Ambassador to BBC: Lithuanians think of themselves as a Nordic nation

[Hercus Monte]

Lithuanians think of themselves as more of a Nordic nation than Eastern European, Lithuania's Ambassador in London Asta Skaisgirytė Liauškienė said in an interview to BBC.


She was asked about the negative image about immigrants from Eastern Europe formed by British tabloids.


"Lithuanians themselves do not think that they are people from Eastern Europe. That's perhaps the paradox. Of course, it depends on how you look upon the geopolitics. We belong to this northern part of Europe and share the values that the Nordic people have, ie hard work, endurance, common sense," the ambassador said.

http://balticbusinessnews.com/article/2013/4/16/ambassador-to-bbc-lithuanians-think-of-themselves-as-a-nordic-nation


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
am I the only Lithuanian out there who didn't know we consider ourselves nordic? :confused:

[sevruk]

Karl disapproves

[Hercus Monte]

Karl disapproves
who's Karl?

[sevruk]

who's Karl?

famous Estonian historian

[Hercus Monte]

famous Estonian historian
why would he disapprove? this is not the popular opinion of lithuanians.

[lI]

why would he disapprove? this is not the popular opinion of lithuanians.Skaisgirytė is mixing up the notions Northern and Nordic. Whether she did it because of ignorance or was it done knowingly for some agenda or her personal insecurities is, of course, another question.

Most Lithuanians don't consider themselves Nordic as in Scandinavian like most Estonians do. Most Lithuanians do, however, consider themselves Northern. Which is not to say that they don't consider themselves Eastern too. After all, these concepts are not mutually exclusive.


I personally am more leaning towards "Northern" - as in: Lithuania is North-East European, firstly Northern, then Eastern. And that's simply because of the fact that culturally and genetically we have more in common with North-West Europeans than with South-East whichever way you look at it: taking the extremes British Isles vs Greece, or less extreme comparison Norway vs Balkan Slavs.

[Stormer99]

They are Northern Europeans but they are also Eastern Europeans.

[Hercus Monte]

Skaisgirytė is mixing up the notions Northern and Nordic. Whether she did it because of ignorance or was it done knowingly for some agenda or her personal insecurities is, of course, another question.

I think it's odd that an ambassador to the UK would make such a mistake. I realize that Lithuanian lacks a proper term for the Nordic states but she should know better.

[robar]

There are no territorial identities around there so it is a question of geography I think.

[Temujin]

I think it's odd that an ambassador to the UK would make such a mistake. I realize that Lithuanian lacks a proper term for the Nordic states but she should know better.

From the article: "She was asked about the negative image about immigrants from Eastern Europe formed by British tabloids."

Many people would distance themselves from a group that has a negative image. The ambassador was no different in that regard. So, her answer may had been influenced by the fact there's a negative image about immigrants from Eastern Europe.

If it was another country, let say, south Korea or Australia, then the geographical European term would be less relevant.

[Pure ja]

Skaisgirytė is mixing up the notions Northern and Nordic. Whether she did it because of ignorance or was it done knowingly for some agenda or her personal insecurities is, of course, another question.

Most Lithuanians don't consider themselves Nordic as in Scandinavian like most Estonians do. Most Lithuanians do, however, consider themselves Northern.


Nordic does not equate to Scandinavian. If it did, one would just call it Scandinavian.
There is Scandian, Fennoscandian, Baltoscandian, and there is Nordic.

Estonians do not consider themselves scandinavians, estonians consider themselves nordic - while others seem to understand that to mean 'northern'. Estonians make the distinction between northern and nordic, but the latter does not equate with scandinavian. There is a very specific word designation for nordic in estonian and finnish languages: Põhjala / Pohjola. Northern Europe would be 'Põhja-Euroopa', which is not the same as Põhjala.

As to the nordic and Nordic, it is the same as to internet and Internet.
There can be Internet and Internet2, just as there can be Nordic and Nordic2. The meaning of nordic should be more general and hence more stable.

Also, while nordic can exist without a continent designation, northern can not. Northern is always either Northern Europe, Northern Asia or Northern America.

[Pure ja]

I would distinguish countries into maritime and continental, depending on whether their capital is on a seashore, or not. Lithuania and Poland and Germany have inland capitals, thus they do not lean to a maritime culture. Contemporary Latvians are maritime largely thanks to assimilated livonians.

And maritime countries in Europe can be divided into Mediterranean, Atlantic and Baltic (let's forget about the Black Sea and Caspian Sea countries for a moment).

[Hercus Monte]

Contemporary Latvians are maritime largely thanks to assimilated livonians..
explain. maritime tradition is important for Latvia. (It's also important for Lithuania, but not as much as Latvia.)

[Pure ja]

explain. maritime tradition is important for Latvia. (It's also important for Lithuania, but not as much as Latvia.)

Here I was mostly considering Riia and Üksküla.

[Hercus Monte]

Here I was mostly considering Riia and Üksküla.
what about Riga?

[Pure ja]

what about Riga?

A place of livonian settlement.
Even the crusaders' town / castle was built partly by livonians.

[Citizen]

Clearly, someone has to be really deluded to consider any of the Baltic states Nordic, Scandinavian or even Northern in a political context, as they are geographically in Northern Europe. It clearly is now a definition of certain economic model, development level and geopolitical stance. None of which fits with any of the Baltic states. Economically all Baltic states are more aligned with Eastern Europe (Russia, Poland, Hungary, Romania, Bulgaria are closest by GDP per capita and income distribution), poverty is high and economic development is low and income distribution is unequal. Socially in all Baltic republics prejudice against certain ethnic groups and sexual minorities is high, as far as I know in all 3 same sex marridge is illegal while "Nordics" are very liberal.
http://www.pinknews.co.uk/images/2013/05/ILGA-Europe_Map_2013.jpg
If you look at foreign policy stance its clear that all 3 republics are in line with rest of Eastern Europe not "Nordic Scandinavia", take a look for example on stance of Iraq war, Eastern Europe was generally in favor of it while a lot of western world and "Nordics" where opposed to it. And this is not about if its right or wrong but the general trend is visible.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:State_positions_Iraq_war.svg

[Turkophagos]

It's almost as pathetic as some balkan slavs thinking of themselves as Macedonians.

[Hercus Monte]

Clearly, someone has to be really deluded to consider any of the Baltic states Nordic, Scandinavian or even Northern in a political context, as they are geographically in Northern Europe. It clearly is now a definition of certain economic model, development level and geopolitical stance. None of which fits with any of the Baltic states. Economically all Baltic states are more aligned with Eastern Europe (Russia, Poland, Hungary, Romania, Bulgaria are closest by GDP per capita and income distribution), poverty is high and economic development is low and income distribution is unequal. Socially in all Baltic republics prejudice against certain ethnic groups and sexual minorities is high, as far as I know in all 3 same sex marridge is illegal while "Nordics" are very liberal.
http://www.pinknews.co.uk/images/2013/05/ILGA-Europe_Map_2013.jpg
If you look at foreign policy stance its clear that all 3 republics are in line with rest of Eastern Europe not "Nordic Scandinavia", take a look for example on stance of Iraq war, Eastern Europe was generally in favor of it while a lot of western world and "Nordics" where opposed to it. And this is not about if its right or wrong but the general trend is visible.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:State_positions_Iraq_war.svg
completely agree, we're far from Nordic. our internal policies are very similar to russia and foreign policy is the same as most of eastern EU members.

It's almost as pathetic as some balkan slavs thinking of themselves as Macedonians.
that's a little harsh.

[Turkophagos]

that's a little harsh.



You're Baltic people, that's already pretty special, you don't need to group (a.k.a. lick the arse of) with the Vikings or any other European meta-ethnicity.

[Äike]

Lithuanians think of themselves as more of a Nordic nation than Eastern European, Lithuania's Ambassador in London Asta Skaisgirytė Liauškienė said in an interview to BBC.


She was asked about the negative image about immigrants from Eastern Europe formed by British tabloids.


"Lithuanians themselves do not think that they are people from Eastern Europe. That's perhaps the paradox. Of course, it depends on how you look upon the geopolitics. We belong to this northern part of Europe and share the values that the Nordic people have, ie hard work, endurance, common sense," the ambassador said.

http://balticbusinessnews.com/article/2013/4/16/ambassador-to-bbc-lithuanians-think-of-themselves-as-a-nordic-nation


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
am I the only Lithuanian out there who didn't know we consider ourselves nordic? :confused:

This must be a misconception...

I have read numerous articles where prominent Lithuanian politicians, journalists, businessmen et cetera are saying that the Estonians are more successful than the Balts, because they're Nordic and have a Nordic work ethic, while the Balts don't and belong into a different cultural sphere. That's what Lithuanians say and think.

Example here: http://www.theapricity.com/forum/showthread.php?16643-Lithuanian-attributes-Estonia-s-success-to-religion&highlight=Lithuanian

Not a single Lithuanian has ever thought of themselves as "Nordic", it's very illogical. But I have heard of Lithuanians identifying with Central-Europe.

[Äike]

Nordic does not equate to Scandinavian. If it did, one would just call it Scandinavian.
There is Scandian, Fennoscandian, Baltoscandian, and there is Nordic.

Estonians do not consider themselves scandinavians, estonians consider themselves nordic - while others seem to understand that to mean 'northern'. Estonians make the distinction between northern and nordic, but the latter does not equate with scandinavian. There is a very specific word designation for nordic in estonian and finnish languages: Põhjala / Pohjola. Northern Europe would be 'Põhja-Euroopa', which is not the same as Põhjala.

Exactly.

[Äike]

Clearly, someone has to be really deluded to consider any of the Baltic states Nordic

I agree with you, the Baltic nations of Latvia and Lithuania are not Nordic. They're missing the key components, being Finnic/Scandinavian, having a historical Lutheran background, Nordic mentality, identity, culture et cetera

[lI]

I think it's odd that an ambassador to the UK would make such a mistake. I realize that Lithuanian lacks a proper term for the Nordic states but she should know better.Would it be the first that that a Lithuanian politician makes a fool out of himself when trying to express himself in English? Think of Degutiene, Vesaite, Butkevicius, Leskevicius... Need I say more? :/





You're Baltic people, that's already pretty special, you don't need to group (a.k.a. lick the arse of) with the Vikings or any other European meta-ethnicity.Dude, find me so much as one Lithuanian who doesn't consider himself Baltic first and foremost!
Northern is a geographical term, Eastern is a geographical term, Baltic isn't. As it happens, geography reflects culture to a certain extent.

That the dumb ambassador mixed up the notion "Northern" with "Nordic", probably on purpose, is of course another matter. Our politicians are infamous for their English skills or rather the lack of it....






I would distinguish countries into maritime and continental, depending on whether their capital is on a seashore, or not. Lithuania and Poland and Germany have inland capitals, thus they do not lean to a maritime culture.Trying to divide the whole countries into maritime or continental sounds redundant. How is Latgala maritime? Or Setomaa? Do tell.

It's ignorant to put Lithuania in the same bag as Germany or Poland in this context.
Klaipeda is our third biggest city, the difference between it and the capital city in terms of size is less than that between Tallinn and Tartu.
If you look through the history, you'll notice that there were ridiculous amounts of resources that Lithuania wasted in order not to lose the access to the sea ever since the start of the crusades. The sea plays an important role in Lithuanian collective consciousness - even our most famous folk tale, often considered our national epic, features the sea. After Latvia's real estate market was opened, Lithuanians started buying properties by the seaside en masse - the phenomena is truly massive, you can read more about it here (http://tevzemesbalss.blogspot.com/2013/07/lietuviesi-iekaro-latvijas-piekrasti.html) (use google translate or smth).
I don't know why that is so, the blood of assimilated Curonians & Semigallians calling us home maybe? LOL





I have read numerous articles where prominent Lithuanian politicians, journalists, businessmen et cetera are saying that the Estonians are more successful than the Balts, because they're Nordic and have a Nordic work ethic, while the Balts don't and belong into a different cultural sphere. That's what Lithuanians say and think.Liar.

You have read only one article written by a single person which you have quoted on these boards several hundred of times already (I'm not exaggerating, you literally spam it onto any topic regardless of what's being discussed).
So, tell me, how is it that you claim to have read numerous articles stating this but only ever quote one of them??

The sad (to you) truth is that the vast majority of Lithuanians do not consider Estonians Nordic either.


I agree with you, the Baltic nations of Latvia and Lithuania are not Nordic. They're missing the key components, being Finnic/Scandinavian, having a historical Lutheran background, Nordic mentality, identity, culture et cetera
Estonians do not consider themselves scandinavians, estonians consider themselves nordicOk. Let me just quote a few posts from another topic :)

Do fellow Scandinavians/Nordics feel any connection and companionship with Estonia and its people?I can only speak for Danes: None whatsoever.
It's not because we're sort of "stuck up" in our feelings towards Estonians (who are total alien to us, even if they aren't alien to the Finns) it's just that we are Nordic, and that's something we call ourselves, and it's our common ethnicity, in a way. It's as if Estonians suddenly decided that they were Germans, it makes as much sense.

It's hard for me to even understand why some Estonian guy would want to consider himself "Nordic" because the notion is completely meaningless for a Nordic person, and as such it's pretty hard to argue against. It also means that some of the Scandis here probably consider Karl completely insane, due to the lack of sense of his notion. But I guess that's just cause it's "lost in translation".http://www.forumbiodiversity.com/showthread.php?p=817885



Nordic does not equate to Scandinavian. If it did, one would just call it Scandinavian.
There is Scandian, Fennoscandian, Baltoscandian, and there is Nordic.Nordic people themselves do perceive it as somewhat synonymous with Norse (and thus Scandinavian).
I'm talking about "a" people, in this context, and the meaning of the word "Nordic" when translated into English. I don't know how it is in Iceland, but in the Scandinavian languages, "Nordic" can be synonymous with "Norse", depending on the context - I gave some examples previously. It's not just that the languages are similar, but rather the meaning of "Nordic" in those languages which has a changed or simplified meaning when it's translated into English, since in English the people are the "Norse", while "Nordic" seems to have a more vague meaning, and Norse primarily refer to the ancient and not the modern people.

