290 Końcówki Proto-Slavic *-ako, *-akъ, *-ikъ, *-ьkъ, *-okъ, *-ъka, *-ъkъ, *-ỳka (i te brakujące), trpaslík, *dalèkъ, *lavà, ława, ławka, lova, *lawwō, *lewH-, *lyžьka, *lъžica, *sòjьka i inne problemy ofitzjalnego jęsykosnaftzfa

A head louse under illumination and magnified.

…..

Oto ciąg dalszy wpisu poprzedniego i opisywania końcówek Proto-Slavic, zawierających dźwięk niespalatalizowany, niskoenergetyczny, tzw. centum / kentum, zapisywany jako *k/K.

W tym wpisie omówię te końcówki j.w., które zawierają samogłoskę przed dźwiękiem głównym. O reszcie bardziej złożonych końcówek Proto-Slavic, zawierających ten sam dźwięk., napiszę we wpisach kolejnych.

Poniżej udowadniam, że ofitzjalne jęsykosnaftzfo:

  • jednocześnie zna i nie zna wielu końcówek Proto-Slavic,
  • potrafi ze znaku miękkiego ь zrobić znak twardy ъ i odwrotnie z twardego miękki,
  • a także z Ławy / L”aWy zrobić fielko-germańską Louse,.. czyli wszę,
  • a przy tej okazji ani słowem nie wspomnieć o przykładzie ponownie potwierdzającym niedziałanie tzw. prawa Wintera, gdzie ofitzjalnie nie doszło do zamiany samogłosek o > a > o w Proto-Slavic…

Okazuje się, że litewskie słowo lóva (“bed”) jest zniekształcone względem ofitzjalnie odtfoszonego Proto-Balto-Slavic *lā́ˀwāˀ (“place to sleep”), podczas gdy Proto-Slavic *lava pozostało dziwnie magicznie niezmienione. Powinno być przecież niby zupełnie odwrotnie, ale skoro nikt ofitzjalnie o tym nie wspomina, więc nie ma problemu, nieprawdaż?

No właśnie. I to dlatego z ławy można ofitzjalnie wystrugać sobie etymologię dla wszy… A co, kto im zabroni?

Tyle tylko,.. że jednocześnie w j. polskim istnieją słowa jak np. Łów / L”o’W, Łowić / L”oWi+C‚, Łowca / L”oW+Ca, itp!

…..

https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/Category:Proto-Slavic_words_suffixed_with_*-ako

Category:Proto-Slavic words suffixed with *-ako

Proto-Slavic words ending with the suffix *-ako.

Pages in category „Proto-Slavic words suffixed with *-ako„

This category contains only the following page.

J

…..

https://en.wiktionary.org/w/index.php?title=Reconstruction:Proto-Slavic/-ako&action=edit&redlink=1

Wiktionary does not yet have a reconstruction page for Proto-Slavic/-ako.

…..

https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/Category:Proto-Slavic_words_suffixed_with_*-ak%D1%8A

Category:Proto-Slavic words suffixed with *-akъ

Proto-Slavic words ending with the suffix *-akъ.

Pages in category „Proto-Slavic words suffixed with *-akъ„

The following 2 pages are in this category, out of 2 total.

E
N

…..

https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/Reconstruction:Proto-Slavic/-ak%D1%8A

Reconstruction:Proto-Slavic/–akъ

Proto-Slavic

Etymology

Deverbal derivations are easily secondary, motivated by parallel formations, e.g.

Comparison with cognates in other Indo-European languages indicates antiquity of deadjectival formations:

Cognate with Proto-Celtic *-ākos (see Etymology 2).

Suffix

*-akъ m

  1. Deadjectival, forming nouns denoting a carrier of a property.
    *junъ (“young”) → *junakъ (“a young man”)
    *novъ (“new”) → *novakъ (“novice”)
    *lěvъ (“left”) → *lěvakъ (“left-handed man”)
    *svojь (“one’s own”) → *svojakъ (“relative, cousin”)
  2. Denominal, forming nouns denoting something connected in meaning to the base-word.
    *rodъ (“kin”) → *roďakъ (“relative, cousin”)
    *kory (“root”) → *koreňakъ (“native, one from the root”)
    *moře (“sea”) → *mořakъ (“sailor”)
    *ryba (“fish”) → *rybakъ (“fishing”)
  3. Denominal, forming masculine counterparts of feminine nouns.
    *gǫsь (“goose”) → *gǫsakъ (“gander”)
  4. Deverbal, from the root, forming agent nouns.
    *prositi (“to ask; beg”) → *prosjakъ >*prošakъ (“beggar; asker”)
Declension
Declension of *-akъ (hard o-stem)
Singular Dual Plural
Nominative *-akъ *-aka *-aci
Accusative *-akъ *-aka *-aky
Genitive *-aka *-aku *-akъ
Locative *-acě *-aku *-acěxъ
Dative *-aku *-akoma *-akomъ
Instrumental *-akъmь, *-akomь* *-akoma *-aky
Vocative *-ače *-aka *-aci
* -ъmь in North Slavic, -omь in South Slavic.
Alternative forms
  • *-jakъ (causing iotation of the preceding consonant)
Derived terms
► Proto-Slavic words suffixed with *-akъ
Descendants
  • East Slavic:
    • Old East Slavic: -акъ (-akŭ)
      • Belarusian: -ак (-ak)
      • Russian: -ак (-ak)
      • Ukrainian: -ак (-ak)
  • South Slavic:
Further reading
  • Šekli, Matej (2012) , “Besedotvorni pomeni samostalniških izpeljank v praslovanščini”, in Philological Studies‎[1] (in Slovene), volume 10, issue 1, Skopje, Perm, Ljubljana, Zagreb, pages 115–32
  • Sławski, Franciszek, editor (1974) Słownik prasłowiański (in Polish), volume I, Wrocław: Polska Akademia Nauk, page 89f

UWAGA!

Brakuje końcówek jak: *-acě, *-acěxъ, *-aci, *-aka, *-akomь, *-akoma, *-akomъ, *-aku, *-akъ, *-akъmь, *-aky!!!

…..

https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/Category:Proto-Slavic_words_suffixed_with_*-ik%D1%8A

Category:Proto-Slavic words suffixed with *-ikъ

Proto-Slavic words ending with the suffix *-ikъ.

Pages in category „Proto-Slavic words suffixed with *-ikъ„

The following 3 pages are in this category, out of 3 total.

T
V

…..

https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/Reconstruction:Proto-Slavic/-ik%D1%8A

Reconstruction:Proto-Slavic/-ikъ

Proto-Slavic

Etymology

(This etymology is missing or incomplete.)

Cognate with Latvian -ieks (< -eikas). The *-i in *-ikъ thus reflects a diphthong *ey, which explains the lack of the third palatalization. Lithuanian -ykas reflects earlier -inīkas, and is not a cognate. Probably not related to Sanskrit -ईक (-īká) and Latin -īco.

Suffix

*-ikъ m

  1. Denominal, forming diminutives.
    *nožь (“knife”) → *nožikъ (“a small knife”)
    *větrъ (“wind”) → *větrikъ (“breeze”)
    *listъ (“leaf”) → *listikъ (“a small leaf”)
    *bobъ (“broad bean”) → *bobikъ (“(a small) broad bean”)
  2. Deadjectival, denoting a carrier of a property.
    *zoltъ (“golden”) → *zoltikъ (“something golden”)
    *porzdьnъ (“empty”) → *porzdьnikъ (“feast, holiday, festival”)
    *moldъ (“young”) → *moldikъ (“something or somebody young”)
    *malъ (“small”) → *malikъ (“something or somebody small”)
Declension
Declension of *-ikъ (hard o-stem)
Singular Dual Plural
Nominative *-ikъ *-ika *-ici
Accusative *-ikъ *-ika *-iky
Genitive *-ika *-iku *-ikъ
Locative *-icě *-iku *-icěxъ
Dative *-iku *-ikoma *-ikomъ
Instrumental *-ikъmь, *-ikomь* *-ikoma *-iky
Vocative *-iče *-ika *-ici
* -ъmь in North Slavic, -omь in South Slavic.
Usage notes

The diminutive function is productive in North Slavic. In South Slavic languages diminutive formations only exist in relics, mostly in Slovene.

Derived terms
  • *-nikъ (appended to the past participle of verbs in *-nъ)
  • *-ьnikъ (with *-ьn- element abstracted away from denominal derivations on *-ьnъ)
Related terms
  • *-ica (feminine counterpart)
Descendants
  • East Slavic:
    • Old East Slavic: -икъ (-ikŭ)
      • Belarusian: -ік (-ik)
      • Russian: -ик (-ik)
      • Ukrainian: -ик (-yk)
  • South Slavic:
    • Old Church Slavonic:
      Cyrillic: -икъ (-ikŭ)
      Glagolitic: -ⰹⰽⱏ (-ikŭ)
    • Bulgarian: -ик (-ik)
    • Macedonian: -ик (-ik)
    • Serbo-Croatian:
      Cyrillic: -ик
      Latin: -ik
    • Slovene: -ik
  • West Slavic:
References
  • Šekli, Matej (2012) , “Besedotvorni pomeni samostalniških izpeljank v praslovanščini”, in Philological Studies‎[1] (in Slovene), volume 10, issue 1, Skopje, Perm, Ljubljana, Zagreb, pages 115–32
  • Sławski, Franciszek, editor (1974) Słownik prasłowiański (in Polish), volume I, Wrocław: Polska Akademia Nauk, page 90f
  • J. Halla-aho (2006): „Nouns in */-k-o-/ ” in Problems of Proto-Slavic Historical Nominal Morphology, University of Helsenki, p. 70

UWAGA!

Brakuje końcówek jak: *-icě, *-icěxъ, *-ici, *-ika, *-ikoma, *-ikomь, *-ikomъ, *-iku, *-ikъ, *-ikъmь, *-iky!!!

…..

https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/trpasl%C3%ADk#Proto-Slavic

trpaslík

Czech

Etymology

From Old Church Slavonic трьпѧстъкъ (trĭpęstŭkŭ), from Proto-Slavic *tri + *pęstь +‎ *-ikъ, literally „three fists tall”

Pronunciation
Noun

trpaslík m

  1. dwarf (a being from folklore)
  2. dwarf (a person of short stature)
  3. (astronomy) dwarf (a star of relatively small size)
    bílý trpaslík ― white dwarf
    červený trpaslík ― red dwarf
    hnědý trpaslík ― brown dwarf
Declension
Declension
singular plural
nominative trpaslík trpaslíci
genitive trpaslíka trpaslíků
dative trpaslíku, trpaslíkovi trpaslíkům
accusative trpaslíka trpaslíky
vocative trpaslíku trpaslíci
locative trpaslíku, trpaslíkovi trpaslících
instrumental trpaslíkem trpaslíky
Derived terms
Further reading

…..

https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/Category:Proto-Slavic_words_suffixed_with_*-%D1%8Ck%D1%8A

Category:Proto-Slavic words suffixed with *-ьkъ

Proto-Slavic words ending with the suffix *-ьkъ.

Pages in category „Proto-Slavic words suffixed with *-ьkъ„

The following 3 pages are in this category, out of 3 total.

B
G
T

UWAGA!

Odnośnik „Proto-Slavic words ending with the suffix *-ьkъ zmyla i przerzuca na tę stronę:

https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/Reconstruction:Proto-Slavic/-%D1%8Ak%D1%8A

Reconstruction:Proto-Slavic/–ъkъ

Wygląda na to, że ofitzjalnie ь/i = ъ/u/o’!!!

…..

https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/Category:Proto-Slavic_words_suffixed_with_*-ok%D1%8A

Category:Proto-Slavic words suffixed with *-okъ

Proto-Slavic words ending with the suffix *-okъ.

Pages in category „Proto-Slavic words suffixed with *-okъ„

The following 3 pages are in this category, out of 3 total.

D
S
V

…..

https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/Reconstruction:Proto-Slavic/-ok%D1%8A

Reconstruction:Proto-Slavic/–okъ

Proto-Slavic

Etymology 1

Nominal suffix, derived from *-kъ appended to o-stems *-ъ, ultimately from Proto-Indo-European *-kós.

Suffix

*-òkъ m

  1. (Regional) From feminine animal nouns (usually in i-stem), forms the respective masculine counter-part (in South Slavic)
    *pъtъka (“duck”) → *pъtokъ (“drake”)
    *mečьka f (“bear”) → *mečokъ f (“bear”)
    *gǫsь (“goose”) → *gǫsokъ (“gander”)
    *myšь f (“mouse”) → *myšokъ m (“mouse”)
  2. From adjectives, forms a carrier of the adjective
    Synonyms:*-ьcь, *-ežь, *-ьjь
    *moldъ (“young”) → *moldokъ (“novice, youth, young tree”)
    *starъ (“old”) → *starokъ (“veteran, elderly”)
    *slěpъ (“blind”) → *slěpokъ (“blind creature/person”)
    Pre-Slavic *sklǫbъ (“lateral”) → *xlǫbokъ (“hip”)
  3. From prepositions, forms a carrier of the adjective
    0-grade of *per (“for, per”) → *prokъ (“remnant, remainder”)
Declension
Declension of *-okъ (hard o-stem)
Singular Dual Plural
Nominative *-okъ *-oka *-oci
Accusative *-okъ *-oka *-oky
Genitive *-oka *-oku *-okъ
Locative *-ocě *-oku *-ocěxъ
Dative *-oku *-okoma *-okomъ
Instrumental *-okъmь, *-okomь* *-okoma *-oky
Vocative *-oče *-oka *-oci
* -ъmь in North Slavic, -omь in South Slavic.
Related terms
Etymology 2

Adjectival suffix, derived from *-kъ appended to o-stems *-ъ, ultimately from Proto-Indo-European *-kos.

Suffix

*-òkъ

  1. From gauge nouns in i-stem, forms adjectives with pertaining meaning: -y
    *glǫbь (“depth”) → *glǫbokъ (“deep”)
    *vysь (“height, elevation”) → *vysokъ (“high, elevated”)
    *širь (“scope, vast space”) → *širokъ (“wide”)
    *dalь (“distance”) → *dalekъ (“distant”)
    *žestь (“stiffness”) → *žestokъ (“cruel, severe”)
    Pre-Slavic *grǫstь (“roughness, cavity”) → *grǫstokъ (“rough, sturdy”)
Alternative forms
  • *-ekъ (when appended to yo-stems)
Declension
Indefinite declension of *-okъ (hard)
Singular Masculine Feminine Neuter
Nominative *-okъ *-oka *-oko
Accusative *-okъ *-okǫ *-oko
Genitive *-oka *-oky *-oka
Locative *-ocě *-ocě *-ocě
Dative *-oku *-ocě *-oku
Instrumental *-okomь *-okojǫ *-okomь
Vocative *-oče *-oko *-oko
Dual Masculine Feminine Neuter
Nominative *-oka *-ocě *-ocě
Accusative *-oka *-ocě *-ocě
Genitive *-oku *-oku *-oku
Locative *-oku *-oku *-oku
Dative *-okoma *-okama *-okoma
Instrumental *-okoma *-okama *-okoma
Vocative *-oka *-ocě *-ocě
Plural Masculine Feminine Neuter
Nominative *-oci *-oky *-oka
Accusative *-oky *-oky *-oka
Genitive *-okъ *-okъ *-okъ
Locative *-ocěxъ *-okaxъ *-ocěxъ
Dative *-okomъ *-okamъ *-okomъ
Instrumental *-oky *-okami *-oky
Vocative *-oci *-oky *-oka
Definite declension of *-okъ (hard)
Singular Masculine Feminine Neuter
Nominative *-okъjь *-okaja *-okoje
Accusative *-okъjь *-okǫjǫ *-okoje
Genitive *-okajego *-okyję *-okajego
Locative *-ocějemь *-ocěji *-ocějemь
Dative *-okujemu *-ocěji *-okujemu
Instrumental *-okyjimi *-okǫjǫ *-okyjimi
Vocative *-okъjь *-okaja *-okoje
Dual Masculine Feminine Neuter
Nominative *-okaja *-ocěji *-ocěji
Accusative *-okaja *-ocěji *-ocěji
Genitive *-okuju *-okuju *-okuju
Locative *-okuju *-okuju *-okuju
Dative *-okyjima *-okyjima *-okyjima
Instrumental *-okyjima *-okyjima *-okyjima
Vocative *-okaja *-ocěji *-ocěji
Plural Masculine Feminine Neuter
Nominative *-ociji *-okyję *-okaja
Accusative *-okyję *-okyję *-okaja
Genitive *-okъjixъ *-okъjixъ *-okъjixъ
Locative *-okyjixъ *-okyjixъ *-okyjixъ
Dative *-okyjimъ *-okyjimъ *-okyjimъ
Instrumental *-okyjimi *-okyjimi *-okyjimi
Vocative *-ociji *-okyję *-okaja
Derived terms
►Proto-Slavic words suffixed with *-okъ
Category Proto-Slavic words suffixed with *-ekъ not found
References

UWAGA!

Brakuje końcówek jak: *-oče, *-ocějemь, *-ocěji, *-ocěxъ, *-oci, *-ociji, *-oka, *-okaja, *-okajego, *-okamъ, *-okaxъ, *-oko, *-okoje, *-okojǫ, *-okoma, *-okomь, *-okomъ, *-oku, *-okujemu, *-okuju, *-okъ, *-okъjь, *-okъmь, *-oky, *-okyję, *-okyjima, *-okyjimi, *-okyjimъ, *-okъjixъ!!!

…..

https://en.wiktionary.org/w/index.php?title=Reconstruction:Proto-Slavic/-ek%D1%8A&action=edit&redlink=1

Wiktionary does not yet have a reconstruction page for Proto-Slavic/-ekъ.

……

https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/Reconstruction:Proto-Slavic/dalek%D1%8A

Reconstruction:Proto-Slavic/dalekъ

Proto-Slavic

Etymology

From *dalь (“distance”) +‎ *-okъ. Compare Latvian tāls (“far, distant”), but the initial d remains unexplained.)[1]

Adjective

*dalèkъ

  1. far
Inflection

This adjective needs an inflection-table template.

Descendants
References
  • Vasmer, Max (1964–1973) , “далёкий”, in Etimologičeskij slovarʹ russkovo jazyka [Etymological Dictionary of the Russian Language] (in Russian), translated from German and supplemented by Oleg Trubačóv, Moscow: Progress
  • Derksen, Rick (2008) , “*dalèkъ”, in Etymological Dictionary of the Slavic Inherited Lexicon (Leiden Indo-European Etymological Dictionary Series; 4), Leiden, Boston: Brill, →ISBN, page 95
  1. ^ Karulis, Konstantīns (1992) , “tāls”, in Latviešu Etimoloģijas Vārdnīca (in Latvian), Rīga: AVOTS, →ISBN

…..

https://en.wiktionary.org/w/index.php?title=Reconstruction:Proto-Slavic/dal%D1%8C&action=edit&redlink=1

Wiktionary does not yet have a reconstruction page for Proto-Slavic/dalь.

UWAGA!

Końcówka *-okъ jak widać powyżej nie występuje, a zamiast niej występuje ofitzjalnie nieopisana końcówka *-ekъ!!!

Słowem Dal / DaL itp., zajmę się w oddzielnym wpisie.

…..

https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/Category:Proto-Slavic_words_suffixed_with_*-%D1%8Aka

Category:Proto-Slavic words suffixed with *-ъka

Proto-Slavic words ending with the suffix *-ъka.

UWAGA!

Ofitzjalnie nastąpiła powyżej zamiana znaku twardego na znak miękki!!!

Przypominam, że odnośnik „Proto-Slavic words ending with the suffix *-ьkъ.” zmyla i przerzuca na tę stronę:

https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/Reconstruction:Proto-Slavic/-%D1%8Ak%D1%8A

Reconstruction:Proto-Slavic/–ъkъ

Wygląda na to, że tym razem ofitzjalnie ъ/u/o’ = ь/i!!!

…..

https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/Reconstruction:Proto-Slavic/-%D1%8Aka

Reconstruction:Proto-Slavic/–ъka

Proto-Slavic

Etymology

Extended version of Proto-Indo-European *-keh₂, appended to thematic roots. The suffix could be attached to any stem (o-, u-, i-, or consonant).

Suffix

*-ъka f

  1. Denominal, forms diminutives.
    Synonym:*-ica, *-ъlа (with additional derogatory flair)
    *mati (“mother”) → *matьka (“mommy”)
    *teta (“aunt”) → *tetъka (“auntie”)
    *gora (“mountain”) → *gorъka (“small mountain, hill”)
    *pǫpъ (“belly button”) → *pǫpъka (“pimple”)
    *kotъ (“cat”) → *kotъka (“young cat”)
    *bylьje (“herb plant, medicine”) → *bylьka (“herb”)
    *lъga (“oval tool”) → *lyžьka (“spoon”) (along with *lъžica)
    *vidla (“pitchfork”) → *vidlъka (“fork”) (along with *vidlica)
    *pala (“stake, pole”) → *palъka (“cane, stick”) (along with *palica)
  2. Deadjectival, denoting a carrier of the specified property.
    *bělъ (“white”) → *bělъka (“something or somebody white”)
    *čьrnъ (“black”) → *čьrnъka (“something or somebody black”)
    *bolьjь (“painful”) → *bolъka (“acute pain”)
    *polъ (“half”) → *polъka (“one half; type of dance”)
    *-měrъ (“considerable, great”) → *měrъka (“measure, estimate”)
  3. Deverbal, denoting a (feminine) agent or a tool performing the specified action or a result from the action.
    *prositi (“to ask, to beg”) → *prošьka (“remission, pardon”)
    *dojiti (“to nurse, to give milk”) → *dojьka (“breast, wet-nurse”)
    *krojiti (“to cut, to shape”) → *krojьka (“embroidery, needlework”)
    *brojiti (“to count”) → *brojьka (“account, number”)
    *bьrati (“to gather, to pick”) → *sъbirъka (“gathering, assemblage”)
    *pьrati (“to propel”) → *perъka (“fin, propeller, vane (of a machine)”)
    *svirati (“to play a music instrument”) → *svirъka (“flute”)
  4. From numerals, denoting a set of the respective number. For numerals between 4 and 8, the supplementary *-orъ is affixed.
    *dъva (“two”) → *dvojьka (“pair”)
    *trьje (“three”) → *trojьka (“triple”)
    *četyre (“four”) → *četvorъka (“set of four”)
    *pętь (“five”) → *pętorъka (“set of five”)
    *desętь (“ten”) → *desętъka (“decade”)
Alternative forms
  • *-jьka (when attached to roots ending in *-j- or some i-stems)
Declension
Declension of *-ъka (hard a-stem)
Singular Dual Plural
Nominative *-ъka *-ъcě *-ъky
Accusative *-ъkǫ *-ъcě *-ъky
Genitive *-ъky *-ъku *-ъkъ
Locative *-ъcě *-ъku *-ъkasъ, *-ъkaxъ*
Dative *-ъcě *-ъkama *-ъkamъ
Instrumental *-ъkojǫ, *-ъkǫ** *-ъkama *-ъkami
Vocative *-ъko *-ъcě *-ъky
* -asъ is the expected Balto-Slavic form but is found only in some Old Czech documents; -axъ is found everywhere else and is formed by analogy with other locative plurals in -xъ.
** The second form occurs in languages that contract early across /j/ (e.g. Czech), while the first form occurs in languages that do not (e.g. Russian).
Derived terms
►Proto-Slavic words suffixed with *-ъka
Descendants
  • East Slavic:
    • Old East Slavic: -ъка (-ŭka)
      • Belarusian: -ка (-ka)
      • Russian: -ка (-ka)
      • Ukrainian: -ка (-ka)
  • South Slavic:
    • Old Church Slavonic:
      Cyrillic: -ъка (-ŭka)
      Glagolitic: -ⱏⰽⰰ (-ŭka)
    • Bulgarian: -ка (-ka)
    • Macedonian: -ка (-ka)
    • Serbo-Croatian:
      Cyrillic: -ка
      Latin: -ka
    • Slovene: -ka
  • West Slavic:
    • Czech: -ka
    • Polish: -ka
    • Polabian: -kă
    • Slovak: -ka
    • Slovincian: -ka
    • Sorbian:
      • Upper Sorbian: -ka
      • Lower Sorbian: -ka
References
  • Šekli, Matej (2012) , “Besedotvorni pomeni samostalniških izpeljank v praslovanščini”, in Philological Studies‎[1] (in Slovene), volume 10, issue 1, Skopje, Perm, Ljubljana, Zagreb, pages 115–32

UWAGA!

Brakuje końcówek jak: *-ъcě, *-ъkama, *-ъkami, *-ъkamъ, *-ъkasъ, *-ъkaxъ, *-ъko, *-ъkojǫ, *-ъkǫ, *-ъku, *-ъkъ, *-ъky!!!

…..

https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/Reconstruction:Proto-Slavic/lava

Reconstruction:Proto-Slavic/lava

Proto-Slavic

Etymology

From Proto-Balto-Slavic *lā́ˀwāˀ (“place to sleep”); cognate with Lithuanian lóva (“bed”), Latvian lâva (“sweat bench, bench in the bath room, bench at the bar oven or at the parlour oven, sleeping place”).

Reconstruction

The East Slavic and South Slavic languages together show the accent paradigm ⟨a⟩, which is a normal reflex of the accent paradigm ⟨c⟩. True that very often in the two-syllable noun of the accent paradigm ⟨a⟩ Czech language loses its longitude, but this stem, when the suffix *-ъka is added, gives a reflex whose longitude is the reflex of the new acute, and the noun of the accent paradigm ⟨a⟩ do not give this reflex in formations with the suffix *-ъka. This stem behaves similarly in Slovak and Polish languages. In the East Slavic and South Slavic dialects, there is a tendency to generalize root accent.

Noun

*lavà f[1]

  1. bench
Inflection
Declension of *lavà (hard a-stem, accent paradigm c)
Singular Dual Plural
Nominative *lavà *lȃvě *lȃvy
Accusative *lȃvǫ *lȃvě *lȃvy
Genitive *lavý *lavù *lãvъ
Locative *lȃvě *lavù *lavàsъ, *lavàxъ*
Dative *lavě̀ *lavàma *lavàmъ
Instrumental *lavojǫ́ *lavàma *lavàmi
Vocative *lavo *lȃvě *lȃvy
* -asъ is the expected Balto-Slavic form but is found only in some Old Czech documents; -axъ is found everywhere else and is formed by analogy with other locative plurals in -xъ.
Derived terms
Descendants
Further reading
  • Vasmer, Max (1964–1973) , “ла́ва”, in Etimologičeskij slovarʹ russkovo jazyka [Etymological Dictionary of the Russian Language] (in Russian), translated from German and supplemented by Oleg Trubačóv, Moscow: Progress
References
  1. ^ Dybo, Vladimir A.; Zamyatina, Galina I.; Nikolaev, Sergei L. (1990) Osnovy slavyanskoy aktsentologii [Fundamentals of Slavic Accentology]‎[1] (in Russian), volume 1, Moscow: Nauka, →ISBN, page 42
  2. ^ Zaliznjak, Andrej A. (2014) , “Drevnerusskoje udarenije. Obščije svedenija i slovarʹ”, in Languages of Slavic Culture‎[2] (in Russian), Moscow: Institute for Slavic Studies of the Russian Academy of Sciences, page 163: “ла́ва”
  3. ^ Zaliznjak, Andrej A. (2014) , “Drevnerusskoje udarenije. Obščije svedenija i slovarʹ”, in Languages of Slavic Culture‎[3] (in Russian), Moscow: Institute for Slavic Studies of the Russian Academy of Sciences, page 150: “ла́вка”

…..

https://en.wiktionary.org/w/index.php?title=Reconstruction:Proto-Slavic/lav%D1%8Aka&action=edit&redlink=1

Wiktionary does not yet have a reconstruction page for Proto-Slavic/lavъka.

