Evidence of a Germanic presence in eastern Europe

[d3cimat3d]

Some people are asking for evidence of east-Germanic people in eastern Europe so I decided to do a thread covering the topic. Some notable Germanic tribes of east Europe are Bastarnae, Scirii & most notably the Goths. Here's a map of Gothic archaeological sites:

http://i742.photobucket.com/albums/xx70/MurderMaterial/Facett_02a-g-2.jpg


I have been wondering for some time now, are there any Eastern Germanic haplotypes left in central-eastern-southern europe ? Do we even know what haplotypes they carried ?

Here is a chart of some eastern European populations.

http://i742.photobucket.com/albums/xx70/MurderMaterial/ha.jpg

Source (http://deposit.ddb.de/cgi-bin/dokserv?idn=981561349&dok_var=d1&dok_ext=pdf&filename=981561349.pdf)

So what are the haplogroups associated with Germanic speaking people?
I1a, I1c, which are found in trace amounts in eastern Europe.

[Ibericus]

Actually one of the theories is that haplogroup I1 originated in the Balkans:cool:

[d3cimat3d]

Actually one of the theories is that haplogroup I1 originated in the Balkans:cool:

Yes but I1a is a sub-clade that isn't found in the Balkans but in Scandinavia & I1c is common in Germany.

[Bloodeagle]

Who is to say that some early Germanic tribes had not R1a1 and R1b1 in their composition?:)

[Agrippa]

Who is to say that some early Germanic tribes had not R1a1 and R1b1 in their composition?:)

They surely had, but I1 is a more secure marker so to say. R1a or R1b could be "this or that", for certain variants of I1 it is much more likely that it is of Germanic origin and you can extrapolate from that of course.

Some of the highest Germanic influences seem to be present in the Russian areas which are heavily Finno-Ugrian mixed in the North probably, there the population might be to a large degree that of Slavicised Germanics and Finno-Ugrians regionally.

I suppose the clearest Germanic influence we can recognise in the yDNA being mostly the result of Varangian/Viking settlements.

I don't know in which thread this was posted already:

Angela Fechner et al - Boundaries and Clines in the West Eurasian Y-Chromosome Landscape: Insights From the European Part of Russia // AMERICAN JOURNAL OF PHYSICAL ANTHROPOLOGY, 2008

http://s54.radikal.ru/i144/0808/5f/a353d5199200.gif

---
Roewer использовал те же данные, что и Angela Fechner, или наоборот ))

Roewer et al. "Analysis of Y chromosome STR haplotypes in the European part of Russia reveals high diversities but non-significant genetic distances between populations" // Int J Legal Med, 2008

R1a-M17 258/545 47,3%
N3-TAT 80/545 14,7%
R1-M173 28/545 5,1%
K 9/545 1,7%
J2-M172 16/545 2,9%
I-M170 119/545 21,8%
G-M201 10/545 1,8%
DE-YAP 16/545 2,9%
C-RPS4Y 2/545 0,4%
F-M89 6/545 1,1%

---

Вот результаты исследования русских популяций Олега Балановского и др.

http://www.ydna.ru/files/area.gif
http://www.ydna.ru/files/russia.gif

[Ibericus]

Who is to say that some early Germanic tribes had not R1a1 and R1b1 in their composition?:)
Actually they had. The R1b-U106 is a germanic branch of R1b-M269

[Loki]

Good thread, I have often wondered about the Germanic legacy in Eastern Europe. They had a strong early influence in those areas noted in Nomad's first map, and no doubt left a lasting genetic mark on the region - especially in present-day Ukraine.

[Osweo]

There's some idea of the River Oka as having a Germanic name, related to Latin Aqua. This is the river that starts in the nook between the Ukraine and Belarus, into which the Moskva falls, and which then joins the Volga.

I'd love to hear of any similar material. :)

I'd also love to hear more on the fate of the 'stay at home' Goths of the Crimea... Into what later population did they merge? The Greek???

[d3cimat3d]

There's some idea of the River Oka as having a Germanic name, related to Latin Aqua. This is the river that starts in the nook between the Ukraine and Belarus, into which the Moskva falls, and which then joins the Volga.

I'd love to hear of any similar material. :)

I'd also love to hear more on the fate of the 'stay at home' Goths of the Crimea... Into what later population did they merge? The Greek???

I have doubts that Oka is derived from a Germanic word, if it is than it must be from the Varangians because Goths had little or nothing to do with Belarus & eastern Ukraine.

However Romanian historian Bogdan Petriceicu-Hasdeu connected the name of the river Moldova with Mulde, a river in Saxony, and Moldau, the German name of the river Vltava in the Czech Republic, and claims that all derive from the Gothic word for "dust" - Mulda.

[The Khagan]

The extinct eastern branch of Germanic peoples must have left a pretty striking genetic legacy, however I have extreme doubts of how much of a genetic impact the Varangians/Rus had, at least in comparison to the former Scandinavian/Germanic outposts in Eastern Europe. As far as I know, the Rus were more or less a dominant, small aristocratic group whose system of governance above genetics and culture, which was Slavicised over time, was the only tangible legacy they left.

[d3cimat3d]

The extinct eastern branch of Germanic peoples must have left a pretty striking genetic legacy, however I have extreme doubts of how much of a genetic impact the Varangians/Rus had, at least in comparison to the former Scandinavian/Germanic outposts in Eastern Europe. As far as I know, the Rus were more or less a dominant, small aristocratic group whose system of governance above genetics and culture, which was Slavicised over time, was the only tangible legacy they left.

You're right about the Kievan Rus being mostly a aristocratic group, but think of how many Slavic fair maidens they slept with every night... ;)

[Basil]

http://www.ydna.ru/files/russia.gif

I have read that the Russian I1s are mostly of Finno-Ugrian origin and doesn't mark any intermixing with Germanics. It's a pre-Germanic haplogroup and the indigenous medieval Finno-Ugrian tribes (which weren't exclusively N1c) got it before Germanics came to the scene. Probably the only area where you can expect some kind of proper Germanic influence is the area with the highest percentage of R1a (62,7) and the lowest one of N1c (4,5). I mean the Livni town area. At least I don't have a convincing explanation how it comes that I1 prevails over N1c in this area (8,2 % to 4,5 %). My paternal village is near Livni by the way. Probably we are the descendants of the Western Slavic settlers (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vyatichi) already partially mixed with Germanics before the migration to the east.

[Agrippa]

I have read that the Russian I1s are mostly of Finno-Ugrian origin and doesn't mark any intermixing with Germanics. It's a pre-Germanic haplogroup and the indigenous medieval Finno-Ugrian tribes (which weren't exclusively N1c) got it before Germanics came to the scene. Probably the only area where you can expect some kind of proper Germanic influence is the area with the highest percentage of R1a (62,7) and the lowest one of N1c (4,5). I mean the Livni town area. At least I don't have a convincing explanation how it comes that I1 prevails over N1c in this area (8,2 % to 4,5 %). My paternal village is near Livni by the way. Probably we are the descendants of the Western Slavic settlers (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vyatichi) already partially mixed with Germanics before the migration to the east.

Well, we can't be absolutely sure, but look at various of the areas with a higher percentage of N being actually weak in I1, like Mezen having zero of it:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mezen

Vologda on the other hand, with a Germanic (as well as Finno-Ugrian) influence, has all variants of I being present, not just I1(a), but also I1c!

Unzha too has higher frequencies of I1(a), I1c and R1b!

Finland and Estonia have weaker frequencies of I1c from what I know and Eupedia says, and that even though they have a significant Indoeuropean and Germanic influence too!

http://www.eupedia.com/europe/european_y-dna_haplogroups.shtml

But of course, that's a lot of speculation and without higher resolutions it might be hard to tell from which group f.e. I1 came into an area, though I still think a Germanic presence is relatively likely for an explanation...

[Äike]

Well, we can't be absolutely sure, but look at various of the areas with a higher percentage of N being actually weak in I1, like Mezen having zero of it:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mezen

Vologda on the other hand, with a Germanic (as well as Finno-Ugrian) influence, has all variants of I being present, not just I1(a), but also I1c!

Unzha too has higher frequencies of I1(a), I1c and R1b!

Finland and Estonia have weaker frequencies of I1c from what I know and Eupedia says, and that even though they have a significant Indoeuropean and Germanic influence too!

http://www.eupedia.com/europe/european_y-dna_haplogroups.shtml

But of course, that's a lot of speculation and without higher resolutions it might be hard to tell from which group f.e. I1 came into an area, though I still think a Germanic presence is relatively likely for an explanation...

Funnily enough, the largest frequency of "Germanic" I1 is in Finland, Western-Finland to be precise. The area has been settled by Swedes, but it still is weird that mixed Swedish-Finnish areas are more "Germanic" than pure Swedish/Norwegian/Danish areas.

