Early Slavs

[PMBardunias]

I'm curious to know if there is any information online about the early Sclavae and Antes, whom I think first appear in history as cavalry auxillaries of Narses. I've read Procopios and "Maurice's" Strategekon, but are there any good secondary sources? modern images?

As for Slavic ethnogenisis I have Sulimirski and Curta, anyone else worth reading? It is a bit troubling that they both posit the origin in their own ancestral lands.

I've time and again suggested an Osprey title on the early Slavs, from their appearance to Mieszko's conversion, feel free to do so as well :wink:

[Robert Vermaat]

Ask our member Kuura about them!

[kuura]

What, who me....I know nuffink :wink:


One of the best sources I have read is;

The Evolution of Slavic Society and the Slavic Invasions in Greece. The First Major Slavic Attack on Thessaloniki 597

By Speros Vryonis Jr

Hesperia Vol 50.

Backed up with eye witness accounts of the siege and plenty of detail on Slavic tactics, dress and weaponry. Unfortunately Jestor appear to have 'grabbed' this article as I have it printed out at home somewhere, will have to dig it out for you later tonight.


As for ethnogensis..a mine field, especially when they move down to the Balkans. Any views will be heavily biased in favour of the authors cultural
background so your guess is as good as anyones.


:roll:

[PMBardunias]

Thanks for the lead, I downloaded a number of his papers.

[Mitra]

Florin Curta - The making of the Slavs

[PMBardunias]

Thanks, I have his books and papers. I don't necessarily buy the idea that slavs emerge on the Limes as opposed to arriving as an ethnic group. I remember he posits Slavic to be a "Lingua Franca", but the element missing from the analogy is the "franca", a group strong enough culturally to cause the adoption of its language as the common tongue.

I suppose slavic could have emerged as a pidgeon tongue between pastoral nomads and farmers, but this could just as well occurred out east.

[kuura]

Not sure about the Slavs being cavalry auxiliaries of Narses as they were predominately foot sloggers.

The trouble with Classical sources is that unless the author has first hand knowledge of a tribal grouping it is hard I feel for them to differentiate between the multitude of sub groups, allies etc that make up the bulk of any transient people. The Byzantines early and late had an annoying habit of referring to anyone from the east as Scythians, an antiquated term at best.

The Slavs first appear on the Danube around the 540's and launch raids on small enclaves, outposts etc and not really posing much of a threat, the Gepids absorbing much of the punishment.
It's not until the 560s and 70s that they became bolder and also a tributary people of the Avars who provided the cavalry arm.

Once the Gepids had been crushed in the Carpathian basin by attacks from Lombards, Avars etc, the Slavs absorbed them as well.

Eye witness accounts describe the Slavs as being Ill armed with bows, spears axes and a few swords. No mention of shields which is strange as accounts of them at Thessaloniki in 597 state they had round shields and large ones the height of a man, possibly rectangular? They were also described as being half naked during the siege, perhaps stripping down to trousers/breeches during the siege works.
During their time spent as subjects of the Avars they must have acquired some of their equipment as excavations of burials indicate that it is almost impossible to differentiate between Avar and Slav in terms of grave goods.

[PMBardunias]

Not sure about the Slavs being cavalry auxiliaries of Narses as they were predominately foot sloggers.

I don't have it in front of me, but i think procopios states that Narses had something like 300 horsemen from the Sclavinae. Perhaps these early troops were upper class. The Antes as well are originally described as cavalry if I remember correctly- there is debate over whether these are slavs.

The description of the Slavs and how they fight is remarkably close to that of the Heruls, who are differentiaed from the goths, etc. for their tactics. Not sure if that means anything.

I just found an english translation online for Paul the Deacon's history of the Lombards- who as you note had close ties to early slavs:

http://www.northvegr.org/lore/langobard/index.php

[kuura]

The Northern and especially the eastern Slavs fielded horse, normally , as you state nobles and their immediate retainers. Perhaps it is because the Balkan Slavs became so ingrained with the Avars that any reference to them having a cavalry arm has been discounted?

The Heruls, hmmmm another problematic bunch
:wink:

The Lombards simply allied themselves or rather stood back and let the Avaro-Slavs crush the Gepids, who then turned on the Lombards.

Tactics are a hard thing to interpret. Later accounts of Baltic Slavs in battle refer to shield walls, a barrage of missiles and war cries followed by a mass assault. If this failed they retreated to their fortified settlements to await retaliation. The Northern Slavs were known to put themselves and their families to the sword rather than face capture.
Their society was based on gift giving, ie ''I've got loads of loot, here have some'' This increased the tribes standing in the community by a generous display of wealth. However, you now have go go and raid the next town to make up for that 'generous gift' and so the cycle of raid and counter raid went on.

Hospitality was another curious aspect. No man could turn away a stranger in need of shelter or bread, this even included on one occasion Christian priests while others, captured from a previous raid were being tortured to death elsewhere hock:

[PMBardunias]

Perhaps it is because the Balkan Slavs became so ingrained with the Avars

I wonder about the relationship between slavs and Avars, bulgars, etc. Specifically, just how "subject" the slav tribes were. Slavic chiefs historically envied each other's power so much that they often only came together to form larger political entities under outside influence- a Frankish adventurer in Moravia, Norse in Russia, and an (apocryphal?) tale of a Jew made to play king-maker in Poland. In none of these cases, though some may argue otherwise for the Norse, can there be a question of the slavs being "conquered" though they are ruled by foreigners.

