The BEST Guide to POLAND
Unanswered  |  Archives 
 
 
User: Guest

Home / History  % width posts: 105

Sarmatism in Poland


saabturbografx - | 3
9 Mar 2010 #61
Sarmatism and Poland ruling class

Does anybody reckon that ancient Sarmatian tribes shared bloodlines with Poland's ruling class? Or did nobility just like the idea of being linked to ancient and renown warriors that were hired as mercenaries by Rome? Is there evidence of this culture in present day Poland, or was it a cultural phenomenon adopted by Szlachta?
TIT 5 | 211
9 Mar 2010 #62
define an ancient Sarmatians for a starter
Sildar - | 34
9 Mar 2010 #63
Maybe it will help you. Sarmatism in Poland.
expatriot 1 | 23
20 Apr 2010 #64
Hi Guys,

havnt posted for a couple years :))
anyway, im half greek half polish, kick ass combo if you ask me.
I saw those symbols that Lukasz posted on the top of the 1st page.
My question is...Is there a coat of arms for Marciniak family ?
My grandad was from warsaw and that was his last name.
I will also try to post my grandmas maiden last name...I wouldnt even know how to spell it.
Im trying to learn more about my polish ancestry.
Thanks for any commments.
time means 5 | 1,310
20 Apr 2010 #65
Yes there's some real Polish smartarses on here.

Did i read it wrongly? Opps sorry :-)
expatriot 1 | 23
20 Apr 2010 #66
lol, no problem. Seriously though...I was just curious if there was a coat of arms for each family name. Dont mean to derail this thread. I will ask in a relevent thread. thanks
Crow 150 | 9,547
5 May 2015 #67
Merged: Turks says that Sarmatism wasn`t Polish but Turkish thing

Truly tragical news. That biggest resort of Polish national pride, Sarmatism, wasn`t result of deepest Polish cultural processes and Slavic (ie Sarmatian) inter-influences but, that belong to Ottoman Turkish and Islamic (with all due respect) cultural impact onto the Poles? What a shame that it was published on Visegrad Group website (as it is stated in article). How much Poles have to sacrifice for the peace in European house? As if falsification of entire Slavic history (by the western European scholars) isn`t enough but, as we learn on Visegrad website, Poles even were not capable to invent their own culture, martial arts and national pride but took it from their opponents- Ottoman Turks.

No, this isn`t tragical news. Its abominable. God even didn`t have plans for Ottomans when ancestors of Poles had their Sarmatian legends, heritage and history. It was Slavs that influences certain processes (including martial art) in Ottomans and not the opposite. Actually, history of antic Rome and Greece wouldn`t be possible to understand without being able to comprehend Sarmatian influence on their cultures. That deep are Polish roots. Roots that are now openly attacked.

Islam's Long-lasting Influence on Polish Culture

Miltiades Varvounis / March 3rd, 2015
muftah.org/islams-long-lasting-influence-polish-culture/#.VUjeGvAmZER

This article was first published on Visegrad Insight's website on February 26, 2015, under the title "'Sarmatism' and Poland's National Consciousness: How Islam Influenced Polish Civilization" and has been republished with their permission.

The wings - wooden frames carrying eagle, ostrich, swan, or goose feathers - of the Polish hussars, undoubtedly their most prominent feature, seem to be closely linked to their origins in the vast Ottoman lands.

Des Essientes 7 | 1,291
5 May 2015 #68
The title of this merged thread, Turks says that Sarmatism wasn`t Polish but Turkish thing, misrepresents the content of the article it references.

At that time, along with the Poles and Lithuanians, the Commonwealth was also inhabited by Ruthenians, Germans, Jews, Italians, Greeks, and Scots as well as Armenians, Tatars, Hungarians, and Walachians. Each of these nations contributed to the creation of a rich, exotic, multifaceted Polish civilization, known as "Sarmatism."

muftah.org/islams-long-lasting-influence-polish-culture/#.VUjsfpNs1-w

There is absolutely nothing controversial in acknowledging oriental influences on the martial, sartorial, and culinary fashions of the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth because they are obvious. The reasons that the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth orientalized parts of her culture are numerous. Some of these reasons were pragmatic I.E. Turkish, Tartar and Magyar influenced cavalry tactics won battles, but many cultural appropriations were done out of aesthetic concerns. There is an interesting story behind the adoption of these aesthetic concerns.

