Does Textual Evidence Mean Quotes

At a glance. There does seem to be some textual evidence for a bipartite division among the Slavic tribes. In the 6th century CE, Byzantine sources divide the new barbarian menace into two tribes known as the “Sclavenes” and the “Antes.” Obviously, the Sclavenes are Slavs. But who were the Antes? There is no such group around today, as far as we know. In theory, some Ukrainians and South Slavs could be their descendants, however. According to Procopius, the Antes and Sclavenes both spoke the same “barbarous” tongue. He claims that they were both descended from a people known as the Sporoi.82 This is very reminiscent of the Hungarian origin legend, which claimed that “Magor” and “Hunor” were originally brothers, and hence the Magyars and Huns shared common origins. We know that “Slav” probably comes from “Slovo” meaning simply “Word.” Therefore, a “Slav” probably originally referred to an ethnolinguistic identity. This explains the name “Sclavene” or “Slovene.” Interestingly, the name “Ante” does not appear to be Slavic in its origins. The most prevalent theory - held by scholar George Vernadsky, is that the name “Ante” is of Iranian (Sarmatian) origins.83 If so, it may well be that the bipartite social structure seen among the Slavs originated from the Antes - and perhaps Dazhbog was originally the patron hearth deity of the Antes. Meanwhile, Volos was regarded as the divine ancestor of the Sclavenes. This would make the Antes rough equivalents of the Ob-Ugrian “Mos” phratry, who claimed descent from a very “Iranian” deity with many names. He was described as a golden hero who rode a winged horse. By this logic, the so-called “Sclavenes” were the Slavic counterparts of the “Por” who retained the totemistic of belief in their descent from a bear spirit.