Slavs on the threshold of statehood

Slavic colonization and the beginnings of statehood


The Slavic colonization of the 7th century in central and southern Europe was significantly different from that of the 6th century. If the former involved mainly Slovenia or slavs that populated vast territories, then the next also included antes.




It took place in a situation when Slavic tribes had already “got acquainted” with state institutions of other countries, and in the process of military migration the formation of tribal forms of government began, first among Slovenians, then Ants.

The turmoil in the Avar "nomadic empire" and the complete loss of control of the Byzantines over the Danube border since the 602 g. Played an important role here (Ivanova O.V., Litavrin G.G.).

Such an active promotion of the Slavs in these lands could not be carried out without military organization. Apparently, this was a tribal military organization (which we will write in detail in a separate article), the elders or jupans headed the clans (a possible etymology from the Iranian “great lord, nobleman”).

Engels:
“Each tribe settled in a new place not on a whim and not because of accidental circumstances, but in accordance with the kinship of their fellow tribesmen ... Closer kinship to large groups got a certain area, within which again separate clans, including a certain number of families, settled together, forming separate villages. Several related villages formed the "hundred" ..., several hundred formed the district ...; the totality of these districts was the people themselves. ”


Migrants in the new territories form pre-state or military-territorial unions, referred to in the Balkans and the Danube as Slavinia or Sklavinia (Litavrin G.G.). Constantine VII (905-959 gg.) Wrote:
“But they say that these peoples did not have archons, except for the elders-zupans, as it is in the rules and in other Slavinia.”


The everyday management of society among the Slavs was still not dealt with by individual tribal leaders - military leaders, but by the heads of clans.

Defensive wars, as in the case of the Slavs of Samo or offensive, as in the situation with the tribes of the Antian circle, were also a factor in stimulating the formation of a control system. But, as we see from stories Slavs of this time, with the decline in the need to conduct defensive or offensive wars, the process of state formation slowed down or stopped (Shinakov EA, Erokhin AS, Fedosov AV).

Slavs on the Balkan Peninsula and Peloponnese


Slavic migration to this region is divided into two stages: the first in the VI century, the second from the beginning of the VII century. As elsewhere, in the first stage the championship was held by the slaves, and the Ants began to take part, obviously, in the second stage, after the Avar attack at the beginning of the 7th century. Here is what he writes about the events of the late VI century. John of Ephesus, albeit a little thickening paint:
“In the third year after the death of Emperor Justin, in the reign of Emperor Tiberius, the Slavic people came out and went through all of Hellas, the region of Thessaloniki and all of Thrace. They captured many cities and fortresses, devastated, burned, filled and subjugated the area and settled in it freely, without fear, as in their own. This was the case for four years, while the emperor was busy with the war with the Persians and sent all his troops to the east. Therefore, they settled on this earth, settled on it and spread widely, while God allowed them. They destroyed, burned and took in full to the outer wall and captured many thousands of royal herds of horses and all sorts of others. And until now, until the year 595, they settled down and live quietly in the Romance regions, without worries and fear. "


After 602, the movement of the Slavs in the eastern Balkans and Greece intensified. This advance was not one-time; in this process, migration flows are mixed, as a result of which new tribal groups are formed or they are formed by clans on a new “contractual” basis, although old tribes are found. How the invasion took place can be clearly seen in the example of the siege by the Slavs of the city of Thessaloniki (modern Thessaloniki) between 615 and 620. The city was threatened several times by storm during the sieges carried out according to the rules of military art. At the same time, the tribes besieging the city united and elected the main military leader.

After the failures of the Slavs during the siege of Thessaloniki, they send gifts to the head of the Avar, inviting him for help, assuring that after the capture of the city, huge production awaits everyone. The kagan greedy for riches arrives here with Avars and subjects Bulgarians and Slavs. These events take place before the siege of Constantinople in 626.

In what relations are the tribes that besieged the Greek city with the Hagan, it is not entirely clear: on the one hand, they call for help from the Avars, and they come as allies, but the Hagan immediately leads the siege. Most likely, the separation of forces here was similar to that which occurred during the siege of Second Rome in 626, which we wrote about in previous article on VO: Avars, subordinate nomads, Bulgarians and Slavs, farmers, entered the Khagan's own army. Interestingly, at the other end of Europe, Avars come to the aid of the Alpine Slavs during the Bavarian attack. So, next to the Avars and their subordinates stood the allied army of the Slavs, who began the siege of Thessaloniki.

In the "Miracles of St. Demetrius of Solunsky", which describes the Slavic sieges, the following is reported:
"... having their clans on land along with their property, they intended to settle them in the city after [its] capture."


This is not just predatory raids, but the seizure of territories, although, of course, the Slavs avoided life in cities, settling in rural areas.

The names of the tribes, including the participants in the siege of Thessalonica, have come down to us.

The Droguvites settled in southern Macedonia west of Thessaloniki, the sagudates and other Uwuites in southern Macedonia, the Velezites settled in Greece, in Southern Thessaly, the Vayunites in Epirus, in the area of ​​Lake Ioannina, where the Berzites lived, is unknown.

We also point out the Antian tribe of Smolyan, who settled in the Western Rhodopes, on the Mesta-Nestor River, which flows into the Aegean Sea (modern Smolyan, Bulgaria).

The ubiquitous Antian tribe of the Serbs is located in Thessaly, near the Bystrica River. Judging by the distribution of Antian brooches, the Ant tribes advancing to the Balkans, following Slovenes and slaves, occupied the zone of the Podunavia, the territories of Bulgaria, Croatia, Serbia, Bosnia and Herzegovina, are a little present in Greece itself.


Antian brooches. VI-VII centuries. First brooch - State Historical Museum, Moscow, Russia; two brooches - British Museum, London, England. Author photo


In these regions, the same processes occur as in other places of migration of the Slavs at this time.

Participants in the campaign, just as in other regions of the Slavs' advancement, have or choose a military leader. At Thesallonica, the tribes were headed by Khatson, to whom other leaders are subordinate, however, often tribes in the tradition of the Slavs waging war act at their own peril and risk.

The combat activity of the Slavic tribes during their settlement of the eastern Balkans allows some researchers to talk about the beginning of the formation of the early state, which seems logical. In the territories captured by the Slavs, another population lived, including urban residents of the Byzantine state (Lamerl P.).

