Christianity hates Indo-Europeans? Yamna DNA seems to inversely correlate with Christianisation date

[Celto-Germanic]

Of course there are many exceptions, and I know these ancestry maps aren't entirely accurate, but it stood out to me that the last paganist countries in europe - and the countries where the protestant reformation took off - coincidentally tend to have higher proportions of Yamna or IE linked DNA.

https://decolonialatlas.files.wordpress.com/2018/03/the-christianization-of-europe.png

https://www.eupedia.com/images/content/Yamna-admixture.png

https://i.pinimg.com/originals/11/ac/1f/11ac1fdff6c2468eef0452526768bcce.png

Lithuania was the last pagan nation in Europe, conquered by Teuton crusaders, and it has very high steppe admixture

[JamesBond007]

Who is highest in Yamna ? Norwegians , Lithuanians and Estonians ? Pretty the nations in Europe who have done almost nothing in the arts and sciences. French have lower Yamna but slaughter those nations in terms of achievements in the arts and sciences and if it wasn't for Britain and Germany, historically, they would be under the yoke of the greater Frankenreich or French empire.

[Celto-Germanic]

Who is highest in Yamna ? Norwegians , Lithuanians and Estonians ? Pretty the nations in Europe who have done almost nothing in the arts and sciences. French have lower Yamna but slaughter those nations in terms of achievements in the arts and sciences and if it wasn't for Britain and Germany, historically, they would be under the yoke of the greater Frankenreich or French empire.

No need to take anything so personally mate. I'm just making an observation. Also it's laughable to claim norwegians have done nothing for the arts and sciences.

[Creoda]

And your point is that people with higher PIE ancestry (Northern Europeans) are less inclined to Christianity? That maybe so, but the reason they were the last to be converted is a matter of geography and exposure to Rome, Christianity spread from the Middle East.

[Insuperable]

What a stupid thread.

[pulstar]

Thousandth time: "correlation does not imply causation".

[Creoda]

What a stupid thread.
The OP is making a habit of them, see the thread yesterday complaining that the Nordic example on Wikipedia had ugly glasses.

[Radimir]

I always say Ragnarök already happened. It occurred in the form of Abrahamic religions which killed off the old gods of Europe.

[sean]

Simply because Indo-European pagans survived on Pastoralism (livestock herding on horseback), like ancient cowboys with swords and chariots instead of rifles and wagons, so conversion in Northern Europe happened in one of three ways:

1. Political (in the case of Balts, some Slavs, Scandinavians and some Germanic peoples in continental Europe):

A king or other leader would “convert” for reasons such as forming a marriage alliance (like Jogaila did in Lithuania and Æthelberht in England) or to prevent war with a Christian state/kingdom.

2. In the instance of peoples like the Irish, missionaries would straight up lie and tell them that Christianity was essentially their original faith and that paganism was demonic subversion that their ancestors fell for.

3. Force:

Lithuania was the last pagan country in Europe and regularly sent back the chopped off heads of priests sent by the Catholic Church to convert the population. The Catholic Church spent about 300 years trying to convert the various Baltic tribes to Christianity, using larger and better equipped armies. In the end, they converted to Christianity out of political convenience and gave the Germans one of the worst historical defeats in their entire history, alongside the Poles, at the Battle of Grunwald.

Besides, most Northern Europeans prior to the Reformation were only nominally Christian.

[JamesBond007]

No need to take anything so personally mate. I'm just making an observation. Also it's laughable to claim norwegians have done nothing for the arts and sciences.


Whose the Norwegian equivalents of Newton, Darwin, Kepler, Laplace, Lamark, Lavosier , Faraday , Galileo, Euler, Gauss, Fermat, Descartes, Pasteur, Watt, Edison, Da Vinci, Aristotle, Plaot, Kant, Descartes , Hegel, Beethoven, Mozart, Bach, Michaelangelo, Picasso, Raphael, Titian, Rembrandt , Durer, Shakespeare, Goethe etc...etc.. ? I could be here all day naming people :picard1:

The only Norwegian I know of is Ibsen that is worth any mention but Shakespeare, Goethe, Dante, Virgil , Homer, Rousseau, Voltaire, Moliere , Byron etc.. blow him out of the water.

[Komintasavalta]

I think the inverse correlation between date of Christianization and EEF ancestry would be even stronger. The map in the first post of this thread is retarded because the legend was drawn over the last region of Europe that remained pagan.

Date of first complete Bible translation in Northeast European languages:

- Finnish - 1642 (http://uralictypology.pbworks.com/w/page/5940075/Uralic%20Bibles).
- Estonian - 1739 (http://uralictypology.pbworks.com/w/page/5940075/Uralic%20Bibles).
- Komi - 1823 (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bible_translations_into_the_languages_of_Russia#Ko mi).
- Chuvash - 2009 (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bible_translations_into_the_languages_of_Russia#Ch uvash).
- Udmurt - 2013 (http://www.ibtpartners.org/ta_ext/ta_ext_9_print.php).

