# Population Genetics > Y-DNA Haplogroups >  Map of Germanic paternal lineages

## Maciamo

I have created a new map combining most Germanic lineages associated with the diffusion Germanic peoples from the Iron Age onwards. These includes Y-DNA haplogroups I1 (except some subclades of Finnish origin), I2-M223, R1a-Z284, R1b-U106, and R1b-L238.

----------


## Goga

Many thanks, this is a very interesting map. Especially data about Holland. I thought that Dutch people were more Celtic than Germanic.

----------


## tjlowery87

The map is awesome.

----------


## nordicwarrior

I'm grousing a bit about not all lines of I1 being included... but overall this is a great map. Illustrates clearly the location of these tribes while attaching them to a specific time frame.

----------


## Eunobid

Great map, Maciamo is a forum hero!

----------


## Degredado

Wouldn't Castile, Valencia and especially Cantabria have at least 5% Germanic Y-DNA? Based on the data found here on Eupedia, Cantabria has 8.5% R1a, 2% I2a2, 1% I1 and surely some of its 55% R1b is U106; Castile has 3% R1a, 0.5% I1, 0.5% I2a2, plus the odd R-U106, and the Valencia region has 3% R1a, 3% I1, 1% I2a2 plus x amount of U106.

----------


## Fire Haired

> I have created a new map combining most Germanic lineages associated with the diffusion Germanic peoples from the Iron Age onwards. These includes Y-DNA haplogroups I1 (except some subclades of Finnish origin), I2-M223, R1a-Z284, R1b-U106, and R1b-L238.


wait R1a Z284 in scandnavia is NOT GERMANIC. it comes from Corded ware culture which spoke the ancestro langauge of Slavic and Baltic. so dont count that i guess some R1a Z284 in the rest of europe is from Germans but not in Finland.

Not all I1 is german. I1 in conteintal europe is I1a1, I1a3, I1a4, and I1b in scandnavia it is I1a2. i1a1, I1a3, i1a4, i1b is most popular in Germany so teh Germanic tribes would have spread some but the 4% i1a1, I1a3, I1a4, and I1b in crtet come on u think that is from Germans then where is teh R1b S21. that is teh question non of the people who think all I1 is german and nordic can answer if Germanss pread I1 in europe and I1 is so spread out where is teh R1b S21 it does not matter if the east germanics orignated ind enmark they would still have over 30% R1b s21.

please give a argument back about why r1b s21 is not spread out like I1 and why I1 is so popular in places like crete. u cant always give German migration as an excuse because where is the r1b s21. i belive this map is somewhat not accurate because of that.

----------


## tjlowery87

good job on the map

----------


## LeBrok

> wait R1a Z284 in scandnavia is NOT GERMANIC. it comes from Corded ware culture which spoke the ancestro langauge of Slavic and Baltic. so dont count that i guess some R1a Z284 in the rest of europe is from Germans but not in Finland.
> .


Can you tell us where Germanic languages come from?
I thought it is IE language, which has beginning with first IE encroachment into central Europe with Corded Ware people. 
I think we should be very careful assigning any specific language to Corded Ware Culture. Most likely they were IE speakers, but who knows if this proto language was closer German, Slavic, Dacian or even Latin. We are talking about 3,000 years before any of these languages were heard.
Assuming that Corded Ware people started with one language, their language diversified very quickly influenced by local substratum, over vast area.

----------


## Maciamo

> wait R1a Z284 in scandnavia is NOT GERMANIC. it comes from Corded ware culture which spoke the ancestro langauge of Slavic and Baltic. so dont count that i guess some R1a Z284 in the rest of europe is from Germans but not in Finland.


My poor chap, you really don't understand much either about genetics or history. Germanic culture developed well after the Corded Ware culture. The Proto-Germanic period was the Nordic Bronze Age, but the first truly Germanic culture developed in the Iron Age. All the people who lived in Scandinavia before the Iron Age were incorporated into the nascent Germanic society. That includes all the Corded Ware settlers.




> Not all I1 is german. I1 in conteintal europe is I1a1, I1a3, I1a4, and I1b in scandnavia it is I1a2. i1a1, I1a3, i1a4, i1b is most popular in Germany so teh Germanic tribes would have spread some but the 4% i1a1, I1a3, I1a4, and I1b in crtet come on u think that is from Germans then where is teh R1b S21.


What's the point discussing with someone who doesn't understand the difference between German and Germanic ? (and who doesn't care enough to write in a legible manner)

----------


## Fire Haired

> My poor chap, you really don't understand much either about genetics or history. Germanic culture developed well after the Corded Ware culture. The Proto-Germanic period was the Nordic Bronze Age, but the first truly Germanic culture developed in the Iron Age. All the people who lived in Scandinavia before the Iron Age were incorporated into the nascent Germanic society. That includes all the Corded Ware settlers.



i can understand ur angre all i did was criticize ur map. when u work very hard on making this maps and other things for this website. When i have only studied this stuff for a few months. U have studied it for probably alot longer and alot more seriously and have become an expert.


I never said Germanic culture devloped before corded ware. I am pretty sure i said the oppiste that Corded ware is much older than Germanic culture. I also know that Nordic bronze age people where most likley proto Germanic speakers i never siad they where not. also i said that The R1a Z284 people who where already in Scandinavia inter married with the Germans then probably spread it when Germanic tribes spread. To me it seemed like u where saying R1a Z284 was orignalley Germanic and that it came from proto Germanic people.

I still am skeptical about saying German speakers spread out of Denmark in the Iron age. A 3,000 year old R1b s21 sample was found in central Germany. I know they report it as R1b but i put its haplotype into subclade predictors all said 100% probabilty R1b s21. 3,000 years ago was very early Iron age and before the Germanic migrations out of Denmark happened. R1b s21 is the Germanic language's marker. R1b s21 would have orignated in central Europe probably Germany then spread to Denmark 4,000ybp i am pretty sure u would agree with those two points. Also the proto proto Germanic speakers would have lived in probably Germany 4,000-4,500ybp not Denmark. Also R1b s21 is more popular in Germany not Denmark and if the R1b s21 in Germany came from migrating Germanic tribes from Denmark u would see s much I1a2 in Germany as R1b s21. Because I1a2 is the Scandinavian I1 subclade. From what i have read from ur I1 page on this website and other sources I1 in Germany and Continental Europe is I1a1, I1a3, I1a4, and I1b not I1a2. So this means there is not alot of Y DNA in Germany of Danish migraters. 

