• This topic has 8 voices and 18 replies.
Viewing 15 posts - 1 through 15 (of 20 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • #346264

    Anonymous

    There's  much of inaccurate information floating on the Internet about history of early Slavs, so it'd be a good idea to compile a summary from academic literature on the subject.  The summaries I will present will be from a perspective of an eastern Slav. I'm neither historian, archaeologist nor a linguist. Therefore, all members  are encouraged to participate to avoid possible bias of selecting certain opinions and sources.

    We may divide the summary on history of early Slavs based on evidence from

    – Primary chronicles
    – Archaeological  findings. Archaeologists made a significant contributions on history of early Slavs, as our ancestors didn't have writing systems living on periphery .
    – Linguistic evidence
    – Genetic evidence if any. R1a Aryan and I2a Illyrian madness is not welcomed.

    The time frame is 2nd century BC – 8th century AD.

    Please reference any information presented appropriately avoiding outdated studies or marginal thoughts from folk-historians. Other than that all scholarly hypotheses and opinions are welcomed.

    Does anyone want to volunteer picking up an area from the subject? :)

    #426874

    Anonymous

    Here the Zakrpatje theory is most established Slavic homeland concept among academia and it is proposed in history school books as well. The concept of this theory is Slavs lived in swampy and relatively densly forested area beyond Carpathian mountain. I think its indeed most plausable concept.

    The area dosen't or better put didn't look very much interesting from invaders point of view, especially not from point of view of nomadic and semi-nomadic tribes and northern invader that were storming western, central and southern europe for centuries. They probably did invade the place sometimes but i bet it wasn't very interesting for them especially not becouse population there the proto-Slavs and later Slavs were just bunch of simple rednecks living in meadows and fields between swamps and forests. Not the least the area was probably pain in the ass to conquer by invaders (specially horse raiders). Slavs could easlly hide in forests, swampy, etc. areas during attacks, do guerilla skirmishes, hit and run tacticts on invader. It would something like Vietcong. Meaning lots of resources would be put to destroy some swamp niggas.

    Surelly enemy mostly didn't bother to lose lots of their man power and time to loot Slavic granaries. ;D This probably enabeled proto-Slavs to expand without much problems and for quite some time unoticed.

    #426875

    Anonymous

    It's accepted among linguists and archaeologists that early Slavs' homeland was in the forest swampy zone away from the sea, mountains and the steppes.

    German archaeologist Werner stated that early Slavic archaeological cultures were similar to those of forest zones of eastern Europe. In addition, Werner stated that the archaeological culture of Slavs appearing on historical scene in the VI century look alien to the cultures of central Europe, and indeed resembling the world of forest.[1] Similar opinions held leading Russian archaeologists B. Shshukin, D. Machinsky and G. Lebedyev.

    Russian linguist Filin F.P stated that the abundance of names for varieties of lakes, swamps and forests in the lexicon of common Slavic language speaks for itself . The presence of names for various animals and birds living in the forests and swamps , trees and plants of the temperate forest-steppe zone , fish typical of this area , and at the same time the lack of common Slavic names of the specific features of the mountains, steppes and sea, provides unambiguous material for inferences about the ancestral home of the Slavs … The ancestral home of the Slavs , at least in the last century of their history [i.e. common Slavic ancestral home of the last century] was in  forest band of the temperate forest zone rich in lakes and swamps located away from the the sea , mountains and steppes. However, our assumption is not definite … The temperate zone area with lakes and marshes located in the area from the middle reaches of the Elbe and the Oder in the west to Desna River [North-eastern Ukraine, western Russia] in the east. Such a vast Slavic ancestral home could not be at least in the early stages of the development of a common Slavic language, because the separation of the language from the  Indo-European dialects , and its development as a single coherent system requires close and constant communication of its carriers for a lengthy time. (Filin 1962 pp. 122-123)

