I1 non Nordic, much older, and Paloithic Cro magnon central European

[Fire Haired]

http://www.eupedia.com/images/content/Haplogroup_I1.gif
http://www.eupedia.com/images/content/I1-tree.gif

I1 M253 in Scandinavia is a offshoot of central European I1

From what i have seen I1 (http://www.eupedia.com/europe/Haplogroup_I1_Y-DNA.shtml) M253 in Scandinavia is majority I1a2 L22 and that I1a2 L22 is only in Scandinavia and areas were there is historical Scandinavian settlement. In the rest of Europe I1 M253 is I1a1 M227, I1a3 Z58, I1a4 Z63, and I1b Z131. It is by far mainly in central Europe the rest in non central Europe was probably spread by Germanic tribes (https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=1&cad=rja&ved=0CC8QFjAA&url=http%3A%2F%2Fen.wikipedia.org%2Fwiki%2FGermani c_peoples&ei=27QPUsj-CMjC2wXT1IHoCw&usg=AFQjCNHSCnne-1y-3iNVBw8uyDDpwD8moA&sig2=CGWcJSangK9y4V3kmpAcug&bvm=bv.50768961,d.b2I). So I1 in central Europe is much more diverse than I1M253 in Scandinavia which is majority I1a2. If I1 M253 originated in Scandinavia wouldn't u except that they would have the most subclades. I1b Z131 is very very rare and from what i have read only found around the Netherlands and western Germany. All of Scandinavian I1a2 L22 brothers are in central Europe same with its cousin I1b Z131.

It seems that I1 in Scandinavia is just a offshoot of the original I1a Df29 of central Europe that is hwy they only have one subclade. People i think are just assuming I1 is unque to Scandinavia and it originated there. Just like people assumed R1b (http://www.eupedia.com/europe/Haplogroup_R1b_Y-DNA.shtml) M343 was unque and original to western Europe.


I1 M253 was the first Y DNA haplogroup to settle Scandinavia and is Much older than predicted
I have heard crazy age estimates for I1 (http://www.eupedia.com/europe/Haplogroup_I1_Y-DNA.shtml) M253 as 4,000-5,000 years old in Denmark or whatever. When u look at how I1 M253 is spread out mainly in Scandinavia it does not represent any non cultures in archaeology in the last 10,000 years. Those age estimates are complete BS i don't know why I1 M253 is always predicted to be so young. Pretty much 100% of Scandnavia Y DNA is I1 M253 (http://I1), N1c M46 (https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=1&cad=rja&ved=0CC8QFjAA&url=http%3A%2F%2Fen.wikipedia.org%2Fwiki%2FHaplogr oup_N-M231&ei=gLUPUqWGEYOY2AXCs4HgBQ&usg=AFQjCNGWJIi_GIvR_6GzrTwBFWa2ZxKXMQ&sig2=jIzkO13Rkx1HSEBJTlF4_Q&bvm=bv.50768961,d.b2I), R1a M420 (http://www.eupedia.com/europe/Haplogroup_R1a_Y-DNA.shtml), R1b M434 (http://www.eupedia.com/europe/Haplogroup_R1b_Y-DNA.shtml), and I2a2 P214 (http://www.eupedia.com/europe/Haplogroup_I2_Y-DNA.shtml). There is about 1-10% G2a P15 (http://www.eupedia.com/europe/Haplogroup_G2a_Y-DNA.shtml), E1b1b M215 (http://www.eupedia.com/europe/Haplogroup_E1b1b_Y-DNA.shtml), and J2 M172 (http://www.eupedia.com/europe/Haplogroup_J2_Y-DNA.shtml)in far southern Scandinavia but those can easily be explained as contact with other Europeans or Neolithic farmers.

R1b M343 and I2a2 P214 in Scandinavia are basically distributed the same way. They are centered in southern Norway and Sweden and only barely exist in western Finland. Just about all R1b M343 in Scandinavia fall under Germanic Italo Celtic R1b L11 which originated in central Europe about 5,000-4,500ybp while proto Germanic Italo Celtic speakers were migrating from eastern Europe. I2a2 P214 originated in central Europe too probably over 10,000ybp and almost defintley migrated with R1b, Germanic languages, and brought red hair (http://www.eupedia.com/genetics/origins_of_red_hair.shtml) to Scandinavia(since it is distrubted the same way as those haplogroups) with the Nordic bronze age culture (https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=1&cad=rja&ved=0CC8QFjAA&url=http%3A%2F%2Fen.wikipedia.org%2Fwiki%2FNordic_ Bronze_Age&ei=46wPUrr1B-XV2AXZ6oGIBQ&usg=AFQjCNEWmRehGQZq-2JvzcKfoyaRC_TJvQ&sig2=p3n2oaT6j28yfEYVeO2mRA&bvm=bv.50768961,d.b2I) 4,000-3,500ybp. So the R1b M343 and I2a2 P214 is easily explained. R1a M420 in Scandinavia is the brother clade of Balto Slavic R1a M420 and can easily be explained by Corded ware culture (https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=1&cad=rja&sqi=2&ved=0CC0QFjAA&url=http%3A%2F%2Fen.wikipedia.org%2Fwiki%2FCorded_ Ware_culture&ei=OrYPUsLTIYOGyQHCyIEw&usg=AFQjCNG8a_yp5nZRFuoQQMXp3bhNuofzOw&sig2=_UwhmcgOF5vWW6HwTEPLAw&bvm=bv.50768961,d.b2I) which had settlement in southern Scandinavia 5,000-4,000ybp and spoke proto Balto Slavic (https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=1&cad=rja&sqi=2&ved=0CC0QFjAA&url=http%3A%2F%2Fen.wikipedia.org%2Fwiki%2FProto-Balto-Slavic_language&ei=ULYPUvzvHOjhygHV14CIAg&usg=AFQjCNHSgm_mTW__BkVedI6xNcaV_vmJUw&sig2=h2_HF8HeqeqLEayT1v0R_Q&bvm=bv.50768961,d.b2I).

N1c M46 in Scandinavia is centered around Finland and Uralic speakers (https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=1&cad=rja&sqi=2&ved=0CC4QFjAA&url=http%3A%2F%2Fen.wikipedia.org%2Fwiki%2FUralic_ languages&ei=abYPUqmRIrGgyAH7xIBo&usg=AFQjCNF3IVFbj2Prdp4mTax8FiKyqbVg1w&sig2=vixFu5MzmH468FdrVCgNzg&bvm=bv.50768961,d.b2I). It also perfectly matches the distributions of Kunda culture(8,000-6,000ybp) and Comb Cermaic culture (5,000-6,000ybp). Y DNA N period is originally mongliod and is very popular in northern Siberia it is estimated to have arrived in northeastern Europe including Finland from Siberia 10,000ybp. So N1c in Scandinavia is defintley from the spread of Uralic languages 10,000-6,000ybp.

I1 M253 though in Scandinavia is very spread out and popular everywhere. No matter if the people speak a Germanic or Uralic language. It does not match any culture in archaeology in Scandinavia in the last 10,000 years. We know the first human settlement in Scandinavia came about 11,000ybp we have very very old human remains in Scandinavia dating around 10,000ybp and their skull shapes were Caucasian. N1c M46 is a Mongliod haplogroup there has to be a native European Caucasian haplogroup of Scandinavia and the only possible one is I1 M253. There is no way I1 M253 spread in Scandinavia in any recent migration and if there was one it had to be pre Uralic over 8,000ybp which to me means it was the first Y DNA haplogroup in Scandinavia.

So what this mean's is Scandnavien I1a2 is probably around 9,000-11,000 years old. Also that I1 itself is much older than 4,000-5,000 years old since I1a2 has brothers and a cousin in central Europe. It would make sense I1 it self originated in central Europe i would guess 15,000-20,000ybp.

