guy: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jan_Mazoch

To me the theory that name Mazovia comes from ground (soil) type widespread in this region - mazia / maź - is convincing.

Of course it as well is possible (but how probable?) that there was a tribe who named themselves (or others named them - once again this exonym / endonym issue?) after that type of ground where they lived (mazia / maź), and later the region was called after them - not directly after mazia. There are, however, no any decisive proofs that Mazovians ever existed as a tribal identity of people who lived in that area.

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

Sile:

Mazovians had their own lands for 400 Hundreds year

What separate land ??? Those were Polish duchies ruled by the same family, Polish Piast dynasty. Moreover - as I wrote before -, Płock - which is in Mazovia - was the capital of Poland during the reigns of Władysław Herman and Bolesław Krzywousty (1079 - 1138).

Old prussians kept their langauge for over a 1000 years

No, only for about 500 years since the conquest (last speakers of Old Prussian ceased to exist in the 1700s).

Most of the germans settled in coastal trading cities and set up burgher system excluding any polish people from joining. A reason for the later teutonic-polish wars

In Konigsberg at one point Poles were 30% of inhabitants (but that was in times when Ducal Prussia was a vassal state of Poland).

But I have figures for ethnic groups in other Teutonic Order's cities before (in the Middle Ages) and no of them was fully German:

Thorn (Torun) years ca. 1380-1400: Poles were 6,5% in the centre of the city and 23% in the suburbs
Thorn (Torun) years ca. 1450-1470: Poles were 23% in the centre of the city and 50% in the suburbs

Kulm (Chełmno) years ca. 1380-1400: Poles were 10% in the centre of the city and 30% in the suburbs
Kulm (Chełmno) years ca. 1450-1470: Poles were 27% in the centre of the city and 52% in the suburbs

Löbenicht (New City Konigsberg) year ca. 1450 plus (the second half of the 15th century) - 42% Germans, 40% Old Prussians, 9% Lithuanians and Tatars, 7% Poles, Czechs, Latvians and Livonians, 2% Scandinavians (mostly Danes and Swedes I guess).

And in the 16th to 17th centuries, when Ducal Prussia was Polish subject, Poles were even 30% of inhabitants of Konigsberg.

Sources:

- K. Mikulski - "Struktura etniczna mieszkańców i status społeczny ludności pochodzenia polskiego w Toruniu..."
- H. Boockmann - "Zur ethnischen Struktur der Bevolkerung deutscher Ostseestadte"
- T. Jasiński - "Przedmieścia..."
- D. Heckmann - "Zuwanderung und Integrationsprobleme in Konigsberg..."
- K. Militzer - "Probleme der Migration und Integration im Preussenland..."
- S. Augusiewicz, J. Jasiński, T. Oracki, "Wybitni Polacy w Królewcu XVI-XX wiek"
- M. Kałuski, "Polacy w Królewcu"
- http://www.iz.poznan.pl/pz/news/9_06. Kowalski.pdf

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

LeBrok:

On base of language Obodrites or Slovaks could have been included as Polish but they never were.

Slovak language is much more closely related to Czech than to Polish.

Austrian and Germans speak same language and yet they have their own national identity.

Austrian national identity is the product of Prussian-Austrian rivalry in the 19th century, later strengthened by the result of WW2.

Anyway - you should rather be wondering why do all Germans have the same national identity (despite being united as late as 1871, after centuries of "Flickenteppich").

Do you really mean there was a tribe without a leader? There are no records, so they didn't exist?

What I mean is that maybe there was no any tribe, but a number of smaller clans / families, who lived throughout the region.

No wonder Poland had 5 time less folks per sq km than Holy Roman Empire.

Poland had 4 - 5 folks per sq km around year 1000 (though according to some scholars, even more).

The Holy Roman Empire certainly did not have 20 - 25 folks per sq km at that time (5 x 4 / 5 = 20 / 25).

Probably the HRE had around 2 times (at the most 2,5 - 3 times) more folks per sq km than Poland, but certainly not 5 times more.

One war every 25 years or so.

Between years ca. 1350 and ca. 1650 (three centuries) there were no any major wars in the core of Polish territory.

Sure, Poland fought wars in that period, but they were fought in borderland regions (like Ukraine, Livonia, Prussia) or in foreign land.