Croats and Serbs


At the beginning of the 7th century, the tribes of Croats and Serbs enter the historical arena, both tribes or, more correctly, the union of tribes belonged to the Ant group. It should be noted that this tribal group, most likely, never called itself ants, since, according to one version, antes are a book name for tribes that lived in the VI century between the Bug and the Dnieper, before the Danube flows into the Black Sea, and they called themselves: Croats, Serbs, etc. Interestingly, the Croats, as Konstantin Bagryanorodny wrote, defined their self-name as "owners of a large country." And it seems to us that this is not a mistake and we are not talking about “Great Croatia”, but about real Croatian self-identification. The etymology of this term from the “shepherds”, of course, had no meaning for this period, it is also unlikely that this self-name was due to the fact that the Croats scattered in places from the beginning of the 7th century. throughout central, southern and eastern Europe. We are, of course, talking about their self-perception of the period of the Antian community, and, which really corresponds to the fact, the Ants were the owners of a large country in the Black Sea region.

How did events develop on the eve of the arrival of the Antian tribes in the western part of the Balkans?


Weapon VI-VII centuries People's Museum. Belgrade


According to Konstantin Bagryanorodny, who relied on some legend, the Byzantine horsemen from the border guard raided the Danube on unarmed Slavic, and possibly Avar settlements, where all the men went on a campaign, after which, as Bazileus writes, the Avars ambushed the Romans, who made another raid over the Danube, after which they cunningly captured the main city and the great fortress of Salon (Split region, Croatia) in Dalmatia, gradually occupying the entire territory except coastal towns.


City Amphitheater Salons, Modern View


Archaeologists record the destruction in the settlements of Rome near Rocha, Muntayana, Vrsar, Kloshtar, Rogatitsa, etc. (Marusik B., Sedov V.V.).

This gave the pretext to Pope Gregory the Great in his letter from the summer of 600 to the bishop of Salon Maxim to lament over the constant invasions of the Slavs, however, noting that all these troubles were “according to our sins”.

Campaigns of the Avars and Slavs subordinate to them were, as Pavel Deacon writes, in these territories in 601 or 602, 611 and 612. In 601 (602), together with the Lombards.

Thomas Splitsky clarifies that the Salon was besieged and captured by the mounted and foot troops "ready and Slavs."

Thomas Splitsky, who wrote in the 13th century, could combine two events. The first time the Slavs came to Soluni in the 536, and from Dirrachia (Drach) to the 548. In the 550 in Dalmatia, the Slavs wintered, which were joined in spring by the Danube for robberies in these parts, and, as reported Procopius of Caesarea, there were unconfirmed rumors that the Slavs had been bribed by the king of the Italian Goths, Totil, in order to distract the troops of the Romans who were planning a landing in Italy. In 552, Totila robbed Kerkyra and Epirus, close lands to Dalmatia.

And in 601 (602), the Lombards plundered Dalmatia together with the Avars and Slavs. This gave the historian a reason to mix the two events.

Moreover, according to Thomas Splitsky, the Slavs did not just rob, they came here as part of a whole noble union of tribes (seven or eight) of the Slovenian group: Lingons or Icemen. According to Konstantin Bagryanorodny, these lands were first looted and turned into a desert, after which the Slavs and Avars begin to settle here, probably with the continued domination of the latter.

Actually archaeological finds of Avar origin are extremely few in this region (Sedov V.V.).

After the events described, a new wave of immigrants struck this part of the Balkans at the beginning of the VII century. We see that the Anty-Croats and Anty-Serbs appear in different places of the Avar-Slovenian territory. Croats do not come from the territory of a certain “White Croatia”. All tribal Croatian centers in the 7th century, including White Croatia and Croats in the Carpathians, are formed in the process of their movement from the north of the Danube. The same can be said about the Serbs: some of them are moving to the Balkans: to Thrace, Greece and Dalmatia, and some moved west, to the borders of the German world.

Croats, like Serbs, come to the western part of the Balkan Peninsula at the very beginning of the reign of Emperor Heraclius, during a severe foreign policy crisis in the east of the empire, where Sassanian Iran seized the most important provinces: the whole Middle East and Egypt, fought in Asia Minor and Armenia.

These tribes were Croats, Hulum, Tervuniot, Canalites, Diocletians and Pagans or Neretlians. Which completely coincides with the period after the defeat of the Ants from the Avars at the beginning of the VII century. against the background of two important points.

The first is the invasion of the Antian tribes in this region during the period of the beginning of the weakening of the kaganate in the first decade of the 7th century. Naturally, the tribal organization contributed to the military rallying of the Croatian clans, but there is no particular reason to argue that the tribes who arrived here had a strong militarily strong group, and not a poorly organized mass of immigrants “fleeing the enemy invasion” (Mayorov A.V.).

Moreover, the same Avars, for example, fleeing from the Türks, were a formidable force for other tribes, like the Gepids, Eruls or the same Goths, during the period of resettlement of peoples. People fleeing persecution were often strong enough militarily: it is important with whom to compare.

The second is in conditions when, after the overthrow of the emperor Foki (610) in the Thracian army, transported to fight Persia, only two participants of the Foki coup remained in the army, Byzantium could rely only on diplomacy on its northern borders (Y. Kulakovsky).

Slavs on the threshold of statehood

Roman warriors in the image of Joshua and Caleb. Terracotta icon from Vinichka Kale. VI – VII centuries Skopje Museum, Macedonia


And here, perhaps, the old ties of Constantinople with the Ants were useful again. An empire that did not have military forces for defense in this region used the divide and conquer principle.

It is not for nothing that the Croatian (Antian) tribes who arrived began a long war with the local Avars: they destroyed some, conquered others, as Konstantin Bagryanorodny writes, mentioning the fact that they acted at the instigation of Vasileus Irakli. We have an extremely small number of Avar archaeological finds in this region, but nevertheless, judging by the description of Vasileus, the struggle was lengthy, which means that the Avars had the support of the settled Slavs here. The victory took place just in the 20-30 years, during the period of serious weakening of the khanate and problems in their own "metropolis". After which stabilization takes place in this region, Byzantine inhabitants return to their towns, exchange and trade are established, and the Slavs settle in the countryside. The local population begins to pay tribute to the Croats instead of Byzantine state taxes. An early management system is being formed, of which we know almost nothing.

Some Croatian clans or tribes led the resettlement movement under the leadership of the leader, the father of a certain Porg or Porin (Ποργã), perhaps there were five of them led by the brothers Kluk, Lovel, Kosendzi, Mukhlo, Horvath with two sisters. Most scholars place these names in Iranian, and more precisely, in Alanian roots (A. Mayorov).

