Books and migrations

[Petrucci]

Firstly I'm here for reference about books about Diadochi period. But I have a couple of conditions:
newer author, that mean publication have less then 20 y
objective , not Old Greek propaganda making them always good boys while others are barbarins
supported by as much as posible facts ofc
English language
Secondly , I would like to know from where did Old Slavs came before they settled down is east Europe/baltic/Ukraine and then divided in three groups and pretty much form state in which they live today.(if this question is unclearm coz English is not my native language, plz ask for clarification)

[Petrucci]

I thought this is the place where historians meet. AM I wrong?

[Gandalfus]

I'm not quite sure what you mean. Slavs came a lot later than the Diadochi into the Balkans, if that's what your asking.

here is a page on one of the more famous Slavic tribes that migrated:
Avars

As you can see the migrations happened in around 600 AD, during the reign of Heraclius, emperor of Constantinople.

[Petrucci]

Ok i'll clarify . You have 2 separate questions. First one is about books about Diadochi's wars and the second one is about Slavs. I know when Slavs came into Balkans, and fight with ERE, Avars, Bulgars , Magyar etc. Btw Avars are Turkish not Slavic tribe. My question is next: Before Slavs devided in 3 groups, South, West and East , they were called Old Slavs or Early Slavs, name depend of books you read, and they lived somewhere valley of six river Pripyat, Bug , Dnieper, Dniester and 2 I cant remember but Im 90% sure they are Vistla and Lab. So where did Old Slavs live before they move in six river valley? Where did they come from?

[Diocle]

You have to be patient Petrucci, your question about Slavs is relly interesting, but the matter is not so popular I think, so....you have to wait,.....wait.....and wait..... somone here will be able to answer, meanwhile, can I suggest you to ask in the Med II Kingdoms, looking in the Forums of Mods like 'East of Rome' or the ' The Great Conflicts' or 'Baltic Crusade', there you'll find many guys with a big knowledge about the matter, maybe you'll find your answer more quickly.....but if so, share it here please, it is really an interesting question.

[Gandalfus]

here is a page on one of the more famous Slavic tribes that migrated:

Mistake on my part


And most books and historical sources details the Slavs coming from the Russian steppes, mainly Ukraine, Belarus, and some were in Eastern Europe. There is no clear evidence on where they are exactly from, but they are the places that are backed up with the most evidence to be the homeland of the Proto-Slavs.

[Petrucci]

I heard about Iranian theory talking they lived somewhere on Caucasus mountain or somewhere north of Plateau of Iran, some Persian historian mentioned names of Serbs and Croats, that lived with scythians or saramntians. And Poles aristocracy have ideology saramantisam which thaught they are descendant of Sarmatians. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scythians

[Gandalfus]

I don't think they would be called serbs and Croats back then.

[Petrucci]

Actually they were or something that sound almost same. That was the reason why they thought Slavs came from Iran.

[Gandalfus]

They called themselves something - aye. But most historical sources state that the term "Serb" wasn't used until they reached Europe.

[NikeBG]

What is the homeland of the Slavs? Unclear - historians (and linguists etc) still argue about it. Some claim it's in modern Ukraine, others - Belarus, thirds - Poland etc. I think the most popular and probable thesis is the Belarus-Poland area, considering the Slavs are closely related to the Balts (IIRC, before the Gothic invasion in the Baltic area, they were one group of people (so-called Balto-Slavic linguistic group), but the Gothic invasion eventually split them in two). F.e. I remember watching an interview with one guy before (who knew 26 languages or so, incl. teaching several of them (like Latin, Old-Bulgarian etc) in the Sofia uni; learned basic Hungarian in just a month), who said that the closest languages to Bulgarian, besides the other Slavic languages, are first the Baltic (Lithuanian and Latvian), then the Germanic and then the Iranic ones. Of course, there are a number of Proto-Germanic words borrowed into Old-Slavic as well, which indicates that there were some good contacts with the Germanics too, but that's expectable for the Belarus-Poland region.