…..

Ława / L”aWa

https://pl.wiktionary.org/wiki/%C5%82awa

ława (język polski)

ława (1.1)

ława (1.2)

ławy (1.3) sejmowe
wymowa:
IPA: [ˈwava], AS: [u̯ava] ​?/i
znaczenia:

rzeczownik, rodzaj żeński

(1.1) deska służąca do siedzenia, długie siedzisko bez oparcia
(1.2) niski stolik, zwykle podłużny
(1.3) miejsce w sejmie lub w sądzie
odmiana:
(1.1–3)

przypadek liczba pojedyncza liczba mnoga
mianownik ława ławy
dopełniacz ławy ław
celownik ławie ławom
biernik ławę ławy
narzędnik ławą ławami
miejscownik ławie ławach
wołacz ławo ławy
przykłady:
(1.1) Kilku gości będzie siedzieć na ławie.
(1.2) Usiedliśmy na fotelach przy ławie.
kolokacje:
(1.3) ławy sejmowe / poselskie / senatorskie / rządowe / opozycji • ławy sądowe • ława oskarżonych • ława przysięgłych
hiperonimy:
(1.1) mebel
(1.2) mebel
(1.3) miejsce
wyrazy pokrewne:
rzecz. ławnik m, ławniczka ż, ławkowiec m

zdrobn. ławka ż, ławeczka ż
związki frazeologiczne:
kawa na ławę • ława fundamentowa • wyłożyć kawę na ławę
etymologia:
pol. ławka[1]
tłumaczenia:(edytuj)
źródła:
  1. ↑ Renata Grzegorczykowa, Zarys słowotwórstwa polskiego. Słowotwórstwo opisowe, wyd. III poprawione, Warszawa 1979, s. 16.

…..

https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/%C5%82awa#Polish

ława

Polish

Pronunciation
Noun

ława f

  1. Augmentative of ławka
  2. coffee table
Declension
declension of ława
singular plural
nominative ława ławy
genitive ławy ław
dative ławie ławom
accusative ławę ławy
instrumental ławą ławami
locative ławie ławach
vocative ławo ławy
Derived terms
Further reading
  • ława in Polish dictionaries at PWN

…..

Ławka / L”aW+Ka

https://pl.wiktionary.org/wiki/%C5%82awka

ławka (język polski)

ławka (1.2)

ławka (1.2)

ławka (1.3)

ławka (1.4)

ławka (1.5)
wymowa:
​?/i, IPA: [ˈwafka], AS: [u̯afka], zjawiska fonetyczne: utr. dźw.
znaczenia:

rzeczownik, rodzaj żeński

(1.1) zdrobn. od: ława
(1.2) twardy mebel do siedzenia dla kilku osób; zob. też ławka w Wikipedii
(1.3) eduk. szkolny mebel do nauki
(1.4) st.pol. (współcz. gw. (Śląsk Cieszyński)) kładka[1][2]
(1.5) szeroka, kilkuosobowa gondola kolejki krzesełkowej
(1.6) zob. ławki
odmiana:
(1.1–5)

przypadek liczba pojedyncza liczba mnoga
mianownik ławka ławki
dopełniacz ławki ławek
celownik ławce ławkom
biernik ławkę ławki
narzędnik ławką ławkami
miejscownik ławce ławkach
wołacz ławko ławki
przykłady:
(1.2) Wieczorem siedzieliśmy na ławce w parku.
(1.3) Najtrwalsze w życiu przyjaźnie, to te ze szkolnej ławki.
kolokacje:
(1.2) ławka rezerwowych
synonimy:
(1.2) gw. (Górny Śląsk) bank
wyrazy pokrewne:
rzecz. ławkowiec mrz

zgrub. ława ż
zdrobn. ławeczka ż
przym. ławkowy
związki frazeologiczne:
ośla ławka
etymologia:
pol. ława + -ka
uwagi:
(1.2) zob. też ławka w Wikicytatach
tłumaczenia:
(1.1) dla języków nierozróżniających zdrobnień zobacz listę tłumaczeń w haśle: ława
źródła:
  1. ↑ Słowniczek trudniejszych wyrazów gwarowych, w: Alina Kopoczek, Śpiewnik Macierzy Ziemi Cieszyńskiej, Cieszyn 1988, str. 375-380.
  2. ↑ Słownik gwarowy Śląska Cieszyńskiego, red. Jadwiga Wronicz, Galeria „Na Gojach”, Ustroń 2010, ISBN 978-83-60551-28-8.

…..

https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/%C5%82awka#Polish

ławka

Polish

ławka
Etymology

ława +‎ -ka

Pronunciation
Noun

ławka f (diminutive ławeczka)

  1. Diminutive of ława
  2. bench (a long seat)
Declension
declension of ławka
singular plural
nominative ławka ławki
genitive ławki ławek
dative ławce ławkom
accusative ławkę ławki
instrumental ławką ławkami
locative ławce ławkach
vocative ławko ławki
Further reading
  • ławka in Polish dictionaries at PWN

…..

https://pl.wiktionary.org/wiki/lova

lova (język litewski)

lova (1.1)
znaczenia:

rzeczownik, rodzaj żeński

(1.1) łóżko
kolokacje:
(1.1) gulėti lovoje → leżeć w łóżku • kloti lovą → słać/ścielić łóżko • sudedamoji lova → łóżko polowe, składane • papildoma lova → dostawka
wyrazy pokrewne:
rzecz. lovatiesė
związki frazeologiczne:
Prokrusto lova → Prokrustowe łoże

…..

https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/lova

lova

Lithuanian

Lithuanian Wikipedia has an article on: lova
Etymology

From Proto-Balto-Slavic *lā́ˀwāˀ (“place to sleep”).

Pronunciation
Noun

lóva f (plural lóvos) stress pattern 1

  1. bed (furniture used for sleeping)
  2. (dialectal) bed (garden plot)
Declension
declension of lova
singular (vienaskaita) plural (daugiskaita)
nominative (vardininkas) lóva lóvos
genitive (kilmininkas) lóvos lóvų
dative (naudininkas) lóvai lóvoms
accusative (galininkas) lóvą lóvas
instrumental (įnagininkas) lóva lóvomis
locative (vietininkas) lóvoje lóvose
vocative (šauksmininkas) lóva lóvos
Synonyms
Derived terms

Livonian

Etymology

Akin to Finnish lava.

Noun

lova

  1. bedstead

…..

https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/Reconstruction:Proto-Balto-Slavic/l%C4%81%CC%81%CB%80w%C4%81%CB%80

Reconstruction:Proto-Balto-Slavic/lā́ˀwāˀ

Proto-Balto-Slavic

Etymology

Possibly from Proto-Indo-European *leh₂wéh₂ (compare Proto-Germanic *lawwō), with accent retraction due to Hirt’s law. Hirt’s law was undone in the Latvian and West Slavic dialects. In Lithuanian dialects, the tendency to generalize the root accent prevailed. (Can this(+) etymology be sourced?)

Noun

*lā́ˀwāˀ f

  1. place to sleep
  2. bench, bed
Inflection
Declension of *lā́ˀwāˀ (ā-stem, fixed accent)
Singular Dual Plural
Nominative *lā́ˀwāˀ *lā́ˀwāiˀ *lā́ˀwās
Accusative *lā́ˀwā(ˀ)n *lā́ˀwāiˀ *lā́ˀwā(ˀ)ns
Genitive *lā́ˀwā(ˀ)s *lā́ˀwāu(ˀ) *lā́ˀwōn
Locative *lā́ˀwāiˀ *lā́ˀwāu(ˀ) *lā́ˀwā(ˀ)su
Dative *lā́ˀwāi *lā́ˀwā(ˀ)mā(ˀ) *lā́ˀwā(ˀ)mas
Instrumental *lā́ˀwāˀn *lā́ˀwā(ˀ)māˀ *lā́ˀwā(ˀ)mīˀs
Vocative *lā́ˀwa *lā́ˀwāiˀ *lā́ˀwās
Descendants

…..

https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/Reconstruction:Proto-Germanic/laww%C5%8D

Reconstruction:Proto-Germanic/lawwō

Proto-Germanic

Etymology

From Proto-Indo-European *lowH-éh₂, from *lewH- (“to cut”) +‎ *-éh₂.[1]

Pronunciation
Noun

*lawwō f[2][1]

  1. groove
Inflection
Declension of *lawwō (ō-stem)
singular plural
nominative *lawwō *lawwôz
vocative *lawwō *lawwôz
accusative *lawwǭ *lawwōz
genitive *lawwōz *lawwǫ̂
dative *lawwōi *lawwōmaz
instrumental *lawwō *lawwōmiz
Related terms
Descendants
References
  1. ↑ Jump up to:1.0 1.1 Kroonen, Guus (2013) , “*lawwō-”, in Etymological Dictionary of Proto-Germanic (Leiden Indo-European Etymological Dictionary Series; 11), Leiden, Boston: Brill, →ISBN, pages 330
  2. ^ Hellquist, Elof (1922) , “lagg”, in Svensk etymologisk ordbok [Swedish etymological dictionary] (in Swedish), Lund: C. W. K. Gleerups förlag, page 394: “*lawwō”

…..

https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/Reconstruction:Proto-Indo-European/lewH-

Reconstruction:Proto-Indo-European/lewH-

Proto-Indo-European

Noun

*lewH-[1]

  1. louse
Derived terms
► Terms derived from the Proto-Indo-European root *lewH-
References
  1. ↑ Jump up to:1.0 1.1 1.2 1.3 Matasović, Ranko (2009) , “*luwā”, in Etymological Dictionary of Proto-Celtic (Leiden Indo-European Etymological Dictionary Series; 9), Leiden: Brill, →ISBN, page 250
  2. ^ Pokorny, Julius (1959) , “lū̆s”, in Indogermanisches etymologisches Wörterbuch [Indo-European Etymological Dictionary] (in German), Bern, München: Francke Verlag, page 692

…..

https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/Reconstruction:Proto-Slavic/ly%C5%BE%D1%8Cka

Reconstruction:Proto-Slavic/lyžьka

Proto-Slavic

Etymology

From an earlier *lъga (“bending”) +‎ *-ъka, reanalyzed to have a soft –ž– under the influence of *lъžica. For comparison, consider *vidlъka (“fork”) and *vidlica (“id”).

Noun

*lyžьka f

  1. spoon
Inflection
Declension of *lyžьka (hard a-stem)
Singular Dual Plural
Nominative *lyžьka *lyžьcě *lyžьky
Accusative *lyžьkǫ *lyžьcě *lyžьky
Genitive *lyžьky *lyžьku *lyžьkъ
Locative *lyžьcě *lyžьku *lyžьkasъ, *lyžьkaxъ*
Dative *lyžьcě *lyžьkama *lyžьkamъ
Instrumental *lyžьkojǫ, *lyžьkǫ** *lyžьkama *lyžьkami
Vocative *lyžьko *lyžьcě *lyžьky
* -asъ is the expected Balto-Slavic form but is found only in some Old Czech documents; -axъ is found everywhere else and is formed by analogy with other locative plurals in -xъ.
** The second form occurs in languages that contract early across /j/ (e.g. Czech), while the first form occurs in languages that do not (e.g. Russian).
Descendants
References

…..

https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/Reconstruction:Proto-Slavic/l%D1%8A%C5%BEica

Reconstruction:Proto-Slavic/lъžica

Proto-Slavic

Etymology

From *lъga (“bending”) +‎ *-ica. An alternative variant of *lyžьka.

Noun

*lъžica f[1][2]

  1. spoon
Inflection
Declension of *lъžica (soft a-stem)
Singular Dual Plural
Nominative *lъžica *lъžici *lъžicę̇
Accusative *lъžicǫ *lъžici *lъžicę̇
Genitive *lъžicę̇ *lъžicu *lъžicь
Locative *lъžici *lъžicu *lъžicasъ, *lъžicaxъ*
Dative *lъžici *lъžicama *lъžicamъ
Instrumental *lъžicejǫ, *lъžicǫ** *lъžicama *lъžicami
Vocative *lъžice *lъžici *lъžicę̇
* -asъ is the expected Balto-Slavic form but is found only in some Old Czech documents; -axъ is found everywhere else and is formed by analogy with other locative plurals in -xъ.
** The second form occurs in languages that contract early across /j/ (e.g. Czech), while the first form occurs in languages that do not (e.g. Russian).
Derived terms
Descendants
References
  1. ^ Kapović, Mate (2007) , “The Development of Proto-Slavic Quantity”, in Wiener Slavistisches Jahrbuch‎[1], University of Vienna, page 6: “*lъži̋ca”
  2. ^ Trubačóv, Oleg, editor (1990) , “*lъžica”, in Etimologičeskij slovarʹ slavjanskix jazykov [Etymological dictionary of Slavic languages] (in Russian), volume 16, Moscow: Nauka, page 257

…..

https://en.wiktionary.org/w/index.php?title=Reconstruction:Proto-Slavic/l%D1%8Aga&action=edit&redlink=1

Wiktionary does not yet have a reconstruction page for Proto-Slavic/lъga.

…..

https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/Reconstruction:Proto-Slavic/soj%D1%8Cka

Reconstruction:Proto-Slavic/sojьka

Proto-Slavic

Etymology

Diminutive of *soja +‎ *-ъka.

Noun

*sòjьka f

  1. Alternative form of *soja
Declension
Declension of *sojьka (hard a-stem)
Singular Dual Plural
Nominative *sojьka *sojьcě *sojьky
Accusative *sojьkǫ *sojьcě *sojьky
Genitive *sojьky *sojьku *sojьkъ
Locative *sojьcě *sojьku *sojьkasъ, *sojьkaxъ*
Dative *sojьcě *sojьkama *sojьkamъ
Instrumental *sojьkojǫ, *sojьkǫ** *sojьkama *sojьkami
Vocative *sojьko *sojьcě *sojьky
* -asъ is the expected Balto-Slavic form but is found only in some Old Czech documents; -axъ is found everywhere else and is formed by analogy with other locative plurals in -xъ.
** The second form occurs in languages that contract early across /j/ (e.g. Czech), while the first form occurs in languages that do not (e.g. Russian).
Derived terms
Descendants
Further reading
  • Vasmer, Max (1964–1973) , “соя”, in Etimologičeskij slovarʹ russkovo jazyka [Etymological Dictionary of the Russian Language] (in Russian), translated from German and supplemented by Oleg Trubačóv, Moscow: Progress
  • Trubačóv, Oleg, editor (2002) , “*obsojьka II”, in Etimologičeskij slovarʹ slavjanskix jazykov [Etymological dictionary of Slavic languages] (in Russian), volume 29, Moscow: Nauka, page 253
  • Todorov T., editor (2010) , “сойка¹”, in Български етимологичен речник [Bulgarian Etymological Dictionary] (in Bulgarian), volume 7, Sofia: Bulgarian Academy of Sciences, page 286

…..

https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/Category:Proto-Slavic_words_suffixed_with_*-%D1%8Ak%D1%8A

Category:Proto-Slavic words suffixed with *-ъkъ

Proto-Slavic words ending with the suffix *-ъkъ.

…..

https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/Reconstruction:Proto-Slavic/-%D1%8Ak%D1%8A

Reconstruction:Proto-Slavic/–ъkъ

Proto-Slavic

Etymology 1

Nominal suffix, formed by rebracketing of *-kъ, typically appended to ancient u-stems. Can also be attached to o-stems to form derivatives of the specified object/property.

Suffix

*-ъkъ m

  1. Forms diminutives from old u-stem nouns
    *listъ (“leaf”) → *listъkъ (“leaflet, a small leaf”)
    *synъ (“son”) → *synъkъ (“boy, little son”)
    *bebrъ (“beaver”) → *bebrъkъ (“small beaver”)
    *medъ (“honey”) → *medъkъ (“honey product”)
  2. Deadjectival, denoting a carrier of the specified property (rare)
    *pętъ (“fifth”) → *pętъkъ (“Friday”)
    *četvьrtъ (“fourth”) → *četvьrtъkъ (“Thursday”)
    *pǫtevъ (“path-related”) → *pǫtъkъ (“footwear, shoe for walking”)
    *bělъ (“white”) → *bělъkъ (“albumen”)
    *žьltъ (“yellow”) → *žьltъkъ (“yolk”)
    *okrǫžьnъ (“circumferential”) → *krǫžьkъ (“circle, shape with circular form”)
  3. Structural formant, without a base noun to synchronically derive from
    *pěsъkъ (“sand”)
  4. Deverbal from the past participle in *-tъ, forms resultant nouns of the specified action
    *dobyti (“to extract”) → *dobytъ → *dobytъkъ (“stock”)
    *dati (“to give”) → *datъ → *datъkъ (“yield”)
    *zaperti (“to expire”) → *zapьrtъ → *zapъrtъkъ (“addle egg”)
    *začęti (“to conceive”) → *začętъ → *začętъkъ (“embryo, germ”)
  5. Deverbal, forms abstract nouns of the specified action
    *pominǫti (“to pass”) → *pominъkъ (“livelihood, means to survive”)
    *do (“to, nearby”) + *jьměti (“to have”) → *nedojьmъkъ (“poverty, lack of income”)
  6. Deverbal, forms an instance of the specified action
    *kyvati (“to knock, to hew”) → *kyvъkъ (“nod”)
    *telťì (“to shove, to pound”) → *tьlčьkъ (“push, impulse”)
    *mazati (“to anoint, to spread oil/paint”) → *mazъkъ (“dab, smear”)
    *glъtati (“to swallow”) → *glъtъkъ (“gulp”)
  7. Deverbal, forms tool or agent nouns for the specified action: -er
    Synonyms: *-ьcь, *-slo
    *strěľati (“to knock, to hew”) → *strělъkъ (“shooter”)
    *skrebti (“to scrape”) → *skrebъkъ (“scraper”)
    *gǫděti (“to buzz, to honk”) → *gǫdъkъ (“horn, buzzer”)
    *pьlzti (“to craw”) → dial. *pьlžьkъ (“slug”)
  8. From propositions, forms an instance of the specified action
    *perdъ (“in front”) → *perdъkъ (“ancestor”)
    *po +‎ *tomь (“later on, over there”) → *potomъkъ (“descendant”)
Declension
Declension of *-ъkъ (hard o-stem)
Singular Dual Plural
Nominative *-ъkъ *-ъka *-ъci
Accusative *-ъkъ *-ъka *-ъky
Genitive *-ъka *-ъku *-ъkъ
Locative *-ъcě *-ъku *-ъcěxъ
Dative *-ъku *-ъkoma *-ъkomъ
Instrumental *-ъkъmь, *-ъkomь* *-ъkoma *-ъky
Vocative *-ъče *-ъka *-ъci
* -ъmь in North Slavic, -omь in South Slavic.
Etymology 2

Adjectival suffix with analogical origin as the nominal suffix. Related to Proto-Germanic *-ugaz (when appended to u-stems) and Proto-Germanic *-agaz (to o-stems).

In rare case, both the original u-stem form (reanalyzed as an o-stem) and the extended *-ъkъ are attested: e.g. Old Church Slavonic крѣпъ (krěpŭ) : крѣпъкъ (krěpŭkŭ).

Suffix

*-ъkъ

  1. From nouns or adverbs, forms adjectives with pertaining meaning: -y
    *kortъ (“piece, bit”) → *kortъkъ (“short”)
    *nizъ (“down, below”) → *nizъkъ (“nether, low”)
    *slizъ (“slime”) → *slizъkъ (“slippery”)
    *goře(stь) (“sorrow, woe, tribulation”) → *gorьkъ (“bitter”)
    *tęžе(stь) (“weight”) → *tęžьkъ (“heavy”)
  2. Deverbial from the past participle, forms adjectives which approximate the meaning of the participle: -ly (rare)
    *plyti (“to float”) → *plytъ (“sunk”) → *plytъkъ (“shallow”)
    *pry(g)ti (“to spring, to jump”) → *prytъ (“sprung”) → *prytъkъ (“agile, nimble”)
    *viti (“to curve, to wind”) → *vitъ (“curved”) → *vitъkъ (“curvу, twisty”)
    *biti (“to beat, to fight”) → *bitъ (“beaten”) → *bitъkъ (“feisty, military”)
  3. (Extension) From former u-stem adjective (some of them surviving as re-analyzed o-stems), forms their doublets
    *gladъ → *gladъkъ (“smooth, plain”)
    *dьrzъ → *dьrzъkъ (“daring, bald”)
    *krěpъ → *krěpъkъ (“solid, firm”)
    *krěxъ → *krěxъkъ (“soft, mild”)
    **lьgъ → *lьgъkъ (“light”)
    **mělъ → *mělъkъ (“small, finely ground”)
    **tьnъ → *tьnъkъ (“thin”)
Alternative forms
  • *-ьkъ (when attached to yu-stems or spread from the ancient comparative in *-jьš-)
Declension
Indefinite declension of *-ъkъ (hard)
Singular Masculine Feminine Neuter
Nominative *-ъkъ *-ъka *-ъko
Accusative *-ъkъ *-ъkǫ *-ъko
Genitive *-ъka *-ъky *-ъka
Locative *-ъcě *-ъcě *-ъcě
Dative *-ъku *-ъcě *-ъku
Instrumental *-ъkomь *-ъkojǫ *-ъkomь
Vocative *-ъče *-ъko *-ъko
Dual Masculine Feminine Neuter
Nominative *-ъka *-ъcě *-ъcě
Accusative *-ъka *-ъcě *-ъcě
Genitive *-ъku *-ъku *-ъku
Locative *-ъku *-ъku *-ъku
Dative *-ъkoma *-ъkama *-ъkoma
Instrumental *-ъkoma *-ъkama *-ъkoma
Vocative *-ъka *-ъcě *-ъcě
Plural Masculine Feminine Neuter
Nominative *-ъci *-ъky *-ъka
Accusative *-ъky *-ъky *-ъka
Genitive *-ъkъ *-ъkъ *-ъkъ
Locative *-ъcěxъ *-ъkaxъ *-ъcěxъ
Dative *-ъkomъ *-ъkamъ *-ъkomъ
Instrumental *-ъky *-ъkami *-ъky
Vocative *-ъci *-ъky *-ъka
Definite declension of *-ъkъ (hard)
Singular Masculine Feminine Neuter
Nominative *-ъkъjь *-ъkaja *-ъkoje
Accusative *-ъkъjь *-ъkǫjǫ *-ъkoje
Genitive *-ъkajego *-ъkyję *-ъkajego
Locative *-ъcějemь *-ъcěji *-ъcějemь
Dative *-ъkujemu *-ъcěji *-ъkujemu
Instrumental *-ъkyjimi *-ъkǫjǫ *-ъkyjimi
Vocative *-ъkъjь *-ъkaja *-ъkoje
Dual Masculine Feminine Neuter
Nominative *-ъkaja *-ъcěji *-ъcěji
Accusative *-ъkaja *-ъcěji *-ъcěji
Genitive *-ъkuju *-ъkuju *-ъkuju
Locative *-ъkuju *-ъkuju *-ъkuju
Dative *-ъkyjima *-ъkyjima *-ъkyjima
Instrumental *-ъkyjima *-ъkyjima *-ъkyjima
Vocative *-ъkaja *-ъcěji *-ъcěji
Plural Masculine Feminine Neuter
Nominative *-ъciji *-ъkyję *-ъkaja
Accusative *-ъkyję *-ъkyję *-ъkaja
Genitive *-ъkъjixъ *-ъkъjixъ *-ъkъjixъ
Locative *-ъkyjixъ *-ъkyjixъ *-ъkyjixъ
Dative *-ъkyjimъ *-ъkyjimъ *-ъkyjimъ
Instrumental *-ъkyjimi *-ъkyjimi *-ъkyjimi
Vocative *-ъciji *-ъkyję *-ъkaja
Derived terms
►Proto-Slavic words suffixed with *-ъkъ
►Proto-Slavic words suffixed with *-ьkъ
Descendants
  • East Slavic:
  • South Slavic:
    • Old Church Slavonic:
      Old Cyrillic: -ъкъ (-ŭkŭ)
      Glagolitic: -ⱏⰽⱏ (-ŭkŭ)
    • Bulgarian: -ък (-ǎk)
    • Macedonian: -ок (-ok)
    • Serbo-Croatian:
      Cyrillic: -ак
      Latin: -ak
    • Slovene: -ek
  • West Slavic:
    • Czech: -ek
    • Kashubian: -k
    • Polish: -ek
    • Slovak: -ok
    • Slovincian: -k
    • Sorbian:
      • Upper Sorbian: -k
      • Lower Sorbian: -k
References
  • Šekli, Matej (2012) , “Besedotvorni pomeni samostalniških izpeljank v praslovanščini”, in Philological Studies‎[1] (in Slovene), volume 10, issue 1, Skopje, Perm, Ljubljana, Zagreb, pages 115–32
  • Halla-aho, Jussi (2006) Problems of Proto-Slavic Historical Nominal Morphology: On the Basis of Old Church Slavic (Slavica Helsingiensia; 26)‎[2], Helsinki: University of Helsinki, page 100

UWAGA!

Brakuje końcówek jak: *-ъcě, *-ъcějemь, *-ъcěji, *-ъcěxъ, *-ъci, *-ъciji, *-ъka, *-ъkaja, *-ъkajego, *-ъkama, *-ъkami, *-ъkamъ, *-ъkaxъ, *-ъko, *-ъkoje, *-ъkojǫ, *-ъkoma, *-ъkomь, *-ъkomъ, *-ъkǫ, *-ъkǫjǫ, *-ъku, *-ъkujemu, *-ъkuju, *-ъkъ, *-ъkъjь, *-ъkъjixъ, *-ъkъmь, *-ъky, *-ъkyję, *-ъkyjima, *-ъkyjimi, *-ъkyjimъ!!!

…..

https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/Reconstruction:Proto-Slavic/-yka

Reconstruction:Proto-Slavic/-yka

Proto-Slavic

Etymology

Of uncertain origin. Probably a combination of *-y +‎ *-ka. A fossilization of an older *-yja or a borrowed origin have been also proposed (see Proto-Germanic *-ungō, possibly from Proto-Indo-European *-n̥kʷ-).

Unlike *-ykъ which seems to be a mere extension of archaic masculine *-y nouns (cf. *ęzykъ (“tongue”) < Pre-Slavic  *inźūˀ), *-yka appears to fulfill a genuine grammatical function.

Suffix

*-ỳka f

  1. Deverbial, forms instruments or representees of the referred verb (rare)
    *motati (“to soar, to transfer”) → *motyka (“hoe, mattock”)
    *volděti (“to rule, to wield”) → *voldyka (“sovereign”)
    *kъldovati (“to conjure, to bewitch”) → *kъldyka (“sick, handicap person”)
Declension
Declension of *-yka (hard a-stem)
Singular Dual Plural
Nominative *-yka *-ycě *-yky
Accusative *-ykǫ *-ycě *-yky
Genitive *-yky *-yku *-ykъ
Locative *-ycě *-yku *-ykasъ, *-ykaxъ*
Dative *-ycě *-ykama *-ykamъ
Instrumental *-ykojǫ, *-ykǫ** *-ykama *-ykami
Vocative *-yko *-ycě *-yky
* -asъ is the expected Balto-Slavic form but is found only in some Old Czech documents; -axъ is found everywhere else and is formed by analogy with other locative plurals in -xъ.
** The second form occurs in languages that contract early across /j/ (e.g. Czech), while the first form occurs in languages that do not (e.g. Russian).
See also
References
  • Duridinov et al. (1991) „-ъıкa” in Граматика на старобългарския език (in Bulgarian), Bulgarian Academy of Sciences, page 183
Further reading

UWAGA!

Brakuje końcówek jak: *-ycě, *-yka, *-ykama, *-ykami, *-ykamъ, *-ykasъ, *-ykaxъ, *-yko, *-ykojǫ, *-ykǫ, *-yku, *-ykъ, *-yky!!!

