3. Lusatian Wends or Sorbs, Upper and Lower, partly in Saxony and partly in Prussia. The Upper Wends number 96,000, the Lower 40,000.

Total number of Slavs in both divisions 89,499,683.

Originally the Slavs were spread over a great part of northern Germany, extending as far as Utrecht, which was anciently called Wiltaburg and was a city of the Wilzen. Thus Slavonic was certainly spoken in Pomerania, Mecklenburg, Brandenburg, Saxony, west Bohemia, Lower Austria, the greater part of Upper Austria, north Styria and north Carinthia, a large part of what is now Hungary, and in the localities now occupied by Kiel, Lübeck, Magdeburg, Halle, Leipsic (=Lipsk, the city of lime-trees), Baireuth, Linz, Salzburg, Gratz (=Gradetz, Gorodetz), and Vienna. The names of the old Slavonic tribes originally settled in these parts of Germany are given in Schafarik’s Slawische Alterthümer, to which work the reader desiring further information must be referred. They are mentioned frequently in such writers as Helmold, Dietmar, Arnold, Wittekind, and others. We hear of a commercial city of importance, which some writers have rather fantastically termed the Slavonic Amsterdam, called Wolin, on an island of the same name, which was known as Winetha to the Germans and as Julin to the Danes. Schafarik even wished to see the Slavonic tribe of the Wilzen in English Wiltshire. This, however, cannot be accepted; the original name is Wilsaetas and that of the town Wil-tun, the town on the river Wily. It has long been a generally received opinion that the modern Greeks have a large Slavonic admixture. This opinion was boldly asserted some years ago by Fallmerayer and has not been upset even by the labours of M. Sathas. He dwells much upon the form ∑θλαβηvoι as distinct from Σκλαβηvoι; but this corruption seems to be owing to some such false analogy as εσθλός . Miklosich, in his Etymologisches Wörterbuch der slawischen Sprachen (1886), considers the two forms to be identical. In like fashion Procopius connects Serbi with Σπόροι and Constantine Porphyrogenitus turns Svatopluk into Σϕεvδόπλoκoς . Mediaeval Greece, especially the Peloponnesus, abounded with Slavonic names, which are now being replaced by others drawn from classical sources. Kollar and Wolanski wished to find a Slavonic population in Italy; but their opinions are considered the wild dreams of unscientific patriots, though these views found their way into such works as the Varronianus of Dr Donaldson. Equally unfounded appears to be the belief that a Slavonic element may be traced in Spain and Asia Minor. If the Slavs have lost in the west of Europe, they have gained in the east considerably, as Russia has encroached upon the Ugro-Finnish tribes of the northern and eastern portions of its empire, and many of these races are now in various stages of Russification.

As to the original home of the Slavonic race there are three leading opinions :—(1) the Slavs settled in Europe at a period contemporaneous with or shortly after the arrival of the Teutonic and other Indo-European families; (2) they first made their appearance in Europe with the Huns, Avars, and other Asiatic barbarians in the 3d century after Christ; (3) they originated in Europe, as did the so-called Indo-European race altogether. This last view has been maintained by Penka and Schrader (see below).

The first of these views has been supported by Schafarik. He considers that the Slavs left Asia in very early times for the following reasons :—(a ) the fact that the Slavonic languages are more closely connected with European tongues than with those of Asia, even granting the many affinities of Slavonic with Zend or (as has been recently shown by Hübschmann) with Armenian; (b ) the similarity of the manners and customs of the Slavs to those of the Celts, Germans, and other European populations; (c ) the occurrence of many mountains, rivers, and towns having Slavonic names which are mentioned long before the Slavs themselves are found in history; (d ) the fact that the Slavs are always spoken of by the earlier writers in terms which show that these writers considered them to be an ancient European nation, and were struck with the large area over which their populations extended. Moreover, the arrival at a comparatively late period of such large hordes would have made a great impression upon the surrounding nations at the time, and this would certainly have found an echo in their historians and chroniclers.

Schafarik believes that the Slavs or Wends (as they were called by their Teutonic neighbours) were settled at a very early period on the southern coast of the Baltic. The word “Wend” he connects with a Slavonic (v oda) and Lithuanian (wandů) root meaning “water”; thus it would signify the people dwelling about the water. He appears to include under the Slavs all people bearing the name Wends, notably the Veneti on the Adriatic. Other writers, however, consider that the word was applied generally to any maritime people; and this view appears probable. The name also occurs in Switzerland. The Wends then, according to Schafarik, were the earliest inhabitants of the Baltic coast; but they were expelled by the Goths in the 4th century b.c. Nestor makes other tribes of Slavs to have been established at an early period on the Danube and to have been driven thence by the Vlachs, a people whom scholars are inclined to identify with the Latin colonists from whom in a great measure the modern Roumans are descended. We find other tribes settled in the neighbourhood of the Carpathians. The first historian who relates anything about the Slavs is probably Herodotus, whose account of the north of Europe is very vague. Among the Scythian tribes mentioned by him two have been identified with the Slavs by Schafarik with considerable probability,—the Budini and the Neuri. Of the former we are told that they were a large nation and had blue eyes and red hair. The description of the country they inhabited corresponds pretty closely to Volhynia and portions of White Russia. The Neuri are placed by Schafarik on the river Bug, which flows through Podolia. There at the present day we find a river named Nureff, and the surrounding country is called Nurska. This opinion is supported by Schrader, who places the original home of the Slavs in Scythia. Pösche goes so far as to consider the eastern part of Europe—especially that portion of Russia which constitutes the basin of the Pripet, the Beresina, and the Dnieper—as the primary abode of the Indo-European race. Dr Kurd von Schlözer interprets Herod. iv. § 6— the story of Targitaus and his three children—as an allusion to the Slavs. The falling of a plough with its yoke from heaven would hardly be a characteristic tale of a nomad people. We seem to have an echo of the stories of the peasants Mikoula, Selianinovich, Piast, and Přemysl, all dear to Slavonic legend. The view that the ancestors of the Slavs are to be found among the Scythian tribes has been supported in recent times by the Russian author Zabielin. He also thinks that their original settlement was in Volhynia and White Russia. The specimens of the Scythian language which have come down in Herodotus and elsewhere can certainly best be explained by Indo-European roots. The name Slav does not occur in any writer before the time of Jordanes, unless it be in the ∑τavavoί of Ptolemy. Jordanes says of them—“quorum nomina licet nunc per varias familias et loca mutentur, principaliter tamen Sclavini et Antes.” It is probably connected with the root slovo, “the word,” which is related to the Greek κλύω (Slav. slît, “to be called”); and in a Polabish vocabulary we get the form slivo. The Slav thus comes to mean “the intelligibly speaking man” in contrast to “the dumb man,” Niemetz, which in the modern Slavonic languages has come to mean simply “German.” Miklosich (Etym. Wörterb.) thinks that the termination -ene in Slovene shows the word to be derived from the name of a place and rejects the explanation from slovo. Some Slavonic scholars have sought an explanation of the name in the word slava, “glory.”

Penka, however, attempts to upset the ordinary etymology. According to him the Slavs are non-Aryan and belong rather to the Ugro-Finnish race. Their name, he tells us, shows that they were subjected by the Aryans and became their dependants. He considers it to be derived from the present participle of the root klu (“ to hear,” Slav. slî), and thus identifies it with “client.” The name Wend is used by Tacitus, who speaks of the Peucini, the Venedi, and the Fenni. Ptolemy also alludes to the Wendic mountains. He tells us that Sarmatia, i.e., all the territory east of the Vistula and north of Dacia, was inhabited by widely scattered races and that the Wenedae were established along the whole of the Wendish gulf. Jordanes calls them Winidae. The other name, Antes, applied by this historian to the Slavs, which, like the word Wend, they never used themselves, Schafarik connects with a Gothic root. Duchinski, Henri Martin, and others have denied to the Russians the right of being called Aryan. Penka, as stated before, carries this opinion much further and refuses the appellation to the whole Slavonic family. Finding that many of the Slavs have chestnut-coloured curly hair and dark eyes, that the White Russians are blond, that the southern Slavs are darker and have a shorter head than those in the north, he is inclined to see in the Slavs a very mixed race, and quotes Procopius in support of his opinion.

The second of the opinions alluded to above has been adopted by Wocel, according to whom the Slavs in the north of Germany on the Elbe, Moldau, Sale, Spree, as also those living south of the Danube, were not living in juxtaposition in the Bronze Age, but wandered into those regions some centuries after the birth of Christ. In proof of this assertion he cites many names of objects which are common to the Slavonic languages and yet could not have been known to any people in the Bronze Period,—as, for example, iron (O.S. želeso), objects made of iron, as scythe (O.S. kosa), chisel (O.S. dlato), tongs (O.S. klěšta), knife (nůž ), saw (pila), hoe (motyka), sword (meč), stirrup (střemen), spur (ostruha), needle (jehla), anchor (kotva). Common to all the Slavonic languages are the names for gold (zlato), silver (střibro), copper (měd), tin (olovo). All these words must have been formed while the Slavonic people dwelt together in a comparatively narrow space,— according to Wocel between the Baltic, the Vistula, and the Dnieper; otherwise, according to this author, if we suppose that the Lutitzes, Obotrites, Sorbs, and Chekhs were autochthonous, it is difficult to see how they could have had the same names for many objects which did not exist in the Bronze Age, e.g., iron, as the Slavs on the Dnieper, the Balkans, and the Adriatic had. Wocel considers the Slavs to have been a pastoral people who entered Europe through the passes of the Caucasus. He compares the agricultural words which all branches of the family have in common, as ploug, "plough” (and also ralo); lemesh, “ploughshare”; zhito, “corn”; pshenitze, “wheat”; yechmen, “barley”; oves, “oats”; proso, “millet”; snop, “sheaf.” On the other hand, as Wocel maintains, objects connected with civilization the knowledge of which only dates from the introduction of Christianity have not a common name in the Slavonic languages, such as “paper,” “pavement,” “steel,” “velvet,” &c. So also there is no common term for “property” or “inheritance,” for the simple reason that the Slavs knew nothing of private property,—the land being held in common under the care of the vladika or stareshina, as in the Servian zadrugas at the present day.

The condition of the original Slavs has also been investigated from the linguistic point of view by Gregor Kreck. According to this writer, besides the cereals previously mentioned the Slavs cultivated the rape (repa), the pea (sochivo, grakh), the lentil (lenshta), the bean (bob), the poppy (mak ), hemp (konop), the leek (louk), &c.; corn ground by a hand-mill or water-mill (zhrinouv, malin) into meal (manka) and baked into bread (khleb), honey (med)— the collection of which was an important occupation among the Slavs, as we find by the Polish laws—meat (menso), milk (mleko), and fruit (ovoshtiye) formed their food. The drinks were ol and vino , beer and wine. Kreck considers that the minute details of house-building point to a habit of living in fixed residences,—thus the house (dom), the stable (khlev), the threshing-floor (goumno), the court (dvor), the village (ves). In opposition, however, to this view of Kreck we have the opinion of Hehn, who contends that all the words used among the Slavs for stone buildings are borrowed, and seeks to prove that till comparatively recent times they had only huts made of osiers and led a half nomadic life. Certainly municipal institutions are no feature of Slavonic life, and the paucity of large towns in Russia is striking even at the present day. According to Kreck, words are to be found very early which show the development of the nation from the family. Thus the commune (o bstchina, rod) becomes the family (ρlemya) and the family the people (narod, yenzik). There are common terms for law (pvavo pravda, “right ”; zakon, “law”). Besides agricultural pursuits we have mention of the arts of braiding (plesti), weaving (tkati), tailoring in a series of common expressions for portions of apparel, carpentering (tesati), working in iron, &c. Of the primitive Slavonic flora we have the oak (doub), the lime tree (lipa), the acorn (yavor), the beech (bouky), the willow (vr’ba), the birch (brěza), the pine (bor), as also special kinds of fruit, the apple (yabl’ko), the pear (grousha), the cherry (vishnya), the nut (orekh), and the plum (sliva).

Pictet placed the original home of the German and Litu-Slavic races on the northern bank of the Oxus. Thence he thought they came over the extensive plains of Scythia to the Pontus Euxinus.

The doctrine of the European origin of the Aryans appears to be steadily gaining ground. It is supported by Professors Rhys and Sayce of Oxford. The last-named is inclined to see the home of the Indo-European race in “the district in the neighbourhood of the Baltic.” Dr Ludwig Wilser makes Sweden and the north German shores the centre of the primitive Aryans, from which the Germanic tribes, Celts, Latins, Greeks, Slavs, Lithuanians, Iranians, and the invaders of India gradually detached themselves, migrating mostly southwards and eastwards.

