# Population Genetics > Y-DNA Haplogroups >  Estimating Germanic Y-DNA in Iberia

## Maciamo

Spain and Portugal are fairly well studied countries for Y-chromosomal lineages. Unfortunately no study so far has tested for the Germanic S21/U106 subclade of R1b, and few papers even distinguish subclades of I (those who did only tested for I2a1a-M26).

I have analysed the raw data from Adams et al. (2008) and attempted to identify by myself the subclades of I as well as R1b-S21 by looking for the DYS390=23 values. About 80% of R1b-S21 has the value 23 at DYS390, which corresponds generally to the Frisian L48 subclade (close to 100% of which have DYS390=23). It's not a perfectly reliable method since DYS390=23 is also found at low frequency among some other R1b subclades - although I have excluded those found among the M153 and SRY2627 subclades. 

Consequently it is important to compare the frequencies for haplogroups I1 and I2b1 with those of DYS390=23 so as to get a reasonable idea of the impact of Germanic peoples (Visigoths, Suebi, Vandals, Franks) on the Iberian gene pool.

Here is the data.


*Aragon (n=34)*

I1 = 2 (6%)
I2b1 = 1 (3%)
R1b3 S21 (DYS390=23) = 5 (14.7%)

*Asturias (n=20)*

I1 = 1 (5%)
I2b1 = 0 (0%)
R1b3 S21 (DYS390=23) = 2 (10%)


*Basque Country (n=116)*

I1 = 1 (0.85%)
I2b1 = 0 (0%)
R1b3 S21 (DYS390=23) = 14 (12%)


*Catalonia (n=80)*

I1 = 0 (0%)
I2b1 = 0 (0%)
R1b3 S21 (DYS390=23) = 5 (6.25%)


*Castilla La Mancha (n=63)*

I1 = 0 (0%)
I2b1 = 0 (0%)
R1b3 S21 (DYS390=23) = 9 (14.2%)


*East Andalusia (n=95)*

I1 = 0 (0%)
I2b1 = 1 (1%)
R1b3 S21 (DYS390=23) = 8 (8%)


*Extremadura (n=52)*

I1 = 3 (6%)
I2b1 = 1 (2%)
R1b3 S21 (DYS390=23) = 4 (8%)


*Galicia (n=88)*

I1 = 4 (4.5%)
I2b1 = 2 (2.2%)
R1b3 S21 (DYS390=23) = 8 (9%)


*Northeast Castille (n=31)*

I1 = 0 (0%)
I2b1 = 0 (0%)
R1b3 S21 (DYS390=23) = 3 (9.6%)


*North Portugal (n=60)*

I1 = 0 (0%)
I2b1 = 1 (1.6%)
R1b3 S21 (DYS390=23) = 5 (8.3%)


*Northwest Castille (n=100)*

I1 = 0 (0%)
I2b1 = 1 (1%)
R1b3 S21 (DYS390=23) = 8 (8%)


*South Portugal (n=78)*

I1 = 0 (0%)
I2b1 = 0 (0%)
R1b3 S21 (DYS390=23) = 5 (6.4%)


*Valencia (n=73)*

I1 = 3 (4.1%)
I2b1 = 1 (1.3%)
R1b3 S21 (DYS390=23) = 7 (9.5%)


*West Andalusia (n=73)*

I1 = 0 (0%)
I2b1 = 1 (1.3%)
R1b3 S21 (DYS390=23) = 7 (9.6%)


*Ibiza (n=54)*

I1 = 0 (0%)
I2b1 = 0 (0%)
R1b3 S21 (DYS390=23) = 5 (9.2%)


*Majorca (n=62)*

I1 = 3 (4.8%)
I2b1 = 0 (0%)
R1b3 S21 (DYS390=23) = 6 (9.6%)


*Minorca (n=37)*

I1 = 0 (0%)
I2b1 = 0 (0%)
R1b3 S21 (DYS390=23) = 4 (10.8%)


The frequency of R1b with DYS390=23 is surprisingly homogeneous all over Iberia, oscillating around 8% and 10% of the male population. Only South Portugal and Catalonia have less than 8%. Three regions exceed 10%: Aragon (14.7%), Castilla La Mancha (14.2%) and the Basque country (12%). 

The Basques, however, have less than 1% of I1 and no I2b1 or R1a at all (this was confirmed by other, larger studies on the Basques), an almost undeniable proof that they have close to no Germanic ancestry, if proof was needed. The Basque DNA Project at FTDNA does not have a single R1b-U106 among members who tested for deep clades, and the U106 Project also lacks any member in or near the Basque country. The high percentage of DYS390=23 can therefore be considered to be due exclusively to the extremely high percentage of R1b (85%) among the Basques. If there is 12% of DYS390=23 among the 85% of Basques R1b and none of it is S21, that would give a ratio of 14% of non-Germanic R1b in Iberia that would misleadingly show up as DYS390=23. If I take an average of 9% of DYS390=23 for Iberia and 65% of R1b, we get about the same ratio of 14%. So it is well possible that very little DYS390=23 in Iberia corresponds to actual R1b-S21. Overall I think it is safe to consider that the percentage of R1b-S21 should always be a bit lower than I1.

My analysis of Germanic Y-DNA in Italy has assessed that the Lombards and Vandals at least, who both originated in southern Sweden, carried around 40% of I1, 30% of R1b, 25% of R1a and 5% of I2b1, not unlike modern Swedes. The Vandals probably didn't have much impact on the Iberian population. It is especially the Suebi who left a clear genetic print around Galicia, Portugal and Extremadura. Based on all the Y-DNA studies on Iberia (and not just Adams et al.) the peak of I1 in Iberia is to be found in Extremadura (3.5%) and Galicia (3%), while I2b peaks in Portugal at 3% (although that could include some Celtic I2b2). The Old Castile, founded by the Visigoths, has precious little I1 or I2b1 - one of the blanks on the map of Iberia along with Andalusia and Murcia.

There have been plenty of discussions on the reasons why the former Suebi kingdom had so much Germanic Y-DNA compared to the former Visigothic kingdom. Of all the Germanic peoples from the migration period the genetic impact of Visigoths is the most elusive. I believe that the reason is that *the Goths stayed for many centuries in Eastern Europe and nearly two more centuries in the Balkans before invading Italy and Iberia and could have assimilated a lot of non-Germanic people, notably R1a and I2a1b Slavs and predominantly E1b1b, I2a1b and J2 Balkanic people.* It would be pretty complicated at the moment to untangle the Balkanic E1b1b and J2 from all the others (Neolithic, Phoenician, Greek, Roman, Jewish, Arabic) found in Iberia. But it is remarkably easy to check the Eastern European I2a1b (M423). It is all the I2a that is not M26. And I cannot reasonably imagine who could have brought it in any number to Iberia besides the Eastern European populations assimilated by the Goths. The I2a Project at FTDNA has three M423-Dinaric-N and one M423-Isles-B2 from Spain.

It's a pity that no study looks at the subclades of R1a in Iberia, and that no member at the House of Spain DNA Project deemed necessary to test for deep clades. The Phoenicians and Jews could have brought some R1a-Z93 to the Mediterranean coast. Apart from that, all the R1a in Spain should have come with the Germanic migrations. It would be interesting to see how much of it is truly Germanic (L664, Z284) and how much is Slavic. By doing the same for Italy, and combining the figures with the percentage of I2a1b (M423), we could get a fairly accurate imagine of how Slavicised the Goths had become before invading the Roman Empire. *It's probably no coincidence that the highest concentrations of R1a in Iberia, aside from the Mediterranean coast, are found in northern Castile, Asturias and Cantabria, the core of the old Visigothic kingdom before the Reconquista.* The R1a in Cantabria is accompanied by typically East European mtDNA haplogroups like T1, T3, T5, U2, U3, U4 and U5b.

----------


## sparkey

More evidence for East Germanic peoples having higher I1 than R1b, unlike West Germanic peoples who have higher R1b, is the high I1 : R1b-U106 ratio in the Balkans. Put together with the geographic distribution of apparently Germanic Y-DNA in Iberia that you mention, and it is striking how much more Germanic Y-DNA the Suebi (and Franks?) seem to have introduced than the Goths (and Vandals?).

Using I2a-Din is an interesting trick to untangle the non-Germanic Y-DNA that was nonetheless introduced by the Visigoths, but can you get a number out of that? The I2a-Din in Iberia, even though samples exist, must be in the ~1% range, if that. I also doubt I2a-Din had finished expanding in Southeastern Europe by the time the Visigoths settled in Iberia, so using the I2a-Din figure is likely to give too low a number if we assume that I2a-Din frequencies were similar then to what they are now. So I'm not sure at this time how we can extract total the Y-DNA impact (Germanic and non-Germanic) of the Visigoths.

----------


## Sile

> More evidence for East Germanic peoples having higher I1 than R1b, unlike West Germanic peoples who have higher R1b, is the high I1 : R1b-U106 ratio in the Balkans. Put together with the geographic distribution of apparently Germanic Y-DNA in Iberia that you mention, and it is striking how much more Germanic Y-DNA the Suebi (and Franks?) seem to have introduced than the Goths (and Vandals?).
> 
> Using I2a-Din is an interesting trick to untangle the non-Germanic Y-DNA that was nonetheless introduced by the Visigoths, but can you get a number out of that? The I2a-Din in Iberia, even though samples exist, must be in the ~1% range, if that. I also doubt I2a-Din had finished expanding in Southeastern Europe by the time the Visigoths settled in Iberia, so using the I2a-Din figure is likely to give too low a number if we assume that I2a-Din frequencies were similar then to what they are now. So I'm not sure at this time how we can extract total the Y-DNA impact (Germanic and non-Germanic) of the Visigoths.


