I'm not saying that you theory is not possible, perhaps the Slavs have descended from the Sarmatians. However, it would be nice to find more sources between Tabula Peutingeriana (drawn before the early 400s AD), which listed Sarmatians in Central/Eastern Europe (e.g. "Venadi Sarmate" along the Baltic coast) and The 'Annals' of Flodoard of Reims (919-966), where we have "Boleslav, the princeps of the Sarmatians" (this is about Boleslav, duke of Bohemia).
On the other hand, we have a sort of continuity between "Venadi" (Tabula Peutingeriana, before the early 400s) -> "Venethi" as Slavs ("Getica", 551 AD) -> "Veneti" as Slavs ("Vitae Columbani", 639-643 AD) -> "Winidi" as Slavs ("Fredegar Chronicle", 659 AD), etc.
Because the written sources are scarce and archaeology is biased, I hope that ancient DNA analysis will give us an answer who the Slavs are and where they emerged, I wouldn't be surprised if their Urheimat was between the Elbe and Dnieper rivers.
Probably many of the Goths and Scythians have been also proto-Slavs. Gothic king Radagaisus (see Slavic god called Radegast), a committed Pagan of Scythian origin described by Orosius have led an invasion of Roman Italy in late 405 and the first half of 406.
Name of Spartak (by Romans- Spartacus), leader of rebelled slaves of Rome, comes as a personal name form ethnic origin of Spartak. Same as ethnic names of Spartans, personal name Spartak coming from some form of Sarmatian name. Its all about Sarmatians.
Let me here remind that famous Slovak historian Konstantin Jiricek, some 150 years ago, said how is ethnic designation for Sporoi, who were recorded by old Greeks, nothing but deformed and helenized form of ethnic name of Serbians. When we know that later historians, by new founding and researching old data, concluded how is ethnic name of Serbs, local (even eventually last remain of old original) form of Sarmatian name, we clearly understand that Spartans were Sarmatians and that Spartak was Sarmatian.
As another proof we taking historical data about Spartak`s origin. By those data Spartak was Thracian. i mentioned here that until the middle age Serbians were known equally as SRBI (Serbs) and as RASANI (Rashani). Back then it was same when you say Serbia or Rascia. Rasci is term how is Serbia recorded in titled of old Polish Kings, who considered themselves legitimate rulers of Rascia after fall of Serbian Empire due to Turkish Ottoman invasion. That is why old Poles spoke of Serbians as of Racowie. Hungarians labeled Serbs as Raci, Germans called them Ratzi. So, Thracian name is in fact this > Th-racia (Raska). Its hellenized form of Rascia. Due to that dualism in ethnic designation that THRACHIAN ethnic name always goes hand in hand with SARMATIAN ethnic name, we have direct proof that Spartak was Sarmatian, even if we disregard all other data.
As for Spartan people, we know that first people that populated Peloponnese was Thracian people. That`s what says even Greek chronicles. And who were Thracians? They were Sarmatians and all this is Proto Slavic or if you wish just Slavic story, from time when all Slavs labeled themselves as SRBI and RASHANI. Same as Thrachia was foreign form of domestic `Raska`, Sarmatia is foreign form of domestic `Srbija`. Why that dualism in ethnic names, well its another long story and i already spoke of it.
Anyway, we all know for Polish legends that speak of Polish Sarmatian origin.
Sarmatism in Poland began only in the 1400s. Jan Dlugosz wrote: "u starożytnych przecie pisarzy i historiografów istnieje Sarmacja Europejska i tak Rusini, jak i Polacy zwani są Sarmatami. Przeto uważam za słuszną i prawdziwą ową nazwę, którą Polakom i Rusinom nadała starożytność."
According to Jan Dlugosz' Chronicles, the Poles in ancient times were called Vandals (Venedi?) and Sarmatians. They were also called by some incorrectly Scythians or Germanics.
the Poles in ancient times were called Vandals (Venedi?) and Sarmatians.
exactly and, that is in fact one and same designation. Wendi is how Germans called Sorbs (Lusatians) in middle age and how they call them even today. That designation for Sorbs, Germans learned from Romans. See, Wend or Vened or Vandal after all, coming from foreign deformation of original native Sarmatian ethnic name- Srbindi (ie Sarmatians), form that is preserved in Rg Vedic manuscripts, from time when Sarmatian realm stretched from what is today Scotland, via entire Europe and Eurasia all the way to the Indian subcontinent. SRBINDI > SRVINDI > VINDI
Only Sarmats that still using their original ethnic name are Lusatian Sorbs and Balkan/Central European Serbs/Serbians. i myself, while writing this and telling this to you can`t describe how is that good feeling, to know, that are we Serbians last bearers of native name of people who gave birth to the Western world. Mi Srbi smo to uradili. Mi smo istrajali. Bog je sa nama (We Serbians did it. We endured. God is with us).