You also have to take into consideration that Finno-Ugrics aren't all the same. Among Indo-Europeans, Germanics differ from Slavs and so on. Finno-Ugrics may have had and still have different groups of people.

We know that several Y-DNA haplogroups are associated with Indo-Europeans, but only haplogroup with the Finno-Ugrics? I find that a bit awkward.

If this is true, then I doubt that all Finno-Ugrics were homogenus.
http://www.suomi.nu/suomiseurat/documents/S2_kielitilanne_5500eaa.jpg

[Pallantides]

At 23andMe I share 74.60% in genome wide comparison with a Ukrainian woman from Crimea.:)


Funnily enough, the largest frequency of "Germanic" I1 is in Finland, Western-Finland to be precise. The area has been settled by Swedes, but it still is weird that mixed Swedish-Finnish areas are more "Germanic" than pure Swedish/Norwegian/Danish areas.




I1 is also quite frequent in the Sámi populations:

Norwegian Sámi 40.9%
Finnish Sámi 40.6%
Swedish Sámi 31.4%
Kola Sámi 17.4%

[Sarmata]

I have read that the Russian I1s are mostly of Finno-Ugrian origin and doesn't mark any intermixing with Germanics. It's a pre-Germanic haplogroup and the indigenous medieval Finno-Ugrian tribes (which weren't exclusively N1c) got it before Germanics came to the scene. Probably the only area where you can expect some kind of proper Germanic influence is the area with the highest percentage of R1a (62,7) and the lowest one of N1c (4,5). I mean the Livni town area. At least I don't have a convincing explanation how it comes that I1 prevails over N1c in this area (8,2 % to 4,5 %). My paternal village is near Livni by the way. Probably we are the descendants of the Western Slavic settlers (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vyatichi) already partially mixed with Germanics before the migration to the east.

It's shame but I didn't know about that:
"According to Nestor tribe of Vyatichi were 'Lachy' (Lechites), similar to Lendians, and used to live in areas east from Vistula river. Due to some foreign invasion they moved to the East...the Vyatichi had already populated the Moskva basin and the area of today's Moscow."
It looks we are really strongly related:thumb001:.

[Agrippa]

Funnily enough, the largest frequency of "Germanic" I1 is in Finland, Western-Finland to be precise. The area has been settled by Swedes, but it still is weird that mixed Swedish-Finnish areas are more "Germanic" than pure Swedish/Norwegian/Danish areas.

First of all, obviously such haplogroups/-types can only be more or less correlated to such groups like Germanics or Finno-Ugrians - at least by now, probably that was different somewhere back in time.

However, I1 is basically Northern European and it is quite likely that the Finns are mix of old Northern Europeans with Finno-Ugrians (bringing yDNA N) and Indoeuropeans.

Also the average in Finland is lower than in North Germanic areas and it also depends on the areas of Scandinavia from which the Germanic settlers came and how the distribution was THEN.


You also have to take into consideration that Finno-Ugrics aren't all the same. Among Indo-Europeans, Germanics differ from Slavs and so on. Finno-Ugrics may have had and still have different groups of people.

Obviously the Baltic Finns are and always were the most European among the Finno-Ugrians (if ignoring today Hungarians which have little real Finno-Ugrian influences and more Central European/Indoeuropean), that's obvious.


We know that several Y-DNA haplogroups are associated with Indo-Europeans, but only haplogroup with the Finno-Ugrics? I find that a bit awkward.

If this is true, then I doubt that all Finno-Ugrics were homogenus.

My idea is, like stated, that the foreign Finno-Ugrian groups came to North Eastern Europe where they just met with older hunter-gatherer populations, which in Finland most likely carried I too, and later Indoeuropean people, from which they got a significant genflow as well.

So regardless of how homogeneous they were when they entered Western Eurasia, they were no longer homogeneous when we can distinguish the Baltic Finns from other Finns and the like...

The map showing such a wide distribution of Finno-Ugrian languages makes little sense though.

[Äike]

First of all, obviously such haplogroups/-types can only be more or less correlated to such groups like Germanics or Finno-Ugrians - at least by now, probably that was different somewhere back in time.

However, I1 is basically Northern European and it is quite likely that the Finns are mix of old Northern Europeans with Finno-Ugrians (bringing yDNA N) and Indoeuropeans.

Also the average in Finland is lower than in North Germanic areas and it also depends on the areas of Scandinavia from which the Germanic settlers came and how the distribution was THEN.

In my opinion, Finns and the Finno-Ugrians are the old hunter-gatherer Northern-Europeans. Kalevi Wiik's theory seems the most logical, I thought that he must be wrong, before reading more about his theory.

Several months ago, I bought a book (http://www.varrak.ee/101eesti/files/image/101_syndmust.jpg) titled 101 historic events in Estonian history. Historic event #1 is the first people coming to Estonia. Genetics is also mentioned.

It says that the Finno-Ugrics differ from other Europeans(it is also mentioned that Slavs, especially Russians, are an exception) by having Y-DNA haplogroup which doesn't exist in Western-Europe, Africa, India, China and Japan.

Rough translation of one chapter:

"This mutation is also widely common among most of the Siberian people. This seems to confirm the widely said assumption that the homeland of the Finno-Ugrics was in Siberia and that they moved west from there and mixed with Indo-Europeans. But gene-scientists say that this isn't so simple. According to them, it seems that the Arctic Y-DNA line has traveled from Eastern-Europe to Siberia, not the other way around."


Obviously the Baltic Finns are and always were the most European among the Finno-Ugrians (if ignoring today Hungarians which have little real Finno-Ugrian influences and more Central European/Indoeuropean), that's obvious.

Baltic-Finns are the most European, because they resemble the native UP-Europeans, the most. Genetically and anthropologically. The Finno-Ugrians further east are sadly mixed with Turkics, Siberians or Tatars. For instance Udmurts live next to Tatars, but they're extremely light featured, just like their brother-populations in Northern-Europe. Some are mixed, though.


My idea is, like stated, that the foreign Finno-Ugrian groups came to North Eastern Europe where they just met with older hunter-gatherer populations, which in Finland most likely carried I too, and later Indoeuropean people, from which they got a significant genflow as well.

So regardless of how homogeneous they were when they entered Western Eurasia, they were no longer homogeneous when we can distinguish the Baltic Finns from other Finns and the like...

My idea is, that Finno-Ugrians are native to Northern- and Eastern-Europe, and Indo-Europeans are foreign to Western- Northern- and Eastern- Europe. They're not foreign to the Balkan area.


The map showing such a wide distribution of Finno-Ugrian languages makes little sense though.

Not really... but I think that Finno-Ugrians being in modern-day UK, is slightly dubious.

[Ibericus]

Haplogroup I1 is not germanic. IE Germanics were R1b.

[Bloodeagle]

Haplogroup I1 is not germanic. IE Germanics were R1b.
I would like to point out that the Germanics that we are speaking of are of a later age and culture than the pre Germanic I1 aborigines of Germany. Germanic ethnicity and language had acquired a tri-hybrid character by the Iron Age.


The Germanic branch

The first expansion of R1a took place with the westward propagation of the Corded Ware (or Battle Axe) culture (3200-1800 BCE) from the Yamna homeland. This was the first wave of R1a into Europe, one that is responsible for the presence of this haplogroup in Scandinavia, Germany, and a portion of the R1a in the Czech Republic, Slovakia, Hungary or Poland. The high prevalence of R1a in Balto-Slavic countries nowadays is not only due to the Corded Ware expansion, but also to a long succession of later migrations from Russia, the last of which took place from the 5th to the 1th century CE.

The Germanic branch of Indo-European languages probably evolved from a merger of Corded-Ware R1a (Proto-Slavic language) and the later arrival of Italo-Celtic R1b from Central Europe. This is supported by the fact that Germanic people are hybrid R1a-R1b, that these two haplogroups came via separate routes at different times, and also on the linguistics of Proto-Germanic language, which shares similarities with Italic, Celtic and Slavic languages. The Corded Ware R1a people would have mixed with the pre-Germanic I1 aborigines to create the Nordic Bronze Age (1800-500 BCE). R1b presumably reached Scandinavia later as a northward migration from the contemporary Hallstatt culture (1200-500 BCE). The first genuine Germanic tongue has been estimated by linguists to have come into existence around (or after) 500 BCE. This would confirm that it emerged as a blend of Hallstatt Proto-Celtic and the Corded-Ware Proto-Slavic. The uniqueness of some of the Germanic vocabulary points at borrowing from native pre-Indo-European languages. Celtic language itself is known to have borrowed from Afro-Asiatic languages spoken by Near-Eastern immigrants to Central Europe. The fact that present-day Scandinavia is composed of roughly 40% of I1, 20% of R1a and 40% of R1b reinforces the idea that Germanic ethnicity and language had acquired a tri-hybrid character by the Iron Age.
Source (http://www.eupedia.com/europe/origins_haplogroups_europe.shtml#IE-invasion)

Germans are of a hybrid culture. The original I1 inhabitants of Germany were mostly slaughtered by the invading IE tribes!

