Possible Early Slavic settlement discovered in Polesie

[Tomenable]

Polesie, region on the borderland between Poland, Belarus, Ukraine and Russia:

http://naukawpolsce.pap.pl/aktualno...olodzy-znalezli-na-slady-kolebki-slowian.html

"(...) This settlement was inhabited between the 2nd and 5th centuries AD. In our opinion it confirms that Slavs originated in the Pripyat Basin. Our research seems to confirm the hypothesis about the origin of Slavs, according to which they expanded all over the rest of Europe generally from Polesie and from neighbouring Kiev Region" - says dr Wadzim Bielawiec from the Historical Department of Belarusian National University in Minsk.

The settlement is located close to the village of Yaskovichi, near the town of Soligorsk in Minsk Oblast.

(...) "Until recently, what was happening in what is now Southern Belarus between the 3rd century AD and the 4th century AD was a huge archeological mistery. We did not have any findings dated with certainty to that period [which is why it was considered that Polesie was uninhabited at that time]. New discoveries, including our excavations from July 2018, shed some new light on these issues." - says Bielawiec.

So far two granaries have been discovered, as well as evidence of goldsmithing and bronze-working.

Also a Roman coin from the times of Emperor Commodus (161-192 AD) has been found there.

 

[Ygorcs]

That region around the borders of Belarus-Ukraine-Poland is exactly the area long assumed to have been the homeland of Proto-Slavic speakers in the Late Antiquity, based on, among other things, linguistic reasons (Proto-Slavic lexicon). It also makes sense geographically and genetically. Nice to see some archaeological evidence for that, too. It seems to confirm yet again that historical linguistics can help us to get at least an approximate location for some ancient people's Urheimat.

 

[Srbadija]

That region around the borders of Belarus-Ukraine-Poland is exactly the area long assumed to have been the homeland of Proto-Slavic speakers in the Late Antiquity, based on, among other things, linguistic reasons (Proto-Slavic lexicon). It also makes sense geographically and genetically. Nice to see some archaeological evidence for that, too. It seems to confirm yet again that historical linguistics can help us to get at least an approximate location for some ancient people's Urheimat.

Would it maybe confirm that Zarubintsy culture is proto-Slavic?

 

[Ygorcs]

Would it maybe confirm that Zarubintsy culture is proto-Slavic?

I guess that is possible, even likely, though it would be more like an Early Proto-Slavic culture. The Kiev culture, roughly conflating with the eastern portion of earlier Zarubintsy, is usually regarded as "the" Proto-Slavic culture right before they began their expansion. As far as I have read, there is controversy about the origins of the Kiev culture, but many also consider it a later development from the Chernoles culture and via the latter also from the Zarubintsy. It would make sense due to the assumed Scytho-Sarmatian as well as Celtic and later Germanic influences in early Slavic culture, all of which was felt by Zarubintsy and Kiev Culture people.

 

[Sile]

Polesie, region on the borderland between Poland, Belarus, Ukraine and Russia:

http://naukawpolsce.pap.pl/aktualno...olodzy-znalezli-na-slady-kolebki-slowian.html

"(...) This settlement was inhabited between the 2nd and 5th centuries AD. In our opinion it confirms that Slavs originated in the Pripyat Basin. Our research seems to confirm the hypothesis about the origin of Slavs, according to which they expanded all over the rest of Europe generally from Polesie and from neighbouring Kiev Region" - says dr Wadzim Bielawiec from the Historical Department of Belarusian National University in Minsk.

The settlement is located close to the village of Yaskovichi, near the town of Soligorsk in Minsk Oblast.

(...) "Until recently, what was happening in what is now Southern Belarus between the 3rd century AD and the 4th century AD was a huge archeological mistery. We did not have any findings dated with certainty to that period [which is why it was considered that Polesie was uninhabited at that time]. New discoveries, including our excavations from July 2018, shed some new light on these issues." - says Bielawiec.

So far two granaries have been discovered, as well as evidence of goldsmithing and bronze-working.

Also a Roman coin from the times of Emperor Commodus (161-192 AD) has been found there.

