Re: That old Odin scenario ...

--- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, george knysh <gknysh@...> wrote:

>
>
> --- tgpedersen <tgpedersen@...> wrote:
> Milograd was
> > Baltic, not
> > > > > Finnic.****
> > > >
> > > > Because ... ?
> >
> > > GK: The material culture is closely related to
> > > similar ones north,west,and east, all considered
> > > Baltic. It is nearly identical to the Pidhirtsi
> > > culture of Ukraine (considered Baltic), it is quite
> > > different ffrom more northern cultures (like Dyakovo)
> > > considered Finnic, and it is located in an area of
> > > nearly universal Baltic hydronyms (no Finnic ones).
> > > Milograd/Pidhirtsi was assimilated into Zarubintsi and
> > > became part of Shchukin's "Bastarnian" complex.
> >
> > Does the manner in which the assimilation took place inspire
> > confidence that some putative Finnic hydronymics would have
> > survived (cf Jackson's map of Celtic river names)?
> > http://www.yorksj.ac.uk/dialect/celtpn.htm
>
>
> ****GK: I am unaware of any Finnic hydronyms that far
> south. But the point about Zarubintsi is this(andthis
> has some relevance to your earlier question about
> distinctions between Przeworsk, Poeneshti-Lukashovka,
> and Zarubintsi. These three are "LaTenized"in the
> sense that the key identifying element in them
> (compared to eastern forest or steppe cultures) is the
> western or "Celtic" object inventory (fibulae types,
> ceramic types, weapon types) as well as settlement
> patterns, burial types etc.) But the balance between
> incoming elements and their interplay with "locals"
> varied. Thus: the Yastorf groups were more numerous in
> Przeworsk and Poeneshti-Lukashovka than in Zarubintsi.
> In the latter, Pomeranian groups seemed to have
> "numerically" predominated, though Yastorf was also
> present. These Pomeranians are also referred to in the
> literature as "Celto-Illyrians" ("Illyrian" being a
> stand in for "Venetic").

The Celto-Scythians of Greek Historians.

> The C/I left more hydronimic
> and toponymic traces in Zarubintsi than the
> Yastorfers, as far east as the basin of the river Ros'
> south of Kyiv. They may have been political
> "Bastarnians" as Shchukin surmises, but the Germanic
> element wouldalso have been much weaker. The "locals"
> with which these incomers interacted were the Balts of
> Milograd and Pidhirtsi, and the "Thrakoid" Scythians
> of the Middle Dnipro region.

I just reread Kortlandt on Temematic. That's where places them
linguistically.

> The Pomeranians seemed
> numerically preponderant over "locals" in the west,
> but Milograd was still more numerous in the center,
> and the east was a more or less even mixture of
> migrants and locals. Zarubintsi was broken up by
> Sarmatian and Aorsan assaults in the mid-1rst c. CE.

Nasty Aorsans. Are you sure it was that late?

> As a result, its western component (in the area of the
> upper Pripet), largely C/I/Yast. with Milograd
> admixture, migrated south to Galicia, where it mixed
> with incoming Przeworkers and Dacians.

OK, so this coud be the later Slavs, or rather Wends?
Did you realize you just said 'migrated south'?

> The vacated
> territory was subsequently occupied by Welbarkers(a
> century later). Central "north Bastarnia" was nearly
> wiped out by 50 CE and its population dispersed
> towards the north and northeast. Some may have reached
> Finnic territories,but most just melted into the
> "BaltoSlavic area".

Could they be the Eastern Balts?

>
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Balto-Slavic_languages
>
> As a non-linguist I can't say much about this issue.
> But I know of no evidence historical or archaeological
> to suggest that the Slavs existed as a distinct group
> much earlier than the 1rst c.CE. ****
>

Torsten