Also R1b s21 was already popular in Germany before iron age Danish German speakers ever migrated there. Since Proto proto German was spoken in central europe probably Germany and the pre German speaking people in Germany had mainly Germanic R1b s21. they would have spoken a very related language to German possibly west Germanic and east Germanic. According to what wikpedia says north Germanic, west Germanic, and east Germanic split only about 2,000-2,500ybp.

To me that sounds way to recent that means north Germanic had to off conquered Scandinavia at the same time west Germanic and east Germanic conquered areas of contental Europe. also if the first west Germanic and east Germanic speakers came from Denmark where is I1a2 in Germany and areas they migrated. i dont know anything about linguistics but if i was going by DNA i would conclude that most of modern Germany was already Germanic 3,000-4,000ybp.

also that there where no major migrations out of Denmark in the last 2,500 years. I honestly don't understand i know that it is true many Germanic tribes migrated out of Denmark but where is the DNA evidence is their any signs in archaeology that a people group in Germany was conquered by Germanic danish in the last 2,500 years. I think west Germanic and east Germanic developed in Germany and the Germanic language did not spread from Denmark to Germany in the last 2,500 years.

----------


## St Delcambre

> I have created a new map combining most Germanic lineages associated with the diffusion Germanic peoples from the Iron Age onwards. These includes Y-DNA haplogroups I1 (except some subclades of Finnish origin), I2-M223, R1a-Z284, R1b-U106, and R1b-L238.


Great Map, Maciamo. Genetic distribution never ceases to surprise me. I had always assumed the Germanic component of modern-day France would have had a North to South tapering rather than an East to West one.

----------


## LeBrok

> I had always assumed the Germanic component of modern-day France would have had a North to South tapering rather than an East to West one.


Yep, me too.

----------


## nordicwarrior

It's both!

----------


## Tiberius

What is the reason for the higher percentage of Germanic Y-DNA in north-western Sicily? Possibly the Normans or some completely unrelated migrations pre Germanic culture?

----------


## Maciamo

> What is the reason for the higher percentage of Germanic Y-DNA in north-western Sicily? Possibly the Normans or some completely unrelated migrations pre Germanic culture?


Obviously the Normans.

----------


## Maciamo

> Great Map, Maciamo. Genetic distribution never ceases to surprise me. I had always assumed the Germanic component of modern-day France would have had a North to South tapering rather than an East to West one.


It's very logical. Apart from Normandy, all the places with a strong Germanic influence border Germany, Switzerland and Belgium. The distribution matches the original borders of the Holy Roman Empire. The Nord, Alsace, Lorraine and Franche-Comté only became French in the 17th century.

----------


## Tiberius

> Obviously the Normans.


How is that obvious? If they settled Sicily like England then there wouldn't be a drastic mark on the map

----------


## tjlowery87

so basically England is about 60 percent Germanic and 40 percent italo-celtic?

----------


## adamo

actually, normans where probably higher in u152, as they lived near the belgic triibes, who where loaded with u152, the hotspot of sicilian s21 may be explained by lombard influence, as the latter hailed from scania or northern germany.

----------


## 1L1JA

Hi Eupedia, hi Maciamo!

My first post. I am mostly interested in branches of the mankind an so I appreciate the work here and the great maps. Thank you for your efforts.

About the Germanic map. How do you explain the absence of Germanic clusters (except I1) in wide parts of South East Europe? For example there is no R1b-S21 (U106), the large Germanic branch, in Serbia.

----------


## Fire Haired

> Hi Eupedia, hi Maciamo!
> 
> My first post. I am mostly interested in branches of the mankind an so I appreciate the work here and the great maps. Thank you for your efforts.
> 
> About the Germanic map. How do you explain the absence of Germanic clusters (except I1) in wide parts of South East Europe? For example there is no R1b-S21 (U106), the large Germanic branch, in Serbia.


that is exactley what i have been saying to Maciamo. I made a thread about it click here to see it. Also The Germanic tribes that spread to eastern Europe the Vandals and Gotsh orignalley came from southern Scandnavia where I1a2 is 30-40%. but the I1 in eastern Europe is I1a1, I1a3, and I1a4 not Scandnavien I1a2. so there is no way it came from Germans. I1 in non Scandnavia Europe is not I1a2 it is I1a1,I1a3,I1a4, and I1b which means they odnt have a Germanic origin.

Germanic languages spread out of southern Scandinavia and northern northern Germany just 2,700ybp but where is the I1a2 that makes me question if the Germans that spread out of Scandinavia in 2,700bc spoke the ancestral language of modern Germans, English, Swiss, and Austrians. and a 3,000 year old R1b sample from central Germany i put its haplotype into a haplogroup predictor it said 100% sure that its Germanic R1b S21 that means this guy was a German or spoke a related language that is now extinct.

The German language and R1b S21 spread to Scandinavia from Germany so do hsitroians except that the German language would go extinct in Germany then come back.

in my opinon this is the real map of Germanic paternal linages. U cant include I2a2 and I1 because it is debatable how much was spread by Germans.

----------


## Fire Haired

I am working on a thread right now that is all about the Germanic tribes their history and their genetics. Here i what i have so far i am stuck on the migration period and their relationship with huns, fall of the roman empire, and medieval age. It is really hard to explain all of that. I think maybe i should summarize more.

I think the Germanic tribes are extremely important. They where about to conquer the Gauls and probably most of the Celtic world. They where extremely powerful warriors and defeated Rome in many battles. They where the last western Europeans to keep their tradtional culture the celts where conquered and changed by Rome later Germans where also conquered by Rome in culturally.

even as recent as 1,000ybp Germans in Scandinavia kept the traditional Germanic/ Indo European culture which i think is the reason Vikings where so violent and scared the more civilized Europeans.

The Germans conquered the western Roman empire they ruled everyspot of western Europe in the early middle ages. The Germans had become civlized and they converted to Christianity and started the medieval age the whole knight and castle thing is from Germans The princes being saved by the knight in shinning armour came from Germanic stroies i guess orignalley it would have been a Germanic warrior with plaid clothing and chainmail.

European Christendom is from Germans. Christianity was spreading like crazy all over Europe, mid east, and north Africa. i guess insular Celts in Ireland also converted but the German Christians are the source of the idea Christianity is the white mans aka Europeans religion. 

It was the barbarian Germans who eventulley became civilized Are the main creatures of modern western civilization the most dominate civilization in human history.

