2


| Thumbs Up/Down |
| Received: 52,631/1,011 Given: 43,539/788 |
BTW I ran Aynora against new averages:
Distance to: aynora(German)
2.15522621 German_Westphalia
2.20873267 German_Lower_Saxony_South
3.27533204 Dutch
3.67398966 English_Southeast
3.74225868 Dutch_Central
3.88423738 English_Midlands
4.00374824 English
4.26929737 English_North
4.39161701 German_Lower_Saxony_North
4.58531351 Dutch_North
Extremely tight fit to Westphalian average which has considerable sample size.




| Thumbs Up/Down |
| Received: 23,113/717 Given: 20,205/1,181 |
If his autosomal DNA results are 100% Chinese but his Muttersprache since 4 generations is German, then he is German for you?
Because language determines? Millions of German-speaking (as Muttersprache) Turks in Germany must also be Germans then.
BTW how did you determine that your Memelland sample is a German, not a Prussian Lithuanian or a "Memellander" ???
BTW since you collect kits based on 4 grandparents / 8 great-grandparents, you should look at ethnicity of these grandparents.
Prussian Lithuanians 200 years ago or even 150 years ago were still not Germanized, evidence can be found in censuses. So even if a Memellander today is ethnic German, his great-grandparents - born before Germanization of the region - were ethnic Lithuanians.
Last edited by Peterski; 01-08-2022 at 10:11 PM.


| Thumbs Up/Down |
| Received: 8,341/42 Given: 8,640/5 |
No. Because this is not the common way how the German people evolved.
No, not only language determines. But among the Germans and the neighboring people language determines if you evalute history and common views.
Right now I can not say something about that kit. But if I did assess that kit I did it by experiencing this individual as an ethnic German. It's about the ethnicity of the testee.
Based on 4 gp. Yes, but non-German ethnicities among them are only relevant if they are outside the common devlopment of the German people in the region in question. Because these Germans are exactly what is intended to assess.
Yes. But that would not make the German testee unsuitable as a reference for the region were he is from.
After there will never be an end with discussions with you, I'll now also deal with other things than Peterska and I thank for your understanding.I've already told you essentially all these things over the years in emails so there is no visible to me sense to repeat all that. We could write forth and back for three years nonstop.
Target: rothaer_scaled
Distance: 1.0091% / 0.01009085
39.8 (Balto-)Slavic
39.0 Germanic
19.2 Celtic-like
1.8 Graeco-Roman
0.2 Finnic-like




| Thumbs Up/Down |
| Received: 23,113/717 Given: 20,205/1,181 |
So far I've been polite while you and the Ustasholina keep attacking me verbally all the time (this includes e.g. twisting my nickname).
BTW it is funny that someone who is an Ustasholina is attacking me for having Germanic admixture, lol.
And also it would not make his DNA unsuitable as a reference for Prussian Lithuanians, if all of his great-grandparents were Lithuanians.
Both names are applicable to the same DNA sample.
This applies to Beeskow sample as well, it can represent Niederlausitz Sorbs, since all of her ancestors 250 years ago were such people.
But you are still evolving, the process has not stopped. Now you are evolving in different conditions.




| Thumbs Up/Down |
| Received: 23,113/717 Given: 20,205/1,181 |
See, "Das Stadtbuch der Stadt Beeskow in der Niederlausitz":
https://zs.thulb.uni-jena.de/receive...ticle_00267050
There is also: "Ortsnamenbuch Der Niederlausitz : Studien Zur Toponymie Der Kreise Beeskow, Calau, Cottbus, Eisenhüttenstadt, Finsterwalde, Forst, Guben, Lübben, Luckau Und Spremberg".
But article below explains why some sources claim otherwise:
https://www.sorabicon.de/kulturlexik...v_ib2_m3d_r3b/
"Territorien, die im 15. und 16. Jh. von der zur böhmischen Krone gehörenden Niederlausitz an die brandenburgische Kurmark übergingen und bis zu ihrer festen Vereinigung mit Preußen Mitte des 18. Jh. eine besondere Verwaltungseinheit bildeten. Dies betraf 1462 die Herrschaften Teupitz und Bärwalde, 1490 Zossen, 1555 Beeskow und Storkow. Diese Gebiete befanden sich zunächst im Pfandbesitz der Hohenzollern, später erhielten sie den Status eines erblichen Lehens. Erst 1742 gingen sie im Ergebnis des Ersten Schlesischen Kriegs im Verband Preußens auf und gehörten fortan staatsrechtlich nicht mehr zur Niederlausitz.
Der Kurmärkisch-wendische-Distrikt umfasste im ausgehenden 16. Jh. eine Fläche von 2 174 km2 mit rund 17 700 Einwohnern, die in fünf Städten und 166 Dörfern lebten. Zwei Drittel der Bevölkerung in 132 Dörfern waren Sorben. Allein in den beiden Ämtern Beeskow und Storkow unterstanden dem Superintendenten Christoph Treuer 1610 noch 40 sorbische und lediglich fünf deutsche Kirchen. Die 29 deutschen Dörfer lagen in den Randgebieten, 19 allein im westlichen Teil des Amtes Zossen. Insgesamt betrug der Anteil der sorbischen Bevölkerung im Kurmärkisch-wendischen Distrikt im 16. Jh. 76 %. (...)"
^^^
So this entire area in the map below had 76% Sorbian population (and the German minority was mainly concentrated in western parts, near Zossen):
Kurmärkisch-wendischer Disktrikt um 1600; Karte: Iris Brankatschk, Sorbisches Kulturarchiv am Sorbischen Institut
Last edited by Peterski; 01-09-2022 at 02:45 AM.

| Thumbs Up/Down |
| Received: 21/0 Given: 161/3 |

| Thumbs Up/Down |
| Received: 21/0 Given: 161/3 |




| Thumbs Up/Down |
| Received: 23,113/717 Given: 20,205/1,181 |
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Bookmarks