Physical appearance of Early Medieval Slavic people

It is you who are producing claims without showing evidence.

You claimed "Poland almost certainly has a Scandinavian past".

And now you are teaching me that Rorik is a Germanic name, as if I ever denied this (which I didn't).

I only wrote that Rurik might not be Rorik. And that there are Finnish historians who claim its a Finnish name.

Now show me that Mieszko / Mesko is a Germanic name, to prove your theory.

==========================

You claimed that Egil's Saga could confuse names. But Nestor couldn't ?

Nestor is a 12th century source and is describing 9th century events. 300 years long gap.
 
Maybe you're smoking pot, or maybe I am, but I have no idea what you're talking about. Mieszko a Germanic name? Theory? What are you on about?
 
Well, it was you who claimed that "Poland almost certainly has a Scandinavian past".

So I'm interested what are you basing this knowledge / certainty on.

I understand that being a "Viking Age" historian you want to see Vikings everywhere.

After all, a Viking Age without Vikings is not a Viking Age.

BTW - there were also Slavic Vikings (pirates) known under few names , including Vindafrelsi.

And there are also accounts - but this is another thing than North Slavic viking-style piracy, and also much earlier one - of South Slavic piracy in the Mediterranean Sea, including raids on Italian Peninsula (after crossing the Adriatic Sea), various islands of the Aegean Sea and even some Slavic settlements in western part of Crete.
 
Meaning that I suspect Poland was probably a lot like Russia in the 10th and 9th centuries, with Norse trading bases and political centres surrounded by Slavic tribal units. Poland has nice big rivers surrounded by rich agricultural zones.

The 'Piast' thing is too specific ... quite likely Miezko's ancestors were low ranking types who only made good later. Unfortunately, written sources are mostly much later and tend to back-project the dynasty of their own day into a past they don't know anything about (and often make ancestors up).
 
Your hypothesis has no grounds not only when it comes to written records but also when it comes to archaeology as there are no any such Scandinavian archaeological findings from Poland prior to the 11th century. Dendrochronology combined with archaeology explains the emergence and expansion of the Polish state. Generally Poland is not much older than Mieszko, and most of its expansion still took place during Mieszko's reign rather than before it. And before Mieszko only ca. 2 generations were expansive.

As for the origin of names (like Rus = Germanic name).

There were many Slavic Medieval tribes, nations and entities with non-Slavic names:

Examples (in brackets most probable linguistic origin of name):

- Warnii (Germanic) - one of West Slavic tribes, lived at the Warnow River
- Rugii (Germanic) - one of West Slavic tribes, their main god was Rugievit
- Venedi (Celtic) - general name for West Slavs (also Wenden, Vinidi, Venedae, etc.)
- Bohemia (Celtic) - and "die Boehmen" was the old German name for Czechs
- Antes / Antae (Iranian) - one of Slavic tribes which invaded Balkans in 6th century
- Croats (Iranian) - Slavic tribe, invaded Balkans in 7th century with Serbs (Sorbs)
- Lusici & Lusitzi (Celtic) - West Slavic tribes of Lusatians; check Lugii & Lusatia
- Sleenzane (East Germanic) - one of West Slavic tribes; check Silingae & Silesia
- Czechs (Iranian) - one of West Slavic tribes, possibly from name Zicchi (Zinchi / Cissi)
- Serbs (Iranian) - check Croats above, check also Ancient Serboi in Caucasus

Etc., etc.
 
I updated the list above (and in fact even many more Slavic tribes could be added to that list).

When it comes to Croats (Hrvati), there were Horohoati / Chroates already in Persian and Greek sources. Hellenistic sources place them in Arakhosia (region called Harahvati in the Avestan language).

Later there were also Choruatos - mentioned as living near Caucasus and near eastern banks of the Black Sea.

And Serboi are mentioned for example by Pliny the Elder (born 23 AD, died 79 AD), as a tribe living in the region of Caucasus.