Tacitus' Germania, lost since late antiquity and discovered in Hersfeld Abbey in 1425, ascribes the rule of the area, that would later comprise the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth, to the Sarmatians. The szlachta wholeheartedly took up the Sarmatian label for themselves. They conjectured that their ancestors must have come from the East, conquered the area, and subsequently adopted the Slavic and Baltic languages of their subjects. They had the example of the Slavic speaking, but originally Turkic, Bulgars for the plausibility of this belief. The szlachta mistakenly believed that the Sarmatians were a Turkic people (they were actually Iranic) and so they began adopting some Turkish styles to celebrate their supposed heredity. Sarmatism allowed the diverse szlachta to believe in a distant common origin for themselves, and to create a style of living unifying them in the present.

Despite, the possibly misleading, title of the article, Islam's Long Lasting Influence Polish Culture, this style had very little to do with the religious precepts of Islam and a lot to do with the aesthetics of certain oriental peoples who had adopted Islam. Another originally oriental people, the Magyars, had at least as much influence on Sarmatism as the Turks and Tartars. The szlachta saw the Hungarian nobility as their closest peers because they had embraced Christianity like themselves.
Crow 150 | 9,547
13 May 2015 #69
There is absolutely nothing controversial in acknowledging oriental influences on the martial, ............ fashions of the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth because they are obvious.

if one say that Sarmatism represent result of foreign (in this case Turkish) influence on Poles, one stealing something from Poles, harming them, harming entire heritage of Slavic (ie Sarmatian) civilization. If it isn`t enough that for the sake of friendship with western Europe (and who knows whom), Poles needs to forget their own history.

Anyway, speaking of martial arts development during Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth, one who knows history and isn`t ready to give up from historical truths, must say that it was Serbian Empire that influenced Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth. In fact, martial arts doctrine of Serbian medieval Empire influenced both, Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth and Ottoman Turkish Empire. Just, in case of Poles, experience and martial arts of the Serbian Empire willingly (and intentionally!) spread in Polish society (by Serbs, by Poles themselves), while at the same time, Serbian martial arts that come in Turkish position were stolen on the ruins of broken Serbian Empire overrun by Ottoman invaders.

It pains me to see when somebody stealing Sarmatisms from Poles and call it `result of Turkish influence`. Accepting Serbian martial art influence, Poles contributed to its own society but also, in space and time, preserved memory on the heights of Serbian Empire (which valuable doctrines would be lost without Poles). Poles received influence and then digested it and then they themselves enriched it and made it even more glorious.

So, it is very important to defend historical facts like this. Sarmatism appeared on historical scene as influence of one Slavic society on another Slavic society. Also, its not even accidentally that `Sarmatism` acquired its name after Sarmatians considering that both, Polish and Serbian societies, Polish and Serbian people, preserved living memory on their Sarmatian origin. Memory on time when Sarmatian name represented universal name of all Slavs.

Ottoman Turkish and Islamic influences made impact on entire world, not only on Europe. Also, at the same time, Turks were also influenced by foreigners that they tried to destroy. Civilizations affecting each others but, this- `martial arts of Sarmatism` is something Polish under the natural influence within same Slavic civilization, influence of other Slavic ethos, not result of foreign Turkish influence.

Winged cavalry and Hussars are Serbian, Polish and Slavic, Sarmatian thing.

What about

Empire of Poland and all Sarmatia
AdrianK9 6 | 369
28 Mar 2016 #70
What about it? Those are two different topics - Poland never really had an empire and the most amount of land they had was in the 1500's to 1600's. The period of Sarmatians and Scythians was nearly 1,000 years before this time period. Empire of Poland when I think of it is the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth - that was the largest Poland ever was and at the time was the 4th largest country in Europe. Poland, stupidly, did not have any colonies in Africa, Asia, or other parts of the world which would've made them far richer instead of just relying on their agriculture based economy.

The Sarmatia to me is more the lands of like Ukraine, the Balkans, Hungary, Russia, etc. That era is way before Poland became an official country and was baptized in the 966. Sarmatian and Scythian culture existed around the end of the Roman empire and into the period right before Poland became a country. The Sarmatians and Scythians were one of the Iranian ancenstry groups that moved around during the great migration - of whom yes many settled in Poland, Germany, Hungary, etc.

