Ok guys i want to find out more about Slavs. Where do they come from?
Are there any groups of Slavs other than East, West and Southern Slavs?
Tell me anything you know about them.
the orange glow of the setting sun, covered my armor in a vibrant reddish hue, the waves lapped and tugged against the wooden vessel, as I watched carefully for any glimpse of that familiar shore. For untold months we had wandered the desolate emptiness of the vast ocean in search of loot and fame, finding none and returning a few men less then when we had set forth.
"A blasted thing war does to men", my first mate grunted as he rowed, his back sweat glistened off the purple and red backdrop.
"A fine thing it gives back in character", I retorted simply, "a bloody but fine thing it does to all mens souls it touches."
Suddenly, I caught a glimpse of pirate vessel, emerging from the horizon. I grasped my axe and yelled, "quickly, head towards them... lets show them that we may have been defeated, but we are not at on deaths door."
They've been following for weeks, and if its a fight they want its a fight they'll get, i thought.
well yeah, but it is a shared ancestry that was divided between about the 5th and 8th century at the time they came westward to europe from their original homeland - of which there apparently are several possible varieties
pre-christianity Slav history is still a subject of heated debates, there are various theories where they came from so im just gonna tell a little about groups
the western Slavs were only relevant thanks to Poland, they loved their noble democracy but went corrupt and got partitioned
The eastern Slavs are obviously Russia. They preferred used have oppressive feudalism for a long time just to fall as a victim to communism. The only part when Russia wasn't abusive shit for its citizens was when it would be Novgorod republic, before Ivan the terrible razed it to the ground.
The south slavs were always either under Byzantines,Austrians or Turks. Basically irrelevant.
>Where do they come from?
No one really knows, most researchers place them somewhere from present day Poland and Czech Republic (the extreme western extent of their supposed homeland) to the Baltic in the north and about Ukraine/Belarus (the extreme east). Pic related stolen off wikipedia shows some of the most commonly assumed ancestors of the Slavonic peoples.
There does not have to be but chances are high there was, as a protlanguage can be reconstructed and suggests a shared protoslavic culture somewhere in present day central/eastern europe.
>protolanguage can be reconstructed
How does this imply there is a shared ancestry?
>I teach a black African English
>he will teach his children English
>soon there's a whole African country speaking English
Does this imply they share ancestry with English people? There's decent enough evidence that East Slavs absorbed a ton of Finno-Ugric people and in the case of West and some South Slavs, Slavic language was used as a lingua franca in the Avar Khaganate and that's how it spread.
Because a high degree linguistical unity in Old or Common Slavonic is a phenomenon that was noted to exist as late as the 9th century and suggests a shared homeland at some point in the past. Your hilarious example says nothing about ancestry, because research would show that there is a clear distinction between newly learnt language and its historical development, in case of English that of its Saxon influences.
When it comes to humans, genetic research is not enough, you're missing the whole fucking half about cultural evolution, which is carried by memes (inb4 you sperg out at >memes).
>teach one man a language
>soon his entire nation speaks that language
that's not how it works
>Slavic language was used as a lingua franca in the Avar Khaganate and that's how it spread.
what about literally the entire region from the baltics to the pannonian plain and over the alps towards west, that wasn't under the khaganate's influence?
I'm guessing you're a west slav trying desperately to distance yourself from the russians?
>what about literally the entire region from the baltics to the pannonian plain and over the alps towards west, that wasn't under the khaganate's influence?
I used the khaganate as just one example among many m8.
We've been talking about physical ancestry though.
>it only existed in Bulgaria at that point
Urhghghg, no, it existed across half of Europe. Because it was the language spoken by the Slavic peoples. Whose language development had not yet broken off into the distinctive language branches. Like, how do you even argue against this, this is literally basic linguistics you can find in virtually any book.