I1 is identified by at least 15 unique mutations, which indicates that this lineage has been isolated for a long period of time, or experienced a serious population bottleneck. Although the first mutation splitting I1 away from I2 may have arisen as long as 20,000 years ago, people belonging to this haplogroup all descend from a single man who lived less than 5,000 years ago. This corresponds to the arrival of the Indo-European, suggesting that a high percentage of the indigenous I1 men could possibly have been killed by the new immigrants.
Source (http://www.eupedia.com/europe/origins_haplogroups_europe.shtml#I1)

[Ibericus]

Yes, I know. Germanics today are a hybrid of IE germanic tribes of R1b's, european indigenous I1, and IE R1a from eastern Europe

[Agrippa]

"This mutation is also widely common among most of the Siberian people. This seems to confirm the widely said assumption that the homeland of the Finno-Ugrics was in Siberia and that they moved west from there and mixed with Indo-Europeans. But gene-scientists say that this isn't so simple. According to them, it seems that the Arctic Y-DNA line has traveled from Eastern-Europe to Siberia, not the other way around."

In the end, it's all about this question, where and when N and it's types originated. Now I read most of the time they came originally from further East and where not the Europoid sphere when we can speak at least of Proto-Europoids or already Europids in West Eurasia.


My idea is, that Finno-Ugrians are native to Northern- and Eastern-Europe, and Indo-Europeans are foreign to Western- Northern- and Eastern- Europe. They're not foreign to the Balkan area.

Well, point is, Finno-Ugrians, especially Baltic Finns, have significant European/Indo-European influences - Nordoid to a large degree.

Indo-Europeans being most likely the product of a Neolithic - Southern-Eastern Mesolithic fusion, with some of the most important steps being done in South Eastern Europe and Eastern Europe-Western Central Asia.

Now from there they expanded and from there even before the Indo-Europeans similar, more Europid and more progressive variants, expanded too, as they did from Anatolia as well.

The Northern Cromagnoids were partly much more archaic, but showed almost no Mongoloid tendency. This foreign tendency appeared later and this might be the element which brought the Finno-Ugrian language, which would make even more sense if they being texted for yDNA haplogroup N and N's origin further East being proven. I'm waiting for that...


Haplogroup I1 is not germanic. IE Germanics were R1b.

Indo-European ethnolinguistic ancestors of the Germanics were most likely originally more R1a and R1b than I1, yes, but Germanics proper, once we can speak of them as a distinct entity out of the general Indo-European context, had I1 from the start, so we can consider it being mostly Germanic - with the possible exception of older Northern European strata elsewhere which predate any Germanic expansion.

[Bloodeagle]

Yes, I know. Germanics today are a hybrid of IE germanic tribes of R1b's, european indigenous I1, and IE R1a from eastern Europe

Except the chronology of influence is indigenous I1 first, Corded-Ware R1a1 second, then finally Hallstatt Culture R1b1 last. :D


The Corded Ware R1a people would have mixed with the pre-Germanic I1 aborigines to create the Nordic Bronze Age (1800-500 BCE).

[Agrippa]

I'm not that sure about any sort of Hallstatt Culture people's influence in Northern Europe, especially not R1b carriers if looking at the distribution even less so.

But probably I'm just wrong ;)

[Bloodeagle]

I'm not that sure about any sort of Hallstatt Culture people's influence in Northern Europe, especially not R1b carriers if looking at the distribution even less so.

But probably I'm just wrong ;)

The haplotype associated with and the language of the Hallstatt Culture did have a significant influence on the Germanic people.:)

These Proto-Italo-Celto-Germanic R1b people had settled around the Alps by 2300 BCE, and judging from the spread of bronze working, reached Iberia by 2250 BCE, Britain by 2100 BCE and Ireland by 2000 BCE. This first wave of R1b assumably carried R1b-L21 lineages in great number, as these are found everywhere in western, northern and central Europe. A second R1b expansion took place from the Urnfield/Hallstatt culture around 1200 BCE, pushing west to the Atlantic, north to Scandinavia, and as far east as Greece and Anatolia (=> see Dorian invasion below).

The new Bronze Age culture flourished around the Alps (Unetice to early Hallstatt) thanks to the abundance of metal in the region, and laid the foundation for the classical Celtic culture. The Celtic Iron Age (late Halstatt, from 800 BCE) may have been brought through preserved contacts with the the steppes and the North Caucasus, notably the Koban culture (1100-400 BCE).

The Alpine Celts of the Hallstatt culture are associated with the S28 (a.k.a. U152) mutation, although not exclusively. The Italic branch (also S28/U152) is thought to have entered Italy by 1200 BCE, but there were certainly several succesive waves, as attested by the later arrival of the Cisalpine Celts. The Belgae were another S28/U152 branch, an extension of the La Tène culture northward, following the Rhine, Moselle and Meuse rivers.

One common linguistic trait between Italic and Gaulish/Brythonic Celtic languages linked to the Hallstatt expansion is that they shifted the oiginal IE *kw sound into *p. They are known to linguists as the P-Celtic branch. It is thought that this change occured due to the inability to pronounce the *kw sound by the pre-Indo-European population of central Europe, Gaul and Italy, who were speakers of Afro-Asiatic dialects that had evolved from a Near-Eastern language. The Etruscans, although later incomers from the Levant, also fit in this category. It has recently been acknowledged that Celtic languages borrowed part of their grammar from Afro-Asiatic languages. This shift could have happened when the Proto-Italo-Celtic speakers moved from the steppes to the Danube basin and mixed with the population of Near-Eastern farmers belonging to haplogroups E-V13, T, G2a and J2b. However, such an early shift would not explain why Q-Celtic languages developed in Ireland and Iberia. It is more plausible that the shift happened after the Italo-Celts had first expanded across all western Europe. The S28/U152 connection to P-Celtic suggests that the shift took place around the Alps and Italy after 1200 BCE.

R1b-S21 (a.k.a. U106) is found at high concentrations in the Netherlands and northern Germany. Its presence in other parts of Europe can be attributed to the 5th- and 6th-century Germanic migrations. The Frisians and Saxons spread this haplogroup to the British Isles, the Franks to Belgium and France, and the Lombards to Austria and northern Italy. The high concentration of S21/U106 around Austria hints that it could have originated there in the Hallstatt period, or originated around the Black Sea and moved there during the Hallstatt period. In fact, southern Germany and Austria taken together have the highest diversity of R1b in Europe. Besides S21, the three major first level subclades of R1b1b2a1b (L21, S28, M167) are found in this area at reasonable frequencies to envisage a spread from the Unetice to Hallstatt homeland to the rest of western Europe.
Source (http://www.eupedia.com/europe/origins_haplogroups_europe.shtml)

[Thulsa Doom]

Some people are asking for evidence of east-Germanic people in eastern Europe so I decided to do a thread covering the topic. Some notable Germanic tribes of east Europe are Bastarnae, Scirii & most notably the Goths. Here's a map of Gothic archaeological sites:

http://i742.photobucket.com/albums/xx70/MurderMaterial/Facett_02a-g-2.jpg



In the good old days, when the grass was still green and the chicks was good looking, Magna Scythia was known as Greater Swithiod.


Snorri Strulason Kringla heimsis....
It is said that the earth's circle which the human race inhabits
is torn across into many bights, so that great seas run into the
land from the out-ocean. Thus it is known that a great sea goes
in at Narvesund (1), and up to the land of Jerusalem. From the
same sea a long sea-bight stretches towards the north-east, and
is called the Black Sea, and divides the three parts of the
earth; of which the eastern part is called Asia, and the western
is called by some Europa, by some Enea. Northward of the Black
Sea lies Swithiod the Great, or the Cold. The Great Swithiod is
reckoned by some as not less than the Great Serkland (2); others
compare it to the Great Blueland (3). The northern part of
Swithiod lies uninhabited on account of frost and cold, as
likewise the southern parts of Blueland are waste from the
burning of the sun. In Swithiod are many great domains, and many
races of men, and many kinds of languages.


So what are the haplogroups associated with Germanic speaking people?
I1a, I1c, which are found in trace amounts in eastern Europe.

Since the ethnogenisis of the Germanic people was in central Scandinavia, the haplogroups associated with Germanic speaking people are the same as for the Swedish population of today.

[Thulsa Doom]

I would like to point out that the Germanics that we are speaking of are of a later age and culture than the pre Germanic I1 aborigines of Germany. Germanic ethnicity and language had acquired a tri-hybrid character by the Iron Age.


Drivel from Eupedia.com


Germans are of a hybrid culture. The original I1 inhabitants of Germany were mostly slaughtered by the invading IE tribes!