They were also called by some incorrectly Scythians or Germanics.
logically. Germans themselves are Sarmats who were Romanized by Romans (and named after Roman province of Germania, with language that later even more evolved). But, traits of people in past still was obvious and some, looking at first Germans sow/heard same people as Poles, meaning Sarmatians or their nomadic branch- Scythians.
If one is European, he must be of Sarmatian, ie Serbian origin. This is the ultimate untold fact about Europe.
Hey Europeans, spot these two words:
SRBIND
and
SRVIND
This is how, let`s say, 10.000 (maybe even more then 50.000 but no necessity to speculate when its anyway immemorial) years ago, your ancestors called themselves. As it is case with languages today, in some parts of Europe B evolve in V and opposite. So, with certainty, you can remember these two words, ethnic designations- SRBIND and SRVIND. That is your ancestral name from time immemorial. That is that Sarmatian name in its original form (or forms, depending on B/V regional domination). Before acquired that name (those names) its quite possible that your ancestors were just monkeys who separated from other monkeys and starting to learning their new language, isolated in European colder climate.
Wincenty Kadlubek in his "Chronica seu originale regum et principum Poloniae" (1190-1208) wrote: "Tak wielka zaś miłość do zmarłego władcy ogarnęła senat, możnych i cały lud, że jedynej jego dzieweczce, ktorej imię było Wanda powierzyli rządy po ojcu (...) Od niej, mowią, pochodzić ma nazwa rzeki Wandal, ponieważ ona stanowiła środek jej krolestwa; stąd wszyscy, ktorzy podlegali jej władzy, nazwani zostali Wandalami."
Wanda (/ˈwɒndə/ won-də; Polish pronunciation: [ˈvanda]) is a female given name of Polish origin. It probably derives from the tribal name of the Wends. The name has long been popular in Poland where the legend of Princess Wanda has been circulating since at least the 12th century.
No wonder that Poles and Serbians feel deep attraction and sympathy for each others. Nothing can`t separate people that ancient. People whose immemorial realm partitioned borders imposed by hostile strangers. Nothing, on this world and underworld. There would be never-ending battle. There would be what can not be.
East Scythians from the Volga steppes were autosomally closer to the Balts and Estonians than to the Slavs.
Identical-by-State (IBS) similarity Lithuanian 0.645247 Estonian 0.645233 Latvian 0.645024
Outgroup f3 shared drift statistics Estonian 0.313726 Latvian 0.313664 Lithuanian 0.313574
It could mean that pra-Balts and pra-Estonians in the Bronze Age were located very near to East Scythians. Perhaps pra-Balts and pra-Estonians were bearers of the Milograd culture (Neuri)?
This could also mean that Slavic homeland was further west than pra-Baltic and pra-Estonian homeland. Definitely, we need more ancient DNA samples to confirm.
They are all product of Slavic (ie Sarmatian) sperm and womb. Its evident. Principe of formation of unique languages/cultures of Balts (Estonian, Latvian, Lithuanian) is same as principle of formation of Germanics, Italians, Albanians, Hungarians, Romanians, Irish, French, Brits, etc nations. That is- native Slavs (Sarmats) lived in region/village/city then came Egyptian or Arab or Jewish traders and cultural influences. In those encounters, influences and people mixed. Something new was created. Then, that new people/cultures continued to spread adding to itself more assimilated Slavs (Sarmats) and killing those Slavs who refused to join. Plus, of course, influencing Slavs to kill each others.
and to add, Greeks and Romans are also mix of native Europeans (Slavs ie Sarmats) and new coming Semitic elements to Europe. Original Romans were blacks. Yes. Their founders came from Africa, organized massive executions of Slavic (white) males and organized massive raping of Slavic (white) females. Just go consult legend of kidnapping of Sabinian (Sarmat) woman. They (Romans) intentionally made an effort to correct its blood line in order to become whites. Or shall i mention Jewish traders who repeatedly, generation by generation, mixed with white Slavic woman.
