The main contradictions, between hypotheses posed by physical anthropologists or geneticists, and the hypotheses put forward by archaeologists or historians, regarding the origin and spread of the Slavs, concerned and still concern the following: (a) the state and biological dynamics of Slavic populations (the capacity for population expansion) , (b) diversity and biological similarity of various groups living in Central Europe at the end of antiquity and in the early Middle Ages, (c) migration movements and their intensity, (d) directions of migration and their importance in the formation of Slavic “ethnos”. On the basis of the results of anthropological research, it can be concluded that: (a) both in the late antiquity period and in the early Middle Ages, the regional diversity of the populations inhabiting the Odra and Vistula basins was maintained, (b) there was a geographical gradient in the variability of morphological features of the skull from west to east of Europe, (c) populations belonging to the Germanic population and populations living in Scandinavia in the Middle Ages clearly differed in terms of morphological features of the skeleton from the population of Western Slavs inhabiting the Odra and Vistula basin. On the other hand, the emergence of a clear geographical gradient in the variability of morphological features of the skeleton, in late antiquity and in the Middle Ages, in Central Europe, allows to conclude that there were no intense migratory movements and the population exchange between late antiquity and the early Middle (d) results of the skeletal morphological features and state and biological dynamics of the population from the Roman period and the Middle Ages indicate a similar level of adaptation of these groups of people to living conditions. This result does not confirm the thesis put forward by some archaeologists and historians that the cultural system of the Slavs was characterized by poverty and a low level of material culture.

The paper attempts to approach some peculiarities of the two branches of the early Slavs (Sclaveni and Antes), as the Byzantine sources of the sixth and early seventh centuries present them as being similar. Within this context the following are examined: a) the origin and ethnic identity of the Sclaveni and the Antes, taking into account certain historiographical models on the early Slavs, as well as the controversial issue of the ethnic identity of the Antes (Slavic or Iranian) and the etymology of their name; b) the material culture: under consideration are the Prague and Penkovka cultures, identifi ed with the Sclaveni and the Antes respectively, their common elements and peculiarities, their mutual infl uences as well as infl uences from other cultures; c) the political and social organization: the internal structures of the Sclaveni and the Antes, taking into account the testimony of Jordanes, Procopius and Maurice, the references in other sources to the titles of chieftains, or a kind of genealogy into the early Slavic society, as well as the treaty of Byzantium with the tribal union of the Antes are under scrutiny. The paper draws the conclusion that the Sclaveni and the Antes shared similarities, but actually were not one and the same at all, as it appears in the Byzantine sources. Furthermore, the peculiarities that appear the political-social organization and the material culture of the Antes, due to their historical and cultural evolution, are not of a degree that could dispute their Slavic ethnic and cultural identity.