It has already been proven that R1b, R1a and I2b2 was in the pre-germanic Germany before 1000 BC and no I1 has still been found. See (http://www.buildinghistory.org/distantpast/ancientdna.shtml)

[Bloodeagle]

It has already been proven that R1b, R1a and I2b2 was in the pre-germanic Germany before 1000 BC and no I1 has still been found. See (http://www.buildinghistory.org/distantpast/ancientdna.shtml)


Drivel from Thulsa Doom

I made no claims to the rarity of haplogroup I1 in the Germanic lands!
Try reading my post before coming to your conclusion about my post. Check my sources and read the article.:rolleyes2:

[Thulsa Doom]

I made no claims to the rarity of haplogroup I1's in the Germanic lands!
Try reading my post before coming to your conclusion about my post. Check my sources and read the article.:rolleyes2:

Now, I have seen the Eupedia site and it is full of speculations and it´s certainly not a source. The idea that the whole western population of men was replaced by R1b men thousand years after the agricultural revolution is highly speculative indeed.

You claimed that there was no other haplogroups in Germany then I1


Germans are of a hybrid culture. The original I1 inhabitants of Germany were mostly slaughtered by the invading IE tribes!

I pointed out that it was more likely that the I1 came from the north later on.

[Bloodeagle]

Now, I have seen the Eupedia site and it is full of speculations and it´s certainly not a source. The idea that the whole western population of men was replaced by R1b men thousand years after the agricultural revolution is highly speculative indeed.

You claimed that there was no other haplogroups in Germany then I1



I pointed out that it was more likely that the I1 came from the north later on.

I laid no claims that I1 was the only haplogroup in Germany, nor did I claim that there were no R1a1 or R1b1 in Germany before 1000 BC.

I did claim that I1 was found prior to the arrival of the R1a1 and R1b1 peoples and cultures to Germany and that all of the many people still found in Germany and Scandinavia that carry the I1 haplotype are descended from a single man that lived approximately 5000 BCE!

Looking at the maps of the I1 percentages in Europe, I will agree with you that the I1 haplogroup did probably come from the north, later on. Probably from descendants of a single man that lived around 5000 Bce. A man who must have escaped a rather brutal IE takeover of Europe.;)

[Äike]

In the end, it's all about this question, where and when N and it's types originated. Now I read most of the time they came originally from further East and where not the Europoid sphere when we can speak at least of Proto-Europoids or already Europids in West Eurasia.

The opinion that Finno-Ugrics are Mongols far away back still exists. In the good old days, the 19th century, Finns, Estonians and Hungarians belonged to the Mongoloid race (http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/2/25/Meyers_b11_s0476a.jpg) :thumb001:

Finno-Ugrics came from Eastern-Europe, it is true even if you're not a believer of Kalevi Wiik's theories.


Well, point is, Finno-Ugrians, especially Baltic Finns, have significant European/Indo-European influences - Nordoid to a large degree.

Baltic Finns have the genetically lowest(even negative) Middle-East scores, because we are not Indo-Europeans. Scandinavians also have very low Middle-East scores as demic difussion didn't happen in Northern-Europe. Still, Baltic-Finns have the lowest Middle-East score as we have retained our language.

Indo-Europeans had a superior culture (http://www.eupedia.com/images/content/Europe-diffusion-farming.gif), thus assimilating the natives was quite easy. The more northwards one goes from the Balkan area, the less Indo-European influence there is.


Indo-Europeans being most likely the product of a Neolithic - Southern-Eastern Mesolithic fusion, with some of the most important steps being done in South Eastern Europe and Eastern Europe-Western Central Asia.

Now from there they expanded and from there even before the Indo-Europeans similar, more Europid and more progressive variants, expanded too, as they did from Anatolia as well.

The Northern Cromagnoids were partly much more archaic, but showed almost no Mongoloid tendency. This foreign tendency appeared later and this might be the element which brought the Finno-Ugrian language, which would make even more sense if they being texted for yDNA haplogroup N and N's origin further East being proven. I'm waiting for that...

There are some Cromagnoids even in NW-Europe who show some "Mongoloid tendency", although they have no Mongoloid influence. It's called borealization. There are considerably less of such individuals in NW-Europe, of course. Because NE-Europe is a lot colder than NW-Europe.

[Osweo]

I
This would confirm that it emerged as a blend of Hallstatt Proto-Celtic and the Corded-Ware Proto-Slavic. !
CHRIST.... :tsk:


eupedia again;
They are known to linguists as the P-Celtic branch. It is thought that this change occured due to the inability to pronounce the *kw sound by the pre-Indo-European population of central Europe, Gaul and Italy, who were speakers of Afro-Asiatic dialects that had evolved from a Near-Eastern language. :)
:rage

MAN, it's absolute drivel, as Thulsa Doom said. Please, take our word for it. I never read such nonsense!!!

[Agrippa]

The opinion that Finno-Ugrics are Mongols far away back still exists. In the good old days, the 19th century, Finns, Estonians and Hungarians belonged to the Mongoloid race (http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/2/25/Meyers_b11_s0476a.jpg) :thumb001:

Finno-Ugrics came from Eastern-Europe, it is true even if you're not a believer of Kalevi Wiik's theories.

Well, it all depends on the haplogroup N, though even if N is Mongoloid, Finno-Ugrians could be still original Europeans, as unlikely as that would be, because the N-newcomers could be assimilated as well.

However, that admixture doesn't make the Finno-Ugrians as a whole Mongoloid, because the real genetic influence of the N-carriers seems to be rather limited. Ancient Mongoloid admixture makes nobody a member of the Mongoloid race, but at best/worst, depends on perspective, influenced...


Baltic Finns have the genetically lowest(even negative) Middle-East scores, because we are not Indo-Europeans.

Baltic Finns have significant Indo-European influences though and are practically "Indo-Europeanised Finno-Ugrians" in almost every respect - though not to the same degree of Hungarians of course.


Scandinavians also have very low Middle-East scores as demic difussion didn't happen in Northern-Europe. Still, Baltic-Finns have the lowest Middle-East score as we have retained our language.

It did happen, but just from movements inside of Europe.


Indo-Europeans had a superior culture (http://www.eupedia.com/images/content/Europe-diffusion-farming.gif), thus assimilating the natives was quite easy. The more northwards one goes from the Balkan area, the less Indo-European influence there is.

That's not true if starting with real Indoeuropeans and not just some sort of Proto-Proto-Indoeuropeans - because Indoeuropeans as a people came up inside of Europe, by the fusion of two influences with the local, most likely Eastern European, component being the dominant factor in the mix.


There are some Cromagnoids even in NW-Europe who show some "Mongoloid tendency", although they have no Mongoloid influence. It's called borealization. There are considerably less of such individuals in NW-Europe, of course. Because NE-Europe is a lot colder than NW-Europe.

Borealisation is a fact, but just consider that it can happen much faster and more drastically if the genes for cold adaptation being introduced by foreign elements, as weak as they might be in numbers. Then they can be selected much faster.

Also you don't have the same degree of Borealisation in most other regions of Europe, not just because of the lack of this relatively stronger foreign admixture, but also because the climate and way of life is not the same.

The basic Europid Borealisation trend results just in more pyknomorphic, shorter legged and the like, but there are details which go beyond that and can be observed in North Eastern Europe - primarily not exclusively - which can be attributed to Mongoloid influences or at least Mongoliform tendencies deviating from the Europid standard towards a transitional status - as Westsibirids (mostly Finno-Ugrians) are in between Europoid and Mongoloid f.e.

However, fortunately only a limited number of people have those Mongoloid/Mongoliform traits in the North East, proportionally it is really a minority in most regions and reduced even in Lapps due to long lasting mixtures with Indo-Europeans - and the already stronger/strong Europid Mesolithic base (Cromagnoid originally, today mostly Baltised).

[lei.talk]

Originally Posted by Osweo http://www.theapricity.com/forum/images/jagohan/buttons/viewpost.gif (http://www.theapricity.com/forum/showthread.php?p=247138#post247138) CHRIST.... :tsk:

:rage

MAN, it's absolute drivel, as Thulsa Doom said.
Please, take our word for it. I never read such nonsense!!!

Oswiu May Recall Thanking This Post http://www.theapricity.com/forum/images/kiddo/buttons/viewpost.gif (http://www.theapricity.com/forum/showthread.php?p=200094#post200094)
if one is making statements
that are consonant with reality,

one need simply point to the proof.

[Loki]

I'd also love to hear more on the fate of the 'stay at home' Goths of the Crimea... Into what later population did they merge? The Greek???

Why Greek? The most likely explanation is that they assimilated within the local pre-Goth populace in Crimea and neighbouring Ukraine/Russia.

[Osweo]

Why Greek? The most likely explanation is that they assimilated within the local pre-Goth populace in Crimea and neighbouring Ukraine/Russia.

Pre Goth would be who exactly, in the Crimea and its hinterland? The earliest period we know of historically has the Tauri and Scythians there. Then Greek colonies are founded, and there's some mixing going on, and then the Romans turn up... under whose rule everyone gets more or less Hellenised. Then the Goths turn up on the mainland, taking the peninsula in the mid Third Century. It will have been more or less Greek then, or Irano-Greek. Then all the other buggers come and go...