The Romanized Germans are the source of modern Europe. they are extremely important in the origin of the modern western world. Think about the USA in a way descends from Germanic tribes. Also most white Americans who take up over 60% of the american population are mainly of Germanic ancestry. Nearly every american president has been mainly Germanic in blood and probably had mainly Germanic R1b S21.



Reconstruction of a "Red Franz". Who is a bog body. found in Germany alot of his flesh and bones where preserved and his facial and head hair was preserved By looking at his thigh muscles it seems that he ride horses ofenlley. He had a healed wound on his left arm possibly cause by an arrow head so he was probably a warrior. He died by getting his throat slashed so someone murdered him but probably not in battle.

King Charlemagne descended of Germanic Frank tribes. He was the first emperor of the Holy Roman empire which took of most of modern day Italy and the land in between. His Franks had become much more civilized than their ancestors and attempted to be a new Rome. They also had converted to Christianity and left their old Germanic religions like just about all other Germans and Europeans. The now civilized Germanic kingdoms became the rulers of medieval Europe.
_
Origin of the Germanic tribes
__Through a mix of R1a1a1b European hunter gathers from the steppes mixed with R1b L23 and R1b M269 Middle eastern farmers and early bronze makers from the Caucus gave birth to Indo European culture and language. It is hard to say who where first people to speak a Indo European language but it was people mainly descended from the Russian and Ukrainian European hunter gathers who also had alot of the middle eastern R1b who spread the language. 

There where different Russian/Ukrianen's Indo European ethnic groups 6,000ybp. From 6,000 and 5,000 year old DNA from early Indo Europeans in southern Russia they had pale skin liken Europeans today and mainly brown eyes like the people in that area today. 3,800 year old DNA from early Indo iranien Indo Europeans in south Siberia who migrated out of Russia 5,000ybp. Had mainly light eyes and light hair some later remains had red hair. So some early Indo Europeans in Russia and Ukriane 6,000ybp where very light haired and eyed and had alot of red hair some where almost only brown haired and brown eyed or a mix of the two.

It seems like the Germanic Italo Celts where very red haired people because there is strong evidence all red hair in western Europe is from Germanic Italo Celts (click here it kind of explains it). It does not seem that they also had alot of blonde hair like the Indo iraniens though. So they may have been like the Udmurts in central Russia today and Irish people 10-20% red hair and 70-80% brown hair.

The Germanic Italo Celtic speakers migrated to Germany about 5,000ybp. Which explains why two 4,600 year old Y DNA samples from central Germany had R1b but where negative for Germanic R1b S21/U106. There are 31 y DNA samples in western Europe from 7,000-4,725ybp none had R1b so this obviously means 4,600ybp R1b L11/P310 Germanic Italo Celts where already in Germany. 

They migrated from either Russia-Poland-Germany or Russia-Bulgaria-Germany. Then about 4,500ybp the Italo Celts split into R1b S116/P312 and conquered modern day austira and started Unetice culture the Germans split into R1b S21/U106 conquered modern day Denmark, south Norway and Sweden and started the Nordic Bronze age which is where Germanic culture was born about 4,000ybp. Eupedia's migrations maps (made by Maciamo) explain how all migrations in Europe from 8,000-3,000ybp happened very accurately (click here to see the maps).

3,600-3,800 year old Chariot from the Nordic bronze age. Some experts believe it is related to Germanic mythology.


Sword from Nordic bronze age


The first Germanic speakers where a mix of native central Europeans who had Y DNA I2a2 and I1a and Germanic's who had mainly R1b S21/U106 and then later Danish/south Scandinavians who had I1a2, with a little R1a Z284. Since the Germanics where the dominate group who conquered the central Europeans and south Scandinavians most of the Y DNA was R1b S21/U106. The red hair and probably most of the brown hair came from the Germanic's most of the blonde hair probably comes from the central Europeans and south Scandinavians. But figuring out where the hair colors come from is much harder that is just my theory.

Most archaeological experts agree that from about 4,000-2,700ybp. The Germanic language and culture only existed in Denmark, southern Scandinavia, northern Germany, and Netherlands to Vistula. Then Migrated to all other German speaking areas after 700bc. Since the German language migrated from Germany to Scandinavia there is a chance some people with a related language and culture with R1b S21 lived in Germany 4,000-2,700ybp.

I think very good evidence for this idea. Is a 3,000 year old R1b sample in Lichtenstein Cave apart of Ceramic part of Urnfield culture. Lichtenstein Cave is literally right in the center of Germany. U can see on the link if gives the R1b its haplotype so i put that haplotype into a haplogroup predictor click here to see the predictor i used. I got FrisanR1b=> 33%,R1b S21*=>33%. Frisan people are Germanic and have 30-40% R1b S21 so that means this 3,000 yer old central German. Most likely had Germanic R1b S21/U106 which also means a group of people who spoke a related language to German was settled in Germany or they where a Germanic people.

Iron age Migrations

Map of Germanic migrations from 750bc-1ad

Like i said before most experts believe the Germanic tribes prior to 700bc only lived in Denmark southern Scandinavia, northern Germany and the Netherlands to Vistula possibly also parts of central Germany. Also that all Germanic languages not in those areas come from Germanic migrations after 700bc in the Iron age. In archaeology it seems that Germanic tribes descended from Nordic Bronze age culture made migrations from southern Scandinavia to coast of eastern Germany toward Vistula. These Germanic tribes where heavily influenced by Hallstatt and Urnfield Celts with R1b S28 ad other R1b S116 subclades who where migrating north from mainly around Austira. I already explained in the thread R1b S28 and R1b S116 Beast Iron and Bronze age Italo Celtic warrior DNA marker. That Italo Celtic warriors dominated bronze and Iron age western and central Europe. Iron had triggered their migrations into Italy and further into western and northern Europe. The Germanic tribes from 850-650bc where faced against very powerful warriors. I am sure they had to fight to keep their new land. 

In 250bc there where many Germanic migration too the south. Archaeology and linguistic evidence says that there where 5 distinct language groups in this migration. North Germanic in southern Scandinavia, North sea Germanic along the north sea and Jutland, Rhine-Wesser Germanic ( a West Germanic langauge ancestral to Dutch and other Low Franconoian languages) along the middle Rhine and Wesser, Elbe Germanic( a West Germanic language ancestral to High German) along the middle Elbe, and East Germanic (a extinct branch of the Germanic language family) between the middle Oder and Vistula. These migrating Germanic tribes where heavily influenced by Hallstatt/ La Tene Celts. Influence by Celts in Germanic tribes reached as far north as the traditional areas of the Nordic Bronze age in south Scandinavia.