All of these leaders or military leaders of certain clans or tribes are mentioned in different parts of the story of Konstantin Bagryanorodny about the history of the Croats.

Already at Porge, during the reign of Heraclius, the first baptism of the Croats takes place. The distrust with which many scholars relate to this fact does not take into account the fact that this process is usually lengthy, and often a long period passes from the baptism of the nobility to the penetration of religion into everyday life.

The Serbs are advancing into this region at the same time as the Croats, and their movement was caused by the same reasons: the collapse of Antian unity under the blows of the Avars.

Like the Croats, the Serbs have their name associated with the period of the formation of the Slavic, Antian community on the basis of the Chernyakhov archaeological culture in the process of interaction with the Sarmatian nomadic tribes. As noted by M. Fasmer:
"* Ser-v-" to protect ", which gave in the classical Scythian * harv-, from where the glory. * xṛvati ".


However, the etymology remains controversial. But the presence of names related to "protection" is significant, and let us not be misled by the interpretations of "cattle guards", "shepherds", only tribes constantly fighting, protecting "cattle" in the broad sense of the word could get such names: in Old Russian "Cattle" is money, like many other Indo-European peoples.

Konstantin Vasilevs also points out the reason for inviting the Serbs to the Balkans as a way of settling areas devastated by the Avars (Avars and Slavs subordinate to them), which were formally controlled by the empire. And these events also take place in the 20 years, a period of weakening of the Avars, which was not until Singidunum (Belgrade), but
"The antiquities of the period of the initial development of the Balkans by Serbian tribes are very difficult to capture by archaeological methods"
(Lyubinskovich M., Sedov V.V.).

Once the Serbs, like the Croats, came to these territories, established their power by force, and this happened during the 20-30-s of the VII century. both in the struggle against the Avars and with the subordinate words (Naumov EP).

The Serbs were baptized during the reign of Heraclius, the process, of course, took a long time, but the consolidation of the arrived tribes and clans takes place rather quickly, although the structure of their union was not strong, and at the end of the 70's some of the lands became dependent on the restored Avar education, but this dependence is most likely “vassalism” or “alliance”, and not “tributary”, as it was before.

Arriving tribes, having seized new lands, needed to organize the management process, but it was still a long way from the formation of early state institutions.

And although the military activity of the immigrants takes place, it is no longer as intense as in the process of migration.

So, we see that at the beginning of the VII century. the Slavs on the Balkan border of Byzantium undergo significant changes - they are approaching the time of the creation of the first states.

Three factors influenced this situation:

1. Haganat weakening.
2. The difficulties of the Byzantine Empire and the fall of military control over the Danube border.
3. The capture of land by the Slavs in a milder climatic zone, areas with higher quality agricultural production.

Subjugation of new territories with a population at a higher level of development, outside the traditional and understandable tribal system for the Slavs, required new management methods.

In the lands where the Slavs met with a population at a similar level of development (the Illyrian tribes of Byzantium), the integration process was intensive.

Sources and literature:

Konstantin Bagryanorodny. About managing an empire. Translation G.G. Timpani. Edited by G.G. Litavrina, A.P. Novoseltseva. M., 1991.
Letters of Pope Gregory I // Codex of the oldest written news of the Slavs. T.II. M., 1995.
Theophanes the Byzantine. Chronicle of the Byzantine Theophanes. from Diocletian to the kings of Michael and his son Theophylact. Translation Bodyanskiy O.M. Ryazan. 2005.
Miracles of St. Demetrius of Solunsky // Codex of the oldest written news of the Slavs. T.II. M., 1995.
Akimova O.A. The formation of Croatian early feudal statehood. // Early feudal states in the Balkans of the 6th - 12th centuries. M., 1985.
Ivanova O.V. Litavrin G.G. Slavs and Byzantium // Early feudal states in the Balkans of the VI - XII centuries. M., 1985.
Kulakovsky Yu. History of Byzantium (602-717 gg.). SPb., 2004.
Mayorov A.V. Great Croatia. Ethnogenesis and the early history of the Slavs of the Carpathian region. SPb., 2006.
Marx K. Engels F. Compositions. T. 19. M., 1961.
Naumov E.P. The formation and development of the Serbian early feudal statehood // Early feudal states in the Balkans of the VI - XII centuries. M., 1985.
Niederlé L. Slavic antiquities. Translation from Czech Kovaleva T. and Khazanova M.M., 2013.
Sedov V.V. Slavs. Old Russian nationality. M., 2005.
Fasmer M. Etymological Dictionary of the Russian Language. T. 4. M., 1987.
Shinakov E.A., Erokhin A.S., Fedosov A.V. Ways to the state: Germans and Slavs. Pre-state stage. M., 2013.
Lemerle P. Les plus anciens recueils des Miracles de Saint Demetrius et la pénétration des Slaves dans les Balkans. II. Commentaire. P., 1981.


To be continued ...
Ctrl Enter

Noticed a mistake Highlight text and press. Ctrl + Enter

60 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must to register.

I have an account? Sign in

  1. Basil50 21 October 2019 08: 20 New
    • 7
    • 6
    +1
    A piece of history can * twirl * in any way. Moreover, there are letters from those who described those events, even after centuries. Today, too, they try to describe the past based either on rumors or on their own imagination, then on * new found * letters .. It is very funny to read the writings of some * historians * about the warriors of antiquity, about weapons about fighting techniques. It is especially funny when those who have never fought argue about it.
    Questions still remain. Who were the Wends? Where did the Wends come from, the very ones who founded Venice? Who are Pelasgians and where did they come from? From the Pelasgians in general, they begin the countdown of European culture in all its diversity. And who brought knowledge and culture to those places that today are called India. And who rebuilt the lands on which the Chinese today carry out such fierce assimilation and attribute to themselves all the achievements of ancient civilization?
    1. Vend 21 October 2019 10: 16 New
      • 4
      • 4
      0
      Quote: Vasily50
      It’s very funny to read the writings of some * historians * about the warriors of antiquity, about weapons about fighting techniques. It is especially funny when those who have never fought argue about it. ?

