Hey Veeky Forums was the Lusatian culture Slavic, Celtic or germanic

hey Veeky Forums was the Lusatian culture Slavic, Celtic or germanic.

in my opinion i'd have to say Celtic.

Other urls found in this thread:

sciencemag.org/news/2016/03/slaughter-bridge-uncovering-colossal-bronze-age-battle
youtube.com/watch?v=a6mxiJNWpYI
youtube.com/watch?v=v77TZuETl1M
microsofttranslator.com/bv.aspx?from=&to=en&a=https://www.tygodnikprzeglad.pl/prawdziwy-niemiec-tez-nie-istnieje/
youtube.com/watch?v=2uBaJIoMvdk
youtube.com/watch?v=Fj7lk2q5xJ0
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Proto-Slavic_borrowings#Slavic_and_Germanic
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Proto-Slavic_borrowings#Slavic_and_Celtic
ekoscian.eu/2017/09/28/odkryto-osade-z-wczesnego-sredniowiecza/amp/
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sorbs
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pomeranian_culture
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Baltic_culture_in_Pomerania
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Veleti
twitter.com/NSFWRedditImage

...

it seems pretty advanced for bronze age northern Europe.

...

All the "cultures" in the area of modern day Poland and eastern Germany were slavic / Polish.

- on the pic attached you have names of "cultures" and their area.

But you need to know that many scientist question that diversyfying of cultures. German source maps always present slavic areas as a bunch of random subgroups what is far from reality.

*Tollense river battle is one of the examples proving that ancient Poles had huge feeling of unity back than as they were able to gather armies of thousand well geared soldiers to fight italic people

sciencemag.org/news/2016/03/slaughter-bridge-uncovering-colossal-bronze-age-battle

1) all the northern europe was a huge forest. it was impossible to transport stones, we had only hard rock/stones here that are difficult to shape unlike in southern europe, climate was cold so it was much better to build out of wood
2) keep in mind that this wooden structures are from 5-6 millenium b.c all the way to 500-600 AD. Italic people didn't start with stone houses as well.

youtube.com/watch?v=a6mxiJNWpYI

youtube.com/watch?v=v77TZuETl1M

They were probably proto-Slavic.

Germanics and Slavs were just two groups among many in the area. I'd say Lusatians spoke an Indo-European language which is now extinct.

>All the "cultures" in the area of modern day Poland and eastern Germany were slavic / Polish.

the guys literally call themselves Serbs

There's a huge gap between the three individuals who cluster beyond modern day Scandinavians and the southerners from Urnfield. I'd guess the former were the locals.

I think you people should stop larping as archaeological cultures for once.

do you think the tollense battle could have been a major conflict between Nordics and Slavs?

This. And not just on Veeky Forums, EVERYWHERE. I'm sick of we wuz being used as a justification for societal purpose, as if the actions of your ancestors can be considered your own personal achievement.

There isn't a single country on the planet that resembles its incarnation as of 500+ years ago.

its more likely that that was battle between Slavs&Nords vs Meds.

its just an assumption because times changes, alliances as well but from well known history, nordic sagas and polish documents and archeological dig sites like wolin/jomsborg
we know that Poles were pretty much always had a good relationship with nordics. We even had a Polish-Danish towns with Jomsborg vikings (slavs and nordics mixed). Also there are stories from the times long before christianization of Poland where Polish kings would use vikings as mercenaries and vice versa.

...

it's not impossible the Urnfield culture spread into Italy. they may have been a migration of Italian Celts
into Poland.

maybe that's what ignited the conflict, ethnic clashes.

compare your map with any other map like for example this one You will see how extremely inaccurate your map is.

also biskupin types of settlement shown in the were build in a west => east direction
aka the ones located in the eastern germany are older than ones found in the western Poland.
Like some archeologist suggest it means that slavs were being pushed eastward not northward.

what is the implication for that? i don't know.

but... this biskupin type of settlement and its area have been settled non stop until the christianity of Poland.
the reason why they moved near Biskupin settlement is because it was covered by water eventually. it was not the best spot for living.

We will probably never know for sure, but what we can say with certainty is that it was not Slavic, let alone the Proto-Slavic homeland like some Polish nationalists like to claim. If it was a "unified" culture their language probably would have been something Centum and similar to Celtic, although it was probably multiethnic with varying influences, although primarily Celtic.

