Need help about Slavs orgin

[Petrucci]

I was redirected here coz I heard you might know where did Proto-Slavs , Old Slavs come from. Here's the link of college of history disc thread http://www.twcenter.net/forums/showthread.php?t=566271
Hope you know the answer.

[Slaytaninc]

If I had to guess, I think it would be something similiar to the Kurgan hypothesis. A group arose in the Steppes at some point, and then conquered the previous inhabitants as they moved westward, with the subject people's adopting their culture.

Assimilation was how the Balkans became predominantly Slavic in culture.

As an aside, here is a map of Y-chromosome haplogroups in Europe:

source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Ha...ups_europe.png

Note that while most of Russia is "Eastern Indo-Europeans", the Balkans is predominantly "Southern Proto-Europeans", especially among the Slavic population. Although not fully conclusive, this implies that Slavic culture spread more than Slavic bloodlines.

This is the hypothetical spread and homeland of early Slavic culture, also from Wikipedia:

[hedning]

This is a most interesting question. I once wrote a paper on the subject in my early days studying archaeology. Conclusion was: We can't tell. Both archaeology and linguistics of the Early Slavs have major problems to establish a so-called "homeland" of the Slavs and historiographic evidence is scarce and blurry. My guess would be that there was no such homeland in the traditional sense, meaning that slavic ethnogenesis didn't take place in a specific, confined region but more "on the run" in a larger area under the influence of a complex set of different factors.
If I may cite Wikipedia

Recent scholarship acknowledges that it may be simplistic to attempt to define a localized Slavic homeland. Although proto-Slavic language may have developed in a localized area, Slavic ethnogenesis occurred in a large area stretching from the Oder in the west to the Dnieper in the east, and south to the Danube river. It was a complex process fueled by changes within barbaricum and as well as within the Roman Empire. Despite the remarkable cultural uniformity, Slavic development appears to have been less politically consolidated compared to the Germani.

[Petrucci]

The idea Slavs might had lived for many years under protection of nomadic people while they had developed agriculture is really stunning but quite possible.Still I miss how their agriculture could be efficient if they used slash and burn method. I mean it could be but hey need to change place every 10-20 years. That might explain why they lived with nomads in such huge territory . After all as farmers they managed to assimilate Huns, Avars, Bulgars.

Others appear to have a non-Slavic, possibly Iranic, roots such as the Antes, Serbs, and Croats.

Either they were nomad first, or they were under nomad patronage and took their name after nomads were assimilated ( that happened with modern Bulgarians)

[Petrucci]

If I had to guess, I think it would be something similiar to the Kurgan hypothesis. A group arose in the Steppes at some point, and then conquered the previous inhabitants as they moved westward, with the subject people's adopting their culture.

Assimilation was how the Balkans became predominantly Slavic in culture.

As an aside, here is a map of Y-chromosome haplogroups in Europe:

source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Ha...ups_europe.png

This is very interesting , how do you explain same color of South Slavs and Scandinavian people?

[Slaytaninc]

This is very interesting , how do you explain same color of South Slavs and Scandinavian people?

There are some similarities genetically, but they are actually two different shades.

Most of Europe's population came in three waves. I'll have to look into it more, but it looks like some groups were marginalized, and ended up in both places.

Remember that this is a map of Y-Chromosome haplogroups, and only shows the majority groupings. It does not show mitochrondrial dna patterns or any other possible markers.

[Slaytaninc]

EDIT: Can someone delete the double post?

[One-Eye]

just one notice: do not forgot that the first "states" in Russia were established by Swedish vikings.

[Sand]

Its version base on "norman" theory. Also exist "antinorman" theory. About 250 year of science discussion and both theories have big set of facts and arguments. Both versions also have big political influence. More realistic version now first states was established by BlackSea gots, also known as "people rus" in arabic and Byzantium sources