You seem to be against Ken stating that I1 are baltic people and not germanic. a conversation with ken below:
*Ken is in bold*
*Overnight two more members of CTS6364+ L22- showed up in FTDNA reports.
This is a gateway branch to the robust L22+ sector of the tree, as L22+
seems to be all CTS6364+
The two new 67 marker haplotype members have Polish surnames. There is an
eastern German surname which I am close to sure will test positive for this
haplogroup. This reinforces my hunch that the origins of I1 some 4500 years
ago will be more to the east than earlier expectations --- maybe Prussia or
Pomerania. Perhaps the late blooming I1 moved up into the north German
plain along the Elbe corridor, while M223+ Z161+ moved up using more the
Danube/Rhine route? My prejudice for the pre-agriculture staging area for
haplogroup I remains the middle Danube basin (present day Bohemia or
thereabouts).*
Ken, I noticed you mentioned Prussia with Pomerania. Prussia is a very
broad, general territory unless you are speaking of Old Prussia or
specifically the area along Baltic east/northeast from Poland, mostly
Lithuania.
*For most of my nine years in the hobby I have believed there is a close 
association of U106+ R1b..... with I1 x L22

But by Prussia I mean the geographical heartland of the peoples once called 
Prussians, not the political empire that the Prussians built up among the 
German peoples in historic times.
*
You mean Old-Prussia (Alt-Preussen) vs. Prussian Duchy/ Kingdom/ Empire
*Something like that. There was even originally a language of the Prussians 
I believe, not part of the standard Germanic or Slavic language group, 
although part of the Indo-European language group. Perhaps related to 
Latvian?*
They were Balts, related to Lithuanians (Samogitians).
Do you see any particular subclades of R1a, say Z284, lining up with
R1b-U106 and I1xL22?

I guess what I'm really getting to is who got to Scandinavia before the
formation of Proto-Germanic group and who came to Scandinavia as part of
the expansion of Germanics?
*AS1 clade of I1 (L338+) has a definite geographical bias toward the west 
(Netherlands, etc.) and there is a part of U106 which has the same. I'm 
sure by now you have a snp for the low countries' brand of U106.
It seemed to me those two clades got their original demographic kick within 
the same tribe --- perhaps the proto-Saxons. The U106 clade I'm talking 
about, however, might be a bit older. Do you have a tmrca for it? KN]] 
*

----------


## sparkey

> You seem to be against Ken stating that I1 are baltic people and not germanic.


He's not "stating that I1 are baltic people and not germanic." He's not saying anything stronger than:




> *...the origins of I1 some 4500 years
> ago will be more to the east than earlier expectations --- maybe Prussia or
> Pomerania.*


Nowhere does he conclude definitively that the MRCA of I1 was Baltic, or that any major I1 expansions were Baltic, etc. It's pretty clear from the data I've seen that Balts of all types, including Old Prussians, have/had lower I1 than practically all Germanic populations. I doubt anybody is certain what culture the MRCA of I1 belonged to. The more interesting question is: which populations expanded I1? Suggesting that the I1 MRCA lived east of the Germanic core area doesn't negate the fact that its later expansion was largely with Germanic peoples. Actually, it might even support my point that East Germanic peoples are more likely to have I1 than West Germanic peoples, if the place with the highest I1 diversity is east of the place with the highest R1b-U106 diversity.

Besides, what does this have to do with my idea about the relative proportion of I1 : R1b in East vs. West Germanic peoples? Are you suggesting that I1 got to the Balkans or to Iberia with the Balts? That doesn't even make sense.

----------


## tjlowery87

I guess im more simpler then most folks....i1 in west Europe.....germanic

----------


## tjlowery87

be warned fire haired will be on soon to say yall are all wrong...lol just kidding

----------


## Sile

> He's not "stating that I1 are baltic people and not germanic." He's not saying anything stronger than:
> 
> 
> 
> Nowhere does he conclude definitively that the MRCA of I1 was Baltic, or that any major I1 expansions were Baltic, etc. It's pretty clear from the data I've seen that Balts of all types, including Old Prussians, have/had lower I1 than practically all Germanic populations. I doubt anybody is certain what culture the MRCA of I1 belonged to. The more interesting question is: which populations expanded I1? Suggesting that the I1 MRCA lived east of the Germanic core area doesn't negate the fact that its later expansion was largely with Germanic peoples. Actually, it might even support my point that East Germanic peoples are more likely to have I1 than West Germanic peoples, if the place with the highest I1 diversity is east of the place with the highest R1b-U106 diversity.
> 
> Besides, what does this have to do with my idea about the relative proportion of I1 : R1b in East vs. West Germanic peoples? Are you suggesting that I1 got to the Balkans or to Iberia with the Balts? That doesn't even make sense.


he states , not germanic nor slavic language group......what else is there, baltic and Finnic ........I recall no other, do you?
These Ken statements are from* late June 2013*, they are not from the distant past.

I do support your theory that I1 was more easterly than the west-germanic people, but what people where easterly, the lusitanian cultural people? 
If we follow Jordanes ( which I do not, ) , then he states that the Goths homeland was from Dacia ( being I1 and I2a1 ) moved to the baltic coast prior to invading the Roman empire in the balkans. *This is the Polish Theory.*
The Gutes from Sweden reflect the go(u)ttones of Ptolemy who went to the baltic coast. 

I believe the Vandals from Scandia settled in pomerania and over time assimilated into/the the native people there ( who where of baltic origin) and later under a germanic tongue, led the germanic invasions of the Roman empire. The goths already on the black sea coast joined in.

in regards to "relative proportion of I1 : R1b in East vs. West Germanic peoples". The marker U106 is clearly a west-germanic marker, a frisii , suebi marker between Netherlands and denmark. and later know as a Frankish marker. This marker in iberia is clearly a separate "invasion" and not the balkan invasion by the germanic people. So I agree


Maybe 
http://www.eupedia.com/forum/threads...l=1#post383585

was correct, I1 was always in the balkans and moved north . Then again, what where the baltic people markers on the coast since they are older than germanic or slavic people?

----------


## nordicwarrior

Oh boy, I think I'm opposed to these haplogroup "pairings". Where is the hard evidence? I say we wait for the ancient remains to be tested. 

It's my opinion the best tools right now to trace hg. I1 movement are the subclade maps on FTDNA. Interestingly, there aren't huge gaps in the locations of these major I1 lines-- those who claim pronounced differences aren't seeing what I'm seeing. Please check for yourself.

Using I and R linkages should only be used as a hint in where to look, but this system of thought shouldn't pass for real proof.

----------


## sparkey

> Oh boy, I think I'm opposed to these haplogroup "pairings". Where is the hard evidence? I say we wait for the ancient remains to be tested.


Yikes, so we need to wait for not only ancient samples to confirm presence, but enough ancient samples to confirm frequencies, across all of the source populations of interest? We could be waiting a very long time. I say let's have some fun now with the patterns we already see.  :Good Job: 




> It's my opinion the best tool right now to trace hg. I1 movements are the subclade maps on FTDNA. Interestingly, there aren't huge gaps in the locations of these major I1 lines-- those who claim major differences aren't seeing what I'm seeing. Please check for yourself.


Who are you responding to here?

----------


## nordicwarrior

Sorry for the mix-up Sparkey, nobody on this thread. I have seen other conversations recently where the differences in location of the main I1 lines have been greatly exaggerated though. A red headed wrestler comes to mind. :) **EDIT** Even Ken seems to buy in to the idea that there are sizable geographical distances in the Norse clades early on. I don't agree, not yet anyway.

As long as this conversation is for fun, I can hang with it. By the way, anyone hear an update on those findings from Denmark?

----------


## Maciamo

> he states , not germanic nor slavic language group......what else is there, baltic and Finnic ........I recall no other, do you?
> These Ken statements are from* late June 2013*, they are not from the distant past.


That's a mute point. There were no Germanic languages 4500 years ago. The first Proto-Germanic speakers appeared around 3600 years ago with the Nordic Bronze Age, and the language didn't become properly Germanic until 2500 years ago according to most linguists. I don't know anybody reasonable and knowledgeable who would claim that Neolithic I1 people were Germanic or even Indo-European speakers. Proto-Germanic language developed when R1b people reached Scandinavia and mixed with the I1 and R1a people from Corded Ware. There is no Germanic people, culture or language without that trihybrid blend.

Obviously before the Indo-Europeans' arrival, the Nordic and Baltic I1 people spoke an Uralic language. So much can be guessed from the Finns and the Sami, who both have a lot of I1 (but hardly any R1b) and still speak Uralic languages.

----------


## Sile

> That's a mute point. There were no Germanic languages 4500 years ago. The first Proto-Germanic speakers appeared around 3600 years ago with the Nordic Bronze Age, and the language didn't become properly Germanic until 2500 years ago according to most linguists. I don't know anybody reasonable and knowledgeable who would claim that Neolithic I1 people were Germanic or even Indo-European speakers. Proto-Germanic language developed when R1b people reached Scandinavia and mixed with the I1 and R1a people from Corded Ware. There is no Germanic people, culture or language without that trihybrid blend.
> 
> Obviously before the Indo-Europeans' arrival, the Nordic and Baltic I1 people spoke an Uralic language. So much can be guessed from the Finns and the Sami, who both have a lot of I1 (but hardly any R1b) and still speak Uralic languages.


I agree

Would there then be a chance that this "baltic I1" migration went to Scandinavian and then relayed to Iberia. looking at Latvian numbers
38 percent of Latvian men belong to Y-DNA haplogroup *N1c1*. The common European haplogroup *R1b* was discovered in 12 percent of Latvian men. Rounding out the list of Latvian Y-DNA haplogroups are I1 (6%), I2a (1%), I2b (1%), J2 (0.5%), E1b1b (0.5%), Q (0.5%), and T (0.5%). 
12% of R1b and 6% of I1

and estonian 
Estonian men is *N*, found among 34 percent of those tested, followed by *R1a*, found in about 32 percent. *I1* is found in 15%, R1b in 8%, T in 3.5%, I2* and/or I2a in 3%, E1b1b in 2.5%, J2 in 1%, I2b in 0.5%, and Q in 0.5%. 
8% of R1b and 15% of I1

Both are decent enough to carry R1b and I1 from east to west

----------


## Maciamo

> I agree
> 
> Would there then be a chance that this "baltic I1" migration went to Scandinavian and then relayed to Iberia. looking at Latvian numbers
> 38 percent of Latvian men belong to Y-DNA haplogroup *N1c1*. The common European haplogroup *R1b* was discovered in 12 percent of Latvian men. Rounding out the list of Latvian Y-DNA haplogroups are I1 (6%), I2a (1%), I2b (1%), J2 (0.5%), E1b1b (0.5%), Q (0.5%), and T (0.5%). 
> 12% of R1b and 6% of I1
> 
> and estonian 
> Estonian men is *N*, found among 34 percent of those tested, followed by *R1a*, found in about 32 percent. *I1* is found in 15%, R1b in 8%, T in 3.5%, I2* and/or I2a in 3%, E1b1b in 2.5%, J2 in 1%, I2b in 0.5%, and Q in 0.5%. 
> 8% of R1b and 15% of I1
> ...