For a start, Lusatian developed out of the probably Italo-Celtic Tumulus culture establishing itself over Trzciniec culture. It also formed part of the later Urnfield culture, which was ancestral to the Celtic Hallstatt culture. Hallstatt had massive influence on Lusatian culture and the western regions of Lusatian in particular essentially copied Hallstatt traits. This influence was to such a degree that some people believe Lusatian settlements in Silesia may have actually been Hallstatt settlements, rather than simplying being Hallstatt-influenced Lusatian settlements. When Lusatian culture eventually collapsed due to Scythian invasions among other factors such as climate, it was succeeded by Celtic cultures in the southern and western regions. In the north it was succeeded by Pomeranian culture, which is considered to have evolved natively from northern Lusatian tribes, and it was either Germanic, Baltic, or some kind of Balto-Germanic interlink language. This isn't surprising since the Pomeranian region of Lusatian culture is sometimes considered to be part of the Nordic Bronze Age due to significant NBA influence. The Lusatian-derived Pomeranian culture evolved into the Germanic Przeworsk culture as well.

Polish user Tomenable tries to get around these facts in his Slavic urheimat theory by stating that Lusatians were driven eastward by Celtic, Germanic and Scythian invasions, and formed the Slavic ethnogenesis further eastward. But this ignores the fact that Scythian invasions were by and large responsible for the mass destruction of Lusatian settlements, and rather than migrating east, this actually drove them westward into the richer and more developed western Lusatian zone. This is enough to prove his theory wrong, but he also ignores how weak the connection between Celtic and Slavic is. There are barely any loanwords from this period, despite considerable Celtic influence being exerted on Lusatian culture for its entire existence. If migrating Lusatians were responsible for the Slavic ethnogenesis, the Celtic-Slavic connection would have to be far, far stronger than it is.

He also ignores the overwhelming archaeological and linguistic evidence for a Slavic urheimat further East, probably stemming from Milograd culture or some other culture from this region.

Why are you obsessed with Italians being involved?
Most of the likely to be Urnfield individuals were like Dutch/Germans/Austrians.
On the PCA only one individual looks like a Northern Italian.

Now that I think about it, considering Tollense was located on the border of Lusatian and Nordic BA world I would guess that the locals were the individuals who are between the Scandinavian and Eastern European clusters like 59.

Why is "Polish user Tomenable" a celebrity on Veeky Forums?
Ariomanus(French Trojan retard) also cites his work.

Because for some reason his theories get spammed on here. He's up there with the likes of Maciamo in the realm of spreading blatant misinformation to suit his agenda.

slavic. The modern lusatians are perfectly understandable to czechs.

Friendly reminder that using genetic similarity between Lusatian peoples and modern day Slavs to "prove" that Lusatian culture was Slavic is as dumb as using genetic similarity between Hallstatt peoples and modern day Germans to "prove" that Hallstatt culture was Germanic.

>in the realm of spreading blatant misinformation to suit his agenda

His claims are backed by sources, unlike Maciamo who spams false maps to further his agenda.

except there is no archeological evidence of anything what you are saying is true.

Tollense is often used as argument because its the biggest archeological finding of this kind but there are hundreds of similar findings all around the area.
I am aware that "culture" can't be identified with "ydna/mdna" but there is a clear notification when it comes to this digsites that they contained genetic material similar to the one that people living in the "modern day poland" have. They don't talk about general r1a1 dna, or slavic dna. They show the exact mutation details.

and also before you start pointing that this could be rigged = most of the dna testing was made by Germans who eventually stopped testing ydna/mdna anymore as every their finding was slavic.

see

But his claims related to Lusatian culture are not true. There is no evidence for a mass migration of Lusatians eastward. They most likely migrated westward, which makes far more sense given that the Scythian invasions were primarily from the south-east.

Sorbian-Lustian (as they are always grouped together) speak VIII ad version of slavic language.
Polish Kaszuby (kaszub. Kaszëbë lub Kaszëbskô) speaks the one from the XII AD. so they are the ones who would understand each other the most

What exactly are you trying to say? Try running it through Google translate and maybe it will make some sense

modern German people are not even racially Germanic they are mostly Celtic.

compare the haplogroups of Germans in pic related to swedes.
see much similarity there? no i didn't think so.

It's perfectly possible that Lusatians are genetically >90% identical to modern day Poles. But this says nothing of their culture or language, which could not have been Slavic, and definitely not the Proto-Slavic homeland. There was probably Balto-Slavic influence in the eastern region, perhaps especially so in the eastern regions centered on the Vistula basin, but the stronger, richer and more developed western Lusatian zone could not have been Slavic due to archaeological and linguistic evidence which points to a Celtic character (and possibly Germanic or Balto-Germanic around Pomerania).