But Gothic speech appears to have survived into remarkably recent times:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crimean_Gothic

The existence of a Germanic dialect in the Crimea is attested in a number of sources from the 9th century to the 18th century. However, only a single source provides any details of the language itself: a letter by the Flemish ambassador Ogier Ghiselin de Busbecq, dated 1562 and first published in 1589, gives a list of some eighty words and a song supposedly in the language.

Busbecq's information is problematic in a number of ways: his informants were not unimpeachable (one was a Greek speaker who knew Crimean Gothic as a second language, the other a Goth who had abandoned his native language in favour of Greek); there is the possibility that Busbecq's transcription was influenced by his own Flemish tongue; there are undoubted misprints in the printed text, which is the only source.


ah... I believe the bolded text above answers my question for me. :p

The Goths were Christians. As a minority under Ottoman rule, they would ally with their co-religionists, and the better connected language won out.

NOW... where are those Hellenised Goths now?!? In the Ukraine, largely Russified, or gone to Greece proper? :chin:

[Basil]

NOW... where are those Hellenised Goths now?!? In the Ukraine, largely Russified, or gone to Greece proper? :chin:

There is some evidence they were eventually assimilated into the Tatars.
http://www.balto-slavica.com/forum/index.php?showtopic=1410&pid=16205&st=0&
(the last paragraph in the first post and the second post)

Also in 1778 Catherine II resettled all Christians of Crimea (mainly Greeks and Armenians) to the areas next to the Sea of Azov in order to undermine the economy of peninsula. It's very likely there were remnants of the Goths and Hellenised Goths among others.

[Äike]

Well, it all depends on the haplogroup N, though even if N is Mongoloid, Finno-Ugrians could be still original Europeans, as unlikely as that would be, because the N-newcomers could be assimilated as well.

However, that admixture doesn't make the Finno-Ugrians as a whole Mongoloid, because the real genetic influence of the N-carriers seems to be rather limited. Ancient Mongoloid admixture makes nobody a member of the Mongoloid race, but at best/worst, depends on perspective, influenced...

We could be talking about mongoloid admixture in Finno-Ugrics actually living next to the Mongoloid peoples. Finno-Ugrics around the Urals have received influences either from Turkics, Tatars or Siberians. In some ethnicities it is quite visible, while other are still predominately Europid.

N probably entered Siberia from Eastern-Europe, but there might have been backwards migration towards Eastern-Europe. Mart Laar states in his book that scientists state that the "Y-DNA haplogroup common only among Finno-Ugrics" entered Sibera from Eastern-Europe. I might talk to him about that in August.


Baltic Finns have significant Indo-European influences though and are practically "Indo-Europeanised Finno-Ugrians" in almost every respect - though not to the same degree of Hungarians of course.

Or as I see it... Northern-Europeans are all Finno-Ugrians, with minor Indo-European influences.


7. Linguistic development of the Post-Swiderian people
It was assumed above that the languages spoken by the Post-Swiderian
peoples at the end of the Ice Age were Finno-Ugric (traditionally Uralic).
What, then, happened to them later?
The Post-Swiderian peoples moved west and northwest in conjunction
with the resettlement of Northern Europe so that the regions they inhabited coincided largely with the area shown on Map 11. Roughly speaking, we
can claim that the inhabitants of the Post-Swiderian region, in other words,
the “New Eastern Europeans”, migrated to the parts of Europe shown on
Map 11 as part of the resettlement of Northern Europe. This is the region
where even today the people living there constitute both genetically and
anthropologically a fairly homogeneous type. The most suitable name for
these people at the end of the Ice Age would be “Post-Swiderians” or “New
Eastern Europeans”. But after their migration it would perhaps be better to
refer to them as “Northern Europeans”.
The belt to which the “Post-Swiderians” migrated when Northern
Europe was resettled after the Ice Age can also be determined using
archaeological methods. The new region was a belt that followed the
southern and eastern shores of the Baltic when they were laid bare by the
melting ice sheet. During the Early Mesolithic period this was the home of
the Maglemose-Nemen-Kunda chain of cultures (that included at a later
stage also Suomusjärvi), and during the Late Mesolithic period where the
Ertebølle-Nemen-Narva-Sperrings flourished. During the very earliest
stage (before that of Maglemosian culture) when the “Post-Swiderians”
reached what is today Denmark and Northern Germany, they came into
contact with Hamburgian and Ahrensburgian cultures. According to Pauli
Saukkonen (2005) the German archaeologist Alfred Rust “came to the
simple conclusion that the people of Hamburgian and Ahrensburgian
cultures came from the east (Rust 1951: 48–52, 1972: 64) and not from the
Magdalenian regions [Western Europe] as was thought earlier and as is still
assumed in Finland. They [the Hamburgian and Ahrensburgian people] had
narrow Brünn-type faces (after finds made at Brünn) as opposed to the
broad-faced Cro-Magnon type (ibid. 200–201). Finds from Hamburgian
culture reveal Gravettian influence, and it belongs to the sphere of
Abschlag culture, which extended from the Black Sea to Germany (...)”.
It must be assumed that these people had, right up to the final period
of the resettlement of Northern Europe, retained (not only their genetic but)
also their linguistic origins. Perhaps the people of Hamburgian and
Ahrensburgian cultures living in this region still spoke Finno-Ugric
(Uralic) languages.
Map 11.
http://img5.imageshack.us/img5/112/finnsandgeneticrelative.png
Map 12.
http://img805.imageshack.us/img805/8236/finnsandlinguisticrelat.png
Map 13.
http://img18.imageshack.us/img18/9430/finnsgeneticandlinguist.png
Map 14.
http://img534.imageshack.us/img534/8899/map14.jpg
The linguistic nature of Northern and Eastern Europe subsequently
changed, however, following two different directions: (1) New Finno-
Ugric-speaking (Uralic-speaking) areas were attached to the old one in the
north and northeast (northernmost Fennoscandia, northeasternmost Europe
and Northern Siberia) and (2) the Finno-Ugric-speaking region has shrunk
in the northern parts of Central Europe, Scandinavia, Poland, the Baltic,
White Russia (Belarus) and Russia. At the beginning of the Christian era
the region where Finno-Ugric (Uralic) languages were spoken covered
approximately that shown on Map 12. Map 13 shows three different
regions: (1) a central region where the Post-Swiderian genetic and
linguistic heritage has been preserved, (2) the western region where the
Post-Swiderian genetic heritage persists but where Finno-Ugric languages
have given way to Indo-European languages, and (3) the eastern region
where people with non-Post-Swiderian genetic heritage have adopted a Finno-Ugric (Uralic) language. The people of region 1 represent “the Finns
and their genetic and linguistic relatives” on Map 13, the people of region 2
are “genetic (but not linguistic) relatives of the Finns”, i.e. original
Germanic-speaking, Baltic-speaking and Slavic-speaking peoples, and the
people of region 3 represent “the linguistic (but not genetic) relatives of the
Finns”, i.e. the Northern Sami and Samoyed people.
The language shift from Finno-Ugric to Indo-European in the western
region occurred during the period 5,500–3,000 BC when agriculture
advanced from the south, mainly from the Band Ceramic, or LBK, region,
bringing it to those regions inhabited by Finno-Ugric-speaking hunters. The
spread of agriculture and with it the Indo-European language to the north
took the form primarily of cultural and linguistic diffusion, not demic
diffusion. In other words, it was only agriculture and the Indo-European
language that spread; there was no migration of people. The people
remained largely where they were and only agricultural skills and linguistic
skills (as a consequence of the change of the subsistence system and
language) were transferred. This idea has been put forward by the
archaeologist Marek Zvelebil, for example, and it is now generally
accepted (for example, by Colin Renfrew and Pavel Dolukhanov) (see Map
15, where the boundary of black dots shows how far agriculture spread
mainly as demic diffusion and how north of it agriculture spread as cultural
diffusion). The claim of the cultural rather than demic diffusion of
agriculture is extremely central regarding the origins of the Germanic,
Baltic and Slavic peoples.
Map 15.
http://img408.imageshack.us/img408/822/map15u.png
This process resulted in the Germanic-speaking, Baltic-speaking and
Slavic-speaking peoples, who even today represent to a large extent the
same genetic and anthropological type as their ancestors, the ancient Post-
Swiderians. The main difference is that they speak a different language
from their ancestors. The evolution of the Finns has been much the same
insofar as they are also of the same genetic and anthropological type as the
Post-Swiderians but they differ from the Germanic, Baltic and Slavic
populations in that they still speak the same Post-Swiderian language as
their ancestors.
There is no firm evidence of the stage at which the northern Sami
underwent the language shift WE > FU (where WE is some western
European language, possibly a form of Basque).
There exist three possibilities (see Map 14 and the three numbered
circles). The first is that the language shift took place at the time when the
genetic ancestors of the Northern Sami lived on the North Sea continent ca.
10,000 BC and represented Brommian culture. The second is that it
occurred within Eastern European Post-Swiderian culture when the
Western Europeans had started moving to Eastern Europe via the Central
European gateway after ca. 13,500 BC. The third possibility is that the
language shift did not take place until ca. 7,500 BC after the land link
between northernmost Fennoscandia and Eastern Karelia had come into
being. The fourth possibility, that the Northern Sami became speakers of a
Finno-Ugric language as late as the Bronze Age can hardly be deemed
credible.
We do not know when the Palaeosiberian people, the ancestors of the
Samoyeds, moved to northeastern Europe and there gave up their
Palaeosiberian tongue in favour of some Finno-Ugric language(s). It has
been thought possible that this did not happen until after 2000 BC.