[kuura]

I think the same can be said for any so called subject peoples, look at the relationship between the Huns and the Gepids who were considered their most 'loyal' subjects.

As for envy, well thats the old 'Gift giving' thing again.

One interesting group are the Milengi Slavs from Northern and central Greece. They frequently played off Byzantines, Franks and other warlords off against each other in the C13th, and became very troublesome to their supposed Frankish overlords so much so that a ring of castles and fortified sites were constructed around their territory. The Milengi later, curiously informed the Franks of a gap in this ring of defences such was their feeling of superiority over the invaders and the cat and mouse nature of their tactics and politics alike.

[PMBardunias]

One interesting group are the Milengi Slavs from Northern and central Greece. They frequently played off Byzantines, Franks and other warlords off against each other in the C13th, and became very troublesome to their supposed Frankish overlords so much so that a ring of castles and fortified sites were constructed around their territory. The Milengi later, curiously informed the Franks of a gap in this ring of defences such was their feeling of superiority over the invaders and the cat and mouse nature of their tactics and politics alike.

It is interesting that you mention the Melingi in the Exo Mani, for I know a bit about them. One of the Byzantine and later Frankish castles in the ring you describe is Castro Bardounia (Vardounia), in the region from which my last name, Bardunias, derives.

I have a number of references on the region, castles, and population if you should need.

[kuura]

Thanks Bardunias, any information on Balkan Slavs would be most welcome
I have a few on-line sources for the Mani region but the information you require is always (as ever) fleeting.

I have a couple of later references to the Principality of Achaea hiring Milengi Slav archers and spearmen in 1296, and an army raised by Guy II de la Roche, Duke of Athens containing 30,000 infantry of Greek and Slav extraction, along with 6,000 Thessalian and Bulgar cavalry.

[PMBardunias]

I came across this online.

Authors: Nalepa J.

Title: Mogilanie - a Proto-Slavic Tribe on the Elbe at the Time of Christ (Mugilones, Strabo, Geographica)
Source: SLAVIA OCCIDENTALIS
year: 2006, vol: 63, number: , pages: 13-44

I have no access, but it references previous work. Is anyone familiar with the arguement that the Mogilanie were proto-slavs?

Here's the abstract:

Abstract: The ethnic name Mugilones was transmitted by an eminent Greek scholar Strabo in his work entitled 'Geographica', written before 29 A.C. This name, in the Polish version read as Mogilanie, even before was considered by some scholars as Slavic, originating from the Proto-Slavic *magula *mogyla, Polish mogila 'mountain, hill' - compare, for example, the name of village Mogilany near Cracow. This interpretation was absolutely rejected by a famous Slavist M. Vasmer. The author of the current remarks critically evaluates the Vasmer argumentation. Having completed a detailed philological and linguistic analysis and an evaluation of source value of the referenced text of Strabo, as well as the inclusion of the historic background, he comes to the conclusion that the ethnonym Mogilanie (*Mogyljanie) can safely be considered as Proto-Slavic. Such thesis is supported by the author with comparative material, among others from Greece (Moguljana/ = *Moguljanie/, the name of a village on the highest mountain of Peloponnesus) occupied in the early Middle Ages by the Slavs. The Proto-Slavic tribe of Mogilane was mentioned by Strabo along with other tribes, which king Marbod annexed to his Marcomannic kingdom - a client confederation of the Roman Empire - with its centre in antique Bohemia, that is in modern Czech Republic. This group of tribes, apart from the Mogilanie comprised the Zumowie, Butonowie and Sibinowie (: Siwinowie). The author contends that also these peoples can be regarded as Slavic. As a result of the conducted geographical and historical study, the author arrives at the conclusion that the Proto-Slavic Mogilans in the times of Christ can be located only north of Bohemia (today Czech Republic), i.e., in Rudavy, west of the Elbe, most probably around the modern town of Mügeln northwest of Meissen. The author claims that this fact documents permanent settlement of the Proto-Slavs west of the middle Elbe in the first century of the Christian era.

[kuura]

You may have seen this already :?:

http://www.muzarp.poznan.pl/archweb/gazociag/title5.htm

Although not directly mentioned here, some suggest that the Wielbark culture may have beem Proto-Slavic.
Personally I hate the term 'Proto-Slavic' as it can open a cultural can of worms and can never really be proven. Most tribes were a confederacy of peoples, more so during the earlier period of our discussion and the thought of diluting this melting pot down to achieve some form of 'racial purity' seems absurd to me :roll:
Some have even suggested that the Jutes were a Proto-Slavic people and one publication has stated that Wends were present in low land Britain (In small numbers) in the C5th, having come over with the Jutes. Now don't get me wrong, I would love to have some concrete evidence that slavs were present in Britain but I have yet to see anything that supports this theory including the linguistic connection between English and some strain of Ukranian that someone else theorised.


As far as most sources go, the Northern Slavs, Obodrites etc did not reach the banks of the Elbe until around 500 AD.