Slavs are descendants of Sarmatians?

"Very much so, though that's only a small part of the story."

It's probably the most important piece of the Slavic ethnogenesis puzzle..If Slavic people did not arrive from somewhere, but are autochthonous populations in Central Europe, then what actually happened between 4th century AD and 6th century AD?

If biological ancestors of the Slavs lived in Central Europe, they (at least majority of them) were either Slavic before the 6th century AD or decided to be Slavic, change their language, culture, etc. during some "wiec" ;) But this is rather improbable, because according to linguists proto-Slavic dates back to Bronze Age and share many similarities with e.g. Sanksrit.

linguisticsociety.org/files/news/ChangEtAlPreprint.pdf

Remember that you're trying to use the same term for groups of people who lived in an entirely different age.

"Remember that you're trying to use the same term for groups of people who lived in an entirely different age."

What do you mean? Venedi lived in Central Europe in the 4th century AD (see Peutinger Map) and then in the early 6th century AD we have Slavs, who according to Jordanes emerged from Venethi. "An entirely different age" means barely 200 years.

And who were Suevi of Isidore of Seville or Tacitus? Wikipedia states that Suevi and Sclavi (Slavs) have the same etymology.

The fourth century is 1600 years ago. You're trying to use the term Slav for disparate groups covering 2 millennia.

"You're trying to use the term Slav for disparate groups covering 2 millennia."

Please familiarize yourself with the links that I posted. It's not me suggesting that Slavic people have the same origin, "off-shoots from one stock", were once united, and then "their languages diverged, unity was broken and the people divided into factions, each of them ruled by their own king".

Yes, and that link is ethnocentric to say the least. History is far more complicated than that.


Glad you reject that hypothesis though.

Today's population in majority Slavonic-speaking countries (and indeed contemporary individuals who may self-identify as 'Slavs) have a much more complicated cultural history.

"Glad you reject that hypothesis though."

Don't put words in my mouth:D

Never ever heard of this. Can you provide a source?

@ Suevi/Venethi
It is interesting that the Germans once referred to Slavs as Wenden. In today's East Germany there used to be three groups of Slavs: Obotrites, Weleti (Lutici) and Sorbs. Why this difference? Could the inflowing Slavs conquer different groups of indigenous people at different times before they became slavicized? Were they first known as Wenden to Germanic tribes and the Germans later on passed that name onto Slavs?

Slavs are Sarmatians or to say Sarmatians were Slavs

Ziemowit
"In today's East Germany there used to be three groups of Slavs: Obotrites, Weleti (Lutici) and Sorbs."

Correction - numerous Slavic tribes were living in today's Germany. Many of these tribes transferred the name of, according to allochthonous theory of Slavic origin unrelated predecessors, to themselves.

Were Venethi (Jordanes), Venedi (Peutinger Map), etc. the same people as Slavic Winidi?

Were Vandali the same people as Slavic Wandali, Vandali, etc.? Why in the first written sources about Polish rulers we have "dux Wandalorum, Misico nomine" or "obiit Misica dex Vandalorum"?

Were Lugii the same as Slavic "ludzie"?

Were Varni (Procopius), Varini (Tacitus), Varinnae (Pliny the Elder), Wærne/Werne (Widsith) and Warnii (Lex Thuringorum) related to Slavic Warnabi, Warnavi, Warnahi, Wranovi, Wranefzi, Wrani, Varnes?

Were Rugii (Tacitus), Ulmerugi (Jordanes) related to Slavic Rujani ?

Jordanes wrote of the "Venethi", the "Sclavenes" and the "Antes", adding that all three ethnonyms referred to the one and same people (...) Not in disagreement with Jordanes's report, Procopius stated that the Sclavenes and Antes spoke the same languages, but did not trace their common origin back to the Venethi but to a people he called "Sporoi". Sporoi means "seeds" in Greek (as in 'spores') and is equivalent to the Latin word Semnones (that's the name of Suevic tribe known from the ancient written sources). In fact, by the time of Jordanes and Procopius, the former Suevi were called by these authors "Suavi" as in "Suavs". In this respect, the Bavarian Geographer's list of Slavic tribes contains at the end a note stating that "Suevi are not born they are sown" 'seminati'.