 

[Tomenable]

Existence of Mazovians as a tribe is hypothetical (according to Leszek Moczulski, "Narodziny Międzymorza" - link below):

http://books.google.pl/books?id=FY_...7Ab_yoCQBw&ved=0CDEQ6AEwAQ#v=onepage&q&f=true

Moczulski writes that the idea that names of provinces originated from tribes is misleading. Name "Mazovia" isfirst attested in the late 11th century.

There are theories that this name originated from rebellious cup-bearer of Mieszko Ii (Maslaw), from hypothetical Piast governor Mazoch or Mazos, or from type of soil (mazia):

http://www.gwarypolskie.uw.edu.pl/i...sk=view&id=505&Itemid=16&limit=1&limitstart=1

Masław (Latin: Meczzlavus) was the cup-bearer of Polish duke Mieszko II, who betrayed his suzerain:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Miecław

Mazia was an old name for a type of clay soil very common in some parts of Mazovia (for example near Płock).

Mazoch / Mazos was a Slavic name (today rather a surname - for example: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jan_Mazoch).

 

[Sile]

What separate land ??? Those were Polish duchies ruled by the same family, Polish Piast dynasty. Moreover - as I wrote before -, Płock - which is in Mazovia - was the capital of Poland during the reigns of Władysław Herman and Bolesław Krzywousty (1079 - 1138).

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

Masovia was reincorporated into the Jagiellon Polish kingdom in 1526.

No, only for about 500 years since the conquest (last speakers of Old Prussian ceased to exist in the 1700s).

your not silly enough to believe old prussian language began only at the start of the wars beteen themselves and the teutonic knights

they spoke the language long before 1200's.................what did they speak before this , ?

In Konigsberg at one point Poles were 30% of inhabitants (but that was in times when Ducal Prussia was a vassal state of Poland).

But I have figures for ethnic groups in other Teutonic Order's cities before (in the Middle Ages) and no of them was fully German:

Thorn (Torun) years ca. 1380-1400: Poles were 6,5% in the centre of the city and 23% in the suburbs
Thorn (Torun) years ca. 1450-1470: Poles were 23% in the centre of the city and 50% in the suburbs

Kulm (Chełmno) years ca. 1380-1400: Poles were 10% in the centre of the city and 30% in the suburbs
Kulm (Chełmno) years ca. 1450-1470: Poles were 27% in the centre of the city and 52% in the suburbs

Löbenicht (New City Konigsberg) year ca. 1450 plus (the second half of the 15th century) - 42% Germans, 40% Old Prussians, 9% Lithuanians and Tatars, 7% Poles, Czechs, Latvians and Livonians, 2% Scandinavians (mostly Danes and Swedes I guess).

And in the 16th to 17th centuries, when Ducal Prussia was Polish subject, Poles were even 30% of inhabitants of Konigsberg.

Sources:

- K. Mikulski - "Struktura etniczna mieszkańców i status społeczny ludności pochodzenia polskiego w Toruniu..."
- H. Boockmann - "Zur ethnischen Struktur der Bevolkerung deutscher Ostseestadte"
- T. Jasiński - "Przedmieścia..."
- D. Heckmann - "Zuwanderung und Integrationsprobleme in Konigsberg..."
- K. Militzer - "Probleme der Migration und Integration im Preussenland..."
- S. Augusiewicz, J. Jasiński, T. Oracki, "Wybitni Polacy w Królewcu XVI-XX wiek"
- M. Kałuski, "Polacy w Królewcu"
- http://www.iz.poznan.pl/pz/news/9_06. Kowalski.pdf

the area was old prussian area and before that it belonged to the Aestii people, the traders of amber.

Sambians

Königsberg was preceded by a Sambian, or Old Prussian, fort known as Twangste (Tuwangste, Tvankste), meaning Oak Forest,^[3] as well as several Old Prussian settlements, including the fishing village and port Lipnick, and the farming villages Sakkeim and Trakkeim.

http://books.google.com.au/books?id...onepage&q=sambian old prussian people&f=false


Your being a racist against baltic people again!

 

[Tomenable]

Poles in Konigsberg were immigrants from Poland plus maybe some Polonized locals.

Not sure what is "racist" in talking about migrations? Are you a native Australian Aborigine that you don't like talking about migrations, or are you a descendant of European or other immigrants ???

I suppose you must be an Australian Aborigine then?

Masovia was reincorporated into the Jagiellon Polish kingdom in 1526.

