A Contribution to Pre-Polish Antiquity

In many issues, a scientic discussion about the beginnings of Slavicism (Pol. Słowiańszczyzna) raises doubts and controversy. This essay is not a contribution about another excavation, but rather a statement at a higher level of generality - an attempt at a kind of synthesizing approach on the basis of logical deduction. The author stands on the side of supporters of the indigenous theory of the origin of the Slavs, which he argues by citing several logical justications. The considerations concern a fairly wide range from the Lusatian culture in the 8th century BC, when Scythian statehood dominated in its neighbourhood, to the 15th century and the great victory of the Kingdom of Poland in alliance with the Grand Duchy of Lithuania over the state of the Teutonic Order. The mainstream consideration, however, concerns the war tradition of the early Slavs and the rst Piasts. The emphasis is also on the specicity of the martial art of Lechites and Poles, compared to the traditions of neighbouring peoples.


Introduction
Hoplology, as a science of the warriors' weapons and cultures, is related to the broadly understood anthropology of martial arts. In this perspective, the issues of the development of the martial art of ancient peoples should be clari ed, while using the achievements of other disciplines and scienti c subdisciplines. Such an interdisciplinary approach and the need to strive for the truth caused re ection, which results in questioning many old paradigms. This is the novelty of this study.

Very personal admission
Looking for another book in my father's library (historian, currently elderly) I came across a book by Paweł Jasienica, which became the main inspiration for me to write this essay. Well, it answered me those questions that I hadn't even asked myself before, not believing in the possibility of getting rational answers. Synthesizing Jasienica's mind was able to combine the essential facts, which by deduction leads to logical conclusions. In addition, I did not know about certain facts, such as the results of Czekanowski's anthropological comparative studies [1]. As a more passionate and self-taught anthropologist, I am an amateur researcher outside the mainstream of historians and archeologists. So I don't know, and I don't even want to know what you can't write, say, or even think so as not to be accused of unscienti city. As a man of science, I am only interested in the pursuit of truth, in which I have no interest, and I even bear some risk. This risk results from the fact that a person from the scienti c world is disturbed by cognitive dissonance in the situation of losing the safe world of knowledge when the falsi ed paradigm collapses. And this old paradigm still has many zealous followers, especially among established scienti c professors. The author of the excellent book titled "Slavic Genealogy" (written in 1961, rst edition -February 1962) must have felt similarly, since -as A.
Gieysztor [2] recalled -he considered himself a profane, against whom "a clan of true historians dug axes of war." Who was Paweł Jasienica? His real name was Leon Lech Beynar . He was a historian and historiosopher, a writer. During World War II he fought as an o cer in the ranks of the Home Army (Polish Armia Krajowa). Then, as a Polish patriot, he was persecuted by the communist authorities. Despite the di culties, he worked in the combined role of historian and writer; for this purpose he travelled a lot, conducting a kind of scienti c tourism and eld research with open observation [3,4,5].
In turn, Prof. Józef Kostrzewski (1885Kostrzewski ( -1969 -is a professional historian and outstanding Polish archaeologist. He was able to deny the pseudoscienti c theory of his German teacher Gustaf Kossinna, talking about the civilization inferiority of the original Slavs towards the Germanic peoples. He was also able to show numerous proofs for the indigenous theory of the origin of today's Poles. Therefore, from the title of his book "Pre-Polish Culture" (in original: "Kultura prapolska") [6], the author borrowed the adjective "Pre-Polish" in the title of this essay. In particular, Jasienica in numerous fragments of his book refers to Kostrzewski's achievements and views. He also wrote explicit that Prof. Kostrzewski "pulled Polish science from the in uence of the chauvinistic 'science' of old Germany", and "The results of (Kostrzewski's) present works fully con rm his old and bold thesis that the Slavs have been sitting in Poland since at least the middle of the second millennium BC" [7: 76-77].