Did I say "three tribes of Slavs"? No, I said there were "three groups of Slavs". Within each of these groups there were several tribes, every one of them known by name in old chronicles of Franks, Saxons and Danes.


But the Germans could also have transferred the name "Venedi", name of some pre-Slavic folk, onto the Slavs when the latter arrived.


Perhaps it is true. One recent theory is that the term "Polonia" was invented in Rome first (it appears in Rome in an old source for the first time ever) and then adopted by king Boleslaus Chrobry as the name for his country (he made coins with the name 'Polonia'). The name "Polonia" meaning literally "land of fields" could have been created according to the same pattern as "Campania" in Italy ('camp' is field) or "Champagne" ('champ' means field) in France, but having been given the core for the name directly from the Slavic language ('pole' means field). So only hell knows how those people used to call themselves before this new name 'Polans' were thrown onto them (name which would literally mean: 'inhabitants of the land of fields') by some foreign monks in Rome and then adopted by the local politicians in Gniezno. Maybe 'Vandali/Veneti' was their proper name before that?

"Lexicon Latino-Polonicum" by Jan Mączyński (published in Königsberg in 1563) - s11.postimg.org/gkltvmk83/archive_prod.jpg

this is what most probably happened

Not only Germans, but also chroniclers from other parts of Europe "transferred" the name of Venedi (Venethi, Winidi, etc.) onto Slavs (Slavi, Sclavi, etc.). Even Poles (see the link below) believed they are ancestors of Venedi. And soon genetics will resolve any doubts...

s11.postimg.org/gkltvmk83/archive_prod.jpg

Slavs are a bastard offshoot of Balts mixed with a little of Iranic Sarmatian remnants (Serbs and Croats were names of Sarmatic tribes)

gumi, your perception of history is truly abominable. Feel free to ask whatever you want. i`m not expert but know something.

Let me show you some historical data that support thesis how is Sarmatian name, as back in past universal name of all Slavs, still preserved in use and still live as ethnic name in its local forms in Lusatia and Serbia (Sorbi, Srbi).

Eastern Roman scholar Procopius (500-560) said about `Sporoi` (Greek: Σπόροι) that ``it was old name of the Antae and Sclaveni, two Early Slavic branches.`` [...]

Bohemian historian Josef Dobrovský (1753-1829) and Slovak historian Pavel Jozef Šafárik (1795-1861) said that `Sporoi` was a Greek corruption of Srbi (Serbs). Šafárik deemed that it was the oldest generic name of the Slavs.

Bavarian Geographer (the anonymous author of a Latin medieval texts first time mentioned in its French form, "Géographe de Bavière" in 1796 by Polish count and scholar Jan Potocki), wrote that people named Zeriuani had so large kingdom that all Slavic peoples originated from there (or from them) [...]

NOTE: for more info, just use google

Edit - 100 copy/paste words rule

Brate Mode i didn`t just copy paste. i changed text using all my talent

Merged: If Spartans were Sarmatians, should we consider them to be kin to modern day Poles?

Scythian and Spartan Analogies in Herodotos' Representation: Rites of Initiation and Kinship Groups
pontos.dk/publications/books/bss-1-files/BSS1_07_Hinge.pdf

An article moved me to raise one question > If Spartans were Sarmatians, should we consider them to be kin to modern day Poles?

This question actually raises many more new questions. i am amazed how many. Should we dare to try to give answers?