Full PDF here: Who are the Finns? (http://www.ling.helsinki.fi/sky/julkaisut/SKY2006_1/1FK60.1.9.WIIK.pdf)


It did happen, but just from movements inside of Europe.

The
spread of agriculture and with it the Indo-European language to the north
took the form primarily of cultural and linguistic diffusion, not demic
diffusion. In other words, it was only agriculture and the Indo-European
language that spread; there was no migration of people. The people
remained largely where they were and only agricultural skills and linguistic
skills (as a consequence of the change of the subsistence system and
language) were transferred. This idea has been put forward by the
archaeologist Marek Zvelebil, for example, and it is now generally
accepted (for example, by Colin Renfrew and Pavel Dolukhanov) (see Map
15, where the boundary of black dots shows how far agriculture spread
mainly as demic diffusion and how north of it agriculture spread as cultural
diffusion). The claim of the cultural rather than demic diffusion of
agriculture is extremely central regarding the origins of the Germanic,
Baltic and Slavic peoples.



That's not true if starting with real Indoeuropeans and not just some sort of Proto-Proto-Indoeuropeans - because Indoeuropeans as a people came up inside of Europe, by the fusion of two influences with the local, most likely Eastern European, component being the dominant factor in the mix.

Borealisation is a fact, but just consider that it can happen much faster and more drastically if the genes for cold adaptation being introduced by foreign elements, as weak as they might be in numbers. Then they can be selected much faster.

Also you don't have the same degree of Borealisation in most other regions of Europe, not just because of the lack of this relatively stronger foreign admixture, but also because the climate and way of life is not the same.

The basic Europid Borealisation trend results just in more pyknomorphic, shorter legged and the like, but there are details which go beyond that and can be observed in North Eastern Europe - primarily not exclusively - which can be attributed to Mongoloid influences or at least Mongoliform tendencies deviating from the Europid standard towards a transitional status - as Westsibirids (mostly Finno-Ugrians) are in between Europoid and Mongoloid f.e.

However, fortunately only a limited number of people have those Mongoloid/Mongoliform traits in the North East, proportionally it is really a minority in most regions and reduced even in Lapps due to long lasting mixtures with Indo-Europeans - and the already stronger/strong Europid Mesolithic base (Cromagnoid originally, today mostly Baltised).

No "foreign genes" are needed for such borealization if living in Arctic conditions.

[Agrippa]

N probably entered Siberia from Eastern-Europe, but there might have been backwards migration towards Eastern-Europe. Mart Laar states in his book that scientists state that the "Y-DNA haplogroup common only among Finno-Ugrics" entered Sibera from Eastern-Europe. I might talk to him about that in August.

That's true, but at the crucial period, when Europoid/Proto-Europoid West Eurasians were already in formation, foreign Eastern elements carried N into Europe, that is the point.


No "foreign genes" are needed for such borealization if living in Arctic conditions.

True, but it is much more likely that certain "detail traits" came with the foreign admixture, because it wasn't necessary in Europe nor could it spread in that way and along the lines of the now proven deviation towards the East...


Or as I see it... Northern-Europeans are all Finno-Ugrians, with minor Indo-European influences.

This being largely disproven long time ago by racial typology and finally by genetics.

First major changes happened in all of Northern Europe from the Mesolithic to Metal Age periods.

Secondly there was an Eastern influence in Finno-Ugrians and thirdly there is no single proof for today's Scandinavians having relations to the Finno-Ugrians, yet alone talking about the Rest of Europe...

Kalevi Wiik was discussed here and elsewhere, can't find the respective thread right now though, but he is standing largely alone...

[Äike]

That's true, but at the crucial period, when Europoid/Proto-Europoid West Eurasians were already in formation, foreign Eastern elements carried N into Europe, that is the point.



True, but it is much more likely that certain "detail traits" came with the foreign admixture, because it wasn't necessary in Europe nor could it spread in that way and along the lines of the now proven deviation towards the East...



This being largely disproven long time ago by racial typology and finally by genetics.

First major changes happened in all of Northern Europe from the Mesolithic to Metal Age periods.

Actually in recent years, the theory is more viable then it used to be.


Secondly there was an Eastern influence in Finno-Ugrians and thirdly there is no single proof for today's Scandinavians having relations to the Finno-Ugrians, yet alone talking about the Rest of Europe...

Scandinavians are Finno-Ugrians/post-Swiderians who speak Indo-European languages... Finno-Ugrians only in the east have "Eastern influence"

The most "Eastern" Finno-Ugrians are the ones who have given up their original language and have adapted a Finno-Ugric one.

about the Sami, the Paleosiberians and the Samoyeds:

There is no firm evidence of the stage at which the northern Sami
underwent the language shift WE > FU (where WE is some western
European language, possibly a form of Basque).
There exist three possibilities (see Map 14 and the three numbered
circles). The first is that the language shift took place at the time when the
genetic ancestors of the Northern Sami lived on the North Sea continent ca.
10,000 BC and represented Brommian culture. The second is that it
occurred within Eastern European Post-Swiderian culture when the
Western Europeans had started moving to Eastern Europe via the Central
European gateway after ca. 13,500 BC. The third possibility is that the
language shift did not take place until ca. 7,500 BC after the land link
between northernmost Fennoscandia and Eastern Karelia had come into
being. The fourth possibility, that the Northern Sami became speakers of a
Finno-Ugric language as late as the Bronze Age can hardly be deemed
credible.
We do not know when the Palaeosiberian people, the ancestors of the
Samoyeds, moved to northeastern Europe and there gave up their
Palaeosiberian tongue in favour of some Finno-Ugric language(s). It has
been thought possible that this did not happen until after 2000 BC.


Kalevi Wiik was discussed here and elsewhere, can't find the respective thread right now though, but he is standing largely alone...

"History is written by the winners"... only recently some realistic theories about the history of Europe have came into existence.

[Agrippa]

Ok, here again about the haplogroup N, which is closest related to O, a clearly Mongoloid East-South East Asian haplogroup.


Haplogroup N is a descendant haplogroup of Haplogroup NO, and is believed to have first appeared in Southeast Asia approximately 15,000 to 20,000 years ago, during the Ice Age.

At that time we deal with AT LEAST Europoid forms in West Eurasia!


After Haplogroup N arose in Southeast Asia, males carrying the marker apparently moved northwards as the climate warmed in the Holocene.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Haplogroup_N_(Y-DNA)

At that time progressive Europids, especially more and more leptodolichomorphic variants from the South and East, expanded in Europe.

If that timeline is even remotely correct, an Europid origin of N is totally out of question and that even Baltic Finns deviate, at least somewhat, with their autosomal DNA towards the East Asian populations in comparison to the rest of Europe points also to the same pattern.


Haplogroup N1c1
The subclade N1c1 is defined by the presence of markers M178 and P298. (It was previously known as N3a.) N1c1* has higher average frequency in Northern Europe than in Siberia, reaching frequencies of approximately 60% among Finns and approximately 40% among Latvians and Lithuanians.[21] It's also more diverse in Northern Europe than in Siberia.[22]

Miroslava Derenko and his colleagues noted that there are two subclusters within this haplogroup, both present in Siberia and Northern Europe, with different histories. The one that they labelled N3a1 first expanded in south Siberia (approximately 10,000 years ago on their calculated by the Zhivotovsky method) and spread into Northern Europe where its age they calculated as around 8,000 years ago.

At that time you deal with the first Neolithic populations and Europe being dominated by clearly Europid variants already - when the carriers of N finally make it into the continent.

Another link:
http://en.academic.ru/dic.nsf/enwiki/2010104

The N carriers might have been no classic Mongolids, but more Mongoloid than Europid and clearly different from both the archaic Cromagnoids in the North East, as well as the more progressive Cromagnoids and Aurignacoids further South.

The racial-phenotypical impact was very limited but being most evident in Europe's racial variation among Lappids (core group) and Eastbaltids (distinguished from Baltised Cromagnoids = Westbaltid-Baltid by their Mongoliform/part Mongoloid characteristics).