These languages only have a translation of the New Testament as far as I know:

- Erzya - 1821 (http://uralictypology.pbworks.com/w/page/5940075/Uralic%20Bibles).
- Northern Saami - 1840 (http://uralictypology.pbworks.com/w/page/5940075/Uralic%20Bibles).
- Lule Saami - 2000 (http://uralictypology.pbworks.com/w/page/5940075/Uralic%20Bibles).
- Karelian - 2003 (https://www.amazon.com/New-Testament-Karelian-Olonets-Language/dp/9529790732).
- Mari - 2007 (https://www.eurasiatica.blog/mari-new-testament-published.html).
- Moksha - 2016 (https://joshuaproject.net/languages/mdf?#bibles).

AFAIK, these languages don't even have a complete translation of the New Testament:

- Nenets: Some gospels have been published this millennium (https://ibtrussia.org/en/tags/nenets).
- Tatar: A partial translation of the New Testament in the Kryashen dialect of Christian Tatars was published in the 1800s (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bible_translations_into_the_languages_of_Russia#Kr yashen).

[dududud]

No, i don't think.

This is more complex.

[PaleoEuropean]

A few points

1. Indo-European is mixed, was never a single culture in Europe and was made up of different people from different waves of emigration; so the correlation would be just chance as genetics are.

2. How does Protestantism correlate with anti-Christianity and genetics? Martin Luther was I2a din. Who knows what John Calvin was but he probably had a balance mixed since he was Northern French.

3. Genetic studies are usually very imperfect and isolated and most floating around are so old they should be questioned just based off how little samples existed when they were done and how much admixture calculation has grown.

You should look at things from the scientific method and find all the holes before you take a theory sailing.

[PaleoEuropean]

Also paganism only lasted so long in the East and North simply because the Vikings carved out their own sphere of influence, culture and trade. Once the Normans stopped the Viking raids on western Europe; the Northern Scandinavians and Scando-Slavs really had to just get with the times and find a new way of gaining wealth as well as gaining land through politicking instead of loosely sponsored settlements. The protestant reformation in the North was mostly due to the lack of ties and over taxation of Rome, most the Catholic world hated the churches system but had enough invested to stick with it even then some like a handful of Poles reformed because they just got sick of the churches hand in everything. Britain reformed just because the King essentially didn't like to stay married; it later got traction mostly in Scotland. The English were never quite fanatically protestant until the creation of the UK, even then a lot of the smaller sects that couldn't muster militias or armies got booted to America.

There is so much depth and complexity to these types of issues.

[Roy]

What a stupid thread.

I would say it is an interesting coincidence though.

[Roy]

I think the inverse correlation between date of Christianization and EEF ancestry would be even stronger. The map in the first post of this thread is retarded because the legend was drawn over the last region of Europe that remained pagan.

Date of first complete Bible translation in Northeast European languages:

- Finnish - 1642 (http://uralictypology.pbworks.com/w/page/5940075/Uralic%20Bibles).
- Estonian - 1739 (http://uralictypology.pbworks.com/w/page/5940075/Uralic%20Bibles).
- Komi - 1823 (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bible_translations_into_the_languages_of_Russia#Ko mi).
- Chuvash - 2009 (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bible_translations_into_the_languages_of_Russia#Ch uvash).
- Udmurt - 2013 (http://www.ibtpartners.org/ta_ext/ta_ext_9_print.php).

These languages only have a translation of the New Testament as far as I know:

- Erzya - 1821 (http://uralictypology.pbworks.com/w/page/5940075/Uralic%20Bibles).
- Northern Saami - 1840 (http://uralictypology.pbworks.com/w/page/5940075/Uralic%20Bibles).
- Lule Saami - 2000 (http://uralictypology.pbworks.com/w/page/5940075/Uralic%20Bibles).
- Karelian - 2003 (https://www.amazon.com/New-Testament-Karelian-Olonets-Language/dp/9529790732).
- Mari - 2007 (https://www.eurasiatica.blog/mari-new-testament-published.html).
- Moksha - 2016 (https://joshuaproject.net/languages/mdf?#bibles).

AFAIK, these languages don't even have a complete translation of the New Testament:

- Nenets: Some gospels have been published this millennium (https://ibtrussia.org/en/tags/nenets).
- Tatar: A partial translation of the New Testament in the Kryashen dialect of Christian Tatars was published in the 1800s (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bible_translations_into_the_languages_of_Russia#Kr yashen).

I am astonished that Udmurt and Chuvash translations appeared only in the 21st century! But Russian ones were long time before that available to them ... so likely there was no much demand.

[gixajo]

So nowadays Moroccan, Syrian or Turks should be loved by "Christianity", according to your tesis , because they were christianized quite early.

[Token]

It has nothing to do with genetics, and a lot to do with Romans failing to penetrate Germania.