There aren't too many records and few historical artifacts from pre-Christian Poland. In the B.C. era, like 3,000 B.C. to 2,000 B.C. most commonly Poland at the time was thought to be populated by the corded ware/battle ax culture - most of this was still stone age technology. Then came Trzciniec Culture in Poland during the early Bronze age. Then followed the Lusatian culture from around 1,000 B.C. to around 500 B.C. which would've been the middle Bronze age in Poland. The migration period in Europe began with Rome's decline and lasted from the the 1st century A.D. to around the 9th century A.D. - that's when you start seeing cultures like the Sarmatians and Scythians showing up in Poland. The area of Poland had a lot of different groups, including many foreign during the migration period, but due to the lack of artefacts or written records, there is a lot of uncertainty and debate in this topic.

Here is a brief timeline of some of the groups that are thought to have lived in Poland prior to 966 are as follows:

Battle Axe, Corded Ware Culture - 3,000 B.C. to around 2,000 B.C. - specifically the Globular Amphora Culture occupied the areas around modern day Warsaw. Mostly stone age.

Trzciniec culture - 2,000 to 1,000 B.C. - early Bronze age in Poland - more advanced domestication, farming, some very early metals arrive like gold, silver, bronze

Lusatian culture - 1,000 B.C. to 500 B.C. - middle Bronze age in Poland - pottery, fortifications, increased trade for metals like bronze from the south for Poland's amber along with some increased domestic production of copper/bronze

Here's where it starts to get confusing because of the migration of people from Rome, the migration of people from the Nordic countries, and the migration of the Scythians/Sarmatians, who are Iranian in origin: 500 B.C. to about 800 A.D.

Migration of Germanic and Nordic tribes in northern Poland (Goths) and Germanic tribes in Western Poland - around 500 B.C. to 100 A.D. all the way to further south by the

300/400 A.D. Period - this is where you see an intersection of cultures that arrived from Sweden and Germany mixing with those during the migration period after the fall of Rome along with the Scythians/Sarmatians and Vandals which arrived in Poland around 200-100 B.C. You begin to see cultures like the Oksywie (northern Baltic Poland to the Wisla - includes the Rugians), Wielbark (eastern Poland - Germanic - Goths, Veneti), Przeworsk (southern Poland - Vandals, later Burgundians) cultures. From the Wielbark culture you see other subgroups like the Goths, Rugians, Veleti, Veneti (which became the Wends from Pomeramia and are considered early Germanic-Slavic people) because they shared many of the same lands in northern and eastern Poland near the Wisla. These were mostly Germanic/Baltic cultures that were in Poland aside from Okyswie (which had some La Tene Culture characteristics, Central and Western Europe like from France to Czech, but north of Alps with some Celtic influence, and also later mixed with the Rugians and became the Pomeranians) who also mixed with the Przework culture which included the Vandals. This becomes very complicated because all these cultures intermingled quite a bit like the Oksywie (north of Alps, Central Europe) mingled with the German/Danish Rugians from the Wielbark culture and also mingled with the Vandals/Burgundians who were almost constantly on the move so it gets to be very complicated. Then come the Huns and Scythians from lands like Hungary into Poland too around the 300-500's mixing with the Burgundians - another mobile traveling group of people. Even the Roman emperors were confused as to what exactly the groups living in modern day Poland were because their culture was similar to the Germans but their language was different.

Migration period - 100 AD to 700/800 AD - Vandals (come from Scandinavia around 1st century AD, begin to form settlements in S.E. Poland/Czech/Silesian areas near the Odra) , Burgundians (around 1st century AD start showing up - formed part of Attila the Hun's army in 400 AD) but then later are given a kingdom near northern Italty/southern France... there was a ton of people on the move at this time in Europe, especially in the lands of Poland, the Kievan Rus, Germany, the Balkans, etc. There wasn't as much movement in France or England when compared to Central and Eastern Europe around this time period.

