User:Ivan Štambuk/Matasović 2008

From Matasović 2008

The oldest linguistic traces of Slavs and the problem of Slavic Urheimat

§23 When one considers the fact that there are more than 200 million people speaking Slavic in modern Europe, it remains a riddle the fact that the historical origins of Slavs are so obscure and mysterious.

Slavs have been from the earliest times divided in a large number of tribes, and in the historical period they appear with certainty on in the 6th century. In the whole course of Greek and Roman Antique, Slavs, as people, make no appearance in the historical records.

§24 Linguistic analysis shows us that the last known common ancestor of all Slavic languages, which we call Proto-Slavic, was spoken around year 600 CE. The speakers of that language were Proto-Slavs, or somewhat less precise, but simpler, Slavs.

However, Proto-Slavic must have head a whole series of ancestor languages, the oldest of which that is reachable to linguistic science is Proto-Indo-European. Proto-Indo-European, which was certainly not spoken after the 3rd millenium BCE, was not attested and almost certainly will never be, but there is a possibility that some other ancestor language of Proto-Slavic was attested, in some way, in historical records.

Every language, which evolves naturally with time, is in every moment used by some social and communication community, and speakers of the proto-languages from which Proto-Slavic developed, and which are not identical with Proto-Indo-European, should be considered „Pre-Slavs“ or the predecessors of Slavs.

Unfortunately, historical and archaeological sources provide almost no clues on the predecessors of Slavs and their language.

In literature often the thesis is mentioned that the first linguistic trace of the ancestors of Slavs was attested in Herodotus, in the part of his Histories, where he speaks of Neurs (Neuroí), one wild people allegedely living north of the Sea of Azov. Here is what Herodotus says on Neurs:


 * „Further from Alizonians there live Sycthians plowmen which do not sow grain for food but for sale. And above them dwell the Neurs, and north of Neurs, as far as I know, is uninhabited area.“ Ibid., IV, 105-106:


 * „Neurs have customs like Sythians, and one generation before Darius lead his army they were forced to leave their entire land because of snakes. A large number of snakes started to appear in the soil, and even more came from desolated northern regions, as long as they haven't, being persecuted that way, settled at Budins abandoning their own land. It appears that these men are wizards. Scythians and Greeks living in Scythia tell that once a year every Neur shapeshifts to wolf for a few days, and then returns to his original form. Those who speak such stories cannot convince me in it, but they keep telling them again and swear in them. Androphagi have the most crude way of life...“

It is fairly obvious that Neurs were a complete mystery for Herodotus. He mentions them paralelly with Androphagi, mythical cannibals that dwell somewhere in the vast steppes of Eurasia.

It is methodologically completely unsound on the basis of Herodotus' testimony on Neurs to conclude that they're Slavs or even ancestors of Slavs.

§25 Considering the importance Slavs gain since the 6th century, when they start to appear under that name at the Danube borders of Byzantium, it is very unusual that they were completely unfamiliar to Roman writers, even to rare ones who, like Tacitus, showed interest into customs of barbaric neighbors of the Roman Empire. Thus it is not surprising that many linguists and philologists sought the ancestors of Slavs in „Venethi“, people which according to Antique authors inhabited the lands of the north of Poland, around the mouth of Vistula (Greek Ouenedikòn kólpos, literally „Venethic bay“). Tacitus speaks of Venethi in the following passage:


 * Hic Suebiae finis. Peucinorum Venethorumque et Fennorum nationes Germanis an Sarmatis adscribam dubito. Quamquam Peucini, quos quidam Bastarnas vocant, sermone, cultu, sede ac domiciliis ut Germani agunt. Sordes omnium ac torpor; procerum conubiis mixtis nonnihil in Sarmatarum habitum foedantur. Venethi multum ex moribus traxerunt; nam quidquid inter Peucinos Fennosque silvarum ac montium erigitur latrociniis pererrant; hi tamen inter Germanos potius referuntur, quia et domos figunt et scuta gestant et peditum usu ac pernicitate gaudent: quae omnia diversa Sarmatis sunt in plaustro equoque viventibus.