I did not mention Bulgarians, because this story is well-known (unlike Serboi, Chroates, etc.).

But Bulgars is a Turkic name. While Serboi, Chroates and Zicchi were Scytho-Sarmatian names.

As you know, Sarmatians (who previously conquered Scythians) were defeated and decimated by Huns.

After that defeat Sarmatians lost their language. Except for Ossetians, among whom Sarmatian language survived until this day.

=============================

Dudlebes - East Slavic tribe in South-Western Ukraine (later conquered by Avars), from name Teudlaibaz / Dietlib, which is a Germanic name.

Regarding Croats - another theory is that this ethnonym is from personal name Horvatos
Regarding Serbs - another theory is that this ethnonym is from word sierb / pasierb (stepson)

When it comes to this "sierb / pasierb" ("stepson") theory - it isn't very convincing to me.

It is hard for me to imagine entire nation of stepsons.

There was also a Slavic word "charwaty" (plural) meaning "warriors". But also "ruotsi" initially meant "sailors" in Medieval Finnish language.

======================================

Some (other) tribes names of which suggest that they were mixes of Slavic tribes with previous populations:

Forsderenliudi (Fors-deren-Liudi) - probably a mixed Slavic-Germanic tribe
Osterabtrezi (Oster-Abtrezi) - probably a mixed Slavic-Germanic tribe
Epta Radici (Epta-Radici) - in English "Seven Clans", a confederation of seven South Slavic tribes, it had a Greco-Slavic name (Epta Radici).

In names of these tribes words "Liudi", "Abtrezi" and "Radici" are Slavic words, while other words are Germanic and Greek (Epta).

Another example is the dualistic tribe (two names) of Heveldi-Stoderani:

- Heveldi-Stoderani (also Hevelli / Hehfeldi / Haefeldan / Heveldun) - name originating partially from Germanic Heruli

Heveldi-Stoderani is another example of a dualistic name (see above). One tribe, two names - Germanic (Heveldi) and Slavic (Stoderani).

According to Thietmar of Merseburg:

http://hbar.phys.msu.ru/gorm/chrons/thietmar.htm#IV|

"(...) Inperator autem a Romania discedens nostras regiones invisit et accepta Sclavorum rebellione Stoderaniam, quae Hevellun dicitur, armato petens milite, incendio et magna depredacione vastavit et victor Parthenopolim rediit (...)"

And here Helmold writes that name of Slavic Heveldi / Hevelli / Hehfeldi originates from Ancient Heruli:

"(...) Sunt et alii Slavorum populi, qui inter Odoram et Albiam degunt longoque sinu ad austrum portenduntur, sicut Heruli vel Heveldi, qui sunt iuxta Habolam fluvium et Doxam, Leubuzi et Wilini, Stoderani cum multis aliis. (...)"

Helmold mentions Heveldi vel Heruli as one of Slavic tribes, but he mentions Stoderani as another Slavic tribe.

However - other authors describe Heveldi-Stoderani as one tribe. Probably two tribes united and merged into one tribe.

Another tribe which had a dual name were Glomaci-Daleminci:

Glommi (also known as Glomaci-Daleminci)* - Slavic tribe mentioned in Anglo-Saxon poetry (there is also river Glomma in Norway):

http://books.google.pl/books?id=BW4...AbqlYCYAg&ved=0CCkQ6AEwAA#v=onepage&q&f=false

From Thietmar of Merseburg:

"provinciam quam nos Daleminci vocamus, Slavi autem Glomaci vocant."

===================================

Other Slavic tribes with (this time less probably, but possibly) non-Slavic or partially non-Slavic names:

- Wagri - one of Medieval West Slavic tribes (member-tribe of the Obotrites confederation)

----------------------------
----------------------------

Check also here:

http://historum.com/european-histor...tribes-nations-possibly-non-slavic-names.html

http://historum.com/european-histor...ons-vikings-47.html#post1788475?postcount=462

http://historum.com/european-history/69009-prussians-16.html#post1788296?postcount=155

BTW - 19th century German propaganda e.g. claimed that Poland became 100% depopulated during the Migration Period, and then populated from the East. It was supposed to justify German "Drang Nach Osten" and Bismarck's policies - as "regaining Ancient Germanic lands" from not rightful owners.