      Oh you fought in the ranks of the Slavs or the Byzantines? Or maybe in the ranks of the Avars or ready? Then you are the most valuable person for historians. laughing
      1. Basil50 21 October 2019 14: 59 New
        • 4
        • 2
        +2
        I had to be in the ranks of those who defended RUSSIA.
        The methods by which the soldiers were trained - our ancestors, were many. Some of these techniques have come down to our time. I saw some imitation of the methods of educating RUSSIAN warriors among the Chinese in China. But there they try to reduce knowledge to Bodhitharma and others .....
        Hand-to-hand enthusiasts try to find and save what happened. That's just among those who educate students who know and know little. They really don’t like those in high schools who at least know how. I had the opportunity to verify this repeatedly.
        1. Vend 21 October 2019 15: 36 New
          • 2
          • 2
          0
          Quote: Vasily50
          I had to be in the ranks of those who defended RUSSIA.
          The methods by which the soldiers were trained - our ancestors, were many. Some of these techniques have come down to our time. I saw some imitation of the methods of educating RUSSIAN warriors among the Chinese in China. But there they try to reduce knowledge to Bodhitharma and others .....
          Hand-to-hand enthusiasts try to find and save what happened. That's just among those who educate students who know and know little. They really don’t like those in high schools who at least know how. I had the opportunity to verify this repeatedly.

          Believe me, you deserve only respect, but the battles of the past and the present are different. Although some postulates are preserved, for example, the attacker suffers greater losses than the defender.
  2. Krasnoyarsk 21 October 2019 08: 42 New
    • 5
    • 5
    0
    Everything that is presented to us in the article for reading is written off from the ceiling.
    1. Edward Vashchenko 21 October 2019 15: 35 New
      • 5
      • 3
      +2
      How did you guess?
      This is a summary of scientific historiography, so do not write nonsense.
      1. Krasnoyarsk 21 October 2019 17: 39 New
        • 5
        • 3
        +2
        Quote: Edward Vashchenko
        This is a summary of scientific historiography, so do not write nonsense.

        And you, of course, are sure that - scientific ... historiography. No need to trust near-scientific guesses based on not entirely reliable sources.
        1. Edward Vashchenko 21 October 2019 18: 06 New
          • 5
          • 4
          +1
          Dear opponent,
          how can you judge this issue: are you a specialist in historical sources, do you speak source languages, are familiar with historiography?
          1. Krasnoyarsk 21 October 2019 18: 43 New
            • 5
            • 0
            +5
            = Thomas Splitsky, who wrote in the 536th century, could combine two events. The first time the Slavs came to Soluni in 548, and to Dirrachia (Drach) - in 550. In 552, the Slavs wintered in Dalmatia, who were still joined by troops from the Danube in the spring for robberies in these parts, and, as reported Procopius of Caesarea, there were unconfirmed rumors that the Slavs had been bribed by the king of the Italian Goths, Totil, in order to distract the troops of the Romans who were planning a landing in Italy. In XNUMX, Totila robbed Kerkyra and Epirus, close lands to Dalmatia. =
            Dear author, I have quoted from your article. From it we see that you fully trust Thomas Splitsky, who informed you about the events that happened 7 centuries before his birth. But I do not differ, unlike you, in such credulity.
            = In Dalmatia, the Slavs wintered =
            How is it known that the Slavs, and that they wintered? To which the detachments joined (?) Because of the Danube (?) For looting (?)
            = ... as Procopius of Caesarea reported, there were rumors that were not confirmed (!!!) ... =
            And do you consider all this a scientific historiography?
            = ... in order to distract the troops of the Romans, planning a landing in Italy. =
            Did the Romans tell you about their plans? Or did Thomas and Procopius make a fuss?
            1. Edward Vashchenko 21 October 2019 19: 23 New
              • 3
              • 4
              -1
              First,
              Procopius of Caesarea, Thomas Splitsky and those authors who have come down to us, that is, from written monuments, have answers to all your questions. I have no guesses here: everything is clear from the text of the sources. I'm not writing: Belisarius was thinking about something like that .. or he dreamed of toto and toto.
              The second,
              Based on your questioning and aplomb, logical to assumethat you are incompetent in your field of activity.
              1. Krasnoyarsk 22 October 2019 00: 04 New
                • 4
                • 1
                +3
                Quote: Edward Vashchenko
                Procopius of Caesarea, Thomas Split has answers to all your questions

                1. I.e. Do you have any answers to my questions?
                2. You did not understand me at all. Which is not surprising. I doubted - how can you unconditionally trust a person who describes the events that happened 7 centuries before his birth?
                What sources does Thomas refer to? Where did he get this information? Great-great-great grandmother great-great-great grandmother told?
                Quote: Edward Vashchenko

                Based on your questioning and aplomb, it is logical to assume that you are incompetent in your field of activity.

                Did I write an article on electrical engineering? And you, after reading this article, have concluded that I am incompetent? But I did not write an article. And you, of course, did not read it. Where did you come to the conclusion about my incompetence in my field of activity?
                1. Edward Vashchenko 22 October 2019 07: 01 New
                  • 1
                  • 1
                  0
                  Good morning,
                  First, Regarding Thomas Splitsky - no one accepts his information on faith. An analysis of his work is contained in the works listed below, under the article.
                  But general information is quite in the outline of other sources.
                  And even in my short article, his information is used as an addition.
                  According to your reasoning, if all the Russian Chronicles came to us from the XIV century, then you should not consider their information: the grandmother told them about the foundation of the Russian state, right?
                  Second, I’m judging your “incompetence” according to a system of questions and reasoning, some kind of pralogic thinking: you cannot be logical in one sphere and illogical in another: everything is interconnected.
                  1. Krasnoyarsk 22 October 2019 08: 03 New
                    • 2
                    • 0
                    +2
                    Quote: Edward Vashchenko
                    Good morning,

                    Good.
                    Quote: Edward Vashchenko
                    But general information is quite in the outline of other sources.

                    And about the "wintering" and, especially, about the "plans of the Romans to land in Italy"?
                    It reminds me of Radzinsky, who wrote - "Stalin thought ..."
                    How does he know what Stalin was thinking?
                    And what is illogical in my questions?
                    History, as a science, is not a matter of faith in certain sources, it is a matter of proven facts. Are you trying to make the reader simply believe.
                    Quote: Edward Vashchenko

                    According to your reasoning, if all the Russian Chronicles came to us from the XIV century, then you should not consider their information: the grandmother told them about the foundation of the Russian state, right?

                    No not like this. Of course, it is necessary to consider the information presented in them, but it is NOT possible to treat them as a historical fact !!!
                    1. Edward Vashchenko 22 October 2019 08: 36 New
                      • 0
                      • 0
                      0
                      History, as a science, is not a matter of faith in certain sources, it is a matter of proven facts. Are you trying to make the reader simply believe.