    Polish botanist Rostafinski (1908) stated whom other scholars reiterated over the years that Slavs didn't know beech, larch and fir-trees. Balts didn't know beech, larch, fir and yew trees. [3] The eastern border of the area in which Beech trees grow runs between modern Kaliningrad in the north and Odessa [Ukraine] in the south. Further east of the border line Beech trees don't grow (Filin 1962 p.22 )

    I sketched a map of the area proposed by the linguists and botanist including the territory of Belarus and western Russia. However, the territories of Belarus and western Russia are encompassed by Baltic hydronyms according to the study of Trubachev and Toporov (1962) [4] See the maps below.

    The accepted early Slavic archaeological cultures are

    The Korchak archaeological culture,  North-western Ukraine and south-western Belarus in VI- VII centuries.
    The Prague archaeological culture spread over southern Poland , Czech Republic , Slovakia and north-western Ukraine , northern Romania and Moldova in VI- VII century.
    Penkov archaeological culture, south-western to eastern Ukraine attributed to the Antes.
    Kolonchinsk archaeological culture , Norh-eastern Ukraine, south-eastern Belarus and western Russia in V- VII century.
    (Buko .A p.58) [6] See the map of archaeological cultures below.

    The archaeological findings of these three (Prague and Korchak cultures are grouped together) archaeological cultures correspond well to the descriptions of Slavs' settlements found in Byzantium chronicles (Proc. BG III. 14 22-30) consistent with three major areas of settlements of Slavic tribes described by Jordanes (Jord. Get. 34, 119) [5]

    However, there's little known about Slavs' settlements before V- VIII centuries. The Chernyahkov and Prezworsk archaeological cultures existed on the territories of Poland and Ukraine preceding the three Slavic archaeological cultures of tthe V- VIII centuries are no longer considered to be Slavic by many archaeologists. The Chernyahkov and Prezworsk cultures weren't 'cultures of forest' featuring many different types pottery and metal objects which Slavs didn't have including burial cultures which Prague-Korchak , Penkov and Kolochin archaeological cultures of the V- VIII centuries lacked. Slavs may had migrated in the areas represented by the aforementioned archaeological cultures of V- VIII from a forest zone of eastern Europe.

    The question remains in which forest zone area Slavs lived before IV AD?


    [1]Werner J. 1971. Zur Herkunft und Ausbreitung der Anten und Sklavenen // Actes du VIII CISPP. Beograd.
    [2] Filin F. P. 1962. The formation of eastern Slavic languages
    [3]Rostafinski J. 1908. O pierwotnych siedzibach i gospodarstwe slowian w predhistorycznych czasach.
    [4] Trubachev and Toporov . 1962 . Hydronyms of upper Dnieper basin.
    [5] Shshukin B. 1997. The birth of Slavs.
    [6] Buko A.  2007 The Archaeology of Early Medieval Poland: Discoveries – Hypotheses – Interpretations


    Forest-swampy zone of eastern Europe in which Beech tree doesn't grow. Possible homeland of early Slavs proposed by linguists marked by green arrows.

    [img width=700 height=396]http://s9.postimg.org/4zmaucbvz/map.png” />

    Map of Baltic hydronyms in upper Dnieper River basin produced by Trubachev and Toporov

    1 — Iranic
    2 — Finnic (Volgaic)
    3 — Finnic (western)
    4 — Baltic

    [img width=700 height=551]http://s14.postimg.org/esxe8mqcx/hydronyms.jpg” />

    Map of Prague-Korchak , Penkov and Kolochin archaeological cultures

    [img width=700 height=539]http://s29.postimg.org/73d8xwz9z/East_europe_5_6cc.png” />

    #426876

    Anonymous

    Maps of some important archaeological cultures from a perspective of early Slavic history.