Around 800-1000 A.D. this group becomes collectively known as the Lechites (of which there is about 6 main groups and around 20 sub groups - all living in or around modern day Poland in various city-states and tribes) and the culture and language becomes more universal in modern day Poland. The piast dynasty, many of whom were pagan up until Christianization and also were named 'Lech' which is still a popular Polish name, and even the name of a Beer, united the tribes and city states of various lands like those in Silesia, Pomerania, etc. and hence that is how the name 'Lech' came from Lechites. This is where modern Poland begins to show up but again it really depends on what part of Poland because the culture in East Poland may differ from that in the north which would differ from that in the West. These cultures were mostly pagan up until Christianity spread and Poland became Christianized.

Hope that helps... when you speak of Sarmatians and Scythians that is a broad topic and that's just one of many groups and cultures that migrated into Poland during pre-Christian Poland.
AdrianK9 6 | 369
29 Mar 2016 #71
Now that I looked again, I thought of Persians : )

That's because the Sarmatian were Iranian of descent.

So yes, modern Poles do have Iranian blood in them.

This is something that Hitler and the Nazis studied a lot and led many excavations into Persia, Pakistan, Iraq, India - those areas. That was the basis of their proto-Aryan race theories - which does have a lot of scientific and archeological backing.

See the thing is, migration spread throughout Europe as metallurgic technology spread. Poland and Germany was actually quite behind in this - we were entering the middle/late bronze age while the Turks and Romans were already in the Iron age.

Modern Poles consist of a mix of a bunch of different ancient groups. Some of the ones from pre-Christian Poland that existed in the late Bronze/early Iron age of that area included the Vandals, Goths, Gepids, Rugians, Vendi, Huns, Sarmatians (which lived in the western part of Scythia), Nordic cultures, Celts, etc. who then formed city-states/tribes like the Polans, Pomeranians, Veneti, Sorbs, Wends, Slovans, etc.

I'm sure there could have well been a Sarmatian revival during the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth as the Scythians were probably the largest and most powerful of the ancient cultures that were a part of modern Poland. There were a lot of revivals of old cultures during the Renaissance, Baroque, and Victorian periods. In Italy, the locals revived the old culture of their ancestor's - the Romans - in their art, writing, philosophy, architecture, etc. In Victorian England, it was fashionable to have Egyptian decorations in your home and even have a mummy in your living room. Perhaps Poland was trying to revive their old culture as well and they may have thought it would be better to emulate the Sarmatian Scythians than the Gepids who were thought of as lazy rowers or the other cultures that may were a little behind the times as far as metallurgy is concerned anyway.

However, when you speak of Sarmatians in general to most people that is an ancient culture that existed around the end of Rome' reign. They would've been more on the south eastern borders of Poland and I'd imagine the Sarmatians probably had more influence on countries like Ukraine, Serbia, Hungary, etc. I do know that the Hussars of Hungary shared a lot in common with the Hussars of Poland. To my understanding, the first Hussars were actually Serbs that fought under the banner of the Hungarians. Maybe Sarmatism became more popular as Poland's boundaries during the commonwealth stretched more towards the Black Sea - although I'd imagine this was most likely the nobles of the day that they had a proud, ancient culture.

I'm not an expert on pre-Christian Poland. However, the books and articles that I have read on this topic it would seem that the Vandals, Goths, Nordic, and East Germanic tribes had a bit more influence on the lands that include modern day Poland.

Again though, if I were a king in the commonwealth and doing some d**k sizing with Poland's neighbors, I'd pick the Sarmatians as my ancestors over a meandering group of barbarians such as Vandals, Goths, etc. too.

Here's what Poland would've looked like around 100-200 A.D. - keep in mind by the time of Mieszko I, and even the semi-legendary Popielec dynasty, these tribes would've intermingled and be known as the Veneti (north Poland), Polans (center), Pomeranians (Odra and Visla, anywhere near water - their name comes from 'of the sea' or people from the sea' - morze is modern day Polish for sea), Silesians/Sorbs (Silesia), etc.

The migration of these times is very impressive - if you look at this map you'll notice the Burgundians in Poland during this time period but several centuries later they were given their own kingdom in southern France/northern Italy - even known to this day as modern Burgundy.