                      If you think so, this does not mean that I am "trying to do it."
                      I repeat, for the hundredth time, everything that has been written about wintering, etc., strictly according to the text from the authors of the 6th-7th centuries, if the VO allowed to lay out links, there would be links to the pages.
                      Do not ascribe, as Radzinsky, to others your thoughts.
                      If in doubt, I have attached a list of sources and literature, you can verify.
                      Of course, it is necessary to consider the information presented in them, but it is NOT possible to treat them as a historical fact !!!

                      This is simply some kind of greatest discovery in the field of all humanities. Almost like Radzinsky, Fomenko and other pseudoscience.
                      You are not trying to figure it out, this is a vice of our time, and present your naive-silly reasonings as the ultimate truth.
                      A person who is trying to comprehend the basics in other sciences, asks practical questions, and does not expose his self as a three-way student.
                      Better master the acquired specialty! It will be more useful for you and for the homeland.
                      I stop the discussion.
                      Yours faithfully, hi
  3. Albatroz 21 October 2019 08: 43 New
    • 8
    • 1
    +7
    The Slavs have different points of view on the origin of statehood, and Byzantine and Arab sources are of particular value in this
  4. Olgovich 21 October 2019 09: 05 New
    • 7
    • 0
    +7
    The topic is as fertile as it is unsteady ...
  5. Operator 21 October 2019 09: 19 New
    • 12
    • 6
    +6
    Two Russophobes - Vashchenko, referring to Engels - a couple bully

    Serbs and Croats (the so-called white Croats) came to the Balkans not from the Carpathians, but from the Sudetenland, from Moravia and future East Germany (Lusatian sorbes).

    The Ants came to Bulgaria and Greece (Morea region) from the Dnieper region, and 100 years earlier than the author of the article misinforms.

    Only foreigners called these tribes Slavs, they called themselves Slovenes (see modern Slovenia, Slovakia, chronicle Slovenes) - in the sense they spoke the same language.

    And yes: the Slovenes spoke their native language - a Sanskrit dialect, in contrast to the Iranians assimilated by the Aryans - blood relatives of the Slovenes.
    1. alebor 21 October 2019 11: 05 New
      • 4
      • 4
      0
      Something I did not understand, what is the Russophobia of the author? The fact that he quoted out of fashion Frederick Engels?
      In my opinion, much greater Russophobia, or Slavophobia, is to say that the ancient Slavs did not speak their beautiful Old Slavic language, dating back to the equally beautiful Proto-Slavic language, but used Indian Sanskrit to express their thoughts! This is a direct insult to the Slavs - Slovenes - Sklavins - Wends and other Ants. :-)
      1. Operator 21 October 2019 11: 16 New
        • 10
        • 6
        +4
        But are you not aware of Russophobian Engels pearls about the Slavs and Russians in particular? Then welcome to google.

        You don’t have an understanding that Sanskrit is the language of the Aryans who came to India from the Black Sea, and not the language of the Indian Dravids, assimilated by the Aryans in the cultural and linguistic sense. Aryans are blood relatives of the Slavs, only darling Engels did not know about it. There is only one difference between Sanskrit and the Slavic language: the first received writing as early as the 5 century BC, and the second - only in the 9 century BC
        1. Talgarets 21 October 2019 19: 17 New
          • 5
          • 4
          +1
          Now the label of Russophobe is hung up to everyone who does not share the conclusions of some figures (Sundakova, Zadornov, etc.).
        2. Beringovsky 22 October 2019 23: 27 New
          • 0
          • 2
          -2
          Actually, the difference between Sanskrit and Old Slavic is huge. Both in grammar and in vocabulary. Slav of the 6th century A.D. would not understand anything from the speech of the aria of the 16th century BC So that. fellow - request
          1. Operator 23 October 2019 01: 24 New
            • 1
            • 0
            +1
            European arias divided into Western, Eastern and Black Sea 6 thousands of years ago. 5 of thousands of years ago, the Western Aryans were partially destroyed, partially migrated to Scandinavia. 4,5 thousands of years ago, the Black Sea arias went to Asia and lost physical contact with European tribesmen.

            Sanskrit of the Indian Aryans in writing was recorded 2,5 thousands of years ago after two thousand years of withdrawal from the Black Sea. The Slavic language was recorded in writing by 1,2 thousands of years ago. Those. Aryan Black Sea and Aryan Eastern European independently developed about 5 thousand years. The first language was influenced by the language of the Dravids, the second - the languages ​​of the neighbors of the Celts, Illyrians, Scandinavians, Caucasians and Northern Semites.

            Not surprisingly, there are differences between Sanskrit and Slavic.

            But the trick is that the roots of words, words and the rules of word formation (inflection) are the same for the Sanskrit and the Slavic language, but for Sanskrit and the agglutinative Basque (native language of the Celts), Nakh (the native language of the Northern Semites) and Abkhaz-Adyghe (native language) Caucasians) - are not the same.

            Classic inflected languages ​​are Sanskrit, Slavic and partly Latin. The latter language is a hybrid language, formed on the basis of the language of the Mitannian Aryans (migrated to Asia Minor 4000 years ago and assimilated the local Northern Semites), the Nakh language and the Basque language of the Latins (assimilated by Etruscans - migrants from Asia Minor, Troy region).

            As a result, the Slavic and Latin languages ​​have not only hundreds of letter-by-word words (back, moon, nova, we / mi, etc.), but also general word-formation rules (for example, the formation of the plural of a noun using the “and”), and modern Russians and Italians speak Italian and Russian languages ​​without accent (phonetics coincidence).
      2. lucul 21 October 2019 11: 52 New
        • 10
        • 4
        +6
        Something I did not understand, what is the Russophobia of the author?