However, as prof. W. Godłowski writes, it was a decrease by ca. 66% (i.e. to ca. 1/3 of previous level), not a total depopulation.

Modern genetic research only confirms population continuity (although it doesn't mean that Slavic language was spoken in Ancient Poland).

==========================
==========================

Norse trading bases

German chronicler Adam of Bremen wrote that Slavic (not "Polish-born Norse") merchants were visiting Birka - a trading base in Scandinavia.

Abraham ben Jacob wrote that West Slavic trade was reaching as far as Rus and Constantinople.

Abraham ben Jacob lived during the 10th century and he travelled to West Slavic countries, later describing them in his work.

Here is for example an excerpt from his account, concerning the Czech Kingdom during the 900s, in Czech translation:

http://aba.wz.cz/zprava_ibrahim_ibn_jakuba_o_slovanech.php

And below is my English translation from Polish translation of one part of that excerpt:

"(...) When it comes to the country of Boleslaus*, it extends from the city of Prague as far as the city of Cracow, which is a 3 weeks long travel. And then it extends very far up to the border of the country of Turks**. The city of Prague is constructed largely of stone and chalk and is the biggest market city in all [Slavic] countries. To this city come people from the city of Cracow, from Rus and from all of Slavdom with trade goods, but also people from the land of Turks, Jews and Turks and Muslims with many trade goods, with various coins, and they bring with them slaves, pewter and various hides. This country is the best of all countries of the North and the richest when it comes to means necessary for life. Here for one pfennig you can buy so much wheat, that one person will have enough for entire month, and for one pfennig you can buy enough barley for a horseman for a 40 nights long travel, and you can buy also 10 hens for one pfennig in this country. In the city of Prague people produce saddles, harnesses and thick shields, which are used in this country. In this country of Czech people also weaved fabrics (munaidi-lât) are produced, thin like nets, and they are not using these fabrics for anything meaningful. Price of these fabrics is constant: 10 fabrics for one phennig. They are using these fabrics as a form of payment while trading and while accountig for between themselves. They are using them as a form of deposit of capital. These fabrics are considered treasures and expensive products can be bought for them, such as: wheat, horses, gold, silver and other products. What is interesting, inhabitants of Czech Kingdom are brown and dark-haired, while blond-type is less frequent among them. (...)"

*Boleslaus: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boleslaus_I,_Duke_of_Bohemia

**Explanation of "Turks" from Abraham's account by a user from Hungary:

Tulun said:
Just a correction, Abraham ben Yacob mentions Turks, Muslim and Jewish merchants coming from the land of Turks (=Hungary) to Prague, but here as in most Arabic (ben Yacob wrote in Arabic) and in Byznatine sources of the time "Turk" meant Hungarian, and Turkey was Hungary if in Central Europe. It is also clear from the source as he describes the length of Boleslav's land from Prague to Krakow is 3 weeks journey and borders on its full length with the land of Turks (=Hungary). the Turkey of Asia Minor didn't exist that time of course.

In another part of his account, Abraham ben Jacob described West Slavic wooden steam baths, which they call "al-istba" (izba).

