Page 1 of 151 1231151101 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 1504

Thread: The origin of the Slavs

  1. #1
    Registered Users
    Posts
    616
    Sex
    Y-DNA
    I2a1b2a1b (A6105)
    mtDNA
    U5a1b3

    Canada Ukraine

    The origin of the Slavs

    For reference.

    Two of the best online sources are:

    The synthesis of the Russian (St Petersburg based) archaeologist B. Schukin. Here: krotov.info/history/09/3/schukin.html

    The analysis of the Belarusian academic V. Nosevych. Here: http://vln.by/node/175

    Both texts are in Russian. But Nosevych has many excellent accompanying maps and drawings which are basically understandable on their own.

    Both scholars favour a late emergence of Slavdom. In Nosevych btw, node 175 is just the introductory page. Scroll down and click on the link to the right at the bottom to proceed node by node.

  2. The Following 6 Users Say Thank You to George For This Useful Post:

     Coldmountains (07-20-2015), MindHive (03-14-2017), NiloSaharan (06-02-2017), rms2 (07-21-2015), Táltos (07-21-2015), Tomenable (07-08-2017)

  3. #2
    Gold Class Member
    Posts
    7,301
    Sex
    Location
    United Kingdom
    Nationality
    British
    mtDNA
    H

    United Kingdom
    In English:

    Paul Barford, The Early Slavs: Culture and Society in Early Medieval Eastern Europe (2001): http://www.amazon.co.uk/The-Early-Sl.../dp/0801439779

  4. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Jean M For This Useful Post:

     rms2 (07-21-2015), Táltos (07-21-2015)

  5. #3
    Quote Originally Posted by Jean M View Post
    In English:

    Paul Barford, The Early Slavs: Culture and Society in Early Medieval Eastern Europe (2001): http://www.amazon.co.uk/The-Early-Sl.../dp/0801439779
    Jean, were do you think the slavic lineage was between the time of the yamnaya and the time when the slavic lineage moved into poland, and how long do you think that time period was?

    Also, do you subscribe to the ringe phylogeny referenced by Anthony? If so, where and when do you think the balto slavic lineage separated from the indo iranian lineage?

    I rather like the idea mentioned by david anthony which is that the lineage for slavic and iranian (some kind of proto conglomerate at the time) resulted from a fusion of CT and minor yamnaya contribution, and then moved northward. I like it because it separates slavic lineage from yamnaya (you disagree I'm sure) and because CT offers the demographic power to result in widespread r1a movement and eventually slavic and iranian. Eastern CW could have been another source and a CW contribution is nearly a given.
    Last edited by nuadha; 07-21-2015 at 12:20 AM.

  6. #4
    Gold Class Member
    Posts
    2,386
    Sex

    Quote Originally Posted by Jean M View Post
    Paul Barford, The Early Slavs: Culture and Society in Early Medieval Eastern Europe (2001): http://www.amazon.co.uk/The-Early-Sl.../dp/0801439779
    Used, the book is somewhat less expensive. Among the reviews, one gives some hint of the author's ultimate conclusion:
    ---
    The interesting picture that emerges is of closely related Slavonic groups (linguistic evidence) probably originating in the Southern Polish, Czech, Carpathian area, cooperating with invading Huns from the East, and moving into land abandoned by the movement of earlier Germanic tribes (who in turn had moved to occupy the collapsing Western Roman Empire).
    ---

    The book was written in 2001, so of course it cannote cite recent corroborating DNA results.

  7. The Following 8 Users Say Thank You to lgmayka For This Useful Post:

     Agamemnon (07-21-2015), Amerijoe (07-19-2016), Awale (01-11-2016), DMXX (07-22-2015), Illyro-Vlach (12-23-2015), Mixed (05-14-2017), rms2 (07-21-2015), Táltos (07-21-2015)

  8. #5
    Banned
    Posts
    130
    Sex
    Ethnicity
    European

    Barfords book is ok. Genetics aside, it actually also lacks the latest in theoretical ethnicity and dendrodating.
    Actually, the Slavs didn't migrated with the Huns (c. 400 AD), but some two centuries later (600AD).
    To me, books like these are introductory and merely serve as points of departure.

  9. #6
    from where

  10. #7
    Registered Users
    Posts
    1,864

    Quote Originally Posted by nuadha View Post
    Jean, were do you think the slavic lineage was between the time of the yamnaya and the time when the slavic lineage moved into poland, and how long do you think that time period was?

    Also, do you subscribe to the ringe phylogeny referenced by Anthony? If so, where and when do you think the balto slavic lineage separated from the indo iranian lineage?