[Pallantides]

Ok, here again about the haplogroup N, which is closest related to O, a clearly Mongoloid East-South East Asian haplogroup.




R is a subclade of P and closest related to haplogroup Q wich is most common in Amerindians, Turkic and Mongoloid populations.
http://img186.imageshack.us/img186/8071/prq.png
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/7/70/Haplogroup_Q_(Y-DNA).PNG

[Agrippa]

R is a subclade of P and closest related to haplogroup Q wich is most common in Amerindians, Turkic and Mongoloid populations.

First of all, Indianids and Westsibirids are not strongly Mongoloid and lived closer to the Europid areas than the ancestors of N even.

Secondly, I deliberately mentioned the timeline for N, because regardless of their South East Asian origin, if they would have been present in an Europid zone 40.000 years ago, things might be different, but as we can see, they came into Europe not earlier than 10.000 years ago!

R on the other hand was always present the West Eurasian, Proto-Europoid sphere, it originated in an area which was and now is largely Europoid, it spread with it subclades in areas which were and are now largely Europid.


This haplogroup is believed to have arisen around 20,000-34,000 years ago,[1] somewhere in Central Asia or South Asia, where its ancestor Haplogroup P is most often found at polymorphic frequencies

= Proto-Europoid and Europoid territory and totally different timeline!

(Western-Southern) Central Asia was originally an Europid core area, until the Turko-Mongol expansions changed that.

So a relation - many tens of thousands of years old, to Q, can in no way be compared with the situation of N.

And actually, one is inclined to believe that Q-carriers were originally closer to Europids than the first N-carriers even, considering the relations of P and R.

Crucial is in any case which haplogroups and -type were present in the original Proto-Europoid groups and Europid's formation period - the same goes for Mongoloids.

Whether they had originally a closer relationship to this or that is not really relevant, more important is which groups came together in the Europid formation populations, the direct Europid ancestors.

The most typical lineages are in this context R and IJ obviously, as well as the minor groups which were present as well.

[Äike]

Ok, here again about the haplogroup N, which is closest related to O, a clearly Mongoloid East-South East Asian haplogroup.



At that time we deal with AT LEAST Europoid forms in West Eurasia!



http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Haplogroup_N_(Y-DNA)

At that time progressive Europids, especially more and more leptodolichomorphic variants from the South and East, expanded in Europe.

If that timeline is even remotely correct, an Europid origin of N is totally out of question and that even Baltic Finns deviate, at least somewhat, with their autosomal DNA towards the East Asian populations in comparison to the rest of Europe points also to the same pattern.



At that time you deal with the first Neolithic populations and Europe being dominated by clearly Europid variants already - when the carriers of N finally make it into the continent.

Another link:
http://en.academic.ru/dic.nsf/enwiki/2010104

The N carriers might have been no classic Mongolids, but more Mongoloid than Europid and clearly different from both the archaic Cromagnoids in the North East, as well as the more progressive Cromagnoids and Aurignacoids further South.

The racial-phenotypical impact was very limited but being most evident in Europe's racial variation among Lappids (core group) and Eastbaltids (distinguished from Baltised Cromagnoids = Westbaltid-Baltid by their Mongoliform/part Mongoloid characteristics).

This is Kalevi Wiik's view:
http://img413.imageshack.us/img413/8957/kwydna.png

The genetic development and migrations of the ancestors
of European men can be presented in the following ten
phases; see .
(1) About 50 thousand years ago (kya) all the ancestors
of the present European men still lived in northeastern
Africa and formed only one clan.
(2) About 45 kya the clan was split into an “African”
Clan E and an “Asian” Clan F, and the “Asian” clan
moved out of Africa to the Arabic peninsula and the
Near East.
(3) About 40 kya part of the “Middle Eastern” Clan F
gave rise to the “Central Asian” Clan K.
(4) About 35 kya two new clans, R and NO, branched
off from K. Clan R moved to western Central Asia and
Clan NO to eastern Central Asia.
(5) About 30 kya Clan R was split into R1 and R2, and
Clan R1 moved to the steppe area between the Ural
mountains and the Caspian Sea.
(6) About 25 kya one branch of Clan R1, Clan R1b,
reached Iberia and the Atlantic Coast, and somewhat
later Clan R1a branched from R1 and became common
in the present-day Ukraine.
(7) About 25 kya the “Middle Eastern” Clan F sent
another branch to Anatolia and further to the Balkans,
and a new sub-Clan I emerged.
(8) Perhaps at about the same time, Clan NO in eastern
Central Asia developed into “Siberian” Clan N and
moved towards the north.
(9) Clan N was split into two sub-clans, N3 and N2, and
these moved first to northwestern Siberia and later to
Eastern and Northeastern Europe.

Full PDF here: Where did European men come from? (http://www.jogg.info/41/Wiik1.pdf)

But recently it has been proposed that N came from Eastern-Europe. Sounds logical(as it is more common in Eastern-Europe than other places), but we can't be sure in that.

You can continue your crusade saying that everyone who aren't "progressive" aren't pure Europeans and must have something foreign in them. I might have believed you 5 years ago, when I didn't know much about these subjects.

[Agrippa]

But recently it has been proposed that N came from Eastern-Europe. Sounds logical(as it is more common in Eastern-Europe than other places), but we can't be sure in that.

The current frequency tells you nothing about the origin, if the variation is very limited and you find f.e. just one or two types, like in Europe, with more variants and older variants being present elsewhere - further East in Mongoloids.

I mean if Q is most frequent in some Indianid groups, what can you say by that about its origin, if the original area was changed afterwards and genetic drift played in?

Nothing.


You can continue your crusade saying that everyone who aren't "progressive" aren't pure Europeans and must have something foreign in them. I might have believed you 5 years ago, when I didn't know much about these subjects.

I just say that at that time and in this context, more progressive variants expanded in Europe (Mesolithic to Metal Ages).

There are progressive non-Europids, like Sinid and Silvid - two Mongoloid racial forms actually and fully Europid less progressive elements, like very reduced-infantilised Alpinids or archaic Cromagnoid forms.

So again, this isn't true.

Edit: As for the Wiik interpretation, the picture didn't load before, it is not in concordance with other studies and even that is very, very close and somewhat too late rather for the Europid formation period. I mean if they had the habitat in Northern Central Asia, Northern Asia, around 20.000 years ago, without too many contacts to Europid populations, how could they become fully Europid then?

Even with Wiiks interpretation, the original N-carriers would be outside of the standard Europid variation.

N1c (in his old work still called N3) would have been arriving in a borderline area, with the starting Holocene (12.000 BP!), in North Eastern Europe!


The Holocene is a geological epoch which began approximately 12,000 years ago

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Holocene

At that time the Europid and Mongolid formation period came to an end and especially in parts of Eastern Europe we already find classic AND progressive Europids.

That "NO" was situated in the Europid formation area is still out of question.


During the LGM the ancestors of the European
men retreated from northern Europe into four refuges
located in Iberia, the Ukraine, the Balkans, and Siberia.

Correct with the vast majority of todays ancestors living on the Balkans and in the Ukraine, those in Siberia were no real Europids, most likely had at least also Mongoloid traits and they never entered Europe before the Holocene.

Westsibirid-Sibirids are therefore, most likely, closer to the original N-carriers than todays Baltic Finns and related Finno-Ugrians of more Europid character.

Also his work is, from a genetical point of view, in certain respects outdated.

[Bloodeagle]

(6) About 25 kya one branch of Clan R1, Clan R1b,
reached Iberia and the Atlantic Coast, and somewhat
later Clan R1a branched from R1 and became common
in the present-day Ukraine.

Here is an opposing view and the one that makes the most sense to many, including myself, regarding R1b's migration into Europe.:)


It was initially believed that R1b, or at least the majority of it in Europe, dispersed from Iberia after the Last Glacial Maximum, and had only come from Asia much earlier. A variant of this idea was that there may have been two separate R1b dispersals in the Mesolithic period, one from Anatolia, and one from Iberia. However, more recently it has become more widely accepted that R1b entered Europe from Asia more recently, perhaps in the Neolithic."The distribution of this lineage, the diversity within it, and estimates of its age all suggest that it spread with farming from the Near East...Previous studies suggested a Paleolithic origin, but here we show that the geographical distribution of its microsatellite diversity is best explained by spread from a single source in the Near East via Anatolia during the Neolithic", Balaresque et al. 2010,A Predominantly Neolithic Origin for European Paternal Lineages{{cite book |author=B. Arredi, E. S. Poloni and C. Tyler-Smith |chapter=The peopling of Europe |editor=Crawford, Michael H. |title=Anthropological genetics: theory, methods and applications |publisher=Cambridge University Press |location=Cambridge, UK |year=2007 |page=394 |isbn=0-521-54697-4}}

[Osweo]

There is some evidence they were eventually assimilated into the Tatars.
http://www.balto-slavica.com/forum/index.php?showtopic=1410&pid=16205&st=0&
(the last paragraph in the first post and the second post)
Wow; благодарю!