Here English translation:

Abraham ben Jacob said:
(...) They [West Slavs] are specially energetic in agriculture. Their trade on land and sea reaches to the Rus and to Constantinople. Their women, when married, do not commit adultery. But a girl, when she falls in love with some man or other, will go to him and quench her lust. If a husband marries a girl and finds her to be a virgin, he says to her, `If there were something good in you, men would have desired you, and you would certainly have found someone to take your virginity’. Then he sends her back, and frees himself from her. The lands of the Slavs are the coldest of all. When the nights are moonlit and the days clear, the most severe frosts occur. The wells and ponds are covered with a hard shell of ice, as if made of stone. When people breathe, icicles form on their beards, as if made of glass. They have no bath-houses as such, but they do make use of wooden huts for bathing. They build a stone stove, on which, when it is heated, they pour water. They hold a bunch of grass in their hands, and waft the steam around. Then their pores open, and all excess matter escapes from their bodies. This hut is called al-istba. Their kings travel in great carriages, on four wheels. From the corners of the carriage a cradle is slung on chains, so that the passenger is not shaken by the motion. They prepare similar carriages for the sick and injured. The Slavs wage war with the Byzantines, with the Franks and Langobards, and with other peoples. (...)

Izba (Polish-English dictionary):

http://en.bab.la/dictionary/polish-english/izba

Thietmar of Merseburg described Slavic temple in Radegost (Radogoszcz), one of political or / and religious centres of the tribe of the Redari:

Thietmar said:
"(...) There is, in the land of the Redari, a gard triangular in shape and with three gates leading to the inside, called Radegost. (...) Two of the gates are always opened for the people who enter. The third one, from the East side, is the smallest one and opens to a small pathway that leads to a nearby fearsome-looking lake. Within the gard there is a single temple, built masterfully from wood and resting on the fundaments made of horns of wild animals. Its inner walls are adorned with the images of pagan gods and goddesses – which are, as one can notice by looking at them closely – sculptured wonderfully, from wood, while inside the chamber there are statues of gods, made by human hand, with helmets and armours – each with his own name engraved. The first one is called Svarozic*, and he is the subject of a particular worship among the pagans. There are also many banners stored in there, which they never take, except for war expeditions, and then they are carried by foot warriors. For protection of all of this, the natives have appointed special priests. (...)"

*Svarozic = Slavic god of fire.

More about West Slavic religion and oracles (in English):

http://sms.zrc-sazu.si/pdf/02/SMS_02_Slupecki_Zaroff.pdf

And here (in German):

http://www.folklore.ee/Folklore/vol42/pommern.pdf

===============================

Regarding the escape of followers Sviatopolk the Damned to Poland in year 1019 (which I described on previous page of this thread).

Sviatopolk for the first time fled to Poland already in 1016 - to ask Bolesław for help.

Later Sviatopolk came with the Polish army during the intervention in 1018 (see previous page) and then fled again in 1019, but was killed.

This excerpt below describes the events of 1016, when he fled to Poland for the first time (to ask Poles for help):

The Chronicle of Novgorod said:
(...) [There was] a fight at Lyubets, and [the sons of Vladimir] won; and Svyatopolk fled to Lyakhi*. And at that time Yaroslav was keeping many Varangians in Novgorod, fearing war; and the Varangians began to commit violence against the wives of the townsmen. The men of Novgorod said: 'We cannot look upon this violence,' and they gathered by night and fell upon and killed the Varangians in Poromon's Court; and that night Knyaz* Yaroslav was at Rakomo. And having heard this, Knyaz Yaroslav was wroth with the townsfolk, and gathered a thousand soldiers in Slavno, and by craft falling on those who had killed the Varangians, he killed them; and others fled out of the town. And the same night Yaroslav's sister, Peredslava, sent word to him from Kiev, saying: 'Thy father is dead, and thy brethren slain.' And having heard this, Yaroslav the next day gathered a number of the men of Novgorod, and held a veche* in open air, and said to them: 'My beloved and honourable druzhina*, whom yesterday in my madness I slew, I cannot now buy back even with gold.' And thus he said to them: 'Brethren my father Volodimir is dead, and Svyatopolk is Knyaz in Kiev; I want to go against him; come with me and help me.' And the men of Novgorod said to him: 'Yes, Knyaz, we will follow thee.' And he gathered 4,000 soldiers: there were a thousand Varangians, and 3,000 of the men of Novgorod; and he went against him. (...)