I guess the meaning may change, and the old meaning may be considered archaic in the future - but it's still used that way when describing the peoples, especially in the context of old Norse language and history. "Nordic" pretty much has the meaning of "North Germanic", but it's not limited to a linguistic context. I suppose it's a colloquial use, but this meaning is prevalent, and it's used this way in textbooks as well. Most importantly, it has become sort of a self-designation at some point, which can be seen in the way the word is used in the "North Germanic" languages.
There is a clear dividing line between Nordic countries and Estonia, or Latvia. There's a linguistic difference. Even in Finland a lot of people spoke Swedish at some point. There is an ETHNIC difference.

Estonian people aren't "Nordics" in the ethnic sense. It doesn't matter how any Estonian feel or look, they still do not belong to this umbrella ethnicity called "Nordic", which I tried to explain from a semi-linguistic point view earlier in this thread. On these kind of forums it's often use as an anthropological type, but that use of the word is unrelated to what the word "Nordic" means to Nordics in their own languages, which is the meaning which is transferred as a label for the Nordic countries as they are now, but with the inclusion of Finland as well.http://www.forumbiodiversity.com/showthread.php?p=817885

[Albion]

Latvia and Lithuania don't really feel like Eastern Europe to me. They do seem more Northern than anything, not Scandinavian (North Germanic) or Finnic, Northern and perhaps 'Nordic' nevertheless.


I would distinguish countries into maritime and continental, depending on whether their capital is on a seashore, or not. Lithuania and Poland and Germany have inland capitals, thus they do not lean to a maritime culture. Contemporary Latvians are maritime largely thanks to assimilated livonians.

And maritime countries in Europe can be divided into Mediterranean, Atlantic and Baltic (let's forget about the Black Sea and Caspian Sea countries for a moment).

I'm not sure if your theory is correct, do you have some examples?

[Hess]

"We belong to this northern part of Europe and share the values that the Nordic people have, ie hard work, endurance, common sense,"

So according to a Lithuanian Ambassador, hard work, endurance, and common sense are exclusively Nordic values?

I guess Nordicism isn't limited to internet trolls on Anthroboards :picard2:

[Incal]

who's Karl?
famous Estonian historian

LMAO. This made my day.

[Äike]

Liar.

You have read only one article written by a single person which you have quoted on these boards several hundred of times already (I'm not exaggerating, you literally spam it onto any topic regardless of what's being discussed).
So, tell me, how is it that you claim to have read numerous articles stating this but only ever quote one of them??

lol, stop being so butt-hurt.



Ok. Let me just quote a few posts from another topic :)http://www.forumbiodiversity.com/showthread.php?p=817885


Nordic people themselves do perceive it as somewhat synonymous with Norse (and thus Scandinavian).http://www.forumbiodiversity.com/showthread.php?p=817885

Quoting one single ignorant guy from an internet guy, even more lulz. At least I quote prominent Lithuanians who actually have a say in the politics and economy of Lithuania.

[Äike]

LMAO. This made my day.

Out of the 3 words, "famous" was wrong.

[Hercus Monte]

Quoting one single ignorant guy from an internet guy, even more lulz. At least I quote prominent Lithuanians who actually have a say in the politics and economy of Lithuania.
what prominent lithuanians? could you name them and the articles where they talk about the protestant work ethic?

[lI]

what prominent lithuanians? could you name them and the articles where they talk about the protestant work ethic?All he's got is the 3 year old article from some online news portal with a quote from Mindaugas Degutis that he posts again and again, and again... And now that you've asked him, he'll post it a few times more :picard2:






lol, stop being so butt-hurt.That's all you have to say? :lol:
I'm not butthurt, your response actually made me laugh. Your strategy is to get pissed and then spam all the threads here with the same old crap that's been refuted a zillion times before in the hope that people with whom you've argued before have already grown tired of your nonsense and won't respond.
This is where you go wrong with me. Being part Samogitian I'm just as jaarapaa as you are.





Quoting one single ignorant guy from an internet guy, even more lulz. At least I quote prominent Lithuanians who actually have a say in the politics and economy of Lithuania."Prominent Lithuanians"??? English is not your strong side, is it? Otherwise you wouldn't be using plural when you quoted only 1 Lithuanian on this issue.
I quoted that internet guy just to remind you that you've already been squashed in a very similar debate in past. What he says is true - the three concepts Nordic, Norse & Scandinavian are somewhat interchangeable:
http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/nordic?s=t
Nor·dic

[nawr-dik] Show IPA
adjective 1. of, pertaining to, or characteristic of a Germanic people of northern European origin, exemplified by the Scandinavians.



http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/Norse?s=t
Related Words for : Norse
Northman, Scandinavian, Norwegian, Norseman, Nordic
Norse
1598, from obsolete Du. Noorsch (adj.) "Norwegian," from noordsch "northern, nordic," from noord "north". Also in some cases borrowed from cognate Dan. or Norw. norsk.
Norse

[nawrs]Norse Show IPA
adjective 1. of or pertaining to ancient Scandinavia, its inhabitants, or their language.





http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/scandinavian

Scandinavian (ˌskændɪˈneɪvɪən)

— adj
1. of, relating to, or characteristic of Scandinavia, its inhabitants, or their languages


— n
2. a native or inhabitant of Scandinavia
3. Also: Norse the northern group of Germanic languages, consisting of Swedish, Danish, Norwegian, Icelandic, and Faeroese

[Hercus Monte]

All he's got is the 3 year old article from some online news portalwith a quote from Mindaugas Degutis that he posts again and again, and again... And now that you've asked him, he'll post it a few times more :picard2:

Degutis isn't even a prominent figure in public life :D

[Citizen]

I agree with you, the Baltic nations of Latvia and Lithuania are not Nordic. They're missing the key components, being Finnic/Scandinavian, having a historical Lutheran background, Nordic mentality, identity, culture et cetera

Dude, every time I meet some of my friends from Norway or Denmark we crack up about Estonia being nordic not baltic. My family is Lutheran trough I consider myself atheist but I come from Lutheran background like majority of western Latvians, I celebrate midsummer with bonfire and decorate home with flowers and tree branches, something that is almost the same in Scandinavia, this must make me really "nordic". The culture in Latvia and Estonia is practically identical, fact that you don't know that Latvians are Lutheran shows something about your knowledge level about the region. As I stated previously, therm Nordic nowdays applies to certain economic model, development level of society and economy and geopolitical stance all of those aspects are the same in Estonia and Latvia or you will try to prove that Estonia has GDP per capita on pair with Sweden or Norway, has worlds most equal and tolerant society like Norway or opposed Iraq war?

[Peikko]

Clearly, someone has to be really deluded to consider any of the Baltic states Nordic, Scandinavian or even Northern in a political context, as they are geographically in Northern Europe. It clearly is now a definition of certain economic model, development level and geopolitical stance. None of which fits with any of the Baltic states. Economically all Baltic states are more aligned with Eastern Europe (Russia, Poland, Hungary, Romania, Bulgaria are closest by GDP per capita and income distribution), poverty is high and economic development is low and income distribution is unequal. Socially in all Baltic republics prejudice against certain ethnic groups and sexual minorities is high, as far as I know in all 3 same sex marridge is illegal while "Nordics" are very liberal.
http://www.pinknews.co.uk/images/2013/05/ILGA-Europe_Map_2013.jpg
If you look at foreign policy stance its clear that all 3 republics are in line with rest of Eastern Europe not "Nordic Scandinavia", take a look for example on stance of Iraq war, Eastern Europe was generally in favor of it while a lot of western world and "Nordics" where opposed to it. And this is not about if its right or wrong but the general trend is visible.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:State_positions_Iraq_war.svg
I would say, that in a political and economical context the Baltic states are very Northern European indeed. Just take a look at all the international companies there. Are they not often from the Nordic states? What are the biggest banks in Latvia? Another example is the fact, that the Baltic states often participate in the Nordic co-operation.

[Citizen]

I would say, that in a political and economical context the Baltic states are very Northern European indeed. Just take a look at all the international companies there. Are they not often from the Nordic states? What are the biggest banks in Latvia? Another example is the fact, that the Baltic states often participate in the Nordic co-operation.

It works one way, pretty much everything in Latvia and Estonia is owned by some Scandinavian company, Rimi, Narvesen, DNB bank, Swedbank. We have all of them but none of our companies dominate in Finland or Sweden which shows that economically we are a province. Lithuania is a bit better in this regard.

[Hercus Monte]

It works one way, pretty much everything in Latvia and Estonia is owned by some Scandinavian company, Rimi, Narvesen, DNB bank, Swedbank. We have all of them but none of our companies dominate in Finland or Sweden which shows that economically we are a province. Lithuania is a bit better in this regard.
the only one we don't have is Narvesen :D
Rimi, Ikea, DNB Nord, Lidl, Swedbank are all in Lithuania.
the only thing Lithuania has going for it is Maxima (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maxima_Group).

[Loki]

They are Northern Europeans but they are also Eastern Europeans.

Yes, same as their cousins the Estonians.

[just]

I am an Estonian and I don't consider my country is Nordic country.
Nordic countries are must be Sweden, Denmark, Norway and Iceland. (Thesedays Finland is included.)
But Northern, Baltic, to be presice, in ethnicity we are not Balts but Finns.
But where is Estonia? Is it in the west? No-East.
So I would say 'Estonia is a Northeast Euro.'

How about Lithuanians?
They are North Euro too. And they are in East too like us.
Their ethnicity is Balts. So Baltic Northeast Euro.

I think when people state the term 'Eastern European countries', people tend to imagine Slavic people.
Though Balts and Finns are not.
This goes for even Romanians and Greeks.

[Peikko]

I am an Estonian and I don't consider my country is Nordic country.
Nordic countries are must be Sweden, Denmark, Norway and Iceland. (Thesedays Finland is included.)
What about between 1250-1809, was Finland a Nordic country then? :rolleyes:



But Northern, Baltic, to be presice, in ethnicity we are not Balts but Finns.

You aren't Finns! WTF?!?

[just]

What about between 1250-1809, was Finland a Nordic country then? :rolleyes:


You aren't Finns! WTF?!?

:p I think Finnish people have many Hallstatt Nordid and East Nordid types.
But we have much more Baltic phenotypes.
I think original Finns are predominantly Baltid.
So you people are more Nordic and we are more Finnic.

[Hercus Monte]

What about between 1250-1809, was Finland a Nordic country then? :rolleyes:

I think this is nordic europe

http://img43.imageshack.us/img43/5921/kalrmar.jpg

[Peikko]

:p I think Finnish people have many Hallstatt Nordid and East Nordid types.
But we have much more Baltic phenotypes.
I think original Finns are predominantly Baltid.
So you people are more Nordic and we are more Finnic.
But what do phenotypes have to do with this?

[just]

But what do phenotypes have to do with this?

You mean 'why?'
Because ancient Finland is not used to be included as a member of Nordic countries.
But today's Finland is included.
That's more emphasized on economical and ideological agendas once had to against with Soviet,
but Finnish people are not that different by looking with Swedes and Norwegians today somehow.
Though Estonians and Finnishes are not that different by looking, I found that Finnish people have more Nordic looking otherwise we are a bit distinguished with Swedes or Norwegians.

[Peikko]

You mean 'why?'
Because ancient Finland is not used to be included as a member of Nordic countries.
But today's Finland is included.
That's more emphasized on economical and ideological agendas once had to against with Soviet,
but Finnish people are not that different by looking with Swedes and Norwegians today somehow.
Though Estonians and Finnishes are not that different by looking, I found that Finnish people have more Nordic looking otherwise we are a bit distinguished with Swedes or Norwegians.
I still don't understand what phenotypes or how people look like have to do with anything. But the Nordic countries have always been the five countries we have now. I don't see what ancient Finland has to do with it.

[Trun]

This "Eastern Europe" identification is a bit retarded often. Here it is used in the context "We are Eastern Europeans, we are tough, we can beat your mom up", while Italians and Greeks are "fags" and "even a 15-year-old girl can outdrink them". I always laugh my ass out when I hear this (mostly from Bulgarians abroad) :lol:

Those idiots don't even realize they are pathetic when they identify like that in the West, where Eastern European countries are viewed as shitholes (in general, most Westerners can't locate Bulgaria on the map and take everything you tell them - and my friend once told them in Bulgaria we adopted Russian traditions :picard1: )

[riverman]

I agree with you, the Baltic nations of Latvia and Lithuania are not Nordic. They're missing the key components, being Finnic/Scandinavian, having a historical Lutheran background, Nordic mentality, identity, culture et cetera

I agree with most of that, but isn't finnic suggestive of the east? it is to me, northern or not.

[just]

This "Eastern Europe" identification is a bit retarded often. Here it is used in the context "We are Eastern Europeans, we are tough, we can beat your mom up", while Italians and Greeks are "fags" and "even a 15-year-old girl can outdrink them". I always laugh my ass out when I hear this (mostly from Bulgarians abroad) :lol:

Those idiots don't even realize they are pathetic when they identify like that in the West, where Eastern European countries are viewed as shitholes (in general, most Westerners can't locate Bulgaria on the map and take everything you tell them - and my friend once told them in Bulgaria we adopted Russian traditions :picard1: )

Average Western Europeans don't know well that Eastern Euroepans defended Europe from Turks and the basic culture of Europe comes from Southern Europeans. :picard1:

[Peikko]

This "Eastern Europe" identification is a bit retarded often. Here it is used in the context "We are Eastern Europeans, we are tough, we can beat your mom up", while Italians and Greeks are "fags" and "even a 15-year-old girl can outdrink them". I always laugh my ass out when I hear this (mostly from Bulgarians abroad) :lol:

Those idiots don't even realize they are pathetic when they identify like that in the West, where Eastern European countries are viewed as shitholes (in general, most Westerners can't locate Bulgaria on the map and take everything you tell them - and my friend once told them in Bulgaria we adopted Russian traditions :picard1: )
I think it's just healthy if Bulgarians can be proud of their Slavic heritage, without caring if it's seen uncool in the West. Good for Bulgaria, really.