Odnośnik *-ykъ zmyla i przenosi tu:

https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/Reconstruction:Proto-Slavic/-k%D1%8A

Reconstruction:Proto-Slavic/–kъ

…..

cdn…

90 uwag do wpisu “290 Końcówki Proto-Slavic *-ako, *-akъ, *-ikъ, *-ьkъ, *-okъ, *-ъka, *-ъkъ, *-ỳka (i te brakujące), trpaslík, *dalèkъ, *lavà, ława, ławka, lova, *lawwō, *lewH-, *lyžьka, *lъžica, *sòjьka i inne problemy ofitzjalnego jęsykosnaftzfa”


  2. The Younger Dryas Impact that Gave Birth to Ancient Civilisation | Ancient Architects
    21,782 views•Mar 11, 2021
    Ancient Architects

    12,800 years ago the world was plunged into another mini ice age, known as the Younger Dryas, a key event in the evolution of human society. It is the most recent and longest of several interruptions to the gradual warming of the Earth’s climate since the Last Glacial Maximum and many believe it was caused by an impact event or airburst, or more specifically, numerous events from the break-up of a comet.

    In March 2020, Andrew Moore et al released a paper regarding one of the impact sites located at Abu Hureyra in Syria, which shows evidence of high temperature melting at more than 2200 degrees Celsius.

    This impact would have been a major event in the pre-Neolithic days of the Middle East and could have even been one of many impacts felt in the region.

    From previous videos we know that the Levant and Anatolia was the place where Neolithic society emerged from after the Younger Dryas but with Gobekli Tepe only around 250 km north of the Syrian Impact site, well, I was surprised that the Fertile Crescent was the birth of Neolithic civilisation after experiencing such an event, an area that was directly affected by the Younger Dryas impacts. But after a little research, it really shouldn’t be a surprise.

    In this video I explain why the Younger Dryas Impact in the Middle East actually gave birth to Ancient Neolithic civilisation and why, if this impact didn’t take place, human evolution may not have accelerated quite as quickly as it did.

    All images are taken from Google Images and the below sources for educational purposes only.

    Polubienie

    Odpowiedz

  3. A tu przykład, jak robi się „naukę” i opisuje odkrycia. Najpierw bicie piany, a potem mięsko, czyli sztuczna skórka…


    Philistine DNA and 4000-year old gate in Tel Ashkelon
    243,031 views•Sep 13, 2020
    Sergio & Rhoda in Israel

    In this final episode of the Philistine cities, we go to Tel Ashkelon where scientists performed a DNA test on the bones from recently excavated Philistine cemetery. The results helped solve an ongoing debate of Philistine origins. In this video, we also go to walk inside the world’s oldest arched gate, which is believed to had been built the Caananites in 1850 BC.

    Video chapters:
    00:00​ Intro
    01:47​ Arrival
    03:18​ Philistine DNA
    06:00​ 4,000 Gate
    09:08​ Conclusion
    10:18​ Outro
    11:06​ Bloopers

    https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6609216/

    Ancient DNA sheds light on the genetic origins of early Iron Age Philistines

    Michal Feldman,1 Daniel M. Master,2,3 Raffaela A. Bianco,1 Marta Burri,1 Philipp W. Stockhammer,1,4 Alissa Mittnik,1,5 Adam J. Aja,3 Choongwon Jeong,1,6,* and Johannes Krause1,*

    Sci Adv. 2019 Jul; 5(7): eaax0061.
    Published online 2019 Jul 3. doi: 10.1126/sciadv.aax0061
    PMCID: PMC6609216
    PMID: 31281897

    Abstract
    The ancient Mediterranean port city of Ashkelon, identified as “Philistine” during the Iron Age, underwent a marked cultural change between the Late Bronze and the early Iron Age. It has been long debated whether this change was driven by a substantial movement of people, possibly linked to a larger migration of the so-called “Sea Peoples.” Here, we report genome-wide data of 10 Bronze and Iron Age individuals from Ashkelon. We find that the early Iron Age population was genetically distinct due to a European-related admixture. This genetic signal is no longer detectible in the later Iron Age population. Our results support that a migration event occurred during the Bronze to Iron Age transition in Ashkelon but did not leave a long-lasting genetic signature.

    …..

    A tak naprawdę, to dane są takie:

    ASH067.A0101 ASH_IA1 Petrous 0.17 1379–1131 Iron I–Post Ramses III 10.9 11.2 M H92 R1

    https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6609216/table/T1/

    …..

    Normalnie nie mogę spać z tego powodu… To R1 zmieniło moje życie, tylko jeszcze nie wiem, czy na lepsze, czy na gorsze… hehehe

    Polubienie

    Odpowiedz

  4. A tu następne to samo, czyli zero danych, tylko blablabla…


    Proto-Indo-European Origins | DNA
    38,747 views•Mar 6, 2021
    Study of Antiquity and the Middle Ages

    The origins of modern Europeans are shrouded in mystery and wracked by controversy. Archaeologists and linguists have long debated the origins of the Indo-European language family as well as the origins of civilization and settled life in Europe. Recent discoveries in past years suggest that the origin of European culture, as well as some central Asian cultures, is within an archaeological culture called the Yamnaya.

    One major source of contention over the origins of the precursor to modern European cultures is over whether they involved the movement of actual people or merely the exchange of ideas. Before about 9,000 BP Europe was still in the Palaeolithic. It was populated largely by hunter-gatherers, living not very differently from how they had lived when they first arrived in Europe roughly 37,000 years ago.

    Beginning around 9,000 BP however, agriculture and village life began to spread across Europe and by 5,000 BP the continent was mostly settled by Neolithic farmers. Around 5,000 BP or 3,000 BC a Bronze Age culture began to spread across Europe, probably from the steppes of Eurasia.

    In one view, this change is related to trade networks that existed across Eurasia. People of Europe were in trade contact with the people of the Middle East and the Eurasian steppes and they adopted the technology and lifeways of more technologically advanced outsiders.

    The original position of many European archaeologists, however, was that the second instance, at least, represented an invasion. In 3,000 BC, nomadic pastoralists from the steppes of Eurasia replaced and interbred with the Neolithic farmers who had settled Europe about 4,000 years earlier.

    More recent views also contend that Neolithic farmers from Anatolia (modern-day Turkey) began to spread across Europe around 7,000 BC without much interbreeding with the native hunter-gatherers. This suggests that both may have been the result of actual migrations of people.

    Although there are still many unanswered questions, sequencing of ancient human genomes has revealed that these culture changes in Europe were partially the result of a migration of people. The earlier migration of farmers from Anatolia is beyond the scope of this article, but recent research suggests that the dawn of Bronze Age Europe was due to the expansion of the Yamnaya culture.

    Link to original article titled „How A Handful of Yamnaya Culture Nomads Became the Fathers of Europe.”
    https://www.ancient-origins.net/ancient-places-europe/yamnaya-culture-0012105

    Polubienie

    Odpowiedz

    • Y-DNA oczywiście brak…


      Tagar Culture and Proto-Scythian Origins | DNA
      12,163 views•Mar 27, 2021
      Study of Antiquity and the Middle Ages

      This episode is based on the study titled „Maternal genetic features of the Iron Age Tagar population from Southern Siberia (1st millennium BC.”)

      Early nomads in the Eurasian steppes since the beginning of the 1st millennium BC played a key role in the formation of the cultural and genetic landscape of populations of a significant part of Eurasia, from Eastern Europe to Eastern Central Asia.

      Numerous archaeological cultures associated with early nomads have been discovered throughout the Eurasian steppe belt. The Tagar archaeological culture existed in the Minusinsk basin (Sayan Mountains, Southern Siberia, Russia) in the northeastern periphery of the Eurasian steppe belt from the 8th to 1st century BC during the pre-Scythian, Scythian, and Early Xiongnu-Sarmatian periods. In this study, we evaluated mtDNA diversity in the Tagar population based on representative series (N = 79) belonging to all chronological stages of the culture.

      The Tagar population had a mixed mtDNA pool dominated by Western Eurasian haplogroups and subgroups (H, HV6, HV*, I, K, T, U2e, U4, U5a, and U) and, to a lesser degree, Eastern Eurasian haplogroups (A, A8, C*, C5, D, G2a, and F1b). The Tagar population showed a similar mtDNA pool structure to those of other Iron Age populations representing the “Scythian World.” We observed particularly high similarity between the Tagar and Classic Scythians from the North Pontic region.

      Our results support the assumption that genetic components introduced by Bronze Age migrants from Western Eurasia contributed to the formation of the genetic composition of Scythian period populations in Southern Siberia. Another important component of the Tagar mtDNA pool was autochthonous East Eurasian lineages, some of which (A8 and C4a2a) are potential markers of the westward genetic influence of the eastern populations of the Scythian period. Our results suggest a genetic continuity (at least partial) between the Early, Middle, and Late Tagar populations.

      Link to study :

      https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371%2Fjournal.pone.0204062

      Maternal genetic features of the Iron Age Tagar population from Southern Siberia (1st millennium BC)
      Aleksandr S. Pilipenko ,Rostislav O. Trapezov,Stepan V. Cherdantsev,Vladimir N. Babenko,Marina S. Nesterova,Dmitri V. Pozdnyakov,Vyacheslav I. Molodin,Natalia V. Polosmak

      Published: September 20, 2018https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0204062

      Abstract
      Early nomads in the Eurasian steppes since the beginning of the 1st millennium BC played a key role in the formation of the cultural and genetic landscape of populations of a significant part of Eurasia, from Eastern Europe to Eastern Central Asia. Numerous archaeological cultures associated with early nomads have been discovered throughout the Eurasian steppe belt. The Tagar archaeological culture existed in the Minusinsk basin (Sayan Mountains, Southern Siberia, Russia) in the northeastern periphery of the Eurasian steppe belt from the 8th to 1st century BC during the pre-Scythian, Scythian, and Early Xiongnu-Sarmatian periods. In this study, we evaluated mtDNA diversity in the Tagar population based on representative series (N = 79) belonging to all chronological stages of the culture. The Tagar population had a mixed mtDNA pool dominated by Western Eurasian haplogroups and subgroups (H, HV6, HV*, I, K, T, U2e, U4, U5a, and U) and, to a lesser degree, Eastern Eurasian haplogroups (A, A8, C*, C5, D, G2a, and F1b). The Tagar population showed a similar mtDNA pool structure to those of other Iron Age populations representing the “Scythian World.” We observed particularly high similarity between the Tagar and Classic Scythians from the North Pontic region. Our results support the assumption that genetic components introduced by Bronze Age migrants from Western Eurasia contributed to the formation of the genetic composition of Scythian period populations in Southern Siberia. Another important component of the Tagar mtDNA pool was autochthonous East Eurasian lineages, some of which (A8 and C4a2a) are potential markers of the westward genetic influence of the eastern populations of the Scythian period. Our results suggest a genetic continuity (at least partial) between the Early, Middle, and Late Tagar populations.

      Polubienie

      Odpowiedz

      • NefariousKoel
        If they only used mitochondrial DNA, such studies wouldn’t give the whole picture regarding interactions of the various groups.

        Jasta 2
        I keep trying to post autmosal PCA plots of like 30 scythian and sarmatian samples but youtube keeps autodeleting it

        Good Old Days
        In a comparison of our Tagar series with modern populations in Eurasia, we detected similarity between the Tagar group and some modern Turkic-speaking populations (with the exception of the Indo-Iranian Tajik population) (Fig 7; S2 Table). Among the modern Turkic-speaking groups, populations from the western part of the Eurasian steppe belt, such as Bashkirs from the Volga-Ural region and Siberian Tatars from the West Siberian forest-steppe zone, were more similar to the Tagar group than modern Turkic-speaking populations of the Altay-Sayan mountain system (including the Khakassians from the Minusinsk basin) (Fig 7).

        Based on our results, we can preliminarily conclude that there was genetic continuity, at least partially, between the Early, the Middle and the Late Tagar populations. We did not find evidence of extensive gene exchange between the Tagar population and any genetically distinct (with respect to the mtDNA pool) human groups.

        Maternal genetic features of the Iron Age Tagar population from Southern Siberia (1st millennium BC)
        Pilipenko AS, Trapezov RO, Cherdantsev SV, Babenko VN, Nesterova MS, et al. (2018)Maternal genetic features of the Iron Age Tagar population from Southern Siberia (1st millennium BC). PLOS ONE 13(9): e0204062.

        Jasta 2
        That’s only Maternal DNA, Scythians took Siberian wives but had West Eurasian paternal ones, and overall west eurasian DNA, turkic groups are very mixed by nature and thus aren’t even very instructive comparison populations in the first place.

        Thomas Kilogram
        @Jasta 2 no they were turkic

        Good Old Days
        @Jasta 2 according to who ??? This is your racist opinion

        Ric Hern
        And yet they talk about Afanasevo and Andronova Cultures and genetics also…..West Eurasian with a more significant East Eurasian influence in the middle stage of the Tagar Culture….?

        Doctor Livsey
        @Ric Hern Only Tagar is considered here, without Srubnaya culture. Siberian Tatars and Bashkirs will not be able to close the Sarmatian period. And mtDNA in Tagar will be almost complete in modern Volga Tatars. Later cultures 4:28

        Although if you’re interested in the DNA component in different Saka groups.
        i) Tagar Saka or Altai Saka. Mainly represented by Tagar and Pazyryk cultures and, according to some scientists, were the main center of the Saks. Saka of the Tagar culture of southern Siberia had among the ancestors of cattle breeders of the Bronze Age (83.5%), hunter-gatherers of southern Siberia (7.5%) and 9% – the contribution of the individual population of MA1.
        ii) Central Saka. Saka of the central steppe, which formed the Tasmolin culture. They are a mixture of cattle breeders of the late Bronze Age (56%) and hunter-gatherers of southern Siberia (44%).
        iii) Tien Shan Saka show a high percentage of pedigree from steppe pastoralists of the late Bronze Age (70%), hunter-gatherers of southern Siberia (25%) and 5% of the source associated with the Neolithic population of Iran (this suggests that the nomads of the southern steppe interacted with the civilization known as the Bactrian-Margian archaeological complex).

        Jasta 2
        Meanwhile in genetic reality >The Scythians reported in this study… are positioned as multiple groups compared to the gradient of present-day populations : (i) A group 1 (scy009, scy010, scy303) showed genetic affinity to north European populations.. (ii) Group 2 (scy192, scy197, scy300, and scy305) showed genetic similarities to southern European populations. (iii) Group 3 (scy006, scy011, and scy193) were between the genetic variation of western uralics and populations of the North Caucasus

        Doctor Livsey
        @Jasta 2 Well done that you found familiar words from the whole lecture.

        RESULTS
        „Late Bronze Age (LBA) Srubnaya-Alakulskaya individuals carried mtDNA haplogroups associated with Europeans or West Eurasians (17) including H, J1, K1, T2, U2, U4, and U5 (table S3). In contrast, the Iron Age nomads (Cimmerians, Scythians, and Sarmatians) additionally carried mtDNA haplogroups associated with Central Asia and the Far East (A, C, D, and M) (table S3) (11, 18). The absence of East Asian mitochondrial lineages in the more eastern and older Srubnaya-Alakulskaya population suggests that the appearance of East Asian haplogroups in the steppe populations might be associated with the Iron Age nomads, starting with the Cimmerians.”

        „Consistent with other Bronze Age populations, the Srubnaya-Alakulskaya individuals were positioned between the genetic variation of the European Mesolithic and the Near East Neolithic populations, being closer to the former and especially to the east European hunter-gatherers (Fig. 1C and figs. S6 and S8). These individuals had higher genetic affinity to Scythians compared to other Iron Age groups”

        „The results showed that Srubnaya-Alakulskaya formed a clade together with Yamnaya to the exclusion of other Bronze Age populations from Russia, Armenia, Jordan, and Hungary. This finding indicates that the Caucasus genetic contribution to the Srubnaya-Alakulskaya individuals was mediated by steppe ancestry instead of originating from the Levant (table S9). Both mean f3 statistics within populations and conditional nucleotide diversity (21) revealed that the genetic diversity was highest in the LBA Srubnaya-Alakulskaya population from the southern Ural region compared to all other Eurasian Bronze Age populations”

        „In the seventh century BCE, the Scythians appeared in the North Pontic region. Iron Age western Scythians displayed slightly higher intragroup diversity compared to that of the Bronze Age groups and formed four discrete clusters including NE, SE, SC, and CC clusters (Fig. 1C and table S10). Scythians belonging to the SE cluster were closer to Hungarian Bronze Age and Iron Age individuals including Vatya and Maros. The NE Scythian cluster fell close to the Iron Age individuals from modern-day Montenegro and Sweden (fig. S9). The SC Scythians further grouped with Early Sarmatians (12) and the Iron Age Scythian from modern-day Hungary (23). It has been hypothesized by Terenozhkin that Scythians reached the Pontic-Caspian steppe region from Central Asia (for example, from Andronovo) (7). To formally test this hypothesis, we calculated f4 statistics in the form of f4(Yoruba, Scythian, Srubnaya, BronzeAgeX), where “BronzeAgeX” refers to either Andronovo, Sintashta, or Afanasievo. This analysis revealed that the western Scythians (tested either as a single population or four different clusters) formed a clade together with Andronovo and two other Andronovo-originated populations to the exclusion of Srubnaya-Alakulskaya from the southern Urals (Fig. 3B and table S14), supporting the Central Asian origin of the western Scythians. Furthermore, the western Scythians shared more drift with Andronovo, Afanasievo, Sintashta, and Mezhovskaya to the exclusion of Yamnaya (table S15). While the eastern Scythians from an earlier study (12) formed a clade together with Srubnaya-Alakulskaya to the exclusion of Yamnaya, the western Scythians of the present study did not show this pattern.”

        „The origins of Scythians of the western Pontic-Caspian steppe are difficult to resolve. We identified four different clusters within our geographically continuous sample set, which likely represent a varying gradient of different genetic components: the Northern cluster, SC, CC, and SE cluster. The latter was characterized by the presence of the NEN component representing local semi-nomadic Scythians with clear genetic uptake from the locals and possibly from other settlers such as the Greeks around the Black Sea region. Finally, the Sarmatians fell between all other nomads that form the bulk of the SC, suggesting that southern Urals is where the continuity of western nomads was sustained.”

        „The diversity of Srubnaya-Alakulskaya individuals was on par with that of Sarmatians and Scythians (table S10) and was also the highest among all published Bronze Age individuals. The Muradym 8/Kazburun 1 site is a unique cultural mixing zone with an unusual number of culturally distinct burials of two different traditions (Srubnaya-Alakulskaya), but the individuals are genetically uniform across the time span of the sites, suggesting that diffusion may have been the main mode of cultural dispersal in the LBA.”

        „In contrast to the eastern steppe Scythians (Pazyryks and Aldy-Bel) that were closely related to Yamnaya, the western North Pontic Scythians were instead more closely related to individuals from Afanasievo and Andronovo groups. Some of the Scythians of the western Pontic-Caspian steppe lacked the SA and the East Eurasian components altogether and instead were more similar to a Montenegro Iron Age individual (3), possibly indicating assimilation of the earlier local groups by the Scythians.”

        „Our results showed that the Western Eurasian steppe nomads were not direct descendants of the Bronze Age Srubnaya-Alakulskaya individuals but shared elements of common ancestry with contribution from different peoples. The early nomads could thus be referred to as a “cultural and chronological horizon” represented by various cultures of the Scythian-Siberian world that was not composed of a genetically homogeneous and/or isolated group. Quite the contrary is observed. We observe little evidence of mobility from the Far East, suggesting that the main source of most Western nomads is likely found in eastern Pontic-Caspian steppe and southern Urals. Thus, we propose that the region, similar to the so-called Mongolian steppe generator of peoples during the Middle Ages, served as the generator of the west nomadic peoples that sustained the western nomadic horizon in the Iron Age.”

        Jasta 2
        Why focus on eastern outlier cultures around Altai and Siberian Yenisey in a video about scythians? Those are small samples by nature, you should use autosomal DNA and PCA’s to plot samples from primary material sites across millenia instead of limited mitochondrial DNA that’s about 20 years outdated, this obviously obscures the actual compositions of Andronovo or Scythian DNA.

        Stephane Lafargue
        R1a scytho aryan people

        Zoltán Pál Kovács
        Árpád nation had also this haplo: R1a1a Z2123

        Thomas Kilogram
        Turkic people yes

        Zoltán Pál Kovács
        @Thomas Kilogram No, not Turkic. Turkics were formed in the Altaics much later, than genomes could be pointed at that ancestors of the Árpád nation have settled in the nowadays Afghanistan (Turanid race from 4500 yrs ago). Most recent studies from Dr Endre Neparáczky after having sequenated the bones from the burials of the IX. century conquerors and our King Béla III.

        Lawrence Rummerfield
        @Thomas Kilogram No, Aryans. Dumbo.

        Thomas Kilogram
        @Lawrence Rummerfield nope turkic people

        Thomas Kilogram
        @Zoltán Pál Kovács nope not at all actually they were always turkic peoole

        Good Old Days
        Contemporary descendants of western Scythian groups are found among various groups in the Caucasus and Central Asia, while similarities to eastern Scythian are found to be more widespread, but almost exclusively among Turkic language speaking (formerly) nomadic groups, particularly from the Kipchak branch of Turkic languages (Supplementary Note 1).

        Unterländer, M., Palstra, F., Lazaridis, I. et al.Ancestry and demography and descendants of Iron Age nomads of the Eurasian Steppe. Nat Commun 8, 14615 (2017).

        We observed particularly high similarity between the Tagar and Classic Scythians from the North Pontic region.

        In a comparison of our Tagar series with modern populations in Eurasia, we detected similarity between the Tagar group and some modern Turkic-speaking populations (with the exception of the Indo-Iranian Tajik population) (Fig 7; S2 Table). Among the modern Turkic-speaking groups, populations from the western part of the Eurasian steppe belt, such as Bashkirs from the Volga-Ural region and Siberian Tatars from the West Siberian forest-steppe zone, were more similar to the Tagar group than modern Turkic-speaking populations of the Altay-Sayan mountain system (including the Khakassians from the Minusinsk basin) (Fig 7).

        Based on our results, we can preliminarily conclude that there was genetic continuity, at least partially, between the Early, the Middle and the Late Tagar populations. We did not find evidence of extensive gene exchange between the Tagar population and any genetically distinct (with respect to the mtDNA pool) human groups.

        Maternal genetic features of the Iron Age Tagar population from Southern Siberia (1st millennium BC)
        Pilipenko AS, Trapezov RO, Cherdantsev SV, Babenko VN, Nesterova MS, et al. (2018)Maternal genetic features of the Iron Age Tagar population from Southern Siberia (1st millennium BC). PLOS ONE 13(9): e0204062.

        Precursor
        All these Aryan supporters who claim the Scythians, Tagars etc. seriously expect the world to believe Turkic populations just popped up into existence 2 millenia later?? These are proto-Turkic peoples in Turkic homeland.

        Anti dweller
        No, turks originated from eastern mongolia as two 2020 studies suggest. And central Asia was Indo european before it was turkic as the largest ever study on central Asia shows.

        TheAnti EggHead
        Why do white supremacists continue to deny that the Tagars were black?

        Polubienie

        Odpowiedz

  5. A tu o tzw Tocharach, ich języku, wcale nie takim wcale kentum. Co to oznacza? Ano wtórną kentumizację potomków Sintashta… 🙂 Przy okazji, jakoś nie mogę uwierzyć w pomyłkę z tym DNA… Szkotów w Azji trza było im znaleźć, więc ich tak omyłkowo „znaleźli”…

    https://eurogenes.blogspot.com/2021/03/how-shirenzigou-nomads-became-proto.html

    Sunday, March 14, 2021

    How the Shirenzigou nomads became Proto-Tocharians

    A couple of years ago, the authors of a paper about a group of Iron Age nomads from the site of Shirenzigou, in the eastern Tian Shan, made a mistake. They wrongly assigned two of these nomads to Y-haplogroup R1b-M269.

    This faux pas made them believe that the Shirenzigou nomads were closely related to the M269-rich population associated with the Afanasievo culture.

    Indeed, since the Afanasievo culture was often credited with the spread of Tocharian languages to the Tarim Basin, these authors, led by Chao Ning, also concluded that the Shirenzigou nomads were potentially the missing link between the Afanasievo culture and the Tocharians (see here).

    Moreover, Ning et al. used formal statistics to argue that the Shirenzegou nomads harbored Afanasievo-related genome-wide ancestry, rather than Sintashta-related genome-wide ancestry, despite the fact that the latter ancestry was widespread in the Tian Shan and surrounds during the Bronze and Iron ages. Soon after, another group of authors, led by Chuan-Chao Wang, also went out of their way to link the Shirenzigou nomads to the Afanasievo people with genome-wide DNA using formal statistics (see here).

    Interestingly, one of the Shirenzigou nomads belongs to Y-haplogroup R1a-Z93, which is an obvious Sintashta-related lineage. Both Ning et al. and Wang et al. missed this important fact.

    They also missed the key fact that the R1b lineage found in the Shirenzigou nomads actually belongs a native Central Asian subclade, which is only very distantly related to the originally Eastern European R1b-M269.

    Now, formal stats are a very useful tool for studying genome-wide ancestry. But they’re not infallible, and that’s actually something of an understatement. Indeed, if you don’t regularly run sanity checks when using formal stats, you’re likely to come to some unusual, even arse about face, conclusions. Uniparental markers, like Y-chromosome haplogroups, can provide a robust sanity check when running formal stats on genome-wide data.

    One problem with formal stats is that Sintashta-related ancestry often looks very much like Afanasievo-related ancestry when it’s mixed with indigenous Central Asian ancestry. Basically, the reason why this happens is that the Central Asian ancestry dampens the Early European Farmer (EEF) signal in the Sintashta-related ancestry.

    This is an artifact that once caused scientists at Harvard to believe that Central Asian Scythians and present-day South Asians lacked Sintashta-related ancestry.

    Unfortunately, since the publication of the Ning et al. paper, a consensus has emerged in academia that the Shirenzigou nomads are indeed the missing link between the Afanasievo culture and the Tocharians. But, let’s be objective and honest here, it’s a consensus based on nothing more than a comedy of errors.

    On the other hand, me and most of the commentators at this blog have formed opinions about the Shirenzigou nomads that are totally at odds with the academic consensus, that:

    – they’re a complex mixture of Sintashta-related, indigenous Central Asian and Tibetan-related ancestries, with no clear, unambiguous signal of Afanasievo-related ancestry

    – they weren’t the speakers of Proto-Tocharian or even related in any specific way to the Tocharians

    – they were probably the speakers of a now extinct Indo-Iranian language, and, at least based on geographic proximity, possibly related to the Yuezhi.

    Feel free to make up your own mind. But for me, the question of how Tocharian languages ended up in the Tarim Basin remains wide open. I admit though, I’m currently quite partial to the idea floated here by commentator Copper Axe that the Chemurchek culture may have had something to do with it.

    See also…

    Don’t believe everything you read in peer reviewed papers

    Posted by Davidski at 10:20:00 PM
    Labels: Afanasievo, ancient DNA, Botai, Central Asia, China, proto-Tocharian, R1a-Z93, R1b-M269, Shirenzigou, Shirenzigou nomads, Sintashta, Sintashta-Petrovka culture, Tarim Basin, Tian Shan, Tocharian

    Polubienie

    Odpowiedz

    • epoch said…
      I think part of the attractiveness of the Shirenzigou theory is that it would link the Yuezhi with proto-Tocharians which was one of the origin theories floating around.