Pre-I1 has been around the Baltic since the Mesolithic. I1 developed around the Baltic during the late Neolithic. I1 remained there until the Iron Age, when Germanic people started expanding south to Magna Germania, then when they invaded the Roman Empire. I really don't see any way I1 could have reached southern Europe before the late Roman period. If a very old migration (e.g. 2500 BCE) had taken place from northern to southern Europe, there would be uniquely southern I1 subclades in the south splitting very early in the phylogeny. The fact is that there isn't any uniquely southern European subclade of I1.

I don't see what hg N and R1b have anything to do with this, or with one another. N1c1 came westward from Siberia. R1b in Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania came eastward from Germany and Poland during the Bronze Age, then again in various waves with the Vikings and the Teutonic knights during the Middle Ages, then again the Swedes during the Renaissance.

----------


## kamani

> If a very old migration (e.g. 2500 BCE) had taken place from northern to southern Europe, there would be uniquely southern I1 subclades in the south splitting very early in the phylogeny. The fact is that there isn't any uniquely southern European subclade of I1.


My data shows ~9% I-M253 (no subclades) for South-Albania. The percentage lowers to 5% as you go North to Kosovo and then it drops to 2-3% in ex-Jugoslavian countries and Greece (based on published sources). How can you explain this distribution? If it were the Middle-age/late Roman Germanic migrations, the percentage would lower as you go South, but the opposite is true in this case.

----------


## Maciamo

> My data shows ~9% I-M253 (no subclades) for South-Albania. The percentage lowers to 5% as you go North to Kosovo and then it drops to 2-3% in ex-Jugoslavian countries and Greece (based on published sources). How can you explain this distribution? If it were the Middle-age/late Roman Germanic migrations, the percentage would lower as you go South, but the opposite is true in this case.


The Goths. They settled in the southern Balkans for 200 years before migrating to Italy, France and Spain.

----------


## kamani

> The Goths. They settled in the southern Balkans for 200 years before migrating to Italy, France and Spain.


9% I1, 3% I2b, 5% R1b L21, 3% R1b L48, 7% nordic R1a, means Albania is 26% Gothic...

----------


## Shetop

> 9% I1, 3% I2b, 5% R1b L21, 3% R1b L48, 7% nordic R1a, means Albania is 26% Gothic...


Where did you get that data?
Please give a source. If you don't, it would be wise to consider the data as a fabrication. Some of the percentages you posted simply make no sense.

----------


## kamani

> Where did you get that data?
> Please give a source. If you don't, it would be wise to consider the data as a fabrication. Some of the percentages you posted simply make no sense.


Consider it however you want, the data is from my own head count of about 70 people.

----------


## Cambrius (The Red)

> Consider it however you want, the data is from my own head count of about 70 people.


That doesn't work. We need sources / facts to buttress opinions.

----------


## Johannes

"I believe that the reason is that *the Goths stayed for many centuries in Eastern Europe and nearly two more centuries in the Balkans before invading Italy and Iberia and could have assimilated a lot of non-Germanic people, notably R1a and I2a1b Slavs and predominantly E1b1b, I2a1b and J2 Balkanic people."

* 
This is incorrect Maciamo. I just read this thread, which was started one year ago, and found it interesting but with inaccuracies. I have read extensively on the Visigoths since my ancestors came from the same region they settled. If you would have read the history of the goths more carefully you would have known that they settled in Poland along the Vistula River (Weilbark Culture) and lived there for about 200-300 years, from about 100 BC to 200 AD (Jordanes who is unreliable claims 400 years). Either way the Slavic homeland has now been accepted by historians to have been in the Pripet Marshes around Belarus and western Ukraine. Thus they were never near the Goths. When the Goths migrated into "Oium" (southern Ukraine) in the second century AD they did meet the Slavs living in what is today western Ukraine, but they never settled there (Jordanes states that the Goths offered the Slavs battle but the Slavs refused). Therefore no Slav DNA was absorbed.

When the Goths arrived at the steppes (somewhere near Uman or south of Kiev) they split up into several groups -- the West Goths went into what is now Moldova and eventually into southern Romania. The Visigoths lived there about 200 years. The Gepids, Heruli, and Rugii seem to have followed the Visigoths but then went into Hungary and Slovakia, (but some seem to have followed the Ostrogoths, since they are mentioned as raiding Greece and Anatolia). The Ostrogoths went and settled in what is now southern Ukraine, between the Prut and Dnepr River. There were never any Slavs in the Ukrainian steppes or in Moldova or Romania or Hungary at that time. There were only Sarmatians and Scythians in that region and the Goths did conquer them. So any DNA the Ostrogoths picked up was R1a from the Sarmatian and Scythian peoples. But I doubt they altered the DNA of the Ostrogoths. The Visigoths on the other hand absorbed 0% Slavic genes, but I will admit they must have absorbed some J2 and E1b1 from Greeks and other Balkan peoples. 

"The Goths. They settled in the southern Balkans for 200 years before migrating to Italy, France and Spain."

Only the Visigoths settled in the southern Balkans for less than 200 years. But they lived in what is now Moldova. If Moldova is considered part of the Balkans then yes. The Gepids and Rugii and Heruli lived in the north part of the Balkans. The Visigoths were pushed into the Roman Empire by their brothers the Ostrogoths at the end of the 4th century AD due to pressure by the Huns. After being defeated by the Huns the Ostrogoths followed Attila into Hungary and joined their brothers the Gepids and settled there at the end of the 4th century AD.

After destroying 3-4 legions, including the emperor Valens, at the Battle of Adrianople, the Visigoths wandered around the Balkans but were denied any land to settle. They eventually moved into Italy and sacked Rome in 410 AD. They were finally granted lands to settle in southwest France. So if they picked up any DNA it would have been in Romania/Moldova were they lived for about 200 years and in southern France. But since the Dacians were exterminated by the Romans it is very doubtful they picked up any Balkan DNA of considerable amounts.

In conclusion, I believe very little J2 and E1b1 or Slavic I2b were absorbed by the Goths. No slabs ever lived in the Balkans before the 7th century AD. And any people who lived in the southern Balkans who had J2 and E1b1 must have been negligible unless they lived in the Roman Empire. In other words, the Balkans were depopulated by neolithic peoples outside the Roman frontiers. Only Germanic and Dacians lived there. But since the Dacians were exterminated then only the Germans occupied it for 200-300 years.

----------


## LeBrok

> "I believe that the reason is that *the Goths stayed for many centuries in Eastern Europe and nearly two more centuries in the Balkans before invading Italy and Iberia and could have assimilated a lot of non-Germanic people, notably R1a and I2a1b Slavs and predominantly E1b1b, I2a1b and J2 Balkanic people."*


For the lack of genetic evidence from Goth's genome, and lack of central and north european admixtures in Iberia, we are almost shooting blanks here. 



> This is incorrect Maciamo. I just read this thread, which was started one year ago, and found it interesting but with inaccuracies. I have read extensively on the Visigoths since my ancestors came from the same region they settled. If you would have read the history of the goths more carefully you would have known that they settled in Poland along the Vistula River (Weilbark Culture) and lived there for about 200-300 years, from about 100 BC to 200 AD (Jordanes who is unreliable claims 400 years). Either way the Slavic homeland has now been accepted by historians to have been in the Pripet Marshes around Belarus and western Ukraine. Thus they were never near the Goths. When the Goths migrated into "Oium" (southern Ukraine) in the second century AD they did meet the Slavs living in what is today western Ukraine, but they never settled there (Jordanes states that the Goths offered the Slavs battle but the Slavs refused). Therefore no Slav DNA was absorbed.


I was reading some time ago that in Wielbark Culture there were examples of coexistance of distinct villages (different cultures) close by. It might be true that Goths didn't mix much with locals from Vistula region, whoever lived there at the time. 
Even if there were no Slavs by Vistula, the population must have been rich in R1a, I assume.




> When the Goths arrived at the steppes (somewhere near Uman or south of Kiev) they split up into several groups -- the West Goths went into what is now Moldova and eventually into southern Romania. The Visigoths lived there about 200 years. The Gepids, Heruli, and Rugii seem to have followed the Visigoths but then went into Hungary and Slovakia, (but some seem to have followed the Ostrogoths, since they are mentioned as raiding Greece and Anatolia). The Ostrogoths went and settled in what is now southern Ukraine, between the Prut and Dnepr River. There were never any Slavs in the Ukrainian steppes or in Moldova or Romania or Hungary at that time. There were only Sarmatians and Scythians in that region and the Goths did conquer them. So any DNA the Ostrogoths picked up was R1a from the Sarmatian and Scythian peoples. But I doubt they altered the DNA of the Ostrogoths. The Visigoths on the other hand absorbed 0% Slavic genes, but I will admit they must have absorbed some J2 and E1b1 from Greeks and other Balkan peoples.


Interesting thought. If Goths mingled with locals in Balkans, they should have picked up lots of J and E. Then again we are not sure if they did.




> In conclusion, I believe very little J2 and E1b1 or Slavic I2b were absorbed by the Goths. No slabs ever lived in the Balkans before the 7th century AD. And any people who lived in the southern Balkans who had J2 and E1b1 must have been negligible unless they lived in the Roman Empire. In other words, the Balkans were depopulated by neolithic peoples outside the Roman frontiers. Only Germanic and Dacians lived there. But since the Dacians were exterminated then only the Germans occupied it for 200-300 years.


 The extermination of ethnicities is rather unlikely. From beginning of neolithic we can see substantial genetic continuation of locals in Europe. Cultures changed but people mostly stayed the same.

I don't believe that invasions of Goths, Vandals or Swabians to Iberia exceeded more than 5 percent of total Iberian population, probably even less and Vandals left anyway. Not numerous enough to change local genetics or local culture.
Probably when future genetic research analyzes village by village (small regions), with bigger definition than what we have right now, we should start seeing some more germanic haplotypes popping up in Iberia in some enclaves.

----------


## Johannes

"I was reading some time ago that in Wielbark Culture there were examples of coexistance of distinct villages (different cultures) close by. It might be true that Goths didn't mix much with locals from Vistula region, whoever lived there at the time. 
Even if there were no Slavs by Vistula, the population must have been rich in R1a, I assume."