Of course, there are also a number of traces of Iranic as well. I also read something quite interesting f.e., that the Slavic languages closest to the Pontic-Caucasian area have mostly neo-Persian influences, while the West-Slavic languages have the most archaic Iranic influences. The reason for this is because those archaic Iranic influences were acquired in the Proto-Slavic period, when the Slavs were still united, and as the Slavs split up, the Western part became isolated from the Iranic sphere and preserved only those ancient influences. While the Slavs closer to the Pontic area eventually replaced the archaics with more and more modern Iranic influences.

Naturally, mixings between those big groups (Slavs with Iranics, Slavs with Germanics) existed in the contact zones as well. I can remember at least one such Slavic-Iranic culture in modern Ukraine from the early Middle Ages.

As for the Serbs and Croats potentially being Iranic tribes - that doesn't make all Slavs Iranic. Just like the old Bulgars (be they mostly Iranic (most likely) or mostly Turkic (less likely)) don't make all the Slavs Irano-Turkic. I.e. if the Serbs and Croats were originally Iranic tribes, then they're simply another case like the Bulgars - a Caucasian tribe taking control over the Balkan Slavs, giving them its name and eventually getting assimilated by them.

As for the Polish Sarmatism - as far as I remember, that was mostly a thing from the Romantic period and the rise of early nationalism in Europe. Though, as previously mentioned, it is theoretically possible that Iranic elements and influences from Proto-Slavic times might have been preserved.

[Publius Clodius Pulcher]

Firstly I'm here for reference about books about Diadochi period. But I have a couple of conditions:
newer author, that mean publication have less then 20 y
objective , not Old Greek propaganda making them always good boys while others are barbarins
supported by as much as posible facts ofc
English language

1.Ghost on the throne : the death of Alexander the Great and the war for crown and empire
Author: James S Romm Publisher: New York : Alfred A. Knopf, ©2011.

2. Dividing the spoils : the war for Alexander the Great's empire
Author: Robin Waterfield Publisher: Oxford ; New York, N.Y. : Oxford University Press, ©2011.

3. Antigonos the One-eyed and the creation of the Hellenistic state
Author: Richard A Billows Publisher: Berkeley : University of California Press, 1997, ©1990.

4. The legacy of Alexander : politics, warfare, and propaganda under the successors
Author: A B Bosworth Publisher: Oxford [U.K.] ; New York : Oxford University Press, 2002.

5. After Alexander : the politics of Macedonian kingship and the rise of the Antigonids
Author: David K Coblentz Dissertation: Thesis (M.A.)--University of Washington, 2011.

Boom, just dropped the WorldCat on you son. All those are from quality publishers, just using the keyword: Diadochi in WC. Don't dismiss works written in the 60s and 70s tho, some can be really good (even those written earlier, works by authors like Bloch and Braudel can still be essential, tho those examples are more medievalists)

[Petrucci]

@NikeBG Baltic hypotheses is the most interesting, can you elaborate more pls.
@Publius Clodius Pulcher Thank you very much

[NikeBG]

Sure, here's the Wiki for the Balto-Slavic languages.

[The Kybrothilian]

I believe the position of the proto-Slavic people caused them to gain influence from the Iranian nomad groups moving nearby. The proto-Balts on the other hand would have had more influence from Germanians.

[NikeBG]

Indeed, I think so too. Though the Proto-Slavs have also certainly had quite great influences with the Germanics themselves. And, of course, all those groups (Balto-Slavs, Germanics, Iranics etc) are more or less closely related through the Indo-European tree.

[Petrucci]

Thats not new. Every tribe , group of people in history was influenced by neighbouring tribe and vica versa.

[The Kybrothilian]

Indeed, I think so too. Though the Proto-Slavs have also certainly had quite great influences with the Germanics themselves. And, of course, all those groups (Balto-Slavs, Germanics, Iranics etc) are more or less closely related through the Indo-European tree.

Yes, but the proto-Slavs came to contact with proto-Germans much later than proto-Balts. The former somewhere in early AD, while the latter in final phase of BC.