      Mallory considers Chemurchek the first step to link Afanasievo with Thocharians. While he also considers a Yuezhi connection but makes it very clear this is disputable.

      http://sino-platonic.org/complete/spp259_tocharian_origins.pdf

      From what I understand of the history of the area’s tribal coalitions were rife and volatile so maybe a number of Indo-Iranian R1a’s in Tocharian graves wouldn’t be impossible.
      March 15, 2021 at 12:11 AM

      Davidski said…
      Well, we’ve got an unambiguous link between the Shirenzigou nomads and Sintashta (Z93). But where’s the unambiguous link between the Shirenzigou nomads and Afanasievo? Some dodgy qpAdm runs don’t really cut it for me.
      March 15, 2021 at 12:14 AM

      Ric Hern said…
      How to connect the Tocharian Language/s with Indo-Iranian to the exclusion of Western Indo-European branches and their similarities to Tocharian I think is the big question…
      March 15, 2021 at 1:35 AM

      Ric Hern said…
      Was there an Indo-Iranian Language so far East closer to Western Indo-European branches ? How did this come about ? Was Proto-Indo-European then indirectly closer to Western Indo-European branches eg. Germanic and Celtic, than previously thought ?
      March 15, 2021 at 1:39 AM

      Ric Hern said…
      Or was there a much later migration from Central Europe to Western China ?
      March 15, 2021 at 1:41 AM

      Ric Hern said…
      Looking at the possibility of how fast Uralic took a foothold in parts of Europe it could be that a very late migration from West to East was responsible for the Tocharian Language.
      March 15, 2021 at 1:46 AM

      Copper Axe said…
      It’s definitely not that strange, it seems like more people on the interwebs prefer that option than Tocharian being Afanasievo derived.

      https://brill.com/view/journals/ieul/7/1/article-p72_3.xml?language=en

      It was particularly Samoyedic which influenced pre-Proto-Tocharian according to these authors, with Yeniseian being in the mix as well.

      If we’re being realistic, this should’ve occurred in the vicinity of the Altai region. This could fit the northeastern extensions of the Andronovo horizon, a presence from around 2000 bc onwards, but it could also fit Afanasievo and their potential successors.

      I’m not sure how to reconcile the Andronovo pathway with the linguistic data reflecting Indo-Iranian loanwords in Tocharian. Uralic languages show a lot of it but when taking away historical loans from Indo-Aryans and Iranics in places such as Khotan, there isn’t much of an Indo-Iranian sub/adstrate in Tocharian.

      That isn’t to say that there isn’t anything from ancient Indo-Iranians present in Tocharian languages:

      https://www.academia.edu/37724756/Peyrot_2018_Tocharian_B_etswe_mule_and_Eastern_East_Iranian
      March 15, 2021 at 3:20 AM

      Romulus said…
      Great post I agree. I think this image from Jeong 2020 concisely demonstrates no continuity from Afansievo and the later appearnce of Sintashta.

      Tocharian is more of an outlier than a Centum language since it has features of both. The best explanation is that it is Sintashta derived.
      March 15, 2021 at 8:23 AM

      epoch said…
      There is a very interesting remark in that paper by Mallory:

      „While the two languages belonged to the same branch, they were mutually unintelligible, at least as much as modern Germanic or Romance languages, and possessed considerable differences in even their most basic vocabulary (Lane 1966, 222–223).”

      Mallory states that this means the languages must have been separated quite a while ago, longer than mostly indicated, and cites Douglas Adams – Not the hitchhiker guy – that we have examples of languages that were isolated for more than 500 years that were mutually intelligible. So Mallory deduces from this that either the Tocharians were in the Basin for a very long time, long enough for these languages to separate in Tocharian A, B and maybe C, or in case that the different languages reflect different settlement events, the origin of Tocharians must be very close to the Tarim Basin.

      A Shirenzigou (200 – 100 y BC) origin of Tocharians would therefore not solve the problem of the origin of the Tocharians.
      March 15, 2021 at 9:48 AM

      Andrzejewski said…
      The question is – what is the link between Tocharians and Tarim Basin Mummies?
      March 15, 2021 at 12:35 PM

      DragonHermit said…
      This Archi person has no idea what they’re talking about. It’s long been accepted that Balto-Slavic/Germanic are closely related, yet belong to Satem/Centum. Greek for example has been much more closely linked to Armenian, than say Celtic. Centum/Satem does not automatically imply close kinship.

      All Centum/Satem is is a classification of how certain consonants are treated, and yes they can develop entirely independently. There are no split branches of IE languages called „Centum” or „Satem”. Balto-Slavic languages and Indo-Aryan languages had contact early on, so similar features are no surprise. That does not mean everything split into 2 groups from the get go.

      It’s long been accepted by scholars that an original Centum/Satem split of IE was a false assumption. Balto-Slavic/Indo-Aryan areal contact does not change that.

      https://www.jstor.org/stable/40849463?seq=1
      March 16, 2021 at 11:06 AM

      Onno Hovers said…
      @Archie: The Centum/Satem theory is that *ḱ -> *k was one of the first things to happen to the Centum language, while *kʷ -> *k and *ḱ -> *c was one of the first things to happen in Satem languages. Some like Meillet and Kortlandt even speculated that PIE really only had two velar series.

      The significant part in Italic is *ḱe -> ke vs. *ke -> ka, which is described in Schrijver’s „The reflexes of the Proto-Indo-European laryngeals in Latin”. This means that the „Centum” merger of ḱ and k happened after this sound change. Albanian has *ḱ -> θ; *k -> k and *kʷ[e/i] -> s, but otherwise *kʷ -> k (Vladimir Orel, 2000, „A concise historical grammar of the Albanian language”). Armenian has *g[e/i] -> tʃ but *gʷ[e/i] -> k (Reinhard Stempel, 1994, „Zur Vertretung der drei indogermanischen Gutturalreihen im Armenischen”). Luwian even has *ḱ -> *ts, k -> k and kʷ -> kʷ.

      So the sound changes associated with Satem/Centum happened relatively late or not at all in some branches.

      Note that RUKI is also not done the same way in all branches. Indo-Iranian applies RUKI also to instances of r that came from an earlier *l. But other branches never applied RUKI to *l (that’s why it’s not called RULKI) so RUKI must have happened in Indo-Iranian after the change IE *l > II *r. Nuristani doesn’t do RUKI when there is a laryngeal in between, unlike the rest of Indo-Iranian. Slavic doesn’t do RUKI before a consonant. So there is no special common ancestor to these languages. All RUKI tells you is that these languages were spoken in the same area at one time.
      March 16, 2021 at 12:29 PM

      Polubienie

      Odpowiedz

  6. Pingback: 291 Pra-Słowiańska końcówka *-jakъ (i te brakujące), jak, jaki, jakiś, *jakъ, *jь, *ís, *yós, jis, jako, ако, *jako, kak, kaki, *kako, *kȃkъ, jakby, jakkolwiek, jakikolwiek, jakość, bylejakość, nijak, nijaki, *kʷ-, nijako, nijakość,


  7. Margums inscription – Cyrillic centuries before Cyril (Dragan Jacanović)
    14,254 views•Jan 26, 2021
    Čačkalica

    Cyrillic in the 4th century? Margum inscription, margum inscription or margum brick, is the name of a mysterious object found during the research of Margum more than 70 years ago. Dragan Jacanović, an archaeologist from the Požarevac Museum, told us what is known about Margum bricks. The subject is most likely from the 4th or 5th century, and some letters correspond perfectly to our Cyrillic alphabet.

    Polubienie

    Odpowiedz

  8. Ciekawy artykuł o KAK, którą podejrzewam o słowiańskość, oto ciekawy urywek:

    Pierwsze ślady KAK pochodzą z terenów centralnej Polski, z Kujaw. Wyniki badań archeologicznych określają jej początki około roku 3700 p.n.e. Jej etap „pre-amforowy” to nawet rok około 3900 p.n.e. (stanowisko 13 w Kruszy Zamkowej, Kujawy). W przeciągu kilkuset lat Grupa Centralna KAK wkomponowuje się w obszar KPL i zajmuje mniej więcej tereny dzisiejszej Polski (Rys.1). W tym obszarze kultura ta trwała najdłużej, bo aż do około roku 2000 p.n.e.
    https://bialczynski.pl/2021/04/04/praslowianie-pl-kultura-amfor-kulistych-mapa-interaktywna-i-artykul/

    Ostatnie zdanie jest najbardziej istotne, gdyż 2000 lat pne to już jest obecny od 600 lat R1a (np. ojciec M458) przybyły ze wschodu.
    Zatem od 4600 do 4000 lat pne byłby okresem zeslawizowania tegoż R1a na terenie Polski, z którego to procesu wyszedł by już klasycznie słowiański R1a M458, który gdzie by się nie pojawił po tej dacie był już wskaźnikiem napływu plemion słowiańskich.

    Polubione przez 1 osoba

    Odpowiedz

    • Miło, miło, ale jak widzę ciągle wytrwale unikasz odpowiedzi na niewygodne pytania. Pociesz się, że nie Ty jeden. Czyżby Carlos miał rację, co do R1a, jako UF? Hehehe…

      Polubienie

      Odpowiedz


    • Yamnaya: Ancient Steppe Genetics & Society — David W. Anthony 2021 Talk
      2,087 views•Mar 26, 2021
      The College of Knowledge

      The author of „The Horse, the Wheel, and Language” discusses the latest 2021 research on the archaeogenetics of the steppe Yamnaya culture, and their elusive societal organization.

      Ric Hern
      6 dni temu
      6500 BC. CHG or 6500 BP CHG ? Did CHG already start encountering EHG during the Mesolithic ? Are there any remains of the Late Upper Paleolithic and or Mesolithic from Kammenaya Balka ( Lower Don) ?

      The College of Knowledge
      6 dni temu
      Hey Ric, I uploaded the following just now: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-MOrEA84qvo.

      ^ In that video, David W. Anthony answers a question regarding the source of Yamnaya’s CHG ancestry.

      Ric Hern
      6 dni temu
      @The College of Knowledge Thank you very much.

      Ric Hern
      6 dni temu
      The quality of the sound is a bit of. What is the place name where that significant CHG Ancestry was found ?

      Milan T
      5 dni temu
      @Ric – Txs for your insight. The notion of ‘indigenous’ can be arbitrary. I will present my view. R1b was present individually in Europe before the two main waves from Russia. It was present in the M.East, too (some Egyptian pharaohs, e.g. Tutankhamun) so as very widespread among the tribes in Cameroon. Yamnaya R1b wave reached the C.Europe in about 2800BC and British Isles in 2500BC. It is still politically incorrect to say that they conducted a genocide. Usually some euphemisms are used (population replacement, etc). My view is that the concept of ‘indigenous’ can be used since the beginning of cultural history which roughly coincides with the end of the Ice Age. During the IA about 95% of people (an estimate) lived in Iron Gates (Vinca, Danube civilization) and created very high civilization thanks to thousands of prosperous years without wars. Since Yamnaya came to Europe up to today we have non-stop wars and genocides.

      ‘I(I1/I2)’ is the only European native haplogroup about 30000 years old and my view is that they are indigenous Euro people. I would be interested to hear your opinion about the term ‘Indo-European’ and optionally the timeline of (P)IE and about its homeland. Maybe, also, how so-called IE language came to India without R1b. Cheers.

      Milan T
      1 tydzień temu (edytowany)
      @CofK – Txs for your time (and space) CofK, esp. for #2, ‘Indo-Germanishe’ aka ‘Indo-European’ (since the balance of power shifted out of German favour towards Anglo-Frenches). I will write about this nonsense later. Neither ‘Indo’ nor ‘European’ existed at that time (a bottle of red who knows the origin of the name ‘Europe’ (!) – no wiki pls). There are so much to say but we will respect this fairly restrictive format.

      Yamnaya people were on much lower cultural and technological levels than indigenous Vincans who had the oldest urban settlements in the world, first metallurgy, architecture, agriculture, the oldest alphabet (with swastika), wheel, cheese, jewellery, mini-skirts, make-up, etc….

      How likely is this scenario?
      Yamnaya came (how many?) to Europe in 2800BC. What’s happened in the next 800 years? They conducted a genocide against indigenous people and spread their (let’s call it ‘Indo-European’) language in every corner of Europe. Quite a challenge in swampy, forested Europe without roads and bridges and without TV and Internet. The language was enforced (where, when, how?) to R1a who have forgotten (?) their original language (which one?), started moving to the east (trip to India lasted for almost 700 years) and as Aryans, composed the first draft of Rg Veda, brought this language to India which became Sanskrit in 2000BC.

      How much Yamnaya nomads (!) needed to develop PIE language and subsequently, IE language which later brought to Europe? Was it the Ice Age and ice covered Russian steppes the optimum environment for at least 7-8000+ years to do this before they started moving to Europe? Where this happened? What was the (P)IE homeland? Which modern language is a natural continuation of this (P)IE language? Which modern language is the most similar to Sanskrit?….

      Albanian History
      5 dni temu
      The closest language group to Sanskrit (an indic language) is Iranian, after that it is Baltic (lithuanian specifically).

      Milan T
      1 tydzień temu
      Just few telegraphic remarks:
      – The term ‘Indo-European’ (language) is meaningless and because it could not be defined nor specified for 200 years.
      – The term ‘Indo-European’ (people) is near idiotic.
      – Q: Who were indigenous European people? I1/I2?
      – Q: Which is indigenous European language(s)?
      – Q: Which language was spoken in Europe for 9000 years btw the Ice Age until Yamnaya (R1b) came to Europe?
      – Which language Yamnaya spoke when they came to Europe?
      – Yamnaya (future ‘westerners’) upon arrival, conducted a genocide in Europe and almost exterminated indigenous people in Vinca (the cradle of European civilization).
      – Were Yamnaya on much lover cultural and technological levels in comparison to indigenous EU people? Txs.

      The College of Knowledge
      1 tydzień temu
      Hey Milan. Interesting observations!
      – „The term ‘Indo-European’ (language) is meaningless and because it could not be defined nor specified for 200 years” — I don’t think that’s a necessary or sufficient reason for something to be categorized as meaningless… It’s a firmly accepted grouping of languages that rests on solid academic support.

      • „The term ‘Indo-European’ (people) is near idiotic.” — Yes, I’d agree, although the term ‚Proto-Indo-European’ (people) does make sense, as the language family necessarily had an origin population.

      • „Q: Who were indigenous European people? I1/I2?” — Yes, something like that. Although, as always with this type of question, it depends on what specific region(s) & time(s) you consider to be ‚indigenous’. For example, modern day Europeans can be considered indigenous, or equally, Neolithic farmers can be considered indigenous, or equally, European hunter gathers can be considered indigenous, etc.

      • „Q: Which is indigenous European language(s)?” — Again, depends on your definitions. This could be answered as anything from PIE, to Minoan, to Etruscan, to Basque-like, etc.

      • „Q: Which language was spoken in Europe for 9000 years btw the Ice Age until Yamnaya (R1b) came to Europe?” — The chance of it being a single language is extremely low, and nobody really knows, as this is prehistoric. We learn about ancient languages through written records, and even then, like with Minoan/Linear A, they can go undeciphered and thus unclassified.

      • „Which language Yamnaya spoke when they came to Europe?” — Most likely PIE, or late-PIE.

      • „Were Yamnaya on much lower cultural and technological levels in comparison to indigenous EU people?” — Depends which indigenous EU people you’re referring to. Compared to hunter gathers, for example in northern Europe, the Yamnaya were significantly more advanced. However, compared to farmers, it depends. In terms of warfare and social organization, the Yamnaya were superior. In terms of the traditional hallmarks of civilization, the farmers were significantly more advanced (writing, for example: Minoans were literate, whereas Yamnaya were not, similar for agriculture/farming, astronomy [Stonehenge!], mathematics, etc).

      Hope that helps.

      Ric Hern
      6 dni temu (edytowany)
      R1b was already present as far as Italy (Villabruna) around 14 000 years ago. The Mesolithic between the Balkans, Baltics and Ural Mountains seems to have had a lot of R1b. As far as I know Europe basically ends at the Urals…

      Seeing that the Ancestors of R1b basically came from the East when considering Mal’ta Buret and Afontova Gora relatedness we can deduct that R1b Ancestors basically entered Europe (West of the Urals) sometime between Mal’ta Buret and Villabruna basically during the Late Upper Paleolithic. So does this make them indigenous enough ?

      Ric Hern
      6 dni temu (edytowany)
      We can see at Talheim Mass Graves and others that things were not peachy among the Population of Central Europe long before Yamnaya related peoples arrived…There were competition amongst them and combining that with the arrival of Yersinia Pestis outbrakes we can not put the blame on Steppe peoples expansion exclusively.

      Polubienie

      Odpowiedz

      • W poszukiwaniu nie tylko CHG…

        https://eurogenes.blogspot.com/2021/03/khvalynsk-is-now-out-of-picture.html

        Monday, March 29, 2021

        Khvalynsk is now out of the picture

        The population associated with the Khvalynsk culture was not ancestral to the Yamnaya people. Archeologist David Anthony says so HERE. So where did the Yamnaya and Corded Ware populations come from? Anthony doesn’t know yet.

        See also…

        Understanding the Eneolithic steppe

        Ancient DNA vs Ex Oriente Lux

        A final note for the year

        Posted by Davidski at 7:16:00 PM 123 comments:

        Labels: ancient DNA, Caucasus hunter-gatherers, CHG, Corded Ware, David Anthony, Indo-European, Iranian Plateau, Khvalynsk, North Pontic steppe, PIE, Pontic-Caspian steppe, R1a-M417, R1b-L51, R1b-Z2103, Volga, Yamnaya

        MitchellSince1893 said…
        Sredny Stog is a good candidate according to Anthony
        March 29, 2021 at 7:25 PM

        MitchellSince1893 said…
        The actual quote from Anthony
        “Yamnaya is incredibly homogeneous…almost inexplicably homogeneous. We have Sredni Stog samples that are right in the same group as Yamnaya so probably Yamnaya evolved from some kind of Sredni Stog culture in the Ukraine…”
        March 29, 2021 at 7:49 PM

        Blogger Davidski said…
        Thanks, I skimmed through the clip and missed that.
        March 29, 2021 at 8:03 PM

        Vladimir said…
        It’s hard to say without dates, but judging by the schedule in Yamnaya presentation, this is a mix of what he called the Eneolite of Russia, located on the left near the Dnieper-Donetsk Eneolite and CHG. Geographically, this is the Eneolithic of the Don River, or in other words, the culture of the Middle Don. A sample of the early Sredniy Stog is located in this place.
        March 29, 2021 at 8:12 PM

        EastPole said…
        I think we can also see influence of Sredny Stog on Trypilia:

        https://postimg.cc/YLmNSwNt

        March 30, 2021 at 2:07 AM

        Synome said…
        Sredny Stog is really looking like the epicentre of the IE explosion these days. I fully concur with David and others who see a predecessor on the Volga-Don steppe. One detail that remains to be resolved is the circumstances of the Anatolian break off. In the video Anthony suggests it occurred with the eastward movement of the early steppe population into the Ukraine region. While most of that population mixed in place in that area he suggests, leading to the ancestor of most IE groups, some must have continued on through the southern Balkans and created the first split in PIE with proto Anatolian.
        March 30, 2021 at 1:44 PM

        Romulus said…
        Origin of Yamnaya? Descendants of ANI163 bringing wagons from the west.
        March 30, 2021 at 2:14 PM

        Andrzejewski said…
        @Matt I used to regard Quiles’s observation as interesting fairytales. I lost all respect for him once he came up with this bizarre “Corded Ware were Indo-Uralic” rubbish.
        March 30, 2021 at 3:59 PM

        Zulfiqar said…
        Hey Davidski, I’m the one who uploaded the video. I just posted further clips of Anthony answering follow-up Q&A questions that I though you & your audience might find interesting:

        Anthony on the source of Yamnaya’s CHG ancestry (interesting new samples coming?):

        Anthony on Steppe Maykop & Maykop:

        Let us know your thoughts!
        March 30, 2021 at 4:09 PM

        Samuel Andrews said…
        @Copper Axe, The idea Pre-PIE came from where CHG ancestry comes from follows good logic. It is not a odd conclusion at all. If the CHG rich population from Southern Russia had roughly 50-60% CHG ancestry, then they can explain the majority of Yamnaya & Corded Ware’s ancestry. Yamnaya can be modelled as 87% Progress Eneolithic (PG004 individual who has the least CHG). If Yammnaya is even 75% derived from Southern Steppe, chances are their language came from the Southern Steppe. Therefore pre-Proto-Indo European came from there.
        March 31, 2021 at 4:01 AM

        Copper Axe said…
        @Sam I think it is pretty baseless because we have some significant gaps sample-wise to begin with, and attributing pre-PIE status to a certain population is quite complicated. Have you considered that you might had populations with various amount of CHG-related admixture, and that it wasn’t a scenario where you just had pure EHGs, Steppe_Eneolithic like populations and pure CHG ones?

        What if the main population of the North-of-the-Caucasus foragers were more CHG shifted than the steppe_eneolithic samples we gave right now? This would make the drastic contribution less.

        Or the second option is that you already had a low CHG-like amount around the Don (as it pops up in small amounts in neolithic samples even, and these populations then admixed with populations which had higher amounts of CHG-like ancestry.

        „If Mycenaeans were even 75% derived from Neolithic Greeks, chances are their language came from Neolithic Anatolia. Therefore pre-Proto-Greek came from there”
        March 31, 2021 at 4:48 AM

        Vladimir said…
        And if we consider such a scenario: The steppe population of EHG in the Early Neolithic penetrated to the foothills of the North Caucasus, where a certain CHG population lived and settled in settlements where the CHG population lived, naturally exterminating the male population, but obtaining 50% of the autosomal profile of the local female population. Such situations were enough in the future. The Meshoko culture fits perfectly into this scenario. There are works in which this culture is structured in two stages. The first stage has Transcaucasian roots from the Darcveti culture, Sioni culture and even Shulaveri – Shomu-tepe. This stage starts in the period of 5000-4800 BC. The date of the Nalchik burial ground, for example, 4800 BC. The second stage has steppe roots in the Skelya culture (Novodanilovka). We can assume that a certain group moving from the north of Mesopotamia gradually came to the North Caucasus. Later, the settlements of this group were captured by the steppe population. And then the already mixed EHG/CHG population spread across the steppe starting from 5000 BC.
        March 31, 2021 at 7:42 AM

        Ned said…
        @all, Sofia, Andrzejewski, Davidski
        The Anatolian problem is not just genetic but also linguistic. If you compare Hittite with most proposals for Late Indo-European (that is before Tocharian split off) you will see significant differences.

        Hittite: two genders (common/neuter); no number distinction in instrumental, dative, locative, ablative, allative noun cases; no subjunctive nor optative; two major verb classes (-ḫi/-mi); no dual in verbs; analytic perfect.

        Late Indo-European: three genders (masc., fem, neuter); plural in all noun plural cases and also a dual in nouns; synthetic verbal complexity including subjunctive/optative; no separate -ḫi/-mi classes; at least 1st and 2nd person dual.

        One explanation of this could be that one of these two groups of languages was adopted by a population previously speaking a different language.
        March 31, 2021 at 11:51 AM

        Davidski said…
        @Ned
        There’s no genetic problem. There was gene flow from the steppe into Bronze Age Anatolia via the Balkans and the Caucasus.
        March 31, 2021 at 11:58 AM

        Rob said…
        @ Ned / Davidski
        Genomes will probably also solve the linguistic concondrum of proto-Anatolian. I suspect that the divergence of Anatolian would be explained by a combination of factors, incl (i) early separation (arriving in Anatolia ~ 3300 BC) (ii) slightly different origins (I2a-rich D-D II part of Europe) , moving via East Balkans (Ezero related). The east Anatolian side is the tail end of proto-Armenian. East Anatolia does have early records, and they suggeste a late take-over by Hittites

        @ Copper Axe
        ‚Imo Pre-PIE comes from the populations ancestral on the paternal line to the R1b-M269/R1a-M417”
        Seems speculative to just lump R1ab-M269 & R1a-M17 together without any convincing evidence to do so.
        March 31, 2021 at 3:39 PM

        Polubienie

        Odpowiedz

      • https://eurogenes.blogspot.com/2021/03/against-conventional-wisdom.html

        Wednesday, March 31, 2021

        Against the conventional wisdom

        I’ve read some very strange theories over the years trying to explain who was responsible for the so called Caucasus/Iranian-related ancestry in the Yamnaya people.

        Proto-Indo-European speaking farmers from what is now Iran? How about Uruk invaders from Mesopotamia? No, wait, they were migrants from India who spoke Sanskrit. Haha.

        Nope, it seems that hunter-gatherers rich in this type of ancestry lived north of the Caucasus already during the so called Pottery Neolithic or even the Mesolithic. That’s the impression that I’m getting from watching the clip HERE.

        This is basically also the idea that I gradually developed at this blog during the last few years, following common sense and logic, but totally against the conventional wisdom in regards to this topic. For instance, see here…

        But here’s my prediction: Steppe_EMBA only has 10-15% admixture from the post-Mesolithic Near East not including the North Caucasus, and basically all of this comes via female mediated gene flow from farming communities in the Caucasus and perhaps present-day Ukraine.

        Modeling Steppe_EMBA

        Of course, I could’ve done better with many of the details in my posts, like the dates and archeological links. But hey, at least I was smart enough to ignore the conventional wisdom.

        I can’t wait for the new ancient samples from the Pontic-Caspian steppe that David Anthony featured in his talks recently. Once I have them we’ll be able to work out the details here for ourselves.

        See also…

        Ahead of the pack

        Ancient DNA vs Ex Oriente Lux

        Understanding the Eneolithic steppe

        Posted by Davidski at 9:49:00 PM 91 comments:

        Labels: ancient DNA, Caucasus hunter-gatherers, CHG, David Anthony, Davidski, Eastern Europe, Indo-European, Iranian Plateau, PIE homeland, Pontic-Caspian steppe, Proto-Indo-European, Yamnaya

        Polubienie

        Odpowiedz

        • Davidski said…
          Is David Anthony still pushing that Out-of-Iran by boat theory for these CHG-rich foragers?
          March 31, 2021 at 10:15 PM

          Davidski said…
          Yamnaya isn’t a EHG/CHG mix, it’s largely derived from this Mesolithic steppe population plus some EEF. That’s why you’re still confused. There was no migration from Iran or Central Asia bringing CHG with it.
          March 31, 2021 at 11:15 PM

          Davidski said…
          It seems that you guys are having a hard time realizing that genetic variation can’t be cut up into neat components like CHG, EHG, Iranian farmers, etc. In reality, there were many different near and far related populations that often formed clines in all sorts of ways for different reasons. So no, there’s no EHG in CHG. This is just an artifact of not having the correct reference samples. There’s also no Iranian farmer input in the Eneolithic steppe populations.
          March 31, 2021 at 11:43 PM

          Davidski said…
          Your thinking about this is way too narrow. We don’t know if CHG moved to the steppe. There may never have been any CHG people on the steppe. Instead, the Mesolithic Bereznovka/Progress/Yamnaya-like populations may have formed via long-lasting contacts between CHG-related and EHG-related populations in the North Caucasus area. This may have happened during the Upper Paleolithic already, and it’s even possible that most of the groups derived from this process went extinct without a trace, so that it might never be possible to connect all the dots.
          April 1, 2021 at 1:02 AM

          zardos said…
          When do they finally test Rakushechny Yar and other sites from the Lower Don culture? Khvalynsk was never in, it was common sense that they were a backward, unusually (for steppe people) mixed and branched off group from the steppe central regions. People just had to read up on the archaeological context to get that. I mean its all nice and sweet to get more information about this dead end relative of Sredny Stog, which was the central and source group for its branches Yamnaya and Corded Ware alike, among many others like Usatovo, but if searching for the PIE cradle, one has to look at the Sea of Azow region and the Don, not the Volga.