There was no just one Mazovian duchy - there was a dozen or so Polish Piast Dynasty duchies in Mazovia, all of which were subjects (fiefdoms) to the Polish Kings, and they were not directly reincorporated back to the Kingdom in year 1526, but gradually between the 1300s and 1526 - after each duke died without male heirs, his duchy was being merged directly into the Kingdom.

You better read how fragmented into various semi-independent small feudal realms was Medieval England, France, various "German" states, etc. The scale of political fragmentation in Western Europe was much bigger than in any region of Poland. There was a time when French kings directly ruled only over a tiny area around Paris!

your not silly enough to believe old prussian language began only at the start of the wars beteen themselves and the teutonic knights

No and I am also not silly enough to think that it began in the 700s AD - considering that Baltic Prussian tribes are listed already by ancient sources. And by the way I clearly wrote "500 years since conquest" - and conquest was in the 1200s AD.

 

[Tomenable]

BTW - Löbenicht (New City Konigsberg) was in the area of Lipnick.

 

[arvistro]

Guys, I really think there is Vyatichi - Ven(e)ti link there.

Please read wiki material:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vyatichi
modern etymology places the word as a cognate to Veneti and Vandals.
According to Nestor the Chronicler the Vyatichi were 'Lachy' (Lechites), similar to Lendians, and used to live in areas east of the Vistula river.
The tribe, however, was constantly trying to defend its own political independence up until the early twelfth century.
In the 11th and 12th centuries, the tribe founded a number of cities due to developing handicrafts and increasing trade, including Moscow,
Some people claim that recently discovered higher percentage of Central European Genetic Marker M458 in areas around Moscow, which cannot be traced to more recent Polish immigration is due to the Vyatichi autochtonic settlement there. There is also similar marker that shows maximum in Poland and on areas of Vyatichi and Radimichs, which was called 'Vyatichi-West'.

And some more.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vistul...ween_the_Veneti.2C_the_Slavs.2C_and_the_Balts
Likewise, the Franks and Bavarians of Styria and Carinthia referred to their Slavic neighbours as Windische.

And now let's do the sound change:
Windische =
in-> ya (as in Varings - Varyags, as in Yatvings - Yatvjags, Balto-Slavic type 'en', 'in' apparently routinely produce 'ya' in Slavic
= Vjadische
Does not it sound like Vjatiči?

___
As to etimology in Balto-Slavic languages I intuitively believe in the end it would be found to be related to Lithuanian Vyti - to charge. And Lithuanian Vytis I believe is same older origin as Latvian vīties, vīt - for example "Karogs uzvijās" - flag gets waved up. As flag waves up, they charge. But maybe not, this is just my intuition at work. Maybe they were just wavers, good in handicrafts, as suggested by wiki for Vjatichi (vjazatj - wave?).

 

[Sile]

Guys, I really think there is Vyatichi - Ven(e)ti link there.

Please read wiki material:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vyatichi
modern etymology places the word as a cognate to Veneti and Vandals.
According to Nestor the Chronicler the Vyatichi were 'Lachy' (Lechites), similar to Lendians, and used to live in areas east of the Vistula river.
The tribe, however, was constantly trying to defend its own political independence up until the early twelfth century.
In the 11th and 12th centuries, the tribe founded a number of cities due to developing handicrafts and increasing trade, including Moscow,
Some people claim that recently discovered higher percentage of Central European Genetic Marker M458 in areas around Moscow, which cannot be traced to more recent Polish immigration is due to the Vyatichi autochtonic settlement there. There is also similar marker that shows maximum in Poland and on areas of Vyatichi and Radimichs, which was called 'Vyatichi-West'.

And some more.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vistul...ween_the_Veneti.2C_the_Slavs.2C_and_the_Balts
Likewise, the Franks and Bavarians of Styria and Carinthia referred to their Slavic neighbours as Windische.

And now let's do the sound change:
Windische =
in-> ya (as in Varings - Varyags, as in Yatvings - Yatvjags, Balto-Slavic type 'en', 'in' apparently routinely produce 'ya' in Slavic
= Vjadische
Does not it sound like Vjatiči?

___
As to etimology in Balto-Slavic languages I intuitively believe in the end it would be found to be related to Lithuanian Vyti - to charge. And Lithuanian Vytis I believe is same older origin as Latvian vīties, vīt - for example "Karogs uzvijās" - flag gets waved up. As flag waves up, they charge. But maybe not, this is just my intuition at work. Maybe they were just wavers, good in handicrafts, as suggested by wiki for Vjatichi (vjazatj - wave?).

