View Full Version : The Difference Between Slavs and Baltids?

Thursday, September 10th, 2009, 08:38 PM
What exactly is the difference between Baltids and slavs? Are they two seperate groups?

Hauke Haien
Thursday, September 10th, 2009, 09:49 PM
The main difference is that Slavs are an ethno-linguistic grouping (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Slavic_peoples), a branch of the Indo-European-speaking peoples, whereas Baltids are an Europid race (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/East_Baltic_race).

So, are they separate groups? I would think that they are overlapping, but not identical, the same way the Nordid race is not currently co-extensive with the Germanic peoples.

Thursday, September 10th, 2009, 11:15 PM
What exactly is the difference between Baltids and slavs? Are they two seperate groups?

It goes like this:


Balts are a non-Germanic, non-Celtic, non-Latinic race. They are mainly of Uralic extraction, but they can also be found amongst Slavs in hybridization form.

Sunday, September 13th, 2009, 03:53 PM
Slavs are not a race, there are Slavic races. Baltids are a racial group, spread among several nationalities. That's the difference.

Some Slavs are Baltids, and some Baltids are Slavs, but not all Slavs are Baltid and not all Baltids are Slavs.

Some German East-Baltids. They aren't Slavs:




It's important also, not to equate Baltid with Baltic. Balts are in a metaethnic sense, Estonians, Latvians, and Lithuanians. They are not Slavs, although some people argue they have some Slavic roots.

Slavs, are like Balts, a metaethnic group. Russians, Poles, Croats, Czechs, Slovaks, Slovenians, etc. That's what Slavs are.

Sunday, September 13th, 2009, 09:32 PM
I think the main place where balts and slavs integrate is belarus. I hope that helps ;)

Sunday, September 13th, 2009, 11:55 PM
What exactly is the difference between Baltids and slavs? Are they two seperate groups?
They have separate related language groups. They are genetically related. To what degree is up to debate.

The Baltic countries have about equal amounts of N (Baltic or Finnic) and R1a (Slavic) genes.

Many Russians have a significant amount (~20%) of N also.

Belarus does not show much N, but has a good amount of I2. I am not sure how to characterize that element.

Friday, September 18th, 2009, 08:42 PM
They have separate related language groups. They are genetically related. To what degree is up to debate.

Just found this:


Craniometric evidence for Slavic-Finnic admixture in medieval Novgorod

The two main sources of the Russian population are well known by genetic evidence, but it is nice to see the historical process of admixture between Slavs and Finns visible in the anthropological record as well. The evidence for the presence of a Baltic component is more surprising in the light of genetic evidence, but at present diagnostic markers of Baltic admixture in uniparentally inherited markers do not appear to be available. Certainly, the high-resolution study of variation in the common N1c an R1a1 Y-chromosome haplogroups may reveal whether differences between Slav, Balt, or Finn (a) still exist, (b) do not exist because of a common substratu, (c) do not exist due to gene flow between the three linguistic groups.

From the paper:

Groups from 13th–14th century burials at Slavenka and Konezerie, and from 14th–16th century burials in Pskov are morphologically heterogeneous, and the variation exceeds that seen in non-admixed groups. Certain crania are markedly Caucasoid, displaying large and dolichocranic braincases, a sharp horizontal facial profile, a high face and a sharply protruding nose. Others are gracile, brachycranic, and have flattened low faces and flattened noses. The former are far fewer than the latter; most individuals are intermediate. The correlation coefficients also attest to heterogeneity; some of them, while concerning morphologically independent traits, are highly significant, and the same heterogeneity is revealed by the principal component analysis (Sankina, 2000).

According to the Mahalanobis distance values, Baltic parallels are especially marked for early Novgorodian groups, whereas Finnic parallels are typical of late groups. While the early and the late groups are very different, continuity between them is evidenced by a combination of intercorrelated traits discovered in the late groups from the upper Luga, Pskov, and the Ingrian Plateau. Speaking of the resemblance between the late Novgorodians and the Finns, it should not be overlooked that most of the former either had absorbed the Finnic substratum or were assimilated descendants of the local Finns. This concerns a group from Slantsy district, certain late groups of the Ingrian Plateau, and many others which, judging by archaeological evidence, were influenced by the traditions of the Baltic Finns.