[Cail]

This must be a misconception...

I have read numerous articles where prominent Lithuanian politicians, journalists, businessmen et cetera are saying that the Estonians are more successful than the Balts, because they're Nordic and have a Nordic work ethic, while the Balts don't and belong into a different cultural sphere. That's what Lithuanians say and think.

That's what Estonians like to think. Fucking arrogance. Please tell me exactly how is Estonia more successful than Lithuania.

2012 GDP per capita at purchasing power parity:
44th Lithuania $23,487
45th Estonia $23,065
Source - World Bank (http://data.worldbank.org/indicator/NY.GDP.PCAP.PP.CD?order=wbapi_data_value_2012+wbap i_data_value+wbapi_data_value-last&sort=desc)

2012 economic growth rate: Estonia - 3.2%, Lithuania - 3.7% (http://data.worldbank.org/indicator/NY.GDP.MKTP.KD.ZG)
2012 inflation rates about the same (3.3% Estonia, 3.4% Lithuania)

Inequality: average income of the 10% of the highest earners divided by 10% of the lowest earners: 10.8 for Estonia, 10.4 for Lithuania

Estonia is higher on the economic freedom index (13 vs 22), but these are both extremely high results, and the difference is negligible - 23 is Iceland, 24 is Japan and 25 is Austria. Norway is 31. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Index_of_Economic_Freedom

Lithuania is higher on the quality of life index, though also negligibly (63 vs 68). http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quality-of-life_Index

Et cetera. Estonians are so full of themselves, how they are "doing better" than other Baltic states, while in reality we're doing just as fine.

[Äike]

All he's got is the 3 year old article from some online news portal with a quote from Mindaugas Degutis that he posts again and again, and again... And now that you've asked him, he'll post it a few times more :picard2:





That's all you have to say? :lol:
I'm not butthurt, your response actually made me laugh. Your strategy is to get pissed and then spam all the threads here with the same old crap that's been refuted a zillion times before in the hope that people with whom you've argued before have already grown tired of your nonsense and won't respond.
This is where you go wrong with me. Being part Samogitian I'm just as jaarapaa as you are.




"Prominent Lithuanians"??? English is not your strong side, is it? Otherwise you wouldn't be using plural when you quoted only 1 Lithuanian on this issue.
I quoted that internet guy just to remind you that you've already been squashed in a very similar debate in past. What he says is true - the three concepts Nordic, Norse & Scandinavian are somewhat interchangeable:
http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/nordic?s=t



http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/Norse?s=t





http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/scandinavian

The butt-hurt is strong in you. You made this post for like... 30 minutes?


Dude, every time I meet some of my friends from Norway or Denmark we crack up about Estonia being nordic not baltic. My family is Lutheran trough I consider myself atheist but I come from Lutheran background like majority of western Latvians

Latvians are historically 50/50 between Catholicism and Lutheranism and they don't have a common historical Lutheran background as a common factor.


The culture in Latvia and Estonia is practically identical

Typical angry Balt trying to Baltify the Finnic Estonians. Latvia is stereotypical Eastern-Europe in so many way, corruption being one of them.

The culture in Estonia and Finland is practically the same, while you, the Latvians, are Balts and Baltic, not like us.

There's a reason why thousands of Finns came to Estonia in 1919, to fight side-by-side as brothers against the Russians and Commie Latvians on the southern front. Me oleme hõimuvennad. If you don't understand that, you have nothing to do with us, Finnics. Continue speaking your Balto-Slavic language.

[Cail]

And also this bullshit about some special "Nordic" identity that is larger than "Scandinavian" and smaller than "Northern". Yes, Estonians are northern, no questions asked. Just as other Balts are. But what exactly makes you so special that there needs to be a separate group within Northern where you and Scandos would belong? Don't tell me it's Lutheranism (plenty of other Lutherans around) or some imaginary "greater cultural similarity".

[Dandelion]

Well, surfing the anthroboards at least some Lithuanians are prone to disagree. ;)

[Cail]

Typical angry Balt trying to Baltify the Finnic Estonians. Latvia is stereotypical Eastern-Europe in so many way, corruption being one of them.

The culture in Estonia and Finland is practically the same, while you, the Latvians, are Balts and Baltic, not like us.

There's a reason why thousands of Finns came to Estonia in 1919, to fight side-by-side as brothers against the Russians and Commie Latvians on the southern front. Me oleme hõimuvennad. If you don't understand that, you have nothing to do with us, Finnics. Continue speaking your Balto-Slavic language.

More Estonian bullshit arrogance. Why would anyone fucking want to "baltify" Estonians? Why would we want to "be like you"?? Who the fuck cares about you Finnishness (that's for Finns to judge anyway, not that it would matter).

Your economic and social outcomes are same as ours. And your culture nowhere near the Scandinavian. Your need to lump yourself with them in the imaginary "cultural-historical group" is simply pathetic. Inferiority complex much?

[Peikko]

More Estonian bullshit arrogance. Why would anyone fucking want to "baltify" Estonians? Why would we want to "be like you"?? Who the fuck cares about you Finnishness (that's for Finns to judge anyway, not that it would matter).

Your economic and social outcomes are same as ours. And your culture nowhere near the Scandinavian. Your need to lump yourself with them in the imaginary "cultural-historical group" is simply pathetic. Inferiority complex much?
Nailed.

[Loki]

It's possible that Finland might only be considered Nordic because of its historical entanglement with Sweden. What do you think? If not, why is Karelia not considered Nordic?

[Cail]

Well, surfing the anthroboards at least some Lithuanians are prone to disagree. ;)

We certainly do (even though I'm a half-blood). Lithuanians and Latvians do not suffer from this crazy mix of inferiority complex and delusions of grandeur like so many of the Estonian nationalists do. Most Estonians are nice though. It's the "patriots"/nationalists that drive me mad with their bullshit.

[Äike]

That's what Estonians like to think. Fucking arrogance. Please tell me exactly how is Estonia more successful than Lithuania.

Skype, becoming an IT-titan on a global scale, the entire European Union implementing and taking over OUR IT-solutions, invented here. There just was an article that Finland, that's less developed than Estonia in terms of IT-solutions used in government work, is asking for the assistance of Estonia, so that we would help them implement one of our solutions. et cetera

Lithuania is mostly known here as a centre of organized crime. According to statistics, over 90% of car thefts done in Estonia are done by Lithuanians, crossing our border only to steal. Lithuanian groups are constantly being caught by the police. There was even an official statement that if someone sees a car with a Lithuanian number plate lurking around, then you should contact the police.


2012 GDP per capita at purchasing power parity:
44th Lithuania $23,487
45th Estonia $23,065
Source - World Bank (http://data.worldbank.org/indicator/NY.GDP.PCAP.PP.CD?order=wbapi_data_value_2012+wbap i_data_value+wbapi_data_value-last&sort=desc)

2012 economic growth rate: Estonia - 3.2%, Lithuania - 3.7% (http://data.worldbank.org/indicator/NY.GDP.MKTP.KD.ZG)
2012 inflation rates about the same (3.3% Estonia, 3.4% Lithuania)

Inequality: average income of the 10% of the highest earners divided by 10% of the lowest earners: 10.8 for Estonia, 10.4 for Lithuania

Estonia is higher on the economic freedom index (13 vs 22), but these are both extremely high results, and the difference is negligible - 23 is Iceland, 24 is Japan and 25 is Austria. Norway is 31. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Index_of_Economic_Freedom

Lithuania is higher on the quality of life index, though also negligibly (63 vs 68). http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quality-of-life_Index

Et cetera. Estonians are so full of themselves, how they are "doing better" than other Baltic states, while in reality we're doing just as fine.

All the numbers you took, the reason why Lithuania is higher is simple. While making the reports, the old population number was used for Estonia but a newer number was used for Lithuania (and Latvia). Wait for the more recent reports, when the error is fixed and start your BS again.

These odd results were also in the Estonian media and it was found out that the statistics used old stats for the Estonian population, thus artificially decreasing our GDP per capita and other stuff.

Also, even with this, the Estonian GDP per capita (PPP) is higher than Lithuanian one. Besides, Lithuanian income mostly comes from selling luxury goods to Belarussians who come from over the border.

You Eastern-Europeans, like you, are so extremely materialistic and see everything in wealth.

Not a single Estonian thinks that he is somehow better than our southern neighbours in any way, no one. Estonians just say that they are Finnic, brothers to the Finns, and Nordic, in the same cultural sphere with the Nordics. Angry Balts, who like that Skype is called "a Baltic invention" get really mad and start saying that we think that we are better than them. That is a Baltic myth. Thinking that we are unrelated and different from them, is a different thing. Wealth or money has absolutely nothing to do with that.

[Äike]

And also this bullshit about some special "Nordic" identity that is larger than "Scandinavian" and smaller than "Northern". Yes, Estonians are northern, no questions asked. Just as other Balts are. But what exactly makes you so special that there needs to be a separate group within Northern where you and Scandos would belong? Don't tell me it's Lutheranism (plenty of other Lutherans around) or some imaginary "greater cultural similarity".

Scandinavian is an ethnic term, Nordic is a cultural/mentality/identity term which composes the Scandinavians and the Finnics. Northern-European is a geographical term which also includes countries like Lithuania and the United Kingdom, which aren't culturally/by identity/mentality/historically Northern-European.


More Estonian bullshit arrogance. Why would anyone fucking want to "baltify" Estonians? Why would we want to "be like you"?? Who the fuck cares about you Finnishness (that's for Finns to judge anyway, not that it would matter).

Your economic and social outcomes are same as ours. And your culture nowhere near the Scandinavian. Your need to lump yourself with them in the imaginary "cultural-historical group" is simply pathetic. Inferiority complex much?

Dude, this is the reason why we are not like you. Calm those hot-blooded Balto-Slavic genes.

[Äike]

Anyway.

Lithuanians are Balts and they're Central/Eastern-European, their ambassador made a mistake.

+nobody is better than anyone, calm your tits.

[/discussion] I'm out, I have better stuff to do.

[Cail]

This "Eastern Europe" identification is a bit retarded often. Here it is used in the context "We are Eastern Europeans, we are tough, we can beat your mom up", while Italians and Greeks are "fags" and "even a 15-year-old girl can outdrink them". I always laugh my ass out when I hear this (mostly from Bulgarians abroad) :lol:

Those idiots don't even realize they are pathetic when they identify like that in the West, where Eastern European countries are viewed as shitholes (in general, most Westerners can't locate Bulgaria on the map and take everything you tell them - and my friend once told them in Bulgaria we adopted Russian traditions :picard1: )

Honestly, do you think you have more similarities with Italians than with Russians or Ukrainians? South-Eastern Europe is, of course, a different region with it's own rich history and culture, but there is also a lot in common with other Slavs, particularly between Bulgarians and Eastern Slavs. Identifying as simply "Southern Euro" makes no sense either.

[Cail]

Skype, becoming an IT-titan on a global scale, the entire European Union implementing and taking over OUR IT-solutions, invented here. There just was an article that Finland, that's less developed than Estonia in terms of IT-solutions used in government work, is asking for the assistance of Estonia, so that we would help them implement one of our solutions. et cetera

Lol, come on, mighty nation if IT-titans. Stop parading this in every fucking discussion. Every time Estonians want to show off, the Skype comes up. Calm down, no one wants to steal it from you. Look at things as a whole. And as a whole, for whatever reasons, you're doing economically exactly the same as us. Bullshit about using "older population numbers" is just stupid. Also, quality of life index, inflation, growth and inequality indices have nothing to do with population numbers.

And yeah, the notion that Lithuania's GDP comes from stealing Estonian cars and selling "luxuries" to Belarusian tourists is pure gold. Especially after you say that not a single Estonian thinks you're better than us.


Scandinavian is an ethnic term, Nordic is a cultural/mentality/identity term which composes the Scandinavians and the Finnics. Northern-European is a geographical term which also includes countries like Lithuania and the United Kingdom, which aren't culturally/by identity/mentality/historically Northern-European.
Lithuania and UK (and Netherlands and Latvia and others) are just as culturally northern European as Estonia and Iceland. There is no separate cultural group that would include Estonians and Scandos, but not Brits or Lithuanians. If anything, Brits and Dutch share a lot more with Scandos culturally and historically than you do.


Summary - either provide

1)strong evidence (numbers) to how Estonians are doing better than Balts (economically and socially).
2)explanation (facts) of why Estonians are more culturally similar to i.e. Norwegians than i.e. Latvians or Northern Germans.

or gtfo.

[Hercus Monte]

Anyway.

Lithuanians are Balts and they're Central/Eastern-European, their ambassador made a mistake.


no Lithuanians thinks he's central European. we say we're northern or eastern, sometimes we say northeastern.

[Hercus Monte]

All the numbers you took, the reason why Lithuania is higher is simple. While making the reports, the old population number was used for Estonia but a newer number was used for Lithuania (and Latvia). Wait for the more recent reports, when the error is fixed and start your BS again.

Not this again, I've already told you that purchasing power and GDP are different things.

[Albion]

It's possible that Finland might only be considered Nordic because of its historical entanglement with Sweden. What do you think? If not, why is Karelia not considered Nordic?

Because Karelia is practically Russian now.