Methods
A comparative analysis of the literature on the subject from an interdisciplinary perspective was used. The synthesizing approach concerns the state of knowledge about the origins of the Slavdom.
This knowledge, and especially the works of several Polish authors, are still little known outside Poland. A logical discussion of the facts arising from genetic and linguistic research is a voice in the debate on the date of the arrival of the Slavs to Central Europe. The author also cites evidence in the eld of defensive architecture and the art of forti cations.

Biskupin and the "Lusatian" culture
Lusatian culture is a local product, an extension of earlier cultures ("Pre-Lusatian", "Trzciniec"). It was created by farmers and cattle breeders who have long lived a sedentary lifestyle.
Biskupin was built according to the plan, calculated on 1000-1200 inhabitants, and its construction had to be well organized [7]. This shows that an advanced social organization was already at that time.
Polish archaeological research of the Biskupin stronghold was carried out in the interwar period, and also from the 1950s. According to Paweł Jasienica, on the lower decks, among others, harpoons and bone bones of reindeer hunters from the older Stone Age were unearthed [7]. This means that these areas were already inhabited, though it was not a permanent settlement. But the stronghold itself on the lake was built in the middle of VIII c. BC. It represents the archeological "Lusatian culture", usually dated to the fourteenth century BC-V AD. Rudolf Virchow [8] introduced this name to the scienti c circulation in the second half of the 19th century. Initially, this name was only used to depict phenomena occurring in the areas of Lusatia, where the burial grounds of ashtrays from the turn of the Bronze Age and the Early Iron Age were found. Lusatian culture covers almost the entire Polish lands, north-west and central Slovakia, north and central Moravia, northern and north-eastern Bohemia, Saxony, Lusatia, eastern Thuringia and eastern Brandenburg, while in the east reaches western part of Volhynia (Fig . 1).
Neighbourhood with the Arian-Slavic Scythians (also belonging to the Iranian peoples) and the Scythian state, biologically related (genetically, dominant hg R1a1) and culturally [9,10], could have in uencedand this impact most probably took place -on the development of the statehood of the Slavs, who the Scythians invaded in VII-VI c. BC and they could manage the area for some time. The material remains are burial mounds, like may be the Krak's Mound in Kraków, and certainly the stronghold in Chotyniec [11]. By the way, whistling Scythian arrows were also found in the Lusatian culture town of the 5th century in Ślęza [7]. The "Pre-Poles" were called Lechites, by medieval chroniclers Wincenty Kadłubek and Jan Długosz, but also Prof. Czekanowski [1]. Signi cantly, ancient Lechia was to extend from the Danish islands in the north to Bulgaria and the Parthian country (Iran) in the south (Vide: Kadłubek Wincenty 1208/1612, book 1, chapter 2:9-10 [12,13]), i.e. it included, as it were, the Scythian and Slavic lands together.
Because genetic studies have determined the origin of the Aryas and Praslavs (Prasłowianie) from what is now Poland from the pre-Lusatian culture [14,15,16], Ario-Slavic peoples -such as the Lechites and Scythians, and maybe also Aryans from Iran, Afghanistan and India, can be treated as closely related, also linguistically [17,18]. Jasienica could not know the results of genetic testing in recent years.
However, he stated about the Lusatian culture, based on the state of knowledge available to him at the time, as follows: "The 'Lusatian' people are today considered by most scholars to be the direct ancestors of the Slavs. For Praslavs simply" [7: 40, 6]. If, according to recent German excavations, direct genetic ancestors of Poles fought a great battle on the Tollense River (Dolęża, Dołęcza or Doleńca) around 1250-1200 BC [19], i.e. they organized themselves before the Lusatian culture period, it could mean that: 1. They had already developed a state form; 2. They were the creators of the Lusatian culture; 3. They were a fairly homogeneous group, which Harald Haarmann [20] directly calls the Slavs -also in the areas of ancient "Germania" -from around 2000 BC.