Crow 150 | 9,547
29 Mar 2016 #72
That's because the Sarmatian were Iranian of descent.

nope. It is the opposite. Iranians as nation formed on Sarmatian ground. You know for the old name for Iran? Its was Persia. See Pe-rsia. European example would be Prussians (P-russians). Its with the reason. Its because anywhere on the fringe of the Proto Slavic world and/or great market/trade centers, where our ancients encountered with foreign cultures and strangers, cultures and languages merged, city states were formed and it was often followed by formation of new nations (peoples). Most of Europe is based on purely Slavic genetics with cultural admixture, while sometimes came to genetic mixing.

i know, you maybe won`t like that RSIA or RUSSIA but it was the one name of the ancients, one of two original known names of the ancients. See, Thracia (Th-racia) or Raethia or Etruscans (Et-ruscans, > Et-rurians > and as they called themselves RASENA), its all about that same people on inter-continental level, our ancients.

But, we know for another original name of the ancient Proto Slavs and that is name of Sarmatians. Exactly that is the reason why Poles knows Serbians, from time immemorial, as both- `Serbowie` and `Racowie`. Medieval Serbia was parallel known as SRBIJA (Serbia) and RASKA (Rashka). In Byzantine sources you have data by historian Duka who speak of Serbs as or Tribali and Thracians. You have remains of Serbian name from Sorbona in France to Sarmizegetusa in Romania all the way to Siberia, etc, etc, etc.

See, for some reason existed that dualism in Sarmatian and Thracian names, while designate one and same people.

So yes, modern Poles do have Iranian blood in them.

No. Its the opposite. They have Polish (Sarmatian/Thracian) blood in them. Same way as Germans and same way as entire Europe have Sarmatian/Thracian blood in itself but only Slavs still exist as Sarmatians/Thracians considering constant genetic, linguistic and cultural continuity. Only Slavs are Aryan Western hyperborean people by all means. That`s how God or Gods wanted.
Ziemowit 13 | 4,453
29 Mar 2016 #73
An interesting paper on the subject (in Polish) can be found here:
kwartjez.amu.edu.pl/teksty/teksty2011_3_7/Jarmoszko.pdf

Its title in English: The Polish-Iranian language heritage, or the pegs on which to hang the myth about the Sarmatian roots of Polish in the light of historical-comparative linguistics

The conclusions point to the fact that the foundations of Sarmatism were not linguistic in nature, but rather stemmed from the erroneous interpretation of historical sources. There are also additional, less clear factors to consider, for example features typical for Polish heraldry which may bear some connection to Sarmatian tamgas.

The last sentence of the above summary in English seems to be rather intriguing ...
Crow 150 | 9,547
29 Mar 2016 #74
The conclusions point to the fact that the foundations of Sarmatism were not linguistic in nature, but rather stemmed from the erroneous interpretation of historical sources.

Conclusions here are politically colored. Therefore, unworthy.
Ziemowit 13 | 4,453
29 Mar 2016 #75
You certainly haven't read this paper (9 minutes is too little a time to read it through given that it is a scientific paper discussing a lot of things in great detail) before jumping up to your most clever conclusion that their conclusions are "unworthy".

There is nothing "political" whatsoever in this paper.
AdrianK9 6 | 369
29 Mar 2016 #76
Crow, ancient Iran was Persia and before that was Sumeria. The Scythians/Sarmatians were one of the many groups thay migrated out of this land.

The map above shows Poland in the 1st/2nd century c.e. The Sarmatians are located more near Ukraine, Hungary, etc. I'm sure there were some Sarmatians that came to Poland but they weren't the majority. Perhaps this thought and influence became more prevalent during the Commonwealth because Poland expanded to areas that use to be Sarmatian lands.

If anything most of the influence on pre Christian Poland during the migration period after the fall of Rome were Vandals, Goths, and other East German/Scandinavian/Baltic tribes like the Rugerians, Veneti (Wends) as cited by Ptolemy, Gepids, etc. Many of these tribes would end up fighting against the Huns and later allied with them during Atillas time.

The issue is that there is not much study into pre Christian Poland. Most Poles regard this as a dark pagan period, although Arianism was somewhat popular. Furthermore, there is not much archaeology aside from the Biskupin fortress and some iron tools left by the Vandals and Goths.

Crow I am familiar with the Etruscans, Thracians, Gauls, Kievan Rus, etc. I studied Latin for four years in high school and most of our lessons included translating historical texts, speeches, decrees, war diaries, etc.
Ziemowit 13 | 4,453
29 Mar 2016 #77
ancient Iran was Persia and before that was Sumeria.