*Lyakhi - Poles, Poland
*Knyaz - Prince
*veche - assembly
*druzhina - company, retinue
 
Domen, I respect you and all, but you are just information dumping from websearchs.

Anyway, it's not a hypothesis, it's a suspicion. Archaeology neither supports nor confirms either it or what you are claiming (different from an absence of contradiction!).
 
My posts contain information (dumping or not - IMO it is rather consistent), while the same cannot be said about your posts.

Your posts mostly contain speculation.

Archaeology neither supports nor confirms either it or what you are claiming

Archaeology contradicts your claim and so do written records.

Political and trade centres in this region are described as Slavic by written records, and Slavic cultural objects were found there by archaeology.

You would probably know this if only your specialization was not "Viking Age" but "period 793 - 1066" instead.

Anyway, it's not a hypothesis, it's a suspicion.

"Almost certainly" is not a suspicion.

And if it is, then you should be ashamed as a historian because this is not how historians work (claiming that their suspicions are "almost certainty").

Domen, I respect you and all,

Not really.

information dumping from websearchs.

You expect me to scan or type out books or documents to prove my point or what ???

There are many good professional sources available online, including primary sources like Medieval chronicles, and also articles / studies / papers.

You can share your own thoughts regarding Norse / Scandinavian past of XYZ by publishing your articles on Academia.eu for example.

I remember you complained that I share information from Polish sources that nobody can verify because they don't read Polish.

Now I am giving you links to English sources and you can verify if what I write is true, but this time you complain that these are "just links".

Well - give me your address I will take a truck, load it with books, and transport this to your home. Is this going to satisfy you ???

Sure - it is much easier to develop opinions and suspicions basing on nothing (apart from your own mental processes), rather than using sources.
 
My posts contain information (dumping or not - IMO it is rather consistent), while the same cannot be said about your posts.

Your posts mostly contain speculation.

Yes, of course, my post was speculation. So what? Speculation is fun.

I remember you complained that I share information from Polish sources that nobody can verify because they don't read Polish.

Nope. I wouldn't have said that. I might have suggested it would be better for you to do that though ... different.

"Almost certainly" is not a suspicion.

And if it is, then you should be ashamed as a historian because this is not how historians work (claiming that their suspicions are "almost certainty").

The problem is that you don't understand much of what you post, and as often as not you're responding to points that are figments of your own imagination; AND then you are intermixing these 'responses' with miscellaneous things you find interesting but which will just distract from any particular point and produce confusion. I've said this to you before btw, you need to do more to make sure you understand what people are saying and you need to concentrate on offering helpful information that you have made sure you know is relevant.
 
Pangur Bán is the only poster in all of CFC willing to read your threads made up of mile-long posts four in a row that answer questions nobody asked and then address and discuss them in detail. I suspect he does respect you.
 
Your advice is good but this doesn't change the fact that you are too frequently speculating, but claiming that your speculations are facts.

And after I show you that your speculations hardly have grounds, instead of just admitting that your knowledge on some historical subjects is limited*, you are trying to defend your points or claiming: "Domen, you didn't understand what I meant, try harder to make sure you understand what people are saying".

*Nothing to be ashamed of nobody is perfect and I also admit that you was right when it comes to Heimskringla that it is from early 13th century and not from late 12th century - early 13th century as I wrote. But author of Heimskringla was born in the 12th century and this is what confused me.

The problem is that you don't understand much of what you post

This is a hard accusation (like implying that I'm stupid or can't understand English) - which part of what I posted was allegedly not understood by me?

Yes, of course, my post was speculation. So what? Speculation is fun.

So let's speculate that the Kingdom of Denmark was established by Polish and / or other Slavic mercenaries - per Saxo and strontium isotopes.

This would still be more probable than the idea that near the Carpathian Mountains there was some invisible city* inhabited by Norse people.