Yes, archaeologists have found sites that were near or next to the Wielbark Culture that were different. The problem is that it was hard to differentiate ethnicity because the skulls were very similar. However, the Vandals lived to next to the Goths on the left bank of the Vistula. On the right bank lived Balts and Slavs (Veneti). 
Historians and archaeologists do not know exactly who were the Veneti -- German or Slav? Do you know what was the original or oldest DNA of the Slavs -- R1a or I2a1b? Since the Goths already contained a lot of R1a it did not alter their DNA considerable. Perhaps made it higher than other western Germans.


"Interesting thought. If Goths mingled with locals in Balkans, they should have picked up lots of J and E. Then again we are not sure if they did." 

The Goths and their relatives -- the Gepids, Heruli, and Rugians -- never lived in the Balkans for a long time. They did live for a long time in the north of the Danube River. The Balkans are defined as all territories south of the Danube River up to Croatia and Serbia (following the Danube River). Hungary and Romania are not considered part of the Balkans. Hungary, Slovakia, Romania, and Moldova were sparsely populated when the German tribes came to occupy them. Any Neolithic farmers who stayed and lived in the forests of Transylvania and plains of Hungary and Wallachia were either fools or very brave because any Neolithic farmers would have been killed and/or enslaved. Worse: if the Huns would have gotten a hold of them it would have been hell. In fact the Huns are the ones who exterminated many of the peoples who lived in these areas, including Gothic peoples. So we must infer that the population was low at the time. 

At that period people do't mix their DNA by shaking hands and dating. Peoples almost always mixed due to the effects of force and rape. Even when they are related by blood and culture. For example, the Romans and Sabines. Thus people who were invaded by more powerful nations usually left their villages or submitted to their will.

"The extermination of ethnicities is rather unlikely. From beginning of neolithic we can see substantial genetic continuation of locals in Europe. Cultures changed but people mostly stayed the same."

Well if you read the History of Romania you will learn that Emperor Trajan exterminated all the male Dacians and most of the women. Roman soldiers later married Dacian women and created the proto-Romanians. Dacia was then repopulated with a lot of Italians and others from Europe and Middle East. So they must have reintroduced a lot of G, J2 and E1b. But then Dacia was abandoned after the Goths attacked it in the middle of the 3rd century AD. Thus almost all of the population moved to the safe cities and towns below the Danube River. Thus very little mixture occurred between Germans and locals. 

"I don't believe that invasions of Goths, Vandals or Swabians to Iberia exceeded more than 5 percent of total Iberian population, probably even less and Vandals left anyway. Not numerous enough to change local genetics or local culture.
Probably when future genetic research analyzes village by village (small regions), with bigger definition than what we have right now, we should start seeing some more germanic haplotypes popping up in Iberia in some enclaves."

When a master nation rules over another they usually increase their numbers. Why? because they get the best land, more wealth, and more women. Granted that the population of Iberia declined from 4 million to 3 million from the 4th to 5th centuries, due to famines, plagues and economic depression, the Germanics would have been affected -- but less. In the center and north of Iberia they did alter the DNA somewhat. I am sure if they do a careful and complete study of the northern Portuguese, Old Castilians, Leonese, and the Aragones you will find higher percentages than they have now. The reason why Germanic DNA is low in Iberia is due to low test numbers and includes the whole of Iberia. Iberia is much bigger than England or Germany or the Low Countries.

----------


## sparkey

> Do you know what was the original or oldest DNA of the Slavs -- R1a or I2a1b?


R1a, presumably, owing to the fact that Slavs descend from Balto-Slavs, and Balts have high R1a but low I2a1b. It's possible that the Slavic ethnogenesis postdates the blending of R1a-carrying Balto-Slavs and some unknown I2a1b population, or that Balto-Slavs carried I2a1b earlier than that and I2a1b expanded within the subset of their population that became Slavs. Of course, we don't have ancient samples to confirm any of this yet.

----------


## LeBrok

> It's possible that the Slavic ethnogenesis postdates the blending of R1a-carrying Balto-Slavs and some unknown I2a1b population, or that *Balto-Slavs carried I2a1b earlier than that and I2a1b expanded within the subset of their population* that became Slavs.


Recently I'm becoming a fan of this scenario. Looking at available ancient samples, it becomes obvious to see huge swings in Y-DNA haplogroups, especially connected to new variety of subclades expanding dramatically, while general autosomal admixtures don't point to population replacement, or other catastrophic changes. Other words, it is very natural and popular phenomenon.

----------


## LeBrok

> Well if you read the History of Romania you will learn that Emperor Trajan exterminated all the male Dacians and most of the women. Roman soldiers later married Dacian women and created the proto-Romanians. Dacia was then repopulated with a lot of Italians and others from Europe and Middle East. So they must have reintroduced a lot of G, J2 and E1b. But then Dacia was abandoned after the Goths attacked it in the middle of the 3rd century AD. Thus almost all of the population moved to the safe cities and towns below the Danube River. Thus very little mixture occurred between Germans and locals.


 When Romanians are analyzed autosomally or even with uniparental DNA they fit nicely into Balkans. They are not being located genetically in Italy or Near East. Whatever killing of dacians happened it wasn't as bad as historians say, or Dacians were strangers to this area anyway. We don't really see obvious correlation and relation between Italian and Romanian DNA. Obviously cultural Roman imprint on Romania was much bigger than genetic one.





> When a master nation rules over another they usually increase their numbers. Why? because they get the best land, more wealth, and more women. Granted that the population of Iberia declined from 4 million to 3 million from the 4th to 5th centuries, due to famines, plagues and economic depression, the Germanics would have been affected -- but less. In the center and north of Iberia they did alter the DNA somewhat. I am sure if they do a careful and complete study of the northern Portuguese, Old Castilians, Leonese, and the Aragones you will find higher percentages than they have now. The reason why Germanic DNA is low in Iberia is due to low test numbers and includes the whole of Iberia. Iberia is much bigger than England or Germany or the Low Countries.


 I believe there will be some statistical differences.

----------


## Sile

> R1a, presumably, owing to the fact that Slavs descend from Balto-Slavs, and Balts have high R1a but low I2a1b. It's possible that the Slavic ethnogenesis postdates the blending of R1a-carrying Balto-Slavs and some unknown I2a1b population, or that Balto-Slavs carried I2a1b earlier than that and I2a1b expanded within the subset of their population that became Slavs. Of course, we don't have ancient samples to confirm any of this yet.


correct me if I am wrong, but did'nt KenN state recently that the "east prussians" where I2a1.
He was referring to iron-age east-prussians..................mostly likely aestii and venedi, galidians also

----------


## arvistro

> correct me if I am wrong, but did'nt KenN state recently that the "east prussians" where I2a1.
> He was referring to iron-age east-prussians..................mostly likely aestii and venedi, galidians also


Who is KenN and based on what did he state East Prussians were I2a1? I don't disagree, because I have no data to agree/disagree, just curious, because there is very little I2a1 in Lithuanians or Latvians.

----------


## Sile

> Who is KenN and based on what did he state East Prussians were I2a1? I don't disagree, because I have no data to agree/disagree, just curious, because there is very little I2a1 in Lithuanians or Latvians.


I was in error , Ken meant I1 was latvian (perhaps) from east prussia

From: "Kenneth Nordtvedt" <[email protected]>

Overnight two more members of CTS6364+ L22- showed up in FTDNA reports.
This is a gateway branch to the robust L22+ sector of the tree, as L22+
seems to be all CTS6364+
The two new 67 marker haplotype members have Polish surnames. There is an
eastern German surname which I am close to sure will test positive for this
haplogroup. This reinforces my hunch that the origins of I1 some 4500 years
ago will be more to the east than earlier expectations --- maybe Prussia or
Pomerania. 

But by Prussia I mean the geographical heartland of the peoples once called 
Prussians, not the political empire that the Prussians built up among the 
German peoples in historic times.

There was even originally a language of the Prussians 
I believe, not part of the standard Germanic or Slavic language group, 
although part of the Indo-European language group. Perhaps related to 
Latvian?

The Old Prussian language is extinct like all other closely related 
Western Baltic languages (Curonian, Galindian and Sudovian) - Lithuanian 
and Latvian are surviving Eastern Baltic languages, to which Old 
Prussian was more distantly related

----------


## arvistro

Like I said, can't comment much. I have neither knowledge on I1 tree, nor its age estimates. 4,500 years ago some I1 tribe from Prussian whereabouts manages to survive and enter general IE world. Why not?
Modern Balts however have very little of any I. On other hand Lithuanians are outliers (as being among tallest populations wihout I haplo), which might mean that I folk haplos got replaced by R1A/N1C1 mix at some point(s).

----------


## Pedro Gomes

Germanic haplotypes in North of Portugal particularly around Porto must be close to 20 percent or even more. Braga itself accounts for I not specified haplogroup of about 18%. The suebi who invaded north of Portugal were about 40000. Plus the Viking input in Povoa de Varzim. Those estimations about N Portugal are wrong.

----------


## Pedro Gomes

Germanic haplotypes in North of Portugal particularly around Porto must be close to 20 percent or even more. Braga itself accounts for I not specified haplogroup of about 18%. The suebi who invaded north of Portugal were about 40000. Plus the Viking input in Povoa de Varzim. Those estimations about N Portugal are wrong.

----------


## Pedro Gomes

Germanic haplotypes in North of Portugal particularly around Porto must be close to 20 percent or even more. Braga itself accounts for I not specified haplogroup of about 18%. The suebi who invaded north of Portugal were about 40000. Plus the Viking input in Povoa de Varzim. Those estimations about N Portugal are wrong.s

----------


## suebiking

Well maybe a little underestimation but you have to remember that north portugal is not just braga and porto it also includes tras-os montes which is probably much less germanic, for example even the buri contingent that separated from the suebi stayed in amares and terras de bouro (lands of the buri) though probably their center was in aplace where it is nowadays amares, the villages of Bouro or Buri. In conclusion the numbers maciamo gave are not necessarily wrong but the samples were simply not taken in areas that were as much affected by the germanic migrations as in braga and porto. For example in beleza et al there is much probably an overestimation on the germanic samples because they were only taken in areas largely affected by both the suebi, the vandals( the ones who stayed with the suebi and those who ran from north africa), some visigoths due to the reconquista and even the most underestimated the vikings who founded a fishing community in a somewhat large lenght of coast, vikings who are most times forgotten and their lineages just taken as part of the suebi and others contingent.