Proof I. Architecture In addition to the results of genetic studies, language studies of Moszyński [17] and interdisciplinary analyzes with the deductive method, Jasienica proposed proof that we can call -from architecture. He wrote that in the village of Biskupin adjacent to the ancient stronghold, he found a hut built around 1850 and characterized it as follows: "The system of its construction is the same, as well as the meadow-sum structure of 'Lusatian' houses on the peninsula" [7: 41], i.e. in a forti ed stronghold that used to be on an island. This stronghold was "surrounded by a vertical shaft of the so-called box or room-like structure: tall and strong boxes made of logs laid on a framework, lled with compacted earth in the middle. We will encounter the same method of forti cation in Slavic forti cations, which are several hundred years later.
Eastern Slavs especially liked this type of forti cations. The wings of the Biskupin gate turned on wooden plugs. Doors were made in a similar way in the 12th century, in Christian Gdańsk and Opole. And the streets were laid in the same way with wood" [7: 41]. Similar strongholds with a similar structure of earth and wooden embankments were built by the Lechites (Biskupin) and later -in the 4th and 12th centuries CE, such as the stronghold of Bolesław Krzywousty in Tum Łęczycki [7].
Wojciech J. Cynarski is a civil engineer by education, with a master's degree obtained for architectural and construction design, from wooden structures. He is also interested in architecture of forti cations [21,13] and hoplology (science of weapons and military cultures). He nds the evidence from architecture cited above convincing. And, what is worth emphasizing again, this is not the only evidence.
Proof II. The art of forti cation Jasienica states after Ibrahim ibn Jakub (10th century): "The Slavs build the majority of their castles in this way. They deliberately go to meadows full of water and thickets, and then draw a circular or quadrilateral line there, depending on what they want the shape of the castle and its area, dig around (ditch) and pile up the excavated soil, strengthening it with boards and a tree resemblance of earthwork, until such a wall (rampart) reaches the dimension they desire. And they measure in it the gate from which they desire, and one enters it after a bridge from a tree" [7: 72-73].
This type of wooden bridge was also built for the castle in Biskupin. The strongholds in wetlands include, among others, Czerwień, Giecz, Kalisz and Łęczyca, and on the lake -Biskupin and Ostrów Lednicki (here a castle was actually built). Of course, fortresses were also built in strategic places, such as Głogów or Niemcza, and from the 11th (?) century also stone castles, as in Giecz and Przemyśl (both with dimensions of 35 by 15m).
"Pre-Polish strongholds with ramparts made of oak trams, clay and boulders were very good strongholds, they ful lled their tasks awlessly. It may seem like a deliberate exaggeration to someone, but what to do -they defended better than, for example, Italian stone fortresses (...) there is no example of the Germans capturing at least one Polish stronghold, forti ed in a way known to us" -wrote Jasienica [7: 81]. The walls were 10m high and more, and their thickness was up to 25 meters. No battering ram could threaten them.
From the mid-10th century, an interesting innovative change was applied in the strongholds of the Polans (rule of Mieszko I). Namely, the so-called hook construction was used. Well, the logs located transversely to the embankment's run were equipped with powerful catches that prevented the beams from sliding out of the upper, longitudinal layer. The construction thus became more stable. Jasienica [7: 91] concludes that "The Old Slavic forti cation system was completely separate and completely different from foreign designs." You can agree with that.

What next with the Lusatian culture?