Two world's collide Germanic tribes migrating south from northern Europe meet up with the Roman civilization migrating north from Italy. The result is constant wars.

The backwoods Germanic tribes around 200bc began to meet up with civilized Rome they where from two completely different world's from each other. The Germans had been isolated in far northern Europe since 2000bc they where straight from Bronze and Iron age European cultures. They had influence from Gauls since 700bc who where a little more civilized and had some contact with the civilized world. The Romans where apart of the civilized world around the Mediterranean and the middle east. From what Roman writers say it was the primitive Barbarian world vs the civilized tamed world. Of course those Roman writers where biased and claimed the Romans where the good guys and the Germans where total sabotages. Even though it was Rome who conquered and massacred people all over Europe, north Africa, and the middle east. It is true the Germans defintley where sabotages they would have conquered all of western Europe and much of eastern Europe if Rome never got in their way.

Compared to the rest of the world the Germans where very advanced but compared to Rome, Greece, north Africa, middle east, India, China they where not. The Germans had iron, bronze, farming, chariots and alot of other advanced stuff. But what they did not have was civilization which is not just advanced technology it is a type of society which is the main difference from the Germans, Rome, and the rest of the civilized world.

The Germans where apart of a tribal society and a more primitive world than the Romans. To us modern western people the Germans would seem like wild violent people living in the foreasts or in remote areas as farmers. The German men ofentlley had long hair and big beards and the women would have very long wild hair. The Romans men had short hair and shaved alot the women hair was ofentlley put in fancy styles and not as wild and long as Germans. The Germans wore tunics with colorful patterns like Celts and modern Irish and Scottish, trouser, and animal skins (click here a link which explains German and Celtic clothing) the Romans wore toagas which are like fancy robes and tunics.

It is hard to explain it but basically Romans and Germans where two extremely different people. I know that is part of the reason Romans hated them if the Germans could write i am sure they would insult the Romans for being fancy or soft.

Germans on top Romans on bottom.

German on top Roman on bottom


Germanic tribes in the Roman period

According to Roman authors From 200-100bc there where many Germanic invasions of Celtic Gaul some invasions went as far south as Spain and Italy. Germanic tribes Cimbri, Teutons, and Abrones from Denmark had a major war with Rome from 109-100bc. Cimbri, Teutons, and Abrones who would have had about 30-40% Y DNA I1a2, 30-40% R1b S21/U106. Migrated south out of Denmark and had many successful battles against Gaulic Celts. They also invaded Gauls who where allied with Rome so Romans came to help their allies and where defeated almost completely annihilated by the Germanic tribes at the battle of Noreia. So the Germanic tribes have made a very terrifying first impression to Rome showing they had more powerful militarie force than the Gauls and possibly even a great civilization like Rome. 

After this these German tribes don't decide to invade Italy they keep migrating in Gaul and face the Romans in many battles and winning most of them. These Germanic tribes planned to invade the Roman republic in 105bc. The Germans defeated the Romans at the battle of Arusio killing about 112,000 Roman soldiers. Rome was in panic a major new threat had just formed in the north. It seemed like the Germans where going to destroy and sack Rome like Gauls did in 390bc. 

While the Cimbri and other Germans in 103bc had many successful pillages of Iberia. The Romans where able to stop the German invasion of Italy. They stopped the Cimbri at the Po river in 101bc at the battle of Vercelle. As the Germanic tribes faced defeat against Rome in Italy many of their chiefs where killed in battle and the women and children committed suicide to avoid slavery. The Cimbri where almost completely anhilated except some may have survived in Denmark till 100ad. Some surviving German captives where reported as being gladiators in the Third Servile war 73-71bc.

Map of Cimbri and Teuton migrations and battles against Rome Cimbri or Teuton defeats green Cimbri and Teuton victory


This Roman Germanic war from 109-100bc showed Romans that the Germans where a very big threat. That they where brave fighters and are probably the second most powerful people in Europe with Rome at number one. Julius Caesar used the German threat as one of his justification for conquering the Gauls because Rome had to control more northern areas to defend against Germans. Ceasar says at one time the Gauls had more military prowess than the Germans and had invaded and taken German land acroos the Rhine. He says the Gauls had been indulged in Luxuries and civilization, and Because of this the Germans where tougher and at the time they had been defeating the Gauls.

So now by 1ad Romans had taken up almost all of the Celts land(except Ireland and Scotland) Celts where Germans biggest competitors. The Germans where becoming the next super power in central and western Europe then the Romans took their spot. Germans where a war like people so they defintley had problems with Rome and Rome was war like and was very expansive so they had problems with Germans. The Germans had a tribal society and rural the Romans where civilized and more urban these and many other things cause Germanic Roman wars.

The Germanic tribes Sugambri, Tencteri, Usipetes had major victories over Rome in 16bc. Then to teach the Germans who's boss Rome conquered much of Germania and where going to attempt a full conquering of the Germanic tribes known as magna Germania. Romans where forcing many Germans to leave their traditions and become like Romans. This really really got Germans pissed

The result was the battle of Teutoburg foreast in 9 AD which is one of the most famous Roman defeats. An alliance of Germanic tribes lead by Arminus and Cherusci ambushed and defeated the Roman legions and auxiliaries of Publis Quinctlilus Varus. Once again the Germans prove themselves as a worthy threat to Rome.

Here is a video reconstructing the battle of Teutoburg forest. The Germans are basically how Roman art depicted them they had the right clothing but the beards and hair sometimes are a little to long. So this video is fairly accurate but not perfect.




It seems that the Germanic tribes where ready to migrate and conquer the Celts and much of Europe. Then the civilized organized Romans with their smart generals and unlimited amount of full equipped solders get in their way. This must have gotten the Germans jealous and angre at Rome. Germans seemed to be so eager to migrate and conquer starting around 200bc. The Celts couldn't beat them and it seemed at first Rome couldn't either but because Rome was organized and now had almost the entire Celtic world and the Mediterranean there is no way the Germans could conquer Rome now.

