Ethnography of Eastern Europe Without Slavs

Dominant ethnolinguistic group of Eastern Europe in this scenario

  • Finno-Ugric

    Votes: 18 10.2%
  • Germanic

    Votes: 52 29.5%
  • Hellenic

    Votes: 7 4.0%
  • Iranian

    Votes: 4 2.3%
  • Romance

    Votes: 4 2.3%
  • Turkic

    Votes: 7 4.0%
  • Some combination of the above

    Votes: 72 40.9%
  • Other

    Votes: 1 0.6%
  • Baltic

    Votes: 11 6.3%

  • Total voters
    176
Given the paucity of information about this part of the world during Late Antiquity and the Early Middle Ages (indeed, we cannot even say with certainty what sort of language groups such as the Huns and the Avars spoke), it may be difficult to discuss this topic, but we can certainly try!

If, for whatever reason or reasons, the early Slavs were not able to capitalize on the power vacuum left by the invasions of the Huns and migrate across much of Central Europe and Eastern Europe, assimilating the inhabitants... well, who would have most likely taken their place over the long-term as the dominant ethnolinguistic group in Eastern Europe? (Obviously not every Eastern European country is majority Slavic, but I think it is fair to describe Slavs as dominant in the area.)

Here are some thoughts...

Baltic peoples: See the explanation given by @Augenis below.

Finno-Ugric peoples: The Magyars obviously made a huge impact with their own migration into Europe, but there was also a significant Finno-Ugric presence in the Baltic and northern Russia at this time.

Germanic peoples: East Germanic peoples such as the Goths were numerous in this area before the Huns pushed many of them west, and centuries later kingdoms of West Germanic peoples (for instance, the Franks) and the Norse (Varangians) would attempt to push into now-Slavic lands in Central Europe and Eastern Europe.

Hellenic culture: The Eastern Roman Empire remained a significant entity for long after the fall of the Western Roman Empire, so in the absence of powerful Slavic kingdoms, could they have expanded further into Eastern Europe and assimilated many of the inhabitants?

Iranian peoples: There were many Sarmatians in Eastern Europe until they were assimilated by Early Slavs.

Romance speakers: Though the exact ethnogenesis of the Romanian people is a matter of debate, it is clear that there were speakers of Vulgar Latin in this area at the time.

Turkic peoples: Many Turkic peoples migrated into Eastern Europe throughout the Middle Ages. In the early part of this era, the Bulgars and Khazars were significant powers in the area.

Some combination of the above: In this scenario, no one group of people becomes as dominant in Eastern Europe as the Slavs would in our world.

Other: Some ethnolinguistic group that I did not mention.
 
Last edited:
>did not even mention the Balts, the actual dominant cultural group in Eastern Europe before the Slavic migration, and whom the Slavs splintered from

Shameful display.

(assuming you mean, like, the OTL East Slavic area)
 
I think there would definitely be a lot more Greeks and Italians in the Balkan Peninsula, particularly different Italians up and down the Adriatic coast and more Greeks up the Black Sea coast, at least as far as the mouth of the Danube. If Magyars still reach the Pannonian Basin, they may also expand southwards and settle modern Serbia, Bosnia, and Croatia, while the Romanians have a larger presence in and around where they currently are.

East Germanic peoples settle modern Poland and Bohemia, but clash with Magyars, Romanians, and Turkic peoples over the western Pontic steppe and the Crimean peninsula.

The Slavs, meanwhile, probably would have decided to expand eastward towards the Urals and remain fairly isolated far to the east of the Volga.
 

Zen9

Banned
So decades ago I remember reading that there was a strong theory of the names Croatia and Serb had a Sarmatian origin as there was some evidence of Sarmatians as far west as eastern Germany. The White Serbs and White Croads being mentioned during the reign of Attila.

So we might see these Iranian languages present from eastern Germany all the way across the Steppes. And perhaps surviving the Magyar invasion in the Hungarian plains. The Iaxuges I think they might have been called.
This could be a transmission medium for Zoarastrianism. ...and Christianity the other way. ...
Arianism might dominatethe east..?

With language pockets of some Germanic languages across eastern Germany and Poland.
I don't see the Slaves and Balts not being there though.

Equally the Romanians will still exist. But perhaps the Thracians as well?
Albanian will still exist.
But I'm not sure about what holds sway in Yugoslavia. ...
 
Finno-Urgic north of the Kazan-Moscow-Minsk line,
mix of Iranic/Turkic/Tartar in the steppe/southern plains
Western parts poland/bohemia/carpathia could be gothic/east germanic
 
>did not even mention the Balts, the actual dominant cultural group in Eastern Europe before the Slavic migration, and whom the Slavs splintered from

Shameful display.

(assuming you mean, like, the OTL East Slavic area)

You make a fair point. I will edit the original post and the poll, and assuming that you already voted, you should have the option to change your vote if you so wish.
 
>did not even mention the Balts, the actual dominant cultural group in Eastern Europe before the Slavic migration, and whom the Slavs splintered from

Shameful display.