          That the Lower Don Culture was the first and major progression towards PIE should be extremely likely. What’s more debatable is rather what happened within this complex. Like which groups founded the oldest settlements, which people contributed to it on the longer run.
          My best guess currently is still that CHG moved up as fishers along the coast, which is now under the sea level and a later CHG-rich wave with more Neolithic innovations, including new building types and ovicaprids, reached the Lower Don/Sea of Azow slightly later, pushed together upwards, founded the first settlements.

          The EHG-rich foragers put themselves on top of this half-Neolithicised settlers and this is what was at the root of the steppe people, led to the developed Lower Don and Middle Don cultures, to Sredny Stog and its first dead end branch Khvalynsk, which mixed while moving up the Volga, and the next big branch Yamnaya, which took over most of the steppe, but not all other Sredny Stog descendants, among which being the Cernavoda, Usatovo and Corded Ware.

          But what exactly happeend in the first stages of the developement in the Lower Don region, this is what’s most interesting, because there was a Neolithic-inspired input there, that is without a doubt, and it looks rather Eastern than Western. So probably we deal with two CHG-rich source groups, of which the main group was Mesolithic Caucasian, with a more Caucasian-Transcaucasian input which brought the innovations either along the coast as well, or even over sea?
          April 1, 2021 at 7:18 AM

          AWood said…
          It sounds like Anthony is basically saying the same thing that David has been saying openly for the last couple years. A group or groups of CHG foragers were on the steppes very early, which would explain the YDNA J1* among some of the mesolithic foragers in Russia. I still believe it really amounts to a R1/J1 dichotomy between EHG + CHG, but for whatever reason the J1* guys died out along with those rare R1b1 lineages. It does beg the question, how did R1b-L23 derivatives become successful at the time of Yamnaya, and later on the R1a-Z645 ones in subsequent cultures. They must have arrived from further west with better technologies? I’m not seeing the smoking gun quite yet. Does anyone have any insights into the material culture of the Caspian sea foragers? Did they have any domesticated animals around 6500 BC?
          April 1, 2021 at 1:36 PM

          aeolius said…
          expanding the topic:
          Rethinking the evidence for early horse domestication at Botai
          https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-021-86832-9.pdf
          April 4, 2021 at 12:04 PM

          Davidski said…
          BMAC couldn’t have been Indo-Iranian speaking.

          If we apply this method to the Indo-Iranian vocabulary, we come to the undeniable conclusion that the Aryans were nomadic pastoralists. They had dozens of words related to horses, harness, chariots, all sorts of cattle, and very limited agricultural terminology. Besides, there were practically no terms in their language relating to permanent houses, let alone words like ‘palace’ or ‘temple’. The only conclusion we can draw is that the Aryans were simply unable to build a city like Gonur. Moreover, they as nomads did not even need such a city.

          https://brill.com/view/book/9789004438200/BP000002.xml?language=en
          April 5, 2021 at 4:26 PM

          …..

          https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-021-86832-9.pdf

          Rethinking the evidence for early horse domestication at Botai

          William Timothy Treal Taylor & Christina Isabelle Barrón‑Ortiz
          Data availability
          All data used in the analysis are provided directly in the manuscript and its supporting information.
          Received: 15 January 2021; Accepted: 19 March 2021
          Published online 02 April 2021

          Despite its transformative impact on human history, the early domestication of the horse (Equus caballus) remains exceedingly difcult to trace in the archaeological record. In recent years, a scientifc consensus emerged linking the Botai culture of northern Kazakhstan with the frst domestication
          of horses, based on compelling but largely indirect archaeological evidence. A cornerstone of the archaeological case for domestication at Botai is damage to the dentition commonly linked with the use of bridle mouthpieces, or “bit wear.” Recent archaeogenetic analyses reveal, however,
          that horse remains from Botai are not modern domesticates but instead the Przewalski’s horse, E. przewalskii—warranting reevaluation of evidence for domestication. Here, we compare osteological traits hypothesized to have been caused by horse transport at Botai with wild Pleistocene equids in North America. Our results suggest that damage observed in Botai horse teeth is likely generated by natural disturbances in dental development and wear, rather than through contact with bridle equipment. In light of a careful reconsideration of the mid-Holocene archaeological record of northern Eurasia, we suggest that archaeological materials from Botai are most efectively explained through the regularized mass harvesting of wild Przewalski’s’ horses—meaning that the origins of horse domestication may lie elsewhere.

          Conclusion
          Te continual emergence of new lines of evidence for understanding ancient human-horse interactions necessitates vigilant reevaluation of models for the domestication of the horse. Based on comparison of materials from the site of Botai with wild equid remains from North America, we suggest that skeletal changes to the diastema and lower premolars observed in this assemblage are a result of natural processes rather than early transport.
          In light of these fnds and other recent biomolecular discoveries, this site and its related assemblages appear to be best explained through mass harvesting of wild horses rather than early domestication. Future work will continue to require careful reanalysis of existing assumptions and revisitation of inherently ambiguous and indirect archaeological data.

          Polubienie

          Odpowiedz

  9. @Robert

    Artykuł, który wspominasz ( http://praslowianie.pl/praslowianie-slowianska-europa-kultura-amfor-kulistych-prapolska.html )
    to kolejna odsłona tezy, że język PS przyszedł z Anatolii
    Ludzie KAK – I2 mają nabyć język prasłowiński od G2a, którzy dodatkowo na terenie Polski spalają swoich zmarłych ( wcześniej spalali się też R1a 😉 w Polsce, wg Rudaweb)

    Wnioski jakie tam są wyciągane z badania aDNA: „A genomic Neolithic time transect of hunter-farmer admixture in central Poland” to kpina z rozumu.
    cytuje z artykułu:
    „Jednak w badaniach autosomalnego DNA KAK („A genomic Neolithic time transect of hunter-farmer admixture in central Poland”, 2018) widać zdecydowanie dwa równoważne komponenty: łowców-zbieraczy (w męskich próbkach kopalnego DNA reprezentowanych przez haplogrupę I2) jak i rolników (w Y-DNA reprezentowany najczęściej haplogrupą G2a), więc bardzo dziwi brak szczątków ludzi z haplogrupą G2a (skoro autosomalne DNA wskazuje na ich obecność). Ewidentnie mężczyźni z I2 zdominowali populację KAK w rejonie (np. biorąc sobie za żony kobiety, których przodkowie mieli rodowód rolniczy, ojcowie byli nosicielami haplogrupy G2a).”
    Co tam widać?
    To PCA z samego badania (fig.2):
    https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-018-33067-w/figures/2
    N22 i N42 to kobiety, gdzie są jacyś męscy łowcy zbieracze związani z rolnikami, którzy idą z południa? JA nie widzę!
    Ewidentnie I2 to łowcy-zbieracze ale 30-20 tys lat BC, to co widzimy na PCA to już pełni rolnicy (to ich dane autosomalne również widzimy na obrazowanej analizie, niestety nie określono hg: N26, N27, N28, N20), dodatkowo widać, że biorą żony z populacji WHG obecnej w tym czasie w Polsce (ród po Y-ku, baby to egzogamia) Fig.1 przypisuje próbki ido kultur wg. czasu.

    To co ja widzę w tym badaniu to zmianę jaka zachodzi z przybyciem KCS, czyli to samo co twierdzi badanie Haak 2015 „Ogromna migracja ze stepów..”
    https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-018-33067-w/figures/5

    Zaś sam artykuł (który linkujesz) na siłę lansuje tezę od odwiecznym pobycie PraSłowian w Polsce (tych z I2 i G2)

    UWAGA!
    N47, N49 Pikutkowo, KCS (hg I2a2a, spokrewnieni) pochodzą chyba ze wschodu, czyli stepu – nieprawdaż? Tak przynajmniej twierdzi badanie Fernandes i wsp. 2018

    pzdr

    Polubione przez 1 osoba

    Odpowiedz

    • „To PCA z samego badania (fig.2):
      https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-018-33067-w/figures/2
      N22 i N42 to kobiety, gdzie są jacyś męscy łowcy zbieracze związani z rolnikami, którzy idą z południa? JA nie widzę!”

      N22 to mężczyzna, sprawdziłem co inni pisali i nikt nie pisał o kobiecie, a tak jest podobny do współczesnych ludzi:

      N22 to przedstawiciek jednego z trzech głównych składowych z których powstali Polacy. W moim spojrzeniu od nich mamy język słowiański

      Wojowie znad Dołęży, są po środku między N22 a współczesnymi Polakami, co według mojej hipotezy byli to powiedzmy Prasłowianie w odróżnieniu od Słowian powstałych gdy Prasłowianie zmieszali z napływającym ze wschodu bałtyjsko-aryjskim R1a.

      Polubione przez 1 osoba

      Odpowiedz

  10. A tu nasz ukochany i umiłowany Fiorin Curta i jego nazistowskie fyfoty o rzekomym pochodzeniu Słowian, min. o języku słowiańskim, jako rzekoma tzw. lingua franca kaganatu awarskiego, itp… Przy okazji, „Study of Antiquity and the Middle Ages”, to wyjątkowo obślizgły ofitzjalny matacz też.


    The Origins of the Slavs
    345 views•Apr 10, 2021
    Study of Antiquity and the Middle Ages

    In this presentation Dr. Florin Curta guides us thoroughly and intensely into not just the history of the early Slavs but into the very heart of the origins of the Slavic Peoples themselves. He draws from archaeology, primary sources, material culture, DNA and so very much more to show the foundations of the Slavic world in the Early Middle Ages.

    He explores a variety of issues and topics such as did they have their own origin stories? Was there actually Slavic migrations? Who were the Slavs before they were Slavs? And how did Slavic culture actually sread? What did outside sources like the Eastern Roman Empire and Western European authors have to say about them? What made them unique? How influenced were they by Steppe peoples like the Avars or Sarmatians?

    Their religious customs and practices before the eventual Christian conversion.

    …..

    Jedyną wartością całego tego nazistowskiego pierdolenia jest to, że OSC / SCS został SZTUCZNIE STWORZONY PRZEZ NIE-SŁOWIAN, ŻEBY NAWRÓCIĆ MORAWIAN I NIGDY NIE BYŁ RZECZYWIŚCIE UŻYWANY PRZEZ ŻADNYCH SŁOWIAN!

    Polubienie

    Odpowiedz

    • Tomek
      8:32 „Niemcy” means „Not Us” (Polish: Nie My) not „Dummies”. Also Polish word „Niemy” means mute/silent. Slavic tribes refered to Germans as „Not Us” to draw clear destinction they are completely not related to germanic origin. To this day, in Polish „Niemcy” plainly means Germany.

      woytzek bron
      One more thing, was mentioned romanian word meaning stupid, actually it sounds exactly like polish ‚nieuk’ wich derives from ‚nie uczony’ – uneducated, strictly it means ignorant, Poland hundreds of years had boarder with Romania so this can be the reason

      erazmo
      At 43:15 Dr. Curta mentioned „strange things that Romanians do to the Slavic language” and he mixes „nauka” (science) with „neuk” (uneducated, not dummy). The root in both is some archaic word like „uk” (or apparently „oko” or an eye, as someone below already mentioned) which survived in a derivate „učiti” (pronounced „uchiti” = to learn). So, „nauka” would be something like „learning on” („na” means „on”, hence „na-uka”….”naučnik” = scholar). „Neuk” however is „ne-uk”, here we have a negation in front of the word, as a prefix and it literally means „un-schooled” or uneducated. Btw., the first word is a noun and the second is an adjective. Otherwise, very interesting topic, since we know very little about the Slavs. Those were excellent questions and very informative answers from Dr. Curta. Thank you.

      D.E. Poland
      About his book flaws…

      „Professor Curta’s book is interesting for its various tables, categorizations, comparisons and other „analytics”. It is also useful for the lists of sources it gives.

      On the other hand, it is an academic book in that it does not provide or attempt to provide a narrative but rather breaks various topics down along the lines of academic debates on the same. (In other words, beginners beware). In lieu of a narrative it provides various claims and assertions for those subtopics that then work to support a thesis and produce a conclusion. The problem is that, while some of this information is interesting, the synthesis is problematic.

      Essentially, the claim is that Slavs did not originate in an Urheimat and walked into Europe (but the autochtons shouldn’t get excited yet) but rather the Slavic identity was essentially given by Byzantine authors to existing groups or mixes of group that always lived on the edges of the empire but, presumably, under various names, speaking different languages and following different cultures. This is a bizarre claim for a whole host of reasons (e.g., how did the Slavic language spread?, how did the DNA spread (e.g., why do Russians and Czechs look so similar)? Did Byzantines cause all that?) that would require a broader response.

      Moreover, in order to make some of these claims, Professor Curta attacks the veracity of certain sources (Jordanes mostly) but does so in a way that is hardly effective. E.g., he claims that Jordanes must have been using maps which, incorrectly, showed the river Vistula going West to East (because the Slavs lived south of the Vistula according to Jordanes). This is a strange assertion and a major stretch of the imagination. Europeans clearly live „north” of the River Nile in that they live in an area that is north of both of the sources and endings of the Nile. To place the Slavs in Moravia would, in effect do the same for them in respect of the Vistula. This hardly shows a lack of familiarity with geography or using „wrong” maps.

      Elsewhere, he discusses the major and, in his own words, „unprecedented” construction of fortifications along the Byzantine border – but then goes on to say that Slav raids did not constitute a threat, at that time, to the Byzantines as their numbers were few (he has to show that Slav bands were small because otherwise they could be seen as movements of the presumably larger „peoples” a la Germanic lines). So what was the purpose of these major, unprecedented public works then? Were they union pork projects? One could, of course, say that Slavs were numerically few but then one would have to show that Byzantines did not take them seriously. That would require showing that they did not construct significant fortifications but to do that Professor Curta would have to ignore the archeological record and that he is not willing or able to do. So we end with a bunch of contradictions.

      Other examples of this kind of lack of analysis or skewed analysis abound. Nonetheless, the book is well organized and should be read to see what the current thinking is on these topics, at least in Florida.”

      Bartholomew Tott
      Exactly this. The guy is a fool.

      Armin Araminur
      Florin Curta is a veiled propagandist who portrays the Slavic invasion and colonization of Southeastern Europe as a result of Avar hegemony, even though he knows the following:

      The Avars have only exerted power over some groups of Pannonian Wends (Fredegar’s Chronicle), unlike the majority of Early Slavs who were constituted by the Sclavenes and the Antes, and were independent and led by their own kings and chieftains, like Mezamir, Muzhok, Radogost, and Dervan/Daurentius. The Greeks and Fredegar were aware of that, and even made sure to distinguish the independent Slavs (majority of Early Slavs) from the subjugated ones by referring to the latter as the „Avaroslavs”, Florin Curta omits that and claims that the Antes and the Sclavenes weren’t Slavs, and were only erroneously described as such by Greek writers, which is simply not true because the Antes and Sclavenes provided the Romans with the bulk of information about the Early Slavs to date, and only because they weren’t part of the Avar Khaganate, and because they vastly outnumbered the Slavs who were subdued by the Avars, which automatically renders his thesis as moot.

      For his thesis to have merit, one must agree to his premise about the origin of the Slavs – an allegedly isolated and outnumbered mobile group of infantry limited only to the Pannonian Basin, which is simply refuted by the historical, genetic, and archaeological realities of the Early Slavs, who’ve conquered and colonized much of Eastern, Central, and Northeastern Europe some century and a half prior to the arrival of the Avars. Early Slavic material cultures like Penkovka, Prague-Korchak, and Sukow-Dziedzice were recognized as Early South and East Slavic material cultures by Michel Kazanski, dating back to either the 4th or 5th century, respectively, more than a century earlier before the arrival of the aforementioned nomads at the invitation of the emperor Tiberius in the mid 6th century. Last but not least, the writings of Jordanes, Procopius, Saint Demetrius, John of Ephesus, Theophylact of Simocatta, and Menander Protector, and even the De Administrando Imperio refute his theses, and he knows that which is why he overly scrutinizes them, which is ironic since he does cite them when it suits him.

      And someone like him being an authority on Slavic history in the USA doesn’t speak well for American academia at all because Slavic studies in the West were always of substandard quality, subject to premises, bias, propaganda, politicization, and severe anti-Slavism, which is to what Florin Curta adapted his work to in order to proliferate himself in the USA, while his academic superiors, like Obolensky and Michel Kazanski, whose work begs the polar opposite, are entirely ignored.

      Marko Uremovic
      My thought was this. Fur traders. The slavs were on the outskirts of the Byzantine Empire. Now the way early Russians traded was for international trade cattle. But for smaller denominations, they traded in furs. One of these furs being the Kuna. A weasel-like creature. Kuna is the former currency of Croatia (before the Euro). So there is a connection between Danubian/Sava Slavs and the Russians. What is the connection FUR. Byzantine would pay cash for furs. SO these people living on the Danube had a monetary incentive to spread out into the forests of Poland and Russia and set up towns, and villages. Hunt furs. Trade. Live life.

      D.E. Poland
      I am 97% Slavic with 3% Wendish which is still Slavic. The maps that I received from my DNA do not equate to what this man has said. And around 900 AD we started being made slaves. The core root of the word Slave is Slav. I have found his information very lacking in origins.

      https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/international-journal-of-middle-east-studies/article/what-does-the-slave-trade-in-the-saqaliba-tell-us-about-early-islamic-slavery/EDDD35D8FD593AB8D576D11550CF62C6

      Armin Araminur
      @D.E. Poland Most Western interpretations of Medieval sources would indicate the Slavic area as being the main reservoir of slaves in the whole period of the Early Middle Ages, beginning probably in the 6th century, and with a peak around the 10th. This preference for slaves of Slavic origin – so strong as to make Slavs the slaves by antonomasia – has been easily explained: in that period Slavic people were the only ones who were still pagan, and this detail is most important as it explains why, by choosing them, early medieval slave traders – mostly Venetian, Genoese and Jewish – did not violate the new principles of the “Societas Christiana”, introduced by Pope Gregory the Great at the end of the 6th century, according to which baptized people must be excluded from slavery. What should be noted is that aside from this being a mere thesis, it is also historically and etymologically inaccurate. After all, the Medieval Latin words for “Slav” and “slave” are not etymologically related. Further on, the Medieval Latin word for “slave”, and with it, its root as well, predate the first sightings and contact of mainland European civilization with the Slavs. Evolution of the name of Slavs „Sloveni/ Slaveni” comes from PIE *klew (to hear) evolving into proto-Slavic *slovo/ *slava (word/ fame), finally evolving into Sloveni/ Slaveni (those glorious/ those who understand eachother). Meanwhile, the English word for „slave” comes from the Latin word „clavis/ clavus” (a key/ nail), which bore the Latin word „inclavare” (to lock in), ultimately giving rise to the word „sclavus” (slave – „a locked one”), which probably entered the English language, along with a major portion of Romance words, with the Norman invasion. Further on, the cognate with Sloveni/Slaveni, is word Sclavinii/ Slabini, a Latin denote for Slavic ethnic group. From a purely historical perspective, Greece and Gaul were Rome’s main reservoir of slaves for centuries, while the Irish were the main reservoir of slaves for their Normano-English oppressors for more than half a millennium, and before them, to Norsemen as well. Dublin was the biggest slave market in Western Europe. Its main sources of supply were the Irish hinterland, Wales and Scotland, while in the Far and the Middle East, the Turkmen tribes would supply the largest portion of Eurasia with innumerable slaves for nearly a millennium. Aside from that, just during the earliest stage of the Slavic invasion of Roman territory south of the Danube (6th century), a quarter of a million Roman citizens were enslaved by the Sclavenes (early South Slavs) in just modern-day Bulgaria, the number of their slaves kept growing as more and more provinces and their capitals fell to the aforementioned Slavs. Granted the Slavs didn’t enslave their enemies permanently, but they’ve enslaved them nonetheless, and in record numbers that are substantially greater than the number of Slavs who were enslaved by non-Slavs during the entirety of the Middle Ages, and it renders the aforementioned non-Slavs as being more fitting to have their ethnonyms made “synonymous” with slavery. In short, it’s an unsubstantiated thesis, politicized as well.

      D.E. Poland
      @Armin Araminur thank you for your input. I read the diary of an Arab slave holder of why they chose Slavics. It was noted in his diary that once castrated they were obedient workers. And they were 10 times more valuable castrated and made eunuchs because of their work ethic. They could have cared less if they were pagan according to that man’s diary. So I disagree with you there. They even were enslaved so they could fight for the Ottoman Empire against the Byzantine from what I’ve seen. Again ….. I’m beginning to realise that all history is up to interpretation. And I am going by the definition of slave that is out there.

      „Slave – Origin

      Middle English: shortening of Old French esclave, equivalent of medieval Latin sclava (feminine) ‘Slavonic (captive)’: the Slavonic peoples had been reduced to a servile state by conquest in the 9th century.”

      „Sla·von·ic
      /sləˈvänik/
      adjective
      relating to or denoting the Slavic language family.
      noun
      the Slavic language family.”

      That’s in the dictionary.

      D.E. Poland
      @Armin Araminur I also learned that there was a crusade against them when they were pagan.

      Marko Uremovic
      @D.E. Poland He also talked about how possibly Bishop Constantine helped almost create/spread the Slavic language by creating writing for those tribes living near the Danube. Like when the Printing press came to Europe, it standardized even further European languages. Like English etc… Once you have words on paper. Then to communicate, this would spread those words elsewhere. To where ever the messages are sent. If you are talking about Fur traders going far into the continent to get the furs. Then that written language is spread. So how Greek was spread all throughout the Eastern Mediterranean as the language of trade. SO would Slavic be spread all throughout Euroasia as the language of the fur trade.

      Jacek Jaglowski
      Science in Slav is Nauka, „na oko”, which means „what you see”. Just like in English „to see is to know/learn”. Nieuk, means „without science”, or blind. The doctor needs to look into Sanskrit and Slav language connection as the oldest and least polluted. The stronger word for nauka is ‚wiedza”, viedza, which is Sanskrit word for knowledge, which also in Slav means „to see”. How about them apples?

      Michael Tomsia
      I find it quite strange that the subject of Sanscrit and/or Persian languages connotations to Slavic was not emphasized in the narration. The similar genetic makeup of these respective group of people as well as their traditions, legends would be also worth mentioning. We are talking here about history predating the Greek/Roman era by thousands of years. It looks like the interlocutors were still bathing in the historic river canalized by English and Germans in the last few centuries… and church for much longer.

      Deadmeat DEC
      I believe it was Thomas Sowell that said the word slave comes from the Slav’s.

      Study of Antiquity and the Middle Ages
      I don’t think we can attribute that to Dr. Sowell considering that (1) it’s not his field and (2) this has been known for quite some time.

      Marko Uremovic
      You can’t enslave other Christians so you have to go out and find some Pagans. Livonian Order. Teutonic Order comes to mind. Then you sell them to slave markets further west. Convert to Christanity. If you refuse to convert. There will be a battle. If the local tribes lose the battle they face certain slavery to the western markets.

      Marko Uremovic
      On the other hand. The Latin or Roman Empire word for Slave is Servorum. So the Roman word transfers to SERFS.. Which ends up being the majority of the peasant population of Western and the rest of Europe lol. So just like today, we’re all slaves to the rich. lol

      Armin Araminur
      Most Western interpretations of Medieval sources would indicate the Slavic area as being the main reservoir of slaves in the whole period of the Early Middle Ages, beginning probably in the 6th century, and with a peak around the 10th. This preference for slaves of Slavic origin – so strong as to make Slavs the slaves by antonomasia – has been easily explained: in that period Slavic people were the only ones who were still pagan, and this detail is most important as it explains why, by choosing them, early medieval slave traders – mostly Venetian, Genoese and Jewish – did not violate the new principles of the “Societas Christiana”, introduced by Pope Gregory the Great at the end of the 6th century, according to which baptized people must be excluded from slavery. What should be noted is that aside from this being a mere thesis, it is also historically and etymologically inaccurate. After all, the Medieval Latin words for “Slav” and “slave” are not etymologically related. Further on, the Medieval Latin word for “slave”, and with it, its root as well, predate the first sightings and contact of mainland European civilization with the Slavs.

      Evolution of the name of Slavs „Sloveni/ Slaveni” comes from PIE *klew (to hear) evolving into proto-Slavic *slovo/ *slava (word/ fame), finally evolving into Sloveni/ Slaveni (those glorious/ those who understand eachother). Meanwhile, the English word for „slave” comes from the Latin word „clavis/ clavus” (a key/ nail), which bore the Latin word „inclavare” (to lock in), ultimately giving rise to the word „sclavus” (slave – „a locked one”), which probably entered the English language, along with a major portion of Romance words, with the Norman invasion. Further on, the cognate with Sloveni/Slaveni, is the word Sclavinii/ Slabini, a Latin denotes for Slavic ethnic group. From a purely historical perspective, Greece and Gaul were Rome’s main reservoir of slaves for centuries, while the Irish were the main reservoir of slaves for their Normano-English oppressors for more than half a millennium, and before them, to Norsemen as well. Dublin was the biggest slave market in Western Europe. Its main sources of supply were the Irish hinterland, Wales and Scotland, while in the Far and the Middle East, the Turkmen tribes would supply the largest portion of Eurasia with innumerable slaves for nearly a millennium. Aside from that, just during the earliest stage of the Slavic invasion of Roman territory south of the Danube (6th century), a quarter of a million Roman citizens were enslaved by the Sclavenes (early South Slavs) in just modern-day Bulgaria, the number of their slaves kept growing as more and more provinces and their capitals fell to the aforementioned Slavs. Granted the Slavs didn’t enslave their enemies permanently, but they’ve enslaved them nonetheless, and in record numbers that are substantially greater than the number of Slavs who were enslaved by non-Slavs during the entirety of the Middle Ages, and it renders the aforementioned non-Slavs as being more fitting to have their ethnonyms made “synonymous” with slavery. In other words, a thesis unsubstantiated and politicized.

      Lern Chann
      I’m sorry, though I respect Mr. Curta, I’m a critic of some of his thesis. A specially his concept of the Slavic “Koine”. I think that’s part of a new revisionist approach on history which become en vogue in the recent years. It has gone so far, that some historians deny major historical events of ancient history, like the barbarian Invasion on western Rome during the late antiquity, saying that there were never big migrations, just minor groups, or even little groups out of bigger groups, searching for new spaces and somehow magically assimilating other people around them. No Sir, I still belief that people spread language. Southeastern Europe was dominated by the Slavic people, not because their language spread invisibly to people living there. I’m sure that it had spread because people, actually being real Slavs themselves, overcome (violently) the Danube-Border to eastern Rome in big, not to say huge numbers, an conquered that land. That’s why many people in that area were later on assimilated. But not because some “Koine” Typ of Slavic slipped over the border and stroked everyone to forget their own language and becoming Slavs 😝

      Polubienie

      Odpowiedz

    • Forry’s Diary
      OMG, This guy does not make difference between Slavs and Thracians. Besi, Sclavs and etc are so-called Thracian tribes. This guy said that Konstantin invented language – ridiculous, nobody ever invented language. He was a Bulgarian missionary send by the Bulgarian king to spread the new alphabet. At that time and up to 19th century Thessaloniki was 80% habitat with Bulgarians – read Ottoman Empire documents. All the books of that so-called ,,Slavik” language was made in three bulgarian academies under Simeon The Great – milion of proves about that. There is no SLAVS – this is word invented by RUSSIA to control all the Balkans and Eastern Europe by putting different nations under one name and fake cultural group.

      Marko Uremovic
      He is saying he standardized the language thru text. Like when the Printing press came to Europe, it standardized even further European languages. Like English etc… Once you have words on paper. Then to communicate, this would spread those words elsewhere. To where ever the messages are sent. If you are talking about Fur traders going far into the continent to get the furs. That that written language is spread. So how Greek was spread all throughout the Eastern Meditterrean as the language of trade. SO would Slavic be spread all throughout Euroasia as the language of the fur trade.

