History of the Uralic Languages

[Ülev]

[Laag]

Yes, Uralic languages are native European languages.

[Ülev]

Yes, Uralic languages are native European languages.

http://eujournal.org/index.php/esj/a...File/4182/4018

THE STORY OF TWO NORTHWARD MIGRATIONS - ORIGINS OF FINNO - PERMIC AND BALTO - SLAVIC LANGUAGES IN NORTHEAST EUROPE, BASED ON HUMAN Y - CHROMOSOME HAPLOGROUPS

This paper attemps to find a plausible explanation for the origins of Balto
-
Slavic and Finno-Permian languages in Northeast Europe by a research based on the analysis of
statistical databases of human Y
-
chromosome haplogroups . The mainstream view that
associates Balto-Slavic languages with haplogroup R1a and íthe Corded Ware Culture, and
Finno-Permian languages with haplogroup N, fails to solve several contradictions: How
come, that the presence of subclades of haplogroup R are as high in most Finno
-
Permian populations, as the presence of haplogroup N? How come, that Corded Ware culture spread
so far north, that it covered the early
-medieval range of most Finno-Permic languages? This

R1a (Z280) was Uralic/Permian, N1 Finnic
when I2a came (probably with R1a m-458) we have those Slavic dialects

??

[Ülev]

[Dunai]

Will sound biased but this language family is the one with which I'm most fascinated about. Even from an outsider's perspective I would be, since it is pretty astonishing how much it managed to spread out (most Northern Eurasia), from very humble beginnings, and also managed to produce two Nobel Prize laureates in literature: Kertész Imre and Frans Eemil Sillanpää. And the incursion of Hungarian into the middle of Europe and its spread and survival to this day is short of a miracle.

[Lemminkäinen]

Saami language was spoken in much larger areas 2500-1000 bp, including South Finland. Saami didn't diverge from Baltic Finnic (or vice versa) in Fennoscandinavia.

Baltic-Finnic (Balto-something in video) languages are shown too early in the north. Actually Finnish speaker migrated northwards from the South Finland as late as 1000 -500 bp.

[Dunai]

Saami language was spoken in much larger areas 2500-1000 bp, including South Finland. Saami didn't diverge from Baltic Finnic (or vice versa) in Fennoscandinavia.

Baltic-Finnic (Balto-something in video) languages are shown too early in the north. Actually Finnish speaker migrated northwards from the South Finland as late as 1000 -500 bp.

Was curious of a Finnish person's perspective upon Finnish-Sami historical relations. Can you walk me through the process of how Finns and Sami first got in contact, where, and how did their relations evolve until today? Was there any time in history when Finns discriminated the Sami similarly to Europeans in the Americas?

[Lemminkäinen]

Was curious of a Finnish person's perspective upon Finnish-Sami historical relations. Can you walk me through the process of how Finns and Sami first got in contact, where, and how did their relations evolve until today? Was there any time in history when Finns discriminated the Sami similarly to Europeans in the Americas?

First contacts between Saamis (or whoever settled Finland before Finns) and Finns happened in Southern and Southwestern Finland. The first Saami migration reached Finland obviously already 2500 years ago, before 2000 bp anyway. Baltic Finns are supposed to have first time been in SW-Finland around 300 ad. Did they come over the sea from Estonia or straight from southeast is a question colored by tribal sentiments. Anyway the later history is well-known. The first Finnish migration to north started around 1000 years ago, along the seaside reaching soon the present-day Swedish boundary. The second wave started around 600 years ago from the east and reached Lapland around 400 years ago. The first wave was more hostile towards Saami people. The Finns saw that they arrived in "no-man's land" (like in America). The second wave happened during the Swedish rule and all backwoods were owned by the king. Backwood meant all places without permanent settlements. Saamis were mostly outside this definition.

[Dunai]

First contacts between Saamis (or whoever settled Finland before Finns) and Finns happened in Southern and Southwestern Finland. The first Saami migration reached Finland obviously already 2500 years ago, before 2000 bp anyway. Baltic Finns are supposed to have first time been in SW-Finland around 300 ad. Did they come over the sea from Estonia or straight from southeast is a question colored by tribal sentiments. Anyway the later history is well-known. The first Finnish migration to north started around 1000 years ago, along the seaside reaching soon the present-day Swedish boundary. The second wave started around 600 years ago from the east and reached Lapland around 400 years ago. The first wave was more hostile towards Saami people. The Finns saw that they arrived in "no-man's land" (like in America). The second wave happened during the Swedish rule and all backwoods were owned by the king. Backwood meant all places without permanent settlements. Saamis were mostly outside this definition.

Very interesting. So it seems Old Finns have arrived in today's Finland "only" 1700 years ago, and spread throughout most of today's Finland only 500-600 years ago. Do you have any explanation why it took so long for Finns to spread out from the Southern basis much earlier, was it because of lack of numbers, the harsh climate or because they wanted to keep distance from the earlier inhabitants of those areas, the Sami? What is your opinion of those Finnish historians (or rather pseudo-historians) who claim Finnish presence in today's Finland thousands of years BP?

[Lemminkäinen]

Very interesting. So it seems Old Finns have arrived in today's Finland "only" 1700 years ago, and spread throughout most of today's Finland only 500-600 years ago. Do you have any explanation why it took so long for Finns to spread out from the Southern basis much earlier, was it because of lack of numbers, the harsh climate or because they wanted to keep distance from the earlier inhabitants of those areas, the Sami? What is your opinion of those Finnish historians (or rather pseudo-historians) who claim Finnish presence in today's Finland thousands of years BP?

The reason was apparently lack of numbers and the harsh climate. Northern areas were not equally suitable for farming. People belonging to the first wave moving along the seaside were fur hunters and fishers. Development in farming made it possible later to expand farming to new areas, f. ex. slash and burn method and new corn cultivars. The later wave (600-400 bp) was mainly a result of Swedish politics and new farming methods. The king encouraged people to move and found
new settlements and farms for two reasons: to get more taxes (although it was not possible immediately) and to avoid Muscovites to do the same. Karelians lived on both sides. Moving to backwoods did not attract western Finns and most of people in the second wave were Karelian.

The continuation theory is outdated. It was valid only a short time from 1980. It was a misstep and recently not mainstream science.