The author of the "Slavic Genealogy" could not have today's knowledge based on genetic research, but also archeological, linguistic and various interdisciplinary, especially the last twenty years. And yet, based on the archaeological and historical knowledge of that time, he concluded: "'Lusatian' culture evolved over time into the culture of 'pit graves' (in the Eastern Slavs the culture of 'burial elds'), which already has direct links with the early Middle Ages civilization" (an important trade center with the Roman Empire), Cieszyn (excavations of the forti cations of the Gołęszyce tribe from the I-II and IV century) and perhaps Kruszwica can testify to settlement and cultural continuity [7]. Jasienica adds agrarian evidence to the architectural evidence: "Biskupin defensive structures -effective and strong chest shafts -nd analogies in much later times. We met them in large numbers throughout Poland. The great piles of clay unearthed in Gniezno may indicate that this type of forti cation also existed there. (...) The biscuit-sumic Biskupin architecture also later appears as if it nds itself in many places, including the same Biskupin, but in the 19th century. The bones of domestic animals from Gniezno provided irrefutable proof that in the 8th, 9th, 10th, 11th and 12th centuries, we had the same breed of cows and indigestion as they 'the Lusatians' knew" [7: 139].
According to Jasienica [7], Scythian (culturally) Neurians are Slavs from Greater Poland. These warriors identi ed with werewolves came to the north of Volhynia and Podolia, and over the Dniester in the 5th century BC. Jasienica proves this by toponyms -names of places and rivers. Let's skip the legendary King Krak in Kraków (Wawel, like Babel -royal place [21]). Apart from re ections on ancient Lechia, the country of Vistulans could function in the south of today's Poland as early as in the 4th century CE. However, Poland comes from the Polan state, i.e. this tribe in the Lechice lands, which was dominated by the native Piast dynastic. Gniezno itself was built in the 8th century CE.
With the hypothesis of the origin of Mieszko I and his team from the Vikings from the north, Jasienica deals explicitly. It was probably the mistake of the writer rewriting the old document: instead of "Ego Mesco dux" came out "Dagome iudex". Above all, however, against this hypothesis written: the chronicle of Gall Anonim, research by W. Hensel, J. Kostrzewski and J. Czekanowski, the difference in the technique of forti cations (evidence I and II), as well as the lack of language borrowings. In the 700-400 BC period, the Pomeranian territories were probably dominated by West Pomerania and Kashubians, called by the Germans Wends (German: Wenden und Winden). Perhaps they caused the removal of the Lechites from Wielkopolska to the Dniester (the above-mentioned Neurons). Meanwhile, the Wends in the 4th century BC rule even on Rügen [7].
German tribes arose from a mixture of ethnos and pre-Indo-European languages (hg I1 and others), Celtic (R1b) and Slavic (mainly R1a1) at least several hundred years, carefully counting, after Ario-Slavic tribal organizations. They emerged in disputed areas of rivalry between the mentioned ethnic and linguistic groups, especially today's northern and western Germany. Temporarily, at the turn of the old and new era, tribes of Burgunds, Goths and Vandals appeared in the Polish lands. Especially in the case of Vandals their Germanity is quite controversial, due to mixing with the Slavic population. In any case, the fall of Rome entailed the fall of the amber route and related trade, which enriched the Lechice land, country and people.

Central centres of the Slavs
Today we do not know where the headquarters was located, organizing the army of Lechites for the battle of Tollense in the 13th c. BC. We do not know whether Biskupin was a princely stronghold or just one of many. We will try to show in a chronological order the next important centres of Slavic.
"It can be assumed that in the period historically decisive for their later development, that is, between the sixth century BC and the fourth century AD, they (the Slavs) occupied lands from the Oder to the Middle Dnieper River." -Jasienica  [7]. At that time, the Czechs also resisted the Franks' attacks with di culty. According to Jan Długosz, it was the rst major defeat of the kingdom of Lechia, never invincible [16,13]. That Lechia could have been a union of the Lechic or, more generally, Slavic tribes.