Custom made Migration map of I1 M253
http://www.theapricity.com/forum/attachment.php?attachmentid=36514&d=1376691369

I know this is sloppy i used MS paint. I dont know were but it seems I1 M253 ancestral form took refuge ins southern Europe it could have been in Spain i dont know. There is a good chance Y DNA I originated in Europe so that would also change my map a bit. But once u get to I1 M253 that is exactly how i think it migrated. The numbers on the side like 9-11 represent thousands of years so 9,000-11,000 years ago.

[Loki]

The distribution seems to correlate with Germanic peoples. Just have a look how the map of Germany (pre-WW2) is delineated by the I1 distribution.

[Fire Haired]

Then how do u explain 30% I1 in Uralic speaking Finland. That central European I1 breaks down into diff subclades than Scandinavian I1 even though both speak a Germanic language. Germanic Scandinavian and Urlaic Scandinavian I1 is majority I1a2 while Germanic central European is not. This shows it's source is not Germanic languages it is from pre Germanic and pre Uralic people. The only Y DNA haplogroup to originate in Germanic speakers and is unque to Germanic speakers is R1b U106/S28 and some subclades of R1b P312/S116. german languages are only 3,500-4,000 years old and the only place they were ever in Scandinavia till recent times. Is southern Norway and Sweden then how do u explain the fact that i1 is much more popular in northern and central Sweden and Norway than it is in Germanic areas.

[Loki]

Then how do u explain 30% I1 in Uralic speaking Finland.

Finland has quite a bit of Germanic (Swedish) blood, especially in the west.

[Loki]

how do u explain the fact that i1 is much more popular in northern and central Sweden and Norway than it is in Germanic areas.

Since when are Sweden and Norway not Germanic? :confused:

[Fire Haired]

Loki it is a fact that only southern Scandinavia was Germanic till the mid ages. The original y dna haplogroup of Germanic languages is R1b U106/S21 when it migrated to south Scandnavia 3,500-4,000ybp it mixed with some I1. I never said modern Swedan and Norway are not Germanic speaking. What evidence do u have that Finalnd has quite a bit of Germanic (Swedish blood). It is true the western tip has 1-5% R1b S21/U106, 1-5%, 1-2% I2a2, and 1-3% red hair and some specifcally swedish I1a2. But Finland has uque I1a2 subclades that take up most of their I1 and barely exist in Norway and Sweden. Look at Eupedia I1 page i dis agree bout them giving every group a name like west germanic mainly to I1b. But they do mention the specific Finnish subclades which are not from migrations from swedan in the last 5,000 years.

[Loki]

Loki it is a fact that only southern Scandinavia was Germanic till the mid ages.

But that's exactly my point. The core Germanic area is in southern Scandinavia. Then with the Volkerwanderung these tribes moved southward into current Germany, and to varying degrees mixed with the local pre-Germanic population. Hence, one would expect to find a higher instance of I1 even today in Scandinavia.

[d3cimat3d]

What evidence do u have that Finalnd has quite a bit of Germanic (Swedish blood) .


http://i41.tinypic.com/2ro411x.png

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Swedish-speaking_population_of_Finland

[Harkonnen]

Finland has quite a bit of Germanic (Swedish) blood, especially in the west.

Again, a funny moment in the forum. Since it now looks that all the ancient DNA samples from southern Scandinavia to North Germany all the way from the mesolithic to the Bronze age cluster autosomally either with Finns or Balts. It means that Finns indeed are genetically similar to Proto-Germanics if not the most Proto-Germanic population. But it also means that modern Germanics are not genetically (pure) descendants of the Prototypes.

[Peikko]

Finland has quite a bit of Germanic (Swedish) blood, especially in the west.

No way man. Finland has very little Swedish blood, and besides I1 predates that.

[Loki]

Again, a funny moment in the forum. Since it now looks that all the ancient DNA samples from southern Scandinavia to North Germany all the way from the mesolithic to the Bronze age cluster autosomally either with Finns or Balts. It means that Finns indeed are genetically similar to Proto-Germanics if not the most Proto-Germanic population. But it also means that modern Germanics are not genetically (pure) descendants of the Prototypes.

It's not a funny moment. Of course Finland has Swedish blood, especially on the West coast. Don't tell me they've erased that from your Finnish school curriculum.

[Loki]

No way man. Finland has very little Swedish blood, and besides I1 predates that.

Really? I wonder if the Finnswede Bonita would agree with you on that ...

[Peikko]

Really? I wonder if the Finnswede Bonita would agree with you on that ...

She's a wannabe Swede language shifter hillbilly.

[Loki]

She's a wannabe Swede language shifter hillbilly.

:picard1:

I know you Finns don't like to hear it. Of course, there were Viking laws against procreating with Finnish people ... :rolleyes:

[Peikko]

Again, a funny moment in the forum. Since it now looks that all the ancient DNA samples from southern Scandinavia to North Germany all the way from the mesolithic to the Bronze age cluster autosomally either with Finns or Balts. It means that Finns indeed are genetically similar to Proto-Germanics if not the most Proto-Germanic population. But it also means that modern Germanics are not genetically (pure) descendants of the Prototypes.
:cool:
Germanics are wannabe Finns

[Loki]

:cool:
Germanics are wannabe Finns

That's more acceptable :p

[Peikko]

:picard1:

I know you Finns don't like to hear it. Of course, there were Viking laws against procreating with Finnish people ... :rolleyes:

No there weren't :picard1: No one has mixed more with Finns than Scandos, but the Vikings were actually afraid of Finns since we slaughtered them.

[Loki]

No there weren't :picard1: No one has mixed more with Finns than Scandos, but the Vikings were actually afraid of Finns since we slaughtered them.

And what about the Estonian Vikings?

[Fire Haired]

But that's exactly my point. The core Germanic area is in southern Scandinavia. Then with the Volkerwanderung these tribes moved southward into current Germany, and to varying degrees mixed with the local pre-Germanic population. Hence, one would expect to find a higher instance of I1 even today in Scandinavia.

proto Germanic languages began in central Germany then settled in Netherlands, northern Germany, and southern Scandnavia includung Denmark. Then they migrated more south in the Iron age the I1 in continental Europe is mainly not Nordic I1a2 so it almost defintlei is not from migration down south. Also what about I1b it is extremely rare bu never found in Scandnavia I1 period is more diverse it has more subclades in central Europe than Scandinavia which is evidence it orignated in central Europe and Nordic I1 is just one line that migrated to Scandinavia.

[Fire Haired]

http://i41.tinypic.com/2ro411x.png

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Swedish-speaking_population_of_Finland

okay it is true there is some swedish blood in Finland but very very little. Language does not mean those people genetically were Swedish, I1a2 subclades in Swedan are diff than the main ones in Finland so I1 in Finland is not from a recent Germanic Swedish source. Even Eupeida said it was probably before the bronze age so over 5,000-6,000ybp.

[Fire Haired]

It's not a funny moment. Of course Finland has Swedish blood, especially on the West coast. Don't tell me they've erased that from your Finnish school curriculum.

yes but u are getting away from the point there is no way Germanic speaking Swedes are the source of I1 in Finland. They have diff I1a2 subclades.

[Fire Haired]

:picard1:

I know you Finns don't like to hear it. Of course, there were Viking laws against procreating with Finnish people ... :rolleyes:

No there weren't No one has mixed more with Finns than Scandos, but the Vikings were actually afraid of Finns since we slaughtered them.

can u guys please give a source. There is no argument hear Swedish German speakers are not the source of I1 in Finland diff I1a2 subclades. There is 1-5% Germanic R1b U106/S21, 1-2% central European(spread by germans who inter married) I2a2, and 1-3% red hair(spread to west euro by Germanic italo Celts) in the west coast of Finalnd. There is also some I1 in the west coast of finland which is not the Finnish type. So there is some but not alot of Swedish blood in far western Finland they are defintley not the source of I1 though in Finland.