In the meanwhile Jesus came and Svetovid was sacked.
Hypothetical ethnogenesis of the Slavs ca. 1000 BC upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/a/ae/Hypothetical_ethnogenesis_of_the_Slavs_ca._1000_B._C..PNG
You are a bit off in your description of Sarmatian influence - they did not expand that far west and their empire was essentially assimilated with other local grounds as they moved west around the time of the Huns. Perhaps it could've reached Austria, Germany, Switzerland, maybe even northern Italy but no way did it go as far as England and France. The Gauls were the dominant people in France throughout the Roman empire. The Sarmatians/Scythians did influence the countries around Eastern Europe - modern day Belarus, Russia, Ukraine, Poland, Serbia, Hungary etc. However, it also had a lot of East German, Norse, and even Celtic (La Tene culture) influence. Most of those western European countries you describe like France, Germany, England were Roman provinces and the locals were mostly barbarian tribes with a Germanic/Norse/Celtic mix. The most prevalent culture of this period (Roman empire) was La Tene which grew out of the earlier Hallstadt culture. Here is a picture of tribes that would've existed in Western Europe around 500B.C. to 100 B.C. - the Sarmatians existed at roughly the same time - 500 B.C. to 400 A.D. with 300-400 A.D. being the timewhen the Huns were gaining a lot of influence and pushing the local people further west. The Sarmatians intermarried and mixed with local East Germanic and Norse tribes - at least in Poland - like the Vandals, Goths, Rugii, Gepids, etc.
Here is a map of how Europe would've looked like in Hadrian's time - 100's C.E.
Pliny the Elder writing in the 1st century about Sarmatians:
From this point (the mouth of the Danube) all the races in general are Scythian, though various sections have occupied the lands adjacent to the coast, in one place the Getae (this would be modern day Hungary/Romania) ... at another the Sarmatae ... Agrippa describes the whole of this area from the Danube to the sea ... as far as the river Vistula in the direction of the Sarmatian desert ... The name of the Scythians has spread in every direction, as far as the Sarmatae and the Germans, but this old designation has not continued for any except the most outlying sections ...
Check out some articles on the Marcomannic War aka German and Sarmatian War - this was a war fought between the German/Sarmatian peoples vs the Roman Empire. A lot of what we know about the various tribes existing in Poland, Germany, etc. as from Roman accounts during these wars as well as some writings by Ptolemy, Pliny, various Greek and Roman statesmen/military brass, and to an extent Jordanes. Here is another map from this time - note that the people that lived during this time i.e. Rugians and Gepids are grouped as general 'Goths' and Wielbark Culture.
We know even names of some rulers, e.g. Vannius (king of the Suevi), Vibillius (king of the Hermunduri).
jassa.org/?p=2613
AdrianK9, there are no written sources which place Vandals in Poland. Why I'm not surprised that map that you posted was created by German user Karl Udo Gerth...
In his work on Greater Germania, the Roman writer Tacitus locates the Germanic Vandali in eastern Central Europe, immediately south of the Burgundiones and the Venedi, and with the Lugii on their south-eastern flank to whom they may be affiliated in some way, either as part of the ...
The Przeworsk is linked by some scholars to the arrival and migration of the Vandali, who seem to have migrated into Eastern Europe from Scandinavia around the middle of the second century BC.
Late Sarmatian federations 200AD-500's AD included a strong proto slav element; Aorsi/Antae, whose remains date back to 200AD in western and central Poland through to Ukraine and Black Sea. Also White Croats living in southern Poland and Czeckoslovak area and Volhynia, were under West Alan/Aorsi/Antae control. Venedi were mixed origin, sharing Sarmatian and German customs. These Sarmatian groups are the ancestors of Slavenae, Antes and Wends. They were speaking Proto Slav by the 6th century AD. In 560AD, there federations were dispersed by the AVARS and they scattered into central Europe, Russia and the Balkans also.
I have just heard that there is a city, village, or a group of people in Poland that they feel they are descendant from Iranian people (as you know Sarmatians were a large confederation of Iranian people). I have got interested in this and started researching for these people with this belief.
Now, I can see that the thing that I'd heard is true, and you are the one feeling in this way.
I am really interested to find the city, village, or group of people who still believe that there is a concoction between them and their Persian ancestor (Sarmatians).