Are you sure that Sumeria later became Persia? i sincerely doubt it. Persia was always east of Sumeria and at one point they conquered Sumeria.
gregy741 4 | 1,204
29 Mar 2016 #78
The map above shows Poland in the 1st/2nd century c.e

there was no Poland in 1-st century..not even any slavic tribes between oder and vistula. slavic tribes settled there in 5-th or something, coming to vistula area together with ostrogoths, from northern Caucasus and black sea area after fleeing huns.

isnt?
AdrianK9 6 | 369
29 Mar 2016 #79
Are you sure that Sumeria later became Persia?

Sorry meant Elam which was basically the parallel to Sumer - general Mesopotamia area. You're right Sumeria was more Iraq near the Tigris and Eurphrates with Ur I believe being their largest city. However, much of the info that we know about proto-Persia actually comes from Sumerian writings like the Sumerian Kings List. Elam later became the Archamenid empire and later the Median empire. This general area was very very civilized compared to the rest of the world, especially Europe which was still mostly living as hunter gathers with no fortifications,

there was no Poland in 1-st century

I know - I'm talking about the people who existed in those times in pre-966 Poland.

t even any slavic tribes between oder and vistula. slavic tribes settled there in 5-th or something, coming to vistula area together with ostrogoths, from northern Caucasus and black sea area after fleeing huns. isnt?

Partially true. There is a bit of debate in this. The culture that would've existed in Poland, again going by modern day borders, would've been the Lusatians which were all over Poland, but developed originally in Lodz, and later became the Pomeranians that lived between the Odra and Wisla which mixed with the Przeworsk culture (contained tribes like the East German Rugians and Lemovi) that was already there. Also, the Veneti, which became modern day Wends/Wendish culture, lived from the Wisla to the north up to Gdansk and are thought to be a Germanic/Batlic people. However, again, this is debatable because most of the tribes like the Gepids, Rugerians, Veneti (Wends), Goths, Vandals were all Germanic tribes. There is a lot of debate on what the ethnicity of the Lusatians is (the culture before the Pomeranians) but it is said that they developed from the earlier Trzciniec culture which is proto-Baltic-Slavic. However, it is said that the Lusatians, which the Trzciniec culture developed into, had many influences from Northern and Western European lands like the Nordic culture and also La Tene culture (ancient Celtic culture) which is more pre-French/Swiss/German.

Some tribes were allied with the Huns and fought against the Romans and other local tribes while some tribes were allied with the Romans and fought against the Huns. Like the Gepids constantly fought the Huns, but then allied with them around the time of Attila. When the Roman empire fell and the huns gained power there were many tribes who migrated westward out of fear resulting in further mixing and assimilation of tribes in Poland/East Germany. The Gepids for example though, like the Rugians, are thought to be a Germanic people and either related to the Goths or a subgroup of them, and they lived in lands that are modern day Poland.

There really isn't too much written records about the slavs aside from Romans and Greeks describing the people who would've lived in Poland. The writing they had aren't too good either - could be propoganda - but we were described as very violent, leaderless people, that were rather disorganized but nonetheless endured hardships and refused to be conquered and subjugated. Our looks included fair to lightly tan skin, very tall and strong, often blue eyes and a wide range of hair colors from blonde, brown, to red.

So in summary, there were a lot of influences on Poland before 966 - Scandinavian (possibly?) Goths, East German Vandals, possibly local Przeworsk (included East Germanic people like the Rugians - who originally came from Norway - means Rye in old norse and similar to rzyto in Polish), Scandinavian Jastorf who's languages became modern day Germanic languages, the Basternae (thought to be a Germanic people originally from northern Poland - lived in the Carpathian mountains as their northern borders and mostly around Dacia which is mostly modern day Romania, they had language similarities to the Sarmatians and were thought to be a tribe or subgroup of the Sarmatian Scythians - could be correct but could also be due to assimilation)

Due to the lack of written records of this time period (unlike say Sumeria, Elam, Egypt) it is difficult to determine ethnicity for certain of these cultures. Researchers can only go by archaeology and cultural influences. Like for Lusatian culture we know they had Nordic influence by the types of bronze weapons and tools discovered but also possibly La Tene culture because of the decorative items and similarities of urns discovered in Poland were similar to those found in France, Austria, Germany, etc.

