• Don't want to see ads? Install an adblocker like uBlock Origin or use a Europe-based privacy-friendly browser like Vivaldi or Mullvad.

What Are Slavic countries?

I agree. He has a round head -- typical of Slavs. But he looks more possibly Italo-Celtic or maybe just Celtic.

I agree, although to me he also looks very germanic.
However, contrary to contemporary slavs, ancient slavs were mostly long-headed, for whatever reason.

The second guy clearly looks Italian of the very ancient sort.

I know what you mean. When I saw this guy for the first time he immediately reminded me of Calligula (is it the haircut?). Although someone else plausibly matched him to a certain man from sweden. Both are no perfect matches obviously. These recostructed Yamnaya samples look kind of average european, yet hard to classify strictly. Just like their genetics: basic, yet extinct in it's pure form.
 
I tried a million times to paste the results of my poll but it does not allow it

^ Try to use this to upload the results of that poll:

http://tinypic.com/

Again I have no time to write long posts at the moment. Later.
 
I agree, although to me he also looks very germanic. However, contrary to contemporary slavs, ancient slavs were mostly long-headed, for whatever reason. I know what you mean. When I saw this guy for the first time he immediately reminded me of Calligula (is it the haircut?). Although someone else plausibly matched him to a certain man from sweden. Both are no perfect matches obviously. These recostructed Yamnaya samples look kind of average european, yet hard to classify strictly. Just like their genetics: basic, yet extinct in it's pure form.

To me at first glance I thought "German." However, I never heard Slavs had long heads -- although I would not doubt it -- many looked very similar to Germans until they mixed with the cocktail of eastern Europe. But Tomenable might disagree!
 
To me at first glance I thought "German." However, I never heard Slavs had long heads -- although I would not doubt it -- many looked very similar to Germans until they mixed with the cocktail of eastern Europe. But Tomenable might disagree!

I disagree with both of you. From all the genetic data I encountered in literature and forums it looks like Slavs emerged by rather late isolation from european stock, mostly WHG+certain sample from the Caucasus-Gedrosia range, and then suddenly expanded to large areas. All of eastern europe with historically recorded slavic settlement show unique shared IDBs of recent origin. Also I2a-Din is 90% exclusively slavic, except maybe in the Balkans, where it is more blurred but still remarkable.

About slavs being dolichocephalic in the past: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Early_Slavs#Physical_appearance
In particular I agree with the passage stating that the change of cephalic index of slavs occured due to environmental conditions and/or genetic selection, not admixture. What some perceive as 'slavic' look is just a local development, imho.
 
ElHorsto - brachycephalization has been an observed phenomenon in entire Europe since the Early Middle Ages.

Not just Slavs but pretty much all Europeans - including Scandinavians - were more dolichocephalic in the past than in the 19th century.

For example nowadays native Scandinavians are mostly mesocephalic, rather than dolichocephalic.

However, in the last 100-200 years it seems that a process of dolichocephalization is again taking place among Slavs.

At least that's what I've read.

I'm quite tired of replying to Johannes when most of the points that he brings up again have already been answered. :)

I already told him that my figure of 1,000,000 population referred to entire area of 250,000 km2 which was shown in the map.

As for R1a - no, Slavic R1a does not come from Turks and the like. R1a was in Europe before agriculture, check Karelian hunter-gatherer from 7500 years ago, and then another hunter-gatherer near the Russian-Belarusian border 6000 years ago. Both were R1a.

Most of N1c is also not a recent immigration from Asia, but probably it was in Europe thousands of years ago.

The oldest ancient DNA sample of N1c from Europe is 4500 years old, found near Smolensk, close to the Russian-Belarusian border.

Half of Lithuanians have N1c but they have about ~0% of East Asian admixture (unlike Finns who have several percent).
 
I'm quite tired of replying to Johannes when most of the points that he brings up again have already been answered. :)

I already told him that my figure of 1,000,000 population referred to entire area of 250,000 km2 which was shown in the map.

As for R1a - no, Slavic R1a does not come from Turks and the like. R1a was in Europe before agriculture, check Karelian hunter-gatherer from 7500 years ago, and then another hunter-gatherer near the Russian-Belarusian border 6000 years ago. Both were R1a.

Most of N1c is also not a recent immigration from Asia, but probably it was in Europe thousands of years ago.

The oldest ancient DNA sample of N1c from Europe is 4500 years old, found near Smolensk, close to the Russian-Belarusian border.