For a short time in the sixth century, the Slavic state of Samon existed (today's Austria, the Czech Republic, Slovakia and Slovenia). The Greater Moravia, founded in the 9 th century, operated for less than a century. The capital was Weligrad. At the same time, there was the Vistula state on the Vistula, whose prince built a pagan temple on Łysa Góra in the 8th or 9th century. He wanted to unite Slavic tribes in this way. However, around 880, Świętopełk from Greater Moravia dominated the Vistulans and in the 9th century the Vistulans were baptized -probably in the Eastern Rite Church and Old Slavonic. According to Jasienica [7], in 906 Hungarians and Poles defeated and brought the Great Moravian State down. Polish forces were commanded by Ziemomysł or Leszek from the Piast dynasty.
In the 10th century, the strong association of Veletis and Redgoszcz (Radogoszcz) was a threat to Mieszko. This threat disappeared when Mieszko married a Czech princess, conquering a Czech ally. His baptism and his team were able to unite the land and the people of Lechia. In 980 AD with his order he founded Gdańsk, probably as a seaside town [7]. He also competed for West Pomerania and Wolin.
Even at the end of the 9th century, the Danish port of Haede was "the border between the Slavs and the Saxons and the English", and the Baltic coast "from the foothills of the Jutland Peninsula to the Vistula Żuławy belonged to the Slavs" [7: 209-210]. In the 9th and 10th centuries Wolin was one of the largest cities in Europe, inhabited by 8,000 to 10,000 inhabitants. It was mentioned by the Skalds of Jomsborgthe stronghold of Slavic Vikings. Also in the ninth century Szczecin was built. In 973, Mieszko I took Wolin and set up his crew in a forti ed fortress (built with a hook system, Vide -proof I) [7].
Jasienica highly rated the achievements of the rst Piasts. In his opinion, this dynasty used the political knowledge of the Lechic rulers of Polabia. Thanks to this: "The Piasts introduced the Lechic tribes under a common state roof. They used violence, they were cruel but not barbaric. This means that they did not destroy the provincial order established on a permanent basis. Rather, they improved it and protected it with the power of a large state" [7: 245]. In this way, Gniezno became the heart of the Slavic land. Especially Bolesław the Brave, who united the Lechic lands, achieved imperial power [16]. It was the turn of the 10th and 11th century.
Meanwhile, already at the beginning of the 7th century CE the "southern" Slavs occupied Dalmatia and Greece. In 912, Simeon the Great became the tsar (emperor) of Bulgaria with the capital in Presław. The Old Church Slavonic language established by Saints Cyril and Methodius became the language of the liturgy of the Eastern Christian rite in the Balkans, and later also in Kievan Rus. Jasienica gives an inscription in this language from the tenth century, which he read in one of the Bulgarian museums -"Tuk leżi Mosticz …" (Here lies Mosticz ... In the fourteenth century, only Kraków was the sovereign centre of Slavonic, and much later Warsaw. Prague came under German rule, which was sealed by the defeat of the Czechs on Bílá hora (8 November 1620). As a result, the Czech elite became Germanized. In turn, Moscow, after being freed from the Tatars, competed with Lithuania for the Ruthenian lands. Thus, various tribes, cities and Slavic peoples consecutively gained advantage or periodic domination. Jasienica cited these facts, but at the same time warned against Russian imperial pan-Slavism, writing and praying: "Keep us from any Slavic ideology, Lord!" [7: 331].

War art of Lechites and Poles up to the 15th century
To what extent was the Slavic "woj" (warrior) similar to Scythian or Thracian? Jasienica found a painting in Bulgaria, depicting a Thracian warrior in a "Phrygian" cap on a four-wheeled chariot -in a tomb in Kazanłyk [7]. Here, it is easy to see the kinship of clothing and martial art with the Aryans and Scythians. Despite their common ancestors, the wooded areas of legendary Lechia and today's Poland did not favour the use of chariots in battle. Still, however, Lechita used horses whose name (as well as the harness and names associated with their breeding) is native to Slavic [17]. They were small, light ponies, as evidenced by the dug horseshoes [7]. In addition to cavalry, infantry was also used quite widely. Also, the infantry was armed with bows.