That's my point. Southern Germans are probably very, very genetically similar to the peoples of Hallstatt culture, but literally no one tries to claim that Hallstatt culture was Germanic because of said genetic similarity. The same should go for Lusatian culture, but due to its more ambiguous nature people seem less willing to be rational.

this map is extremely inaccurate. There was a study conducted by Swiss Igenea University in Zurich conducted on 20 000 ethnic Germans in GDR and the result was 40-50% celtic 6% nordic (from the father side / 15% from the mother side) 30% slavic

oh right i forgot about Lower Sorbian, i was talking about our Sorbs. The sorbs are also the only other language in the world to use "ř".

>Western Germany
>30% Slavic
Lol

microsofttranslator.com/bv.aspx?from=&to=en&a=https://www.tygodnikprzeglad.pl/prawdziwy-niemiec-tez-nie-istnieje/

the university that conducted the study don't publish any essays they just publish raw data so its difficult to find english language source for that kind of claims.

also keep in mind that this is western germany / ethnic germans. If you would add the hundreds of thousands of polish kids kidnapped by hitler and eastern germany for obvious reasons the data would be highly ... hmmm falsified when it comes to analyzing real origins

>It's perfectly possible that Lusatians are genetically >90% identical to modern day Poles

Doubtful. Just because there were a few Balto-Slavs in Tollense doesn't mean they were from the Oder. The warriors could have been born very far to the east and heeded the call to defend against incoming Urnfield.
The battle was obviously organized by both sides and wasn't some random clash.

Guys are we talking about an entirely diferent society than these Lusatians?youtube.com/watch?v=2uBaJIoMvdk
I don't know if there was another society called the Lusatians before these people but these are 200% slavic and that's indisputable.

I'm still skeptical to be honest, although I have no real evidence to prove otherwise so I won't say anything.

Also the title is pretty funny, but also a bit harsh :^)

Well I wasn't saying that for sure, I was just being hypothetical.

that sounds pretty accurate although i think the Nordic component would be higher then 6%.

it is depending on gender.
this genetic markers that allow us to group people are passed in a way where:
Boys get their father marker
girls get their mother marker
boys cant get mother marker and girl can't get father marker.
Thats why we talk about YDNA and MDNA

Males were obviously fighting and dieing in wars so thats why Germans males have this gene present only in 6% cases. Females on the other hand have 15% if im right.

>Slavic, Celtic or germanic
you just said the same thing three times

Baltic, but you're not far off desu.

Don't think so. Pan-slavism is academically BTFO, even more than Pan-Illyrianism which actually makes sense and has been remodeled valid.

>Baltic
Proof?

They weren't Baltic. Not Y-DNA wise, not A-DNA wise. Stop making shit up. Balts never had so much territory and were never nation populusa.

Not an argument. Lusatians were Proto-Slavs. So was Trzciniec.

Actually the arguments I posted throughout this thread prove that Lusatians could not have been Proto-Slavs. And what you posted is not an argument whatsoever.

Your arguments are irrelevant. You're not an expert. You're on par with idiots wanting to put Slavs in Ural mountatins and Germanics everywhere in Europe, despite those claims getting BTFO with each new discovery.

>According to the earliest records, the area was settled by culturally Celtic tribes. Later, around 100 BC, the Germanic tribe of the Semnones settled into that area. The name of the region may be derived from that of the Ligians. From around 600 onwards, West Slavic tribes known as the Milceni and Lusici settled permanently in the region.
-literally first sentence in Wikipedia.

I don't know how organised and advanced the celtic and germanic tribes who lived there were but you're very likely thinking of the slavic Lusatians which were actually called lusatians.
/thread

>citing outdated wiki shit

And yet you are yet to provide any arguments.

And I know that I'm not an "expert", but I've done a lot of reading on this period, including from Polish sources, and this has left me with one conclusion - Lusatian culture was not Slavic and it was not the Proto-Slavic homeland.

Alright, get me a better argument fucking tapeworm, and have some traditional slavic music from lusatia while you're circle jerking to revisionist history.

youtube.com/watch?v=Fj7lk2q5xJ0

Yes it was Proto-Slavic and you don't matter. I'm not gonna waste my time trying to convince some turboautist on a chinese board.

You're irrelevant as far as it goes.

> do you think the tollense battle could have been a major conflict between Nordics and Slavs?

Seems likely and the DNA evidence so far only reinforces that position.

And odds are the Mediterraneans found at the site, were likely allied with the Slavs who due to geography, they would have had contact with.