[Harkonnen]

Finland-Swedes have around 40% N1c1 which is higher than the West Finnish-Osthrobothnian average. So that means they're Swedish admixture would then have to come from the maternal side.

[rashka]

A lot of East Europeans including Balkan slavs are cromagnid.

[Loki]

proto Germanic languages began in central Germany then settled in Netherlands, northern Germany, and southern Scandnavia includung Denmark.

Do you realise you're contradicting yourself?


Loki it is a fact that only southern Scandinavia was Germanic till the mid ages.

[Loki]

I think you're complicating things unnecessarily.

[Harkonnen]

Anyway as always Fire Haired is just spewing nonsense. The fact that I1 might have existed in pre IE Skandinavia and North Germany doesn't mean that it can't be Germanic. In fact it would actually support it's Germanicness. Afterall we are not talking about proto IE here, but proto-Germanic. So all we need for it to be Germanic (or some clades of it) is that it was present in the population where Proto-Germanic was sprung. So I really have no clue what you are arguing here.

[Andrew]

So what this mean's is Scandnavien I1a2 is probably around 9,000-11,000 years old. Also that I1 itself is much older than 4,000-5,000 years old since I1a2 has brothers and a cousin in central Europe. It would make sense I1 it self originated in central Europe i would guess 15,000-20,000ybp.

Custom made Migration map of I1 M253
http://www.theapricity.com/forum/attachment.php?attachmentid=36514&d=1376691369

I know this is sloppy i used MS paint. I dont know were but it seems I1 M253 ancestral form took refuge ins southern Europe it could have been in Spain i dont know. There is a good chance Y DNA I originated in Europe so that would also change my map a bit. But once u get to I1 M253 that is exactly how i think it migrated. The numbers on the side like 9-11 represent thousands of years so 9,000-11,000 years ago.

The problem is when you consider that Britain was only repopulated 10,000 years ago at the end of the Last Glacial Maximum (last "ice age"). Scandinavia took a bit longer to thaw out, so estimates at 11,000 in Scandinavia are just too much. It may be possible that it was one of the first haplogroups in Scandinavia though.

[Andrew]

No there weren't :picard1: No one has mixed more with Finns than Scandos, but the Vikings were actually afraid of Finns since we slaughtered them.

If Finns are so fearsome, why are they hiding in the forest for 10,000 years?

[Fire Haired]

The fact that I1 might have existed in pre IE Skandinavia and North Germany doesn't mean that it can't be Germanic. In fact it would actually support it's Germanicness
How does that support it's Germanicism If it existed there before Germanic langauges it does not. Germanic speakers just mixed and adopted some I1 but it is much much much older than Germanic languages.

.
Afterall we are not talking about proto IE here, but proto-Germanic. So all we need for it to be Germanic (or some clades of it) is that it was present in the population where Proto-Germanic was sprung. So I really have no clue what you are arguing here.

What i am saying is it was there before Germanic languages or even Indo European languages existed. I dont see how that is hard to understand.

[Fire Haired]

The problem is when you consider that Britain was only repopulated 10,000 years ago at the end of the Last Glacial Maximum (last "ice age"). Scandinavia took a bit longer to thaw out, so estimates at 11,000 in Scandinavia are just too much. It may be possible that it was one of the first haplogroups in Scandinavia though.

The reason is I1 was in Finland before Mongliod N1c which arrived 8,000ybp with Kunda culture with Uralic languages. So I1a2 had to be in Finland before that so it makes snese that it started in Norway or Swedan 9,000-11,000ybp and since the first major human settlement in Scandinavia came 11,000ybp it would make even more sense they had only I1a.

[Fire Haired]

Finland-Swedes have around 40% N1c1 which is higher than the West Finnish-Osthrobothnian average. So that means they're Swedish admixture would then have to come from the maternal side.

that is ture but what we where arguing is that I1 in finland is not from recent mixture with German speaking swedes.

[Peikko]

If Finns are so fearsome, why are they hiding in the forest for 10,000 years?
What do you mean by this? Finns formed the back bone of Swedish army. Besides, our country is so awesome that Finns rarely feel any need to immigrate. The same can't be said about UK and Ireland.

[Andrew]

What do you mean by this? Finns formed the back bone of Swedish army. Besides, our country is so awesome that Finns rarely feel any need to immigrate. The same can't be said about UK and Ireland.

What I mean is that Finns and Finnic peoples can't be as mighty as you make out, otherwise they'd have expanded in all directions as Germanics, Slavs and even Celts did. Slavs and Germanics have expanded at the expense of the Finnic peoples, holding onto some semi-wilderness (Finland) is hardly much of an achievement. It's like the scraps the Germanics and Slavs left the Finnics with.
UK people emigrate because the islands are overcrowded. British peoples have built much of the world though, founded many new countries. We didn't hide on our islands. :)

[Peikko]

What I mean is that Finns and Finnic peoples can't be as mighty as you make out, otherwise they'd have expanded in all directions as Germanics, Slavs and even Celts did. Slavs and Germanics have expanded at the expense of the Finnic peoples, holding onto some semi-wilderness (Finland) is hardly much of an achievement. It's like the scraps the Germanics and Slavs left the Finnics with.
UK people emigrate because the islands are overcrowded. British peoples have built much of the world though, founded many new countries. We didn't hide on our islands. :)

What are you talking about? I didn't say anything about Finnic people, I was talking about Finns. And yes, Finns kicked some butt with the Vikings. If you haven't noticed, the population of Finland is a fraction of populations of Germany or Russia, so I don't see how any expansion could have occurred. But good for you if you managed to get out of there.

[Fire Haired]

Andrew and Mr.Knowitall u need to give sources to what u are saying. Also Andrews Italo Celts (https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=1&cad=rja&ved=0CC0QFjAA&url=http%3A%2F%2Fen.wikipedia.org%2Fwiki%2FItalo-Celtic&ei=qxYQUsSQJ6ab2QXW94DgAw&usg=AFQjCNH1mQ-FuTCspHXB3KKDCexHLhcStQ&sig2=vXoOJ5uOE7mrjlK7PZimdQ&bvm=bv.50768961,d.b2I)(specifically Urnfield (https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=1&cad=rja&ved=0CC8QFjAA&url=http%3A%2F%2Fen.wikipedia.org%2Fwiki%2FUrnfiel d_culture&ei=mBYQUrGEAoqo2wXj_oCIBA&usg=AFQjCNFiQZ9OiLC2boFrSbQAv9K1jC8CZg&sig2=A1KqV_0IXgNSBho3ycsnnQ&bvm=bv.50768961,d.b2I) Italo Celts) made by far the biggest expansions and conquerings. U can look at my thread R1b L11-L51 Germanic Italo Celts: rulers and conqueres of bronze-iron age west europe (http://www.theapricity.com/forum/showthread.php?89535-R1b-L51-L11-Germanic-Italo-Celts-Rulers-and-conqueres-of-Bronze-Iron-age-west-Europe). The Urnfield culture in central Europe and the alps started 3,500-3,300ybp is were R1b S28/U152 spread south into Italy from 3,200-2,800ybp conquering it and forming into Villnoeaven culture. They also gave birth to Hallstat Celtic culture (https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=1&cad=rja&ved=0CDAQFjAA&url=http%3A%2F%2Fen.wikipedia.org%2Fwiki%2FHallsta tt_culture&ei=7hYQUrfaHOTL2QWao4DoAw&usg=AFQjCNEEcOxr9MyRVR2Y4cu7yzREpRtFPQ&sig2=dI-NIPuh3PSy8tHJKNm-CA&bvm=bv.50768961,d.b2I)which was able to make their culture dominte over almost all of western Europe and it later gave birth to La Tene (https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=1&cad=rja&ved=0CC8QFjAA&url=http%3A%2F%2Fen.wikipedia.org%2Fwiki%2FLa_T%25 C3%25A8ne_culture&ei=RBcQUvrwE-jv2QXYwYGYAg&usg=AFQjCNHMXjiEd7NZIb9V6cGYdj_YkRHAPg&sig2=qRa1fN5ssrcpexmhOMrt_Q&bvm=bv.50768961,d.b2I)culture which expanded by conquering alot of eastern Europe and made settlement in central Anatolia they were the Gauls. The Gauls aka Hallstat-La Tene Celts are probably one of the most successful ex panders and conqueres in European history. I dont know about the Celt Iberians they adopted Hallstat culture but there may have already been Celts in Iberia.