The Germans where migrating and conquering many non Roman areas in Europe during the early period of the Roman empire around 0-100ad. The east Germanic tribes Goths and Vandals migrated out of southern Scandinavia and took alot of land in eastern Europe mainly around Poland and mixed alot with the Slavs cultralley. The Polish Slavic's would have had about 50-60% Y DNA R1a1a1b1a. The east Germans orignally would have had about 30-40% R1b S21/U106, about 20-40% I1a subclades, and 5-15% I2a2. Germanic tribes had migrated pretty far east.

map of Magna Germania and the Roman empire in 200ad

__map of Germans and their language family in 1AD. Blue North Germanic, Red North sea Germanic, Orange Weser-Rhine Germanic, Yellow Elbe Germanic, Green east Germanic

Major Germanic migrations and invasions of Rome





By 200-300AD the Goths and Vandals had conquered land from Poland all the way to the black sea and the Danubian. They had almost all the land that bordered the Roman empire's territory in Europe. The Vandals and Goths where conquering and mixing with mainly Indo Iranian Indo Europeans like Sytheins and Sarmatiens who would have had almost only Y DNA R1a1a1b2 and some I2a1b. They migrated there from central Asia hundreds of years earlier. They also had La Tene Celtic and Thracen elements in their culture. The first Greek references to Goths they called them Sytheins. Probably because Goths where living in the area Sythiens had ruled for hundreds of years and because Goths had a similar lifestyle that was not like Greeks, Romans, and other civilizations.

The Vandals where split into two major groups the Silingi around the Czech republic and the Hasdingi around Poland, western Slovakia, and Hungary. From 200-400ad while Goths where conquering Sarmatiens around the Black sea they split into two groups. The Visgoths ruled by the Balthi family and the Ostrogogths ruled by the Amali family. Visgoths became the western Goths and the Ostrogoths became the eastern Goths.

It is hrad to say how Germanic the eastern Germans really where. They where influenced alot by the people they conquered like Indo Iranian Sytheins and Sarmatiens who also had La Tene Celtic and Thracian elements. They where also heavily influenced by Rome. They became much more organzied and civlized than the Germans in 200bc theyw here able to create organized kingdoms. Eventuley it was Germanic kingdoms that conquered most of western and central Europe and started the medival age. Also eastern germans and other Germans where converting to Christianity very quickly eventulley all Germans became Christian mainly by will but leaders felt so strong about it they forced people too. Germanic religion was very importnat to German society it is what they based many of their decisions on like weather to go to war or not. There is no doubt that Germans in the 300ad's where very differnt than Germans in the 100bc's._

----------


## sparkey

> Hi Eupedia, hi Maciamo!
> 
> My first post. I am mostly interested in branches of the mankind an so I appreciate the work here and the great maps. Thank you for your efforts.
> 
> About the Germanic map. How do you explain the absence of Germanic clusters (except I1) in wide parts of South East Europe? For example there is no R1b-S21 (U106), the large Germanic branch, in Serbia.


Have you seen what Maciamo had to say in this thread?

I can't speak for him, but I find it likely that U106 levels were lower in the sorts of Germanic peoples (largely East Germanic) who settled in southeastern Europe. That is, their I1:R1b-U106 ratio was higher than what we would find in, for example, the Netherlands. The diversity patterns of I1 and R1b in Europe both lend to this.

----------


## Fire Haired

> Have you seen what Maciamo had to say in this thread?
> 
> I can't speak for him, but I find it likely that U106 levels were lower in the sorts of Germanic peoples (largely East Germanic) who settled in southeastern Europe. That is, their I1:R1b-U106 ratio was higher than what we would find in, for example, the Netherlands. The diversity patterns of I1 and R1b in Europe both lend to this.


east germanic tribes came from southern scandnavia that area today has about 30-40% R1b U106, and 30-50% I1a2 and other I1a subclades they had alot. U should except to see at least some R1b U106 in serbia if I1 is and Crete if I1 is over 4%. Also eastern Europe does not have scandnavien I1a2 subclade which is what east germans would have orignalley had so i think it is not from the Germans.

The east germans tribes conquered Slavs, and Indo Iranien tribes Sarmatiens and Sythiens. The east Germans mixed alot cultrally with these people. click here it kind of explains it europeans in the middle ages cofennlley called slavic people Vandals. The east germans where not that German they kept the German identity and many German tradtions but they where also heavily influenced by eastern Europeans and Rome. Their blood defintley was not mainly German probably mainly Slavic.

I think this is the most accurate map of Germanic paternal lineages because we dont know how much I2a2 and I1 come from german migrations. Sine their both from Paloithic central Europe and because Germans spread it only after inter marrying with the native central european paternal lineages.



u can see that in poland the areas the east Germans began and the parts that where apart of magna germanic have pretty high R1b S21. and it expand pretty far into eastern Europe. Sicily which was raided by Germans more than once has I1 and R1b S21 and the same areas have more. So that is evidence that since many areas have I1 but not R1b S21 that they dont get the I1 from germans.

----------


## 1L1JA

> Have you seen what Maciamo had to say in this thread?


Indeed there is 2% Germanic R1b in Serbia. I assumed according to the R1b-S21 map that the northern R1b subclades were totally absent (in favor to the South Eastern R1b). If you see Maciamo, well, recommend an update on R-S21.

----------


## Fire Haired

> Indeed there is 2% Germanic R1b in Serbia. I assumed according to the R1b-S21 map that the northern R1b subclades were totally absent (in favor to the South Eastern R1b). If you see Maciamo, well, recommend an update on R-S21.


where did u hear R1b S21 is 2% in Serbia because in maciamo's map he includes any areas with 1-5% but most of Serbia was not included. many areas with I1 did not have any R1b s21.

----------


## 1L1JA

> where did u hear R1b S21 is 2% in Serbia because in maciamo's map he includes any areas with 1-5% but most of Serbia was not included. many areas with I1 did not have any R1b s21.


I can not post or quote a link, so you have to see the link in post #24 from sparkey in Maciamo's thread (see the study "Serbian Y-DNA by Regueiro et al"). If you then google a pdf or image to this study you may find a tree about the serbian groups. Or try it in this way (if the moderation will allow it): w w w.dodaj.rs/f/N/is/3snt1Qj1/1/haplogroupsydnaserbia.jpg

----------


## Jackson

This seems like a pretty good general picture, only issue i would have thought is the 'local' spike of R1b-U106 in the Netherlands and Frisia which may make it slightly disproportionate compared to autosomal genetics, but then again the same could be said about I1 for example, so this shouldn't be an issue really.

It's quite accurate in regards to England - consistent with POBI which found most of England was also about 50-60% Germanic, with the remainder being a mix of Irish-like and northern French-like DNA (So i guess mainly a mixture of Insular and Central European Celtic peoples, probably explained at least partly by the migration of Belgic tribes prior to Roman arrival).

Although i am a little confused as to why Lincolnshire is slightly less...By all rights it's probably the most Germanic place in the whole country, or one of the most.