      Leopoldus Carniolus
      Not what I expected. This professor makes lots of apologies and excuses for the lack of knowledge about the Slavs. He should consult Russian sources who found a cemetery 10,000 years old with tall bond haired bodies which were in perfect preservation as they were in sand and Russian scientists classed these as being Slavs. Perhaps he is studying in the wrong country.

      jack arnon
      This was one long confused mess. No,the Slavs cannot be compared to the Celts, because there are today more than a half dozen Slavic States and maybe one and a half Celtic States. Ireland and the province of Galicia in Spain. So why couldn’t our brilliant historian pick one Slavic State , the earliest one, and talk about how it was organized? And when?

      Armin Araminur
      In the “Making of the Slavs”, the author takes great liberties in interpreting preliminary archaeological data and primary historical sources – which were, unlike the former, selectively subjected to ambiguous scrutiny (and only depending on whether the paragraphs or their general information supports the author’s work), which is ironic and contradictory, because as its author, Florin Curta is forced to rely on the aforementioned sources, while unwarrantedly scrutinizing their validity whenever it suits him.

      After he had realized that the Antes and the Sclavenes – who’ve formed the bulk of the Early Slavs and were led by their own rulers, and were never under the suzerainty of the Avars, like Dervan, Dobreta or Dauritas (trans. Daurentius), Radogost (trans. Ardagast), Muzok (trans. Musokios) and Mezamir, didn’t fit his „definition” of Slavs, he then portrayed them as „just numerous tribes of heterogeneous origin” who were merely „hastily and „erroneously” (unsubstantiated thesis) defined by Greek chroniclers and historians as „supra-tribal” entities of the Early Slavs, and that’s only because the records regarding the aforementioned groups of Early Slavs are the strongest rebuttal to one of his core beliefs – that those Pannonian tribes of Wends who were few in numbers and subjugated by the Avars were the “original” Slavs, even though the overwhelming majority of what we know of Early Slavs stems from the aforementioned writings of Greek historians, who’ve based all of their work off of the language, traditions, history and beliefs of the Sclavenes and Antes.

      This particular detail was recorded by Procopius and Pseudo-Maurice, and both have stated that the Sclaveni and Antes are two barbarian peoples with the same institutions and customs since ancient times and that they’re numerous people, who did not allow enslavement and conquest, and were resistant to hardship, bearing all weathers. who’s led a primitive life and were henotheistic, believing in the god of lightning (Perun), the ruler of all, to whom they sacrificed cattle? Matter of fact, Menander Protector refers to the Slaves and their supreme leader Daurentius as „Slavs” and states that he and all of his Sclavene chieftains refused Bayan’s demands for tribute and submission, and in the following diplomatic meeting between the Sclavenes and the Avars, Menander writes the following: „This movement of Avars against the Slavs did not only result from Emperor’s envoys and the wish of Bayan to return the courtesy unto Romans for all the gestures of friendship and help that he had received from the Emperor but also because he held great hate for them (the Slavs) out of personal sentiment as well. The Avar leader has, therefore, sent envoys to Daurentius (Δαυρίτας) himself, and to his chieftains, calling on for their submission and enlistment among tribute-payers. Mauritius and the leaders alongside him replied: „Who is, then, the man which basks in sunlight that threatens to conquer our strength? We are used to ruling over others, not to being ruled over – of that we are certain for as long as wars are waged and swords are forged”.

      Since the Slavs acted so haughtily, the Avars were no different in boasting. Then the scolds and insults resulted from that, being that the barbarians are of a narrow and proud mind, and the fight broke out. The Slavs, unable to control the anger, killed the envoys, as Bayan found out from another source. Because of that Bayan has long since raised accusations against the Slavs, fueling a secret hatred against them, mad for they refused him, and angry that from them he received an unforgivable insult, in the same time he thought he would do a favor to Caesar and likewise find a rich land to plunder, for far too long has the land of Romans been plundered by Slavs, and theirs (Slavic) – never by any of other peoples.” This excerpt is important as well: “(Strategikon of Maurice: „…being freedom-loving, they are in no way inclined to become slaves or to obey, especially in their own land.” (Strategikon of Maurice, ed. prep. V. V. Kuchma. SPb., 2004, p. 189). Just from these mere excerpts, we can attest the following facts:

      1. That the Antes and the Sclavenes are undoubtedly Slavic, and they’ve shared the same institutions, customs, language (Sclavene chieftains like Radogost serving under kings of Antes like Muzok) and beliefs (henotheism and the worship of Perun, the chief Slavic god), which refutes Curta’s theory of a Slavic identity being introduced to them at a later stage.

      2. That the land the Greeks have considered as „Slavic” weren’t subdued, raided, or ruled by others, that the Slavs are freedom-loving and that they’re in no way inclined to become slaves, and that steps should be taken against them sometime after the meeting between Bayan’s emissaries and Daurentius, which contradicts his thesis of the Early Slavic tongue being a small, isolated language, and that the territory where it was spoken was vast, to begin with.

      3. That his theory of Proto-Slavic originally being a language of a relatively small ethnic group, which was then spread as „Lingua Franca” only thanks to the existence of the Avar Khaganate has no substantiation whatsoever, especially not in primary sources, which is the reason why he has taken steps to scrutinize their content, but only selectively, meaning only the parts that refute his theories – like the fact that the Sclavenes and the Antes were defined as Slavs for more than a hundred years earlier than the Wends were (in Fredegar’s Chronicle, where even he discerns that the Wends were merely one of three groups of Slavs, the other two being the Sclavenes and the Antes), which gives credence to the following postulations:

      a) He’s making a name for himself in a poorly understood field of Western historiography by publishing sensationalist interpretations of Slavic history that barely differ from the well-known, imperialist, and dehumanizing anti-Slav premises that were normalized in Western academia for centuries.

      b) The „Making of Slavs” was written in English – a language which has replaced German as the chief expropriator of anti-Slavic sentiment and premise in the media and academia alike, and was only translated to Romanian and Bulgarian, which is extremely suspicious, given the Fascist and anti-Slavic pasts and policies of Romania and Bulgaria, which still persist in some of their right-leaning parties and communities, even to this day. The fact that his aforementioned authorship is one of the chief booklets of modern-day Balkan fascists and autochtonists – who deny the existence of Slavs and are actively deconstructing this identity, is damning evidence of the aforementioned.

      Last but not least, we have evidence that proves that Proto Slavic was spoken as early as the 4th century and that its unstoppable expansion into the surrounding areas was a well-noted phenomenon even as early as the 5th century. It should also be mentioned that Jordanes provides us with the name of the first Slavic king ever to be recorded by name – Bozh (most likely a shortening of “Bozhidar”, he’s mentioned in the “Lay of Igor’s Host”), who fought, initially was winning, but was then taken prisoner and crucified with his sons and many nobles by the Goths in the late 4th century. Aside from that, even if his theory had some merit to it, it still fails to rationalize why Proto-Slavic was being spread to Eastern Germany, Baltic, Poland, Belarus, Ukraine, and Russia decades before the Avars have even arrived to the northern basin of the Danube in 562 (on the invitation of a Greek emperor to act as allies against Slavs), why there are no Avar toponyms in Southeastern Europe, while it’s full of Slavic toponyms, or to explain why all Slavs (barring some groups of Bulgarians), whether they’re West, East or South Slavic, still boast Early Slavic autosomal DNA as their major genetic heritage, and are predominately bearers of Y-DNA lineages that have expanded in all directions with the migration and invasion of Slavs, which further refutes his assessment of the Antes and Sclavenes “being heterogeneous tribes that were hastily and erroneously” described as Slavs by primary sources, and reaffirms their identity as Early Slavic peoples.

      Armin Araminur
      Procopius, Book V, XXVII, 134:
      „(…) This exploit, then, was accomplished by the Goths on the third day after they were repulsed in the assault on the wall. But twenty days after the city and harbor of Portus were captured, Martinus and Valerian arrived, bringing with them sixteen hundred horsemen, the most of whom were Huns and Sclaveni and Antae, who are settled above the Ister River not far from its banks. (…)”

      Procopius about Slavic invaders capturing and enslaving a lot of Romans:
      Procopius, Book VII, XIII – describing events in year 545 AD:
      „(…) For a great throng of the barbarians, the Sclaveni, had, as it happened, recently crossed the Ister, plundering the adjoining country and enslaved a very great number of Romans. (…)”

      Procopius of Caesarea:
      „(…) In Illyria and Thracia, from the Ionian Gulf to Byzantine surrounding cities, where Hellas and Chersonese regions are situated, (…) the Sclavenes and the Antes, penetrating practically every year since Justinian administering the Roman Empire, were inflicting irreversible damage to their inhabitants. In each invasion I estimate 200,000 Romans were either took as prisoners or killed (…)”

      Procopius about Roman attempts to stop the Slavic invasion:
      „(…) the Empire wasn’t able to find just one only man just as brave to undertake this task.”

      Pope Gregory I in a letter to Exarch of Italy from year 599:
      „(…) It deeply afflicts and disquiets me the Slavic nation that menace us. It afflicts me from what I already suffer from you, it disquiets me because they have already started to penetrate into the Italic peninsula through Istria. (…)”

      And according to Priscus, in 610 Slavic tribes flooded into Greece.
      Procopius of Caesarea:
      „(…) Nay further, they [the Slavs] do not differ at all from one another in appearance. For they are all exceptionally tall and stalwart men, while their bodies and hair are neither very fair or blond, nor indeed do they incline entirely to the dark type (…)”.

      Procopius of Caesarea:
      „(…) In more or less the same time [549 – 550] a Slavic army (…) gathered itself together and after crossing without encountering any resistance from anyone the river Ister [Danube], and later with similar ease the river Heuros, it divided itself for two parts. (…) Commanders of Roman garrisons in Illyria and Thrace fought against both those parts and even though they had already separated from each other, the Romans suffered – contrary to their expectations – a defeat, and some of them fell dead on the spot, while others found salvation in escaping. (…) After all garrisons had suffered such defeats at the hands of either one or the other one of barbarian armies, one of enemy bands fought against troops of Asbadus. He was a member of Emperor Justinian’s personal guard (…) and he led a numerous and elite force of cavalry, which had been garrisoned for a long time inside the Thracian stronghold of Tdzurulon. But also, they were forced to retreat by the Slavs and most of them, shamefully escaping, got slaughtered, while Asbadus himself was captured and temporarily left alive, but soon after that the Slavs skinned him alive and threw him into a burning campfire. After that the Slavs were plundering all neighbouring Thracian and Illyrian lands without any obstacles and both of their two units captured many strongholds. (…) And those who had defeated Asbadus, later plundered in turn everything up to the sea coast, and captured in an assault the coastal city of Toperus (…) And they slaughtered 25,000 men, plundered everything, and enslaved all the children and all the women. (…)”

      John of Ephesus:
      „(…) In third year after the death of Emperor Justin, during the reign of victorious Tiberius, the damned nation of the Slavs has risen, and marching through entire Hellas, through lands of Thessaly and Thrace, captured many cities and strongholds, plundered, burned and robbed, seized the land and settled there with full ease, without fear, like in their own land. (…) they were plundering the country, burning it and robbing, as far as the Great Walls [of Constantinople], and this is how they captured many thousands of cattle, as well as many other kinds of booty. (…) Until today, that is until year 584, they still continue to live in peace in lands of the Rhomaioi, without fear and concern, plundering, murdering and burning, getting rich and highjacking gold and silver, capturing horses and plenty of weapons; and they have learned to fight better than the Rhomaioi. (…)”

      Menander Protector:
      „(…) About the fourth year of the reign of Caesar Tiberius Constantine, some hundred thousand Slavs broke into Thrace, and pillaged that and many other regions. As Greece was being laid waste by the Slavs, with trouble liable to flare up anywhere, and as Tiberius had at his disposal by no means sufficient forces, he sent a delegation to the Khagan of the Avars. (…)”

      Strategikon of Maurice:
      „(…) They do not keep prisoners in perpetual slavery like other peoples, but they demarcate for them a limited period of time, after which they give them a choice: they can return home after purchasing their freedom, or stay among them as free people and friends. (…)”

      “Strategikon of Maurice:
      „…being freedom-loving, they are in no way inclined to become slaves or to obey, especially in their own land.” (Strategikon of Maurice, ed. prep. V. V. Kuchma. SPb., 2004, p. 189)”

      Jordanes:
      „(…) These people, as we started to say at the beginning of our account or catalogue of nations, though off-shoots from one stock, have now three names, that is, Venedi, Antes and Sclaveni. (…) they now rage in war far and wide, in punishment for our sins (…) Though their names are now dispersed amid various clans and places, yet they are chiefly called Sclaveni and Antes. (…)”

      Procopius of Caesarea:
      „(…) Belisarius was eager to capture alive one of the men of note among the enemy, in order that he might learn what the reason might be why the barbarians were holding out in their desperate situation. And Valerian promised readily to perform such a service for him. For there were some men in his command, he said, from the nation of the Sclaveni, who are accustomed to conceal themselves behind a small rock or any bush which may happen to be near and pounce upon an enemy. In fact, they are constantly practicing this in their native haunts along the river Ister, both on the Romans and on the barbarians as well. (…)”

      Abraham ben Jacob (a 10th century Sephardic Jewish traveller from Muslim Spain):
      „(…) Slavic countries extend from the Mediterranean Sea to the Northern Ocean. (…) Generally speaking, Slavs are warlike and violent, and if not their internal discord and lack of unity, no other nation would be able to match them in strength. (…)”

      And about the arrival of the Croats and Serbs (but it was much later – not during the 500’s, but during the 600’s):
      Constantine Porphyrogennetos, „De Administrando Imperio”:
      „(…) their ancestors were Pagan Croats and Serbs, known also as White [Croats and Serbs]. Great Croatia, called also White [Croatia], until today is still Pagan, just like neighboring [Lusatian / West Slavic] Serbs [Sorbs] (…)”

      And another excerpt – „De Administrando Imperio”:
      „(…) Therefore everyone, who would like to do research about Dalmatia, can read herein about the way how the Slavic peoples took it. The Croats with their families came to Dalmatia and found the Avars in possession of that land. After fighting against each other for some time, the Croats defeated the Avars, partially murdered them and partially forced them to submissiveness. Since that moment the country was seized by the Croats. (…)”

      Daurentius is the first Slavic chieftain to be recorded by name, by the Byzantine historian Menander Protector, who reported that the Avar khagan Bayan I sent an embassy, asking Daurentius and his Slavs to accept Avar suzerainty and pay tribute, because the Avars knew that the Slavs had amassed great wealth after repeatedly plundering the Byzantine Balkan provinces. Daurentius reportedly retorted that „Others do not conquer our land, we conquer theirs […] so it shall always be for us.”

      Daurentius (to the Avar envoy): „Who is, then, the man which basks in sunlight that threatens to conquer our strength? We are used to ruling over others, not to being ruled over – of that we are certain for as long as wars are waged and swords are forged”.

      I’ve extracted the most relevant quotes from the primary sources and DAI, hope it helps.

      Armin Araminur
      In terms of material culture, we can distinguish two groups, the Proto Slavic, Early Slavic (group a) and Partially Slavic (group b) cultures:

      a) Penkovka culture, Prague-Korchak culture, Sukow-Dziedzice culture, Feldberg culture, Slavic Tornow culture, Mogilla culture, Volyntsevo culture, Kiev culture.

      b) Chernyakov culture, Kolochin culture, Przework culture, Ipotesti-Candesti culture.

      Further on, the Franks, Avars and the Magyars have only influenced the military and administrative history of the Pannonian Wends, and they’re the ancestors of the Slavs of Balaton, Nitra, Great Moravia and Slovakia, and they’ve never formed the bulk of the Early Slavs, but merely a portion of the Wends (the Early West Slavs). To interpret the history of the rest of the Slavs through their particularity is rather tendentious, and even ignorant of the full extent of the history of the Early Medieval Slavs, whether they’re West, East or South Slavic. Matter of fact, the bulk of the Early Slavs was made of the Sclavenes and the Antes, and the overwhelming majority of primary sources from that era were based off of peaceful and hostile interaction with them. Further on, the military and administrative history of the Antes and the Sclavenes was strictly a mixture of Slavic traditions and East Roman/Greek influences, which was reflected in the First Bulgarian Empire as well, where Slavic and Bulgar tribal and administrative traditions were integral parts of the state, yet the latter would be entirely ousted by the Slavo-Roman model as early as during the reign of Boris I. In terms of sheer aDNA, Yugoslavs still score predominately in Early Slavic ancestry (ranging from 55-70% on an average), the reason why they’re more southern-shifted is not because they’re „Greek farmers”, but because they’ve assimilated populations that were overwhelmingly of Neolithic autosomal ancestry, thus them clustering not as closely to modern Western and Eastern Slavs, who’ve historically mixed with peoples who were of a similar genetic composition as the Medieval Western and Eastern Slavs.

      Armin Araminur
      Those who attribute the success of the Slavic invasion and colonization of Roman territories to the Avars omit the following:

      a) Serbs didn’t invade in the 6th, but the mid-7th century, and in toe with the Croats, and were tasked with exterminating all Avars south of the Danube and ruling all the provinces they’d liberate at the request of emperor Heraclius.

      b) The Slavs who’ve invaded, conquered, and colonized Southeastern Europe were the Sclavenes and Antes, not the “Avaroslavs”, who were noted to have been Pannonian Wends, and were, aside from the Greeks/Romans themselves, also distinguished from other Slavs on that very basis by Fredegar, and were mentioned only twice in all primary Greek sources, during the Siege of Constantinople in 626, and during one of the many Slavic sieges of Thessaloniki, where Saint Demetrius states they arrived to assist the already present Sclavenes who’ve besieged the city, lured by promises of the city’s wealth.

      c) By the time the Avars have arrived at the Danubian basin at the invitation of emperor Tiberius, who had invited them for the sole purpose of waging war against the Sclavenes, Antes, and Kutrigurs, the Slavs were already invading and raiding Southeastern Europe for roughly forty years, and as deep as Southern Peloponnesus, Crete and the outer walls of Constantinople.

      d) All primary sources, like Jordanes, Procopius, Saint Demetrius, John of Ephesus, Theophylact of Simocatta, and Menander Protector state that the Sclavenes and the Antes were under the rule of their rulers like Mezamir, Muzhok, Dervan/Daurentius, and Radogost, and weren’t subdued by the Avars, and distinguish them from the aforementioned Avaroslavs (Pannonian Wends).

      e) Attributing the success of the Slavic invasion and colonization of Southeastern Europe to the Avars is, aside from being contradictory to all primary Roman/Greek sources, since the very purpose of the invitation of the Avars was to wage war against the Slavs and the Kutrigurs, which is exemplified in the joint Avar-Roman invasion of Daurentius’ realm, also a textbook example of 19th and 20th-centuries German, Italian, Greek, Hungarian and Austrian anti-Slavism designed to undermine the legitimacy of Slavic history, the geopolitical realities of Slavic territories, and to portray Slavs as a subsidiary mass of naturally subordinate peoples.

      Sources: Jordanes, Procopius, Saint Demetrius, John of Ephesus, Theophylact of Simocatta, and Menander Protector, De Administrando Imperio, Sima Cirkovic, Dimitry Obolensky, and Frederick Hamilton Jackson.

      Armin Araminur
      The war with Persia in 600-614 strained the Roman resources and thus denuded the coast of soldiers, therefore the Avars and Slavs inroads ravaged as they pleased under Heraclius (610-640), who had called in the latter to drive out the Avars; Narona, Salona, Epidaurus, Burnum, and Rhizinium were destroyed. In 641 Pope John IV., a Dalmatian by birth, sent Abbot John to Istria and Dalmatia to ransom prisoners and collect relics. The Croats and Serbs exterminated the Avars in the middle of the seventh century and delivered the province, the Croats occupying the west to the river Cetina, the Serbs the east from the Cetina to Albania. A century and a half later, Wonomyrus Sclavus/Vojnomir, the duke of all Slavs of Lower Pannonia and a vassal of the Franks, would devastate Avar dominions between the Danube and Tisza in 795, and is responsible for defeating the Avars a year later, and delivering nearly all of Pannonia to the Franks.”

      Sources: The Royal Frankish Annals, De Administrando Imperio, an Outline of the Early history and migration of the Slavs by Karl Heinrich Menges, the Land Between: Slovenia by Oto Luthar, and the Shores of the Adriatic by Frederick Hamilton Jackson.

      Marko Uremovic
      @Armin Araminur You sure it wasn’t the Justinian plague and the never-ending war between Byzantine and Germanic tribes in Italy? Those 2 concurrent events created massive needs and employment opportunities for any mercenaries or even people just to work the fields.

      Armin Araminur
      @Marko Uremovic Yes, because there’s no ancient author who attributes the success of the Slavic invasion and colonization to the plague, or the Gothic Wars, in which the Slavs fought for the Romans, and were trusted enough to evacuate Belisarius out of Italy, that’s an entirely modern historiographic phenomenon.

      Armin Araminur
      Most Western interpretations of Medieval sources would indicate the Slavic area as being the main reservoir of slaves in the whole period of Early Middle Ages, beginning probably in the 6th century, and with a peak around the 10th. This preference for slaves of Slavic origin – so strong as to make Slavs the slaves by antonomasia – has been easily explained: in that period Slavic people were the only ones who were still pagan, and this detail is most important as it explains why, by choosing them, early medieval slave traders – mostly Venetian, Genoese and Jewish – did not violate the new principles of the “Societas christiana”, introduced by Pope Gregory the Great at the end of the 6th century, according to which baptized people must be excluded from slavery. What should be noted is that aside from this being a mere thesis, it is also historically and etymologically inaccurate. After all, the Medieval Latin words for “Slav” and “slave” are not etymologically related. Further on, the Medieval Latin word for “slave”, and with it, its root as well, predate the first sightings and contact of mainland European civilization with the Slavs. Evolution of the name of Slavs „Sloveni/ Slaveni” comes from PIE *klew (to hear) evolving into proto-Slavic *slovo/ *slava (word/ fame), finally evolving into Sloveni/ Slaveni (those glorious/ those who understand eachother). Meanwhile, the English word for „slave” comes from the Latin word „clavis/ clavus” (a key/ nail), which bore the Latin word „inclavare” (to lock in), ultimately giving rise to the word „sclavus” (slave – „a locked one”), which probably entered the English language, along with a major portion of Romance words, with the Norman invasion. Further on, the cognate with Sloveni/Slaveni, is word Sclavinii/ Slabini, a Latin denote for Slavic ethnic group. From a purely historical perspective, Greece and Gaul were Rome’s main reservoir of slaves for centuries, while the Irish were the main reservoir of slaves for their Normano-English oppressors for more than half a millennium, and before them, to Norsemen as well. Dublin was the biggest slave market in Western Europe. Its main sources of supply were the Irish hinterland, Wales and Scotland, while in the Far and Middle East, the Turkmen tribes would supply the largest portion of Eurasia with innumerable slaves for nearly a millennium. Aside from that, just during the earliest stage of the Slavic invasion of Roman territory south of the Danube (6th century), a quarter of a million of Roman citizens were enslaved by the Sclavenes (early South Slavs) in just modern-day Bulgaria, the number of their slaves kept growing as more and more provinces and their capitals fell to the aforementioned Slavs. Granted the Slavs didn’t enslave their enemies permanently, but they’ve enslaved them nonetheless, and in recorded numbers that are substantially greater than the number of Slavs who were enslaved by non-Slavs during the entirety of the Middle Ages, and it renders the aforementioned non-Slavs as being more fitting to have their ethnonyms made “synonymous” with slavery”.

      Polubienie

      Odpowiedz


    • The Origins and History of the Polabian Slavs
      16,084 views•Feb 3, 2021
      Study of Antiquity and the Middle Ages

      Not all of history’s tales have a happy ending. In fact, most of them are rife with sad fates and great turmoil, with the ruthless passage of time erasing entire nations.

      One of these tales it that of the Polabian Slavs . Westernmost of all Slavic tribes, these warriors and traders struggled for survival through their entire existence.

      Known also as the Pomeranians or the Baltic Slavs, they were fundamental in the historical development of western and central Europe, and the emergence of Germany, from whom they suffered centuries of competition.

      Join us as we uncovered the history of these diverse Slavic tribes about whose ethnogenesis there is a wealth of information and who remain a subject of active research to this day. What was the fate of these tribes? And, what have they left behind? The truth can be easier to discover than you might think.

      Ing. Respekt
      This video is better than I expected. It really warms my heart and touches my soul. Thank you so much for this great video.

      Marcin Dryja
      Veleti = Viltzi – WILCY, Lutici – LUTYCY all means WOLVES (WILKI plural, WILK singular, exactly the same as in the Polish language). LUTY was used more often because WILK was a taboo word, which could bring danger to the calling one. LUTY is also a word for February month, because WOLVES mate in that time of the year.

      bxho hrjh
      Many Osten Germans Have Slavic ancestry reflects in their Slavic family names

      Bert Jafn
      Many Western Germans, too. Inherited from their polish ancestors, who migrated for work in the 19th century (examples: Schimanski, Koslowski). It isn’t that easy. There was also a huge influx of refugees from today’s Czech Republic during the early 18th century (similar to the one from France), and the resettlements after WW2 mixed up a lot, too. In Germany family names started to emerge in the 12th century. That’s about the same time when Germany cleared out the last pockets of slavic resistance in today’s Eastern Germany. In most of those areas, slavic languages fell out of use during the 15th or 16th century (except for Lusatia). Therefor most of the familiy names that you would point a finger at and identify them as „clearly slavic” are either of Polish or Czech, and for a very minor degree of Lusatian origin.

      Rugia 1168
      In addition, Dresden and Leipzig were founded by Slavs. Original names were Drezno (people of the forest) and Lipsk (place of linden trees).

      Polubienie

      Odpowiedz


  11. Dlaczego nie uczymy się o Słowianach w szkole?
    73,296 views•Oct 17, 2019
    ŚWIATOWA HISTORIA
    80.9K subscribers

    A. D.
    Tak, tak. Watykan z Niemcami sciagneli nas z drzew, nauczyli mówić, czytać i pisać….

    ŚwiętyJudasz
    Ja jednak uważam, że powinniśmy się uczyć bardziej o mitach i legendach słowiańskich, które przetrwały, jak choćby o Lechu, Czechu i Rusie, Popielu czy smoku wawelskim oraz o obrzędach słowiańskich, które znamy z przekazów oraz tych, które do dziś przetrwały w schrystianizowanej formie.

    Luki Tom
    Ja sie uczylem w szkole o slowianych i to zarowno w podstawowce jak i liceum. Jezdzilismy na wycieczki do Biskupina itp. Pytanie, ktore postawiles ma sie nijakn do rzeczywistosci. Jakas kolejna teoria spiskowa;)

    Zlepszowak
    O Słowianach w szkole się nie uczymy ponieważ uczono by nas takich kłamstw jak w tym materiale😎

    Muniek M
    Stary jest kilka teorii na temat pochodzenia Słowian etc.. podałeś jedną…. przyjmując ją za pewnik, tak się nie robi,

    Grzegorz Małyska
    Zrobiłeś film sprzed 7 miesięcy. A masz nie aktualne dane .

    Szahk
    Czemu kolejny raz ten sam film? Już go któryś raz wstawiasz

    Tomasz Gręda
    W kolejnym odcinku chciałbym coś o niemeckich twoich sponsorach ty niemiecki trolu.

    Polubienie

    Odpowiedz


    • Czego powinniśmy uczyć się o Słowianach w Szkole?
      21,236 views•May 23, 2019
      ŚWIATOWA HISTORIA

      Roman
      Od jakiegoś czasu trafiam na twoje wypociny i powiem ci weź się lepiej za (wyrzucanie gnoju ) ta profesja bardziej do ciebie pasuje a od nas Słowian trzymaj się z daleka .Staram się nie komentować w ten sposób ale nie wytrzymałem .