Here is a map of the expansions of Hallstat-La Tene Celtic culture
http://www.eupedia.com/images/content/Hallstatt_La_Tene_map.gif

I think British people get this confused sometimes they think the Gauls who were known to fight naked, spike up their hair, had those long swords were the same as British and Irish Celts. Not exactley true Hallstat- La Tene culture never really had a strong presence in Britian and Ireland. British and Irish celts speak a Insular Celtic language (https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=1&cad=rja&ved=0CC8QFjAA&url=http%3A%2F%2Fen.wikipedia.org%2Fwiki%2FInsular _Celtic_languages&ei=HBcQUrTTGOTe2QXDpoHQDA&usg=AFQjCNEiWAtqoMSmTb7As-oYR6apz8lbcQ&sig2=nVabOWOZoOrTxvlS1c7LIA&bvm=bv.50768961,d.b2I) Gauls and from what wikpedia says Celt Iberians spoke a Continental Celtic language two separate families. Celts most likley migrated to Britian and Irland in the bronze age 3,000-4,000ybp. They are split with the Gealic's in Ireland and the Brythonic's in Britain the Britons in the south in modern day England and Wales and the Picts in the north in modern day Scotland.

[Fire Haired]

I think a reason why Finland never made huge expansions. Is they were kind of out of the main European world till modern times and the middle ages. They were very far away fro what was happening in the bronze and Iron age withe xpansions of Germanic Italo celts. They were very far away from Neloithic age when farming was spreading 10,000-6,000ybp most of Scandnavia was period. They had some conatct with Balto Slavic speaking Corded ware culture 5,000-4,000ybp but only southern Finland. They also had some contact with Germanic speakers in the late bronze age and iron age 4,000-1,500ybp.

I doubt they had alot of contact with Rome which eventulley would in a way change and bring a end to all other cultures in Europe. Modern Europe in a way is the son of the ancient Greco Roman world but since Finland is so far away i would assume they were far away from main stream Europe even in the middle ages. Today countries mainly in Europe cant expand on other countries turf with nuclear bombs, modern weapons, the united nations.

[Graham]

What do you mean by this? Finns formed the back bone of Swedish army. Besides, our country is so awesome that Finns rarely feel any need to immigrate. The same can't be said about UK and Ireland.

We both have a good share of depression.. So it's not that great. lol

[Peikko]

^That's right fire haired, Finland was very isolated and the population was very small.

[Peikko]

We both have a good share of depression.. So it's not that great. lol
That's right, Finland and Scotland have much more in common than people realize. Both countries have been poor for most of our history. We both have about equal population and equal sized economy. And neither country is Germanic ;)

[Andrew]

What are you talking about? I didn't say anything about Finnic people, I was talking about Finns. And yes, Finns kicked some butt with the Vikings. If you haven't noticed, the population of Finland is a fraction of populations of Germany or Russia, so I don't see how any expansion could have occurred. But good for you if you managed to get out of there.

Vikings didn't bother much with Finland because there wasn't anything worth looting there. Population of Denmark, Norway, Sweden and Austria are also tiny, but they've conquered large areas of the continent before. Finns didn't because they couldn't. The end.

[Peikko]

Vikings didn't bother much with Finland because there wasn't anything worth looting there. Population of Denmark, Norway, Sweden and Austria are also tiny, but they've conquered large areas of the continent before. Finns didn't because they couldn't. The end.

No, Denmark and especially Norway hasn't conquered much. Population of Austria used to be way bigger. And Scotland and Ireland never conquered anything. In fact, the Irish are the only Keltic nation to even have a country of their own. Keltics have been almost fully assimilated to other people and even lost their own languages. Now go flip some burgers to your Germanic masters, bitch!

[Fire Haired]

Mr.Knowitall Celtic culture and Celtic languages in the pre Roman Iron age around 800-200bc took up more land than any European ethnic group of empire has in history. They were extremely successful they descended from Bronze age about 4,000-3,000ybp Celts who also dominated France, central Europe, Britain and Ireland. The Celts had never lost any type of major defeat till Rome so for over 2,000 years they went just about undeafted against non Celtic people. The Italo celts period completly dominted western Europe about 50% of west europe's paternal lineages are Italo Celtic R1b S116/P312 because they dominted in war and killed off native male lines.

map of Italo Celtic R1b S116/P312 from Eupedia
http://www.eupedia.com/images/content/Celtic_Europe.gif

I tried to explain how dominte Germanic Italo Celts were in bronze to Iron age in Europe in that one thread. The Urnfield R1b S28 Italo Celts orignally from central Europe about 3,500ybp defintley were the most succesful. They conquered Italy from 3,200-2,800ybp they spread their culture by conquering and through trade in the enitre celtic world and most of central and western europe. The Hallstat/La Tene Celts were the most succseful decendant of Urnfield culture.

map of Hallstat/La Tene expansions
http://www.eupedia.com/images/content/Hallstatt_La_Tene_map.gif

By the late Irona ge so 200bc-1ad the Germanic tribes were migrating out of the north and beating up most of the time on Celts. They even beat up on Rome alot but eventulley Rome conquered the Hallstat/La Tene Celtic world and southern Britain so the Germans took land in eastern Europe. After the western Roman empire fell apart and the whole migration period thing Germans took power of just about all of western Europe and this is when they went to Britain and eventulley is what caused Irish, Welsh Cornish, and Scottish to speak English. By this time the culture in Germanic and Celtic people had changed a ton mainly because of Rome and the spread of Christianity.

[Peikko]

You guys sound like the Medocentrists. You've got nothing to brag about but ancient history.

It was easy for the Keltics to expand since they were numerous and practically no one was habiting the regions they expanded to.

[Fire Haired]

Mr.Knowitall western Europe has been heavily populated for probably around 40,000 years. The Ice age's did make people go more south but there is no doubt there were many man many people in France when Celts conquered it in the bronze age. The proof is not all Celts look the same. Look at Spanish and Portuguese they were conquered by Celts from France same with British and Irish and look how much more dark haired and eyed Spanish and Portuguese are. Then look at Irish who are mainly light eyes and have 10-15% red hair while Iberians only have around 1%. Obviously there is diff ancestry.

[Balmung]

What do you mean by this? Finns formed the back bone of Swedish army. Besides, our country is so awesome that Finns rarely feel any need to immigrate. The same can't be said about UK and Ireland.

Most Brits who immigrate, immigrate to other Anglosphere countries. That is the beauty of being a huge former colonial power. If you're not content in your current nation you can move to another with little cultural change or phenotypical change between people, with the only real change being of scenery & climate.

[Graham]

Most Brits who immigrate, immigrate to other Anglosphere countries. That is the beauty of being a huge former colonial power. If you're not content in your current nation you can move to another with little cultural change or phenotypical change between people, with the only real change being of scenery & climate.