----------


## Pedro Gomes

These estimations must be wrong about the I. Please check my comment in you thread.

----------


## Pedro Gomes

> Spain and Portugal are fairly well studied countries for Y-chromosomal lineages. Unfortunately no study so far has tested for the Germanic S21/U106 subclade of R1b, and few papers even distinguish subclades of I (those who did only tested for I2a1a-M26).
> 
> I have analysed the raw data from Adams et al. (2008) and attempted to identify by myself the subclades of I as well as R1b-S21 by looking for the DYS390=23 values. About 80% of R1b-S21 has the value 23 at DYS390, which corresponds generally to the Frisian L48 subclade (close to 100% of which have DYS390=23). It's not a perfectly reliable method since DYS390=23 is also found at low frequency among some other R1b subclades - although I have excluded those found among the M153 and SRY2627 subclades. 
> 
> Consequently it is important to compare the frequencies for haplogroups I1 and I2b1 with those of DYS390=23 so as to get a reasonable idea of the impact of Germanic peoples (Visigoths, Suebi, Vandals, Franks) on the Iberian gene pool.
> 
> Here is the data.
> 
> 
> ...


Maciamo, you are wrong aboutnorthern Portugal. The region was barely studied. You write the Germanic I1 iszero, knowing that 40000 suebi settled around Porto and Braga. The culturalimpact of the Vikings and suebi tribes in northern Portugal is huge. Bragaaccounts for 18% of I not specified haplogroup. Some Portuguese from Povoa looklike Norwegians. You may know a lot about European history but not about myregion. People are always underestimating the impact of the Germanic tribessince this is a southern European region. England before the invasion of theanglo-saxons was so Germanic as northernPortugal before the invasion of thesuebi. But in your works you point out heavily the Germanic influence ofdifferent regions in England and you do not do the same for Portugal. I wouldappreciate an answer of yours. Please check my comments in the thread suebiinput in Northern Portugal and Galiza.

----------


## RobertColumbia

> ...England before the invasion of theanglo-saxons was so Germanic as northernPortugal before the invasion of thesuebi....


Do you have any evidence of England being Germanic before the Anglo-Saxon invasion?

----------


## Pedro Gomes

You cant read. Before the suebi N of Portugal was not Germanic.

----------


## Twilight

> You cant read. Before the suebi N of Portugal was not Germanic.


I can't read either, please do tell why the Romano-Britians should be called Germanic instead of Celtic. Roberts quote of reference seems pretty legit I'm afraid.

As for Northern Portugal, I agree that there was not Germanic dominance in the area before the Suebi
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Visigothic_Kingdom

----------


## Pedro Gomes

As for Northern Portugal, I agree that there was not Germanic dominance in the area before the Suebi. 
So the same happens with England before the anglo-Saxons right? Understood?

----------


## Twilight

> As for Northern Portugal, I agree that there was not Germanic dominance in the area before the Suebi. 
> So the same happens with England before the anglo-Saxons right? Understood?


In a way, England was invaded before the Anglo-Saxons, but not by Germanic tribes but by the Romans and they called The Brythoic tribes of England & Wales Brittania (43-410 AD). In 410 the Romanized-Britians were left to their own devises and were soon invaded by Anglo-Saxons

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roman_Britain

----------


## Pedro Gomes

It is the last comment I may post on this forum. Are you playing dumb?
or are u really dumb. Cant u understand thet I wrote that Britain
was so germanic as Portugal because N Portugal was
not germanic before the invasion of the suebi as England was NOT BEFORE
THE INVASION OF THE ANGLO-SAXONS!!!! MAKES SENSE NOW????

----------


## Twilight

> It is the last comment I may post on this forum. Are you playing dumb?
> or are u really dumb. Cant u understand thet I wrote that Britain
> was so germanic as Portugal because N Portugal was
> not germanic before the invasion of the suebi as England was NOT BEFORE
> THE INVASION OF THE ANGLO-SAXONS!!!! MAKES SENSE NOW????


Pedro, even if you are not as Viking genetically doesn't make you any less Portuguese or Norseman at heart. Our Ancient Ancestors used to intermarry with each other frequently after an invasion, people assimilated and even changed allegiances to preserve their reputation.

It may be true that I'm dumb but I know this. Like archaeology as well as DNA, we are growing in our understanding of the ancient world. However with archaeology and DNA, we don't have a time machine to examine the culture nor collect DNA samples. Instead, we have to discover clue and read the history in order to solve our questions; just like what a detective would do. :)

----------


## Pedro Gomes

It is not the question that I want to be a Viking or Germanic. Simply Porto and Braga, have always been heavily Germanic, as history accounts report,culture and the high incidence of haplogroups of Germanic origin as 18% of I in Braga as well as other germanic sublcades of R1b.
The problem lies with the fact people dont want to admitt, these two
cities are genetically more germanic than most of central Europe. There is
further an input from the vikings in the area in Povoa de Varzim. 
There Peolple look as norwegians, the traditional dress is like
in the coast of Norway and the boats design was influenced by vikings
long boats. You can check it on wikipedia if u like it.

----------


## Angela

I have no idea if the people in that particular little village are unusually fair as I don't remember ever going there. 

I can tell you, however, that there's a very large community of Portuguese=Americans near me, virtually all of whom are from Braga and Porto, whom I happen to know quite well because more than a few of them have worked for me, including a young woman whom I hired "fresh off the boat", as it were. :) We became quite close to her, and through her to the community. My son was ring bearer at her wedding, and I've been to many, many affairs at the Portuguese Community Center. (great food by the way)

They're very honest, hard-working people who are faring quite well here. They are not by any stretch of the imagination Norwegian looking, however. In fact, they're quite the  shortest, darkest Europeans I've ever met. Nor is there anything wrong with that in my book, for what it's worth, but it's the reality.

I've also recently been hosted at the second home she's bought in the Porto area, and while there's certainly a few fairer types in the area it is _by no means_ some Norwegian outpost in terms of phenotype. 

In terms of the frequency of certain yDna lineages, the studies are the studies. That's all we have. Someone's _feeling_ that the number _must_ be higher doesn't have any probative value.

You also seem to be unaware that the y lineage can be extremely uninformative as far as autosomal make-up (and phenotype) is concerned. An elite migration of men can spread their y chromosome around, and it can drift to high frequency in some villages or towns, but in less than two hundred years there could no longer be any autosomal material left in their descendants.

----------


## Pedro Gomes

I dont know where have you been or who do you know from my region.
Telling we are short and dark is completly wrong. I am over 5´11 foot
and blue eyed. Most of my friends are about or above that height. I had ´
friends from Povoa de Varzim who were 6´3, and some were ash-blond haired.
Of course extreme light pigmentation and nordic feautures dont apply to
most of the country. But as I wrote I am only concerned about the real
inhabitants from Porto and Braga. Lots of people from other regions
of Portugal migrated to these areas, rural exodus weird? You talk about
an elite group, being 40000 suebi? Just a minor impact on the gene pool?
Most of the names and traditions of certain areas are nothern european because of what?
I haplogroup at 18 % in the area. You know what about my region? Nothing. Than you
come making assumptions about the history of my country just beacause you dont
want to admit our germanic origin. That is shameful.

----------


## Twilight

Perhaps you could invite your local friends and relatives to take part in DNA testing. The more DNA test we get, the more accurate the results. I recommend going to a DNA testing company to test for adna instead of relying on ydna alone.
I still remember the day when we Englishmen used to think we were either 100% roman or 100% Saxon, but DNA has proved otherwise.

----------


## Pedro Gomes

That is something I would like to do.I think the studies have already proven that the germanic component is significant. I only hate people like Angela who have some kind of inferior complex and reffuse to accept reality as it is. Coming on forum saying " I saw very dark portugueses so you cannot be germanic" which is a very scientific approach to the subject.

----------


## Angela

> That is something I would like to do.I think the studies have already proven that the germanic component is significant. I only hate people like Angela who have some kind of inferior complex and reffuse to accept reality as it is. Coming on forum saying " I saw very dark portugueses so you cannot be germanic" which is a very scientific approach to the subject.


My dear Pedro, you are the one who raised the issue of phenotype when you claimed that the people of Porto and Braga are very "Norwegian" looking. I have seen scores of them both here and in Portugal and that's absolute rubbish. If you didn't want to discuss it, why did you bring it up?

You must also be confusing me with someone else. I have absolutely _no_ interest in "being" Germanic, or "looking" Germanic. Given the history of my particular region and my family during the war that would be a sign of a rather severe mental disorder. Plus, I was raised by an Italian nationalist of the old school; for him, even the Celts/Gauls were barbarians whom he was sure we had sent packing. I have accepted the findings of population genetics to the contrary with as good a grace as I can muster. :)* As for the Germanic invasions, they destroyed our empire. I would celebrate it...why?

As for "science", you have been presented with the "science" in the form of yDna studies, which aren't even determinative in terms of autosomal composition anyway, which you don't seem to understand. You refuse to accept these yDna studies because they don't support your chosen narrative. The fact is that you have no data whatsoever to support you contention. So, precisely _who_ is being un-scientific here?

Ed.
*That was a joke, Pedro, in case you couldn't tell. I'm quite content to accept all my ancestors. Neither do I hold grudges over what happened two thousand years ago.

----------


## Pedro Gomes

First of all Povoa de Varzin is a town, not a little village(why say a little village because it suits
you?) Second genetic studies on northern Portugal prove we are mostly 
descending from the celts(r1b3 ever heard?) Third the region I am talking about
displays 18% of I haplogroup being the historical spot where the suebi
and the viking chose to settle. The average height of northern portuguese
youngesters is 5´10 or 178 cm, not short. Italians by the way in south
look like middle eastenaers as their y-dna proves. Start to search
wikipedia about Povoa de varzim and the suebi in Northern Portugal. since
that may be the only thing you can read. I dont know what kind of 
portugueses you know, they may be from south or you mistake their identities
or they are not really from norhten Portugal. Since you visit northern
Portugal I would advise to pay attention to how people look particularly 
in the villages. Apologize to me should be polite by the way.