 * „Here lies the end of Svebia . As to the tribes of the Peucini, Veneti, and Fenni I am in doubt whether I should class them with the Germanic or the Sarmatæ, although indeed the Peucini called by some Bastarnæ, are like Germanic in their language, mode of life, and in the permanence of their settlements. They all live in filth and sloth, and by the intermarriages of the chiefs they are becoming in some degree debased into a resemblance to the Sarmatæ. The Veneti have borrowed largely from the Sarmatian character; in their plundering expeditions they roam over the whole extent of forest and mountain between the Peucini and Fenni. They are however to be rather referred to the Germanic race, for they have fixed habitations carry shields, and delight in strength and fleetness of foot, thus presenting a complete contrast to the Sarmatæ, who live in wagons and on horseback“ (Tacitus, Germania, 46, 1, 2).

It is obvious from the quotation that Tacitus doesn't know much on Venethi. He heard of that people which differ from Sarmatæ in their sedentary lifestyle, and are similar to Germanic people in some traits.

Just like Herodotus' Neurs, Tacitus' Venethi are also a pople from the end of the world, of which there are no certain news. However, it is not doubtful that the name of that people was in later sources connected to Slavic people. Older German title for Slavs is Windisch, which can be derived from Germanic substantivized adjective *winiþa-; that form is on the other hand likely the one attested in Tacitus' form Venethi, where th in place of t should be ascribed to the operation of Grimm's law, i.e. Germanic consonant shift. From Germanic the ethnonym reached the Finnish, where Venäjä < *Venädä is the name of Russia. For those who want to believe that the Slavic Urheimat was in Poland (most of which are represented by Polish scholars), therefore see in Venethi the ancestors of Slavs.

However, ethnonym Venethi is very dispersed in Europe and even in parts where there was almost certainly no Slavs and their ancestors; Venethi that gave the name to today's Venice were living in the north-east Italy before the Roman conquests; their language is well konwn and has absolutely no relation to Slavic; it is an Indo-European language which shows peculiar connections to Italic and Germanic languages.

In Antique Gaul, in the vicinity of modern-day Vannesa, there was a Celtic tribe called Veneti, and in the region of Macedonia Herodotus recorded an Illyrian tribe named Enetoí, which can be regularly deduced from earlier *Wenetoi. It is therefore an ethonym which easily migrated from one ethnic group onto another and is extremely dispersed in time and place, which makes it very non-informative; if it makes sense at all to etymologize ethnonyms, it seems probable that all the forms of that name originate from proto-form *wenHeto, an adjective derived from Proto-Indo-European root *wenH- „to love, be close to“ (cf. Old Irish fine 'family' < *wen(H)yeh₂). From what Tacitus says on Venethi almost nothing can be concluded, except that it's some kind of non-Germanic people or a tribal association. Whether Tacitus' Venethi have anything to do with Slavs is as unknown as whether we're dealing with the remains of those same Venethi which inhabited the shores of Adriatic in the prehistorical period. At any case, Germanic people could have easily transferred the name of some pre-Slavic people onto Slavs, once they've made contact with them.

§26 In Latin sources Slavic name is first mentioned with Jordanes, Romanized Gothic writer of the 6th century CE. That author of the History of the Goths has collected for his work a large number of nowadays lost written sources, but also oral tales of his people. He calls Slavs Venethi and Antes, emphasizing that it's a numerous people living on a vast area of the eastern shore of Vistula.