Saxo writes that Harald "based his power on Slavic warriors towards the end of his reign". But for the sake of this funny speculation, we can reject the second part, and assume that he in fact based his power on Slavic mercenaries already since the beginning - i.e. when he founded the kingdom of Denmark.

===================================

*Kraków (Cracow) doesn't count as its name is clearly Slavic in origins. Kraków is from word krk - meaning a hilly island or a town:

You can find it here in a "Serbo-Croatian to English" dictionary: http://glosbe.com/sh/en/Krk

First fortified town in what later expanded into the city of Kraków was located on a certain Vistula River island called Wawel Hill:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wawel

There is also one more Kraków (today Krakow am See) located in Germany - it also used to be a Medieval Slavic grod (city):

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Krakow_am_See

Coming back to Cracow in Poland - it used to be part of Great Moravia and part of Czechia before it became part of Poland. So if you claim that warriors born near the Carpathian Mountains in modern Poland were Norse, you need to prove that Great Moravia and Czech Kingdom also had "a Scandinavian past".
 
Pangur - you might be interested in reading this (a lot about Slavic influences on Scandinavian societies):

http://nordbyz.net/node/921

Mats Roslund (born 1957) is professor in historical archaeology at Lund University. I have been connected to the Institute of archaeology and ancient history since 1992 as Ph. D-student, teacher and scholar. Defended my thesis “Guests in the House. Cultural transmisson between Slavs and Scandinavians 900 to 1300 AD” in 2001. It was published in English by Brill, Leiden in 2007.

Some free pages of this book available to read via Google Books:

http://books.google.pl/books?id=AyI...AaVpIDwBg&ved=0CFUQ6AEwBQ#v=onepage&q&f=false

Spoiler :



When it comes to hypothetical Norse-sponsored trading bases / political centres, etc. in Poland, established in the middle of Slavic "tribal villages".

In West Slavic areas we find specific techniques of constructing ramparts of cities / strongholds (grody) - described (in Polish) for example here. Such techniques are not seen in Scandinavia, where they used very different techniques. So how would you explain the alleged Norse provenance of West Slavic gards (fortified towns) - did they learn how to construct such things in Poland, but forgot this technique totally when they returned back to Scandinavia?

Also according to Danish historian Eric Christiansen, West Slavic societies were actually more urbanized than Scandinavian Viking Age societies.

And you claim that Scandinavians founded urban centres (political / trade centres), surrounded by "rural tribal territories" of West Slavic tribes.

So here goes another question - if Scandinavians allegedly constructed so many urban centres in West Slavic lands, why did they fail to construct a similar number of equally large urban centres in Scandinavia? And of course I'm talking about times when German "Ostsiedlung" was still unseen and unheard.

West Slavic tribes in the 9th to 12th centuries had many cities (yes, we can call them cities) bigger than anything which could be found in Denmark, with the exception of Slesvig (which was perhaps already inhabited mostly by "mainland" German settlers rather than by native Danes / Scandinavians).

In Early Medieval Sweden and Normay there were also very few - if any - urban centres of similar size to many of West Slavic urban centres.

Wide range of Norse influence in Europe during the so called "Dark Ages" is well-known, but claiming that everything, everywhere, was Scandinavian or that other cultures didn't contribute anything meaningful, or that Slavs were too stupid to develop and to create cities and states without foreign help, are claims similar to those of 19th century Germanic supremacist historiography. Modern Scandinavian scholarship has long rejected such one-sided views on history (as examples of scholars and studies that I've mentioned in this thread show), but apparently in Scotland (or indeed Albania) they are still popular. There are records which indicate that Scandinavians could be involved in emergence of several realms. But no such records exist for Poland, as you even admitted.

I am open to discuss this, of course.

I hope my post above "offers helpful information that I have made sure I know is relevant" - as you have advised.
 
