This map isn't particular ground breaking, new, or scholarly (although I can confirm from my previous knowledge that it is generally correct in broad outline, although no doubt with some debatable points). But, it is pretty and thought provoking by providing information about this issue in an easily digestible form.
I am particularly struck by how small the geographic range of the Germanic languages was this late in history (but prior to the "migration period"). The Oghur language was part of the Turkic language family.
From here.
Another map suggested in the comments to this post, via comments in the source post, is reproduced below, although it is more of a political map than a strictly linguistic one.
The intentionally archaic looking type setting is harder to read so I will describe it: The colored in parts are West, East and South Slavic respectively. The Azars are in the "island" surrounded by the Slavic tribes. The unshaded area near the Baltic Sea contains "Balts", "Finns" are to the east of the Eastern Slavs, "Hungarians" are to the South of the Finns (although the Hungarian ethnicity as we know it didn't really exist in 600 CE and the Hungarian language hadn't arrived either by then either). Franks are to the West of the West Slavs. Romans are in Anatolia.
The commenters on Facebook seem to have found some 'debatable points.'
ReplyDelete@MarkB They did, but honestly, none of great moment to me. They argue for a tweak of the Arabic range, note that Romanian is a Romance and not a Slavic language (leading to the biggest change in the map if implemented), and a few other smaller points, but none that are really material to the aspects of the map that I find most notable.
ReplyDeleteLate-Antique guy checking in.
ReplyDeleteThe map does look good. I actually agree with it on Arabic, which was indeed Arabic at this time (not "North Arabian", "Thamudic" etc anymore).
One omission is the East Caucasus. Caucasian Albanian = Udi in particular was a serious force in east Caucasian Christendom at the time. The map should just put all that stuff in grey and mark it off if it thinks that region is out of scope (which implicitly it does).
"Middle Aramaic" is an ignorant designation. North is Syriac; Palaestina spoke Koine and Christian Palestinian Aramaic. These are different languages.
Ditto "Berber". By then Kabylie had charted a different direction from the mainline Tamazight dialects so needs its own part of this map. I think Tuareg had differentiated itself as well.
The criticism of the commentator Dervanus Arhontus looks appropriate to me based on what I know from history. Let me copy what he says:
ReplyDeleteAside from the glaring typing errors, the spread of the Slavic language is almost cut in half, the nigh-totality of Southeastern Europe, including Romania, was conquered and colonized by the Invading Slavs in the 6th and 7th centuries, barring isolated spots of Roman rule on the Eastern Adriatic coast, the Western coast of the Black Sea, the eastern interior of Thrace, Monemvasia, Thessaloniki, and the Aegean Isles, where Koine Greek and Latin would've persisted.
He complements his criticism with this map, which seems accurate to me:
https://scontent-amt2-1.xx.fbcdn.net/v/t39.30808-6/277804350_358673039522799_6756468834962923678_n.jpg?_nc_cat=102&ccb=1-5&_nc_sid=dbeb18&_nc_ohc=HSMyFUHCAt4AX-lG6eE&_nc_ht=scontent-amt2-1.xx&oh=00_AT_j0cvaIjS0KFa_EiInZdfluxO-8SrQQ7J-4QOr2y2cJg&oe=624D99CB