----------


## mbw1986

Excellent map. Great synthesis. Bravo.
-Mbw

----------


## Fire Haired

> Excellent map. Great synthesis. Bravo.
> -Mbw


are u talking about maciamo's map or my copy and paste of r1b 21.

----------


## mbw1986

Maciamo's Germanic map.

----------


## Fire Haired

> Maciamo's Germanic map.


thanks for the info

----------


## tjlowery87

> This seems like a pretty good general picture, only issue i would have thought is the 'local' spike of R1b-U106 in the Netherlands and Frisia which may make it slightly disproportionate compared to autosomal genetics, but then again the same could be said about I1 for example, so this shouldn't be an issue really.
> 
> It's quite accurate in regards to England - consistent with POBI which found most of England was also about 50-60% Germanic, with the remainder being a mix of Irish-like and northern French-like DNA (So i guess mainly a mixture of Insular and Central European Celtic peoples, probably explained at least partly by the migration of Belgic tribes prior to Roman arrival).
> .


I agree....

----------


## tjlowery87

knordvedt believes there is only 30-40% ydna in england

----------


## tjlowery87

any response to knordvedt estimates

----------


## sparkey

> any response to knordvedt estimates


They sound about right for England as a whole, although some areas certainly reach higher than 30-40% (like Norfolk, for example) and some certainly drop lower (like Cornwall).

----------


## tjlowery87

thanks sparkey,i wonder what the percentage might be if you had to estimate women who have fathers with Germanic ydna?

----------


## Jackson

> They sound about right for England as a whole, although some areas certainly reach higher than 30-40% (like Norfolk, for example) and some certainly drop lower (like Cornwall).


Actually, put like that that does seem about right for the whole of the country. Some parts of the west and especially the far south-west as you say are predominantly Celtic in ancestry. Although most of south, east and central England is 50%+ (e.g where L21 drops to 10-15% or so) a lot of the fringe areas are probably more like 75%+ Celtic, and are still part of England.

----------


## tjlowery87

so Yorkshire down to kent is the most Germanic with about 50 plus%,basically like the people of brittish isla map says?

----------


## Maciamo

> Indeed there is 2% Germanic R1b in Serbia. I assumed according to the R1b-S21 map that the northern R1b subclades were totally absent (in favor to the South Eastern R1b). If you see Maciamo, well, recommend an update on R-S21.


It is true that there is very little data about R1b-S21 in the Balkans at the moment. In all logic R1b-S21 should be found within the 1-5% range in many places in Southeast Europe considering that I1 is found everywhere and I2b1 in many locations too.

----------


## tjlowery87

maciamo,what is your opinion on the amount of Germanic dna in England?

----------


## Maciamo

> maciamo,what is your opinion on the amount of Germanic dna in England?


What is your question more specifically ?

----------


## tjlowery87

i was wondering how much y dna you think is in England that is germanic

----------


## tjlowery87

if you had any estimate between the east and the west of Germanic dna in england

----------


## Maciamo

> i was wondering how much y dna you think is in England that is germanic


About 50% (+-5%). It could be more if you count non-Germanic haplogroups that came with Germanic people. It is very likely that the Anglo-Saxons carried a small percentage of Neolithic lineages like E1b1b, G2a, J or T.

----------


## tjlowery87

thanks maciamo

----------


## tjlowery87

my theory after talking to seaveral different folks on the subject of Germanic ydna in England is 
at the least I would say that 50% of east England (central to east) is Germanic and that England as a whole would be about 25 to 40% Germanic,this would also go well with the people of the brittish isles map.At the most I would say about 50% in all Germanic.does that sound about right?

----------


## tjlowery87

so what has changed over the years that has made England look more Germanic?if I remember correctly sykes(I think)use to say that there was bearly any Germanic dna in England,but know it seems its around 50%, so what changed?.......as all ways thanks for your replys.

----------


## apulomilan

Hi Maciamo. Thank you for this great idea of yours that is Eupedia.
Two notations: 
- I expected that in some zones of Umbria and Toscana the Lombard impact was as high as in north-western Italy at least: in fact the existence of Duchy of Tuscia and the Duchy of Spoleto suggested a significant possible concentration of lombard population (i.e. not limited to soldiers and their families) in those areas; 
- the map of higher germanic paternal lineages in continental Italy seems to roughly correspond to the a map of the towns which have a reference to lombard "fara" in there names, as to confirm that in those areas arrived entire clans, not only soldiers. 

One question: what you think could be a way to distinguish Goth influence on paternal lineages from the Lombard one? (notice that I think that Goth influence on "italian" is far lower of the Lombard one, as the historical sources seem to confirm that after the notorious gothic war very few Goths survived or remained in Italy).

----------


## Jackson

> so basically England is about 60 percent Germanic and 40 percent italo-celtic?


Pretty much. The most extensive genetic study of the British Isles has shown up basically this.

----------


## Fire Haired

Y DNA does not tell ur full ancestry just ur direct male line. I would agree though that England is mainly decended from Germanic people from around Netherlands and Denmark since they have such high amounts of blonde hair then compared to for example Ireland.

----------


## silkyslovanbojkovsky

Very Interesting map. Do you know what regions exactly were tested in Slovakia?

----------


## Noman

> Pretty much. The most extensive genetic study of the British Isles has shown up basically this.


I guess I expected something like that but it's strange to actually see it.

----------


## Hauteville

Some correction for Italy. I1 is 14% in Molise plus other 7% of I2 and probably the U106 is also high. U106 hotspot is 12% in Catania and it is not reported both in the map.
http://www.eupedia.com/genetics/italian_dna.shtml

----------


## MOESAN

> This seems like a pretty good general picture, only issue i would have thought is the 'local' spike of R1b-U106 in the Netherlands and Frisia which may make it slightly disproportionate compared to autosomal genetics, but then again the same could be said about I1 for example, so this shouldn't be an issue really.
> 
> It's quite accurate in regards to England - consistent with POBI which found most of England was also about 50-60% Germanic, with the remainder being a mix of Irish-like and northern French-like DNA (So i guess mainly a mixture of Insular and Central European Celtic peoples, probably explained at least partly by the migration of Belgic tribes prior to Roman arrival).
> 
> Although i am a little confused as to why Lincolnshire is slightly less...By all rights it's probably the most Germanic place in the whole country, or one of the most.



it seems as a whole a sensible map - just some points:
all the Y-R1b-U106 and Y-I223 and even Y-I1 are not to be put on account of the only Germanics in far eastern Europe (N-Russia), maube Estonia too
Y-I223 in N-W Europe and the Isles can have had other origins than the only germanic one - 
in the Netherlands, Frisia has AND more Y-R-U106 AND more Y-I1 than other parts of the country (southern Netherlands have even lesser than dutch average)
in details, central-east Wales had surely more germanic Y-haplos than the remnant, even in the southern towns (surely not an hazard, spite the same number of "welsh names" than other central regions of Wales if not more, this central-east welsh region had more depigmented hairs than others, and the Welsh language border line makes like a concave curve there, this little part having abandoned welsh language even before Gwent/Monmouth (S-E) and Denbych/Denbigh, N-E very anglicized today

----------


## Hauteville

New map with the hotspot of Molise and Catania province.