However, the Slavs who reached the Balkans fought mainly on foot. According to the descriptions of Procopius and Maurice, the Slavs and Antes speak the same language, they are strong and brave, they ght without armour, mainly on foot, with a small shield and a list (spear). As before on the Baltic Sea and perhaps the Adriatic Sea (former Venice), so from the 7th century the "southern" Slavs demonstrated their knowledge of Viking ghting -"In the Aegean Sea their privateer ships appeared" [7: 294].
It has already been about the speci c art of forti cation. It is worth noting that the Lechic and Polish warriors could effectively defend their strongholds (the word "gród"/stronghold is also Slavic). Jasienica cites a German siege of Głogów, quoting Gall Anonim: "Germans wound up hand crossbows, while Poles made machines with crossbows; Germans red arrows, while Poles red arrows and other missiles; Germans made slingshots with stones, while Poles millstones and strongly sharpened piles. When the Germans, covered with wooden boards, tried to get under the embankment, the Poles gave them a bath with boiling water, covering them with burning heads. The Germans led iron rams to the gates, while the Poles rolled wheels from above, armed with steel stars. The Germans climbed the ladders and the Poles, hooking them with iron hooks, carried them into the air" [7: 50].
According to Henryk Łowmiański, the armies of Mieszko I and Bolesław the Brave were divided into three categories: higher knighthood, war team and lower knighthood. Spurs found during excavations show that this third category of warriors also used horses. There was no lack of wood for strongholds, or iron for weapons. Iron metallurgy was still cultivated in ancient Lechia BC [7]. Mieszko I -had 3,000 armoured cavalry in a team of ten troops, 300 riders per troop. Ibrahim ibn Jakub wrote that every warrior in Mieszko was worth ten others. So they had to be well-armed and well-trained. His son and the next ruler -Bolesław the Brave maintained 3900-4200 heavily armed (13-14 troops) respectively, and in the event of war he may have had as much as 17,000 to 32,000 militia together, according to various estimates.
Despite the changes in armaments and the art of war, the ethos of valour was preserved by Poles. Jasienica indicates that the exceptional e ciency of Polish knighthood and Polish war art (martial art) was confronted with the Teutonic State, which in the fourteenth century was Europe's greatest power and prevailed in the technique of war (including the art of forti cation) over Poland [7,21]. However, in the great Battle of Grunwald (1410), the combined Polish-Lithuanian forces won. "Only twelve prominent Polish knights were killed at Grunwald, although they participated in the hottest battle as wanderers. In the then ghting, involving melee combat, the weak, the less resistant died" [7: 310]. They also had to be well-trained in foot and horse ghting techniques. An example would be Zawisza Czarny of Garbów, coat of arms Sulima (1370-1428), undefeated in numerous knightly tournaments, being a model of knightly virtues.

Discussion
In the light of the above, the correct note is contained in one of the encyclopedia of general history about the Slavs that "what seems very likely, they lived in the lands located north of the Carpathians, in the Odra, Vistula and Dnieper basin already in the so-called Lusatian culture (around 1300 -around 400 BC)" [22: 588]. This is con rmed by language, archaeological, myth and religious studies, as well as genetic studies [6,17,10,15,20,13]. Some researchers postpone the occurrence of Slavs in these areas to around 2000 BC or earlier [20,23].
Of course, it is wrong to nd out the ancestors of the Slavs among the Etruscans. However, the in uence of the genes of the warriors of the Eastern European steppes is a fact con rmed in genetic research.
Holders of R1a1 Y-DNA haplogroups arrived in this area around 3000 BC. They were the ancestors of the Aryans, Scythians and today's Slavs [15,16]. By assimilation with the pre-Indo-European people found here, they rst initiated the legendary Lechia, and then the historical Slavonic. However, in detail we are not yet able to resolve many things. For example, according to Jasienica, the Neurians were Praslavs from Greater Poland, and according to Smirnov they were Prabalts. He believes that the Slavs only in the V -IV centuries BC from the Vistula and Bug basins expanded to the east, inhabiting the areas of Polesie and Wołyń/Volyn [24].