And I remember your previous erroneus claim, that cities in Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth were inhabited by Germans. While there was large influx of German settlers to Polish cities (and also to Polish countryside) following the Mongol Invasion of Poland in 1241, you failed to notice that in areas of Central, Southern and Eastern Poland (i.e. all areas which remained under Polish political control during the political perturbations and the reunification of most of previously fragmented Poland during the 14th century) any German-speakers in cities became gradually Polonized since the moment when they came until the end of the 15th / early 16th centuries. Even Nazi Era and pro-Nazi German historian Kurt Lueck recognized this fact, but you failed to recognize it - which was a major blunder. Only cities in regions which were lost by Poland during the 1300s - and therefore to a large extent fell out of orbit of Polish cultural influence - remained largely German-speaking, or to be more precise - became largely German-speaking, as most of those "Germans" were Germanized Poles. Even among original "German" settlers there were many of previously Germanized West Slavs. This is also evidenced by "Genetic Project East Prussia", which is testing DNA of descendants of former East Prussian Germans, who lived there before WW2.

And in so called Luebeck Law influence of previous Slavic customary law from the same place (Ljubice) can be found.
 
@Domen

You consider Early Rus' as Slavic or Scandinavian?

As symbiosis of both.

In general it seems that there were large-scale mutual interactions between North Slavic and Norse worlds.

Denmark most certainly adopted Christianity from Poland, for example.

And Polish princess, sister of king Bolesław I Chrobry, became wife of Danish monarch.

Poland previously adopted Christianity from Czechia - and Mieszko I married Czech princess Doubravka.

Apparently both countries - first Poland, then Denmark - did not want to adopt Christianity from the HRE, from Germans.
 
As for Proto-Slavs:

IMO Proto-Slavs were Scytho-Sarmatians of Ukraine, but not nomadic south-eastern tribes - rather northern Scythian tribes, who were farmers:

http://www.livius.org/people/scythians-sacae/

The Scythian-Farmers seem to be identical with the archaeological culture known as Chernoles, which has been identified with the Iron Age Slavs.

Note that Sarmatians (who came from areas around the Caspian Sea) conquered Scythians and assimilated into them - forming Scytho-Sarmatians.

This can explain why there are over 30 words of Sarmatian origin in Slavic languages.

And these over 30 Sarmatian words are almost all related to culture, religion and spirituality.

Later Huns destroyed Scytho-Sarmatian in the steppe zone. Remnants of steppe zone nomads escaped to neighbouring forest-steppe zone farmers.

Physical appearance of Scythians and Sarmatians:


Link to video.

Note that Ancient Scythians and Sarmatians were mostly mesocephalic - just like Early Medieval Slavs, but unlike dolichocephalic Scandinavians.

================================================

Sarmatian language was of course one of Iranian languages. However, I don't think that the original Scythian language was Iranian.

Today the only surviving language closely related to Ancient Sarmatian, is the language spoken by Ossetians of the Caucasus:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ossetian_language

It is believed to be the only surviving descendant of a Sarmatian language.
 
So Domen, what Scandinavians do in societies with pre-existing 'states' is come in small or medium numbers and trade like good boys, or come in very large numbers and fight / try to conquer.
What they do elsewhere in Europe is establish fortifications as bases from which to plunder / trade with neighbours. Though these raiding/trading units can be very small, few hundred warriors, the numbers are larger than the permanent contingents of most European rulers (i.e. the guys who permanently live in the hall of the ruler, rather than the farmers who are called up for temporary hostings). I.e. political units need to get larger in order to defend themselves. So 'state formation' can take place around by which either they subordinate local tribal groups and create kingdoms (Rus, parts of Britain and Ireland, Normandy) or kingdoms are created around them in reaction to their presence (Munster, Flanders, Wessex-England, Greater Poland?).
 
What they do elsewhere in Europe is establish fortifications as bases from which to plunder / trade with neighbours.