      Czesław Góralski
      A i twoja argumentacja genetyki mija się z prawdą, allochtonizm zakładał FIZYCZNĄ wymianę ludności a genetyka to obaliła, słowianie zamieszkują te ziemie od czasów epoki brązu

      Jacek Z.
      Historii o słowianach uczyłeś od Bismarcka ?

      GalahadMcGregor
      Nie. Z wykopalisk i wiedzy zebranej przez archeologów i historyków. Swoją drogą co ma do tego wymieniony ongiś kanclerz ?

      Czesław Góralski
      @GalahadMcGregor tyle że on się opiera na archeologii Kossiny xD

      Faza MusiByc
      Gdyby ten film powstal przed 2012 bylby ok a tak jest tylko efektem niemieckojezycznej propagandy antyslowianskiej

      Sattivasa
      Ten beucott to o czym miał być?

      Robert Boniecki
      Myślę że mogę coś dodać lub się niezgodzić z prelegentem w jednej sprawie. Byłem w ostatnią noc muzeów w Muzeum Hutnictwa Mazowieckiego w Pruszkowie i tam była prelekcja o Celtach. Było powiedziane że to właśnie Celtowie nie mieli pisma ponieważ cała wiedza i kultura tego ludu była przekazywana ustnie poprzez Druidów oni byli taką encyklopedią i skarbnicą wiedzy a wiedza była imponująca jak na owe czasy ponieważ np kucie żelaza to była ich technologia i Rzymianie od nich się tego nauczyli. Jednak Rzymianie mieli pismo i ich wzmianki o Celtach to była propaganda w sensie czarnego pijaru. A więc pisma nie mieli nie tylko Słowianie lecz wcześniejsi Celtowie

      Grzegorz Rogawski
      Jak czegoś takiego na studiach historycznych uczą to lepiej żeby nie uczyli wcale

      Darek Budrewicz
      Z przykroscia stwierdzic trzeba, ze poziom wiedzy przekazywanej studentom zalezy w glownej mierze od aktualnie panujacej opcji politycznej,czego przykladem jest ten material, niestety lapka zdecydowanie w dol.

      GalahadMcGregor
      /Od czego ? Jakiej opcji ? Podstawówka się kłania. Tu nie ma nic do rzeczy polityka…matkoo

      Darek Budrewicz
      @GalahadMcGregor Witam, nie wiem ile masz lat,ale przedmiot historia w szkolach wygladal i nauczal czego innego przed 1989 rokiem (dla przypomnienia komunizm), a po 1989 roku program nauczania zalezal od opcji aktualnie rzadzacej. Jesli chcesz, przejdz sie do biblioteki i porownaj podreczniki szkolne,zanim napiszesz kolejny „inteligentny inaczej” post. Raczej Cie nie pozdrowie.i.

      Sattivasa
      @Darek Budrewicz
      Brednie.

      Czesław Góralski
      @Sattivasa prawda

      Sattivasa
      @Czesław Góralski
      Mój drogi, daruj sobie. Gucio wiesz o tym, czego się studentów historii czy archeologii uczyło i uczy.

      Czesław Góralski
      @Sattivasa tak dosłownie wiem zero mając w rodzinie dwóch absolwentów historii i przeczytane podreczniki akademickie XD

      Sattivasa
      @Czesław Góralski
      🤣🤣🤣

      Czesław Góralski
      @Sattivasa tia, dobrze podsumowałaś swój poziom

      Sattivasa
      @Czesław Góralski
      Nie podsumowała, a podsumowałeś, drogi eugeniuszu. Już to od dawna powinieneś wiedzieć. I jak zwykle: postaraj się nieco, bo nawet na wizę turystyczną do Wielkiej Szurlandii nie zapracujesz.

      Czesław Góralski
      @Sattivasa szurem nazywasz człowieka który czyta teksty źródłowe a nie przestarzałe Interpretacje turbogerman? Wow, postaraj się bo nie zasługujesz nawet na znaczek leminga

      Sattivasa
      @Czesław Góralski
      🤣🤣🤣

      Czesław Góralski
      @Sattivasa tia, pozostań orzy garnkach bo szersza historia czy antropologia cie przerasta

      Sattivasa
      @Czesław Góralski
      Jak wyżej, tylko bardziej.

      Zadruga Słowianin
      Język polski ma 7 przypadków odmiany rzeczowników, łacina 6, ruski 6,sanskryt 8, niemiecki 4,angielski tylko 1. Język polski ma trzy rodzaje przymiotników :męski, żeński i nijaki. Tak samo łacina. Prymitywny język angielski ma tylko rodzaj męski. W języku polskim tak jak w łacinie jest odmiana czasowników przez osoby. W prymitywnym, germańskim języku angielskim posługują się tylko bezokolicznikiem. Tak rozbudowany gramatycznie język polski, podobnie jak łacina świadczy o bogatym dziedzictwie. Tak rozbudowany język musiał powstać w mocarstwie jakie mieli Słowianie. Teutoni, prymitywni językowo Anglosasi byli wtedy bandami złodziei i rabusiów nie uprawiającymi ziemi. Wszystkie słowa dotyczące rolnictwa w językach germańskich są zapożyczeniami ze słowiańskiego. To Słowianie uprawiali ziemię, dzięki czemu mieli żywność. A dzięki dobremu zaopatrzeniu w żywność mogli tworzyć kulturę i tak rozbudowany gramatycznie język.

      Sattivasa
      Nic głupszego nie potrafiłeś całemu światu ogłosić? Postaraj się trochę, bo w ten sposób to ty nawet na wizę turystyczną do Szurlandii nie zapracujesz.

      Zadruga Słowianin
      @Sattivasa Jesteś naprawdę głupcem jeśli tego nie rozumiesz. Jednakże bardziej jesteś szkodnikiem tej prawdy, której napisałem. Gdyż wiesz, że ona prowadzi do świadomości, że język polski jest wznioślejszy od prostackiego, pozbawionego odmian wyrazów języka angielskiego. A w związku z tym, my Polacy jesteśmy dziedzicami tej szlachetnej kultury słowiańskiej. Będąc tego przeciwnikiem, szkodnikiem czeka cię los szkodnika.

      Polubienie

      Odpowiedz


    • Czy haplogrupa R1a1 to wyznacznik Słowiańskości?
      5,095 views•Jan 1, 2021
      ŚWIATOWA HISTORIA

      sHcHeniak bAZGROV
      I co 50% to malo…?lol

      MICHAL K
      polecam Kronikę Kadłubka, Długosza … zniemczone ludziska

      Sattivasa
      Gdybyś kiedykolwiek choć raz te kroniki przeczytał…

      Pieczar
      Nie dziwne że niemcy mają halpogrupę r1aw 20% skoro podbili ogromne słowiańskie tereny aż po łabę, ślady r1a w skandynawii wskazują prawdopodobnie na kolonizację tych terenów słowian lub migracje, w estonii te ludy mogły się same się krzyżować. Halpogrupa r1a jest aryjska, ludu który podbił indie i ustanowił tam system kastowy czego dowodem jest r1a u 73% braminów. Nasz język jest językiem bardzo bliskim sanskrytowi i pochodzi od niego w prostej linii. Także wiara słowiańska przetrwała aż do chrystianizacji – bardzo przypomina wiarę indusów bo brahma to świętowid. Moim zdaniem 55% do dosyć sporo biorąc pod uwagę tysiące lat w których ludy mogły się przemieszać. Kultura słowiańska była atrakcyjna dla innych ludów z powodu gościnności, braku niewolnictwa i uczciwości tych ludów co sprzyjało „mieszaniu się”.

      Sattivasa
      🤣🤣🤣

      Hortensja Nick
      Kulturę łużyckia stworzyły ludy z haplogrupa R1A. Ludy te nazywane też : protoslowianskie, zajmowały tereny do Renu. Historia Ariów jest uwieczniona w ich ” świętych księgach” Wedach. Jest przyjęte, że przyszli oni z północy, podbijając ludy drawidyjskie i spychając je na południe Półwyspu Indyjskiego. Ariowie przejęli kulturę miejscową / Harrapa /, wprowadzając swoją religię i obyczaje. Zaprowadzili system kastowy, dlatego jest tak wysoki procent haplogrupy R1A wśród najwyższych kast : braminów- kapłanów i rycerzy. Niemcy powołują się na swoje pochodzenie, powołując się na Gotów. Mieszkańcy Skandynawii: Norwegowie i Szwedzi, chełpią się korzeniami Wikingów. Grecy współcześni, dumni są ze swojej antycznej historii. Jak wiemy, nowożytni Grecy nie mają aż tak wiele genetycznie wspólnego z Grekami starożytnymi.

      Sattivasa
      Moja droga, gdyby tak Ci uwierzyć, że ludzie z haplogrupą R1a to przynajmniej „protosłowiańscy” są, to musielibyśmy uznać, że skośnoocy i mówiący po turecku Kirgizi są pełnoprawnymi Słowianami Jurtowymi. Niemcy nie powołują się na żadnych Gotów, albowiem to nie ta grupa Germanów. Goci to wschodni Germanowie, którzy sobie powędrowali przez ziemie polskie aż nad Morze Czarne, a stamtąd aż na Półwysep Apeniński (Ostrogoci) i na Półwysep Pirenejski (Wizygoci).

      Hortensja Nick
      @Sattivasa ” Co ma piernik do wiatraka” Haplogrupa, to haplogrupa, nie ma nic wiele wspólnego z narodowością. Mutacje miały miejsce wiele tysięcy lat temu. Narody tworzyły się i tworzą, ludzie się mieszają. Na przykład Chazarzy, w Afganistanie wyglądają inaczej a bardziej na zachód Azji inaczej. Kirgizi często mają haplogrupe R1A i co z tego. Nie rozumiesz najwyrazniej istoty sprawy.

      Sattivasa
      @Hortensja Nick
      🤣🤣🤣 W tym właśnie rzecz, że ludzie się mieszają, a haplogrupą nie decyduje o przynależności do grupy etnicznej. Dotyczy to również Słowian.

      Hortensja Nick
      @Sattivasa Jednak jest taka nauka jak genetyka, łączy się ona z antropologią. Uczeni badając naszą prehistorię i historię sięgają do tych pierwszych. Nie można tego zanegować. Zostały wyszczególnione haplogrupy, które charakteryzują się określonymi cechami. Spotykamy jeszcze w Europie przedstawicieli tak Celtów jak i Słowian. Łączy ich nie tylko pochodzenie indoeuropejskie ale też język. Na przykład Irlandczycy bardzo są dumni ze swych celtyckich korzeni. Też będziesz ich wyszydzał, czy może skupiasz się tylko na Słowianach?

      Sattivasa
      @Hortensja Nick
      Ta paplanina to miała o czym być?

      Hortensja Nick
      @Sattivasa Może ty boisz się słowa Słowianin jak ” Diabeł święconej wody”? Co, nie nie ma takich dziedzin nauki? Nie odpowiadają ci w odniesieniu do Słowian? Daj spokój bo paplasz.

      Sattivasa
      @Hortensja Nick
      A to miało być o czym?

      Hortensja Nick
      @Sattivasa No wypowiedz się na temat Słowian, bo twoje kontr argumenty to paplanina. Negujesz poważne dziedziny nauki. Uważam, że jesteś złej woli. Nie mam czasu na takie podjazdy.

      Sattivasa
      @Hortensja Nick
      I znowu pustosłowie.

      Jacek Partyka
      Śmierdzi niemiecką propagandą.

      Bonus88
      Daj sobie spokój. Jesteś niekonsekwętny. R1 to nie słowianie i tym bardziej Polacy a w innym filmie mówiłeś że Piastowie byli Celtami właśnie z powodu haplogrupy.

      filozof dociekliwy
      zadziwiasz mnie kłamco , bo wszyscy wiedzą że kultura łużycka to byli słowianie (do dzisiaj istnieje język serbsko łużycki i nie jest językiem niemieckim), a poza tym Polacy nie są potomkami persów, znaczniki czasowe mutacji Y-DNA jasno dowodzą że R1a1 pochodzi z centralnej azji i wczesne mutacje powstały tam , na tym drzewie mutacji ludy „bałtosłowiańskie” powstały wcześniej niż irańskie i indyjskie ,poza tym nie ma nic niezwykłego w tym że słowianie są blisko spokrewnieni z ariami którzy podbili indie, co znaczy że żyje tam 300 mln naszych krewnych. No i najgorsze że koleś powtarza kłamstwa naszych zaborców o tym że słowianie spadli desantem spadochronowym z bagien prypeci w 7 wieku naszej ery, mimo współczesnych badania które dowodzą że ludy „prasłowiańskie” są na terenach środkowej europy już co najmniej 6 tyś lat

      Sattivasa
      Mój drogi, nazwa kultury łużyckiej nic wspólnego nie ma ze Słowianami, nie istnieją żadne badania, dowodzące, że jacyś Prasłowianie „są na terenach środkowej europy już co najmniej 6 tyś lat”.

      Polubienie

      Odpowiedz


  12. Słowiański Bełkot ciąg dalszy ….
    23,799 views•Feb 28, 2019
    ŚWIATOWA HISTORIA

    lesław ostapiuk
    Ty lawirujesz miedzy ściema a prawdziwa historią tak w połowie 🙂 Walcz dalej bo postępy zrobiles od ostatniej publikacji o słowianach, pozdrawiam 😀

    Bartosz
    Ej to jak słowianie pojawili sie w 5 wieku to gdzie byli przedtem? ( to nie jest sarkastyczne pytania ale chcialbym wiedzieć)

    Mariusz Kwiat
    Te dzikie ale jakże ludne plemiona bez kszty kultury gnieździły się zapewne w jakimś lesie na Ukrainie. Gdy opuścili teren to pozostały tylko dzikie pola bez lasu. Było po prostu ich w tym lesie tyle, że drzewa nie rosły. A co ja tam będę mówił, w zerówce pewnie było.

    Marcin Cichowski
    Chodzą słuchy że byli na Marsie, ale gdy doszło do wybuchu elektrowni atomowej tam musieli uciekać i uciekli na ziemię.

    Lukasz K
    Na przystanku czekali na autobus do Polski.

    J K
    Jeśli chodzi o komentarz do 2-go wpisu : Skoro mówisz że słowianie pojawili się w 6 wieku to skąd w grobach ocenianych na 2600-2000 r. p.n.e szczątki z haplogrupą R1a ?

    J K
    Zapomniałem dopisać że groby te odryto w Małopolsce 5 km od mojego domu.

    ŚWIATOWA HISTORIA
    Mutacja R1a powstała 15 000 lat temu najprawdopodobniej w okolicach Indii albo Afganistanu, i haplogrupę tę nie posiadali tylko Słowianie, ale również ich przodkowie jak np. przedstawiciele kultury grobów jamowych, i trzeba pamiętać że za pomocą haplogrupy można obserwować ruchy społeczności, ale to nie świadczy o słowiańskości, bo występuje ona w Polsce (50% mężczyzn ją posiada) ale też posiadają ją Niemcy, Afgańczycy, Turcy czy Łotysze. Pozdrawiam

    J K
    Rozumiem. Szkoda że tak mało w szkole podaje się wiedzy ” co było przed Mieszkiem I ” Pozdrawiam.

    Vik_JP
    Napewno nie w Indiach bo tam to R1a przylezli zaledwie kilka tysiecy lat temu. R1a u Niemcow to w ponad 90% zgermanizowani Polacy, Polabianie i Sorby. Najnowsze badania genetyczne w Niemczech zachodnich wykazaly, ze prawie 1/3 Niemcow zachodnich pochodzi od Slowian z Polski. Az sie Niemiaszki zdziwili. Baltowie to mieszanka dwoch grup: N i R1a dlatego nawet dzis np w lotewskim liczebniki sa niemal identyczne jak w polskim. Tak samo jest w jezyku jakim mowia w Punjabie czyli Pieciorzeczu. Mialem w pracy kolege matematyka z Pinjabu i wyszukiwalismy sobie slowa zrozumiale w obu jezykach. Jest ich calkiem sporo. Jeszcze wiecej takich ktore po zastanowieniu sie wygladaja, ze pochodza z tego samego slowa. @ŚWIATOWA HISTORIA

    Kamil Kolmer
    R1A maja tez turasy, norwedzy czy szwedzi xd

    De Revolutionibus
    Słowo „lach” nie wywodzi się ze staroruskiego, tylko ze starobałto-słowiańskiego, a tak na dobrą sprawę z praindoeuropejskiego, ponieważ w wielu innych językach indoeuropejskich znajdujemy jego odpowiedniki. Rdzeń „lah” podlega alteracjom „leh”, „loh”, h się udźwięcznia na g i k. Stąd znajdujemy słowa takie, jak Lach, Lech, Legnica, Lędzianie („le(g)dzianie”), ląd („lond”), łąka („lonka”), Lądzianie („londzianie”). Po starogrecku mamy logos („połączenie, zdanie”), legein („mówić, łączyć”), po litewsku lankà („łąka”), po tocharsku lak („patrzeć, oglądać”), po albańsku mbledh („łączyć, dodawać”). A o Lachach w księdze Nestora jest sporo, ale nie zawsze wiadomo, czy mówi o jednym plemieniu, czy dwóch różnych o tej samej nazwie.

    Sattivasa
    Akurat u Nestora wiadomo, co to takiego te Lachy.

    Defender muuus
    Kultura Łużycka to przodkowie słowian? 🙂 Czyli jednak możemy być dumni z ich zdobyczy technologii, bo to jednak w jakimś stopniu nasi przodkowie.

    Sven Zimmermann
    Defender 2005 muuus Kultura Łużycka należała do różnych ludów, nie tylko do jednych. Owszem prawdopodobnie byli wśród nich ludy słowiańskie, ale raczej nie Polacy, tylko bardziej Słowianie łużyccy (tzw. Serbołużyczanie).

    Sattivasa
    @Sven Zimmermann
    Kultura Łużycka nic wspólnego nie ma z Serbołużyczanami..

    Muniek M
    Jeden zasadniczy błąd… teorii na temat czasu przybycia na nasze ziemie Słowian jest wiele… przyjmujesz za pewnik jedną…. poniżej krytki…. odpowiedz mi na jedno pytanie Panie przemądrzały jakim językiem mówili przedstawiciele np. kultury łużyckiej….. pytanie retoryczne oczywiście bo nikt z nas tego nie wie a przyjmując za PEWNIK że byli to nie słowianie stajesz się „betonem” nie uwzględniając naprawdę dużej ilości opracowań. Nie jestem Turbo słowianinem etc tylko podejdż do zagadnienia krytycznie… tak naprawdę Gówno ty wiesz jak i gówna ja wiem na temat słowian bo po sobie prawie nic nie zostawili a wygłaszanie teorii i hipotez jako pewnik tylko miesza w głowach.

    Ajki
    Teoria podważenia naszych praw do tych ziem, to jest trend zaszczepiony w naszych uczelniach na zgubę naszej ojczyzny. Razem ze stajnią genderową.

    Piotr Kiczek
    Ostatni przedstawiciel kultury idiotów zrobił film.kultura Łużycka lejkowata itd .gdzie oni się rozeszli jedni na Marsa drudzy na Wenus i tak sobie spacerowali bo nie mieli nic do roboty spróbuj wejść tutaj w polemikę że mną zobaczymy jak wiele potrafisz jak wiele wiesz ja z tego nie żyje nie pałam się też tym że jestem Lechią bo nie wiem czy Lechia była.ale nienawidzę gdy ktoś komuś oferuje bzdury jako prawdę .

    Sattivasa
    Ten bełkot to miał o czym być?

    ituri1
    Najlepsze w tym wszystkin jest to,ze miazdzeniem turboslowian,zajeli sie potomkowie prawdziwie dzikich,bezkulturowych i bezmyslnych ,plemion z Bliskiego Wschodu,A najciekawsze,ze sami wymyslili jakies absolutnie bzdurne opowiesci.Przykladowo jak po przejsciu sucha noga morza.zrobili porzadek z innymi narodami rozwalajac gra na trabkach mury miast.Pozniej rozwineli wspaniala cywilizacje,przyrzekajac solennie ,ze nigdzy juz nie posuna zadnej kozy.Dziwnym trafem cala ta przebogata ,przesiaknieta niewiarygodna madroscia cywilizacja ,zaginela w piaskach pustyni.I zal tylko koz…

    Sattivasa
    Ten bełkot to o czym miał być?

    Jerzy Skowronek
    W oparciu o co jest ta twoja wiedza ??? Doszedleś sam do tego ?? czy wyczytaleś gdzieś w książkach??? czy pamiętasz ze szkoły ?? A więc ja ci wyjaśnię mądrusiu , ten kto pisał tą ksiazke z której jest ta twoja wiedza skąd to wszystko wiedział ???? Może z neta ??? A oni skąd znali tą historię ?? Może z książki??? Prymitywny jesteś chłopczyku ! Jeśli chcesz coś pisać i mówić w tym temacie to nawet tytuł profesora ci nie da takiej wiedzy jaka jest rzeczywista historia ! Zaznaczam iż twoja teoria bierze się z nikąd bo każdy pisze jak widzi . Jeśli chodzi o bzdury to sam pieprzysz nie wiesz o czym.

    Sattivasa
    Ten bełkot to miał o czym być?

    Philipek42
    Sceptycyzm zawsze jest zdrowy. Ja ze sceptycznym podejściem szukam prawdziwej historii. Ale.. To co Ty mówisz, to teorie całkowicie niepasujące do badań genetycznych. Tak się składa, że mieszkam niedaleko „słowiańskich piramid”. Wielokrotnie je odwiedzam i wielokrotnie od deski do deski czytam tamtejsze tablice. Jeden z leżących tam, najpewniej bardzo ważnych wojów, zginą od włóczni. Jednakże przeżył 2 trepanacje czaszki. Grób datowany na 3500p.n.e. Badania DNA wykazały, że leżą tam nasi bezpośredni przodkowie. R1a1. Oczywiście obalasz teorie postawioną na podstawie tychże badań, mówiąc, że dużo tego DNA też u Duńczyków. A może Duńczycy dostali od nas wciry? Wychędożyliśmy ich dziewki, osadziliśmy się na ich rejonach i stąd tam nasze DNA? Za łatwo Ci przychodzi odrzucanie różnych teorii bez konfrontacji i ich rozpatrzenia a sam wszystkich o to oskarżasz. Jasne, że wszystko może być bajką powielaną przez egocentryzm Polaków z kompleksem Wikingów. Nigdzie też nie mogę znaleźć rzeczowych dowodów na fałszerstwo wszystkich RUN słowiańskich. Chociażby tych co mamy na odwrocie banknotu 10zł. Nie są to litery.

    P.S. W żadnym wypadku nie zamierzam na Ciebie naskakiwać. Długo szukałem jakiegoś sceptyka, który temat by poruszył a nic nie jest tak efektywne w weryfikowaniu swoich informacji jak merytoryczna debata z drugą stroną konfliktu. Historia z naszych podręczników wielokrotnie była fałszowana. Chociażby wyżej wspomniane, przeze mnie grobowce, po odkryciu były okrzyknięte grobami Arian-przodków nazistowskich Niemców którzy teraz w historii próbują być przedstawiani jako „naziści” najlepiej pochodzenia polskiego a biedni Niemcy byli przez nich okupowani. Takie fałszerstwo dzieje się na naszych oczach.

    Sattivasa
    🤣🤣🤣

    robert ozdoba
    Poziom szkolnictwa w Polsce jest słaby???? A ty gdzie się uczyłeś historii? W Niemczech czy w Watykanie? Bo brniesz w zaparte jak osioł.

    Andrzej
    autor to tak: mądro – głupo? Naczytał się wikipedii, dorwał się do kompa i wydalił z siebie filmik. No cóż…każdy może….. Jak rozumiem, ostatnie badania, np. genetyczne (nie ujęte w wikipedii) nie mają znaczenia dla autora i wszechświata? Najważniejsze, że mamy kultury garnków, które tak naprawdę niczego nie udowadniają. Są to artefakty, które próbowano do czegoś dokleić z wikipedii. Trzymajmy się tego jak tramwaju (takiego starego, przedwojennego). „Skrócę się mocno”, bo zrozumiałem, że z autorem nie warto polemizować. To taki osobnik, co chętnie paliłby książki a jedyną słuszną, którą by zostawił byłaby wulgata a może czerwona książeczka z myślami Mao. „Perły przed wieprze”.

    Polubienie

    Odpowiedz

    • Wygląda na to że, autor filmików pobierał nauki w Wyższej Szkole Bezpieczeństwa i Ochrony, w której wykładają absolwenci Akademii Michaiła Frunzego.

      Polubione przez 1 osoba

      Odpowiedz

      • Myślę, że to raczej abiturient, absolwent, itd. jednocześnie polskojęzycznego oddziału Fielko-Germańskiej Szkoły Narodowego Pruskiego Socjalizmu, jak Sattivassa, itp., czyli jest po UJ…

        Polubienie

        Odpowiedz

          • Faktem jest, że ten (i inni mu podobni) kolesie umysłowo mieszkają w samym środku fielko-germańsko-prusko-nazistowskiej dziury w niemieckiej dupie. Nie ma sensu dyskutować tu o jego / ich pochodzeniu, genetyce, itp. Ktoś, kto żywi się fielko-germańsko-prusko-nazistowską kupą i jeszcze ją rozsiewa swoimi ustami, nie interesuje Mię. Życie owsików, glist ludzkich, tasiemców, czy innych gnijących padalców pozostawiam im samym.

            Polubienie

            Odpowiedz


  13. Indo-European words for God – The Meaning of God Through Etymological Exploration
    7,693 views•Apr 5, 2021
    Fortress of Lugh

    A look at the meaning for words for god or the gods in various Indo-European languages. This is not a comprehensive list of all words, mainly those with cognates in other languages.

    Dayron
    In Polish:
    bogactwo = wealth
    bogaty = rich
    ubogi = scarce

    …..

    Dziwne nie jest, że o Dziw, Dziwny, Dziewczyna, Dziewka, Dziwka, itp ofitzjalni nie słyszeli, ani nie kojarzą tego.

    Polubienie

    Odpowiedz

  15. Polecam dyskusję pod ostatnim wpisem u Davidskiego, szczególnie od komentarza 200:
    https://eurogenes.blogspot.com/2021/04/the-bacho-kiro-surprise-hajdinjak-et-al.html

    Właśnie dochodzą tam do wniosków o których piszę od dawna, że GAC są słowiańskim elementem zaś R1a napływowym, zeslawizowanym bałtyjskim, które w epoce żelaza, w kulturze łużyckiej są już jednorodną populacją słowiańską.
    R1a poza zasięgiem GAC zostało takim jakim było, czyli niesłowiańskim, aż do epoki żelaza i migracji słowiańskich na wschód, o czym w następnej epoce zaświadcza nam Nestor.

    Polubienie

    Odpowiedz

        • „Skoro Uraliki są już na stałe przypisani do hg.N, do czego przypiszesz Bałtów?”

          Nie wiek kto kiedy i jak przypisał UF do N, a szczególnie do N1c. Taki Carlos R1a od dawna przypisuje na stałe do UF, czyli wg niego Bałtowie to UF. Ja ciągle pytam skąd wziął się Proto-IE jednocześnie i u WHG i u EHG, skoro wg Ciebie jednocześnie i I2a mają być IE i R1a też. Uciekasz od odpowiedzi na to pytanie już bardzo długo…

          Jak widać na przykładach językowych, Pra-Bałtowie nie mogli być pierwotni wobec Pra-Słowian. Było dokładnie odwrotnie. Bałtowie wytworzyli się z Proto-Słowian, tak wynika z danych językowych i pisze o tym już od dość dawna. Nowy wpis tez będzie o tym.

          Polubienie

          Odpowiedz

          • [skąd wziął się Proto-IE jednocześnie i u WHG i u EHG, skoro wg Ciebie jednocześnie i I2a mają być IE i R1a też]

            Nie wiem, skoro sanskryt zaliczono do języków IE, to i R1a pozostałe w Europie też musi być w tej grupie. Mi to wystarcza.