You are mixing Venedi with Veliti

[FONT=&quot] [/FONT]

[FONT=&quot] [/FONT]
[FONT=&quot] [/FONT]

[FONT=&quot][/FONT][FONT=&quot](1) Veltae ([/FONT][FONT=&quot]Οὔελται[/FONT][FONT=&quot]). Word for word, this is the Vylte and Wilzi of the middle ages; a form which appears as early as Alfred. It was German, i. e. applied by the Franks to certain Slavonic population. It was also native, its plural being Weletabi. Few nations stand out more prominently than these Wilts of the Carlovingian period. They lie, however, to the west of Prussia, and indeed of Pomerania, from which the Oder divided them. In short, they were in Mecklenburg, rather than in Livonia or Esthonia, like the Veltae of Tacitus. Word for word, however, the names are the same. The synonym for these western Wiltae or Welatabi was Liut-ici (Luticzi). This we know from special evidence. A probable synonym for the Veltae of Tacitus was also some form of Lit-.This we infer from their locality being part of the present Lith-uania and Lett-land. Add to this that one writer at least (Adam of Bremen) places Wilzi in the country of Ptolemy's Veltae. The exact explanation of this double appearance of a pair of names is unknown. It is safe, however, to place the Veltae in Lett-land, i. e. in the southern parts of Livonia, and probably in parts of Lithuania Proper and Courland. Constantine Porphyrogeneta mentions them as Veltini. North of the Veltae--[/FONT] [FONT=&quot](2.) The Osii (Ossii), probably in the isle of Oesel. It should be added, however, the root ves-, wes-, appears frequently in the geography of Prussia. Osilii, as a name for the occupants of Oesel, appears early in mediaeval history.[/FONT] [FONT=&quot](3.) The Carbones, north of the Osii. This is a name of many explanations. It may be the Finn word for forest == Carbo. It may be the root Cur-(or K-r), which appears in a great number of Finn words,--Coralli (Karelian), Cur-(in Cur-land), Kur-(in Kur-sk), &c. The forms Curones and Curonia (Courland) approach it, but the locality is south instead of north. It more probably==Kar-elia. It almost certainly shows that we have passed from the country of the Slavonians and Lithuanians to that of the Esthonians, Ingrians, and Finlanders. Then, to the east,--[/FONT] [FONT=&quot](4.) The Kar-eotae.--Here the Kar-is the common Finn root as before. Any part of the government of Novogorod or Olonetz might have supplied the name, the present Finns of both belonging to the Karelian division of the [/FONT]

[FONT=&quot] [/FONT]

[FONT=&quot] [/FONT]

[FONT=&quot][/FONT][FONT=&quot](1) Veltae ([/FONT][FONT=&quot]Οὔελται[/FONT][FONT=&quot]). Word for word, this is the Vylte and Wilzi of the middle ages; a form which appears as early as Alfred. It was German, i. e. applied by the Franks to certain Slavonic population. It was also native, its plural being Weletabi. Few nations stand out more prominently than these Wilts of the Carlovingian period. They lie, however, to the west of Prussia, and indeed of Pomerania, from which the Oder divided them. In short, they were in Mecklenburg, rather than in Livonia or Esthonia, like the Veltae of Tacitus. Word for word, however, the names are the same. The synonym for these western Wiltae or Welatabi was Liut-ici (Luticzi). This we know from special evidence. A probable synonym for the Veltae of Tacitus was also some form of Lit-.This we infer from their locality being part of the present Lith-uania and Lett-land. Add to this that one writer at least (Adam of Bremen) places Wilzi in the country of Ptolemy's Veltae. The exact explanation of this double appearance of a pair of names is unknown. It is safe, however, to place the Veltae in Lett-land, i. e. in the southern parts of Livonia, and probably in parts of Lithuania Proper and Courland. Constantine Porphyrogeneta mentions them as Veltini. North of the Veltae--[/FONT] [FONT=&quot](2.) The Osii (Ossii), probably in the isle of Oesel. It should be added, however, the root ves-, wes-, appears frequently in the geography of Prussia. Osilii, as a name for the occupants of Oesel, appears early in mediaeval history.[/FONT] [FONT=&quot](3.) The Carbones, north of the Osii. This is a name of many explanations. It may be the Finn word for forest == Carbo. It may be the root Cur-(or K-r), which appears in a great number of Finn words,--Coralli (Karelian), Cur-(in Cur-land), Kur-(in Kur-sk), &c. The forms Curones and Curonia (Courland) approach it, but the locality is south instead of north. It more probably==Kar-elia. It almost certainly shows that we have passed from the country of the Slavonians and Lithuanians to that of the Esthonians, Ingrians, and Finlanders. Then, to the east,--[/FONT] [FONT=&quot](4.) The Kar-eotae.--Here the Kar-is the common Finn root as before. Any part of the government of Novogorod or Olonetz might have supplied the name, the present Finns of both belonging to the Karelian division of the [/FONT]