Half of Lithuanians have N1c but they have about ~0% of East Asian admixture (unlike Finns who have several percent).

I apologize my friend for making you tired, but I could not find anywhere in the internet the size of the entire area of Eastern Germany where the Slavs settled. I am used to miles not kilometers and 250,000 sq km seemed too large to me (250,000 sq km = 96,525 sq mi. That's larger than Austria). My rough estimation came to 40-50,000 sq mi. Given the conditions of the time when populations were declining, huge forest or underdeveloped land was common, and economic depressions were likewise common, I cannot conceive there were so many Slavs at that time! If there were 1 million Slavs in such as small area, then how many millions of Slavs occupied all of Central and Eastern Europe!!!??

You were probably tired and did not read my post carefully: I did not mean to say the Slavs got ALL their R1a exclusively from Turkic peoples -- and I know R1a existed in Europe way before the Turks entered the scene -- and I know Slavs are European not Turks! (I am not trying to insult you) -- all I said was that the Avars, Turks, Tatars, and others came in and mixed with the Slavs in some degree and this must have infused more R1a and made Slavs slightly exotic in appearance. How much do Slavs have that is "Turkic" R1a from Central Asia and how much in Asiatic admixture?
 
2e22yj4.jpg
 
[
2wd7hwn.jpg


Ok here are the results. Tinypic.com worked! Now I forgot about Austrians being here so I would say that 20% are guesses, 15% could go either way, and 65% certain. Don't rush and take your time responding. With all the information we have exchanged it's like taking an online crash course in Slav-German history!
 
OK I am not going to retake the test again as its too tiring. because of the Austrians I will say that about 20% will be guesses, 10-15% can go either way, and 65-70% I was certain. So I am curious about what the actual results are. On the first plate I came to 60% German which is high given that it should have been 50%. But that's because of the Austrians. The second plate I was more accurate (I think) because I chose 55% Germans.
 
I'm quite tired of replying to Johannes when most of the points that he brings up again have already been answered. :)

I already told him that my figure of 1,000,000 population referred to entire area of 250,000 km2 which was shown in the map.

Yes you are right. I just checked page 5 and you sent me good maps of the tribes. Sorry for being a pain, but you bombarded me with too much information in too short of a period -- by the way its great information that is very useful to me -- and I lost my way. Let me digest all the stuff you sent me and I will get back. The problem is that I always check your posts after I come from work and I am usually dead tired. Only on weekends can I catch up.
 
Thanks, I will count your answers and check how many were correct. :)

What about the second part, with the same number of people ???
 
Thanks, I will count your answers and check how many were correct. :)

What about the second part, with the same number of people ???

I posted it right after the first one but someone send me a message that they needed to be approved by someone (Lebrok?). I sen other posts but they also need to be checked.

Like a good student I did my homework and will post my answers to the Slavic dilemma in East Germany. You dont need to resend maps. Yours are excellent its just that I forgot about page 5. Next time don't bombard me with so much information during the week. I am not as alert as when I am rested. :-)
 
I. OK here is a summary of what I found on the internet about the German expansion to the East from 10th to 12th centuries. Lets divide our dialogue into three parts: A) Demographics of Slav and German populations during the Dark Ages and Late Middle ages. B) The attack by Henry the Fowler against the Slavs in the 10th century.
C) The "Wendish Crusade" during the 11th and 12th centuries.

A.
According to my findings the population of Europe was between 25-30 millions (27.5 on average). ("Estimates of the total population of Europe are speculative, but at the time of Charlemagne it is thought to have been between 25 and 30 million, and of this more than half were in the Carolingian Empire that covered modern France, the Low Countries, western Germany, Austria, Slovenia, northern Italy and part of northern Spain.") If we subtract 5 millions from Iberia, 1 million from England, 0.5 Scotland, Ireland, and Wales, 1 Scandinavia, and 1-2 millions form Italy (these are speculations) we get 18-19 million in the Carolinian Empire. Now we subtract 6 million form France and 3 from low countries, and 2 from Austria and Slovenia we get 7-8 millions left not counting the Germans. I would imagine at least 5 millions were Germans. How do you explain the Slav numbers? They should be 2-3 millions TOTAL (and we are not counting the Balkans). How can you fit 1 million is such a small area as East Germany at that time (heavy forests, bogs, marshes, underdeveloped land).

Here is another source:
"The population levels of Europe during the Middle Ages can be roughly categorized:
280–400 (Late Antiquity): population decline
400–1000 (Early Middle Ages): stable at a low level.
1000–1250 (High Middle Ages): population boom and expansion."