Hi Crow I'll repeat what I said in other topic >
polishforums.com/genealogy/poles-aware-thracian-aspect-original-roots-42268/3/#msg1506164

..what you don't get is that Thracian and other Slavic tribes like Etruscans Spartans Greece ..etc are from ancient 'Poland/Lechia' ..so yes you are right we are connected .. and Poland is the original HomeLand of the SlavicAryan People

also I would like to add something about Kraków and your theory

did you notice that old latin name for Krak and Kraków was - Grakchus (Gracchus) = city of Krak/Grakch this name was used by W.Kadłubek

now do you now that ancient Greeks were 'Graecus' (Γραικός)
also latin Graecia & Graeci = G*rasia / G*rasi (rase)
but the Greeks called themselfs Hellas or Ellada :)
+ do you know the legend about the Krak and Dragon ?
note that krako and drago are very similar ;)

Now let see some interesting stuff about LECH / Lechia / Lechici ..etc

Lechia or Lachia = kraj Panów (land of 'Lords') and some countries still use this name and we were called Lachy
in Hungary they call us - Lengyel = Lech + Angyel (Pan i Anioł / Lord and Angel) and Poland is Lengyelorszag which mean the Lord Angels Country !

we can find Lach / Lah in Hebrew -- Elah (Eliah) *plural -- Elahim -- we know this from old hebre -- Elohim which mean Lord but also shepherd

Lahem in Hebrew mean - bread - which comes from God

in Arabic it's the same -- AlLah -- which mean this God -- Lord
Arabs call Poland Lahestan which mean Country of God !

***

as we know most popular theory about etymology of name Słowianie 'Slavs' say it comes from - słowo (the word) and mean be able to speak and communicate

other theory say it's from - sława / sławni (fame) because Slavs were famous warriors
from other hand we call Germans - Niemcy (niemy) which mean - mute -
historians claim that Slavs didn't have alphabet but interesting is that the old polish / slavic name for alphabet and writing was 'bukwa' and germans call collection of writings -- buk -- buch --- and now english name is book :

***

you claim that Polish people are from Thracians tribes and you say that in Serbia (Lachy) LEDJANI mean `people from the ice`
note - FROM

because we were those people from the ice which migrated FROM 'Poland' and Baltic 10000-8000bc to other parts of Europe
and the Poland was the original homeland of white proto-Slavic aryans
note there was no Thracians 8000bc ;)

hope this will help you solve real history of Poland and Slavs

Regards

most probably that is period of 10.000 years just little fragment from the history of Slavic civilization. Our Slavic roots are much deeper


i don`t have problem to accept possibility that all Slavs originate from Poland. Czech Jandacek see Proto Slavs even 40.000 years in past. It means that our ancestors had several major migrations on the Baltic-Balkan line, to say from North-South of Europe. Ancient Slavs re-populated Europe after every Ice Age ended. So, right now, we simple can`t say with certainty, when began moment when Proto Slavic civilizations appeared as unique culture of humankind. It also means that we can`t be sure where that heppend- on the North or South of Europe or even outside of Europe. We have to wait for future scientific discoveries.

But, what one who is familiar with Proto Slavic history have to conclude is that without any doubt Slavic civilization gave birth to all other White cultures. All White people in one point of history had Slavic ancestors. Slavic World is maternal and fraternal civilization of the West.

What? 10,000 years? Longer than civilisation itself? A tiny fragment??? Would you care to clarify that point?

go google on work of Petr & Louise Jandacek. Seek

Crowie, the earliest civilisations arose about 5500 years ago. So saying


is bonkers. As are the Jandacek's if they are really saying that Slavic civilisation, Sarmatians, whatever pre-date that as a coherent civilisation. Though they are not.

Nice pics on their website though...

Incorrect on two accounts:

1. Arabs NEVER used that as a name for Poland. The "stan" suffix is Persian, not Arabic, (and it is used to imply land or country). Lahestan is actually the Persian name for Poland.

2. It does not mean the land of God as stated. The name is derived from the persian word "lah" which squeeze or crush, and the name literally means the squeezed land (or squeezed country) - as in geographically squeezed between other countries by virtue of changing borders. The word "stan" by itself in Persian means friends.