    I rather like the idea mentioned by david anthony which is that the lineage for slavic and iranian (some kind of proto conglomerate at the time) resulted from a fusion of CT and minor yamnaya contribution, and then moved northward. I like it because it separates slavic lineage from yamnaya (you disagree I'm sure) and because CT offers the demographic power to result in widespread r1a movement and eventually slavic and iranian. Eastern CW could have been another source and a CW contribution is nearly a given.
    The structure of R1a doesn't look neolithic. The Karelia R1a dude doesn't look like he came from CT. And in terms of archealogy there are a handful of reasons why Dnieper Donets and/or Bug-Dniester work better for R1a. In this case CT is likely just a source of maternal lineages for Dnieper-Donets and CW. Just like Yamnaya likely was for Sintashta-Andronovo. Plus we have R1a from the border of Western Russia and Belarus which is pretty close to (if not in? anyone with a better grasp of Eastern European geography can chime in) Dnieper Donets territory.

    Or perhaps you think the Dnieper Donets I/II/II hunter gatherers (and their Middle Dnieper descendants in later CW lands) that dominated the Ukranian/Russian steppe, Ukranian/Russian forest steppe and forest zone of N.Ukraine and South/CentralBelarus were entirely?

    Bug-Dniester is also a good candidate and some have speculated it played a role in the formation of Dnieper Donets. Plus the northern edge of those rivers end up in the theorized genesis of CW in SE Poland.

  11. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to newtoboard For This Useful Post:

     Coldmountains (07-21-2015), DMXX (07-22-2015)

  12. #8
    Quote Originally Posted by newtoboard View Post
    The structure of R1a doesn't look neolithic. The Karelia R1a dude doesn't look like he came from CT. And in terms of archealogy there are a handful of reasons why Dnieper Donets and/or Bug-Dniester work better for R1a. In this case CT is likely just a source of maternal lineages for Dnieper-Donets and CW. Just like Yamnaya likely was for Sintashta-Andronovo. Plus we have R1a from the border of Western Russia and Belarus which is pretty close to (if not in? anyone with a better grasp of Eastern European geography can chime in) Dnieper Donets territory.

    Or perhaps you think the Dnieper Donets I/II/II hunter gatherers (and their Middle Dnieper descendants in later CW lands) that dominated the Ukranian/Russian steppe, Ukranian/Russian forest steppe and forest zone of N.Ukraine and South/CentralBelarus were entirely?

    Bug-Dniester is also a good candidate and some have speculated it played a role in the formation of Dnieper Donets. Plus the northern edge of those rivers end up in the theorized genesis of CW in SE Poland.
    I wasn't saying that the IE r1a (the r1a broadly tied to IE expansions in slavs, balts, iranians, etc...) necessarily came from CT and I do concede that the IE r1a, almost without a doubt, had its origin in EHG. So I agree with most of what you say.

    I think the fallen CT are a decent candidate for a large chunk of the man power (not literally just men) that was needed for the r1a associated IE migrations that also brought a crapload of autosomal dna mtdna towards central asia. I think the fallen CT is also a good candidate for the linguistic transfer of early IE in r1b yamnaya to a non r1b population. Of course yamnaya being predominantly r1b and the main source of early IE is just my opinion. Maybe the CT had r1a (picked up from the the north) or maybe they didn't. At some point though, I think its likely that r1b yamnaya taught r1a people to the northwest IE and those r1a people then spread into central asia. For the language tree I use ringe et al.

  13. #9
    Registered Users
    Posts
    1,864

    Quote Originally Posted by nuadha View Post
    I wasn't saying that the IE r1a (the r1a broadly tied to IE expansions in slavs, balts, iranians, etc...) necessarily came from CT and I do concede that the IE r1a, almost without a doubt, had its origin in EHG. So I agree with most of what you say.

    I think the fallen CT are a decent candidate for a large chunk of the man power (not literally just men) that was needed for the r1a associated IE migrations that also brought a crapload of autosomal dna mtdna towards central asia. I think the fallen CT is also a good candidate for the linguistic transfer of early IE in r1b yamnaya to a non r1b population. Of course yamnaya being predominantly r1b and the main source of early IE is just my opinion. Maybe the CT had r1a (picked up from the the north) or maybe they didn't. At some point though, I think its likely that r1b yamnaya taught r1a people to the northwest IE and those r1a people then spread into central asia. For the language tree I use ringe et al.
    This entire post seems wrong.

    -Why invoke CT at all? Some gene flow into the steppe/forest steppe sure. But for all we know the autosomal signature of R1a was already present by 7000-4000 BC and is something like 80% Dnieper-Donets and 20% CT. It is clear the expansion of R1a into Central Asia is related to the invention of chariots and the creation of weaponry/metal working unheard of in the Yamanya period. And the most common lineage in Andronovo/Central Asian IE speakers (mt T) was already common in Dnieper Donets.

    -Yamnaya was never supposed to be early PIE. I have seen PIE dated to 4500 BC-4000 BC. I doubt it is even late PIE. PIE/Pre-PIE is better placed in Late Samara (R1b-M73+?), Sredny Stog (R1b-L23*?) and Dnieper Donets II/III (R1a-Z2645?). You are right that Yamnaya being the early source of IE and Indo-Europeanizing R1a is only your opinion. One that is wrong and the sort of biased, imaginary nonsense that is best restricted to a site like Eupedia.