Yeah, but Britain took advantage to basically castrate( not literally :p) our countries population & culture. The amount of people we lost to places like Nova Scotia, is sad. We don't see it as a positive thing.

[Peikko]

Mr.Knowitall western Europe has been heavily populated for probably around 40,000 years. The Ice age's did make people go more south but there is no doubt there were many man many people in France when Celts conquered it in the bronze age. The proof is not all Celts look the same. Look at Spanish and Portuguese they were conquered by Celts from France same with British and Irish and look how much more dark haired and eyed Spanish and Portuguese are. Then look at Irish who are mainly light eyes and have 10-15% red hair while Iberians only have around 1%. Obviously there is diff ancestry.
I didn't say that there isn't any difference. But the truth is, that Iberians, and French don't speak Keltic languages. They have some Keltic ancestry, but they aren't Keltic nations. Keltics have been assimilated.

When it comes to UK and Ireland, Anglo-saxons were the rulers and the Keltics once again lost their languages and got assimilated. I don't really see much glory in it. The British Empire wasn't a Keltic achievement, but Germanic.

[Peikko]

Most Brits who immigrate, immigrate to other Anglosphere countries. That is the beauty of being a huge former colonial power. If you're not content in your current nation you can move to another with little cultural change or phenotypical change between people, with the only real change being of scenery & climate.
Most Irish and Scots who immigrated to new world did so because they were poor. The Irish ran out of potatoes and were dying like flies! And Australians were expelled by the English. What a glorious triumph!

[Albion]

No, Denmark and especially Norway hasn't conquered much. Population of Austria used to be way bigger. And Scotland and Ireland never conquered anything. In fact, the Irish are the only Keltic nation to even have a country of their own. Keltics have been almost fully assimilated to other people and even lost their own languages. Now go flip some burgers to your Germanic masters, bitch!

Lol


You guys sound like the Medocentrists. You've got nothing to brag about but ancient history.

It was easy for the Keltics to expand since they were numerous and practically no one was habiting the regions they expanded to.


Celts were just stronger, the older cultures were advanced in their time but had become obsolete and weak (same happened to Celts latter on).


Yeah, but Britain took advantage to basically castrate( not literally :p) our countries population & culture. The amount of people we lost to places like Nova Scotia, is sad. We don't see it as a positive thing.

What are you talking about? It was a wonderful thing, a shame more didn't leave to spread our branch of European civilization and people into even more regions. England is still overpopulated despite 25 million+ people leaving for the British Empire. It'd be a lot more comfortable here if we sent another 15 million to Canada and Australia each.
Scots and Irish are a different matter, but at least Irish got to survive from emigrating. It's a shame they emigrated to the British Empire and America though, they were behind like every uprising there ever was - Eureka, Fenian invasion of Canada, etc.
Only place where Brits never existed though are UK and USA, in the rest the peoples mostly mixed to varying degrees. Nova Scotia has a stronger Scottish element, Alberta, British Colombia and Ontario are quite English.
In New Zealand, Canterbury, Marlborough and North Island have a stronger English element whilst Westland is more Irish and the south of South Island, especially Otago is very strongly Scottish (bagpipes, kilts and the lot).

[Fire Haired]

I think u guys need to stop trying to compare which country is best. No people group and no one has ancestry which won 100% of the time. How countries form how they become powerful and their culture is never 100% pure from them. Alot of our culture we dont know were it came from and some comes from people who conquered ur country 100's of years ago. English do not have traditional Germanic culture. all Europeans left their old cultures pretty much and tried to be like Rome or other Europeans who became like Rome. So powerful Germanic people ur civilizations is based on Romans who ur ancestors hated and constnatley fought. For French and Iberian the ancient Hallstatt-La Tene Celtic cultures of ur ancestors culture is gone and you speak Roman languages. Rome conquered and massacred ur ancestors but French and Spanish are proud of their history since Roman times which is when their national identity and language was formed.

[Albion]

I think u guys need to stop trying to compare which country is best.

Ugh, don't be such a pussy.


No people group and no one has ancestry which won 100% of the time. How countries form how they become powerful and their culture is never 100% pure from them. Alot of our culture we dont know were it came from and some comes from people who conquered ur country 100's of years ago. English do not have traditional Germanic culture. all Europeans left their old cultures pretty much and tried to be like Rome or other Europeans who became like Rome. So powerful Germanic people ur civilizations is based on Romans who ur ancestors hated and constnatley fought. For French and Iberian the ancient Hallstatt-La Tene Celtic cultures of ur ancestors culture is gone and you speak Roman languages. Rome conquered and massacred ur ancestors but French and Spanish are proud of their history since Roman times which is when their national identity and language was formed.

We here this a lot, but Europe developed since Rome. Rome formed the foundation, all the larger countries that came after it built on that and created the present European Civilization.
Germanics, Slavs and Finns didn't just abandon their cultures, nor did they adopt everything that Rome had to offer. Mostly they continued as they did before, although they adopted Roman religion (Christianity), some Roman military ways and Latin script. State formation was already in its infancy far before Rome meddled in Northern Europe, if anything Rome set it back for centuries.

By the time Rome fell in the west, the Germanics were:


Writing - both in Runic (derived from Latin) and latter in Latin
Farming the crops they'd continue to farm into the middle ages (most of them arriving before Rome, in the Neolithic)
Consolidating into larger tribes such as the Alemani and Saxons, the basis for ethnogenesis, early states
Were being ruled by functioning governments in some areas, often with more accountability to the people than their successors in feudal societies
Trading long distances
Organised enough to mount serious attacks against Rome and even migrate through the empire and take some of its most prized provinces


Europe as we see it today is more complex than just saying it's a continuation of Rome. If anything, it's a continuation of medieval Europe, especially of France, HRE, the Iberian and Italian states, Ottoman Empire and England.
Where Rome never ventured, into Eastern Europe (other than the Balkans), the eastern part of European Civilization developed along similar lines. Some might claim this is because of the Orthodox church, but the extent of the church beyond religion and education is limited.

[Fire Haired]

I am just saying it is stupid u guys are arguing about that because things change so much. Right now America beats all of u.

There is no doubt the old cultures of Europe so over 2,000ybp are just about completely dead. Sure people still call themselves Germans, Slavs, Baltic's, Finnish, Sami, Greeks, Italians. But Europe's culture was totally changed by Rome and it just changed on its own. Modern French descend from the Gauls but they were apart of the Roman empire for over 400 years they lost they even lost their old language. When Germans were conquering everyone in west Europe the French saw themselves as Roman French not Gauls. Some Frankish kings i think one of the most important ones Chaildric was buried with the Roman eagle. He wanted to show that he wanted to continue Rome which in the early middle ages they saw as the good old days. I really dont see a continuity with modern French culture and the Gauls or french culture in 1,000's.

One huge sign Europe was completely changed by Rome. Is all Europeans Celts, Germans, Slavs, Baltic's, Italic's, Iyrillans, Finnish, Sami were in tribal society's i guess their version is called Chiefdoms. They were more advanced than like the Cherokee Indians but they were far away from a organized civilization. After Rome Europe was full of organized civilizations like the Holy Roman empire and these civilizations eventually formed into the countries in Europe today like England. Every thing Europe dopes that has to do with civilization and stuff like writing originally came from Rome and before that Greece. Why do u think that European historians are so addicted on Rome and Greece and why we hear so much about them in history because they knew that is were western civilization came from. I know they did not just abadon their cultures the whole dragon thing in the mid ages mainly comes from German folk stories same reason why Vikings were so into Dragons even though they were not Christian and not really apart of western Civilization yet. Those books like Belwolf from the mid ages i think were Germanic people trying to keep those old stories alive because they knew their traditional culture was dying.