What do specialists from the Scythians and Sarmatians say about cultural relations and especially in the eld of military culture between the Slavs and nomads from the east? According to Alexey Smirnov, "Scythians plowing" are probably Slavs, as Herodotus described it in the 6th-5th century BC. The Russian researcher indicates: "The researchers attribute the culture of burial elds burial elds to Slavs. The pre-Slavonic origins of the Scythian plowmen, as related to newcomers (from the culture of burial elds), facilitated their penetration into the areas of Transnistria" [24: 61]. The genetic and cultural root of the Scythians, Sarmatians and Indo-Iranian Aryans was common. "Sauromats and Sakis probably come from the creators of Andronovska culture (Aryans -note by the author). Apparently, all the late bronze peoples and the cultures they created (...) gave rise to Scythian tribes in the broad sense of the term. Anthropological varieties of all Scythian tribes are in most cases Europeanid" [24: 89].
The Scythians are already identi ed by ancient writers with mounted archers. They also used light javelins and heavy spears, short akinakes (30-50 cm) and long swords, axes, ice axes and llers. The richer used plate or scale armour and helmets, mostly made of bronze. On the basis of the rich burials of the tribal aristocracy, it can be assumed that heavy-armed Scythian cavalry constituted their main striking force. "The less wealthy Scythians, without heavy gear, armed with bows, throwing spears and short swords (akinakes), formed light cavalry units" [24: 150, 25, 26]. Every adult free man was a warrior. The use of archers and heavy driving were the advantages of the Scythian tactics for a long time, including in later battles with the Romans, as in the Battle of Carrhae, where the Scythians supported their related Parthians. Smirnov believes that heavy driving rst appeared in the Saki and Massaget in the second century BC. In addition, infantry were also used. "The formation of the Scythian infantry was presumably in uenced by the Greek phalanx of the 4th and 2nd century BC, which the Scythians had to come across more than once" [24: 153].
Similarly, the Sarmatians were excellent riders and warriors, in which they practiced from the early boyhood. Sulimirski refers here to Strabo (VII, 4, 6) and Ammianus Marcellinus from the 4th century.
Sarmatians fought on horseback or on foot. They used a bow, sword up to 130 cm long, javelin or spear, battle ax, wicker or wooden-leather shield, slingshot and rope. They used armour from untreated volition skin or iron plates sewn onto the skin. The Roksolan tribe introduced very long spears with an iron cave, departing from the main role of the bow and arrow. At the end of the 4th century BC, the inhabitants of Chorez and Massaget created a heavy-duty ride -cataphracts. Tactics and combat technique gradually evolved. "The second century AD brought the twilight of heavy-armed driving and a change of Sarmatian tactics after the introduction of a new and dangerous 'Hunski' bow (...). Arrows of this type, equipped with a strong iron arrowhead, pierced the armour. This change was caused by the arrival of new Sarmatian tribes (Alans) from the east, which the people from Eastern European steppes were unable to resist properly" [27: 19].
The martial art of the Scythians and Sarmatians (more generally we can talk here about their speci c warrior culture [26]) in uenced the Lusatian culture, especially through the invasions of these warlike peoples into the basins of the Vistula and the Oder. It motivated Lechic people to build forti ed strongholds. Scythian strongholds, like the stronghold in Chotyniec (today's Podkarpackie province), had embankments built in a different way -no room construction was found [28], which could have been a pro-Slavic invention. The Scythians probably had an advantage in the open eld, in direct clashes. Meanwhile, conquering forti cations was not a strong point of the indicated steppe peoples. Alliances of the Lechites and Scythians, probably against the Persians of King Darius, were probably also implemented, as Bukowski [29] suggests. The Scythians invaded Central Europe several times, probably for robbery purposes, which they did with varying degrees of success, not always victorious. The content of archaeological nds east of the Vistula also points to the "commercial", material and technological impact of Scythian culture, and indirectly -Greek [29,32]. The weapons found in women's burials in Poland may speak for the Sarmatian tradition of women's participation in combat, but may also be the result of special respect for both women and weapons; that is, weapons may not have been owned by these women -we do not know if they had the privilege of carrying weapons with them [30].