I'b be extremely thankful, if you could help me with this matter.
Here is my g-mail address, Please do not hesitate to contact me. sshjavan69@gmail
Don't get so upset, Crow. The science of genetics hasn't uttered its last word yet. Btw, some time ago I read a dissertation on how some Polish words are strangely related to some old-Iranian words. And it wasn't at all about the common PIE heritage.
Crow - the current theory about the nature of Serbs and Croats among Slavic speakers (both Serbs and Croats were originally Sarmatian according to the ancient sources) is they lived in close vicinity to Slavs and travelled to central europe with them - I don't know if they became Slavicized already in the Slavic Urheimat or only after settling in Central Europe but they were probably Slavicized before they reached Balkans and the present day Germany
`Srbi`/`Srbin` in its original or as Rg Veda manuscripts says `Srbenda`, or as Northern Serbs (Lusatians) still call themselves, same as the Southerns Serbs call themselves, as it remained in the ancient city of Sarmizegetuza, to the west at Sorbona or to the east to the Siberia and so on, so on, is nothing but the ancient and very original name of all Slavs, in fact primordial name of entire White race. See, form of `Sarmatians` is nothing but foreign given, actually foreign pronounceable form of that original name. Now, be careful, I don`t say that all Slavs and all White race are Serbs. No, I just merely telling you that those who call themselves `Srbi` still using that original name that belonged to us all. That`s just how it is. Its just happen to be and, if you want to know how it feels to still using that first original name as your own ethnic designation, yes, its good feeling. It don`t make you feel superior. Just grateful to God. Its how it feels now. Tomorrow, who knows. It would maybe sound backward, too traditional.
As for Serbs and Croats dilemma. Its very simple. When foreigners once accommodated original `Srbi` and `Srbija` to its own language and languages, comes the `Sarmati`. From `Sarmatia` they needed just one more step to get `Croatia` (foreign given name for what is now Hrvatska). Much later in time it happen that `Srbi` designation remain for one /let`s say/ tribe of same people and `Hrvati` for another, as similar thing happened massively with other `tribal names` on inter-continental level in long process. But, it again have nothing to do with reality of what is behind those names. Those who now call themelves `Srbi` (speaking of Southern Serbs) are, as linguistic science says Shtokavian dialect speaking Slavs and originate from Shtokavian speaking area. `Hrvati` (Croats) in its original are Kajkavian Slavs. It happened that by political influences of foreigners Croats claim number of Serbs and want them to be Croats. That`s it.
Isn`t all this wonderful and tragic at the same time. Even beautiful. See, at the end, when one comprehend, only beauty remains.
@jon357, don`t be small-minded. Listen what is told to you. Sarmatians and Thracians were and are Slavs.
Sarmatians and Thracians are ethnic designations for Slavs, for some epoch in our past. In fact, even those designations survived test of time. Lusatian CE Serbs and Balkan/CE Serbs both still keep using form of once universal name of all Slavs- Sarmatian name. Then, Balkan/CE Serbs are even today known as Serbians (Sarmatians) and as Rashani (Thracians). Not to mention all legends, mythology, linguistics, etymology, folklore, traditions and culture of all existing Slavs. Oh yes, direct ancient line of Western civilization still exist.
They died out (along with their culture) many centuries ago.
No, no my dear friend. I assure they didn`t die. They survived and outlived their adversaries. You right now talk to one.
Any other suggestion is fantasy.
No, no and no again. Fantasy is to tell that they died.
By the same crap logic, you could pretend that Italians are Etruscans, that Libyans are Phoenicians and Swiss are Cisalpine Gauls.
First, you must be clear with two facts.
95% of today`s European population/nations/countries are of native European origin. But, only Slavs preserved direct line to ancient roots of native European culture- ie Western heritage.
As for Etruscans (Et-ruscans), they were kin to Thracians (Th-racians). They called themselves Rasena. And no, Italians can`t claim their heritage. Slavs can. Slavs can via language, via ethnic name, via ethnicity,... other elements of culture. Similar is with Swiss and Cisalpine Gauls. Slavs inherit Gaul heritage, too. See, Italians, Swiss and Slavs are all native Europeans but, that fact don`t make us all Western. Italians and Swiss didn`t preserve that direct line of heritage, while Slavs did. Its not about who is older, or who is more pure, or anything else more. Its just about who preserved cultural line. Its the matter of simple fact.