Here is an excellent source with a timeline of Poland history that goes from 9000 B.C. to the present:
historyfiles.co.uk/KingListsEurope/EasternPoland.htm#Vidivarii

If you are interested in learning more about Sarmatism in Poland there are many books on the topic. There's one called 'Sarmatians In The Polish Past'

As as Poland's pre-966 history, Tacitus and Ptolemy are probably the best written sources. Even they couldn't figure out the exact ethnicity of the people who lived in Poland (again, going by the modern boundaries) at the time but stated that they were similar in culture to the east Germans.

Here is a brief exerpt from a website:

The presumed ancestors of the szlachta, the Sarmatians, were a confederacy of predominantly Iranian tribes living north of the Black Sea. In the 5th century BC Herodotus wrote that these tribes were descendants of the Scythians and Amazons. The Sarmatians were infiltrated by the Goths and others in ...

everything.explained.today/Sarmatism

Here is an article from Tacitus around 100 AD describing the people that would've inhabited Eastern Europe - granted a bit east of Poland as during the 1st century most of the people that would've lived in modern day Poland would've been Vandals, Goths, Gepids, Rugians, etc. The Fenni and Veneti/Venedi lived a bit further east in Russia/Belarus but would've come closer to Poland throughout the european migration and also as the huns gained power.

Here Suebia ends. I do not know whether to class the tribes of the Peucini, Venedi, and Fenni with the Germans or with the Sarmatians. The Peucini, however, who are sometimes called Bastarnae, are like Germans in their language, manner of life, and mode of settlement and habitation.

The Romans, and especially the Greeks, didn't like the slavs very much because they'd constantly pillage their cities and destroy everything.

Ptolemy classes the Veneti/Venedi as being more closely located to the Baltic in the areas of Poland up to the Wisla in the 2nd century. A later author, Jordanes, states that the Veneti are the ancestors of Slavs and originated from around the Wisla and migrated outward.

There is so much mixing of tribes and movement in Poland from around 500 B.C. to 800 A.D. that it's nearly impossible to determine a single common ancestral group. The Veneti are oftentimes the most accepted - but even they, along with most of the others, are East Germanic people.
AdrianK9 6 | 369
29 Mar 2016 #80
Here is a distribution of Halpogroup R1a. 50%+ of Poles have this halpogroup in the DNA. It is widely believed that R1a originated from Iran.



Szalawa 3 | 248
30 Mar 2016 #81
R1a originated from Iran

Actually R1a is not that common in Iran, however it has a significant presence in Afghanistan. R1a did originate in Persia, however not in Iran
Ziemowit 13 | 4,453
30 Mar 2016 #82
R1a did originate in Persia, however, not in Iran

What's the difference between Persia and Iran?
Szalawa 3 | 248
30 Mar 2016 #83
Persians/Persia includes Afghans and Baluchi/Pushtu people in Pakistan which is where the concentration of R1a lies, as it is not very common amongst Iranians

Also Kurds are Persians, but they do not share much R1a like Iranians

Its sort of like comparing Slavic with Polish
Ziemowit 13 | 4,453
30 Mar 2016 #84
Persia includes Afghans and Baluchi/Pushtu people in Pakistan

I don't get it, Szaława. Persia changed its official name to "Iran" in 1935. I thought the Afghans and Pushtu were always different to Persians, though sometimes annexed by them. Also the Afghans at one time conquered Persia, so why do you say Persia includes the Afghan people. Poland was annexed by Russia in the past, but this doesn't mean Russia includes the Polish people.
AdrianK9 6 | 369
30 Mar 2016 #85
Persia, so why do you say Persia includes the Afghan people.

It depends what time period you're talking about. Gernally, though Iran has always been the center of the Persian empire except for the periods it was under Macedonian and Mongol control and also conquered during the Islamic conquest of Persia.

Median/Archaemenid/Pathian/Sasanian empires stretched from Afghanistan/Pakistan regions to Turkey but always included modern day Iran.

Generally though, Persia = Iran... Persians = Iranians..

Yes, R1a is not that common in Iran but subclade R1a1 is. R1a is thought to have originated from that around the Iran-Pakistan-India area, went through Central Asia, Russia, then finally Eastern Europe. There are many Poles and East Germans that are R1a1 as well as Pashtuns, Bedoins in Kuwaits, many Turks, and Iranian - however R1a isn't found there except for a small incidence in northern Iran. There's not many Europeans west of Poland that have R1a - most people in like France, Spain, Britain, etc. are R1b.