[Albion]

I am just saying it is stupid u guys are arguing about that because things change so much. Right now America beats all of u.

For all of 5 minutes. If you look at history, you'll see that one European state only ever dominated the others for very brief periods. America as an extension of Europe has stepped into that cycle.


There is no doubt the old cultures of Europe so over 2,000ybp are just about completely dead. Sure people still call themselves Germans, Slavs, Baltic's, Finnish, Sami, Greeks, Italians. But Europe's culture was totally changed by Rome and it just changed on its own. Modern French descend from the Gauls but they were apart of the Roman empire for over 400 years they lost they even lost their old language. When Germans were conquering everyone in west Europe the French saw themselves as Roman French not Gauls. Some Frankish kings i think one of the most important ones Chaildric was buried with the Roman eagle. He wanted to show that he wanted to continue Rome which in the early middle ages they saw as the good old days. I really dont see a continuity with modern French culture and the Gauls or french culture in 1,000's.

French are a continuation of Gauls. Language shifts happen, Welsh are still Welsh even if most speak English now.


One huge sign Europe was completely changed by Rome. Is all Europeans Celts, Germans, Slavs, Baltic's, Italic's, Iyrillans, Finnish, Sami were in tribal society's i guess their version is called Chiefdoms. They were more advanced than like the Cherokee Indians but they were far away from a organized civilization. After Rome Europe was full of organized civilizations like the Holy Roman empire and these civilizations eventually formed into the countries in Europe today like England.

England formed by totally destroying what was left of Rome in the British Isles, so that's a lie. It's early states were Germanic, had Germanic systems of government and laws and had a Germanic language.
Rome civilization was wiped out across much of its former range, only parts of it like writing made their way back with the church.


Every thing Europe dopes that has to do with civilization and stuff like writing originally came from Rome and before that Greece. Why do u think that European historians are so addicted on Rome and Greece and why we hear so much about them in history because they knew that is were western civilization came from. I know they did not just abadon their cultures the whole dragon thing in the mid ages mainly comes from German folk stories same reason why Vikings were so into Dragons even though they were not Christian and not really apart of western Civilization yet. Those books like Belwolf from the mid ages i think were Germanic people trying to keep those old stories alive because they knew their traditional culture was dying.

We hear so much about Greece and Rome because they wrote a lot down and the intelligentsia like to imagine themselves as modern Romans and Greeks and fantasize about those civilizations.
Germanics told stories to keep themselves entertained and pass down elements of history in the same way that Romans said the city's founders were suckled by a Wolf.

[Fire Haired]

U keep pushing that modern european civilizations were formed based on the old tribes. Without Rome or influence from the ancient civilized world europe today would probably not have any civilizations. There is no way in heck those kingdoms in the mid ages were based mainly on old Germanic traditions. The type of organized civilizations in the mid ages were not based on tribal stuff germans did before. Sure yes they did keep some traditions but they changed alot. look at america in the 1700's and now things change very quickly. Rome defintley had a huge or the biggest part in that change that happened from the Iron age tribal people to civilizations in the middle ages. U REALLY THINK FRANCE IS STRAIGHT FROM THE GAULS. France was probably changed the most by Rome, How many french in the mid ages wore torcs or traditional urnfield swords.
King luois late 1700's statue of La Tene Gaulic warrior the only source i read said it was found in northern Italy.
http://www.nndb.com/people/230/000092951/louis-xvi-1.jpg http://patricklavin.com/sitebuildercontent/sitebuilderpictures/BronzeCelticWarrior.jpg

defintley not the same people culturally they are genetically though. modern England and lowlands of scotland were conquered by Germanic tribes from mainly around Netherlands and Denmark from 400-600ad. The Germans dominated because the Britons depended on Rome they had lost their military traditions so they could not defend themselves. The English were also changed in the mid ages to be like the other Europeans and they were already more civilized when they arrived in Britain. I can keep going on but there is no way u can say Germans created their civilizations mainly on their own without help from Rome. If u have watched 300 they Leonides mentions it is east vs west because historians have said when Greeks beat the Persians saved western civilization which would later grow to the rest of Europe. In history class when we learn about the world when it comes to europe all u hear about is Greece then Rome because they are the founders of western civilization. There is no way everything comes from them other Europeans put their own traditions in it and created new traditions.

[Fire Haired]

U should look at the Book on Invasions or other Irish books written by their monks in the mid ages. They had no idea what Celts were all they knew is they were Gaelic Irish people. When they wrote about mythology and other stories i dont have exact quotes to give u but when reading i remember them saying these are stories from our ancestors. They knew that their ancestors stories were not going to be passed down anymore because the culture was changing that is why they wrote those books. The whole fairy tale thing and the prince saving the princes from the dragon do stem from old mythology stories. Probably mainly from Germanic tribes but what we here today has been changed alot from what they orignalley were. U have to admit Irish culture in 1,000ad was totally Roman Catholic it had changed an ton to what they probably had 1,000 years before they left alot of their traditions because of other Europeans influenced them who orignalley were influenced by Rome.

[Peikko]

Fire haired, blaa blaa blaa

I1 is nordic, just deal with it.

[Albion]

U keep pushing that modern european civilizations were formed based on the old tribes. Without Rome or influence from the ancient civilized world europe today would probably not have any civilizations. There is no way in heck those kingdoms in the mid ages were based mainly on old Germanic traditions. The type of organized civilizations in the mid ages were not based on tribal stuff germans did before. Sure yes they did keep some traditions but they changed alot. look at america in the 1700's and now things change very quickly. Rome defintley had a huge or the biggest part in that change that happened from the Iron age tribal people to civilizations in the middle ages. U REALLY THINK FRANCE IS STRAIGHT FROM THE GAULS. France was probably changed the most by Rome, How many french in the mid ages wore torcs or traditional urnfield swords.
King luois late 1700's statue of La Tene Gaulic warrior the only source i read said it was found in northern Italy.
http://www.nndb.com/people/230/000092951/louis-xvi-1.jpg http://patricklavin.com/sitebuildercontent/sitebuilderpictures/BronzeCelticWarrior.jpg

defintley not the same people culturally they are genetically though. modern England and lowlands of scotland were conquered by Germanic tribes from mainly around Netherlands and Denmark from 400-600ad. The Germans dominated because the Britons depended on Rome they had lost their military traditions so they could not defend themselves. The English were also changed in the mid ages to be like the other Europeans and they were already more civilized when they arrived in Britain. I can keep going on but there is no way u can say Germans created their civilizations mainly on their own without help from Rome. If u have watched 300 they Leonides mentions it is east vs west because historians have said when Greeks beat the Persians saved western civilization which would later grow to the rest of Europe. In history class when we learn about the world when it comes to europe all u hear about is Greece then Rome because they are the founders of western civilization. There is no way everything comes from them other Europeans put their own traditions in it and created new traditions.

What in France is Roman other than the language? There's nothing much Roman about Romance countries other than their use of languages derived from Latin.
English conquered the Britons because Celts were naturally weaker than the Germanics, as was proved in the non-Roman held territories in Germany where Celts got conquered by Germanics expanding south. Celts put up a fight in England and even reversed the conquest for 50 years (there's evidence of migrations back to the Anglo-Saxon homelands), but were ultimately weaker.

Greeks didn't found European civilization, nor did Romans, but they did influence it a lot. European cultures already had their own complex civilizations as far back as the Neolithic, Rome if anything hampered the development of certain groups whilst destroying others and destroyed a lot of diversity.
Where before there were advanced pre-Roman civilizations in Iberia, the Balkans and southern France, they became replaced by a Roman blanket culture. Iberians already had writing btw.

You need to highlight just what is Roman other than some languages and the church.