 * Ab ortu Vistulae fluminis per immensa spatia Venetharum natio populosa consedit quorum nomina licet nunc per varias familias et loca mutentur, principaliter tamen Sclaveni et Antes nominantur. (Jordanes, De orig. actibusque Getarum, 34-35)


 * „From the source of the Vistula through immense distances, dwells the populous nation of the Venethae. Their names, though perhaps now changed through different families and places, are chiefly called Sclaveni and Antes.“

Jordanes mentions Slavs in a section on Ermanaric's military conquests at the end of 4th century:


 * Post Herulorum cede item Hermanaricus in Venethos arma commovit, qui quamvis armis despecti sed numerositate pollentes primum resistere conabantur... Nam hi... ab una stirpe exorti, tria nunc nomina ediderunt, id est: Venethi Antes Sclaveni; qui... tunc omnes Ermanarici imperiis servierunt.


 * „After the defeat of Heruli, Ermanaric has turned his weapons toward the Venethi. They were, despite weaker in arms, very numerous and have tried to resist at first... For they...descended from one kin, now have three names: Venethi, Antes and Slavs; they...have then all served Ermanaric's rule.“

The form of Slavic name Sclaveni is likely to still reflect the Proto-Slavic form *Slawēnaj: in that period PSl. a did not turn itself to o, long ē is preserved, and the consonant cluster sl- which is absent in Latin is replaced with scl-.

The other ethnonym, Antes, must have originally referred to the eastern part of Slavs or to ethnically mixed population in which Slavic elements mixed with Iranian. The very name Antes is likely Iranian in origin – it is derivable from Proto-Iranian *anta- „border, limit, edge“ (cf. Ossetian ätt’iyä „hinder, back“). It is also mentioned in Byzantine sources (in the form Ántai), but after the 7th century it disappears without a trace. It is most likely a name by which Iranian tribes of Sarmati and Alans in Ukrainian steppes referred to eastern groups of Slavs they came in contact with.

§27 At the same time as did Jordanes, the first news of Slavs is brought by Byzantine sources, primarily by Procopius (comp. Historia arcana 18, De bello Gothico 3, 14i). He also has two names for the Slavs: Sklabēnoí and Ántai, but he however emphasizes that they have the same language, customs and religion. Slavs have already in the y. 548 reached Durrës at the shores of Adriatic. Some time later, Slavs have been joined by Avars, nomadic people from the steppes, probably of Turkic origin.

It appears that nomadic-livestock Avars have imposed themselves upon sedentary Slavs as some kind of military aristocracy that organized and governed their territorial and ethnic expansion. Byzantine sources of the late 6th century, e.g. Strategicon of Maurice (11 2-4) distinguish Avars from Slavs chiefly by way of life and social organization.

While avars are portrayed as typical steppe horse riders, Slavs are agriculturalists mostly appearing as Avar infantry in military conquests. In later Byzantine writers the difference between them is increasingly being obscured, surely under the ethnic assimilation of Avar aristocracy which acquired Proto-Slavic language very early, and later also the customs.

§28 The earliest known Slavic tale on their own origin relates Slavs with the region of Danube basin; that tale is reflected in the Kiev annals from the 11th century :


 * Vo mnozěx že vremęněx sěli sutь Slověni po Dunajevi gdě jestь nyne Ugorьska zemlę i Bolgarьska. [i] ot těxъ Slověnъ razidošasę po zemlě i prozvašasę imeny svoimi gdě sědše na kotoromъ městě jako prišedše sědoša na rěcě imęnemъ Marava i prozvašasę Morava, a druzii Česi narekošas, a se ti že Slověni Xrovate Bělii..


 * „A long time ago Slavs settled on the shores of Danube where today lies Ungarian land and Bulgaria. And parts of those Slavs scattered around and called themselves by their names, according to the place they populated; so those who settled on the river of Morava called themselves „Morava“, the other ones called themselves Czech, and those same Slavs White Croats..“

§29 Although there are still many current theories on the origins of Slavs, critical approach to this issue brings us to the following conclusion:

Slavs as an ethnic community with a consciousness of its own identity arose in the 6th century, at the period of Great Migrations, during the perpetual wars with Byzantium and Avars. Slavic community was formed at the Danube limes of Byzantium, where has, for the purposes of easier communication (and coordination of the war and trade) among the speakers of various, but close dialects and closely-realted langauges, spread some kind of koiné, common supradialectal idiom which we call Proto-Slavic. That language was still pretty-much unitary: in the 6th and 7th century there is no evidence of its dialectal diversification.