    -Yamnaya looks Z2103 dominant. So in all likelhood Michal is right and Yamnaya-Afanasievo represents the speakers of the Balkan group of languages. Which is actually in line with the theories by numerous Finnish and Russian archeologists that Yamnaya represented the speakers of Greco(Balkan group)-Aryan(Indo-Iranian) with the forest steppe Abashevo group representing Indo-Iranian speakers as well. Only thing they were wrong on was that Indo-Iranian was restricted to the forest steppe rather than being split up between the forest steppe and Volga-Ural steppe (some Poltavka samples will obviously confirm this one way or the other).

    -It is unlikely R1b-L51 will be found in Yamnaya imo. But even if it is are you suggesting that Italo-Celtic-Germanic shared a node with the Balkan group so late in history. Unlikely. You are essentially suggesting there was no divergence between the Balkan group, the groups that led to Italo-Celtic and Germanic, Tocharian and three apparently Indo-Europeanized R1a groups (Balto-Slavic, Indo-Iranian, Xiahhoe and possibly five or six if R1a-CTS4385, R1a-Z282-A and R1a-Z284 also spoke some extinct IE languages) between 3500-2800 BC. Unlikely. You might find some agreement with Jean here but I'll go with the linguists and archeologists who split up Iranian and Indo-Aryan by 2800-2500 BC.

    -Indo-Iranian and Balto-Slavic do not make a node. Never have, never will.I am sure some satemization arguments will follow. But that is rejected by most linguists. And it is clear that Satemization behaves differently in Indo-Iranian vs Slavic vs Baltic which confirms the areal nature of this feature that R1b guys are fixated on.

    -I think R1b is an EHG marker but we wil likely need some confirmation now that we know the Samara R1b EHG was M73+(although to be fair R1a will need some confirmation too given the Karelia guy belongs to R1a-M459). Michal's SE Caspian origin of R1b-M269 (in line with the distribution of M269(xL23) in Western Central Asia?) might be well and alive.

  14. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to newtoboard For This Useful Post:

     Coldmountains (07-21-2015), DMXX (07-22-2015)

  15. #10
    Registered Users
    Posts
    1,156
    Sex

    The main obstacle scholars face in many Slavic countries is the origin of the Slavs in early Iron Age. There were two schools of thought in USSR/Russia on the origins of Slavs. One was from Moscow and the other one was from St-Petersburg. Two prominent scholars were Valentin Sedov working in Moscow and Mark Shchukin from St-Petersburg. Both were archaeologists. In a nutshell, Sedov favoured the origin of the Slavs south-eastern Poland & western Ukraine on the periphery of the Przeworsk culture, while Shchukin suggested that the earliest known archaeological Slavic cultural horizon the Prague-Korchak was quite different to that of the Przeworsk archaeological culture out of which the Prague-Korchak ought to have emerged referencing Tacitus visiting central Poland in 98AD , linguists and archaeologists. Shchukin proposed that homeland of the Slavs could have been in what is present-day northern, central and eastern Belarus , as well as adjacent region of western Russia. The main obstacle in Shchukin's hypothesis and others who favoured this hypothesis before him was the abundance of Baltic hydronyms in the region. While Stroked-Ceramic, Dniepr-Dvinsk and Tushimlinsk archaeological cultures found in the region although considered Baltic were quite similar to earliest known Slavic archaeological cultures and different to those of the neighbouring Balts from Lithuania and Latvia. For this reason, scholars tend to call people of these cultures the Dniepr Balts. Shchukin also referenced comparative linguist H. Birnbaum who proposed that the Dniepr Balts could have been a Balto-Slavic group of people speaking a transitional dialect.

    Most good papers on the subject are written in Slavic languages . Shchukin's paper on the origins of Slavs appeal to many people in present time. "The Birth of Slavs" (1997) M. Shchukin (in Russian) https://vk.com/doc-41371964_27238790...cf9963ac7336b7
    Paul Barford's book is very general on the subject. Maybe one of the better books published in English.
    Last edited by Volat; 07-21-2015 at 03:23 AM.

  16. The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to Volat For This Useful Post:

     K33 (06-02-2016), Mixed (05-14-2017), Silesian (07-26-2015)

Page 1 of 151 1231151101 ... LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. Origin of E ?
    By #YoloSwag in forum E
    Replies: 25
    Last Post: 08-16-2016, 01:28 PM
  2. Origin(s) of Y-DNA J
    By Agamemnon in forum J
    Replies: 57
    Last Post: 09-04-2015, 12:08 AM
  3. What is the history and origin of I1
    By Fire Haired in forum I1-M253
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 11-27-2013, 02:29 PM
  4. DE/YAP+ origin?
    By Ezana in forum Other
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: 08-14-2012, 04:31 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •