--supplementary
article to PART ONE --
UINI, UENNE, UENETI, etc:
The Boat People Identity in Historical Records and Language
by
ANDRES PÄÄBO
Synopsis: It is in the nature of the real world that
if we can see something in one way, we can also see it in another
way. For example if we can see a fruit, we can touch it and smell it
too, and that confirms it is real. It is common in false science that
something is argued to exist in one way, but there fails to be any
evidence of it in another way. The Main Article of PART ONE, is based
mainly on interpreting archeology in the framework of geography
and human nature as it applies to nomadic hunting people. But if
there really was such a migration of boat peoples, then there should be
manifestations of it too if we look at it in another way. This
article looks at the subject from the point of view of observations in
the historical record, as well as words still alive in languages
today, to identify the boat peoples. One of the most interesting clues
to the boat peoples is that they seem to have referred to
themselves as 'people of the water-gliding' and the word, which was
probably something like a genitive case of UI-, ie UINI, a word
which evolved , when the concept of water-gliding became irrelevant,
into INI-type words, which appear in whale hunter
languages, and which evolved in Europe according to dialectic
change and observer interpretation into FINNI , VENNE,
VAINE, VANNE, and plurals when a T,D was added as in
FINNIT, VENNET, VAINET, VANNET, etc
The Historical Perspective
THE OBVIOUS EVIDENCE OF THE ABORIGINAL PEOPLES OF NORTHERN EUROPE
If one reads historic texts from Norwegian or
Swedish resources, one finds that the native, aboriginal, peoples are
called "Finn" . In historic times, the Scandinavian Peninsula was
in control of Germanic-speaking kingdoms of Norway and Sweden, and the
general population was increasingly Germanic speaking (Norse and
Swedish). The survival of the original peoples was dependent on
how isolated they were from centers of development, and generally from
the south to the north - a pattern well known in North America but also
applicable to everywhere in the northern world. The last indigenous
hunting peoples tend to be found in places that civilization, based on
farming, did not want to go. Today, for example, aboriginal
peoples in northern Russia are remnants of peoples whose languages
belong to the Uralic language family - including Samoyedic (from
reindeer peoples) and Finno-Ugric (from the boat peoples). For example,
while Estonia and Finland have people who are difficult to distinguish
from north Europeans generally - other than their Finnic language - the
Finno-Ugric languages furthest away, the Khanti on the Ob River of
north-central Asia, still retain very old customs, including still
making dugout canoes and dividing time between urban life and camping
in traditional hunting/fishing grounds up the Ob River during the
summer season.
In North America, mass media - satellites and
internet - are making it difficult for northern aboriginal peoples to
be isolated from world culture, but until modern times the same thing
applied - the more isolated a people were from the centers of
approaching civilization, the more they remained in their traditional
ways. Thus while towards the south there might be Native
communities completely adapted to civilization - running businesses and
living in the popular modern way, the north had communities living in
the grey zone between old traditions and new European culture.
In the British Isles, history tells us that when the
Romans departed in the early fifth century, there were three power
groups trying to fill the vacuum left by the departure of the
Romans - Germanic (Anglo-Saxon) forces in the east, Celtic in the
west, and "Picts" in the north. It makes sense, considering how
the northern parts of the British Isles had mountains and numerous
islands, that the original British - those developed in the British
Isles and not arriving from elsewhere - endured there in the north and
that the term "Picts" meant descendants from the original peoples at
various levels of influence and development.
According to archeology of the "Maglemose" culture
which first defined the aboriginal peoples across the north, south of
the reindeer herds, the aboriginal peoples of the north, those
people history called the "Finns", ranged from Britain eastward to the
east Baltic, and from there, with variations to adapt to other
conditions, as far as they could go with boats - the Ural Mountains.
This expanse of aboriginal peoples of a similar
culture is not unusual. That is how it was across northern North
America - a single culture could extend across half the continent
varying only dialectically.
It follows that the "Picts" were probably from the
same culture as the "Finns" in Norway and Sweden, and going back in
time, the native British generally. There is actual historic evidence
that seems to indicate that the "Finnic" language of the aboriginal
north Europe did indeed include the native British and Picts.
If we consider the "Aestii"
nations described by Roman historian Tacitus in the first century, as
being ancestral to Estonians (who have always called themselves Eesti), who are Finnic speaking, then when Tacitus wrote (Ch 45 of his Germania) that the Aestii were much like the Suebi (of
the south Baltic coast, Jutland Peninsula and south Sweden), but spoke
a language 'closer to' that of the native British. This statement, that
has puzzled scholars for two millenia, suggests that the northern
indigenous languages, from the east Baltic across southern Scandinvia
to Britain were all "Finnic". But that is what we would expect. There
is no reason to assume that the original "Finnic" language of the
aboriginal peoples of "Maglemose" descent across northern Europe ever
vanished from farmer immigration. There are two ways an indigenous
language vanishes - 1. there is major immigration of a new people into
the area of the indigenous peoples, and 2. territories owned by
indigenous peoples are taken by military conquest.
Let us consider the possibility of either.
The entire region in question was mostly marshes,
and it was much worse in Roman times and earlier. The lands formerly
depressed by the Ice Age glaciers .have been rebounding, and it is only
in recent times that with both the rising of the lands, and draining of
water, farming has become more widespread. Thus although
archeology has recorded changes in material culture and assigned
various names to them, the reality is that this entire area has
recieved very little intrusion of actual farmer immigrants. Most
changes have occurred from the indigenous "FInnic" peoples adopting
customs and technology introduced by the farming immigrants
("Corded-Ware" culture).
It follows that since there was no massive migration
into the aboriginal regions that the aboriginal culture remained
dominant even if they adopted innovations they learned of towards the
south.
The second way in which an indigenous culture can be
ended is of course military campaigns in which the conquerors exert
their power via an army. With a powerful army, there isn't any need for
immigration. The conqueror establishes their own people in key power
positions, and imposes their will on the conquered peoples. While the
conquered people may continue to hold on to their original language and
culture, gradually they learn that to get ahead they have to speak the
language of the officials that run everything. Soon the indigenous
peoples are bilingual, and then after ten generations or so, the
original 'mother tongue' vanishes. In recent times we could see the
pattern in the Soviet Union. Although the Soviet Union permitted all
the regions to continue to practice their original culture, the reality
was that anyone who wanted to be successful, needed to speak Russian.
The Soviet Union lasted several generations, and at the time it fell
appart, in the 1990's, the Russification was already apparent.
It is clear that the Germanization of Scandinavia
did not occur until the second development - the military campaigns of
the "Goths". Tacitus' writiing "Germania" actually suggests the beginnings of the "Gothic" military conquests in his description of the "Chatti" (Given that the Roman CH sound was much like a G, the actual word was similar to the Göta in the city name Göteborg.) Tacitus reported that these Chatti pursued war as an art and had already (in the first century) conquered people to the north called Cherusci and Fosi. It is easy to see that these Chatti would have continued to conquer the Jutland Peninsula native tribes in the next several centuries.
To me it is clear that the aboriginal "FInnic"
peoples of Scandinavia , whether primitive or developed, did not
encounter circumstances in which their original language was threatened
until the military conquests by the Goths occuring in the first
centuries AD followed by the pressures to move towards the Germanic
language of the officials holding positions of power. Note as with the
Soviet Union exerting pressure to adopting Russian, or the Roman Empire
exerting pressure to adopting Latin (resulting in French and Spanish
being Roman languages), the influence was a gentle natural one
spread over many generations. The fact is that overt pressure to
abandon one's original language tends to result in resistance.
Thus by historic times, the northern regions were
being transformed towards the conquerors, but aboriginal peoples in
northern regions who were able to continue in their traditional way of
life endured the longest - native British surviving in the northern
British Isles under the name "Picts", native Scandinavians
surviving in the northern and remote parts of Norway and Sweden under
the name "FInns", native peoples of the east Baltic coast,
surviving in more northerly places. The east Baltic coast was
originally Finnic and oriented towards the market at the mouth of the
Vistula. During historic times, Germanic, Balt, and Slavic powers moved
in militarily and took charge throughout the east Baltic coast.
Estonians were not assimilated into Germanic because they were made
serfs in the feudal system, and that created two separate societies -
the serfs vs the feudal landlord society. When the feudal system
collapsed, the more populous serf communities recovered their country.
Thus Estonian culture was a special situation.
Going towards the east into Russia, the Finnic
culture survived in a patchwork fashion, once again the more remote
peoples assimilating less and preserving their traditional language and
ways the most.
Returning our attention to Scandinavia, by the last few centuries, the
original "Finns" where recognized by Norwegian and Swedish Germic
governments by the hinterlands at the north end of Norway being called
"Finnmark" (Forest of the Finns) and the hinterlands of Sweden being
called "FInnlanda". The latter eventually became independent and formed
today's "Finland".
The evidence that "Finnic" culture is descended from the original
aboriginal peoples from Britain across to the Urals, is overwhelming,
and it is supported by archeology too (as described in the main
article) that shows an initial expansions out of Europe followed by
indigenous peoples continuing their traditional way of life (mostly
fishing) while adding innovations learned from the farming cultures
that entered continental Europe.
However there is evidence that there was major trade
going up and down the Volga, and as a result population genetics will
find connections between the east end of the Gulf of Finland, and
populations of the lower Volga. But such internal movements within the
large Finnic aboriginal range do not alter the basic story of
aboriginal peoples - reindeer hunters in the tundra and boat-using
hunter-fisher-gatherers to their south - applicable to the entire
region where the remnants are found - linguistically in the form
of Uralic cultures (Samoyed for reindeer people, and Finno-Ugric
for boat-using hunters) It is important to recognize that when
peoples of a similar culture meet and interract, the result is a mixing
of the two. It is only when two cultures are starkly different (like
Finnic vs Roman, Finnic vs Germanic, Finnic vs Slavic) that either one
culture or the other will eventually conquer the other. This is a very
important concept, since it allows much to have taken place within the
Finnic aboriginal world without there being much evidence of it. (For
example, the Samoyed and Ugric languages when often in contact could be
the result of such blending, instead of one conquering the other.
Lingusits can mistake the converging as diverging, and come to false
conclusions as to what happened.)
POPULATION GENETICS SHOWS SWEDISH MEN ARE ABORIGINAL HENCE OF FINNIC ORIGINS
In recent times, scientists have begun to look into the past through the tool of population genetics.
I came across a study entitled. Y-chromosome diversity in Sweden – A long-time perspective, Andreas O Karlsson et al, (European Journal of Human Genetics (2006) 14, 963–970. doi:10.1038/sj.ejhg.5201651; published online 24May 2006)
In the concluding paragraphs is the following summary:
...our data do not correlate with the
agricultural spreading to northern Europe with migrating Anatolian
farmers. Furthermore, in Scandinavia there is no evidence for a swift
replacement of the hunter-gatherer economy, and there are also
indications that the local wild fauna was used in the northern European
domestic stock to a greater extent than in southern Europe. Thus, we
believe that our data indicate population continuity, acculturation and
acceptance of new ideas rather than migration and population
replacement in the Mesolithic-Neolithic
transition. They also underline that migration is not a necessary
prerequisite of cultural change, often presumed. Anyhow, we have to
conclude that emerging agriculture was an introduction of ideas and/or
a result of immigration not visible in our Y-chromosome data, i.e. as
for example female immigration.
In other words, the y-chromosomes suggest the
male lineage in Sweden is aboriginal, and the farming, etc not to
mention the Germanic language, was acquired. The authors make a slight
suggestion to the possibility that if Swedish females were studied,
migrations from the mainland may indeed be evident. This may very well
be the case. I think it is possible that the men, originally Finnic
trappers, used their boats to become traders for the sedentary
farming communities. Travelling widely, they would have found
wives in those settlements they visited, brought them home and had the
women maintain their own farms while they went away in their trading
activity. It is important to bear in mind human nature. Population
genetics must not forget that men and women do not behave the same. Men
roam, and find mates far away, bring them home, and have them manage
the farming settlement while they continue to carry wares long
distances in their boats.
A Matter of Names
NAME FORM DEPENDS ON DIALECT
We have mentions a number of historical names given
to the aboriginal peoples of northern Europe. Neither the word "Finn" or "Aestii" (or "Eesti") has any meaning in Finnic as written. Another word that appears in historical texts is with reference to Wends, or Venedi. In historic times, the Germanic Scandinavian word for them was Vindo, plural Vindyr. Historically Finns called them Venta, and Estonains Võnd. This suggests that Scandinavian Germanic raised the vowels. It follows that the word "Finn" was actually "Fenn" which was what Tacitus used (Ch 46, Germania) (Finni). This is now closer to the Estonian and Finnish words, whose stems are Venn- and Võnn- Since Finnic pluralizes with T, D, Tacitus could have heard the plural Fennet but wrote Finni because Latin plural is achieved with the final. Tacitus also identified Venedi, as another people of the area so that the issue is really in the nature of the initial consonant.
The explanation can be in the fact that Roman Latin
used the letter "V" for the "W" sound, and did not speak the "V" sound
common today. Thus Tacitus may have chosen to use the "F" instead
of "W" in this case. Another indication of the confusion in the
initial sound is in the fact that ancient Romans used the word Veneti ("WENETI") while ancient Greeks wrote Henetoi or Eneti. When we consider various names for aboriginal peoples across the ancient north - Anglo-Saxon Cwens, Germanic Quans, the Finnish dialect called Kainu, the Khanti or Handi of
the Ob River - what is clear is that it is always a question of
how the initial high vowel is launched. The fact is that Finnic
stresses the first syllable, and when the initial syllable begins with
a vowel, a consonantal sound appears, whether intentionally or not, in
order to launch that initial vowel. Foreigners then interpreted
the H-like sound according to the characteristics of their own language.
With this in mind, as I will continue below, I
suggest that the original word was something that has survived in the
stem UI- which means 'swim, float'
I believe that the UI- (which is actually a glide
between the two sounds) could become "WI" and be slightly aspirated
too. If greatly aspirated it then begins to sound like an
"FI".
The N comes as a genitive marker, as needed for
using that stem to name a people. UINI 'of the floating (person)'
or UINIT for the plural, which can now be transformed into Fenni, Finnyr, Vindo, Vindyr, Venni, Veneti, Wendi, etc.
This word UINIT sounds remarkably like the Inuit of
arctic North America, and perhaps the prehistoric Finnic language had
similar limited sounds. The language of the Inuit only recognised a
low, middle and high vowel - represented by U, A, and I. But this
did not prevent a speaker using in between vowel sounds - as long as
the dialect made a distinction between three levels. (It is like in
English, someone saying HEPPY DEI instead of HAPPY DAY.) I
believe that the southern Finnic language speakers, being in contact
with southern civilization languages, were influenced in their dialect.
My investigation suggests that the Finnic languages
closest to the Germanic ("Corded ware" farmer immigrants) were
influenced to raise their vowel sounds, causing U>O, A>E,
E>I, I >(sound break or H), and that the dominant lingua franca of the region from the Jutland Peninsula and South Baltic spoken by the Suebi tribes, was a vowel-raised and palatalized Finnic language and that Tacitus compared the Aestii language to the native British because these were not vowel-raised or palatalized.
Herein we find why the Estonian name for themselves, Eesti, not to mention Tacitus' version Aestii,
has no meaning in Estonian. It must be the name given these
people who ran the market at the mouth of the Vistula (actually at
today's Elblag). Let us lower the vowels. If we begin with ESTJI (J=Y
sound) then it lowers to ASTJE > OSTJA and the last word is a
very common word in Estonian and Finnish - ostja 'buyer'.,Suebic tribes took their furs to the market where the ESTJI who ran the market purchased it.
. I think that the dialectic
variation was similar to the difference between a regular British
accent and a cockney accent. Once you get used to it, you can
understand. However foreigners will write the words as they hear it,
and so the same word can be recorded differently.
Another example is the word Suebi
itself. If we lower the vowels we approach something like SUO-ABA.
which means 'the open waters of the marsh' suggesting the original
dominant tribe from which the name came lived perhaps at the mouth of a
river, perhaps at the mouth of the Oder. It is interesting to
note that the Finnish name for their country is Suomi,
which may be based on SUO MAA 'Land of marshes'. SUO ABA is just
another way of expressing the fact that these boat people lived in
lands dominated by marshes, lakes, and rivers.
This raising of vowels and palatalization affected
how the Danish Norse spoke. The raising of an E to an I was common.
Thus FENN became FINN, and VENN became VINN.
The Norse language, thus, was how the original
Finnic-Suebic spoke the Germanic imposed on the natives from being
conquered by the Gothic military campaigns of the first centuries AD.
This high palatalized dialect has endured in Danish and the south
Swedish dialect. It is
well known that when someone learns a new language, they speak it in
the fashion of their original language, and we call it an
"accent". This accent will endure if the descendants of these
speakers do not experience any other more 'proper' way of speaking
it.
SUMMARY: SURVIVAL OF "MAGLEMOSE' LANGUAGE?
In spite of the fact that the Aestii had the same religion and customs as the Suebi, Tacitus said their language was "closer to" that of the native British. It implies that the language of the Aestii, Suebi, and Britannicaewas
all of the same language family. The
original "Maglemose" culture and language, which ranged from Britain to
the Vistula and then at the Vistula transformed a little to the
sea-going "Kunda" culture, did not die as long as the lands were all
flooded and thereby preserved the original culture. In other words, if
farming could not displace the original boat-using way of life, then
the original boat-using way of life, language, and culture, tended to
continue. So I conclude
that the entire region from Britain through southern Scandinavia and
southern Baltic, remained in its "Maglemose" character and only changed
in periferal ways in response to the arrival of farming peoples. The
core way of life of deriving sustinance from harvesting marshes, seas,
rivers, continued. There was no great force causing them to abandon it
- until of course the military domination approach introduced by the
Romans in western Europe and Germanic (Gothic) in middle Europe. (Later
Slavic expansion altered the character of .eastern Europe)
Indeed this idea of a continuation of the
"Maglemose" culture was expressed by an archeologist who had no
personal bias in this regard. He was only reacting to what archeology
suggested:
..it is becoming increasingly evident that much of its [Neolithic culture of southern Britain] came
from the North European Plain to the east, a conclusion which in view
of the common Maglemosian heritage should hardly occasion surprise. (p 134, World Prehistory, Grahame Clark)
The connections arise from boat use, and as long as
boat use dominated - later including long distance trade as far east as
the east Baltic - then the same orientation towards the east would
continue. And there was nothing ever to cause the connections between
peoples across the northern cease by boat to cease. Even after the
original Finnic language was replaced by Germanic languages after the
Roman Age, the east-west orientation continued.
After the Göta, Gothic, military conquests of the
Jutland and Scandinavian Peninsulas, what remained was Denmark, Norway,
and Sweden. Since the Germanic power remained and did not leave, there
has been since the first millenium AD, a steady assimilating of the
original peoples who historic textbooks refer to as "Finns". It
is important to point out that, like with the Roman conquest of western Europe, there was no
immigration. The Romans did not bring Roman immigrants to the various
places of the empire. Nor did the Goths ship families into Sweden or
Norway. The Roman method was to conquer a people, establish an
army in the vicinity to keep them in line, and only transfer officials
from Rome to operate the provinces thus formed. Thereafter all
additional officials, soldiers, etc serving Rome were taken from the
local population. In other words there was no genetic replacement.
The Goths of the Kingdom of Denmark did the same.
Their successful strategy of conquering the entire Norwegian coast, was
a combination of showing military strength to a coastal settlement, and
then sending an earl to establish a government answerable to the king
back in Denmark. To make the transition smooth, the earl would marry
the daughter of the local chief, and in doing so actually inherit the
chief's power. Once again, there was negligible genetic replacement.
These conquests were done not by migrations of people but by simply
establishing authority and managing it. The conversion from the
indigenous culture to that of the kingdom might not be forced, but in
the long run it is more practical to operate in one language than in
two, and the language of the dominating power tends to be the more
useful.
The longer the Scandinavian kingdoms remained in
power, the weaker and fewer were the indigenous peoples, until all
those of southern Scandinavia had assimilated and only the primitive
"Finns" of the remote places remained. Norway called the northern
hinterlands "FInnmark". Sweden called their hinterlands "Finnlanda".
As we come towards modern times,.the term "Finn"
ceases to be used for arctic Scandinavians, and is replaced by the term
"Lapp" Less than a century ago, one might identify "Fisher Lapps" on
the northern coast, "Forest Lapps" in northern forests, and "Reindeer
Lapps" in the reindeer tundra.
But only in the last half century the "Fisher" and
"Forest" Lapps have vanished, or rather, assimilated into the
Norwegians. Only the "Reindeer Lapps" have survived: they had a
way of life that nobody else had, their own niche. But not long
ago they made it know they wished to be called by their own word
"Saami". The "Saami" in my opinion are the cultural remnants of the
original reindeer hunters of arctic Scandinavia, who acquired the
Finnic language of the boat peoples who visited the arctic waters and
dominated the region. (See main article of UIRALA)
Because the Scandinavian Peninsula was Germanized by
military conquest not by any migrations, the peoples there will show,
as the Swedish study indicated, that at least the men are still
descended from the "Finns" the original hunter-gatherers. But since the
original Finns were likely dark not fair, that means the tall fair
haired features of Scandinavia may have come from the female side. It
would be interesting what a mtDNA study will demonstrate.
In general, what we see is that a review of
historical information is at odds with any traditional linguistic
theory of Finnic migrations to the Baltic from the east. Like the
archeological and geographic analysis, an analysis from a historical
perspective leads to the same conclusion - that that Scandinavian
"Finns" mentioned in historical texts, are descendants of the original
"Maglemose" culture and have never left, never come from anywhere else.
We can of course allow internal movements within this broad Finnic
domain which would not leave much evidence since similar cultures and
languages merge easily.
But in the broader study of the boat peoples and
their expansion around the world, we have to go back further in time,
back to the whale hunters of the White Sea, whose descendants appear to
have carried the name UINIT to describe themselves, to distant coasts
of the Atlantic.
The Name Trail of Boat People
PEOPLE WHO WALK, PEOPLE WHO FLOAT
The Saami, formerly known as Lapps, and before that
being among the abroiginal peoples called Finns (as discussed above),
are idenfied today for being reindeer herders
in the Norwegian arctic, are not boat people. Today's Saami are best
identified with a well
developed culture revolving around reindeer. In this respect they are
culturally close to the other reindeer peoples in the arctic, the
Samoyeds. One cannot help noticing the similarity in names.
My own thinking is that in prehistoric times,
in places where the boat people encountered reindeer people, it was
necessary to distinguish between the two. If we were to give the boat
people a name, using modern Finnic words, we might call them VENE 'of
the boat' or VENED (plural-'people of the boats'). But for many reasons
I will express below, it seems to me that the more basic stem is UI-
which in modern Estonian and Finnish means 'swim, float'. Thus we might
call boat people UINIT 'people who float'. Supporting this
approach is the fact that if in future there is no need to distinguish
between 'people of the floating' and other people, then the word can
simply mean 'people' and that would explain the word Inuit meaning 'people' that names todays people of the North American arctic.
It is possible that the word for 'water' and word
for 'float' are related. Possibly the meaning was determined by level
of vowel. Indeed Estonian words show the significance of vowel
level. For example vool 'current', vee 'of the water', vii 'of the carrying (on top of the water). It, as well as Germanic water,
suggests that the low vowel referred to the fluid or being beneath the
surface, the middle vowel referred to being at the surface, and
the high vowel referred to being above the surface. In any event we
have reason to believe that UINI could be UENE or UONO etc and
that the vowel level clarified the meaning (unless it was dialectic, in
which case the entire language was shifted in terms of vowel
level.) We note that the in reality there may also have been
AINI, UAINI, etc.
But such dialectic changes cover many thousands of
years over a very wide range of boat-peoples, and we cannot do more
than generalize and offer some ideas.
One question we may wonder about is the origins of
the name. Usually people invent a name when they need to distinguish
between two realities. For example, if a people call themselves people
who glide, it is because they need to distinguish themselves from other
peoples who do not glide on the water. Who did they encounter - the
reindeer hunters who only travelled on foot.
If we assume the boat people saw themselves as
UINIT, what name would they have for the reindeer peoples? If the basis
for the name is the manner of travel, then reindeer peoples are
walkers. If we apply modern Finnic we might say SAMMUJAD 'people
who walk'. I believe the name Samoyed
was applied by Finnic
speakers. The word "Saami" used in Scandinavia for the reindeer
herders, thus must be a contraction of the word. It could
have arisen independently. What if Finnic boat people who were
harvesting the
seas off arctic Norway. Coming across reindeer people, they would
similarly have known them as 'people who walk'. The word SAMMU ('of the
stepping') might also have been used.
But then, when these people expanded in their boats
to places where they never saw any reindeer people, and therefore the
distinction between walkers and water-gliders was no longer relevant,
the word UINIT and variations would simply have reduced in
meaning to 'people'. And that is exactly what we find among the boat
peoples of northeastern and arctic North America - notably in the word Inuit 'people'
Is it possible to map the distribution of names of
the kinds described above over top of the theory of distribution
outlined in the main article of UIRALA? THE ORIGINS AND EXPANSIONS OF BOAT-ORIENTED WAYS OF LIFE : Basic Introduction to the Theory
SOME RESONANCES BETWEEN NAMES AND BOAT-PEOPLE EXPANSIONS
The name that
may have had the form UINIT and developments from it, could have been
carried forward in time
and space along with the migrations of these boat peoples. The
following is an exploration of how we can use the name the boat people
used for 'people' to trace their expansion in Europe and beyond. The
purpose of this is purely to stimulate thought. The mapping below is
partly from actual data and partly suggested as likely possibilities
based on the discussions above and in the main article.
Map 1.
The Traces of Boat People Expansion in Names
This
map introduces many inventions of name, and this article will explain
the reasons. Here are some brief explanations: UINI is an invented word
(from Finnic stem UI-) that can be seen to be ancestral to both
"Finnic" and "Inuit". UINU is a variation that can be seen to
have evolved into "Khanti", UENE can be seen to be ancestral to
the Roman word for hunting people in the east Baltic Fenni, considering
that the Roman F-character was really used for a sound that was more
like V today. UENETI can be seen as its plural and ancestral to the
same word in the southeast Baltic according to Ptolemy and
others. I also show Vistula as arising from UISE-LA, another
variation. Far to the west, I have written UITULA purely because Caesar
describes the dominant people identifiable with the Aquitani, as
Uiteriges, or Bituriges. Uiteriges, by Estonian or Finnish suggests
uide riigid 'nations that float/swim'. The other naming (in
white) takes directly from established words. "Brito-Belgic" of course
refers to the Belgae and Britannicae of the Roman British period, and
"Suevo-Aestic", combines the Suevi and Aestii larger regions as
identified by Roman Tacitus and other ancient historians. Note that the
intent of the map is to describe logical units based on how geography
would influence interraction of boat-oriented peoples. Note to
scholars: To keep the map simple, it does not include any
information pertaining to land-based people other than the reindeer
hunters at the top.
The UI-stem for "People Moving Over the Water Surface"
A CLOSER LOOK AT PARALLELS FAR AWAY
This study proposes that the names for
boat peoples originated from a word stem that sounded like the
still-existing Finnic stem UI-. It is written in Finnish with ui- as in
uima- (prefix indicating 'swimming-, floating-'). In Estonian it is
written with uj- as in ujumis- (prefix 'swimming-, floating-').
In the beginning humans only moved
around on land, on foot. But then, as described in THE ORIGINS AND EXPANSIONS OF BOAT-ORIENTED WAYS OF LIFE : Basic Introduction to the Theory
some broke away and began to develop
a new way of life in emerging wetland regions that required travelling
around in boats on water. It then became necessary around 6000BC to
distinguish between people who walked - like the reindeer people - and
people who glided on water.
In the evolution of
languages, words with fluid (many) meanings, differentiated into
narrower meaning; but this did not cause the older word to be
abandoned. For example the Estonian/Finnish stem vee- 'water-", could
have been derived from UI-. That is to say the original word UI-
would have had a wide range of meanings, the listener determining the
meaning from the context in which it was used. It could have meant
'travel by water', 'float', 'swim', 'carry-by-boat', 'connected
with water', and so on, as we have already mentioned above. The first step in creating narrower
meanings would be to vary the I as in producing UE- or UAI-
A change to VE- or VAI- was easy because whenever a vowel begins a
word, it has a tendency to become a consonant (and lose its pure vowel
quality). Another change would have been from "UE" to "WHE" as discussed above.
In arctic Canada, the name of the
arctic people of boat traditions there, Inuit, is plural of innuk
'person'. From the Inuit we can look further south too, to the
Algonquians. Among the Algonquians to their south, the word inini means
'man, person'.
What evidence is there that the word inuit may have the origins in Finnic as proposed above and be related to Estonian and Finnish uj- or ui-? The Inuit language has words with the
word element ui- which appears to relate to water as for
example in uijjaqtuq 'water spins' or uimajuq 'dissipated' which
interestingly parallels Estonian ujumis-, Finnish uima- ('swimming-,
floating-') and even Estonian uimane 'dazed'. The Estonian uimane
is interesting in that it seems to suggest that the original meaning
UI- described water as a dynamic thing - moving, swirling, etc.
Although Estonian and Finnish now use the stem vee- for 'water'
presumably it is because over the millenia, among those in contact with
southern civilizations, there has been a development in the
derivation of new words that substituted V for U, and E for I
It is possible that this adjustment from I to
E began with trade contact with southern civilizations. Sumeria is one
of the very few ancient languages that has been preserved as a result
of their habit of doing everyday writing in cunieform on wet clay
tablets, and scholars have determined that the Sumerian word for
'water' was simply "EE". Having the original word for 'water'
expressed by stressing a high vowel is natural.
Languages do not use every
sound that can be made, but only those sounds that linguists call
phonemes. It is significant that the Inuit language still shows only
the most basic sounds (as a baby produces them) and recognizes only
three vowels - a high, medium and low. Thus originally E was
interpreted the same as an I, or O was interpreted the same as an
U. In the development of new words, the easiest way to do so was
to recognize new sounds. For example by recognizing the E, suddenly UI
produced two stems UI and UE.
Although we cannot directly prove that the
North American INNI words meaning 'person' might originally have meant
'(people) of the water' (in contrast to other people who did not use
boats), it is a reasonable hypothesis because we can make the
connections with the Finnic languages. This speaks towards the idea of
circumpolar movement of skin-boat using sea-harvesters passively
migrating throughout northern waters ever since the earliest arctic
skin boats which, according to the age of arctic rock carvings showing
them, suggests somewhere around 4000BC. This has been explored in detail in other UIRALA articles
More on Later Developments of Names
MORE ON FINNI, VENETI ETC
As discussed above, the Scandinavians of centuries ago called the
native peoples throughout Scandinavia by the name "Finns". That
must have been a real name used by the natives, since it is unlikely
the Scandinavians would have borrowed the use of the same name by the
Roman Tacitus and Greeks like Ptolemy, with reference to
primitive peoples in the wilderness behind the southeast Baltic. (See
Tacitus Germania 98AD, ch 46). The Greeks wrote Phinnoi, and
Tacitus used Fenni. But Finnic languages did not originally
have the "F, PH" sound; therefore it must have been a sound that
somewhat resembled an "F". We note that there are historical
records which speak about Indu peoples in the Gulf of Finland as well,
and of course there exist the Finno-Ugrians called Khanti at the Ob
River, who Estonians call Handid.
But we noted above, that a
language uses only certain sounds from all the sounds humans make. If
the speakers of a language had peculiarities in their manner of
speaking - what linguists call paralinguistics features - they could
have made sounds that were not relevant to the language, but foreign
observers found the sounds relevant and put them in. For example, let
us say that the Finnic languages did not have the "F" sound (and they
still don't), but when speaking words beginning with emphasized vowels,
they gave the first vowel an explosiveness, then they could have
sounded like they added something like an "F" sound at the front.
For longer words, a language like English puts emphasis on the second
syllable, but Finnic languages put it on the first regardless of the
word. As a result the English media today consistently pronounces
Finnish words wrong, for example Helsinki as hel-SINK-i when it should
be HEL-sinki. If the aboriginal peoples across Scandinavia called
themselves by UINU, it would have sounded like UI-nu. The English
speaking person who has been reading this has probably been pronouncing
UINU differently in their mind up to this point. You have probably been
thinking something sounding like "whee-NEW". Indeed the Finnic way of
pronouncing UI- has no correspondence in English at all. Best
approximation is "ooo- yeee" (UUU-YIII) spoken very fast.
My intention here is not to investigate
in detail the matter of how the orignal sounded or how the biases of
the foreign language interpreted the word, but to repeat again that the foreign languages that wrote Phinnoi, Fenni,
Finni, were merely interpreting an explosive beginning on the
intial vowel, and a sound that did not exist in their own
language. This initial feature may have had "H" in it, and it may
have varied dialectically from place to place, even though it was not
phonemic. Here is a discussion of it in more detail.
One tribe may have made an initial sound that was close to
"KH" and another may have put in a "BH" and another a "WH". But as far
as the language was concerned, the presumed initial consonants were
simply not there. In fact it can be argued that even the initial H in
Helsinki, was not really phonemic originally, and that the initial H in
Finnic languages is an artificiality. (For example as spoken by a Finn,
removing the initial H to produce Elsinki, would not change how it
sounds compared to Helsinki. Initial H's in Finnish and Estonian
languages seem to appear spontanously as a paralinguistic feature to
strengthen the initial vowel, and really do not have to be there.(The
speaker introduces it only when talking loudly) Take Estonian
haruldane. If it were written aruldane, it would sound the same, when
speaking in normal voice. H makes an appearance AUTOMATICALLY if it is
necessary to shout it. It shows that if we dropped most of the H's at
the start of Finnish and Estonian words, the H will be added
automatically as needed, and really does not have to be there. It all
arises from the need to emphasize the first syllable. A weak initial
vowel, thus, needing strengthening, invites the addition of the
consonantal sound that intensifies it.
The original word could indeed have been "UINNI",
but was spoken by the people themselves so it sounded like "WHINNI" or
"BHINNI" or "HINNI" or.....The foreign listeners wrote down what the
bias of their own language observed, whether the sound was in the
language or not.
As already mentioned above, when Latin writers like Tacitus wrote the
F-character, they may have been describing
the "V" sound, whereas when they wrote the V-character they always
meant the "W" sound. Thus Latin Fenni may have actually been "VENNI",
while Latin Venni was actually "WENNI"
I noted earlier that the
name for the ancient people called Veneti
by the Romans, These people I believe are descended from north-south
traders carrying northern amber and were of northern Finnic
origins. They were called
Eneti or Henetoi, by Greeks. The difference is not that great if
we rewrite the Roman version properly as Weneti. What both versions
have in common is the ENETI part. It shows that the Roman ear and the
Greek ear interpreted the initial peculiarity in different ways. A
third language may have interpreted it yet differently still like say
"KHENETI" (which reminds us of the people popularly called
Khanti, but which Estonian language calls Handid.)
The proof of this explanation for
the origins of the name of the Eneti/Veneti seems to be found in
inscriptions left by the Eneti/Veneti themselves in North Italy. They
left behind short pieces of writing that have been the subject of
investigation (of little success) over the years. Of interest are words
that could be interpreted as their own words for Eneti/Veneti. In their
own phonetic writing modelled after Etruscan writing, they wrote their
own name as follows (transcribed to Roman alphabet, but keeping the
dots used) .e..n.no -- Note the dots around the
initial E. The dots in their inscriptions appear, in my analysis, to
signify some kind of special linguistic feature. Scholars have solidly
established that in some situations .i. distorts the "I"
sound to resemble an "H". It can therefore be assumed that
the E with dots on both sides, similarly represents dome kind of H-like
quality. We conclude therefore, the Venetic inscription placing dots
around the initial E confirms the theory of the actual speech
introducing an aspirant consonantal feature in front, but one that was
not clear enough to define as a letter. We can speculate that maybe the
sound was similar to "WH" since the Romans interpreted it as
"WENETI".
Conclusions
Evidence to argue
theories
about boat people and their movements as early as 6000 years ago, is
very vague, and so we cannot rely on any one field for supporting data.
In other words, we cannot prove anything by archeology alone, history
alone, linguistics alone, geography alone..... That is why finding an
explanation for the names the boat people called themselves, is one
additional source of evidence to add to the rest, But the main
argument does come from the hard archeological evidence combined with
geography and our knowledge of geological and climatological
developments after the Ice Age. Thus the core theory remains within the
main theory THE ORIGINS AND EXPANSIONS OF BOAT-ORIENTED WAYS OF LIFE : Basic Introduction to the Theory
SOURCES
AND REFERENCES
Because most of the theory is based mostly on commonly accepted
information, most of the information for which references are not given
in the text, come from most textbooks, etc. One book as being very
important: Eesti Esiajalugu, Jaanits et al, 1982, Tallinn. Other
special sources of data, pictures, quotes are given immediately within
the text.
author: A.Paabo, Box 478,
Apsley, Ont., Canada
2013 (c) A. Pääbo.