----------


## Angela

> First of all Povoa de Varzin is a town, not a little village(why say a little village because it suits
> you?) Second genetic studies on northern Portugal prove we are mostly 
> descending from the celts(r1b3 ever heard?) Third the region I am talking about
> displays 18% of I haplogroup being the historical spot where the suebi
> and the viking chose to settle. The average height of northern portuguese
> youngesters is 5´10 or 178 cm, not short. Italians by the way in south
> look like middle eastenaers as their y-dna proves. Start to search
> wikipedia about Povoa de varzim and the suebi in Northern Portugal. since
> that may be the only thing you can read. I dont know what kind of 
> ...


Apologize for what? For pointing out the obvious? The published y Dna data doesn't support your position. Therefore, there is no scientific support for your position. End of that story. 

No autosomal analysis of these people has been done to my knowledge, but there's certainly been autosomal analyses by the score of Iberians. They are not "Germanic", to put it mildly. Nor do they cluster anywhere near the Irish or the British on any PCA I've ever seen. According to the Ralph and Coop IBD analysis, there's virtually no autosomal impact of the Germanic invasions in Iberia. 

Next...I begin to suspect you've never even been to Porto and Braga. If you had, there's no way you could be saying these things. I also repeat: you are the one who brought up phenotypes. I don't know why you're unhappy about the phenotypes of the majority of the people of Porto and Braga, but that isn't my problem. I'm more than happy with the looks, the personality, and the make-up of my own. 

If you find some dna results that support your claim that the people of Porto and Braga not only have yDna but autosomal results that prove that they are very "Germanic" in make-up let me know. Otherwise, I'm not interested.

----------


## Pedro Gomes

If you knew a little of genetic studies you would realize people
from Porto and Braga are genetically more germanic than most of central Europe.
You dont read what I tell you to, and you dont know about the atlantic
model haplotype. You are a just an italian with an inferiority complex.
The word to describe your attitude would be ignorant, you reffuse to
learn.I am over 5´11, blue eyed and I am from that region, my grandma
had ash-blond hair. Tell me how on earth are we distant from the northern
europeans. Some germans look less german than myself.

----------


## Angela

I am truly overwhelmed by the number of tall, blonde Nordics in that town. Oh, and I won't stop you from posting unsupported _beliefs_, but one more insult directed at me or any other poster or any ethnic group whatsoever and you'll get an infraction. Calling people dumb qualifies. They can add up quickly. Ask some of your friends.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sF-FgrXxmyc

----------


## Pedro Gomes

The only insulteous person, were you.You try to rewrite the history of my region against scientific work. If this forum is about that, 
this may be my last post.
See that you end up agreeing that we are nordic.

----------


## Angela

> The only insulteous person, were you.You try to rewrite the history of my region against scientific work. If this forum is about that, 
> this may be my last post.
> See that you end up agreeing that we are nordic.


Now that would be heart breaking.

As I said, when you have scientific data be sure to share it. After all, genotype does not necessarily equal phenotype. In the meantime, as you can see, they have very nice festivals in the Porto and Braga area. I had a great time there. You should pay a visit and connect with your roots.

----------


## Degredado

I refuse to believe this Pedro fellow is being 100% serious. Surely this is someone pretending to be Portuguese and trying to give the Portuguese people a bad name on this website?

Of course the Suevi left their mark in N. Portugal/Galicia, essentially in a bunch of personal names, some vocabulary, the "sh" sound for the letter S before consonants (as in German), which is unique among Romance languages, the economic model of small, independent rural properties, and the very peculiar Portuguese names for the weekdays (which were invented by Suebi bishops, if I remember correctly). 

But I think the deeper question is: what is behind this Germanic/Viking fetish that so many Southern Europeans on this forum seem to have? I emphasize "this forum", because in real life, I've never met any Portuguese, Italians or Spaniards displaying this obsession. At the end of the day, the Suevi genetic legacy must realistically be no larger than that of other invaders, i.e. Romans, Moors etc.

----------


## Angela

> I refuse to believe this Pedro fellow is being 100% serious. Surely this is someone pretending to be Portuguese and trying to give the Portuguese people a bad name on this website?
> 
> Of course the Suevi left their mark in N. Portugal/Galicia, essentially in a bunch of personal names, some vocabulary, the "sh" sound for the letter S before consonants (as in German), which is unique among Romance languages, the economic model of small, independent rural properties, and the very peculiar Portuguese names for the weekdays (which were invented by Suebi bishops, if I remember correctly). 
> 
> But I think the deeper question is: what is behind this Germanic/Viking fetish that so many Southern Europeans on this forum seem to have? I emphasize "this forum", because in real life, I've never met any Portuguese, Italians or Spaniards displaying this obsession. At the end of the day, the Suevi genetic legacy must realistically be no larger than that of other invaders, i.e. Romans, Moors etc.


I hope you're not including me in that group?  Sometimes I feel like I'm Alice after she's fallen down the rabbit hole.

Not that only some bizarre sub-group of southern Europeans have been infected. Nordicism is sort of an equal opportunity disorder. Still, if the people espousing it are northern Europeans it makes a modicum of sense even if it's intellectually and morally bankrupt. 

More than once I've been tempted to find myself another intellectual hobby. I mean, how much can one really read about the Indo-Europeans, especially when it comes with all this associated claptrap? At least here we insist on actual data, and we mix it up a bit in terms of interests both genetic and in terms of the broader European context, as you'll find if you stick around.

----------


## Degredado

> I hope you're not including me in that group?  Sometimes I feel like I'm Alice after she's fallen down the rabbit hole.
> 
> Not that only some bizarre sub-group of southern Europeans have been infected. Nordicism is sort of an equal opportunity disorder. Still, if the people espousing it are northern Europeans it makes a modicum of sense even if it's intellectually and morally bankrupt. 
> 
> More than once I've been tempted to find myself another intellectual hobby. I mean, how much can one really read about the Indo-Europeans, especially when it comes with all this associated claptrap? At least here we insist on actual data, and we mix it up a bit in terms of interests both genetic and in terms of the broader European context, as you'll find if you stick around.



Angela, you're most definitely not a part of that group. I never see you attaching or conditioning your Italian pride to being Germanic/Viking/Celtic etc. On the contrary, I always see you trying to put some sense into these Southern nordicists' heads, but it doesn't seem to have much effect.

----------


## suebiking

Well let's just say the suebi and vikings left a kind of big print in the area culture wise and it is fairly normal that people with a kind of germano-celtic culture want to be that same way in dna.It is just ordinary, sincerely I am from a family with a lot of germanic attributes, though I do not believe I will be that much germanic in genetics (autosomal dna), about what angela said I would never say it is a lie, portuguese are a mixture of many peoples over the years and some darker phenotypes happen sometimes, for example I have a cousin, her mother has blonde hair and is very white, her father is a little darker and she when tanned could be confused with a north african for example and in both sides of her family noone looks even a bit close to her. About the people looking germanic, I would say it is about 10-20% of the population of this area that could pass unnoticed in germany or austria, actually I have an austrian friend from tyrol near innsbruck and he looks like my uncle.
About the comments made on this forum it is no way possible that north portugal will be as germanic as germany or austria, we all know that the source of the germanic peoples will always be the place with more germanic people.

----------


## suebiking

As a conclusion to my later post I would had that I am not even a little nordicist nor I will ever be, it is more a question a curiosity that I search these kind of matters and in my point of view it is very impolite to say to someone that I am superior because of my genetic background. Yes it is more than true that there are more people in north portugal with germanic caratheristics but not even close to other european countries. If I had to describe myself by the common terms of european genetics I would be neither nordic nor alpine nor mediterranean nor dinaric. I would say I am portuguese a short fellow with light skin and a kind of germanic look with green eyes ,but germanic, I don't think so if I had to make an estimate and cuting out small people movements I would say I probably descend from the celts and the peoples that they overtook like 90% the rest I would leave to germanic and even who knows berber countributions. And no the portuguese are not racists, we have our problems mainly with gypsies but not with anyone else.

----------


## Fire Haired14

> If you knew a little of genetic studies you would realize people
> from Porto and Braga are genetically more germanic than most of central Europe.


If you think people from your region have a lot of Germanic ancestry take a DNA test. It'll tell you if you have a lot of Germanic ancestry. It'd be really interesting if your region of Portugal are descended from Goths.




> I am over 5´11, blue eyed and I am from that region, my grandma
> had ash-blond hair. Tell me how on earth are we distant from the northern
> europeans. Some germans look less german than myself.


There's many differnt physical appearances in ethnic groups. Two differnt people from the same town can look completely differnt. And two people from differnt ethnic groups can look identical to each other. There isn't a single look for every group of people in the world. Your family having pigmentation traits most popular in North Europe doesn't mean you have ancestry from there. 

I found this interesting. It's examples of Scandinavians with Mediterranean-type pigmentation: Dark Scandinavians/Northern Germanics. All of a sudden they look South European. A similar thing might be going in your family.

----------


## Angela

> Angela, you're most definitely not a part of that group. I never see you attaching or conditioning your Italian pride to being Germanic/Viking/Celtic etc. On the contrary, I always see you trying to put some sense into these Southern nordicists' heads, but it doesn't seem to have much effect.


Degredado, if someone can look at the people in that video and think that they look Germanic, then they're obviously not operating from a place of reason or science. In fact, they must be blind. 

One can't debate an illusion, or, more like, a delusion. It's something like charging windmills, yes?  :Smile:

----------


## Twilight

> Well let's just say the suebi and vikings left a kind of big print in the area culture wise and it is fairly normal that people with a kind of germano-celtic culture want to be that same way in dna.It is just ordinary, sincerely I am from a family with a lot of germanic attributes, though I do not believe I will be that much germanic in genetics (autosomal dna), about what angela said I would never say it is a lie, portuguese are a mixture of many peoples over the years and some darker phenotypes happen sometimes, for example I have a cousin, her mother has blonde hair and is very white, her father is a little darker and she when tanned could be confused with a north african for example and in both sides of her family noone looks even a bit close to her. About the people looking germanic, I would say it is about 10-20% of the population of this area that could pass unnoticed in germany or austria, actually I have an austrian friend from tyrol near innsbruck and he looks like my uncle.
> About the comments made on this forum it is no way possible that north portugal will be as germanic as germany or austria, we all know that the source of the germanic peoples will always be the place with more germanic people.