This can only mean that population had declined and did not start to grow until the 11th century and after. Therefore the Slav numbers would have been much lower that 1 million.

I found this online: "The Bavarian Geographer anonymous medieval document compiled in Regensburg in 830 contains a list of the tribes in Central-Eastern Europe to the east of the Elbe. Among other tribes it lists the Uuilci (Veleti)- with 95 civitates, the Nortabtrezi (Obotrites) - 53 civitates, the Milzane (Milceni)- 30 civitates, and the Hehfeldi (Hevelli)- 14 civitates."

Do you know how many people lived in a "civitate?" Civitates were simply villages and small towns, although some were also large towns (cities). If we assume each civitate = 500 to 3,000 souls, then out of 192 civitates = 96,000 to 576,000 Slavs lived in East Germany. Does this seem correct to you? However, using your source it would be much larger. How did you come to these figures? You listed 4,722 civitates!! If I use your source it comes to 2,361,000-14,166,000!!!!

So it seems we have 5 million Germans attacking 300,000-600,000 Slavs? The Saxons probably numbered 1-2 millions. So it would have been a 2.5 to 1 or 5 to 1 ratio.
 
Thanks, I will count your answers and check how many were correct. :)

What about the second part, with the same number of people ???

I dont know whats going on but someone is stopping my posts. Let me see if the second part of our poll goes through. If not that means someone does not like what I write -- probably LeBrok.

2wd7hwn.jpg
 
Hey where did you get info about the Austrians?

There is not a single Austrian there, just Germans and Poles.

That's what I wrote, I didn't mention the Austrians.
 
Johannes, thank you very much for your time and effort, and for solving my poll! :)

I have counted your results. I think I will wait with revealing the details just in case if someone else wants to try (I won't make it easier for them). So instead of giving you detailed results now, I will give percentages (I will send to you detailed results later).

Your results in percentages:

Out of all Germans, you identified 56.608 percent as Germans, 42.952 percent as Poles, and you forgot to label a few.

Out of all Poles, you identified 54.625 percent as Germans (!), 44.323 percent as Poles,
and you forgot to label a few.

Does anyone else want to try ??? :)

===================================

Edit:

Photos are on page 6 if you want to try - and also I attach them again below:

FACES_B.jpg

FACES_A.jpg


Links to the same 912 photos but in full size:

http://postimg.org/image/dc5r8yp4d/full/

http://postimg.org/image/6ajrmpreb/full/

Please do not google search for answers in the internet - that would be unfair!
 
Last edited:
and why are they sooo much good looking than some Northern Euros like the Brits or Dutch people

What do you mean by good looking?
Prettier? More beautyfull?

Hmmm... perhabs, maybe we have much
less cromagnonian genes than they... :-p
But it is only the case in central Europe.



also and the Wends settled in Danelaw and other places.

Hmm... very interesting. Can you say more about that case?
And what do you mean by Wends? Pomeranians?

Like other nations, Greeks are a combination of all of the civilizations that settled there; becides royal civilizations like the Norman's in England for example.
Anyways, Greeks are a combination of ancient Greek, Anatolian, Slavs and maybe Celts and Goths.
Russians the same thing, they are a mix of Slavic, Norse, Uralic and.maybe Tatar

You could write more simple: everyone is mixed with everyone :)

Let's settle on, that it used to be Slavic some time ago.

It's simply depends on, what we mean talking about slavic countres.
Osi's are probably mostly slavic people, who simply speak german :)

Something like 5 years ago, before Angela Merkel.

She is de domo Aniela Kazimierczakówna vel Wojciechowska :P
And she is more Pole, than I am :)

The main reason why Slavic women are very attractive is that they keep their figures toned. The reason for this is that they do not drive everywhere and do not eat high fat food like the women in the west do. This is not to say western women are decadent: its that Slavic women do not make much money and have to live on little food
smiling.gif

It is really funny, I apreciate it. :)
But the final conclusion is simply stupid.

About this multiplying exterminations: why are you so obsessive? It wasn't so bad, as you decribed. Really.

The Slavs just moved into the areas that were deserted by the Goths, Burgundians, Saxons, Vandals, and Lombards.
Not deserted but severely depopulated. The closer West the lesser depopulation. Unfortunately what happened then we can only guess from archaeology and in future from genetics. These were Dark Ages and not much anything written survived.

Germanic tribes did not perish in 100%.
Some of them stayed in central Europe and later they were slavinized (do exists such a word? :) )
Even earlier, germanic peoples cohabitated with Slavs.