Yes and we know how those fortifications looked like. And they did not look like anything in East Germany or in Poland.

the numbers are larger than the permanent contingents of most European rulers

In tribal and pre-feudal societies every man capable of using a weapon in combat was a warrior.

There were only warriors with better equipment (upper class; nobles) and with worse equipment (rest of them).

So your example with "European rulers" is a wrong example, because Slavic and Baltic (Prussian, Lithuanian) tribes did not have such "rulers".

or kingdoms are created around them in reaction to their presence (Munster, Flanders, Wessex-England, Greater Poland?).

In Polish historiography the prevalent theory is that realm in Greater Poland was created in reaction to eastward expansion of the Holy Roman Empire.

The first recorded by written sources major battle in Polish history was the battle of Cedynia in 972 - against the Germans, not the Vikings.

Tell me why Vikings didn't establish any state in coastal regions of Wagria, Polabia, Pomerania, Pomerelia, Prussia, Lithuania, Latvia, Livonia, Estonia ???
 
Yes and we know how those fortifications looked like. And they did not look like anything in East Germany or in Poland.



In tribal and pre-feudal societies every man capable of using a weapon in combat was a warrior.

There were only warriors with better equipment (upper class; nobles) and with worse equipment (rest of them).

So your example with "European rulers" is a wrong example, because Slavic and Baltic (Prussian, Lithuanian) tribes did not have such "rulers".

Even if I accepted that were true, which I do not, you still have to solve the problem of dealing with a permanently mobilized group of professional warriors who will enrich themselves on predation whenever these guys aren't mobilized.

In Polish historiography the prevalent theory is that realm in Greater Poland was created in reaction to eastward expansion of the Holy Roman Empire.

The first recorded by written sources major battle in Polish history was the battle of Cedynia in 972 - against the Germans, not the Vikings.

Tell me why Vikings did not establish any state in coastal regions of Polabia, Pomerania, Pomerelia, Prussia, Lithuania, Latvia, Livonia and Estonia ???

Just because there is a 'prevalent theory' doesn't make it true. Most 'prevalent theories' are later rejected. Anyway, the two forces are not mutually exclusive, but an argument against the HRE hypothesis would be to point out that the Frankish realm had been on those borders since around 800. I do agree however that Christianization was central to the origin of most 'states' in northern Europe ... in terms of them transitioning from semi-permanent military hierarchies to bureaucratic institutions with administrative boundaries, and so on.
 
Even if I accepted that were true, which I do not

So you apparently did not read anything about - for example - Prussian society, did you?

but an argument against the HRE hypothesis would be to point out that the Frankish realm had been on those borders since around 800.

You are mistaken. There was a lot of eastward expansion in between, and the Eastern March of the HRE was established not before the 920s:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marca_Geronis

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/March_of_the_Billungs

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/March_of_Lusatia

Moreover, by years 948 - 955 German rulers managed to temporarily subjugate Polabian Slavs. German rule in Polabia ended in 983.

And the battle of Cedynia in 972 was fought in Pomerania, at the Odra River, where German forces were on foreign soil (trying to conquer Pomerania).

So between 800 and 972 not only did the HRE conquer Sorbian tribes, but it also conquered Polabian tribes. And in 972 they tried to take Pomerania.

Sorbian tribes remained under German rule, while in case of Polabian tribes German rule was brutally overthrown by the Great Slav Rising of 983:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Slav_Rising

It took the Holy Roman Empire next 200 years to regain territories between the Elbe and the Oder which had been lost in 983.

But this is irrelevant because Poland was established when the eastern border of the HRE was along the Odra River - i.e. before 983.

In other words - Poland was established when Germans were already knocking at Poland's western doors.

I do agree however that Christianization was central to the origin of most 'states' in northern Europe

Poland adopted Christianity from Czechia - not from Germany - precisely because Polish rulers did not want to fall into German sphere of influence.

Please note that in year 966 Czech rulers were still independent rather than being vassals of Holy Roman Emperors, which they became later.
 
Top Bottom