(assuming you mean, like, the OTL East Slavic area)

Russia gets replaced with Great Galindia. Angry swamp people conquer the world yet again. I'd read it!

I think this isn't that silly: archaeological presumed-Balts like Slavs seem to have fairly simple material cultures which aren't particularly stratified but aren't particularly exclusively tribal either. The early Slavic expansion could be mimicked by a Baltic one too.

Beyond that, some kind of Iranians (Great Chrobatia and Great Severia!) or Turcs (Great Chuvashia!) might be good candidates. I'm not really convinced by the Goths and the rest. They never seem to be very numerous in the east, archaeologically-speaking. Maybe as some kind of elite layer at best.
 

krieger

Banned
>did not even mention the Balts, the actual dominant cultural group in Eastern Europe before the Slavic migration, and whom the Slavs splintered from

Shameful display.

(assuming you mean, like, the OTL East Slavic area)

It isn't actually proven, who was first and Slavs being a result of mixing is very unlikely, because Slavic languages have a very, very complicated structure and it is unlikely to happen in creol languages who have (mostly) a simple gramatical structure, which Slavic languages are lacking (for example Polish is considered to be one of hardest languages to learn). And many argue that it worked actually in reverse, and that Balts are Slavs who got some Finnish influence (it is based on Old Prussian not displaying the same amount of Finnish influence as Lithuanian or Latvian). But if I had to bet on the group dominating Eastern Europe without Slavs (and with Hunnic invasion still happening) it would be definitely Balts, as a closest relatives of Slavs (and IOTL Balts were already present on many territories, which are now dominated by Slavs). I'd see Eastern Balts taking over the whole thing which we know now as Russia (but it'd also mean no Latvians in Latvia, because fertile lands of Ukraine would be open for them) and Old Prussians slowly expanding by Baltic coast and through Vistula (maybe crossing Carpathians at some point).
 
What about the Balts expanding West not the Slavs, they were in a good position to do that but did not...the POD should be Balts absorbing the Vistula Veneti instead of the Slavs.
 

Albert.Nik

Banned
Greeks would be dominant in Macedonia and parts of Bulgaria without any doubt. Hungarians probably be dominant in regions of Serbia,Bosnia,Slovenia,Slovakia,etc. Scythians and Sarmatians would be dominant in parts of Ukraine and small parts of Romania. Germanic people would also be dominant in large parts where Hungarians live other than Hungary. Russia could be a combination of Germanic(Nordic),Finnic,Baltic plus White Turkic people like Tartars(who are actually genetically more Scythians). Balts in Poland along with Finnic and Germanic peoples.
 

krieger

Banned
Greeks would be dominant in Macedonia and parts of Bulgaria without any doubt. Hungarians probably be dominant in regions of Serbia,Bosnia,Slovenia,Slovakia,etc. Scythians and Sarmatians would be dominant in parts of Ukraine and small parts of Romania. Germanic people would also be dominant in large parts where Hungarians live other than Hungary. Russia could be a combination of Germanic(Nordic),Finnic,Baltic plus White Turkic people like Tartars(who are actually genetically more Scythians). Balts in Poland along with Finnic and Germanic peoples.

From where do you want to have these Finns in Poland? And we Hungarian invasion may even not happen, and them dominating current Slovakia, Serbia or Bosnia is total ASB.
 

Vitruvius

Donor
What happens with the Bulgarians when they arrive in the Balkans if there isn't a large Slavic population there? Are they able to preserve a turkic identity? Or do they assimilate into Greek, Vlach/Romanian, Albanian/Illyrian or Thracian identities?
 

krieger

Banned
Why is an Hungarian unified Empire in Balkans ASB?

Because without Slavs these lands wouldn't be literally uninhabited before Hungarian invasion, and if some other people settled there Hungarians would be as "succesful" in assimilating them as they were "succesful" in assimilating Slavs.
 
Because without Slavs these lands wouldn't be literally uninhabited before Hungarian invasion, and if some other people settled there Hungarians would be as "successful" in assimilating them as they were "successful" in assimilating Slavs.

The Slavs dominated in OTL because they took advantage of a vacuum that arose out of the Balkans being ravaged by war and disease. Depopulation was furthered with many migrating south to more prosperous regions. The same could be said for the regions near the vistula as the Slavs moved into those regions *after* they were vacated by the Goths.
 
Wasn't that debunked in the recent years, ie, there was no (full) vacuum left by migrating Germanics, there are evidences for the continued settlement?
Interesting. I would love to your sources for this as that would be a very entertaining read.
 
You want Slavs not expanding, or Slavs not existing itself?

Romance, Germanic, Finno-Ugric and Hellenic, I agree, would exist. But where are the Iranians in Eastern Europe coming from?

From the region historically called the outer Iran. Basically the western part of the euroasian steppe.


Also the entire question is mind wrecking. I am trying to put into use everything I learned at the Uni and the butterfly effect is just so colossal I am not sure from where to begin with.

Even finding the PoD is mindbogling.
 
Top