The speakers of that language have descended (in ethnic sense) from various parts of Eastern Europe northern of the Carpatians and Danube and western of Vistula, and among them surely must have been those who preserved the legend of their Iranian, Scythian or Sarmatian origin. That fueled the later Sarmatian theory of the origin of Slavs, whose reflections can be seen in Cosmographer of Ravenna in 11-12th century (I, 12): (ibi)... Scytharum est patria unde Sclavinorum exorta est prosapia „(there) lies the homeland of the Scythians whence the tribe of Slavs originate“.

One of the Iranian tribes could have originally carried the name, which in Proto-Slavic must have sounded as *Xruwāte, from which the modern ethnonym Hrváti originates. Although that name is almost certainly Iranian in origin, and other linguistic evidence of the „Iranian origin of the Croats“ is extremely scarce.

How long have been the languges of the steppe people preserved among the Slavs – Iranian, Proto-Bulgar, Avar etc. – it is no possible to ascertain: all that languages have been covered by the dominant Proto-Slavic language.

§30 The area in which the language was spoken and from which Proto-Slavic evolved prior to the expansion towards the Danube limes of the Empire is probably located norther of the Carpathians; there lies the territory with the greatest concentration of hydonyms that can be ascribed to Proto-Slavic, and starting with that exact area it is the easiest to explain all later Slavic migrations.

That area, with Dnjestr on the south, western Bug on the west, and Pripjat swamps on the north, provides a very good correspondence to the archeological culture Korčak, attested in the period of 5th-75h century CE. That culture later (in the 7th century) fuses with „Prague (or Prague-Peńkovski) culture“, which is doubtless Slavic, and which is attested at the area of Slavic spread towards the West (Czechia and Moravia).

§31 The spread of Slavs towards the west and south has made some testimony in the population genetics. Some genes, especially on y-chromosomes are very frequent in Slavic lands, with the peaking occurence in Poland, Slovakia and Czech Republic, and parts of continental Croatia and northwestern Balkans.

At the south, north and east of those area, their frequency is dropping. The percentage of those genes is especially small in some parts of Croatia, e.g. Adriatic islands, which is the evidence of rather small number of Slavic newcomers. That fact is also confirmed by the research of mytochondrial DNA.

One genetic type (the so-called haplotype „Eu7“) is especially frequent in Croatian population, and is generally considered to belong to autochtonous population which survived the last Ice age at the shores of Adriatic, and have gradually spread from there towards the north. The frequency of that haplotype in Croatia is explained by the assumption that most of the population of of modern-day Croatia consists of the descendants of the original Paleolithic population, and not the newcomers from the „Neolithic revolution“, or even later Roman and Slavic colonization.

We cannot reconstruct with certainty the sociolinguistic processes which made the pre-Slavic population, which was dominant in most parts of the Illyricum, to accept the language of Slavic newcomers, but we can imagine a plausible scenario of it:

At the period of a complete collapse of Roman military, political and economic system in the 7th century Illyricum, native Romanized population must have been completely disoriented with regard to its own cultural and ethnic identity, especially outside the cities which were under Byzantine rule. If one could not live anymore in a traditional, Roman way of life, well-organized Slavs and Slavicized Avars gave a role model to imitate; they brought with themselves not only their language, but also cultural and legislative institutions, military organization and religion. In such situation it wouldn't haveve been unusual for the Proto-Slavic language of the newcomers to turn into prestigious idiom, which aboriginal not necessarily had to, but wanted to learn and hand it down to their progeny.