Russia cannot into nordicks. (polandball style grammar)

[Styggnacke]

The butt-hurt is strong in you. You made this post for like... 30 minutes?
I'm just quoting myself here:

You're the one known to reply with childish oneliners when people have responded to your bullshit with lenghty posts filled with sources. Anyone could just look at the discussions you have had with Linkus, where she has pretty much slaughtered your arguments, and you have answered with something like "LOL, you stupid Balt".
http://www.theapricity.com/forum/showthread.php?43635-Who-are-the-purest-Aryans&p=1887044#post1887044

Q.E.D.?


Nordic people themselves do perceive it as somewhat synonymous with Norse (and thus Scandinavian).http://www.forumbiodiversity.com/showthread.php?p=817885
The word for "Norse" in Swedish is "fornnordisk", which can basically be translated to "Old Nordic".

[Hercus Monte]

On the other hand, we should remember that Eastern Europe is much like the term Western Europe. That is, quite diverse.
that's really the only reason why I say Northeastern rather then eastern. I find it hard to relate to Russians or Estonian nationalists.

[Hercus Monte]

What do nationalists have to do with this? Judging from your own thoughts about Russia, you don't seem to relate to Lithuanian nationalists. It's hardly nationalism to disagree with something that is pretty obvious even without International Relations Directorate's official statement. The apathy of yours is something almost all Lithuanian nationalists do not share with you. Sure, you relate more to them than Russian nationalists which is something obvious. Though I'm sure you would try to mention this. (Probably you will mention this despite the fact I already mentioned it because you're quite repetitive.). Anyway, that is not something special of you, most people do not relate to nationalists.

sigh, it was being slightly sarcastic. By Estonian nationalists I meant this Aike person.

[Äike]

sigh, it was being slightly sarcastic. By Estonian nationalists I meant this Aike person.

If you would be Northern-European, like us, you would have typed Äike... not "Aike", that word means nothing. Oh sorry, I forgot, you're Balto-Slavs. Just accpet your Baltic identity and live with it.

P.S I'm not a nationalist.

[sevruk]

If you would be Northern-European, like us, you would have typed Äike... not "Aike", that word means nothing.


It sounds pretty stupid, even for Karl

[Hercus Monte]

If you would be Northern-European, like us, you would have typed Äike... not "Aike", that word means nothing.
yet, somehow you figured out I was referring to you. good job.


Oh sorry, I forgot, you're Balto-Slavs. Just accpet your Baltic identity and live with it.

why say balto-slav and not Germano-balto-slav? :D

and in order to accept my Baltic Identity I would need to renounce it first, I've done no such thing.


P.S I'm not a nationalist.


your thoughts on Russians suggest otherwise.

[Äike]

yet, somehow you figured out I was referring to you. good job.


why say balto-slav and not Germano-balto-slav? :D

Because Balto-Slavic is one group who expanded from Central-Eastern-europe quite recently compared to other IE groups.


and in order to accept my Baltic Identity I would need to renounce it first, I've done no such thing.



your thoughts on Russians suggest otherwise.

You mean my facts about immigrants? Lithuania was too poor and undeveloped to receive large amounts of Russian immigrants, lucky you.

[Hevo]

P.S I'm not a nationalist.



I'm also an Estonian nationalist. Because we, the Estonians, are on the verge of extinction with our very small population.

http://www.theapricity.com/forum/showthread.php?3760-Hello-I-m-Karl

[Hercus Monte]

You mean my facts about immigrants? Lithuania was too poor and undeveloped to receive large amounts of Russian immigrants, lucky you.
yeah, the tsar issued a decree to stop all constructions and developments for oven 50 years because we revolted and didn't bow our head to Russians, unlike some...

don't forget to thank the Russians for developing your country, seems to be a theme in your history.

[Äike]

http://www.theapricity.com/forum/showthread.php?3760-Hello-I-m-Karl

You just proved my point. I only have a problem with the immigrants here while contrary to nationalists, I don't "hate" my neighbors.

[Styggnacke]

If you would be Northern-European, like us, you would have typed Äike... not "Aike", that word means nothing. Oh sorry, I forgot, you're Balto-Slavs. Just accpet your Baltic identity and live with it.

Are you a moron? The "ä" is from Germans, and Nordics has traditionally used "æ". Both of them are Latin letters, either way. It's not a proof of Nordicness whatsoever.

[Äike]

yeah, the tsar issued a decree to stop all constructions and developments for oven 50 years because we revolted and didn't bow our head to Russians, unlike some...

don't forget to thank the Russians for developing your country.

Estonia and Finland were autonomous and Germans were ruling here, not Russians, during the Russian Empire. Get your facts straight.

[Äike]

Are you a moron? You don't realize that the "ä" is from Germans and that Nordics used "æ"????????

Umlauts are in use all over Northern-Europe. Danes and Norwegians just write them differently.

[Hercus Monte]

Estonia and Finland were autonomous and Germans were ruling here, not Russians, during the Russian Empire. Get your facts straight.
finland was autonomous, estonia wasn't.
btw we were ruled by lithuanians. that doesn't mean we had autonomy xD

[Cail]

[/discussion] I'm out, I have better stuff to do.
Looks like you don't.

[Äike]

finland was autonomous, estonia wasn't.
btw we were ruled by lithuanians. that doesn't mean we had autonomy xD

Get your facts straight.

http://www.estonica.org/en/History/1710-1850_The_Baltic_Landesstaat/


Looks like you don't.

I was "out" from that dumb "GDP" and "Estonians are better" discussion.

[Peikko]

It's possible that Finland might only be considered Nordic because of its historical entanglement with Sweden. What do you think? If not, why is Karelia not considered Nordic?


Because Karelia is practically Russian now.

Russia cannot into nordicks. (polandball style grammar)
This is my opinion about this:
http://www.theapricity.com/forum/showthread.php?93661-Why-aren-t-Finnics-considered-Nordic-in-general

[Hercus Monte]

Get your facts straight.

http://www.estonica.org/en/History/1710-1850_The_Baltic_Landesstaat/


so you were autonomous because Baltic Germans rules you? right, I'm not going to waste my time arguing with you.

[glass]

Estonia and Finland were autonomous and Germans were ruling here, not Russians, during the Russian Empire. Get your facts straight.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reval_Governorate
i see a lot non baltic german surnames among governors
also many fo those baltic germans have russian names which means they got "russified" aka got education in Russia proper and began their carreer outside estland governorate

PS: Irony many baltic gemans died fighting german foes of Russian Empire, but they were not so eager to fight for independant Estonia lately;)

[Peikko]

It's possible that Finland might only be considered Nordic because of its historical entanglement with Sweden. What do you think? If not, why is Karelia not considered Nordic?


so you were autonomous because Baltic Germans rules you? right, I'm not going to waste my time arguing with you.
Yeah, pretty retarded argument. Estonia wasn't autonomous, it's just an Estonian nationalist interpretation of history.

[Äike]

Yeah, pretty retarded argument. Estonia wasn't autonomous, it's just an Estonian nationalist interpretation of history.

Estonia was autonomous from Russia and ruled by Western-Europeans.

[Peikko]

Estonia was autonomous from Russia and ruled by Western-Europeans.
Estonia was ruled by ruling class übermensch. Prove the autonomy, I couldn't find any official sources.

[Äike]

Estonia was ruled by ruling class übermensch. Prove the autonomy, I couldn't find any official sources.

Learn to read.

[Hercus Monte]

Estonia was autonomous from Russia and ruled by Western-Europeans.
thank god it wasn't rules by their eastern European subjects(estonians).

[Äike]

thank god it wasn't rules by their eastern European subjects(estonians).

Estonians are native Northern-Europeans (Finnics). Just saying in case you skipped school.

[Cail]

Estonia was autonomous from Russia and ruled by Western-Europeans.

Probably that's the reason why Russian Tsar was also the Duke of Estonia. And the Estonian Soviet Socialist Republic must have been governed directly from the Washington D.C. I guess.

[Hercus Monte]

Estonians are native Northern-Europeans (Finnics). Just saying in case you skipped school.
so in other words you admit that estonians had no say in how to run ''their'' country before 1918?

[Cail]

The last 50 years of Estonian Governorate btw:

1868–1870 Mikhail Nikolaiyevich Galkin-Vraskoy
1870–1875 Prince Mikhail Valentinovich Shakhovskoy-Glebov-Strezhnev
1875–1885 Viktor Petrovich Polivanov
1885–1894 Prince Sergey Vladimirovich Shakhovskoy
1894–1902 Yefstafiy Nikolaiyevich Skalon
1902–1905 Aleksey Valerianovich Bellegarde
16 March 1905 – October 1905 Aleksey Aleksandrovich Lopukhin
1905–1906 Nikolay Georgiyevich von Bünting
1906–1907 Pyotr Petrovich Bashilov
1907–1915 Izmail Vladimirovich Korostovets
1915–1917 Pyotr Vladimirovich Veryovkin

[Äike]

so in other words you admit that estonians had no say in how to run ''their'' country before 1918?

Estonians only had a say on a local level. For instance, the Estonians won the elections in Tallinn already before World War I.

[Hercus Monte]

Estonians only had a say on a local level. For instance, the Estonians won the elections in Tallinn already before World War I.
impressive, over a thousand year of history and you won an election before WWI.

[Äike]

impressive, over a thousand year of history and you won an election before WWI.

Before entire Christian Northern-Europe united against the Estonians, we dominated the Baltic sea region, thus stfu. Estonians are the only people who have looted and burned down the Swedish capital.

[Hercus Monte]

Before entire Christian Northern-Europe united against the Estonians, we dominated the Baltic sea region, thus stfu. Estonians are the only people who have looted and burned down the Swedish capital.
nobody knows if the Oeselians or the curonians burned down the capital.
even the combined forces of the holy roman empire couldn't take us on and force their religion on us for centuries.
but I have to say for a short period in time you were good at stealing other peoples stuff. meanwhile we were busy being the biggest state in Europe. but good for you.

[Äike]

nobody knows if the Oeselians or the curonians burned down the capital.
even the combined forces of the holy roman empire couldn't take us on and force their religion on us for centuries.
but I have to say for a short period in time you were good at stealing other peoples stuff. meanwhile we were busy being the biggest state in Europe. but good for you.

"stealing other people's stuff" is a very silly term to describe "Epic Estonian vikings"

[Hercus Monte]

"stealing other people's stuff" is a very silly term to describe "Epic Estonian vikings"
estonian Vikings are nothing compered to Icelandic Vikings.
the Oeselians were practically the same as curonians, not that impressive.

[Peikko]

estonian Vikings are nothing compered to Icelandic Vikings.

Or the Norwegian, Danish, or Swedish vikings. Or Minnesota Vikings.

But I would be very interested to get my hands on some real historical documents about Estonian vikings.

[Hercus Monte]

btw, I in no way tried to offend other Estonians members. I think you have a respectable and good peoples. I just dislike aggressive forms of nationalism.

[Trun]

I think it's just healthy if Bulgarians can be proud of their Slavic heritage, without caring if it's seen uncool in the West. Good for Bulgaria, really.

I don't know how should we be proud of it, as Slavdom gave nothing to us. They owe us everything.

Anyway, my thoughts are it's idiotic that many Bulgarians who identify as Eastern Europeans do it just because Eastern Europeans are "tough" and "mafia guys" and women are "damn hot pussiez" :picard1:

[Hercus Monte]

Anyway, my thoughts are it's idiotic that many Bulgarians who identify as Eastern Europeans do it just because Eastern Europeans are "tough" and "mafia guys" and women are "damn hot pussiez" :picard1:
we have the same problem with chavs here, but they don't consider it eastern-european but rather baltic :picard2:

[Dandelion]

we have the same problem with chavs here, but they don't consider it eastern-european but rather baltic :picard2:

Baltic Pagan badasses who took on the Teutonic Order, but sadly got overwhelmed eventually?

[Hercus Monte]

Baltic Pagan badasses who took on the Teutonic Order, but sadly got overwhelmed eventually?
that's prussians, the tutonics never overwhelmed Lithuanians. in fact we beat the crap out of them, with help(Niech żyje Polska!)

[Cail]

I don't know how should we be proud of it, as Slavdom gave nothing to us. They owe us everything.

Srsly? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liberation_of_Bulgaria

[Cail]

Baltic Pagan badasses who took on the Teutonic Order, but sadly got overwhelmed eventually?
Lithuania was never conquered by the Teutons. In fact the Order got its ass handed to it on numerous occasions.

The christianization only occurred when Jogaila decided that he wanted to bang the Poland's teen-aged queen and to become the Polish king. He then got christened and so eventually did the Grand Duchy.

[Hercus Monte]

Umlauts are in use all over Northern-Europe. Danes and Norwegians just write them differently.
Umlauts also happen in Lithuanian. In root morpheme metaphony, to be precise.

[Dandelion]

Lithuania was never conquered by the Teutons. In fact the Order got its ass handed to it on numerous occasions.

The christianization only occurred when Jogaila decided that he wanted to bang the Poland's teen-aged queen and to become the Polish king. He then got christened and so eventually did the Grand Duchy.

Indeed. And I even knew very well the Lithuanians didn't share the fate of the Prussians. I focused too much on the Catholicism part here. Ah, we all have a right to post stupid replies I guess.

[Pure ja]

Latvia and Lithuania don't really feel like Eastern Europe to me. They do seem more Northern than anything, not Scandinavian (North Germanic) or Finnic, Northern and perhaps 'Nordic' nevertheless.



I'm not sure if your theory is correct, do you have some examples?

In all Nordic countries + Estonia, the islands and the coastline is more densely populated than the inlands. In fact, this principle is universal (on Earth). In Nordic countries and in Estonia (and in Latvia) that has also resulted in the capital city residing on the coastline (or very close to the coastline). And yet there are countries (like Lithuania, Poland) which have a seashore, but whose seashore is not that densely populated and the capital is way inland. And hence the continental leaning and the maritime leaning.

[Pure ja]

It's almost as pathetic as some balkan slavs thinking of themselves as Macedonians.