Sulimirski believes that the Antes were Alans (belonging to the Sarmatians), as well as Serbs and Croats. In his opinion, these Iranian tribes ruled in the Lechic lands; "The Sarmatians apparently constituted a local ruling class, which was gradually enslaved" [27: 179]. The proof is to be Sarmatian tamga transformed into Polish nobility coats of arms [27]. Meanwhile, Jordanes already explained that the Slavs, "although of the same origin, used three names: Wends, Antes and Sclaveni." If they spoke a similar language, why shouldn't we consider them Slavs? Especially since there is also a strong biological relationship here. Above all, however, there is no genetic research that would show a statistically signi cant difference in the origin of the Polish nobility and the rest of the Polish society, in particular when comparing the descendants of the nobility with people of peasant origin. This fact refutes Sulimirski's thesis about the Sarmatian origin of the nobility in Poland and the alleged rule of (foreign) Sarmatians over the Slavs. Well, the Antes, Serbs (or Sorbs) and Croats were -like other Indo-European Scythians -an Ario-Slavic people and they spoke a language related to the Lechitic language [17].
War democracy of the Scythians and Sarmatians is related to Old Slavic. Similarly -the tactics of using complementary light and heavy cavalry and infantry formations; the use of eld traps, lit arrows, anking the enemy and defending your own rolling stock. The rich vocabulary connected with horse breeding and horse riding, which from the Slavic language has changed to Polish, indicates the traditions of horse warriors from the time -perhaps -the Great Scythia. Signi cantly, Old Polish chroniclers such as Wincenty Kadłubek in particular identify the territorial scope and ancient achievements of the Lechites and Scythians [12,17,19,13].
In confrontation with Asian powers, the Slavs suffered several unpleasant defeats. In the 13th century at the battle of Legnica (Polish lands, 1241) the Polish prince Henry II the Pious fell at the hands of the Mongols. Similarly -in 1444 near Varna (Bulgaria) -Władysław III, king of Poland and Hungary. This took place in the battle against Sultan Murad II. The above-mentioned Zawisza Czarny also fell while ghting the Turks. Poles fought to defend Christian, European civilization. In the following centuries they did so with many victorious successes. They perfected the ght of horse formations -from light to heavy hussars, as well as weapons and the technique of its use (hussar sabre) [31][32][33][34]. Thanks to this, for the next two centuries Rzeczpospolita (the Kingdom of Poland in union with Lithuania) was a power that rebuked both Swedes (Livonia, present-day Estonia), Russians (victory at Kłuszyn and capture of Moscow), Tatars and Turks -for the famous relief and the victory of Vienna 1683 year.

Conclusions And Epilogue
Some historical atlases require map replacement for periods prior to 700 AD. In the light of the cited evidence and logical justi cations, the indigenous theory of the origin of the Slavs is con rmed. However, the hypothesis about the Scandinavian origin of Mieszko I is falsi ed. This does not mean that his team could not serve, among others, warriors came from across the Baltic.
Old heritage, political and military knowledge, paid off in Poland in the X-XI centuries, and then in the XV-XVII. Slavs living west of Poland were almost completely Germanized. Today, separate countries like the Czech Republic, Poland, Slovakia, eastern Germany and western Ukraine operate in the areas of the former Lusatian culture. Con icts of interest/Competing interests: There is no con ict of interest.
There is full availability of data and material (data transparency).
I agree to codes availability of your Journal.
Author's contribution: It is my own work (100 percent).