Whoa, did I miss something. 
This could go in both ways, first of most what he said, also I'd also like to add that some neiborhoods in America have places like Chinatown and Japantown, kind of like cultural pockets; with Tradition passed down for generations even after the Germanic admixture gets diluted. Or perhaps maybe Portugal has some Norsetown or Suebitown neiborhoods yet to be discovered; however like I said we need more detailed samples. It's too early to tell.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chin...trict,_Seattle

----------


## Angela

> Whoa, did I miss something. What he said, also I'd also like to add that some neiborhoods in America have places like Chinatown and Japantown, kind of like cultural pockets. Perhaps Portugal has some Norsetown or Suebitown neiborhoods yet to be discovered; however like I said we need more detailed samples.
> 
> https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chin...trict,_Seattle


Oh, for goodness sakes'. The Suebian "cultural", "ethnic" pocket of Germanic looking people he pointed to is* this specific town*. That's why I chose a video from there and not just generally from Porto or Braga. They look Germanic to you? There are lots more clips on youtube of the celebrations where locals would be participating, versus tourists at the beach. The rest of the towns in the area are just the same. I've actually been there, unlike all these internet experts, and I have friends from there, friends to whom I'd never reveal the bizarre self hatred that some of their compatriots express. It's disgraceful.

This is cloud cuckoo land. What's wrong with the way they look anyway? Why would someone with roots from there want to misrepresent them? Next time, others so inclined should pick some totally isolated, unknown village whose people have never been filmed or photographed. That's the only way to get away with this kind of thing.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sF-FgrXxmyc

----------


## Twilight

> Oh, for goodness sakes'. The Suebian "cultural", "ethnic" pocket of Germanic looking people he pointed to is this specific town. That's why I chose a video from there and not just generally from Porto or Braga. They look Germanic to you? There are lots more clips on youtube of the celebrations where locals would be participating, versus tourists at the beach. The rest of the towns in the area are just the same. 
> 
> This is cloud cuckoo land. What's wrong with the way they look anyway? Why would someone with roots from there want to misrepresent them?
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sF-FgrXxmyc


its not coco land to wait for more data. I refuse to jump to conclusions at this point with all do respect. Just because a certain person looks a certain way doesn't mean they like watermelons. There are still stuff we don't know yet.

----------


## Angela

> its not coco land to wait for more data. I refuse to jump to conclusions at this point with all do respect. Just because a certain person looks a certain way doesn't mean they like watermelons. There are still stuff we don't know yet.


With all due respect to_ you_, this person maintained in numerous posts that the people in this _specific_ town not only have much higher levels of "Germanic" y dna than has been reported, but that they look "Germanic", more "Germanic" than people in central Europe. He has no proof of the first and the second is manifestly ridiculous, as anyone who has seen these people, either in photos or film, would know.

If someone wants to say that they "believe" that there has been a large autosomal impact by "Suebi" or other Germanic peoples on the specific area of Porto and Braga, and that they think future tests will show that, they're welcome to do so. As I specifically stated upthread, genotype is not always phenotype. The claims about the physical appearance of these people are something else again, and clearly false.

----------


## Twilight

> With all due respect to_ you_, this person maintained in numerous posts that the people in this _specific_ town not only have much higher levels of "Germanic" y dna than has been reported, but that they look "Germanic", more "Germanic" than people in central Europe. He has no proof of the first and the second is manifestly ridiculous, as anyone who has seen these people, either in photos or film, would know.
> 
> If someone wants to say that they "believe" that there has been a large autosomal impact by "Suebi" or other Germanic peoples on the specific area of Porto and Braga, and that they think future tests will show that, they're welcome to do so. As I specifically stated upthread, genotype is not always phenotype. The claims about the physical appearance of these people are something else again, and clearly false.



I guess so, I agree with you. Appearances are the least reliable indicator of a person. I'm not mad at all, just that ancient history is full of surprises is all.:) Again, I'm not jumping to conclusions. I do understand that I just walked into a fight and I apologize.

----------


## Angela

> I guess so, I agree with you. Appearances are the least reliable indicator of a person. I'm not mad at all, just that ancient history is full of surprises is all.:) Again, I'm not jumping to conclusions. I do understand that I just walked into a fight and I apologize.



There's no need, and it's not a_ fight_. :)

It's just that if you're going to post things here you have to support them with data. If you don't have the data, don't expect other people to just accept it, especially if the data we do have runs contrary to what you are proposing. 

Most importantly, don't misrepresent things, even if it's just the physical appearance of people in certain towns. As I said, if people want to get away with that kind of misrepresentation they'd better make sure it's a town no one has ever visited, photographed or filmed.

----------


## Pedro Gomes

I am deleting my account in this forum.
None seem to care to study or learn
the basic history of Portugal. Angela
does not even bothers herself to google
data about Povoa de Varzim. I am not a lecturer.
For that job I would like to be paid. Telling
the truth of what I learnt in my history classes
is considered nordicism. If it is data that my
affirmations lack, go and search it. Since Angela
is more concerned on having fun in festivals, and
drinking shots, I am going to paste some information.
There are a couple of genetic studies,look for et Beleza,
pointing I haplogroup in Braga of ~18%. Find a history book
of Portugal, and READ IT REALLY. Check this text on wikipedia
which contains the precious data of Ramalho Ortigão a great 
writer about Poveiros. Due to the practice of endogamy and the caste system, Póvoa's fishing community maintained local ethnic characteristics. Anthropological and cultural data indicate Nordic fishermen settling during the period of the coast's resettlement.[13] In _As Praias de Portugal_ (Beaches of Portugal, 1876), Ramalho ortigão wrote that the Povoan fishermen were a "race" in the Portuguese coast; entirely different from the Mediterranean type of Ovar and Olhão, Poveiro is of "Saxon" type. On the other hand, the man from the interior was a farmer with Galician character (Paleo and Nordid-Atlantid). In a 1908 research, anthropologist Fonseca Cardoso considered that _Poveiros_ were the result of a mixture of Phoenicians, Teutons, Jews and, mostly, Normans.[41] In the book _The Races of Europe_ (1938), _Poveiros_ were distinguished by having a greater than usual degree of blondism, broad faces of unknown origin, and broad jaws.[42]
_Poveiros_ have migrated to other places and this attenuated the population growth. One should notice that the _Poveiros_ tended to create their own associations abroad, there are Casa dos Poveiros (Poveiros House) in Brazil (Rio de Janeiro and São Paulo), Germiston in South Africa and Toronto in Canada. In Rio de Janeiro, the community was known by not wanting other peoples of other origins, including Portuguese born in other regions, within their community. In 1920, many Poveiros emigrated in Brazil returned, as many refused to lose Portuguese nationality.[43] The governor of Angola, with an ambition to develop fisheries, suggested the creation of a Povoan colony in Porto Alexandre. Due to fisher classes affairs, the fisher areas of Vila do Conde, Esposende and Matosinhos have strong Povoan cultural influence and half of the population of Vila do Conde and Matosinhos are of Povoan descent.[44]
Póvoa de Varzim is an ethno-cultural entity.[1] Until the beginning of the 20th century, the communities of Póvoa de Varzim were marked by endogamy, exclusiveness and local identity features with several centuries.[2]
Due to endogamy and a caste system, the fisher community of Póvoa de Varzim kept particular ethnic features. Povoan fishermen, supported by 19th century scientific theories, believed they were a separate race, named "_Raça Poveira_" (Povoan Race). Anthropological and cultural data indicate the colonization of Nordic fishermen during the period of the coast's resettling. Since the 19th century, the visible ethnic differences when comparing with the surrounding people, led to different theories over the origin of the population: Suebi, Prussians, Teutons, Normans and even Phoenicians. In the book _The Races of Europe_ (1939), Povoans were considered to be slightly blonder than average, with wide faces of unknown origin and robust cheeks.[3] In a research published in _O Poveiro_ (1908), using 19th century scientific methodology, the anthropologist Fonseca Cardoso considered that an anthropological element, most noticeably the aquiline nose, was of semitic-Phoenician origin. He considered that Povoans were the result of a mixture of Phoenicians, Teutons, Jews and, mostly, Normans.[4]
Ramalho Ortigão when he wrote about Póvoa in the book "As Praias de Portugal" (1876), The Beaches of Portugal, stated that the main curiosity of Póvoa was the Povoan fishermen, that was a special "race" in the Portuguese coastline; completely different from the Mediterranean type typical of Ovar and Olhão, Povoans are of "Saxon" type: they are "_fair-haired, clear eyes, wide shoulders, athletic chest, herculean legs and arms, round and strong faces._"[5] More recently, Óscar Fangueiro noticed that the Nordic influence could have happened during the late Middle Ages when Portugal built diplomatic ties with Denmark.[6]
 
Matrix of Siglas Poveiras.

Main article: Siglas poveiras
Siglas Poveiras are a form of 'proto-writing system'; these were used as a rudimentary visual communication system, and are thought to derive from Viking settlers that brought the writing system known as _bomärken_ from Scandinavia. The siglas are used as a signature to sign belongings.

----------


## Pedro Gomes

Fire head 14. See now if it just happens that my family happens to be exceptional blond with no Germanic characteristics. Angela you should be banned. If you dont understand now your IQ IS TOO LOW.
You can say bullshit about other countries and other regions
but when you say about my region I just guarantee to everybody
YOU ARE SAYING BULLSHIT. WELCOME TO PORTO!!!!

----------


## suebiking

As a fellow portuguese I think you should go easy on people. Nothing will be accomplished by throwing things at peoples faces. One thing is the the peoples of north portugal are culturally germanic which is debatable because truly germanic celebrations only occur in porto braga and as mensioned povoa do varzim, but this forum is about genetics and that is a much more complicated matter. for instants I do not believe that the romans left a big genetic presence in iberia but culturally their had such a big impact the same can be said for the moors in andalusia and south portugal. You should as I do patiently wait for genetic research to be made in people from the areas where the suebi and vikings settled or take a test yourself as I'll do. Then and only then can you claime something about genetics. Another very important thing, almost everyone in this forum is very polite and comprehensible and so you don't need to pick them because altough I am member for only a couple of months I've been here in awhile and most people in here including angela and maciamo are imparcial, they only interpret the studies and don't take conclusions in their own benefit. So in conclusion as a compatriot I ask stop that irracional discussion, I understand that you as me feel a little igored by most genetic studies but it isn't by shouting in everyones faces that you'll get what you want so relax don't take comments personally and enjoy the forum because there much more interesting gentics peculiarities that you can investigate together with your forum colleagues.
If you are really leaving the forum good luck with the search for the proof of a great germanic impact in north portugal but remember the truth is the truth and if what you want is not what you find at least it was worth the journey.