Sure, I'm glad these days are over in Europe. But why did you use word destroyed? Obviously they were conquered and assimilated. It was never wise to kill off all taxpayers and labour force even in Middle Ages. Germany/Holly Roman Empire was rather multi ethnic, and as such didn't have policy of ethnic cleansing. Once a nation was conquered, there was no logical, ethical, economical reason to exterminate a population.

In Austria, Silesia and Pomeriania was no ethnical cleansing.
People germanized naturally. It begins with middelages' mode
on german language, and the first who was germanized were dukes.
The same was in many parts in Elba region. Especially in frankonia,
Saxony and Bavaria, were Slavic settlement were numerious, but
with some exeptions, did not dominate.

Here is a map wich shows, how far slavic settlements reach the West.
==>> https://bialczynski.files.wordpress.com/2010/05/mapa-sc582owianie-nad-c582abc485-vi-viii-wiek.jpg

Even in XIX century were some slavic villages still exist as far as Hannover.

Aaaa. I must add that Abodrites conquered germanic Holstein in 795! :)
Charlemagne even got a king-title to their ruler.

I'm sorry, but you pick snippets from history and science, that you read, and are trying to fit your ideal vision of "history" or some agenda. Aryan, is the Irdo-Iranian tribe of Middle East. They never ever were in Europe.

LeBrok, I must stand in deffance of him because:
- some decades ago the term aryan = indo-european
- in many english language publications, probably mostly american, the term aryan still is using as equivalent to the term indo-european
- exists a theory, that the word arian, was a some kind of original self descibed term for indoeuropean people, which we can see not only in Aryana, Iran, Arya, Aryavarta and Armenia in Asia, but also in greek word aristocracy, celtic and english name of Hibernia: Erie, Ireland; in Lugian (germano-slavo-celtic) tribe Arii/Harii in the present day Poland and in germanic word for army forces - Haria, today Heer (and mayby word lord - Herr, have the same etymology). So who knows... Btw, name Arya is the most anciet known name for indoeuropean tribes; especialy another R1a people were exists whithout known names thosands of years, and get their names millennia later, or still don't have a name (as for example Balts :) )

1) Population density in Wielkopolska during the 600s-700s:

Where did you get this?
 
It is really funny, I apreciate it. :) But the final conclusion is simply stupid.

LeBrok, I must stand in deffance of him because:
- some decades ago the term aryan = indo-european
- in many english language publications, probably mostly american, the term aryan still is using as equivalent to the term indo-european
- exists a theory, that the word arian, was a some kind of original self descibed term for indoeuropean people, which we can see not only in Aryana, Iran, Arya, Aryavarta and Armenia in Asia, but also in greek word aristocracy, celtic and english name of Hibernia: Erie, Ireland; in Lugian (germano-slavo-celtic) tribe Arii/Harii in the present day Poland and in germanic word for army forces - Haria, today Heer (and mayby word lord - Herr, have the same etymology). So who knows... Btw, name Arya is the most anciet known name for indoeuropean tribes; especialy another R1a people were exists whithout known names thosands of years, and get their names millennia later, or still don't have a name (as for example Balts :) )

No. Its not stupid. I have been to Ukraine many times and even to Russia, Poland and Lithiuania. People don't make much there. In Ukraine people make $250 a month. I even knew a half Ukrainian half Uzbek scrawny lazy man who never worked and ate two cheeseburgers every day at McDonalds. How he earned money is a mystery.

At least you are enlightened, not like some people here, and have not been conditioned by liberalism. What is "Aryan?": its simply a word. But people always identify it with the Nazis. Aryan means lord, or upright (as opposed to bad) or strong (as opposed to weak). It also means noble. Have you ever heard of Hari Krishna? It means Lord Krishna. Why are people here so ignorant???

Did you read about Dr. Hunt who got fired for saying in a seminar that women cause problems in labs because they are too emotional? Liberals and their Political-Correctness are destroying Western Civilization. Liberals make people stupid. We are reverting towards a new Dark Age in which TV is the new IDOL.
 
Last edited:
Hey where did you get info about the Austrians?

There is not a single Austrian there, just Germans and Poles. That's what I wrote, I didn't mention the Austrians.

See what you did? You bombarded me with so much information that I misread what you wrote. It came from "And Austrians also look distinctly. West Slavs look similar to East Germans and Austrians." And I probably read it fast and misconstrued what you meant.
 
Last edited:
Back
Top