        Give a magnifying glass?
        The author as soon as the Avars are mentioned - so immediately always followed by "and Slavs subordinate to them." And to the place and out of place - the main thing is to focus on this. Even the title picture in the article about. Moreover, the action taking place in the Balkans is supposedly transferred automatically to the entire territory of the Slavs, to the entire East European Plain, up to the Ural Mountains.
        The funny thing is, according to the author, the Slavs do not yet have statehood, but nothing at all, they live just like Neanderthals. And right here in history:
        "" In the third year after the death of Emperor Justin, during the reign of Emperor Tiberius, the Slavic people came out and went all over Hellas, the regions of Thessaloniki and all Thrace. They captured many cities and fortresses, devastated, burned, filled and subjugated the area and settled in it free, without fear, as in his own "
        That is, the Neanderthals Slavs took a bunch of cities and fortresses without problems, and not from anyone there, but from the Romans themselves.
        OK, right? For all that, as all historians write, archaeological finds in these territories are precisely Avar ones that are just negligible.
        1. Edward Vashchenko 21 October 2019 15: 34 New
          • 4
          • 6
          -2
          Vitaliy,
          You are obviously not a specialist in pre-class societies,
          therefore, your reasoning, to put it mildly, is not correct, read the article carefully, there will be a continuation - there will be more information there - the formation of state institutions is a complex and lengthy process.
          And then write nonsense - and do not be shy, excuse me for being frank.
        2. Mikhail Matyugin 24 October 2019 00: 35 New
          • 0
          • 0
          0
          Quote: lucul
          That is, the Neanderthals Slavs took a bunch of cities and fortresses without problems, and not from anyone there, but from the Romans themselves.

          I don’t understand what surprises you? There are many cases in history when peoples located at rather low levels of social development seized land and took fortresses of much more "progressive" nations.

          And the fact that the Slavs accounted for most of the compelled infantry in the Avar troops is generally a well-known fact (in general, not an analogue of the Mongol "hashar" thrown from Kievan Rus to Hungary and Poland several centuries after the events described, but something close) ..
        3. venaya 31 October 2019 19: 22 New
          • 1
          • 0
          +1
          The author as soon as the Avars are mentioned - so immediately always followed by "and Slavs subordinate to them." And to the place and out of place - the main thing is to focus on this. Even the title picture in an article about ..
          - Here, in this particular case, there is only one possible explanation for such a striking bias in my opinion: The author associates himself beloved with a particular tribe, namely, the direct relatives of these “Avars”, that is, Ugric tribes, in other words, “Ugric-Finnish” with the center of their settlement in the Ural Mountains, the most prominent representatives of which are the Khanty and Mansi tribes. No other explanation of the author’s apparent bias is yet to be seen. I hope that you agree with me in this case.
      3. Trilobite Master 21 October 2019 12: 17 New
        • 8
        • 4
        +4
        Quote: alebor
        In my opinion, much greater Russophobia, or Slavophobia, is to say that the ancient Slavs did not speak their beautiful Old Slavic language, dating back to the equally beautiful Proto-Slavic language, but used Indian Sanskrit to express their thoughts!

        There is an Indo-European group of languages, which includes all (almost all) languages ​​spoken by the indigenous population of Europe, and a total of 2,5 billion people speak these languages. All of them come from one parent language and are related to varying degrees. The Russian language is the same relative to Sanskrit as German, and Tajik and, say, Ossetian, as well as another hundred languages ​​and has as much in common with it as the same German, Lithuanian or Swedish ..
        Of course, I know that the Operator’s main source of inspiration is reformatting, but sometimes I get the feeling that when he doesn’t exude miasma here, he’s gaining intelligence on “specialized” Ukrainian sites. The screams that come to me from time to time remind me of what the Operator is broadcasting to us.
        It seems to me that such a coincidence is not accidental. Most likely, texts for “enlighteners” of this kind both in Ukraine and in our country are written in one institution, after which they put “rus” in the text for Russia and “Ukrainian” for Ukraine, and it’s done. I even guess where this institution is located approximately. Do you, Operator, guess?
        1. Edward Vashchenko 21 October 2019 15: 27 New
          • 5
          • 4
          +1
          Michael,
          Thanks for the comment,
          Accurate remark.
          The Operator has a classic substitution of concepts:
          If Engels is a “Russophobe”, then his observations on the formation of tribal structures during the migration period are not true, this is certainly an argument!
          Cognitive dissonance, what to do.
          1. Trilobite Master 21 October 2019 17: 51 New
            • 6
            • 6
            0
            Quote: Edward Vashchenko
            If Engels is a “Russophobe”, then his observations on the formation of tribal structures during the migration period are not true.

            In order to understand Engels, one must read his works in full, and not quotes taken out of context. And not just to read, but to understand at what time these compositions were written, in connection with what events, to understand what Russia, Germany, and Europe as a whole were at that time ...
            Yes, Engels did not like Russia, and for about the same reason that we do not like the United States now, in particular, he was simply pissed off by the Russian invasion of Hungary in 1849. He was young, ardent and categorical, dreamed of a revolution and wrote about the current events in hot pursuit.
            If we are seen from the side, as Engels saw, and not only him, it is rather an occasion to think about how we look, or looked at that moment, and not an occasion to hang up the Russophobe label on the author and multiply everything by zero in general that comes from it.
            Although ... Who cares. The pig will find dirt everywhere (this is such a Russian proverb, otherwise the Resurrected in the Mist will come now and attribute an insult to me). And the Operator will find Russophobe everywhere. After all, there must somewhere be the one who is to blame for ... something, it doesn’t even matter what.
            Operator, what are you Russophobes to blame? How do they interfere with your life, except for the fact of their existence? I, as a Jewish Tatar, are interested. laughing
          2. voyaka uh 21 October 2019 21: 56 New
            • 4
            • 4
            0
            The operator’s everything is simple and clear: who was lucky to get from the depths
            Bronze Age Aryan haplogroup Ra1, those are cool guys who carry light
            and knowledge to all other ancient people.
            Those who didn’t receive this super-tag wandered in the darkness in Asia-Europe without meaning and purpose.
            laughing
        2. Talgarets 21 October 2019 19: 39 New
          • 4
          • 2
          +2
          I completely agree with you. Assessing the general situation, some discerning people believe that Russia is preparing the ground for the coming to power of some fascist party.
          1. Trilobite Master 21 October 2019 20: 12 New
            • 6
            • 5
            +1
            It has long been my intention to write and try to publish an article here on the topic of distortion of history, pseudo-patriotism, cave nationalism, etc., their origins and consequences of a possible spread. While courage is not enough to take, the topic is controversial, you need to refresh something in your memory, learn a lot, and the luggage that I have is enough only for polemic, but not enough for the article.
            The only thing I want to say is that the soil is not "preparing", or rather, it is preparing, but it is preparing on its own, regardless of anyone's will. State propaganda in Russia is now aimed at suppressing these trends, but the objective economic and political situation has some growth for their growth.
        3. Hantengri 21 October 2019 21: 27 New
          • 5
          • 3
          +2
          Quote: Trilobite Master
          that when he does not exude miasma here, it’s gaining intelligence on the “specialized” Ukrainian sites. The screams that come to me from time to time remind me of what the Operator is broadcasting to us.