----------


## gyms

Dear Friends!

I1 and I2 are not germanic not either indoeuroean.They are indigenous europeans assimilated by the newcomers.I1 was found in neolithic Hungary unike R1a and R1b.

----------


## Tomenable

I wonder why there is so much of Germanic Y-DNA in areas (red borders below) from which Germans were expelled after WW2:



Most of people who live there today, came from Belarus, Ukraine, Lithuania, Eastern Poland, Southern Poland.

Check this thread:

http://www.eupedia.com/forum/threads...entral-Poland)



*So did ethnic Poles from places like Belarus had so much of Germanic Y-DNA - or who had it ???*  :Petrified:

----------


## Maciamo

> I wonder why there is so much of Germanic Y-DNA in areas (red borders below) from which Germans were expelled after WW2:


Easy answer. Y-DNA frequencies usually look at the oldest known patrilineal ancestor's place of origin, which can be anything from 100 to 500+ years ago. Therefore Y-DNA frequencies and maps (on this site and others, including 23andMe) represent pre-industrial distributions, not present ones.

----------


## giuseppe rossi

> New map with the hotspot of Molise and Catania province.


The map is still wrong since Latium should be in 10-20% range. I1 alone is ~9%.

----------


## Expredel

> I wonder why there is so much of Germanic Y-DNA in areas (red borders below) from which Germans were expelled after WW2:


Might have been much higher prior? Early anthropologists classified both England and Latvia as 60% Germanic. So Maciamo's map should match Gunther's map, which it mostly does.





It's possible Stalin sent a lot of people who had been classified as "Nordic" and naturalized by the Nazis to Soviet concentration camps. Alternatively poor sample size is distorting the map. Especially I1 appears to be lacking in Latvia.

The Nazis may have been more thorough in their measurements than Gunther, most information has likely been destroyed but some is still available on Wikipedia under _Generalplan Ost. 

_It also appears that Gunther did not classify the R1a in Norway as Germanic and remarked on the presence of an East-European population in Western Norway.

----------


## Drac II

> Might have been much higher prior? Early anthropologists classified both England and Latvia as 60% Germanic. So Maciamo's map should match Gunther's map, which it mostly does.


Looks more like the Germans who made that map considered England to be roughly equal parts "Nordic" (red) and "Mediterranean" (blue).

----------


## giuseppe rossi

The new correct map.

I've added the data from this recent study, including the hotstop of 25-35% of I1 in eastern Latium. 

http://www.eupedia.com/forum/threads...cient-genetics

----------


## Maciamo

> The map is still wrong since Latium should be in 10-20% range. I1 alone is ~9%.


I updated the haplogroup frequencies for the Latium 5 days ago using the data from Messina et al. 2015. I didn't have time to update all the maps since then.

----------


## Maciamo

> Looks more like the Germans who made that map considered England to be roughly equal parts "Nordic" (red) and "Mediterranean" (blue).


But that is correct. British and Irish people do have quite a lot of Atlantic or Mediterranean admixture. In fact this map is surprisingly accurate for something done in 1922, well before genetics existed.

----------


## Maciamo

I have now updated the Latium frequencies on all the Y-DNA maps. Here is the one about Germanic lineages.

----------


## Hauteville

It lacks the hotspots of Catania (U106) and Cosenza (M223).

----------


## Hauteville

> The new correct map.
> 
> I've added the data from this recent study, including the hotstop of 25-35% of I1 in eastern Latium. 
> 
> http://www.eupedia.com/forum/threads...cient-genetics


Cosenza has 6% of M223 as well.

----------


## giuseppe rossi

> I have now updated the Latium frequencies on all the Y-DNA maps. Here is the one about Germanic lineages.


Ok thanks.

Few tips for you.

1. There is a 6% of M223 in Cosenza, so Northern-Central Calabria should be in the 5-10% range.

2. Molise should be in in the 30-40% range. This is from your own page.

"The DNA samples from Campobasso in Molise and Benevento in Campania can give a good idea of what proportion of each Germanic haplogroup the Lombards carried."

" Among the Germanic haplogroups identified in Campobasso by Boattini et al. (2013) there were 16% of I1, 10.5% of R1b-U106 and 3.5% of I2a2a. "

http://www.eupedia.com/genetics/italian_dna.shtml

This is Molise.

----------


## Maciamo

> Ok thanks.
> 
> Few tips for you.
> 
> 1. There is a 6% of M223 in Cosenza, so Northern-Central Calabria should be in the 5-10% range.
> 
> 2. Molise should be in in the 30-40% range. This is from your own page.
> 
> "The DNA samples from Campobasso in Molise and Benevento in Campania can give a good idea of what proportion of each Germanic haplogroup the Lombards carried."
> ...


Boattini 2013 is not the only study with data for Molise. The average for I1 + I2-M223 + R1b-S21 is just under 30% for Molise.

What data did you use for Cosenza ? Boattini 2013 has 0% of I2 for Cosenza+Crotone. My average for all studies on Calabria has only 0.5% of I2-M223 in Calabria.

----------


## Hauteville

Maciamo these sources are in Sarno et al.Cosenza has 6% of I-M223, Catania 12% of U106 and other 2% of I-M223 as well.

----------


## Expredel

> But that is correct. British and Irish people do have quite a lot of Atlantic or Mediterranean admixture. In fact this map is surprisingly accurate for something done in 1922, well before genetics existed.


Dinaric matches I2a. The Mediterranean race matches the combination of R1b-S11 and E1b1b. The Ostische / Alpine race matches R1b-S28 plus western R1a. These are peculiar combinations. N1, r1a-Z280, J1 and J2 appear to be fairly well matched. Could be that the Y chromosome influences the male skull shape as that was the primary thing they were measuring.