Only in reverse.
Ethnically germanic scandinavians in the northern Europe are a much more recent phenomenon than finno-ugrians in the northern Europe.
Finnic Põhjala / Pohjola is older than north-germanic Norse / Nordic.

[Cail]

Only in reverse.
Ethnically germanic scandinavians in the northern Europe are a much more recent phenomenon than finno-ugrians in the northern Europe.
Finnic Põhjala / Pohjola is older than north-germanic Norse / Nordic.

Nordic bronze age (Indo-European) dates back to around 2000 B.C. At depths like this, the "we were here first" arguments do not really work.

[Pure ja]

Trying to divide the whole countries into maritime or continental sounds redundant. How is Latgala maritime? Or Setomaa? Do tell.


I don't think that is redundant.
Russia with the capital in St.Petersburg is different from Russia with the capital in Moscow.
Estonia with the capital in Tartu would be much different from when the capital is in Tallinn.
Latvia with the capital in Daugavpils would be much different from when the capital is in Riga.
Lithuania with the capital in Klaipeda would be much different from when the capital is in Vilnius.

PS. Most of Setomaa is within RF now, so the issue is moot at the moment.
In a distant future, when AGW induced sealevel rise has turned Lake Peipus into part of the Baltic Sea, then perhaps Setomaa (the part that would still remain above sealevel: the Irboska hills + some more) will become maritime-leaning. At that time, the 4 largest towns of Estonia (Tallinn, Tartu, Pärnu and Narva) will all be submerged (Tartu would be an archipelago). The capital of Estonia could be Viljandi or maybe Rakvere, Jäneda or Kadrina. Võru would be a borderline case, depending on isostatic rebound.




It's ignorant to put Lithuania in the same bag as Germany or Poland in this context.


I disagree.
In my opinion it is very pertinent in this context.




Klaipeda is our third biggest city, the difference between it and the capital city in terms of size is less than that between Tallinn and Tartu.


You have to make Klaipeda as your capital for me to change my mind :)




If you look through the history, you'll notice that there were ridiculous amounts of resources that Lithuania wasted in order not to lose the access to the sea ever since the start of the crusades.


That is simple logistics to avoid military blockade, but Lithuania has still been very different than Finland, for example, which has had Turku, Helsinki and Viipuri as capitals (all on the coastline).




The sea plays an important role in Lithuanian collective consciousness - even our most famous folk tale, often considered our national epic, features the sea. After Latvia's real estate market was opened, Lithuanians started buying properties by the seaside en masse - the phenomena is truly massive, you can read more about it here (http://tevzemesbalss.blogspot.com/2013/07/lietuviesi-iekaro-latvijas-piekrasti.html) (use google translate or smth).
I don't know why that is so, the blood of assimilated Curonians & Semigallians calling us home maybe? LOL


It does not change the leaning. You would have to bring your capital to the seashore.




Ok. Let me just quote a few posts from another topic :)http://www.forumbiodiversity.com/showthread.php?p=817885

Nordic people themselves do perceive it as somewhat synonymous with Norse (and thus Scandinavian).http://www.forumbiodiversity.com/showthread.php?p=817885

Read above.
Estonia and estonians have always been nordic, but not Nordic at the moment. There can be Nordic and Nordic2, just as there can be Internet and Internet2, but only one internet. Get it?

[Pure ja]

So according to a Lithuanian Ambassador, hard work, endurance, and common sense are exclusively Nordic values?


Hmmm, maybe keeping a cold head?
Hard to emulate that in the heat.

[Pure ja]

It works one way, pretty much everything in Latvia and Estonia is owned by some Scandinavian company, Rimi, Narvesen, DNB bank, Swedbank. We have all of them but none of our companies dominate in Finland or Sweden which shows that economically we are a province. Lithuania is a bit better in this regard.

That is not entirely true any more.
There is that shipping company called Tallink.
I suppose there are other similar smaller examples.

[Pure ja]

:p I think Finnish people have many Hallstatt Nordid and East Nordid types.
But we have much more Baltic phenotypes.
I think original Finns are predominantly Baltid.
So you people are more Nordic and we are more Finnic.

Estonians are south-western baltic-finnic.
Or maybe even mid-western baltic-finnic.
Or maybe even central baltic-finnic.

[Pure ja]

I think this is nordic europe

http://img43.imageshack.us/img43/5921/kalrmar.jpg

Northern Saami areas and Lapland were not considered as part of the Kalmar Union.
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/c/c4/Kalmar_Union_c._1500.svg/250px-Kalmar_Union_c._1500.svg.png

[Pure ja]

Estonians are so full of themselves, how they are "doing better" than other Baltic states, while in reality we're doing just as fine.

Of course we are full of ourselves. It comes naturally, and it has the further benefit of allowing no room for not-ourselves to creep in. :)

However, we estonians would much appreciate if you balts would acknowledge that finno-ugric peoples are doing just as fine as indo-europeans. All we hear about from south is how balts like to call themselves über-indos. We, estonians, did not have to switch language to be just as fine.

[Pure ja]

And also this bullshit about some special "Nordic" identity that is larger than "Scandinavian" and smaller than "Northern". Yes, Estonians are northern, no questions asked. Just as other Balts are. But what exactly makes you so special that there needs to be a separate group within Northern where you and Scandos would belong?

There is no "northern" without a continent designation. It could well be northern Antarctica.
And since "northern" does not apply, one would have to use "nordic", with a small n.

[Pure ja]

Scandinavian is an ethnic term, Nordic is a cultural/mentality/identity term which composes the Scandinavians and the Finnics. Northern-European is a geographical term which also includes countries like Lithuania and the United Kingdom, which aren't culturally/by identity/mentality/historically Northern-European.


Actually, Scandinavian is not an ethnic term, it is also geographic. Saami are Scandinavians.
Germanic scandinavians (or north-germanic Scandinavians) are ethnic.

[Cail]

However, we estonians would much appreciate if you balts would acknowledge that finno-ugric peoples are doing just as fine as indo-europeans. All we hear about from south is how balts like to call themselves über-indos. We, estonians, did not have to switch language to be just as fine.

Uber-indos from the south are just as stupid as IT-titans from the north. We're all doing about the same here.

And Balts did not "switch language", except for maybe some areas in northern Latvia. No one says that Balts don't have some Finnic ancestry (we obviously do), but most of our heritage is Indo-European.






































Even though I myself am N1c as are all other Gediminids... lol.

[Peikko]

I'm pretty sure the original Letto-Lithuanians were predominantly N1c1-carriers, because anthropologists always described them much lighter than neighboring Slavs. Lithuanians are just Slavicised.

[Pure ja]

Are you a moron? The "ä" is from Germans, and Nordics has traditionally used "æ". Both of them are Latin letters, either way. It's not a proof of Nordicness whatsoever.

jää-äär

For germanic origin, 'ice' would have to be 'jää', and edge would have to be 'äär'.

[Cail]

There is no "northern" without a continent designation. It could well be northern Antarctica.
And since "northern" does not apply, one would have to use "nordic", with a small n.

"Northern" in my post has obviously referred to "Northern European".

Scandos (Nordic) are an obvious group, as are Northern Euros (nordic, if you so please). Even Fenno-Scandos can be argued for (would also be Nordic then, simply including them in that definition). But a group that would include Estonians and Scandos, but not, say, Scots or Latvians, just does not exist. There is no such group to call your version of Nordic or nordic or whatever.

[Pure ja]

nobody knows if the Oeselians or the curonians burned down the capital.


Baltic curonians wouldn't know an island if they ever saw one, let alone an archipelago. :p

Most likely the Sigtuna raid was coordinated by oeselians, guided by proper finns, and supported by finnic curonians and mixed finnic-russian specialists from Karelia and Novgorod.

[Pure ja]

even the combined forces of the holy roman empire couldn't take us on and force their religion on us for centuries.


According to polls, estonians are the least religious people on earth, so that means that 800 years of forcing of religion on us has still failed.
The same can not be said of lithuanians :p

[Äike]

Uber-indos from the south are just as stupid as IT-titans from the north. We're all doing about the same here.

And Balts did not "switch language", except for maybe some areas in northern Latvia. No one says that Balts don't have some Finnic ancestry (we obviously do), but most of our heritage is Indo-European.



Oh really?

http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-Yfni7YPLzkc/TwO_5_hoy-I/AAAAAAAALGc/NVWFceK9SxU/s1600/800px-European_Middle_Neolithic.gif

[Hercus Monte]

Baltic curonians wouldn't know an island if they ever saw one, let alone an archipelago. :p

Most likely the Sigtuna raid was coordinated by oeselians, guided by proper finns, and supported by finnic curonians and mixed finnic-russian specialists from Karelia and Novgorod.
oeselians don't know what pizza is :p

it's only the estonians who this the oeselians burned down the capital. The baltic, scandinavian and other historians all agree that we have no idea.


According to polls, estonians are the least religious people on earth, so that means that 800 years of forcing of religion on us has still failed.
The same can not be said of lithuanians :paccording to a eurobarometer poll from 2010 we are bellow the EU average with 47% who believe in god.

estonians are not the most atheist(that's france) you are the most spiritual eu members(50% of you believe in spirits)

[Twistedmind]

According to polls, estonians are the least religious people on earth, so that means that 800 years of forcing of religion on us has still failed.
The same can not be said of lithuanians :p

According to pools Czechs are least religios in Europe. Anyway, you build your Nordischness on Lutheran religion which is, btw South German movement, how that two go together?

Anyway, I am not interested in all of this, but lol, all your arguments are stupid. :rolleyes: Karl is at least funny since his childish rage is amusing.

[Cail]

I'm pretty sure the original Letto-Lithuanians were predominantly N1c1-carriers, because anthropologists always described them much lighter than neighboring Slavs. Lithuanians are just Slavicised.

The original Lithuanians couldn't have been N1c as it is not an IE marker. The genetic mark-up of the original Balts would've been similar to the modern eastern Poland/western Ukraine (not the Carpaths), which is probably the purest remaining PIE/BS region at present. Belarus, Northern/Western Russia and Lithuania are essentially of the same stock, but with significant Finnic input (even more so for Latvia). Further to the west (Czech Rep, Eastern Germany etc) there is more mixing with the pre-IE R1b population.

[Cail]

Oh really?

Ya really. Ever heard the word "migration"? Obviously some mixing does occur, but assuming that all the genetic populations just stay in the same places is ridiculous. Otherwise Spaniards would also be some genetically Basque language-switchers.

[Pure ja]

Nordic bronze age (Indo-European) dates back to around 2000 B.C. At depths like this, the "we were here first" arguments do not really work.

They do work, if there is a cultural similarity between seal-hunters on both sides of the Baltic Sea.
But, if you prefer, you can consider northern-Europe as the area - finno-ugrians were here before north-germanics.

[Pure ja]

Uber-indos from the south are just as stupid as IT-titans from the north. We're all doing about the same here.

And Balts did not "switch language", except for maybe some areas in northern Latvia. No one says that Balts don't have some Finnic ancestry (we obviously do), but most of our heritage is Indo-European.


Of course balts switched language.
Or there would be difficult to explain that:
http://eurogenes.blogspot.com/2012/04/so-whos-most-european-of-us-all.html

[Cail]

They do work, if there is a cultural similarity between seal-hunters on both sides of the Baltic Sea.
But, if you prefer, you can consider northern-Europe as the area - finno-ugrians were here before north-germanics.

Anyway, you came from Urals, we came from the steppe. Does it matter if some of your ancestors migrated earlier? And by the way, those were probably the Saami ancestors or undifferentiated Uralic, because the closest linguistic relatives of modern Balto-Finns are the Mordvins, and look where they live. This is where Balto-Finnic ancestors migrated from, and relatively recently - because Finno-Volgaic (Balto-Finnic+Mordvinic+Mari) is dated to about 2000 B.C. This means that your linguistic ancestors migrated here about the same time as Indo-Europeans, and mixed with earlier Uralic-speaking populations (which Indo-Europeans also did). So don't tell me you were here first.

[Cail]

Of course balts switched language.
Or there would be difficult to explain that:
http://eurogenes.blogspot.com/2012/04/so-whos-most-european-of-us-all.html

This map shows the most Northern European, not the most Finnic. Otherwise it would mean that Lithuanians are more Finnic than Finns themselves. Also note that Indo-European Poles and Russians score higher than the Finnic Mordvins (Erzya and Moksha).

[Pure ja]

"Northern" in my post has obviously referred to "Northern European".

Scandos (Nordic) are an obvious group, as are Northern Euros (nordic, if you so please). Even Fenno-Scandos can be argued for (would also be Nordic then, simply including them in that definition). But a group that would include Estonians and Scandos, but not, say, Scots or Latvians, just does not exist. There is no such group to call your version of Nordic or nordic or whatever.

I am not deliberately excluding balts among nordics, as are some other estonians here. I think it is up to the balts.

As to "northern", you missed the point.
The use of "northern" is incompatible without a continent designation (well, it could also mean Northern-Italy), and it would not be apt to describe anything meaningful as "northern-Europe". Baltic-finnic national epics and folk tales and songs say very little about "northern-Europe", but there is a lot of mention about "Põhjala / Pohjala".

Põhjala / Pohjala is not equal to "Northern-Europe", 'nordic' with a small n is a much better match. The only other suitable designation that I can come up with, would be 'the North'.

Good luck for you going against Kalevala or the Karelian rock paintings.

[Cail]

I am not deliberately excluding balts among nordics, as are some other estonians here. I think it is up to the balts.

As to "northern", you missed the point.
The use of "northern" is incompatible without a continent designation (well, it could also mean Northern-Italy), and it would not be apt to describe anything meaningful as "northern-Europe". Baltic-finnic national epics and folk tales and songs say very little about "northern-Europe", but there is a lot of mention about "Põhjala / Pohjala".

Põhjala / Pohjala is not equal to "Northern-Europe", 'nordic' with a small n is a much better match. The only other suitable designation that I can come up with, would be 'the North'.