[FONT=&quot] [/FONT]

 

[arvistro]

I am not mixing Frank Windische is Vjatichi. Velsmth would not produce Vjasmth.
The only real question is what is the link between Frankish Windische/Wends (later known as Vjatichi, also Radimichi, part of Lechites) to older Vistula Venets/Veneds.

 

[Sile]

I am not mixing Frank Windische is Vjatichi. Velsmth would not produce Vjasmth.
The only real question is what is the link between Frankish Windische/Wends (later known as Vjatichi, also Radimichi, part of Lechites) to older Vistula Venets/Veneds.

Venets have never resided in wendish lands, vandili ( vandals ) are the ones that resided in wendish lands.

your playing word games ...........how is Vjatichi resemble Veneds?


VE´NEDAE (Οὐενέδαι, Ptol. 3.5.19), or VENEDI (Tac. Genrm. 46; Plin. Nat. 4.13. s. 27), a considerable people of European Sarmatia, situated on the N. declivity of the mountains named after them, and along the Sinus Venedicus about the river Chronos, and as far as the E. bank of the Vistula. They were the northern neighbours of the Galindae and Gythones; but Tacitus was doubtful whether he should call them Germans or Sarmatians, though they more resembled the former than the latter in some of their customs, as the building of houses, the carrying of shields, and the habit of going on foot, whilst the Sarmatians travelled on horseback or in waggons. They sought a precarious livelihood by scouring the woods and mountains which lay between the Peucini and the Fenni. Whether they were the forefathers of the Wends is very problematical. (Cf. Schaffarik, Slav. Altherth. i, p. 75, seq., p. 151, seq. &c., Ueber die Abkunft der Slaven, p. 24.)


VELTAE (Οὐέλται, Ptol. 3.5.22), a people of European Sarmatia, dwelling on both banks of [p. 2.1270]the river Rhubon, identical, according to Ukert (iii. pt. ii. p. 435), with the Sclavonian Veleti, or Lutizi, who dwelt on the Oder.


VENEDICI MONTES (τὰ Οὐενεδικὰ ὄρη, Ptol. 3.5.15), certain mountains of European Sarmatia, bounding the territory of the Venedae on the S. They were probably the low chain of hills which separates East Prussia from Poland. [T.H.D]


Eth. GYTHO´NES (Γύθωνες, Ptol. 3.5.20), a Sarmatian people, situated to the W. of the Venedi, whose position must be sought for in the eastern parts of Prussia. (Comp. Schafarik, Slav. Alt. vol. i. pp. 121, 204, 301.) [E.B.J] [p. 1.1023]


Vandălĭi or Vandĭli or Vandĭlĭi , ōrum, m., I.the Vandals, a people in the northern part of Germany in the time of Tacitus, Tac. G. 2 (Vandalii, Halm; Vandilii, Ritter); Plin. 4, 14, 28, § 99 (Vandili, Jan. and Sillig). —Sing.: “Vandalus,” a Vandal, Sid. Carm. 2, 369.—Hence,

 

[Tomenable]

Any ideas about the ancient nation of the Lugii / Lygii / Lugiones / Lougoi ???

They also lived in what later became Poland.

What about the Longiones in later times, and River Lygis?

Is ancient River Lygis the same as modern River Lech?

Then we have the Lupiones-Sarmatae shown by Tabula Peutingeriana.

 

[arvistro]

your playing word games ...........how is Vjatichi resemble Veneds?

Word Vjatichi directly descend from Windische. Same as word Varjagi descend from Varings. It is not word games. It is linguistics. (nice slogan )

Actually if we can guess what was Slavic language state AD 100, we should be able to assess how those ancient tribes would be spelled in modern or at least OCS Slavic. Probably some light would be shed on this subject

If anyone can provide me with list of tribes from AD somewhere, I may try to put in known Slavic sound change laws from A) proto-Slavic or B) proto-Balto-Slavic and arrive at their modern sounds. But be careful since I only know some of those laws, I am not linguistics pro.