You seem to have made a bit of a mistake in your post. Luckily, the users of 4chan are always willing to help you clear this problem right up! You appear to have used a tripcode when posting, but your identity has nothing at all to do with the conversation! Whoops! You should always remember to stop using your tripcode when the thread it was used for is gone, unless another one is started! Posting with a tripcode when it isn't necessary is poor form. You should always try to post anonymously, unless your identity is absolutely vital to the post that you're making!
Now, there's no need to thank me - I'm just doing my bit to help you get used to the anonymous image-board culture!
Church Slavonic was only one slavic language among many, that was chosen to teach the slavic people about christianity. The first slavic king to adapt christianity was a bohemian king, which obviously also spoke a slavic language
> The first slavic king to adapt christianity was a bohemian king, which obviously also spoke a slavic language
We don't know what language(s) he spoke, honestly. The information about him is extremely scarce.
Genetically speaking the peoples were already here at least 3000 BC. Culturally/linguistically speaking we assume they derive from the peoples living in Pripyat forest somewhere during the Srubna culture based on toponyms and hydronyms (they have the archaic words for many of the flora there while having little descriptions for entities of water, indicating them being landlocked for a long time).
We don't know exactly where we come from.
Slavs started out as a distinct ethnic group but after the migration there was quite some mixing with Celtic, Illyrian, Finno-Ugric and other people. I wouldn't say it's just a linguistic thing.
Obviously. The question was whether there was a common ancestry of the Slavic people after the differentiation from the Proto-Indo-European group and before the migrations.
There had to be one, considering the Balto-Slavic connection.
Which only further increases the problem as slav is used nowadays interchangeably as either ethnic group or linguistic group and being part of the latter does not make you part of the former and vice versa.
Slavs didn't migrate from Russia, they migrated INTO Russia.
This is a really silly theory, since it would mean that they first migrated to Russia and then migrated from it again, as if the places they migrated from to Russia was empty when they left.
>The south slavs were always either under Byzantines,Austrians or Turks. Basically irrelevant.
Slavs constituted a huge chunk of the Austrian empire which was a big deal in Europe, saying they're "irrelevant" is pretty stupid.
>the western Slavs were only relevant thanks to Poland
King of Bohemia was the most powerful noble in HRE after Emperor.
>they preferred used have oppressive feudalism
Tatar influence, also don't confuse Kievan Rus and Muscovy
>south slavs were always under Byzantines
Bulgaria was one of the most powerful medieval empires, not to mention Serbian, Bosnian or Croatian kingdoms
It means both. In Polish there's kniaź/książę (prince) and ksiądz (Catholic priest), both stemming from the same root. Obviously, in the beginning it was more generally position of authority, both secular and religious, but was divided after christianization.
Interestingly, the Polish world for Moon, Księżyc, is a patronymic, meaning prince's (książę's) son - originally it was the name for the new moon, worshipped as a son of the moon god.
I appreciate you giving me that link. Not to widen the goalposts or anything, but I should have mentioned in the original post, that I'm looking for something more in depth than that.
Particularly something that mentions, explains, or even focuses on east slavic mythical symbols and such.
Thank you for your help.
I've tried searching in russian, but it's hard to sift out actual legitimately interesting articles from clickbait-tier bullshit.
It's funny how little we are taught about "ancient" eastern europe, despite it being a key foundation to my national identity.
I did wonder if there even are written documents from that time or at least something like hieroglyphics (I know I'm retarded), I suppose that is the reason why I can't find much.
It's disappointing that no records of this were made by the more modern slavs until it was too late to really research this.
I don't know anything about it either, however without written sources there is basically no history, I'm sorry, anon ;(
Except what can be gleaned from archaeology, maybe doing some research on Eastern European archaeology will give you some better luck in finding out some info.
no one really knows what was our religion the church pretty much erased most records
and to think Scandinavians whine about church destroying their culture lmao at least they know their gods
>eastern slavs are obviously russia
yes but not, russians origin from the rus vikings that came through the rivers from the baltics, slavs originate from the south, the balkans. rus vikings only adopted their lenguage and maybe shortly their religion but got christianized shortly after.