Good luck for you going against Kalevala or the Karelian rock paintings.

I've nothing against the Pohjala. I just can't see how it justifies including Estonians in the Scandinavian "Nordic" group, to the exclusion of (by other Estonian nationalists, not by you) other circum-Baltic nations. There is a very distinct Scandinavian, and to lesser extent a Fenno-Scandinavian group. There is a much more loose, but still discernable "north-European" group. There is even a parallel circum-Baltic group, also pretty loose. But there is no group that would include both the Pohjala and Norden, but not anyone else.

[Pure ja]

oeselians don't know what pizza is :p


But estonians know how to sod enemy's face with sod, so that they can eat dirt.
How's that? :p




it's only the estonians who this the oeselians burned down the capital. The baltic, scandinavian and other historians all agree that we have no idea.


You can trace what was going on by swedish raids right before and after the Sigtuna raid.
Those were directed against Saaremaa, Karelia and Finland Proper. Not against Curonia, as far as I know. Maybe against Prussia?




according to a eurobarometer poll from 2010 we are bellow the EU average with 47% who believe in god.

estonians are not the most atheist(that's france) you are the most spiritual eu members(50% of you believe in spirits)

Non-religious does not mean atheist.
Spiritual does not mean religious.

[Pure ja]

According to pools Czechs are least religios in Europe. Anyway, you build your Nordischness on Lutheran religion which is, btw South German movement, how that two go together?

Anyway, I am not interested in all of this, but lol, all your arguments are stupid. :rolleyes: Karl is at least funny since his childish rage is amusing.

I was not basing MY statements on lutheranism.
In fact, lutheranism was the religious current that got estonians really kick-started on christianity, to that world-record low of 15%.

[Äike]

oeselians don't know what pizza is :p

it's only the estonians who this the oeselians burned down the capital. The baltic, scandinavian and other historians all agree that we have no idea.



Actually the majority of historians and practically all the Scandinavian historians say that the Estonians did it.


The Sigtuna-problem has recently been tackled by two Estonian historians, Enn Tarvel and Hain Rebas. They both come to similar conclusions. The following is an abstract of their thesis.

First, here is a list of medieval and early modern sources that identify the ones responsible for the destruction instead of just referring to "pagans" as some of the earlier accounts:

1) Eric's Chronicle from about 1320 says the Karelians did it.
2) Olaus Petri's En Swensk Cröneka (1540s) claims it was the Estonians.
3) Laurentius Petri's Chronica Svekana (16th century) also blames the Estonians.
4) Johannes Magnus (16th century) "credits" the Estonians as well.

One would think Eric's Chronicle is most reliable since it is far older than the rest. However, the information on Sigtuna can be claimed to have been motivated by contemporary politics. Sweden was actively expanding to the east in the early 14th century and having conflicts with Novgorod over Karelia. It would have served a propagandist agenda to point out that the Novgorod-Karelian "problem" was an ancient one. In the chronicle, Russia is said to have rejoiced over the victory along with the Karelians, thus indicating that the latter were acting in alliance with the former.

Apart from that, what makes the account of Eric's chronicle even less reliable? First, there is no contemporary information about the Karelians ever making raids west of Häme (Tavastia) in Finland. There is hardly any historical evidence on ancient Karelian seamanship. More importantly, the Novgorod annals (or any other Russian annals, for that matter) make no mention of the destruction of Sigtuna. It is highly unlikely the "rejoicing" Russians would have kept silent about such a great victory.

On the other hand, we have several contemporary accounts of Estonian pirate activity in Scandinavia: ravishing Öland in 1170 with the Curonians (Saxo Grammaticus), raiding Listerby in 1203 (Heinrici Chronicon Livoniae), looting on the Swedish coast in 1226 (the same). What's more, both Eric's chronicle and Olaus Petri relate about an earl named Jon who got killed by the same pagans (Estonians according to Olaus) on Lake Mälaren. Jon's widow is then said to have gathered folk and slaughtered the enemies on "a hill that is called eesta skär ('Estonians' islet')". The islet is today known as Estbröte.

Both authors conclude that the Estonian version is the most probable one.

http://www.abiyamo.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/09/apply-cold-water-to-the-burned-area.jpg

[Hercus Monte]

You can trace what was going on by swedish raids right before and after the Sigtuna raid.
Those were directed against Saaremaa, Karelia and Finland Proper. Not against Curonia, as far as I know. Maybe against Prussia?

doesn't really mean anything. as I said, there is no conclusive evidence.



Non-religious does not mean atheist.
Spiritual does not mean religious.
did I say it was? anyway, I sure it's exactly the same in Estonia as it is in Lithuania:the youth is mostly atheist of spiritual.



Actually the majority of historians and practically all the Scandinavian historians say that the Estonians did it.lol, both authors is not practically all historians. in any case, on a global stage the theory is in the minority.

but you can have it if you want. Burning a city down is not very important for us.

[Pure ja]

Anyway, you came from Urals, we came from the steppe.


Wrong.
The ancestors of estonians, livonians and finns were mostly pre-swiderians, swiderians and post-swiderians.
Eastern input was less than that.




Does it matter if some of your ancestors migrated earlier?


For defining the meaning of nordic or the North? Yes, it matters, just as much as the issue of Macedonians.




And by the way, those were probably the Saami ancestors or undifferentiated Uralic, because the closest linguistic relatives of modern Balto-Finns are the Mordvins, and look where they live. This is where Balto-Finnic ancestors migrated from, and relatively recently - because Finno-Volgaic (Balto-Finnic+Mordvinic+Mari) is dated to about 2000 B.C.


Contemporary understanding of the finno-ugric language tree is that it was not a tree, but a comb or even a brush.
There are no discernable intermediate branching steps between what is considered to have been proto-finno-ugric and proto-baltic-finnic.
What happened around 2000 BC is something else, not a migration of baltic-finnic peoples or a migration of a baltic-finnic culture. At best, it was a wave of influences that did not overwhelm the local native culture in Estonia. Tree models are outdated, network models are the way to go.




This means that your linguistic ancestors migrated here about the same time as Indo-Europeans, and mixed with earlier Uralic-speaking populations (which Indo-Europeans also did). So don't tell me you were here first.

We were here first.

[Pure ja]

This map shows the most Northern European, not the most Finnic. Otherwise it would mean that Lithuanians are more Finnic than Finns themselves. Also note that Indo-European Poles and Russians score higher than the Finnic Mordvins (Erzya and Moksha).

You are misreading the map.
The inner core has the least amount of recent input from out of Europe.
If lithuanians group together with estonians within the inner core, then that means that both have received relatively very little genetic input - and that means that at least lithuanians have had to switch language.

Lithuanians should group together with the poles (instead of estonians), for them to have any claim to "indo-european genetic" heritage.

[Cail]

Contemporary understanding of the finno-ugric language tree is that it was not a tree, but a comb or even a brush.
There are no discernable intermediate branching steps between what is considered to have been proto-finno-ugric and proto-baltic-finnic.
What happened around 2000 BC is something else, not a migration of baltic-finnic peoples or a migration of a baltic-finnic culture. At best, it was a wave of influences that did not overwhelm the local native culture in Estonia. Tree models are outdated, network models are the way to go.

I kinda know that, being a linguist and all. All families evolve through a mix of a tree model and a wave model, unless something drastic happens. There is a well discernible branching between the Finno-Volgaic group and the Permic group. And there certainly is a huge difference between the Saami languages and the Finno-Permic group. Meaning that Balto-Finns (<Finno-Volgaic<Finno-Permic) migrated westward and replaced the earlier Uralic languages of the area (which might've been Saami-like or some other Uralic). And that happened after the Finno-Volgaic split from Permic, which is around 2000 B.C. But of course, these pre-Balto-Finnic Uralics are also the ancestors of modern Balto-Finnic speakers.

[Pure ja]

I've nothing against the Pohjala. I just can't see how it justifies including Estonians in the Scandinavian "Nordic" group, to the exclusion of (by other Estonian nationalists, not by you) other circum-Baltic nations. There is a very distinct Scandinavian, and to lesser extent a Fenno-Scandinavian group. There is a much more loose, but still discernable "north-European" group. There is even a parallel circum-Baltic group, also pretty loose. But there is no group that would include both the Pohjala and Norden, but not anyone else.

"The North" does not "include both the Pohjala and Norden, but not anyone else".

Besides, isn't it so that originally Norse designated areas to the north of germanic scandinavians, actually mostly populated by non-germanic scandinavians? At that time it was a derogatory term for north-germanic scandinavians.

[Pure ja]

doesn't really mean anything. as I said, there is no conclusive evidence.


There is indirect evidence. And that means something.

The fight was about Finland.
Novgorod - Karelia wanted to rule Finland. Sveas wanted to rule Finland.
Saaremaa had some sort of alliance going on with southern-finns, Saaremaa did not want to rule Finland.
Finland "fell" right after the fall of Saaremaa at 1227. The activities about Finland could well have been one of the reasons why oeselians seemed at times passive against the german crusaders.

Sweden concentrated on Finland,
Denmark concentrated on northern Estonia.
Germany concentrated on Livonia, Estonia and on baltic areas.
It was sort of a "team effort".

[Cail]

Lithuanians should group together with the poles (instead of estonians), for them to have any claim to "indo-european genetic" heritage.

Actually, Y-DNA analysis easily shows that not only Lithuanians have plenty of IE genetic heritage, but so do Estonians themselves, having almost 37% R1a, which is definitely PIE. Which means that Estonians have over a third of their ancestry coming from PIE through mixing with Balts and Slavs (and maybe some Germans). Also consistent with their N1c getting diluted proportionately, around 40% against Finns' 65%.

[Hercus Monte]

There is indirect evidence. And that means something.

The fight was about Finland.
Novgorod - Karelia wanted to rule Finland. Sveas wanted to rule Finland.
Saaremaa had some sort of alliance going on with southern-finns, Saaremaa did not want to rule Finland.
Finland "fell" right after the fall of Saaremaa at 1227. The activities about Finland could well have been one of the reasons why oeselians seemed at times passive against the german crusaders.

Sweden concentrated on Finland,
Denmark concentrated on northern Estonia.
Germany concentrated on Livonia, Estonia and on baltic areas.
It was sort of a "team effort".
indirect evidence is subjective, for all we know they avoided curonians because they were scared of them.

[Pure ja]

indirect evidence is subjective, for all we know they avoided curonians because they were scared of them.

(sigh)

Since when?
The scandinavian sagas have ample records on raids on Curonia. But I am not aware of any Swedish raids right before or after the Sigtuna raid.

[Pure ja]

Actually, Y-DNA analysis easily shows that not only Lithuanians have plenty of IE genetic heritage, but so do Estonians themselves, having almost 37% R1a, which is definitely PIE.


R1a is not "definitely PIE".




Which means that Estonians have over a third of their ancestry coming from PIE through mixing with Balts and Slavs (and maybe some Germans). Also consistent with their N1c getting diluted proportionately, around 40% against Finns' 65%.

It doesn't mean that.
You would have a hard time explaining the existence of inner core of "europeanness" in the Baltics.

http://eurogenes.blogspot.com/2012/04/so-whos-most-european-of-us-all.html

[Äike]

Actually, Y-DNA analysis easily shows that not only Lithuanians have plenty of IE genetic heritage, but so do Estonians themselves, having almost 37% R1a, which is definitely PIE. Which means that Estonians have over a third of their ancestry coming from PIE through mixing with Balts and Slavs (and maybe some Germans). Also consistent with their N1c getting diluted proportionately, around 40% against Finns' 65%.

29% same as in Norway, not 37%.

[inactive_member]

The original Lithuanians couldn't have been N1c as it is not an IE marker. The genetic mark-up of the original Balts would've been similar to the modern eastern Poland/western Ukraine (not the Carpaths), which is probably the purest remaining PIE/BS region at present. Belarus, Northern/Western Russia and Lithuania are essentially of the same stock, but with significant Finnic input (even more so for Latvia). Further to the west (Czech Rep, Eastern Germany etc) there is more mixing with the pre-IE R1b population.


Finno-Ugric ancestry among Balts is often pointed to the fact Baltic male population has N1c1 haplogroup.
These are facts I know which may not be accurate. There are two large sub-groups in N1c1 haplogroup.

Group 1 is found among

Estonians, Latvians, Lithuanians, Belarusians, Ukrainians, some Russians, some Finns living in SW, Poland, Scandinavia, British Isles and Iberia. Yes, in Iberia.

Group 2 is found among

Finno-Ugric and Finnic speakers mostly but not among Estonians. The group 2 is more common among Finnish population. Only 11% of group 1 found among Finnish population according to a paper published in 2011.

Group 1 and Group 2 of N1c1 had a common ancestor living 2,200 years ago whose origins were in the east as per the same paper. Let’s say in eastern Europe. As people migrated from Siberia or Ural further west they assimilated local populations inheriting genes of locals living in the areas which N1c1 carriers settled.

Finnic languages split from proto-Finnic 1,000 - 1,500 years ago(?) Proto-Finnic split 2,000 years ago from a branch Uralic languages(?) So, the common ancestor of Group 1 found among central European and south Baltic populations pre-dates Baltic Finnic language meaning Finnic speakers in south Baltic were likely to be the language shifters. ;)

Irrespective which language spoke the carriers of Group 1 of N1c1 only 35% of Lithuanian male population has it. 45% of the population has R1a1 haplogroup. Around 20% of the population has haplogroups commonly found among other European populations.

The structure of mtDNA in Lithuanian female population does not differ very much from central European population from memory.

On autosomes south-Baltic Lithuania, (Latvia & Estonia probably too), NW Russia, Belarus and NE of Poland are from the same stock as you mentioned. AFAIK, anthropologists were stating the same thing before genetic data were obtained.

Given this information, as well as linguistic and ethnographical evidence, it's difficult to show Finno-Ugric ancestry in Lithuanians. If anyone has some information in academic literature, then I'd like to read it.