          Maybe the whole thing is simply that fascism (and, especially, its extreme form is Nazism), that Italian, that Spanish, that German, that Ukrainian, that Russian is generated by the same reasons and has common characteristics, making his followers look alike, like deja vu?
          1. Trilobite Master 21 October 2019 22: 40 New
            • 2
            • 2
            0
            Quote: HanTengri
            has common characteristics that make his followers alike, like deja vu

            I don’t know, Igor. I have looked enough in life, unfortunately. They are different - young, mature, old and very old. There are those who admire Hitler openly, there are Slavic dolboslavs, there are simply stupid ones whose ideology is limited by the desire for violence anyway over whom. Among them are marginalized and wealthy. They are not only among the privileged sections of society, among the very rich, among the elite.
            In general, fascism, in my opinion, is a purely bourgeois, even, probably, petty-bourgeois ideology. Moreover, an ideology fueled by fear. Straight to lose that little that you have, the fear that you are weaker, that someone can come and take everything away. A sort of defensive reaction to a certain threat, perhaps not even a hypothetical one. Fear is precisely what unites all these radical chauvinists.
            Who can come to us and take everything away? What factor will be decisive in this process? Migrant workers take over all jobs? The Chinese will buy all the plants and land? Will the Americans bring democracy and chaos, and again they will take away both the plants and the land, only for nothing?
            What, for example, is the Operator afraid of? He is obviously afraid of something.
            1. The comment was deleted.
      4. zyablik.olga 22 October 2019 05: 58 New
        • 3
        • 2
        +1
        Quote: alebor
        Something I did not understand, what is the Russophobia of the author?

        Here's what about Andrei Vasilev (Operator) wrote in the comments about a year ago:
        In psychiatry there is such a diagnosis of paranoid schizophrenia ... There is one of the symptoms, a person sees something that is not there, and most importantly it haunts him everywhere. And here, no one sees Russophobia in the lines, but you see ...

        So don't be surprised ... request
    2. Mikhail Matyugin 24 October 2019 00: 32 New
      • 0
      • 0
      0
      Quote: Operator
      Serbs and Croats (the so-called white Croats) came to the Balkans not from the Carpathians, but from the Sudetenland, from Moravia and future East Germany (Lusatian sorbes).

      But who knows, it seems that the Carpathian region seems to be more objective, from where the 2 stream came - to the south, to the Balkans, and to the north - to the region of modern Germany.

      Quote: Operator
      The Ants came to Bulgaria and Greece (Morea region) from the Dnieper region, and 100 years earlier than the author of the article misinforms.
      Again, the Carpathians as an "intermediate ancestral home" are more obtained - from the Dnieper to the Balkans and Greece, you can just go through them.
      1. Operator 24 October 2019 13: 26 New
        • 1
        • 0
        +1
        You are right and wrong at the same time - the ancestors of the Luga’s sorbians and white Croats really came from the Carpathians, but the route of their arrival in the Balkans looks like the “letter G”: first west to central Europe (the territory of present-day Slovakia and the Czech Republic), and only then to the south (territories of present-day Hungary, Croatia, Bosnia and Serbia) after the liquidation by the Avars and Slavs of the power of the Romans / Byzantines in the province of Illyria.
  6. kalibr 21 October 2019 12: 56 New
    • 9
    • 8
    +1
    Traditionally good material "From Edward". Nice to read good materials.
    1. Edward Vashchenko 21 October 2019 15: 28 New
      • 3
      • 3
      0
      Thanks Vyacheslav Olegovich! hi
  7. fuxila 21 October 2019 14: 08 New
    • 7
    • 1
    +6
    Edward, when will you finally start reading the texts you write yourself? You "" Droguvites settled in southern Macedonia west of Thessaloniki, sagudates and other Uwites in southern Macedonia ... "Despite the fact that the Droguvits and Druzhuvites are one and the same tribe.
    "... where the Berzites lived is unknown." Very well known! They lived in Macedonia near Ohrid and until the 19th century. locals also called themselves Brzyats. You have not yet mentioned the Rhinchins and Strumians who lived next to them, as well as the Milings and Jesherites settled in the extreme south of Greece. To the south of the Danube, between the Serbs and the Bulgarians, the Timochans, Moravans, Branichites and encouraged settled. Naturally, there were much more Slavic tribes in the Balkans, and these are the names of only those who were recorded in the annals, and even then in a distorted form.
    1. Edward Vashchenko 21 October 2019 15: 29 New
      • 3
      • 3
      0
      Alex,
      good day,
      I didn’t plan to list all the tribes: tiring for the reader, and the topography is not clear to everyone in this region, I wanted to lay out a map from V.V. Sedova (Selected Works) - forgot)
      wink
  8. alexey alexeyev_2 21 October 2019 14: 48 New
    • 5
    • 4
    +1
    The author has violent fantasy ... no wonder .. Judging by the list of references ...
    1. Edward Vashchenko 21 October 2019 15: 30 New
      • 4
      • 4
      0
      Alex,
      Do you know how it was?
      Do you know what fantasy is in history?
      There are no fantasies here - they are concise conclusions of scientific historiography, not charlatans.
      1. alexey alexeyev_2 22 October 2019 00: 14 New
        • 2
        • 0
        +2
        But nobody knows. Well, maybe something is stored in the archives of the Vatican. But who will let you go there. Yes, you yourself probably will not want to ... The state itself was mentioned here .. But you know perfectly well that from the bay floundering of the state does not form. This is a long evolutionary process. Each state, being formed, rests on some foundation of the former statehood .. So, before the Slavs themselves, there was some form of organization implying some kind of statehood. Didn't the pope instill this idea in them? And this is certainly a fantasy of pure water ...
        1. The comment was deleted.
        2. Edward Vashchenko 22 October 2019 08: 44 New
          • 1
          • 0
          +1
          And nobody knows that.