This has been known for about 6 years from russian scholars ..............from that place ( mapped ) traveled the proto-Veleti to the mountains of the upper vistula river ....and you already know about the Veleti

 

[Tomenable]

This archaeological discovery inspired me to suggest Maciamo that we should add West Polesie (this small part of Polesie, which remained in Poland after the border changes caused by WW2) as another region of Poland. Previously I did not include it due to its relatively small size and location at the crossroads of 4 much bigger, more populous regions (Mazovia, Lesser Poland, Podlachia and Red Ruthenia).

Here is how it looks like right now (15 regions in Poland):

https://www.eupedia.com/genetics/regional_dna_project_poland.shtml

After the suggested update, there would be 17 regions:
(I also introduced several other minor changes as well)

 

[Srbadija]

I guess that is possible, even likely, though it would be more like an Early Proto-Slavic culture. The Kiev culture, roughly conflating with the eastern portion of earlier Zarubintsy, is usually regarded as "the" Proto-Slavic culture right before they began their expansion. As far as I have read, there is controversy about the origins of the Kiev culture, but many also consider it a later development from the Chernoles culture and via the latter also from the Zarubintsy. It would make sense due to the assumed Scytho-Sarmatian as well as Celtic and later Germanic influences in early Slavic culture, all of which was felt by Zarubintsy and Kiev Culture people.

More likely Middle proto-Slavic? Since Middle proto-Slavic period is estimated about (1000 BC – AD 1), and the Zarubintsy culture is about -200 BC

Early proto-Slavic is estimated until 1000 BC according to wiki.

 

[Ygorcs]

More likely Middle proto-Slavic? Since Middle proto-Slavic period is estimated about (1000 BC – AD 1), and the Zarubintsy culture is about -200 BC

Early proto-Slavic is estimated until 1000 BC according to wiki.

That's a matter of terminology. From PIE to early Slavic languages there was a continuum with no strict boundaries between one language and the other, so classifications may vary. I personally prefer to use the term Proto-Slavic just for the latest common language that gave birth to all known Slavic languages, so just the "Late Proto-Slavic" of other classifications, but for the sake of simplification, due to the lack of names for the earlier stages of that branch going back as far as Proto-Balto-Slavic, I understand why it's plausible to use the classification "Early + Middle + Late Proto-Slavic) going back to as long ago as 1500 BCE according to some linguists. I think "Pre-Proto-Slavic" would be better for the stages beween Proto-Balto-Slavic and Proto-Slavic, because it makes it clear that they were not exactly the same language as Common Proto-Slavic and that it may have engendered other languages eventually superseded and absorbed by the Proto-Slavic of the Early Middle Ages.

Anyway, the core of this matter does not change: if Zarubintsy was directly ancestor to the medieval Slavs, it probably spoke an earlier form of the language, whether it's going to be preferably called Middle Proto-Slavic or Early Proto-Slavic or something else.

 

[Srbadija]

That's a matter of terminology. From PIE to early Slavic languages there was a continuum with no strict boundaries between one language and the other, so classifications may vary. I personally prefer to use the term Proto-Slavic just for the latest common language that gave birth to all known Slavic languages, so just the "Late Proto-Slavic" of other classifications, but for the sake of simplification, due to the lack of names for the earlier stages of that branch going back as far as Proto-Balto-Slavic, I understand why it's plausible to use the classification "Early + Middle + Late Proto-Slavic) going back to as long ago as 1500 BCE according to some linguists. I think "Pre-Proto-Slavic" would be better for the stages beween Proto-Balto-Slavic and Proto-Slavic, because it makes it clear that they were not exactly the same language as Common Proto-Slavic and that it may have engendered other languages eventually superseded and absorbed by the Proto-Slavic of the Early Middle Ages.

Anyway, the core of this matter does not change: if Zarubintsy was directly ancestor to the medieval Slavs, it probably spoke an earlier form of the language, whether it's going to be preferably called Middle Proto-Slavic or Early Proto-Slavic or something else.

Yes, when i said Middle-Slavic i mean the "scientific name" for such period. Anyways, we understood each other.