The largest R1a presense is seen in West Bengal Brahmins and north Indian Brahmins (technically castes) from India, Krygyz, certain Tajiks, Poles, Russians, and Ukranians. R1a-M458 is especially common in modern day Poland, Czech, Slovakia, Austria (surprisingly), and Ukraine. It's highest prevalence though is in the area of Poland, Czech Republic, part of S.E. Germany, and Slovakia - especially near rivers going to the Baltic. M458 however does have a small incidence in Turkey and the Caucasus.
Szalawa 3 | 248
30 Mar 2016 #86
Persia changed its official name to "Iran" in 1935

I suppose I talk about linguistic groups, they all speak a variant of Persian whether that be Farsi, Dari, Kurdish etc.
I think of it like comparing Polish to Russian, both are Slavic but both are different. The Afghans I knew considered themselves Persians

I suppose you can be Persian without being Iranian

Poland was annexed by Russia in the past, but this doesn't mean Russia includes the Polish people.

But they are both Slavic

1a is thought to have originated from that around the Iran-Pakistan-India area

Yeah I agree with that, that's why Roma gypsies have high concentration of R1a1
whocares
31 Mar 2016 #87
Poland probably Slavicized some Sarmatians in the region.
AdrianK9 6 | 369
31 Mar 2016 #88
Sarmatia/Scythia was pretty much extinct by the time Poland had Lechtic tribes like the Polans, Silesians, Masovians let alone by the time Poland became a country in 966. Technically, Sarmatia was basically western Scythia but by the turn of common era, Sarmatian culture became a bit more dominant than the Scythian. The differences was basically a different supreme God and a larger role in society for woman than just cooking and making babies.

Around the 1st century, Sarmatia/Scythia was at its peak and it stretched up to the Wisla - so it is likely that they influenced the S.E. tribes of Poland (again, going by current modern day boundaries). So yes, Sarmatia probably did have a bit of influence on Poland and it looks like a revival occured around the time of the Commonwealth - perhaps especially since it included more south eastern lands that were traditionally Sarmatian strongholds. There is little to no evidence of Sarmatians living near the Odra or near the Baltic - those were East Germanic tribes like the Vandals and Norse/Germanic tribes like the Goths (Gotland in southern Sweden is thought to be the origin of the Goths).

Sarmatian culture is beautiful and I could understand why the nobles would implement it. They'd make a better impression adapting red boots, red cloaks, and intricate decorative weaponry as well as clothing would make a better impression than wearing barbarian type clothing and painting your skin blue. Plus ideas like religious tolerance, military technology, honoring ancestors, etc. helped with unifying the different cultures withint he society.
Michał
3 Apr 2016 #89
Adrian, your thesis lacks in one point: Sarmatians existed (notably) from 50BC till 100/200AC. Problem: The Venetis, eventually becoming Poles, wendish, mazovians etc. migrated into Poland AFTER the migration-period, when the germanic tribes (Goths,Rugii,Vandals etc.) left the region. Sarmatians could have mixed with the Veneti at the black sea for example. Sadly the Venetis left barely anything on their way to Poland, so it's a very speculative thing trying to find their origin. But it's mostly accepted that the Venetis were at least semi-nomads. But there's is a theory which appears much more to me. Venetis mixing up with goths (or greuthungi) at the black sea. This one speculates on a vacuum of power after the Greuthungi left (cause of Huns), just like it existed after the magyars moved from Besarabia to Transcarpathia. The whole region became a mess of tiny warlords cause the formerly dominating power left. This would explain the causes of the Veneti pretty accurate. Cause why would you stay in a devastated region when there's so much more fertile land in the north?

Did you get my point? The biggest difference is the date of the "formation" of the Veneti tribe. The only thing we know is that the Veneti dominated the region of Galicia-wholhynia after the death of Attila, eventually moving to modern day Poland.
Crow 150 | 9,547
3 Apr 2016 #90
(Goths,Rugii,Vandals etc.) ................ Veneti

all Slavs (ie Sarmatians).

Open your eyes. Accept history as it was.


Home / History / Sarmatism in Poland
BoldItalic [quote]
 
To post as Guest, enter a temporary username or login and post as a member.