          But experts are trying to figure it out, attracting related sciences,
          I’m writing about this: how pre-statehood developed, and you from the floundering bay, not possessing any knowledge in this area from the word at all, begin to troll, in the style of the Vatican archives.
          IF YOU KNOW LATIN, ANCIENT GREEK - go to Rome - study, they let everyone in there who have a certain degree of knowledge.
          But there you will not find it,
          do not watch "Angels and Demons" at night, it affects the perception of the world.
          about Itself - in the next article and the Pope has nothing to do with it - write something that does not belong to the topic at all.
          hi
  9. Operator 21 October 2019 16: 04 New
    • 6
    • 5
    +1
    Quote: lucul
    according to the author, the Slavs do not yet have statehood

    Now local Russophobes will “explain” to you that the formation of statehood among the Slavs is a long process. Tolley is Goth’s business: they didn’t have time to land on the southern coast of the Baltic - and immediately formed a Gothic state in Transnistria (no one has found traces of them yet - such as the capital was in their swamp), but these are highly cultured Germans, where the Slavs barbarians were before them. Or suppose the Avars flew a horde into the Pannonian Basin and at this moment formed a Haganate (the capital and other settlements, however, also cannot be found until now - but they are nomads, they are excusable) laughing

    The author of the article deliberately misinforms readers about the establishment of Slavic statehood - the Samo state on the territory of the Czech Republic, Moravia, Slovakia and Slovenia (623 year), Great Moravia on the territory of Hungary, the Czech Republic, Slovakia and Greater Poland (822 year), Greater Poland (860 year), Ruska The land with its capital in Novgorod (862 year), Bulgarian kingdom (865 year), Czech Republic (872 year).
    1. Edward Vashchenko 21 October 2019 16: 11 New
      • 5
      • 4
      +1
      What article is considered in the article?
      Read carefully.
      the beginning of the 7th century, they still did not reach Samo.
      Written: Slavs on the threshold of statehood, and nothing else.
      Or did Engels work like a red rag?
    2. Mikhail Matyugin 24 October 2019 13: 53 New
      • 0
      • 0
      0
      Quote: Operator
      the formation of statehood among the Slavs is an oooooooooooooooooooooooooh very long process.

      By the way, everything is very simple - the Slavic tribes were initially not inclined towards expansionism; it was enough for them to simply live peacefully in their "fields and forests", no more; statehood, especially of the imperial type, is a form characteristic of expansion. Hence, its extreme variety, namely in nomadic militarized communities - the horde of Avars - who came to Pannonia - was already a nation-state. Yes, they came and sat on the neck of the Slavs. And they led them to fight against Byzantium and the Western European countries.

      And the capital of the Avar Kaganate, as I know, although I may be mistaken, was found, and for a long time it is the city of Szeged.

      Quote: Operator
      and immediately formed a Gothic state in Transnistria (no one has yet found traces of them - like the capital was in their swamp)
      Actually, again - see the question of expansionism - a clear state structure for which - and the first capital is ready, yes, it is not clear where, but the main one is quite well known - on the Dnieper ("Dnieper shelter" of chronicles), conditionally "proto Kyiv".
  10. kalibr 21 October 2019 18: 35 New
    • 4
    • 3
    +1
    Well written, Michael! But why are you a Jewish Tatar? This is from the same opera that my grandfather is a Polish general, right?
    1. Trilobite Master 21 October 2019 19: 57 New
      • 3
      • 3
      0
      Thank you, Vyacheslav Olegovich. hi
      Rather, from the opera where you are an agent of the Intellectual service or whatever, I don’t remember ... smile One "militant patriot" blurted out stupidity, another picked up and now my probable Tatar roots haunt our Operator. Well, these "patriots" considered me a "Jew" before they "found out" that I was a "Tatar." Anton suggested that I sign up for Finno-Ugric, but I decided that it wasn’t worth it. I will remain a Tatar in the memory of the people. laughing
      1. 3x3zsave 21 October 2019 21: 29 New
        • 5
        • 2
        +3
        Yes, we will remain so. You are a Tatar, I am a Lopar, Shpakovsky is a mazur rootless, VikNik is generally a “fifth column”, Nikolay is an Ingrian, from the word “completely” ... Who else can raise the collapsed ensign of the Great Russian world? Only the Ural mountaineer Vlad! But he considers himself a “hammock”! Where to go to poor Moscow peasants?!?!?
        1. bubalik 21 October 2019 21: 39 New
          • 7
          • 1
          +6
          ,,, what an interesting company has gathered what
          1. 3x3zsave 21 October 2019 21: 49 New
            • 3
            • 2
            +1
            Yeah. Fuck not get up! At the same time, we all consider ourselves Russian, even the Lombard City Hall, and the Turk Khan Tengri. That's bastards!
            And to which tribe of non-Russians do you consider yourself, dear Sergey?
            1. bubalik 21 October 2019 22: 01 New
              • 4
              • 0
              +4
              ,,, according to the story recourse the settlement was founded in 1762 by Molokan sectarians. belay (in the Samara province). Molokan sectarians stop I don’t know who they are. But this is a settlement. And the ancestors either fled, or resettled them from under Tambov. yes
        2. Trilobite Master 21 October 2019 22: 00 New
          • 5
          • 0
          +5
          Quote: 3x3zsave
          Where to go to poor Moscow peasants?!?!?

          And what, are there such ones here? Well, yes, mera! And submit here to our Russian company, we will teach them to love their homeland!
          1. 3x3zsave 21 October 2019 22: 25 New
            • 4
            • 0
            +4
            No, Michael! What are we, Bazhins, Bocharovs, Popovs, and Mikhailovs?!?! We are not talking about all sorts of "underpoles", such as Shpakovsky and Vashchenko! Even the Tungus Zhalobin can only modestly claim the place of a junior janitor at the court of the most enlightened dynasty of the true carriers of the Vasiliev’s paradigm of the Russian!
            1. Trilobite Master 21 October 2019 22: 54 New
              • 3
              • 0
              +3
              Incidentally, one of my great-grandmothers has the maiden name of Mikhailov, and the other Vasiliev. laughing
              What paradigm do I write to? (emphasize as damaged laughing )
              1. 3x3zsave 21 October 2019 23: 06 New
                • 4
                • 0
                +4
                Why are you screwing ?! Write as is: Luga! laughing
            2. Edward Vashchenko 22 October 2019 07: 04 New
              • 3
              • 2
              +1
              Anton,
              Why are underpoles? the most that neither is.
              Vyatichi and Radimichi, on the other hand, came from the little earth, according to the PVL, and this is the North-East of Russia! laughing
  11. Operator 24 October 2019 14: 02 New
    • 0
    • 0
    0
    Quote: Mikhail Matyugin
    the horde of Avars - who came to Pannonia - was already a nation-state

    Nomads (Goths, Huns, Avars, Polovtsy, Pechenegs) do not have a state by definition. It is possible for those who have passed over to settled (Khazars, Bulgar, Hungarians, Mongols).