Leaving now the attempts to determine the primitive home of the Slavs and the date of their immigration into Europe, and also the names which they have in common, whether used by themselves or given by foreigners, we will trace as far as possible the derivation of the chief appellations of the Slavonic peoples. (1) Russians.— For an analysis of this name see Russia (vol. xxi. p. 87 sq.). (2) Bulgarians.—By the 3d century we find Slavs settled between the Danube and the Balkans. Immigrations were going on till the middle of the 7th century, as these hordes were driven southwards by new invaders. About 681 the Slavonic settlers fell under the yoke of the Bulgarians, a Ugro-Finnish race, if we accept the views of Schafarik, Drinoff, and others. The origin of the Bulgarians themselves is obscure. Some have made them Tatars. Professor Ilovaiski believes them to have been Slavs. The theory which connects the name “Bulgarian,” “Bolgare,” with the Volga is now no longer held. Early modifications of the name, such as Burgari, Wurgari, &c., show its analogy with forms like Onoguri, Uturguri, Kutriguri. The elements of the word are bul and gari. Professor Vambéry attempts to derive the name from the Turkish verb bulga-mak, “to revolt”; but this seems little better than a guess. We are told that Koubrat, a Bulgarian prince, made himself independent of the Avars, and that on his death his territories were divided among his five sons. The eldest remained in the ancient settlement on the Volga, where the ruins of their former capital, Bolgari, are still to be seen. The third son, Asparoukh, crossed the Dnieper and the Dniester, and settled in a place called Onklus, probably the Old Slavonic ongl, “ angulus,”

between the Transylvanian Alps and the Danube. From this place they migrated to the localities which they have since occupied, where they became mixed with the original settlers, to whom they gave their name, just as the German Franks imposed theirs on the Gauls, and a branch of the Slavonians took the Finnish name of their conquerors.

(3) Serbs.— See Servia (vol. xxi. p. 688). The name “Croat” has been already explained under Servia (l.c.).

(4) The Slovenes have preserved an old form of the family name, and therefore no explanation is necessary. (5) Poles.— The first authentic date of their history is the year 963. Perhaps they are the Bulanes of Ptolemy. See Poland, vol. xix. p. 285. (6) Bohemians or Chekhs.—

The word “Bohemia ”—“home of the Boii,” a Celtic tribe —has nothing to do with the Slavs who came into the country about 495, after the Marcomanni, who had dispossessed the Boii. The derivation of the name “Chekh” or Czech has never been satisfactorily traced. Dobrovsky sought to connect it with a word četi, signifying “to begin,” and thus makes the name imply the original inhabitants. Schafarik, however, does not endorse this etymology. Perwolf connects it with a root čak, “ to beat,” and thus makes the name mean “the warriors.” Whatever the word “Chekh” may signify, it occurs, as Schafarik has shown, in other Slavonic countries. (7) Lusatian Wends or Sorbs.— The word “Lusatia” (German Lausitz) is derived from the Slavonic lug or luza, signifying a low, marshy country.

Slavonic Languages and Literatures.

The first to attempt a classification of the Slavonic languages was Dobrovsky, who was followed by Schafarik and Schleicher. These agree in the main, except that Schafarik was so little acquainted with Bulgarian—at that time almost a lost language—that he grouped it with Servian. The following are the characteristics of the two divisions, which we take from Schafarik’s account with some trifling omissions :— [table]

This division, however, has been repeatedly challenged. Schleicher insisted upon the two following as important principles: (1) primitive Slavonic dj , tj become in all west Slavonic dialects dz , ts (=c)∙ , among the Chekhs and Sorbs dz becomes at a later period z ; (2) d , t before l , n are preserved in the western dialects, but disappear in the south-eastern. Upon this last canon Johannes Schmidt remarks as follows: “The dentals are preserved in Slovenish, certainly in the western part of its area; thus modlim in the Freisingian documents, in the perfect participles, as predel, bodel, pletel, cretel, fem. dla, tla , and in the suffix dlo , as kresadlo, motovidlo, šidlo . D is also preserved in Slovenish before n , as omladnem, osladnem, zbodnem, padnem, kradnem . T , on the other hand, appears everywhere to vanish before n , as obernem , ‘I go round.’” He also criticizes two of the principles of difference given by Schafarik. The nom. sing. masc. of pronouns appears in western Slavonic to be increased by n , thus Chekh, Polish,...