Please explain how Lusatian culture was the Proto-Slavic homeland if:
>Trzciniec culture extended no further west than the Vistula basin, and Proto-Lustian culture developed on the Oder basin from Tumulus (Italo-Celtic) influence
>For its entire existence, Lustian culture was influenced massively by a string of Celtic cultures, to the degree that Western Lusatian culture was essentially Hallstatt culture with its own "twist"
>Hallstatt influence was so strong that Silesian Lusatian culture may have actually been Hallstatt culture
>Lusatian culture formed part of the Urnfield systems
>Pomeranian Lusatian culture is considered by some to be part of the Nordic Bronze Age due to significant NBA (Pre-/Proto-Germanic) influence
>Despite at least 800 years of massive Celtic influence and Lusatian culture directly bordering Celtic cultures, there are barely any Celtic loanwords in Proto-Slavic and the Slavic and Celtic languages are quite distant
>Lusatian culture was succeeded entirely by Celtic and Germanic cultures
>For Lusatian culture to have been the Proto-Slavic homeland, there must have been a mass migration eastward, but Scythian invasions from the south-east actually caused a migration westward to the more developed and secure western Lusatian regions
>Linguistic and archaeological evidence suggests a Slavic homeland further east
>If Lusatian culture is to be considered due to genetic similarity to modern day Slavs, then Celtic Hallstatt culture must actually be Germanic (lmao)

You still haven't posted any arguments by the way.

*If Lusatian culture is to be considered Slavic

Bullshit. Polish archaeologist are still pulling that meme, aren't they? There's zero evidence from that, we don't know shit.

What is Venedic?

>The Trzciniec culture developed from three Corded-Ware-related cultures: Mierzanowicka, Strzyżowska and Iwieńska. These were succeeded by the Lusatian culture, which developed around Łódź.
>three Corded-Ware-related cultures

I'm sure this is irrelevant.

>This is what happens when Germanics and Proto-Slavs border each other for a few hundered years
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Proto-Slavic_borrowings#Slavic_and_Germanic

>This is what happens when Celts and "Proto-Slavs" (actually Lusatians) border each other for a thousand years
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Proto-Slavic_borrowings#Slavic_and_Celtic

Hmmm.....

In this map it is a hypothetical non-Slavic, yet satemic language that is extinct.

Tollense people were just R1a Cordeds indistinguishable from Slavs, but it doesn't mean they were certainly Slavic. They were pan-Cordeds.

>These were succeeded by the Lusatian culture
You failed to include the part that says how Lusatian culture was formed by Tumulus culture establishing itself over Trzciniec, and how eastern Trzciniec was essentially limited to the Vistula basin while core Lusatian territory was based primarily on the Oder basin.

They were Cordeds, but not necesserarily Slavic...
The most of Northern Europe was R1a people of the Nordic race, just like Balto-Slavs but not exclusively them.

>Nordicist brainlet is here
Abandon thread.

Gothic language has plenty of loanwords from Celtic, but no loanwords from Proto-Slavic at all. But the Slavic language has a plenty loanwords from Gothic, and no Celtic loanwords at all.

So it's more likely Goths shared border with the Celts than the Slavs.

>Tollense people were just R1a Cordeds indistinguishable from Slavs
>but it doesn't mean they were certainly Slavic.

>non-Slavic
you got it, and look how much closer they are geographically to Lusatian culture.

24 = Cordeds

They were NORDICS, now gtfo and cry swarthy subhuman.

What about all the Gothic loanwords in Proto-Slavic, though?

back your words up with legit source
every research note points the genotype of people who live ONLY in the modern day poland area. Not just Slavic. You do know you can differ slavic genes from each other, right?

Wikipedia ...
Are you fcking serious?
Everyone can write anything on wikipedia, get a real book, read about archeological discoveries etc...

Back your words up with real source, this map is based on archeological findings, linguistics and genetics.
For as long as there is no archeological/genetical evidence that this theory is wrong, this is the only legit theory

But I'm a blonde-haired, blue-eyed, fair-skinned "Nordic" with very slight Baltic and Mediterranean influence.

I'm Polish, but just being objective. The most of Northern Europe was back then genetically and racially the same - R1a Nordics.
Slavs assimilated many Goths, we even have found a settlement which had both Slavic and Germanic cultural traits
ekoscian.eu/2017/09/28/odkryto-osade-z-wczesnego-sredniowiecza/amp/
>back your words up with legit source
Mainly Carleton Coon, The Races of Europe for race
Mainly eurogenes and polishgenes for genetics
So what is your problem?

I don't have a problem, I just wanted to see your response :^)

1) Do not confuse genetics with culture
2) R1a is a one thing R1a-M458 is a different thing. Thats how we can tell who participated in Tollense battle...

This, the current Lusatian culture is Sorbic.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sorbs

>According to Constantine VII Porphyrogennetos, Serbs from the Balkan peninsula have the same origins as Lusatians and Kashubians. He also claims that Serbs inhabited the areas between the rivers Elbe and Vistula, on the southern coast of the Baltic sea.

Sorbian is a West Slav language. In Upper Lusatia it is closer to Czech, while in Lower Lusatia it is closer to Polish, but the language also has many Germanisms