[Albion]

U should look at the Book on Invasions or other Irish books written by their monks in the mid ages. They had no idea what Celts were all they knew is they were Gaelic Irish people. When they wrote about mythology and other stories i dont have exact quotes to give u but when reading i remember them saying these are stories from our ancestors. They knew that their ancestors stories were not going to be passed down anymore because the culture was changing that is why they wrote those books. The whole fairy tale thing and the prince saving the princes from the dragon do stem from old mythology stories. Probably mainly from Germanic tribes but what we here today has been changed alot from what they orignalley were. U have to admit Irish culture in 1,000ad was totally Roman Catholic it had changed an ton to what they probably had 1,000 years before they left alot of their traditions because of other Europeans influenced them who orignalley were influenced by Rome.

This is about the worst example you could give.The Irish were still essentially in the iron age when the English invaded - they were semi-nomadic pastoralists (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transhumance) for goodness sake (they moved cattle between seasonal pastures and the island was still largely forested and under-developed).
What do Irish myths speak of? Cattle raids and "high kings", even into the middle ages they still lived much as they had done in the iron age.

Germanic and Celtic myths and legends probably do stem from real histories that have been distorted by story tellers over time. I doubt they foresaw the destruction of their cultures though, although fear of what lies ahead is a basic human instinct. They probably wrote things down to stop them becoming distorted or forgotten, not because they saw a long dead Rome destroying their history.

[Loki]

Thread reopened. Why was it closed? :confused:

[Albion]

Thread reopened. Why was it closed? :confused:

Damn it, Loki. :shakefist To give us a break from Fire haired for a few hours. :D Was going to reopen it... eventually.

[Loki]

Damn it, Loki. :shakefist To give us a break from Fire haired for a few hours. :D Was going to reopen it... eventually.

No we shouldn't stop discussions just for the heck of it, or because we disagree with it. It would damage the forum's reputation of free expression. :)

[Fire Haired]

Albion I am sick of ur total BS trying to say Germans started western Civilization. U have no evidence or any historians to back u up ur just throwing out random non historical things. Europe today is a completely diff people than they were 2,500ybp and Rome and Greece are the reason. Look at the Freaking Holy Roman empire started by Germans and compare that to the Tuetons and other Germanic people in 100bc or whatever. Seriously how blind are u they even called themselves the holy ROMAN empire. When they said Holy they mean t Christian which came to them through Rome. Why do u think civilizations started to pop up all over Europe right after Rome was it just random. Why for over 1,000's of the iron age Germanic tribes were never able to create a organized civilization then right when they start to have contact with Rome. The mid ages start and they create these amazing civilizations.

I cant find the exact quote but u can look up the book Julis Ceasar wrote about his Gaulic wars and wars in Britian. He said the Gauls in southern Gaul were becoming more civilized because of influence from ROME and he also said this caused them to be weaker than the more primitive Gaul's in the north like Belgie. He said the Germans had started to beat up on the Gauls near the Rhine because Gaul's had become more civilized and that Gaul's used to be one of the most war like people and used to beat the Germans. I rember reading another Roman writer say basicalley the same thing even before Roman conquest Gaul's were becoming a lot more civilized which they also said caused the average Gaul to be more soft.


look at these coins gauls made before Rome conquered them do u really think they made these on their own.
http://www.ngccoin.com/images/auction/auction_details/00005r00.jpg (http://www.google.com/url?sa=i&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&frm=1&source=images&cd=&cad=rja&docid=EH4k-rUJktgSVM&tbnid=fgrmFQu42zlJnM:&ved=0CAUQjRw&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.google.com%2Furl%3Fsa%3Di%26r ct%3Dj%26q%3D%26esrc%3Ds%26frm%3D1%26source%3Dimag es%26cd%3D%26cad%3Drja%26docid%3DEH4k-rUJktgSVM%26tbnid%3DfgrmFQu42zlJnM%3A%26ved%3D%26u rl%3Dhttp%253A%252F%252Fwww.ngccoin.com%252Fgaller y%252FAuction%252Fgreek.aspx%26ei%3D3wAYUqn0G4S72w Wn2oFY%26psig%3DAFQjCNGdvWFpWAUNzUlsyCmbC-W818OrVA%26ust%3D1377391200028058&ei=4wAYUvHaJeSqyAG0noGoDw&psig=AFQjCNGdvWFpWAUNzUlsyCmbC-W818OrVA&ust=1377391200028058) http://www.moneymuseum.com/imgs/xcoins/thumbnail/2009/7/T_O_3808_2.jpg (http://www.google.com/url?sa=i&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&frm=1&source=images&cd=&cad=rja&docid=gKEm0H1_WYiDhM&tbnid=2DtqSTtStsA-4M:&ved=0CAUQjRw&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.moneymuseum.com%2Fmoneymuseum %2Fcoins%2Fperiods%2Fcoins.jsp%3Flang%3Den%26aid%3 D2%26gid%3D14%26cid%3D91&ei=GQEYUuuzN4jYyQHUrICgCA&psig=AFQjCNGdvWFpWAUNzUlsyCmbC-W818OrVA&ust=1377391200028058)