    Przerworsk archaeological culture

    image

    Kiev (light brown ) and Chernyakhov (green boundary) archaeological cultures

    [img width=700 height=619]http://s24.postimg.org/y6crqkiph/81dbbfe5bf70.jpg” />

    Prague-Korchak archaeological cultures

    image

    Kolochinsk (light brown) and Kolochins-Tushemlinsk (yellow) archaeological cultures

    image

    #426877

    Anonymous

    Irish-American archaeologist J. P. Mallory wrote a short chapter on Slavs in his book In Search of the Indo-Europeans: Language, Archaeology and Myth (1989).  The chapter provides a concise summary on history of early Slavs using archaeological evidence mostly.  I am attaching the chapter from J. P. Mallory's book.

    #426878

    Anonymous

    the most accurate map i have seen in my life

    #426879

    Anonymous

    Most accurate maps of early Slavic settlements are sketched using archaeological or linguistic evidence mostly produced by archaeologists and linguists. The maps show the locations of archaeological findings or Slavic hydronyms/toponyms. In which book did you scan the map if you don’t mind me asking?

    #426880

    Anonymous

    Zbigniew Gołąb, The origins of the Slavs: a linguist’s view.

    BTW the Scholar is among the supporters of the theory which supports that the European languages formed 2 groups, the first included Italo-celts and Greeks and the second Balto-slavs and Germans.

    this theory is among the first Indeuropean theories,which lost its popularity in 20th century,but regained its popularity during the last 2 decades.

    today it’s among the predominant theories.

    #426881

    Anonymous

    Two academic books on Slavic history by Valentine Sedov. Valentine Sedov was a known archaeoligist from Russia. He is  presenting his arguments from a perspective of an archaeologist.

    Slavs in antiquity (1994) V. Sedov: http://www.archaeology.ru/Download/Sedow/Sedow_1994_Slaviane_v_drevnosti.pdf
    Slavs in early middle ages (1995) V. Sedov : http://www.archaeology.ru/Download/Sedow/Sedow_1995_Slaviane_v_rannem_srednevek.pdf

    A collection of articles on Slavs  http://www.archaeology.ru/Tribes/tribes_slaviane_1.html
    Archaeological cultures : http://www.archaeology.ru/AK/AK_index.html

    Unfortunately, the books and articles are in Russian only.

    #426882

    Anonymous

    I recommend to everyone google:
    "Interdisciplinary and linguistic evidence for Paleolithic continuity of Indo-European, Uralic and Altaic populations in Eurasia, with an excursus on Slavic ethnogenesis"

    #426883

    Anonymous

    The so-called ancient Illyrians and Thracians were also of a Slavic race.

    #426884

    Anonymous

    In my first post:

    it’d be a good idea to compile a summary from academic literature on the subject. …Please reference any information presented appropriately avoiding outdated studies or marginal thoughts from folk-historians. Other than that all scholarly hypotheses and opinions are welcomed.

    #426885

    Anonymous

    By which logic?

    #426886

    Anonymous

    Her logic.

    #426887

    Anonymous

    I dont know about illyrians but there are quite few arguments supporting fact that Thracians were Slavic tribe. Have you read this document I’ve recommended?
    But about Thracians… Descriptions of Thracians and Slavs are very similar. There are even ancient sources saying that names Slavs ,Thracians ,Getae were used for same people. Also Thracian language was probably one of the Slavic ones (some names of places ,cities ,mountains etc are clearly in Slavic language f.e. Belagora ,White Mountain). Also this is simply not possible that described as giant in numbers tribe disappeared without any trace. I don’t know how about genetic research of human remains. I have to check it out ,but Dr.Alinei says they were Slavs and he use genetic research also so I believe he knows what he says. From what I know Romans were very mixed but mostly R1b (Celtic) ,and Alinei says that Hungarians are related to Etruscans and that would be right cause old theory was that Romans were Etruscans.

    Edit.:
    Ok,I’ve checked it, Thracians were R1a.

Viewing 15 posts - 1 through 15 (of 20 total)

You must be logged in to reply to this topic.