While the presence of the Finnic element, which manifests itself in late Novgorodian groups, which cannot be disputed, the “Baltic” tendency of early Novgorodians is more difficult to explain. Large-scale Baltic presence in the Novgorodian territory during the pre-Slavic period (Early Iron Age) is evidenced by both archaeological and toponymical data. Recent archaeological and linguistic findings suggest that by the time of the Slavic colonization (7th century AD), Balts and Finns lived in the territory of northwestern Russia side by side, and the Balts which were numerically predominant, migrated to this territory several times, both from the east (the Dnieper basin) and from the west (the Vistula basin) (Vasiliev, 2008). Certain Baltic groups were apparently assimilated by the Slavs. Notably, among the fourteen 10th–13th century eastern Slavic groups from other territories, only three resemble the Balts. Another explanation may be that Balts, Slavs and Finns had absorbed the same ancient European substratum, which had been widely distributed in the past.

Of course, some non-Slavic elements may have participated in the population history of medieval Novgorod in more recent times. For instance, it is hardly accidental that the early group from Pskov is similar to populations of southeastern Estonia, which borders on the Pskov region.

Archaeology, Ethnology and Anthropology of Eurasia
Volume 37, Issue 2, June 2009, Pages 119-134


S.L. Sankina

Cranial series from cemeteries on the territory of the medieval Novgorod Republic were subjected to multivariate analysis. Northwestern Russia is the region where important population changes occurred in the early 2nd millennium AD. As a rule, earlier groups (11th – early 13th centuries) are dolichocranic and exhibit a sharp horizontal facial profile. In those series whose lower chronological limit is 11th–12th centuries, diachronic morphological changes can be traced.

In later groups (13th–14th centuries), the cranial index is higher than in earlier ones (11th – early 13th centuries), whereas cranial height and nasal protrusion angle decrease, and the orbits become narrower. Series from the 13th– 16th century cemeteries apparently attest to an admixture. A combination of traits, correlated mostly at the between- group level (orbital breadth, nasal height, and nasal prominence angle), points to the presence of two components. This combination separates early and late Novgorod groups, at the same time opposing neighboring non-Slavic populations. While early groups (11th–13th centuries) resemble the 10th–18th century Balts, late ones (late 13th – early 20th centuries) resemble various Finnic groups of the same period.


Saturday, January 1st, 2011, 11:46 PM
The Baltic peoples (Lithuanian and Latvian) are related to the Sclavonic peoples as well as to all other members of the greater Indo-Germanic family of peoples (the Estonians themselves are related not to the Sclavs, Balts, or Germans, but are Urgo-Finnic, related to the Finns and Magyars/Huns; this is not to say that many modern Estonians are all non Indo-European, for no doubt many have intermarried with Russian, Lithuanian, Latvian and German neighbors, as well as the Danes who ruled their nation for some time). The Balts, like the Germanic Peoples (Northern, Eastern, and Western) are descendents of the Scythians; Whereas, the Sclavs are primarily descended from the Sarmatians. The Sarmatians and the Scythians were originally the same people, but probably branched off and took separate directions and became distinct from one another in language c. 5th Century B.C.

This post is a little late... however, I just came across this thread (and this entire forum) by accident, while searching for something else on the web.

Is this answer helpful to anyone...?

Northern Paladin
Friday, August 26th, 2011, 09:06 PM
You must be confused, Slavs are an ethno-linguistic group while Baltids are a Europid sub-race. A lot of Slavs are of the Baltid variety. A lot of Germanics and Balts are also of the Baltid sub-racial variety.

In Europe there are a lot of distinct ethno-linguistic groups, here are the Indo-European speakers:

Germanics, Celts, Balts, Slavs, Latinics (Romanics), Hellenics, and Albanians.

Here are the non-Indo-European speakers:

Finno-Ugrics, Basques, Jews, and Gypsies.

Did I miss anything?