            Polubienie

            Odpowiedz

            • Znów nic nie wyjaśniasz i kręcisz się w kółko. I2a jako Proto-IE to WHG, a R1a jako Proto-IE to EHG. I2a od 30,000 lat siedzi na Bałkanach, podczas gdy R1a przyszło ze wschodu z Syberii, itp, jakieś 10,000 – 12,000 lat temu…

              Nie umiesz tej 20,000 letniej różnicy logicznie skleić, ale i tak sklejasz w jedno i to samo Proto-IE… Brafo! Południowa droga R1a i jego samospalanie, itp, no to przy Twoich pomysłach bledną! 😦

              Jeśli Tobie to wystarcza, no cóż…

              Polubienie

              Odpowiedz

              • [ podczas gdy R1a przyszło ze wschodu z Syberii, itp, jakieś 10,000 – 12,000 lat temu…

                Nie umiesz tej 20,000 letniej różnicy logicznie skleić, ale i tak sklejasz w jedno i to samo Proto-IE…]

                Przecież jak dotąd najstarsze R1a pochodzi z pogranicza Ukrainy i Rosji, ale zostało znalezione razem z I2 oraz R1b. Były tam trzy mezolityczne próbki, czyli kontakty były już w mezolicie, a przecież podział język-haplogrupa który postuluję to neolit.

                Do tego R1a na pewno nie pochodzi z Syberii patrząc na płw.Indyjski i dominujący tam R2, to R1a widziałbym gdzieś pod drodze między południową Rosją a Indiami, ale na razie nie wiadomo skąd przyszedł, czy tez gdzie się rozdzieliło R1 z R2.

                Polubione przez 1 osoba

                Odpowiedz

                • Robercie, Bałtowie nie mają 90% słowiańskich końcówek, rdzenie ich słów bardzo często bywają zupełnie inne od rdzeni słów słowiańskich / polskich, itd. Wynika z tego, że tzw. Bałtowie, to coś zmieszanego i wtórnego wobec Pra-Słowian. Weź to na klatę, prześpij się z tym i może spróbuj wyjaśnić, ale nie tak, że Tobie to wystarcza…

                  Jeśli myślisz, że bredzę, no to lepiej zerknij na ten artykuł i komentarze pod tym wpisem.

                  https://eurogenes.blogspot.com/2021/04/the-history-of-scythians-gnecchi.html

                  Thursday, April 22, 2021

                  The history of the Scythians (Gnecchi-Ruscone et al. 2021)

                  Zamierzam tam trochę popisać i wyjaśnić to i owo. Oto bowiem nadejszła wiekopomna chwiła i zamierzam odkopać śmierdzące truchło pierdoleń sarmacko-scytyjskich, a także fielko-tureckich i pokazać je wszem i wobec. Dr Makuch i inni scytyjsko-sarmaccy bajkopisarze powinni raczej głębiej kopać swe norki…

                  Zaczęło się bardzo obiecująco, patrz:

                  SKRiBHa said…
                  Hello there.

                  I have looked at the ‘Supplementary Materials’ attached to this paper. I noted that there is additional data related to YDNA of these 111, or 117, samples.

                  Particularly, the file „abe4414_Data_file_S1.xlsx” contains very interesting data.

                  It can be observed that the Scythians and Sarmatians were very mixed peoples, see the haplogroups:

                  Q1a (Q-M1155, Q-L472), Q1a1 (Q-F1215, Q-F1096), Q1a2a (Q-L475; Q-L53), Q1a1a1 (Q-M265, Q-M120), Q1a1b1a (Q-L713), Q1a2a1 (Q-L54), Q1a2a1c (Q-L334; Q-L330), Q1b1b1 (Q-FGC4872, Q-Y2990),
                  E1b1b1a1b1a (E-V13), E1b1b1b2a (E-M123),
                  CT (CT-M5812, CT-M168), CT (CT-M5603, CT-M168),
                  CF (CF-M3690,CF-P143),
                  J (J-CTS852, J-M304), J2a (J-L212, J-M410), J2a1h2 (J-L25),
                  C2b (C-L1373), C2b1c (C-F1918),
                  D1b2a (D-Z17175; D-CTS220),
                  L (L-PF5747, L-M20), L1a2 (L-M357),
                  NO (NO-F549, NO-M2313),
                  N1c1(N-L395, N-M46), N1c1a (N-P298, N-M178), N1c1a1a (N-L392), N1c1a1a2 (N-CTS10082, N-Z1936),
                  F (F-P14, F-M89),
                  G (G-M3544, G-M201),
                  P1 (P-P243, P-M45),
                  BT (BT-M9267, BT-M42), BT (BT-Z12003, BT-M42),

                  However, I paid special attention to the diversity of the samples of the R haplogroup presented there, see:

                  R1 (R-P225, R-M173), R1 (R-P238, R-M173)

                  R1b1a2 (R-PF6475, R-M269)

                  R1a (R-L62, R-M420),
                  R1a (R-L63, R-M420),
                  R1a1a (R-M512),
                  R1a1a (R-M198, R-M512), R1a1a (R-L449, R-M512)
                  R1a1a1 (R-M417),
                  R1a1a1b (R-Z645),
                  R1a1a1b (R-Z647, R-Z645),
                  R1a1a1b2 (R-Z93),
                  R1a1a1b2a (R-Z94)

                  Both the so-called ‘European’ and ‘Asian’ R1a was present among the Scythian and Sarmatian peoples.

                  Questions:

                  1.
                  Were the ancestors of male Scythians also R1a men from Europe, e.g. from CWC, or were they only people from Siberia, e.g. descendants of Locomotiv, etc.?

                  2.
                  Does the lack of ‘Asian’ R1a subclades among the present population of Poland prove the lack of contact between the ancestors of the present Poles and the Scythians and Sarmatians?

                  I will be very grateful for your opinions.

                  Best regards
                  SKRiBHa
                  April 28, 2021 at 3:49 PM

                  Blogger Davidski said…
                  There’s no R1a in Locomotiv. Those samples are either contaminated or wrongly dated.

                  R1a didn’t exist in Asia until it was brought there by migrants from Europe during the Bronze Age.

                  And Poles don’t have any Scythian or Sarmatian ancestry, that’s why there are no Asian, or rather so called Asian, R1a subclades in Poland except in rare cases among people who have non-Polish ancestry, like from a Tatar or Jewish male ancestor.
                  April 29, 2021 at 4:05 AM

                  Polubienie

    • Dodam jeszcze, że oficjalnie Varaha (dzik, który wyłowił ziemię) pochodzi z uralskiego substratu w indo-irańskim, a uralski woraća, fiński oraca nie mają nic wspólnego z oraniem, ryciem i racicami. „PWU (Fi., Md.) woraći/woraća ‘pig, boar’ (UEW Nº 1458) ~ PIIr. *warāʒ́ʰá- ‘boar, swine’ (Parpola 2005: 42-45). Usually assumed to be a borrowing in Indo-Iranian from the Asian Agricultural Substrate, the regularity between both West Uralic branches hints to an early Uralic borrowing (Holopainen 2019: 313-314 with references).”

      Polubione przez 1 osoba

      Odpowiedz

  17. Pingback: 294 Końcówki Proto-Slavic *-nьcь, *-nikъ, *-ьnica, *-ьnikъ, -ница, -ник, помазанник, pomazaniec, избранник, wybraniec, wybranek, wybranka, избранница, *bedrьnьcь, *bedrьnikъ, *bedrьnica, biedrzeniec, bolni

  18. Bardzo ciekawy film, o Celtach i ich pochodzeniu. Okazuje się miedzy innymi, że garnki oznaczają garnki, i nic więcej, czyli KoSSinowcy nie mogą tego filmu lubić…


    Ancient Origins of the Celts – Ancient Civilizations DOCUMENTARY
    3,311 views•Apr 27, 2021
    Kings and Generals

    The Kings and Generals animated historical documentary series on the ancient civilizations continues with a video on the Celts, as we discuss their ancient origins, culture, religion, economic and political structures, with a focus on the Hallstatt and La Tene civilizations.

    Polubienie

    Odpowiedz

  19. Milczę bo nie wiem czy teoria Robka jest najlepsza.
    Najbardziej nie pasuje mi w niej bałtyckość R1a, a następnie powszechna jego slawizacja.
    Nawet mam opory z zaakceptowaniem że Z280 było bałtyckie.

    Poza tym nie mam pewności czy Prusowie mieli etnonim po Porusie władcy Pendżabu czy odwrotnie Porus był potomkiem przybyłego do Pendżabu Prusa.
    Jak myślicie?

    W zasadzie to jeśli rzeczywiście tzw dryf bałtosłowiański czyli rozlanie się genów z brązowej Estonii na południe był związany z językiem bałtyckim to należy rozważyć słowiańskość południa, bo skąd Bułgarzy, Słowency czy Serbowie mieliby język słowianski jeśli przybyli byli Bałtami?

    Bez względu na język komponentu BA Estonia to trochę niesamowite że mamy tego tak dużo.
    I ciekawe skąd się wziął. (w sensie co złożyło się na jego powstanie, bo przed nim było CWC bałtyckie)
    Pamiętam że w Brązie stepu ubywa a WHG wzrasta.

    S, czego dowiedziałeś się od Davidskiego?

    Polubione przez 1 osoba

    Odpowiedz

    • (…) S, czego dowiedziałeś się od Davidskiego? (…)

      Dużo, patrz Alexandria, jako Z93 była z grobu z innego okresu, itp. Kluczy jednak, co do CHG i Yamna. Przyciskam go jak mogę, ale unika tego, co mu nie pasuje. Sama zobacz.

      Polubienie

      Odpowiedz

    • [Najbardziej nie pasuje mi w niej bałtyckość R1a, a następnie powszechna jego slawizacja.]

      Tak piszą o języku, który najmocniej zeslawizował Bałtów:

      Według Franciszka Sławskiego język scs. nawiązuje ściśle do końcowego okresu języka prasłowiańskiego, oddaje język wspólny wszystkim Słowianom, język prasłowiański. Podobną opinię wyrażał Leszek Moszyński i Henrik Birnbaum. Czesław Bartula uważał, że język ten ma charakter prasłowiański o podłożu dialektalnym sołuńskim[4].

      Coś co jest najbliższe prasłowiańskości to obszar, gdzie R1a jest znaczącą mniejszością:

      Dodam, że znaczna część bałtykskiego R1a została na wschodzie najpierw zuralizowana i zugrofinizowana, a dopiero potem zeslawizowana, większość całkiem niedawno, bo za caratu.

      Polubione przez 1 osoba

      Odpowiedz

      • (…) Według Franciszka Sławskiego język scs. nawiązuje ściśle do końcowego okresu języka prasłowiańskiego, oddaje język wspólny wszystkim Słowianom, język prasłowiański. Podobną opinię wyrażał Leszek Moszyński i Henrik Birnbaum. Czesław Bartula uważał, że język ten ma charakter prasłowiański o podłożu dialektalnym sołuńskim[4]. (…)

        A ja twierdzę, że SCS / OCS to sztuczny język, stworzony przez wrogów Słowiańszczyzny, którym nie mówił nikt, oparty na późno zesłowiańszczonych jakichś gwarach turków wołgarskich.

        Nawet wiki to wie, patrz:

        https://pl.wikipedia.org/wiki/J%C4%99zyk_staro-cerkiewno-s%C5%82owia%C5%84ski

        Polubienie

        Odpowiedz

  20. Mnie to zastanawiało dlaczego badacze jak Davidsky (nie jak Carlos) są tacy pewni że komponent jak Yamna przenosił języki indoeuropejskie.
    Skoro żadna współczesna IE populacja nie ma tego komponentu tyle co Mansowie czy Khantowie. Nie pamiętam już kto dokładnie.
    Ale pamiętam, że słowo mańś u Mansów oznaczało człowieka. Zupełnie jak man u Anglików. Więc wspólna leksyka jest.
    Co o tym myślicie?
    Czy pra Mansowie byli PIE i następnie zostali zUF?

    Grecy i Włosi mają niewiele tego Mansi/Yamna komponentu, ale mają maxa rolniczego zaraz po Sardyńczykach.

    Polubione przez 1 osoba

    Odpowiedz

    • Hej, poczytaj to, co pokarze się w moich następnych komentarzach u Davidskiego. Masz tam moją teorię co do Yamna.

      https://eurogenes.blogspot.com/2021/04/the-history-of-scythians-gnecchi.html?showComment=1620308916672#c3265996771519200294

      Robert ma rację, że I2 było w sumie wszędzie. Jeśli ono ma być Pra-Słowiańskie / PIE, czy Pra-PIE, no to musi w końcu napisać wszystko to, co myśli w punktach, żebyśmy mogli się temu przyjrzeć dokładnie. Jak na razie dzupa spita.

      Ja drażę do coraz bardziej tyłu, ale po kolej. Teraz ustalam, gdzie wyłonił się Pra-Indo-Irański, czyli Pra-Aryjski, ale już nie CWC, no chyba, że ‚europejskie’ CWC to też ‚azjatyccy’ Ariowie… hehehe

      Miło, że odtajałaś. Mam nadzieję, że u Ciebie wszystko gra i bucy. Pozdrawiam.

      Polubienie

      Odpowiedz

      • „patrz Alexandria, jako Z93 była z grobu z innego okresu,”
        Oj szkoda. Mieszają nam w głowie a potem prostują?
        Spora różnica między 4 tys pne i M417 a dużo młodszym Aryjczykiem na Ukrainie.
        Więc R1a nie było w kulturze SS i nie miało nic wspólnego z koniem.
        Czy Babik znalazł indoiranską warstwę toponimiczną na Ukrainie? Coś wiesz?

        Też bym chciała żeby Robert lepiej objaśnił swoją wersję. Przede wszystkim podał argumenty które sprawiły że właśnie tak myśli.

        Potrzebuję też wyjaśnić wspólne słowa z UF.

        Również Cię pozdrawiam.

        Polubione przez 1 osoba

        Odpowiedz

    • [Czy pra Mansowie byli PIE i następnie zostali zUF?]

      Ja bym własnie tak przyjął, tylko tym PIE był komponent bałtyjski, nie ma ich na tej liście jakie mają YDna https://www.eupedia.com/europe/european_y-dna_haplogroups.shtml
      Ale wszyscy ich sąsiedzi mają ten sam schemat, czyli dwie główne składowe R1a i N, tylko w róznych proporcjach, co by nawet miało potwierdzenie w ich przekazie kulturowym:

      Nazwa Manś (Moańś) w języku mansyjskim oznacza „człowiek”.

      Naród wykształcił się w rezultacie zmieszania się miejscowych, neolitycznych plemion uralskich z napływowymi plemionami uralskimi, które w II–I tys. p.n.e. przez stepy i lasostepy zachodniej Syberii i Kazachstanu przybyły do północno-wschodniego skrawka Europy. (Świadomość owego dwuskładnikowego pochodzenia narodu zachowana została w tradycji podziału Mansów na dwie grupy: Por i Moś.)

      To jest to o czym powyżej napisałem, że najpierw stracili swoją bałtyjskość na rzecz uralskości, a dopiero potem zostali zeslawizowanie, pomocny niech będzie cytat o Komiakach, ich sąsiadach:

      Wywodzą się ze średniowiecznych plemion ugrofińskich, zamieszkujących tereny między jeziorem Ładoga a Uralem. W XIII i XIV w. ich ziemie włączone zostały do Republiki Nowogrodzkiej, a Komiacy podlegali silnym wpływom ruskim – wkrótce przyjęli również religię prawosławną.

      Zwracam uwagę, że słowiańskim był tylko Nowogród Wielki, był samotną wyspą pośród niesłowiańskich ludów. To niech będzie też dowód na wątpliwości jakim cudem stała się ta slawizacja.
      Proces jest udokumentowany, język religii prawosławnej, wymyślony w Grecji, był tutaj kluczowy, dopiero po nim wchodzi dodatkowo carat i polityczny nadzór.

      Komi z twarzy na takich własnie wyglądają:

      YDna Komi to 30% R1a oraz 50% N.

      Gdy język starocerkiewnosłowiański powstał gdzie R1a występuje do 15%

      Polubione przez 1 osoba

      Odpowiedz

      • „neolitycznych plemion uralskich z napływowymi plemionami uralskimi” – chyba uralskich (w sensie geograficznym/archeologicznym) z napływowymi ugryjskimi – redaktor wiki nie umiał przetłumaczyć (местных племён уральской неолитической культуры и угорских племён).
        Jest taki konstrukt jak języki paleoeuropejskie i substrat przedugrofiński, tylko że ów substrat, gdyby miał być związany z R1a, powinien zachować się także u północnych Słowian.

        Polubione przez 1 osoba

        Odpowiedz

  21. Mi chodziło czy Babik badając tysiące nazw z Białorusi i Ukrainy wspominał o innym podsłowianskim substracie niż tylko bałtycki.

    Co do stepu to dopóki nie pojawi się coś przełomowego to jest gdybanie i hipotetyzowanie bez konca.
    A to mnie wymęczyło już.

    Napisałam – najsłabszym punktem jest maksymalna obecność komponentu jak Yamna u Mansów, Khantów i okolicznych grup.
    Więc z tej perspektywy nie podzielam hura optymizmu zwolenników tej teorii.
    Czy Davidsky jakoś odniósł się do tego?

    Carlos na ten przykład wybrnął z tego tak, że tylko właściwy step z R1b był IE, a plemiona lasostepu z R1a to Uraloidy. Więc w CWC języki uralskie lasostepu a w BBC IE ze stepu.

    Polubione przez 1 osoba

    Odpowiedz

    • (…) Co do stepu to dopóki nie pojawi się coś przełomowego to jest gdybanie i hipotetyzowanie bez konca.
      A to mnie wymęczyło już. (…)

      Jak sama wiesz, mnie CHG też zmuliło. Davidski i inni nic o tym w sumie pewnego nie wiedzą, poza tym, że Khvalynsk tego czegoś nie miał częściowo. I tak nie jest źle, bo Sredny Stog idzie na wiodące miejsce, a Yamna i jej zwolennicy spadli w szczaw. Davidski już wyraźnie wspiera Sredny Stog i CWC i powoli wypiera się Yamna, ale jeszcze jest ciemno i kur nie zapiał…

      Poczekaj na moje nowe komentarze i odpowiedzi Davidskiego. Pytam się tam o Proto-IE I2 w imieniu Roberta, żeby nie było, że niewdzięczny i tchórzliwy jestem… Jak to się rozwinie, to jeszcze tam trochę powierzgam, jako adwokat diabła… hehehe

      A z ‚Pra-Bałtyckim” podkładem w Pra-Słowiańskim, jest dokładnie tak samo, jak z końcówkami ‚Proto-Balto-Slavic’… Wystarczy porównać ich ilość… To łatwe. 🙂

      Polubienie

      Odpowiedz

      • SKRiBHa said…
        @Davidski

        Thank you very much for your answers and time spent responding to my comments.

        My first comment was addressed to everyone who writes here. I did not expect you to find time at all and want to answer it!

        (…) You appear to be very new to this hobby (…).

        Well. I know and like the charming style of your answers from the now deleted ‚Forumbiodiversity’, where Polako, Dhira Simha, Pioterus, Wojewoda, EastPole, Elias, Jaska and others ‚discussed’ there in the good old days, ten years ago or so.

        I know that this is your blog, who rules it and what comes out of it…

        I was not going to write anything here because I know how such an activity ends, see Gaska. I was kind of forced to write here by:

        -Robert and AnnaM writing on my blog,
        -as well as what Genos Historia, Copper Ax, Hannibal, Rob, but especially Onur Dincer wrote, see:

        (…) The R1a finds in the paper seem to be all Z93 (…)
        April 22, 2021 at 9:56 PM

        @Rob Any ideas about the origins of Turks propper ?
        Proto-Turks might have been the Slav Grave people or at least a part of them. Genetics and geography are compatible with that, and chronology certainly fits. Proto-Mongols, on the other hand, might have been the Donghu people, their eastern neighbor.
        April 23, 2021 at 12:31 AM

        I hope you will not ban me just yet and let me here:

        -list in points a summary of what resulted from our exchange of views,
        -ask others questions about the Afanasievo-Aryan-Scythian-Sarmatian-Mongolian ‚origins of Turks’ and what comes out of it…

        Hopefully some of the commentators will be tempted to comment on that.

        (…) Also, considering that you’re referencing such nonsense as Carlos Quiles Indo-European blog, then you’re obviously completely lost (…)

        On my blog, I have repeatedly commented on Carlos’s claims of R1a as alleged UF, which I do not think to be logical, but who knows. I believe that anyone can be wrong and it does not have to be a crime right away, unless it is not a mistake, but deliberate manipulation.

        Recently, together with those who comment on my blog, I have been testing various theories.

        Thinking out of the box is also not a crime and after all you Polako / Davidski used it yourself and still do sometimes…

        Thank you again for your answers and time spent responding to my comments.

        Best regards
        SKRiBHa

        May 11, 2021 at 3:57 PM
        https://eurogenes.blogspot.com/2021/04/the-history-of-scythians-gnecchi.html?showComment=1620773833917#c8335618006493967329

        Polubienie

        Odpowiedz

  22. Chanty i Mansi sorm, estonski surm, kildin soarm.
    A lud maryjski ma słowo smort.

    Za to np. my śmierć.

    I Robek pisał o Maryjczykach.

    A wiecie że w sami kildin soarm + maa to martwa ziemia?
    A mieszkaniec takiego obszaru to (wg mojego pomysłu) soarm+maa+ta.
    Jak pieszo i Piecho+ta.
    Więc Sarmata może pochodzić z języka Samów.

    Taką samą etymologię może mieć Tartar.
    I Tantar. I tuntar. I tunturia. I tuoder.
    I u zachodnich Samów doedtere.

    I co my znamy jako tundra.

    Tak sobie pomyślałam o podobieństwie Samów doedtere z dead terrain.

    Polubione przez 1 osoba

    Odpowiedz

  24. Budowniczowie magalitów zostali wymienieni na Wyspach przez potomków CWC / Bell Beakers… Te same rdzenie są słyszalne i w j. polskim i w j. angielskim…


    Bronze Age People – The Corded Ware Culture
    7,058 views•Apr 5, 2021

    Dan Davis Author

    My novel Thunderer features the early Corded Ware people. The Corded Ware culture existed between c. 3000 BC – c. 2300 BC, spanning the late Neolithic, through the Copper Age, and the early Bronze Age. The name Corded Ware comes from the cord-like impressions on their pottery. They encompassed a vast area, from the Rhine on the west to the Volga in the east, occupying parts of Northern Europe, Central Europe and Eastern Europe. These people were, to one extent or another, ancestral to all northern European people from the Baltic to the Atlantic.

    Polubienie

    Odpowiedz


    • Bronze Age People – The Yamnaya
      14,552 views•Mar 25, 2021
      Dan Davis Author

      The Yamnaya feature in my Bronze Age fantasy series GODS OF BRONZE.

      The Yamnaya culture was a Copper Age to early Bronze Age archaeological culture of the Pontic steppe (north of the Black Sea) dating to 3300–2600 BC.

      Its name derives from its characteristic burial tradition: yamnaya is a Russian adjective that means ‚related to pits’, and these people used to bury their dead in tumuli (the famous kurgans – which we call barrows or burial mounds in Britain) containing simple pit chambers beneath the mounds.

      In life they practiced transhumance, a type of pastoralism or nomadism where they spent winters in wooded river valleys and summers out on the grasslands with their herds.

      The Yamnaya culture is identified with the late Proto-Indo-Europeans, and is the strongest candidate for the original homeland of the Proto-Indo-European language (of which English is just one of many descendants).

      They possibly invented the wheel, they were the first (or almost) to domesticate and ride horses, and they invented 4-wheeled, ox-drawn axeled wagons that enabled them to drive herds of cattle across the steppes and carry enough water and shelter with them to do so.

      For many of us, if you trace our lineages back through father to son all the way back five thousand years, we would find that these men of the Yamnaya are quite literally our forefathers.

      That is in part why I wanted to recreate these people and show their impact on the world in Gods of Bronze.

      Polubienie

      Odpowiedz


    • Bronze Age People – The Cucuteni-Trypillia Culture
      24,641 views•May 3, 2021
      Dan Davis Author

      The Cucuteni–Trypillia culture (or Tripolye culture) spanned the Neolithic the Copper Age and the early Bronze Age. They are one the of most impressive civilisations of Neolithic Europe. The culture extended from the Danube river basin to the Black Sea and the Dnieper. It encompassed the central Carpathian Mountains as well as the plains, steppe and forest steppe on either side of the range. Its historical core lay around the middle to upper Dniester. More than 3,000 cultural sites have been identified, ranging from small villages to the largest settlements in the world.

      Polubienie

      Odpowiedz

  25. @Onur Dincer

    (…) Both are Proto-Turkic and have no IE linguistic relation anyway. (…)

    You are wrong again. Since, according to Davidski’s and your opinions, there are no typical Scythian and Sarmatian haplogroups in the current gene pool of Poles, logically the same applies to Iranian, Scythian, Sarmatian, as well as Turkish influences and borrowings in the Polish language, e.g. the word Kurhan / Ko’R+HaN, Kurgan / Ko’R+GaN, which is semantically identical to the Polish word Górka / Go’R+Ka.
    Znów mylisz się. Skoro i wg Davidski i wg Ciebie brak jest typowo scytyjskich i sarmackich haplogrup w obecnej puli genowej Polaków, to logicznie to samo dotyczy irańskich, scytyjskich i sarmackich, a także tureckich wpływów i zapożyczeń w j. polskim, np. słowo Kurhan / Ko’R+HaN, Kurgan / Ko’R+GaN, które jest identyczne znaczeniowo do polskiego słowa Górka / Go’R+Ka.

    Górka / Go’R+Ka
    https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/g%C3%B3rka

    Kurhan / Ko’R+HaN
    https://pl.wiktionary.org/wiki/kurhan
    https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/kurhan

    It is the same with Zigurat / Zi+Go’R+aT, see:
    Z Zigurat / Zi+Go’R+aT jest zresztą tak samo, patrz:

    https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/zigurat#English
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ziggurat

    The etymology of the word Ural is exactly the same, see:
    Etymologia słowa Ural jest dokładnie taka sama, patrz:

    Ural / (G)+o’R+aL
    https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/Ural

    Góral / Go’R+aL
    https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/g%C3%B3ral

    Góra / Go’Ra
    https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/g%C3%B3ra#Polish

    And here for a comparison the etymology of the Himalaya Mountains:
    A tu do porównania etymologia gór Himalaya:

    Himalaya / HiMa+Lay/Ja
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Himalayas

    Hima / HiMa
    https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/%E0%A4%B9%E0%A4%BF%E0%A4%AE#Sanskrit

    Zima / ZiMa
    https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/zima#Polish

    Note the typical secondary devoicing i.e. debuccalization / rough breathing Z/S > H, ZiMa > HiMa.
    Zwróć uwagę na typowe wtórne ubezdźwięcznienia w typie tzw. rough breathing Z/S>H, ZiMa > HiMa.

    Laya / Lay/Ja
    https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/%E0%A4%86%E0%A4%B2%E0%A4%AF#Sanskrit

    Śliski / S’+LiS+Ki
    https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/%C5%9Bliski

    Ślizg / S’+LiZ+G
    https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/%C5%9Blizg

    S=Z, K=G

    The etymologies for Pamir, Hindu Kush, as well as Caucasus and the Carpathians are also IE.
    Etymologie dla Pamir, Hindu Kush, a także Caucasus i Karpaty są też IE.

    Polubienie

    Odpowiedz

Dodaj komentarz

Ta witryna wykorzystuje usługę Akismet aby zredukować ilość spamu. Dowiedz się w jaki sposób dane w twoich komentarzach są przetwarzane.