In short, for non-Russian speakers, some Germanic lexica was observed even in 1806, among the Crimean Tatars of the Mangup region. And these same differed in appearance from their neighbours, appearing more 'northern European'.

A Swedish traveller in the 1600s compiled a list even longer than Busbeq's but lost his notes later on, in China. :(

The village of Nikita was known (prior to forced exile of its inhabitants in 1944) for its Nordic inhabitants.

... an Islamic Germanic people!! :eek:

Also in 1778 Catherine II resettled all Christians of Crimea (mainly Greeks and Armenians) to the areas next to the Sea of Azov in order to undermine the economy of peninsula. It's very likely there were remnants of the Goths and Hellenised Goths among others.
Ah!

That explains the Greek areas between Donetsk and the coast of the Sea of Azov! I always wondered when this had happened. My friend's father lived around there before moving to Moscow, and taught us some Greek swearwords. :thumbs up Heh, I might even go some day, to spot a Goth... ;)

Here they are, bright green on the right;
http://a.imageshack.us/img69/3030/ukrainafolk.jpg (http://img69.imageshack.us/i/ukrainafolk.jpg/)

[Pallantides]

... an Islamic Germanic people!! :eek:



Didn't Hitler wish that Germanics had adopted Islam instead of Christianity...:D

[Inese]

Didn't Hitler wish that Germanics had adopted Islam instead of Christianity...:D
Absolut rubish from where do you get your lies?? :rolleyes2:

[Äike]

I just say that at that time and in this context, more progressive variants expanded in Europe (Mesolithic to Metal Ages).

There are progressive non-Europids, like Sinid and Silvid - two Mongoloid racial forms actually and fully Europid less progressive elements, like very reduced-infantilised Alpinids or archaic Cromagnoid forms.

So again, this isn't true.

Edit: As for the Wiik interpretation, the picture didn't load before, it is not in concordance with other studies and even that is very, very close and somewhat too late rather for the Europid formation period. I mean if they had the habitat in Northern Central Asia, Northern Asia, around 20.000 years ago, without too many contacts to Europid populations, how could they become fully Europid then?

What is the Europid formation period? Also, you're always saying that Central-Asia was some kind of Europid heartland. N and R both come from Central Asia. N from eastern Central Asia and R from western Central Asia.

Does a Europid population need contacts to Europid populations to become "fully Europid"?


Even with Wiiks interpretation, the original N-carriers would be outside of the standard Europid variation.

According to you.


N1c (in his old work still called N3) would have been arriving in a borderline area, with the starting Holocene (12.000 BP!), in North Eastern Europe!

Define borderline and tell me exactly who inhabited the borderline areas 20 000 years ago.


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Holocene

At that time the Europid and Mongolid formation period came to an end and especially in parts of Eastern Europe we already find classic AND progressive Europids.

That "NO" was situated in the Europid formation area is still out of question.

Wasn't Central-Asia an "Europid heartland" as you have stated before?


Correct with the vast majority of todays ancestors living on the Balkans and in the Ukraine, those in Siberia were no real Europids, most likely had at least also Mongoloid traits and they never entered Europe before the Holocene.

Westsibirid-Sibirids are therefore, most likely, closer to the original N-carriers than todays Baltic Finns and related Finno-Ugrians of more Europid character.

Also his work is, from a genetical point of view, in certain respects outdated.

Both the people who retreated into the Ukrainian and Siberian refugees and then resettled Northern-Europe, spoke Finno-Ugric languages. The Northern group of Finno-Ugrics had N3 and the Southern group had R1a.

What Mongoloid traits are you talking about by the way? If it's the extreme borealization by living in the coldest inhabited region in the world, then you probably don't have to answer.

The original N-carriers were of pure Cro-Magnon stock, they were not related to modern-day Siberians.

http://img18.imageshack.us/img18/9430/finnsgeneticandlinguist.png

What aspects of his work, from a genetical point of view, are outdated?

[Pallantides]

Absolut rubish from where do you get your lies?? :rolleyes2:

ISLAM, A RELIGION COMPATIBLE FOR THE GERMANIC PEOPLES

His conversations on a number of subjects were recorded by his closest confidants. One of these was Albert Speer, chief architect and Reich Minister of Armanents and Munitions, who quoted Hitler's regret the Germans accepted Christianity rather than religions which would have been more compatible to them:

"Hitler usually concluded this historical speculation by remarking: 'You see, it's been our misfortune to have the wrong religion. Why didn't we have the religion of the Japanese, who regard sacrifice for the Fatherland as the highest good? The Mohammedan religion too would have been much more compatible to us than Christianity. Why did it have to be Christianity with its meekness and flabbiness?'

http://www.ummofiles.com/POMAGALSKY/illustrations/grand_mufti1.jpg

"It is only with the Roman empire where one can say that culture was a factor under the government. The government of the Arabs in Spain too was infinitely distinguished: Many scientists, thinkers, astronomers, mathematicians, one of the most humane times, at the same time as a colossal knighthood. When, later, Christianity came there, then one can say: barbarians. The knighthood that the Castilians have is actually one of Arab heritage. If Charles Martel had not overcome in Poitiers: since the Jewish world already seized us - that Christianity is something well of insipid - we would have better received Mohammedanism, those doctrines of the reward of heroism-: combatants alone have the seventh heaven! With that the Germans would have conquered the world. It is only by Christianity that we have been held distant."

http://debatt.aftenposten.no/item.php?GroupID=28&ThreadID=296425&page=1#item4773989
http://forums.islamicawakening.com/f20/adolf-hitler-islam-muslims-16502/

[d3cimat3d]

I must admit that the majority of the Goths left the Dnestr region following the arrival of the Huns, but if you read the entire Hlöðskviða it states that many of them retreated and hid in the forests, so I think there is some continuum of the Gothic phenotypes in Moldova. I think these Moldovans are good examples of what the Goths looked like. I will post pictures of my family members later.

http://i742.photobucket.com/albums/xx70/MurderMaterial/1111.jpg
http://i742.photobucket.com/albums/xx70/MurderMaterial/111-1.jpg

http://i742.photobucket.com/albums/xx70/MurderMaterial/222-1.jpg

http://i742.photobucket.com/albums/xx70/MurderMaterial/555.jpg
http://i742.photobucket.com/albums/xx70/MurderMaterial/666.jpg
http://i742.photobucket.com/albums/xx70/MurderMaterial/444.jpg

http://i742.photobucket.com/albums/xx70/MurderMaterial/6666.jpg

http://i742.photobucket.com/albums/xx70/MurderMaterial/333.jpg

The Scandinavian look is very distinct and it's very easy to differentiate them from Slavic blonds.

[moskovit1791]

Looking at these beauties, the Scandinavians are dying of envy, and Slavic Mongoloid blondes sprinkle ashes on his head .....

Now everyone knows how the ancient Goths look .....

[Pallantides]

This guy could pass as Scandinavian:
http://i742.photobucket.com/albums/xx70/MurderMaterial/444.jpg

[Jaska]

Both the people who retreated into the Ukrainian and Siberian refugees and then resettled Northern-Europe, spoke Finno-Ugric languages. The Northern group of Finno-Ugrics had N3 and the Southern group had R1a.
Pseudo-science.
None of the refugia spread the Uralic language.
You cannot guess the language from the genes.

http://www.mv.helsinki.fi/home/jphakkin/Uralic.html

[Äike]

Pseudo-science.
None of the refugia spread the Uralic language.
You cannot guess the language from the genes.

http://www.mv.helsinki.fi/home/jphakkin/Uralic.html

You're stuck in the 19th century, with your outdated theories.

[Jaska]

You're stuck in the 19th century, with your outdated theories.
Very funny! :thumb001:
I represent the newest and best argued views of the last decade. You support the views that were disproved and outdated even at the 80's (J.P. Mallory's critique at Colin Renfrew's continuity argumentation at 1989). You can't survive with bluff here. I'm ready to discuss with you about the subject, but you only bluff.

You may first tell us, how is it possible to predict the language from genes? To my knowledge, there is no gene which would determine that I speak Finnish, you speak Estonian and so on.

Please, the arena is yours. :)

P.S: In case you didn't notice, I put the question bold.

[Godric]

There are many evidences, including features.

[safinator]

Actually one of the theories is that haplogroup I1 originated in the Balkans:cool:
Not at all.
It clearly originated in Southern Sweden.

[Mordid]

fuck you for bumping my old threa... Oh wait, I thought it was my thread.

[Artek]

Not at all.
It clearly originated in Southern Sweden.
Southern Sweden?
Genographic project clearly says that it possibly originated there
(See M253)
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/d/db/Genomap01.jpg/800px-Genomap01.jpg
This branch is still present in Spain and has nothing to do with Scandinavian ones. I analysed a Spanish Project carefully to make that statement.