----------


## Fire Haired14

> Fire head 14. See now if it just happens that my family happens to be exceptional blond with no Germanic characteristics. Angela you should be banned. If you dont understand now your IQ IS TOO LOW.
> You can say bullshit about other countries and other regions
> but when you say about my region I just guarantee to everybody
> YOU ARE SAYING BULLSHIT. WELCOME TO PORTO!!!!


I don't see what Angela has done wrong besides maybe expressing anger. But you are overreacting to her anger. She said herself that she considers the possibility of significant Germanic ancestry in your town. She doubts it, but she still considers the possibility you are right. 

I have not seen evidence that you're a bad person and raciest. I think you notice Northern-features in your family and town and reasonable suspect Germanic ancestry because Germanic people have lived in Portugal. That's good thinking. You could be right. I suggest that you order a test from 23andme or FTDNA. It will resolve whether you have significant Germanic ancestry or not.

----------


## Angela

@Pedro,
There are rules on this forum. You can debate all you like here. You can even make claims totally unsupported by data. Other people can show that your data doesn't exist, or you're misinterpreting it. That's the way that rational debate is conducted.

What you can't do is make up data or deliberately falsify data points. 

You also can't call people names or attack them for pointing out the holes in your argument. The penalties are even greater if the person you attack is a team member. It has to be that way or there would be chaos. 

You should have read the rules. I could have banned you, but you sound rather young so I am giving you some lee-way here. Each infraction for insulting a team member is four points. You now have two. When it gets to ten points total it results in an automatic ban. So, if you want to keep posting here, please keep a civil tongue in your head, and _follow the rules_, just like everybody else.

None of this is personal. You just can't expect to come on here posting about the genetics of a certain group of people with no demonstrable genetic proof for your claims and expect people not to notice or point it out. Indeed, the genetic data we currently have is exactly the opposite of what you claim. As others have pointed out to you, it is true, of course, that culture is different from genetics. I have my doubts as to how "Germanic" Portuguese culture is, but the thread title refers to genetics and that is the focus of this discussion. 

Be that as it may, as I said if such genetic information becomes available please share it with us. We're trying to learn here, or at least I am, not score points.

@Fire-Haired,
My dear Fire-Haired, exasperation is not anger. There's a difference. :)

----------


## Twilight

We've given you the Benifit of the doubt, you make a good point and these pockets are worth looking into but we are not that detailed enough to study City/town DNA or weather there is a "percentage border" so fine at all. Just to reiterate, if you want to find synificant Germanic ancestry Ancestrydna,Ftdna and 23andme are the way to go.

I could be called Coco, I could be called whatever. But that doesn't change the fact that I'm trying to learn and understand genetics as well as the rest of us.

You Pedro have shown us a possible glimpse of the next frontier of genetics, thank you for bringing this to our attention although genetic companies are a little too pixelated in tech to answer or debunk your claim at this point.

----------


## Angela

@Twilight, 
I seem to have struck a nerve. Living in cloud cuckoo land just means that a person doesn't see things as they really are, just in case you didn't know, and it referred to the claim that the people of that town look more Germanic than do central Europeans. It did not refer to anything you yourself said. If it came across as anything other than that, I do apologize.

----------


## Twilight

> @Twilight, 
> I seem to have struck a nerve. Living in cloud cuckoo land just means that a person doesn't see things as they really are, just in case you didn't know, and it referred to the claim that the people of that town look more Germanic than do central Europeans. It did not refer to anything you yourself said. If it came across as anything other than that, I do apologize.


Its cool its not you, just been getting attacked lately; although this forum drama did set me off. Attacking others for questioning or creating hypothesis scenarios even with sources seems to be the norm for some places, perhaps this drama was a means of self defense; as counterintuitive as it is. The moderator team has done a wonderful job here and your Genetics tab is the info I can trust most confidently. I see great potential and if we can keep this up, supiority arguments could easily be rendered coco. :)

These kinds of attacks are usually my motivation for being here in a nut shell. Without DNA testing I would've overlooked so many cultures in European history and their ancient colonies. There is a lot of history we can learn just from our own cheeks but it's going to take time.

----------


## mani

There are certainly Germanic DNA in Portugal and Spain, because of the large history of Europe. 

I think, there was already some Germanic DNA before the Celts (people) and later the Romans (politics) went to Iberia.

A lot of present Germanic DNA could be of Suevi or Goth origin, but there are also Anglo-Saxons, Franks, Vikings and other Germanic DNA in Iberia. The middle ages brought also Germanic DNA to Iberia.

People who know Iberia can find out that there are lots of isolated locations. Most of them are around the coasts (mountains) and regions like Extremadura. 

If in a village or area exists more Suevi, Goth, Franks or other Germanic DNA is often a question of Iberian regional history.

Suevi-Germanic is not Nordic. I would say it could be a variation of North-, Middle- and East-Continental-Europe, where the Suebi-Germanic tribes came from. 

I think some people in Portugal and Spain carries a Germanic DNA.

Some of them carries only the Y-DNA, only the mt-DNA or autosomal DNA or more.

We can’t say whether the typical autosomal DNA Suevi is only blond and has got only green or blue eyes, but these characteristics come from North-, Middle- and East-Europe, isn’t it ?

However, I think,the Celts, the Scandinavians and most tribes of East Europe also carried blond hair and green or blue eyes.

----------


## Fire Haired14

@Mani,

I agree there's Germanic ancestry in Iberia. However Ancient DNA tells us little has changed in Iberia since 1500 BC. So, the Germanic input must be small.

----------


## mani

> @Mani,
> 
> I agree there's Germanic ancestry in Iberia. However Ancient DNA tells us little has changed in Iberia since 1500 BC. So, the Germanic input must be small.




Ancient DNA of 1500 BC can’t tell us what happend after this time.

I think, ancient DNA of 1500 BC doesn’t tell us much about Germanic DNA in Spain,because at that time the Germanic culture began to exist and expand in some parts of North Continental Europe.

But,at first, it could be that very few families went to Iberia as heardsmen from the time Germanic culture began to exist. In that case, Germanic DNA had been there before the Celts.

Later,with exodus and migration of people, the Germanic DNA came to Iberia. I think that was with the Suevi, Goths and some few Vikings, Anglo-Saxons, Vandals.

After or during the „Reconquista“ there were certainly migrations to populate empty zones with Christian Franks and others.

I am sure, after 1500 BC, Germanic-DNA increased in Iberia more than before.

However, there are not many if we compare with the whole Iberian population. 

But I think there are more than we believe to see, because Y-DNA and MTDNA are not visible. 

Autosomal-DNA, the visible one, can be a kind of highlight for the Germanic-DNA in a village or area and that there are more Germanic DNA in form of invisible Y-DNA and MTDNA.

For instance, a man in a family looks like Germanic. He test his Y-DNA. His resultis are Germanic-DNA. His father, one of his grandfathers, his sons, his brothers don’t look like Germanic, but at least for Y-DNA they are Germanic, too.

----------


## Fire Haired14

@Mani,

The accepted theory is: Germanic languages evolved in Scandinavia between 2500 and 500 BC. The common ancestor all Germanic languages existed in 500 BC. After 500 BC Germanic languages expanded out of Scandinavia. 

This means: It is impossible for there to be any significant Germanic presence in Iberia in 1500 BC. 

So, if Iberians in 1500 BC were basically the same as Iberians today it is impossible for there to be very significant Germanic ancestry. There is certainly some but it isn't significant.

----------


## mani

> @Mani,
> 
> The accepted theory is: Germanic languages evolved in Scandinavia between 2500 and 500 BC. The common ancestor all Germanic languages existed in 500 BC. After 500 BC Germanic languages expanded out of Scandinavia. .


Why do English people say German-ic and not Scandinavian to Germanic DNA?

I think, North Germany and its areas around was the centre of Germanic origins. The first Germanic Scandinavians were the people of Denmark and then northbound to Sweden and Norway.

The people in North Germany and its areas became first Germanic when they mixed with the imigrated Indo-Europeans, coming from the East on Continental Europe.





> This means: It is impossible for there to be any significant Germanic presence in Iberia in 1500 BC.



I agree with this. At this time, I suppose, there wasn’t any Germanic DNA in Iberia.“But, at the time when Germanic began to exist were possibilities to get there.”





> So, if Iberians in 1500 BC were basically the same as Iberians today it is impossible for there to be very significant Germanic ancestry. There is certainly some but it isn't significant.



From 1500 BC to now the Germanic DNA increased with the Suevis, Goths etc. Not very significant but they are there, more than we believe. I am sure they are some villages and areas with more Germanic DNA than on average.

I would say any DNA in Iberia in 1500 BC was Germanic. I think, the Megalithic I2a2a-M223 found in La Mina is clear not Germanic and maybe it became a part of original Iberian people in that peninsula.

The I2a2a-M223 which went to North Germany certainly became with other DNAs (Indo-Europeans)Germanic.

----------


## Muhammad Isa

Pedro Gomes you are  lier in majority North center south they looks like Mediteranean ( mostly iberian and North African, Levantin syrian palestinian, Italian, Anatolian Turkey, Greek, South France) and in minority we have little population who looks like North France for exemple but its minority ! 

I Come from Vila Do Conde neighbours of Povoa de Varzim , 15 km to Porto

----------


## Muhammad Isa

WE have only 1-3% haplogroup i1 and its In only North portugal its nothing 
WE are iberian with Big admixture North African and Italian

----------


## Muhammad Isa

No th nordic people was in majority the Wisigoth, Suebi and Vandal with minority Viking WE had nothing or very very very little frank

----------


## nuno77

> WE have only 1-3% haplogroup i1 and its In only North portugal its nothing 
> WE are iberian with Big admixture North African and Italian


https://www.eupedia.com/europe/europ...y_region.shtml


Portugal
I1 - 2
I2a - 1.5 
I2b - 3
R1a - 1.5
R1b - 56
G2a - 6.5
J2 - 9.5
J1 - 3
E1b1b - 14
T - 2.5
Q - 0.5
N1c1 - 0

----------


## nuno77

> No th� nordic people was in majority the Wisigoth, Suebi and Vandal with minority Viking WE had nothing or very very very little frank


Curiously enough, our first King, D. Afonso Henriques, is a descendent of Frankish nobles and even Kings.

https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/cl%C3...se-king-tayeb-

----------