******** my friend - ever heard of Lech, Lachy etc??

If it is so, then it most probably they got it from the Turks or other people living east of Poland.

Basically, in the Middle Ages the Poles were known either by the names derived from the name "Polanie" (to the people living west of Poland) or derived from the name of the tribe Lędzianie (to the people living east or south of Poland). The latter is very well heard in Hungarian (Lengyel) and in Lithuanian (Lenkija). In Ruthenia the word went through some trasformation (not explained satisfactorily yet) to form the word "Lach/Lech". Some mediaeval Polish historians adopted the name "Lech" to call the Polish people "Lechici" or to call their legendary ancestor with the name "Lech".

The tribe of "Lędzianie" lived in today's Rzeszów/Zamość and further east to the Ukraine regions (the so called "Grody Czerwieńskie" area), while the tribe of "Polanie" lived around Gniezno (surprisingly, you can find the "Hill of Lech" {Wzgórze Lecha} in Gniezno, but the name is of a later date).

Practically nothing. yes, 10.000 years is practically nothing in timeline of Slavic civilization. Jandacek and many others gave nice insight in subject


Let`s not go into it what define civilization and when first civilization appeared. Nobody knows that


here is the site which summarize their work on topic. Jandacek made it with Perdih. They here deal with period (last 100.000 years) of development of primary Indo-European linguistics and identified Proto Slavic language as the fundamental mother language from which others inherit. They founded traces of Slavic linguistical roots not 40.000 years in past but actually 70.000 years in past. So, its hardly to say at this moment when exactly Slavic civilization was born. In any case Slavic civilzation gave birth to Western world and Europoids.

Some Novel Views On The Prehistory Of Western Eurasia

By Anton Perdih, Petr Jandáèek [Amended October 2009]




jandacek.com/proto-slavic-concepts/views/

i warmly suggest this article for reading to all who seek. Authors were brave enough to speak of obvious truth founded on old data and newest scientific results.

Practically nothing? Rubbish. As explained to you carefully yesterday, no civilisation is older than half that, and Jandaczek is just some guy in America with a home made website who believes in pseudoscience.

you don`t need to be that careful. i won`t flip. i have kitnikez with me.

As I wrote before Sorbs are very closely related genetically and linguistically to the Poles. The first mention of the Sorbs is in "Chronicle of Fredegar" under the year 631/632 AD: "(...) etiam et Dervanus dux gente Surbiorum, que ex genere Slavinorum erant et ad regnum Francorum iam olim aspecserant, se ad regnum Samonis cum suis tradidit" meaning "(...) and it has Dervan, the prince of the tribe of the Sorbs, which is of Slavic origin and has been from time immemorial under Frankish rule, entrusted with his family the rule of Samo". The same chronicle claims that Slavs have descended from Winidi/Winedi.

The earliest mention of the Poles is found around 1000 AD, so perhaps the Poles emerged from the Sorbs, who emerged from the Slavs, who emerged from the Venedi?

See, Sorbs (SORBI) is domestic designation of Sarmatian name. It was/is local form. More southern, local form was/is Serbs (SRBI). Considering that form of SRBI (Balkan, Panonian basin) existed and exist on location that in past, several times, for eons served as `Ice age refugium` (where population retreated due to Ice age and again and again re-populated Europe) for Sarmatians, i presume, form SRBI is closer (as if) to once back in time original universal form of Sarmatian name, that was name for all Slavs.


Old chronicles also state that Sarmatian name was back in time universal name of all Slavs. In connection to it, in Hindu Rg Vedic manuscripts (at least 4000 years old), says that `SRBINDA was the enemy of Indra`. It designate SRBINDA as the hyperborean (White newcomers from North) invader on India. It is possible that WIND (Vinidi, Vendi) represent remain of form SRBIN-DA (or SR-BINDA > B often sound as V > VINDA). To strangers it certainly sounded that way and was more easily to pronounce. VENET is also form of some ethnic designation.