[Hercus Monte]

(sigh)

Since when?
The scandinavian sagas have ample records on raids on Curonia. But I am not aware of any Swedish raids right before or after the Sigtuna raid.
sigh, maybe after the curonians beat them up? (assuming they did, since we don't really know who did)
we know that viking and the curonians had peace treaties before, who's to say they didn't have one after the Sigtuna raid.

[Peikko]

The original Lithuanians couldn't have been N1c as it is not an IE marker. The genetic mark-up of the original Balts would've been similar to the modern eastern Poland/western Ukraine (not the Carpaths), which is probably the purest remaining PIE/BS region at present. Belarus, Northern/Western Russia and Lithuania are essentially of the same stock, but with significant Finnic input (even more so for Latvia). Further to the west (Czech Rep, Eastern Germany etc) there is more mixing with the pre-IE R1b population.
Okay, let's be more accurate. The Balts are the result of multiple migrations to the region, mainly N1c1=proto-European and R1a=PIE.


Anyway, you came from Urals, we came from the steppe. Does it matter if some of your ancestors migrated earlier?
Nobody came from anywhere. Modern day Balts and Finnics formed in the same region they now live in as a result of multiple migrations. All of N1c came from Urals and all of N came from China.


And by the way, those were probably the Saami ancestors or undifferentiated Uralic, because the closest linguistic relatives of modern Balto-Finns are the Mordvins, and look where they live. This is where Balto-Finnic ancestors migrated from, and relatively recently - because Finno-Volgaic (Balto-Finnic+Mordvinic+Mari) is dated to about 2000 B.C. This means that your linguistic ancestors migrated here about the same time as Indo-Europeans, and mixed with earlier Uralic-speaking populations (which Indo-Europeans also did). So don't tell me you were here first.
Apparently the Saamis came from Iberia through Norway and mixed with some Eastern tribes at later time. They probably spoke some Paleolithic language before adopting the Uralic.


Actually, Y-DNA analysis easily shows that not only Lithuanians have plenty of IE genetic heritage, but so do Estonians themselves, having almost 37% R1a, which is definitely PIE. Which means that Estonians have over a third of their ancestry coming from PIE through mixing with Balts and Slavs (and maybe some Germans). Also consistent with their N1c getting diluted proportionately, around 40% against Finns' 65%.
Estonians actually are more PIE, than Lithuanians.

[inactive_member]

Estonians actually are more PIE, than Lithuanians.

Does one determine the amount of PIE-ness in Estonians and Lithuanians using R1a frequency? What is it in Estonian population? I doubt it's higher than in Lithuanian population which is around 45% : http://img819.imageshack.us/img819/4341/lith.png

[Äike]

Actually, Y-DNA analysis easily shows that not only Lithuanians have plenty of IE genetic heritage, but so do Estonians themselves, having almost 37% R1a, which is definitely PIE. Which means that Estonians have over a third of their ancestry coming from PIE through mixing with Balts and Slavs (and maybe some Germans). Also consistent with their N1c getting diluted proportionately, around 40% against Finns' 65%.

The Estonians have never mixed with Balts or Slavs as neither of those populations, through human history, have ever lived in Estonia. The Balts bogged down in southern-Latvia and even in the early 19th century, the regions over the border, in Russia, from Estonia were still Finnic.

If you had half of a brain, you would know that R1a getting here is because of the expansion of the Corded Ware people from Central-Europe.

[Peikko]

Does one determine the amount of PIE-ness in Estonians and Lithuanians using R1a frequency? What is it in Estonian population? I doubt it's higher than in Lithuanian population which is around 45% : http://img819.imageshack.us/img819/4341/lith.png
Indo-European would be R1a+R1b. Though, Estonia has a little bit less (3%) so you're right.

[Peikko]

the closest linguistic relatives of modern Balto-Finns are the Mordvins, and look where they live. This is where Balto-Finnic ancestors migrated from, and relatively recently - because Finno-Volgaic (Balto-Finnic+Mordvinic+Mari) is dated to about 2000 B.C. This means that your linguistic ancestors migrated here about the same time as Indo-Europeans, and mixed with earlier Uralic-speaking populations (which Indo-Europeans also did). So don't tell me you were here first.
Fun fact, but Volga Finns have high amounts of R1a, so they're more Indo-European, than Finns. They also have different subclade of N1c1, so they can't be our ancestors.

[inactive_member]

Indo-European would be R1a+R1b. Though, Estonia has a little bit less (3%) so you're right.

Not that I don't trust you but you need to provide the sources. R1a+R1b P*(xR1a) in old nomenclature ) is 50% in Lithuanian population as per the source I quoted above.

[Äike]

The Proto-Finnic (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Finnic_languages) homeland was in modern-day Southern-Estonia, just saying in case someone didn't know. Also the Finnic languages are more similar to the Saamic languages than they are to the Mordvinic languages.

[Peikko]

Not that I don't trust you but you need to provide the sources. R1a+R1b P*(xR1a) in old nomenclature ) is 50% in Lithuanian population as per the source I quoted above.
So I need to provide my sources, but you don't need to provide yours? Anyway, check Eupedia. R1a+R1b in Estonia = 40% and in Lithuania = 43%.

[sevruk]

If you had half of a brain, you would know that R1a getting here is because of the expansion of the Corded Ware people from Central-Europe.

that are direct ancestors of Slavs and Balts (and Estonians) ;)

[inactive_member]

So I need to provide my sources, but you don't need to provide yours? Anyway, check Eupedia. R1a+R1b in Estonia = 40% and in Lithuania = 43%.

Feel free to ask for the sources.

My source is from "Y chromosome and mitochondrial DNA variation in Lithuanians.(2004) Kasperaviciūte D et al" http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15469421
Table from the article is showing R1a+R1b = 50%: http://img819.imageshack.us/img819/4341/lith.png

Eupedia for Estonian populaton is showing R1a+R1b = 40%. http://www.eupedia.com/europe/european_y-dna_haplogroups.shtml

It's not that I want to prove you are wrong and I am right. There is a lot of inaccurate information being spread about their ancestry, it is ridiculous.

[Peikko]

Feel free to ask for the sources.

My source is from "Y chromosome and mitochondrial DNA variation in Lithuanians.(2004) Kasperaviciūte D et al" http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15469421
Table from the article is showing R1a+R1b = 50%: http://img819.imageshack.us/img819/4341/lith.png

Eupedia for Estonian populaton is showing R1a+R1b = 40%. http://www.eupedia.com/europe/european_y-dna_haplogroups.shtml

It's not that I want to prove you are wrong and I am right. There is a lot of inaccurate information being spread about their ancestry, it is ridiculous.
Yeah, I know. Everyone interprets all studies to suit their own nationalistic agendas. Do you have sources for this comment of yours? I'm interested in the sub-clades of N1c1:

Finno-Ugric ancestry among Balts is often pointed to the fact Baltic male population has N1c1 haplogroup.
These are facts I know which may not be accurate. There are two large sub-groups in N1c1 haplogroup.

Group 1 is found among

Estonians, Latvians, Lithuanians, Belarusians, Ukrainians, some Russians, some Finns living in SW, Poland, Scandinavia, British Isles and Iberia. Yes, in Iberia.

Group 2 is found among

Finno-Ugric and Finnic speakers mostly but not among Estonians. The group 2 is more common among Finnish population. Only 11% of group 1 found among Finnish population according to a paper published in 2011.

Group 1 and Group 2 of N1c1 had a common ancestor living 2,200 years ago whose origins were in the east as per the same paper. Let’s say in eastern Europe. As people migrated from Siberia or Ural further west they assimilated local populations inheriting genes of locals living in the areas which N1c1 carriers settled.

Finnic languages split from proto-Finnic 1,000 - 1,500 years ago(?) Proto-Finnic split 2,000 years ago from a branch Uralic languages(?) So, the common ancestor of Group 1 found among central European and south Baltic populations pre-dates Baltic Finnic language meaning Finnic speakers in south Baltic were likely to be the language shifters. ;)

Irrespective which language spoke the carriers of Group 1 of N1c1 only 35% of Lithuanian male population has it. 45% of the population has R1a1 haplogroup. Around 20% of the population has haplogroups commonly found among other European populations.

The structure of mtDNA in Lithuanian female population does not differ very much from central European population from memory.

On autosomes south-Baltic Lithuania, (Latvia & Estonia probably too), NW Russia, Belarus and NE of Poland are from the same stock as you mentioned. AFAIK, anthropologists were stating the same thing before genetic data were obtained.

Given this information, as well as linguistic and ethnographical evidence, it's difficult to show Finno-Ugric ancestry in Lithuanians. If anyone has some information in academic literature, then I'd like to read it.

[Cail]

If you had half of a brain, you would know that R1a getting here is because of the expansion of the Corded Ware people from Central-Europe.
Corded ware was Proto-Germano-Balto-Slavic, and those who migrated to modern Estonia certainly weren't Germanic speakers.

[inactive_member]

Yeah, I know. Everyone interprets all studies to suit their own nationalistic agendas. Do you have sources for this comment of yours? I'm interested in the sub-clades of N1c1:



It was published by Anatoly Klyosov in 2011.


Деревья этих коротких фрагментов гаплотипов были детально
рассмотрены в работе (Клёсов, 2011b), и было показано, что большинство
гаплотипов гаплогруппы N1c1 расходятся на две большие группы – угро-
финскую и южно-балтийскую. Обе они довольно молодые, обе
образовались в 1-м тысячелетии нашей эры. Каждая из них включает
несколько подветвей, и если эти подветви «огрубить», сложить, то эти две
большие ветви имеют следующие базовые гаплотипы, угро-финский и
южно-балтийский, соответственно:

14 24 14 11 11 13 11 12 10 14 14 30 – 17 10 10 11 12 25 14 19 30 13 13 14 14 – 11 11
18 19 14 15 18 19 36 36 13 10 – 11 8 15 17 8 8 10 8 11 10 12 21 22 14 10 12 12 17 7 13
20 21 15 12 11 10 11 11 12 11 (угро-финский базовый гаплотип)

14 23 14/15 11 11 13 11 12 10 14 14 30 – 17 9 9 11 12 25 14 19 28 14 14 15 15 – 11 11
18 20 14 15 17 19 36 36 13 10 – 11 8 15 17 8 8 10 8 11 10 12 21 22 14 10 12 12 17 7 13
20 21 16 12 11 10 11 11 12 11 (южно-балтийский базовый гаплотип)

Между этими ветвями на вид 10 мутаций, на самом деле 7.82 мутации,
поскольку некоторые мутации при усреднении дробные. Это разводит обе
ветви латерально («по горизонтали») на 1725 лет, и помещает общего
предка обеих ветвей на 2400 лет назад. Но это в первом приближении,
потому что сами ветви состоят из подветвей разного количества и разного
размера. Если все это учесть, то общий предок всей гаплогруппы N1c1 по
доступным гаплотипам опускается во времени до 4200 лет назад.


Source (page 1712) http://aklyosov.home.comcast.net/~aklyosov/Vestnik_4_09.pdf



Use google translator if you have to. The two groups he is discussing as indicated by Founder Hyplotype (FHT) in quoted text above are Central European FHT (L550+) and Eastern European FHT (L132+) indicated below on the diagram. These two groups had a common ancestor living 2,200 years ago as per his calculations. The age of N1c1 is 4,200 years.

http://s13.postimg.org/5rj6fud1j/n1c1.png

Source of diagram : http://www.elisanet.fi/alkupera/N1c1.pdf

[Peikko]

It was published by Anatoly Klyosov in 2011.

Use google translator if you have to. The two groups he is discussing as indicated by Founder Hyplotype (FHT) in quoted text above are Central European FHT (L550+) and Eastern European FHT (L132+) indicated below on the diagram. These two groups had a common ancestor living 2,200 years ago as per his calculations. The age of N1c1 is 4,200 years.

http://s13.postimg.org/5rj6fud1j/n1c1.png

Source of diagram : http://www.elisanet.fi/alkupera/N1c1.pdf
I had that diagram already. I was hoping you would have had something more and maybe academic.

[inactive_member]

I had that diagram already. I was hoping you would have had something more and maybe academic.

There are two sources above already pointing to the two founder hyplotypes. The diagram is just for convenience. Besides, Klyosov is a molecular biologist, who was/is a visiting professor at Harvard. He may not know history but he can calculate the age of mutations using acceptable methods. Do you doubt the existence of two founder hyplotypes found in different groups of people with a common ancestor living 2,200 years ago?

[Peikko]

Mr.KnowItAll, what is it that you don't like again?

Someone probably showed you FTDNA N1c1 project's maps, but here they are again:

http://www.familytreedna.com/public/n1c1/default.aspx?section=ymap


There are two sources above already pointing to the two founder hyplotypes. The diagram is just for convenience. Besides, Klyosov is a molecular biologist, who was/is a visiting professor at Harvard. He may not know history but he can calculate the age of mutations using acceptable methods. Do you doubt the existence of two founder hyplotypes found in different groups of people with a common ancestor living 2,200 years ago?
What I meant is, that your sources didn't help me. But thanks anyway. The map is better than the tree.

[Hercus Monte]

just for the record, we don't think we're nordic. Maybe some Estonian do, but not us. (albeit, I've never met an estonian who thinks he or she is nordic, in fact i know some estonians who told me their are not ashamed of being eastern european)

[Pure ja]

sigh, maybe after the curonians beat them up? (assuming they did, since we don't really know who did)
we know that viking and the curonians had peace treaties before, who's to say they didn't have one after the Sigtuna raid.

Very unlikely.

[Pure ja]

Indo-European would be R1a+R1b.

Don't be too modest. Why don't you tag I1 and N1c as "Indo-European" as well, that would probably make estonians as "the most Indo-European" in Europe. And still refusing to speak the language as their first language.

[Pure ja]

Mr.KnowItAll, what is it that you don't like again?