Now look at this Gaulic warrior from 100bc he has short hair like Romans, he is shaved like Romans, he also is convered in armour and chain mail I don't know if u can say that is roman influence. And compare him to Hallstat/La Tene Gaulic warriors from 400-200bc they are the naked ones with beards and long hair. There are actulley a good amount of ancient Roman and Greek statues and writing about Gauls. All the ancient art of Gauls warriors up to 200bc are naked with long hair and some type of facial hair. Also it was traditional for them to spike up their hair which it seems they stopped by the time Caesar came.
http://i.imgur.com/w2MD7BE.jpg (http://www.google.com/url?sa=i&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&frm=1&source=images&cd=&cad=rja&docid=m4ufMc-xDcHHyM&tbnid=Q2hnUKbJnqEdUM:&ved=0CAUQjRw&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.google.com%2Furl%3Fsa%3Di%26r ct%3Dj%26q%3D%26esrc%3Ds%26frm%3D1%26source%3Dimag es%26cd%3D%26cad%3Drja%26docid%3Dm4ufMc-xDcHHyM%26tbnid%3DQ2hnUKbJnqEdUM%3A%26ved%3D%26url %3Dhttp%253A%252F%252F.net%252Fthreads%252Fpicture-thread.6685%252Fpage-10%26ei%3D0wEYUsXAOa_lygHymoCoDg%26psig%3DAFQjCNHX xwwE4WTMOluCDU_Pk5YRA-CjSA%26ust%3D1377391444177606&ei=IQIYUpHPDqa0ygGhz4CwDQ&psig=AFQjCNHXxwwE4WTMOluCDU_Pk5YRA-CjSA&ust=1377391444177606)http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/d/d4/Dying_gaul.jpg/300px-Dying_gaul.jpg (http://www.google.com/url?sa=i&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&frm=1&source=images&cd=&cad=rja&docid=nMoNHnMgOrTZQM&tbnid=Ow7T2ts2UUNjoM:&ved=0CAUQjRw&url=http%3A%2F%2Fen.wikipedia.org%2Fwiki%2FCelts&ei=-wEYUozzKIHkyAH2o4GIBw&psig=AFQjCNHXxwwE4WTMOluCDU_Pk5YRA-CjSA&ust=1377391444177606)http://cache2.asset-cache.net/xt/122219111.jpg?v=1&g=fs2%7C0%7Ceditorial69%7C19%7C111&s=1 (http://www.google.com/url?sa=i&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&frm=1&source=images&cd=&cad=rja&docid=md77xrddZxuzXM&tbnid=UsY1HI3f1iQ9IM:&ved=0CAUQjRw&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.gettyimages.com%2Feditorial%2 Fcalcite-pictures%3Fpage%3D6&ei=UwIYUsTrLuKbygG66YGQDQ&psig=AFQjCNHXxwwE4WTMOluCDU_Pk5YRA-CjSA&ust=1377391444177606) https://encrypted-tbn1.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcQIRPMWv6zhfP6yB34cNovYHBdHJ9o70 Qt4RlIcocUpL0cLJJQX (http://www.google.com/url?sa=i&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&frm=1&source=images&cd=&cad=rja&docid=z-gI5HvGnOchLM&tbnid=Y215aAtw83_jCM:&ved=&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.dreamstime.com%2Fstock-image-statue-dying-gaul-image26531901&ei=0wEYUsXAOa_lygHymoCoDg&psig=AFQjCNHXxwwE4WTMOluCDU_Pk5YRA-CjSA&ust=1377391444177606)http://farm9.staticflickr.com/8488/8230485542_282715a10b_z.jpg (http://www.google.com/url?sa=i&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&frm=1&source=images&cd=&cad=rja&docid=hBmA0fp2j9ZwaM&tbnid=dK3sSKSfPVEAKM:&ved=0CAUQjRw&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.flickr.com%2Fphotos%2F2472961 5%40N00%2F8230485542%2F&ei=aAIYUqDjE7LlygGZ3IGABQ&psig=AFQjCNHXxwwE4WTMOluCDU_Pk5YRA-CjSA&ust=1377391444177606)http://patricklavin.com/sitebuildercontent/sitebuilderpictures/BronzeCelticWarrior.jpghttp://farm4.static.flickr.com/3170/2419766146_a79c4e9aff_m.jpg (http://www.google.com/url?sa=i&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&frm=1&source=images&cd=&cad=rja&docid=j5CqzYWyhDUl2M&tbnid=hpSCXCu4rpGA4M:&ved=0CAUQjRw&url=http%3A%2F%2Fflickrhivemind.net%2FTags%2Fgalat ian%2FInteresting&ei=fAIYUty3H8beyAHck4C4Bg&psig=AFQjCNHXxwwE4WTMOluCDU_Pk5YRA-CjSA&ust=1377391444177606)http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/4/4a/Gaul_warrior_Vacheres_2.jpg/220px-Gaul_warrior_Vacheres_2.jpg (http://www.google.com/url?sa=i&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&frm=1&source=images&cd=&cad=rja&docid=ji4Rjjjo9iJQaM&tbnid=0_Ynd6_NUkcICM:&ved=0CAUQjRw&url=http%3A%2F%2Fen.wikipedia.org%2Fwiki%2FMail_(a rmour)&ei=uQIYUt2kFc3YyQGmtICYDQ&psig=AFQjCNGAki9dYF-KYh_NnjHnUWplE-CDcQ&ust=1377391662693034)

[Fire Haired]

Fire haired, blaa blaa blaa

I1 is nordic, just deal with it.

Mr.Know it all then how do u explain I1b Z131 a long lost subclade is only found in central Europe. Just because I1 is most popular in Nordic areas does not mean it originated there. Just look at R1b it is most popular in west Europe but originated no where near west Europe.

[Albion]

I'll respond to this in the morning fire head, no need to be cocky.

[Peikko]

Mr.Know it all then how do u explain I1b Z131 a long lost subclade is only found in central Europe. Just because I1 is most popular in Nordic areas does not mean it originated there. Just look at R1b it is most popular in west Europe but originated no where near west Europe.
The Nordic states carry high dosages of I1, because we are more isolated. Obviously it didn't have to originate here, modern human originated in Africa, but we're not all Africans.

[Artek]

Fire Haired, you have many good points in terms of genetics but please, improve your writing style. It's not easy to read your posts

[Albion]

Albion I am sick of ur total BS trying to say Germans started western Civilization. U have no evidence or any historians to back u up ur just throwing out random non historical things.

Who's saying this? Modern European civilization is directly descended from medieval Europe, Medieval Europe developed as a result of the migrations and subsequent Christianization of the continent.


Europe today is a completely diff people than they were 2,500ybp and Rome and Greece are the reason. Look at the Freaking Holy Roman empire started by Germans and compare that to the Tuetons and other Germanic people in 100bc or whatever.

Fire haired, the the Romans and Greeks inhabited larger settlements, but cities and towns existed across much of Europe already. Celts had oppida in Gaul and Britain which were the foundations of cities, they had early states based on tribal confederations and the concept of high kings (which would become suzerainty in latter Europe).
Germanics organised into larger federations such as Alemanni and Saxons that essentially attrition warfare against Rome.
All realms of the world at this time were essentially agrarian, even the Roman Empire was mostly an agricultural economy.


Seriously how blind are u they even called themselves the holy ROMAN empire.

When they said 'Roman', they meant they were taking over the former role of Rome in securing Christianity.


When they said Holy they mean t Christian which came to them through Rome.

Oh wow, so Rome is ultimately Levantine by that logic.


Why do u think civilizations started to pop up all over Europe right after Rome was it just random.

Not civilizations, there is only one European civilization (two if you divide east and west along catholic/protestant and orthodox lines, but they're just subgroups). Do you think civilizations didn't exist before it? Look at Iberia - Tartessians, Iberians, Celtiberians. Gaul - Ligurians, Gauls. Romania - Dacians.


Why for over 1,000's of the iron age Germanic tribes were never able to create a organized civilization then right when they start to have contact with Rome. The mid ages start and they create these amazing civilizations.


Civilizations have more densely populated settlements, characterized by a ruling elite, and subordinate urban and rural populations, which, by the division of labour, engage in intensive agriculture, mining, small-scale manufacture and trade. Civilization concentrates power, extending man's control over both nature, and over other human beings.[1]

[Prisoner Of Ice]

What in France is Roman other than the language? There's nothing much Roman about Romance countries other than their use of languages derived from Latin.
English conquered the Britons because Celts were naturally weaker than the Germanics, as was proved in the non-Roman held territories in Germany where Celts got conquered by Germanics expanding south. Celts put up a fight in England and even reversed the conquest for 50 years (there's evidence of migrations back to the Anglo-Saxon homelands), but were ultimately weaker.

Greeks didn't found European civilization, nor did Romans, but they did influence it a lot. European cultures already had their own complex civilizations as far back as the Neolithic, Rome if anything hampered the development of certain groups whilst destroying others and destroyed a lot of diversity.
Where before there were advanced pre-Roman civilizations in Iberia, the Balkans and southern France, they became replaced by a Roman blanket culture. Iberians already had writing btw.

You need to highlight just what is Roman other than some languages and the church.

When it comes to tech, Rome got absolutely everything from elsewhere. Some of it was greek but most of the metalurgy, tactics, formations, etc. all came from various celtic tribes. Everything else, they got from Etruscans.

I1 is what the nordics were before they were nordic, but actually like I have pointed out a billion times nordics and which has been ignored a billion times they would have mostly been r1b in roman times. The saami expanded dramatically after the plague and that's where most of the I1 comes from! That's why there's a lot less blonde people and I1 even in tribes we know for sure migrated right out of scandinavia.

[blogen]

Not civilizations, there is only one European civilization (two if you divide east and west along catholic/protestant and orthodox lines, but they're just subgroups). Do you think civilizations didn't exist before it? Look at Iberia - Tartessians, Iberians, Celtiberians. Gaul - Ligurians, Gauls. Romania - Dacians.

This was same civilization. And the Celtics were the centre of the antique Europe, the Greeks lived on the periphery, but this periphery was attached to the great Oriental civilizations, and the development of the southeastern periphery was different in some details (urbanization level, literacy, etc.), but the Mycenean times, the "Greek Middle Ages" was similar yet than the Hallstatt:

http://img5.imageshack.us/img5/8181/mo75.jpg