Someone probably showed you FTDNA N1c1 project's maps, but here they are again:

http://www.familytreedna.com/public/n1c1/default.aspx?section=ymap

Only two hits in Estonia, that should be enough for any conclusion.

[Pure ja]

I kinda know that, being a linguist and all. All families evolve through a mix of a tree model and a wave model, unless something drastic happens. There is a well discernible branching between the Finno-Volgaic group and the Permic group. And there certainly is a huge difference between the Saami languages and the Finno-Permic group. Meaning that Balto-Finns (<Finno-Volgaic<Finno-Permic) migrated westward and replaced the earlier Uralic languages of the area (which might've been Saami-like or some other Uralic). And that happened after the Finno-Volgaic split from Permic, which is around 2000 B.C.

I disagree.
You are still clinging too close to the tree model.

Besides, if there ever was any large-scale finno-ugric linguistic influence from east to west at the dawn of the bronze age, it wasn't likely directly from the east but from south-east or even from the south. And not by pure finno-ugrians, but by the linguistic finno-ugric-baltic (or baltoslavic) mix. That mix were bilingual finno-ugrians, who later in and around Lithuania became balts.

And the first baltic-finnic contact with the corded ware was
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rzucewo_culture
which had Narva culture as one component.

[Pure ja]

You mean the conclusion in my signature? It's epic, I agree.

No, I mean ANY conclusion.

[Peikko]

I think this thing, where everyone tries to prove they're "more European" than others or that their nation was here first, is just stupid.

[Pure ja]

This map shows the most Northern European, not the most Finnic. Otherwise it would mean that Lithuanians are more Finnic than Finns themselves.

The inner core coincides with the southern-baltic-finnic area.
The outer core coincides with the baltic-finnic area.

Finns have been a genetic isolate. Finns did not represent the majority of baltic-finns until after the Livonian War or even after the Great Nordic War.
Before that the majority of baltic-finns lived to the south of the Bay of Finland.

EDIT: and the iron age in the Baltics (to the south of the Bay of Finland) still started with an even population split between the baltic and baltic-finnic.



Also note that Indo-European Poles and Russians score higher than the Finnic Mordvins (Erzya and Moksha).

So?
Mordvins live on the main street.

[Pure ja]

Actually, Y-DNA analysis easily shows that not only Lithuanians have plenty of IE genetic heritage, but so do Estonians themselves, having almost 37% R1a, which is definitely PIE. Which means that Estonians have over a third of their ancestry coming from PIE through mixing with Balts and Slavs (and maybe some Germans). Also consistent with their N1c getting diluted proportionately, around 40% against Finns' 65%.

You are again ignoring the fact, that Karelia was the gateway to central and northern Finland and to Lapland and beyond. But that Karelia and Beloozero was NOT much of a gateway to Estonia, because that would have been orthogonal to the climate zones and soil zones. Estonia has got much less (more recent) eastern input than finns. Your "dilution" is more likely "delusion".

[Pure ja]

sigh, maybe after the curonians beat them up? (assuming they did, since we don't really know who did)
we know that viking and the curonians had peace treaties before, who's to say they didn't have one after the Sigtuna raid.

Btw, that does not explain the lack of svea raids to Curonia before the Sigtuna raid.

[Äike]

Corded ware was Proto-Germano-Balto-Slavic, and those who migrated to modern Estonia certainly weren't Germanic speakers.

No.

There were no Germanics, Slavs or Balts when R1a expanded into Northern-Europe. It was just Corded Ware. Even your Balto-Slavic homeland didn't exist yet, where the future expansion of the Slaves and the Balts started.

[Äike]

just for the record, we don't think we're nordic. Maybe some Estonian do, but not us. (albeit, I've never met an estonian who thinks he or she is nordic, in fact i know some estonians who told me their are not ashamed of being eastern european)

Not some Estonians think that they're Nordic, all of us do. Being Nordic is the same as being Estonian, we cannot stop being one even if we wanted to.

I'm also very glad that you communicate with proud Eastern-Europeans Vladimir and Igor, they've had Estonian citizenship probably for at least 2 years.

By the way, Lithuanians are seen as stereotypical Eastern-Europeans here, in the recent years, your reputation in our our eyes has gone from neutral (we have absolutely no feelings towards our southern neighbors, as we have no relation to them whatsoever) to negative as Lithuanian criminals are very active in Estonia. The majority of car thefts in Estonia is done by criminals coming over the border from the Baltic nations, mostly from Lithuania.

[Hweinlant]

Finnic languages split from proto-Finnic 1,000 - 1,500 years ago(?) Proto-Finnic split 2,000 years ago from a branch Uralic languages(?) So, the common ancestor of Group 1 found among central European and south Baltic populations pre-dates Baltic Finnic language meaning Finnic speakers in south Baltic were likely to be the language shifters. ;)


I have no idea where you are pulling this stuff. Proto-Finnic split to South, North and East Finnic approx. 2000 years ago. Before that they were living on the Baltic seashore and had lively connections with Germanics. This can be seen from Germanic loanwords, which have wide distribution in all Finnic languages (ie. they were loaned before the Finnic languages diversified into daughter branches). Proto-Germanic stage is usually thought to have existed between 500BC-0AD, so basically Pre-Roman Iron Age in archeological sense. All Finnic languages also have loanwords from previous Germanic stage, so called Pre-Proto-Germanic, where the defining sound shift, Grimm's Law, had not yet happened. This stage is generally associated with Nordic Bronze Age culture of Baltic Sea. This means that early Proto-Finnics were at the Baltic seashore atleast 1000bc, thats 3000 years ago.

[inactive_member]

I have no idea where you are pulling this stuff. Proto-Finnic split to South, North and East Finnic approx. 2000 years ago. Before that they were living on the Baltic seashore and had lively connections with Germanics. This can be seen from Germanic loanwords, which have wide distribution in all Finnic languages (ie. they were loaned before the Finnic languages diversified into daughter branches). Proto-Germanic stage is usually thought to have existed between 500BC-0AD, so basically Pre-Roman Iron Age in archeological sense. All Finnic languages also have loanwords from previous Germanic stage, so called Pre-Proto-Germanic, where the defining sound shift, Grimm's Law, had not yet happened. This stage is generally associated with Nordic Bronze Age culture of Baltic Sea. This means that early Proto-Finnics were at the Baltic seashore atleast 1000bc, thats 3000 years ago.

Thanks for clarification. I was googling as I was writing the text missing the BCE part from the date.

[Trun]

Honestly, do you think you have more similarities with Italians than with Russians or Ukrainians? South-Eastern Europe is, of course, a different region with it's own rich history and culture, but there is also a lot in common with other Slavs, particularly between Bulgarians and Eastern Slavs. Identifying as simply "Southern Euro" makes no sense either.

Bulgarians and Eastern Slavs don't share much, those are myths created by wannabe Russian commies after 1944. We don't share anything with Italians on the other hand. Closest to us are Balkan Orthodox Christians - Macedonians, Serbs, Montenegrins, Romanians, Greeks, Tosk Albos in this order.

[Hercus Monte]

Not some Estonians think that they're Nordic, all of us do. Being Nordic is the same as being Estonian, we cannot stop being one even if we wanted to.

I'm also very glad that you communicate with proud Eastern-Europeans Vladimir and Igor, they've had Estonian citizenship probably for at least 2 years.
clearly you know little about your own country.
and nice try to pretend that the estonians I mentioned are Russian. well, I hate to break it to you but their names are Tiina and Nigul.(yes, ethnic estonians)



By the way, Lithuanians are seen as stereotypical Eastern-Europeans here, in the recent years, your reputation in our our eyes has gone from neutral (we have absolutely no feelings towards our southern neighbors, as we have no relation to them whatsoever) to negative as Lithuanian criminals are very active in Estonia. The majority of car thefts in Estonia is done by criminals coming over the border from the Baltic nations, mostly from Lithuania.
yes, you accused me personally of stealing your cars. yet, you're not racist at all.
don't bother replying, you're on my ignore list from now on.

[Äike]

]
clearly you know little about your own country.
and nice try to pretend that the estonians I mentioned are Russian. well, I hate to break it to you but their names are Tiina and Nigul.(yes, ethnic estonians)

Tiina is a stereotypical Estonian name, you made that up. And the word Nigul doesn't exist as a first name, it's only used as a last name.


yes, you accused me personally of stealing your cars. yet, you're not racist at all.
don't bother replying, you're on my ignore list from now on.

If you can't live with Estonians being Nordics of Finnic ancestry, but not Balts, then you probably have no other choice.

[justme]

I think they are more North then east...

I thought Norway was the only Nordic country... I remember meeting a Lithuanian and telling him Baltic and Slavic people are related... He went angry...

[Albion]

According to pools Czechs are least religios in Europe. Anyway, you build your Nordischness on Lutheran religion which is, btw South German movement, how that two go together?


Because Lutheranism took hold in the North whilst the South mostly remained Catholic.

[Äike]

According to pools Czechs are least religios in Europe. Anyway, you build your Nordischness on Lutheran religion which is, btw South German movement, how that two go together?

The least religious people in the world are:

1. Estonians
2. Swedes
3. Danes
4. Norwegians.

There's a strong link between the Nordic cultural sphere and being non-religious.

The Czech are just an exception, for some reason. Their Slavic brethren, the Slovaks are quite religious. I'd also say, that from my Estonian point of view, the Czech are also religious.

[justme]

The least religious people in the world are:

1. Estonians
2. Swedes
3. Danes
4. Norwegians.

There's a strong link between the Nordic cultural sphere and being non-religious.

The Czech are just an exception, for some reason. Their Slavic brethren, the Slovaks are quite religious. I'd also say, that from my Estonian point of view, the Czech are also religious.

Slavs are too religious.

[Styggnacke]

There's a strong link between the Nordic cultural sphere and being non-religious.
I think there is a strong link between communism and Estonians being non-religious. :)

[Twistedmind]

The least religious people in the world are:

1. Estonians
2. Swedes
3. Danes
4. Norwegians.

There's a strong link between the Nordic cultural sphere and being non-religious.
Nope, 100 years ago Scandinavians had rigid ultra conservative Luteran societies. They were not Nordic back then?




The Czech are just an exception, for some reason. Their Slavic brethren, the Slovaks are quite religious. I'd also say, that from my Estonian point of view, the Czech are also religious.
Well no ffense, but Estonian pont of view means ratt's arse. Scientific research would put objective criteria (church attnedance, number of people who are baptised, number of people who at least few times in year take part in relgious ceremonies), and than would compare findings in various European countries. According to all survies Czechs are least relgious.

BTW, Slovaks are not religous. Except of Estonia you are rather ignorant on European matters. (You tried to define Moscow as Southern Europe, despite it being more on north than Copenhagen)

Czechs lived under Communism for half of centur, its kind natural to be religious.

[inactive_member]

I think there is a strong link between communism and Estonians being non-religious. :)

Good point. ;)

[Insuperable]

Czechs lived under Communism for half of centur, its kind natural to be religious.

Didn't we also live under Communism too?

[Twistedmind]

Didn't we also live under Communism too?

Yes, and we are not religious. I mean, Croats are most religious in ex-YU, thats true. But you see, I am in Church every week and hollyday, and whenever I can from classes I am going on Evening and Morning services. There are in place with some 1000 Orthodox Serbs, 30-40 people in Chruch which could accomodate 400, ever weak. On Morning and Evening Services, its 2-3 people. Offten just priest and chorister. Not something you would consider religous society.

[Insuperable]

Yes, and we are not religious. I mean, Croats are most religious in ex-YU, thats true.

Maybe you are more focused on Christianity, but wouldn't Bosniaks be the most religious?


But you see, I am in Church every week and hollyday, and whenever I can from classes I am going on Evening and Morning services. There are in place with some 1000 Orthodox Serbs, 30-40 people in Chruch which could accomodate 400, ever weak

Aren't you a priest? If so it is nothing strange for you trying to attend Church as much as possible.


On Morning and Evening Services, its 2-3 people. Offten just priest and chorister. Not something you would consider religous society.

From my observations when passing by Churches it depends from Church to Church. On work days in some Churches there can be 2-3 people inside also, while Sundays are a different story.

[Twistedmind]

Maybe you are more focused on Christianity, but wouldn't Bosniaks be the most religious.
Emh, most of them drink alchohol, go in Mosque few times in year, do not fast, and many of them eat pork. I saw it personally. They are maybe least religous of all.



Aren't you a priest? If so it is nothing strange for you trying to attend Church as much as possible.

Technicaly, I am not. I am waiting ordination. But, yes I will be. And yes, I am going in Church regularily, but it acctually gives me oportunity to see how religious Serbs are. :) And they are barely. Ok, maybe its significant for Europe as whole. But Greeks, and even Russians have higher percentage of trully relgious people. Not self-declerative nationalists, whose all Christianity is to make sign of cross when they are scared.




From my observations when passing by Churches it depends from Church to Church. On work days in some Churches there can be 2-3 people inside also, while Sundays are a different story.

Yes I agree, but my point was we, ex-Yugos are hardly among top religious people in Europe. Comunism left traces here. Nothign strange.

[Insuperable]

Yes I agree, but my point was we, ex-Yugos are hardly among top religious people in Europe. Comunism left traces here. Nothign strange.

I think we are really among top religious people in Europe. Who all do you think is more religious than us today?

[Twistedmind]

I think we are really among top religious people in Europe. Who all do you think is more religious than us today?

Poles, Russians, Italians, Spaniards, Greeks. We are maybe religous considering selfidentification. But problem is, man who declares himself to be Orthodox or Roman Catholic, and goes in Church on Christmass and Easter (in Serbain Orthdox case, also add when he is going before his patron saint day, to have his koljivo blessed), really does not fit description of religous man. He is not Atheist, since he could be verry assured in existance of God, but again you cant be religious if you dont practice religon or barely practice it. Sorry for hi-jacking topic.