Based on Gunther's data we'd expect hot spots in Central Spain, Central Italy (confirmed), Yugoslavia, Kurdistan, and Russia.

----------


## giuseppe rossi

> Boattini 2013 is not the only study with data for Molise. The average for I1 + I2-M223 + R1b-S21 is just under 30% for Molise.


It's between 20 and 30% for Molise as whole, but Boattini et al found 30-40% of Germanic y-dna lineages in Campobasso alone, which is about 2 thirds of Molise.






> What data did you use for Cosenza ? Boattini 2013 has 0% of I2 for Cosenza+Crotone. My average for all studies on Calabria has only 0.5% of I2-M223 in Calabria.


Boattini et al have 37 samples from Cosenza/Crotone/Catanzaro, while Sarno et al. found 6% of M223 in Cosenza alone.

----------


## Hauteville

Here Sarno et al distribution.
http://journals.plos.org/plosone/art...l.pone.0096074

----------


## Drac II

> But that is correct. British and Irish people do have quite a lot of Atlantic or Mediterranean admixture. In fact this map is surprisingly accurate for something done in 1922, well before genetics existed.


Indeed, if you read British ethnographic and anthropological literature from even as far back as the 19th century you will see very similar conclusions. They considered British and Irish populations to be a composite of Mediterraneans and Nordics. They reached that conclusion purely from examining physical/skeletal/craniological traits.

----------


## giuseppe rossi

So Maciamo when will you correct the map and upload it in your genetic section?

I remind you that this is also wrong, Catania and Campobasso should be in the 10-15% range for the U106.



You are usually very quick at making maps of Phoenician and African admixtures in Southern Europeans, but when it comes to other stuff it takes months for you to do it....

----------


## UltraViolence

> So Maciamo when will you correct the map and upload it in your genetic section?
> I remind you that you that this is also wrong, Catania should be in the 10-15% range for the U106.
> 
> You are usually very quick at making maps of Phoenician and African admixtures among Southern Europeans, but when it comes to other stuff it makes months for you to do it....


are you ok? do you need a tissue ?

LMFAO

----------


## Hauteville

So Maciamo do you have seen my link?which subclades of I are Germanic and which aren't?
I1M253 germanic or not?I1a-L22?Ii2-P215 as well?If you summarize that with U106 Ragusa-Siracusa has 11,1% of Germanic dna as well.

----------


## giuseppe rossi

> So Maciamo do you have seen my link?which subclades of I are Germanic and which aren't?
> I1M253 germanic or not?I1a-L22?Ii2-P215 as well?If you summarize that with U106 Ragusa-Siracusa has 11,1% of Germanic dna as well.


Hahahah good point.

Also there is some R1a in Italy which could be of Germanic origin, but those maps ignore that.

----------


## Vallicanus

You people are only interested in your racist fantasies..babies.

----------


## Maciamo

> Hahahah good point.
> 
> Also there is some R1a in Italy which could be of Germanic origin, but those maps ignore that.


Most of the R1a in Italy belongs to the Balto-Slavic CTS1211 branch, which I believe was brought by Proto-Slavs who accompanied the Goths.

----------


## Hauteville

> You people are only interested in your racist fantasies..babies.


Why?we have reported new data and percentage for a new study for make a better and more accurate map.

----------


## giuseppe rossi

> Most of the R1a in Italy belongs to the Balto-Slavic CTS1211 branch, which I believe was brought by Proto-Slavs who accompanied the Goths.


We can't know for sure.

According to FTDNA there are also Baltic, Central European and local Paleolitich subclades, with at least one Slavic M458 found in Lombardy. Although those results are incomplete since most FTDNA users from Italy didn't took the complete test.

https://www.familytreedna.com/public...ection=results

Underhill has samples from only 3 locations in Italy.

----------


## Vallicanus

Y dna is prone to genetic drift and bottleneck effects. It's only 1 or 2 pc of one's total genetic makeup.

What matters is autosomal DNA which also influences actual physical appearance.

----------


## giuseppe rossi

None is talking about phenotypes here and the autosomal dna is also a very tiny part of genome (just 100k SNPs from more than 3 Bilions of human genome).

Stick to the topic and stop trollin.g with nonsense talk about phenotypes and racism.

----------


## MOESAN

> Y dna is prone to genetic drift and bottleneck effects. It's only 1 or 2 pc of one's total genetic makeup.
> 
> What matters is autosomal DNA which also influences actual physical appearance.


_Y DNA has by force some signification in patriarcal sociétés and the separative drifts Y<-> autosomes are not always quick_

----------


## UltraViolence

I wish someone made a Y-DNA map of European lineages in America,Canada, SA, Australia etc....


and see in which regions in every country have patterns or show where certain types are more common/prevalent than others

it would be interesting to see how much R1b-L21 there is compare to R1b-U106 there is in those places, and from region to region

----------


## Vallicanus

Y dna has little genetic significance.
There are black Americans with Germanic y dna.

----------


## giuseppe rossi

Black Americans are 20-30% British autosomally. 

Again stop t.rolling and stick to the topic.

If you want to share some percentages of y-dna lineages from serious sources, ok.

Otherwise you are only spam.ming and t.rolling.

----------


## Vallicanus

Why are you so obsessed with minority Germanic mixture in Italians?

Is there something wrong with Phoenician or Greek or Arabic mixture?

----------


## giuseppe rossi

Why are you obsessed with Italians in the first place?

For the rest I will say it again.

If you want to share some percentages of y-dna lineages from serious sources, ok.

Otherwise you are only spam.ming and t.rolling.

----------


## Angela

> Y dna has little genetic significance.
> There are black Americans with Germanic y dna.


This thread is about a map Maciamo created to show the frequency of certain yDna lineages. It isn't about the autosomal composition of any of the countries on that map. If you're not interested in yDna lineages and have no data to contribute, then what are doing on it? Please stop trying to derail the discussion.

----------


## MOESAN

Vallicanus have you some hidden psy problem?

----------


## Tomenable

Slavic R1a could be brought to Italy after year 598, when Slavic people penetrated into Italy through Istria.

That was reported for example by Pope Gregory I in his letter (dated 599 AD) to Exarch of Italy:

*"(...) It deeply afflicts and disquiets me the Slavic nation that menace us. It afflicts me from what I already suffer from you, it disquiets me because they have already started to penetrate into the Italic Peninsula through Istria. (...)" - Pope Gregory I

*As for Slavic expansion into the Balkans:

South Slavonic tribes were raiding Roman lands from their homeland north of the Danube river in what is now southern Romania since around the 490s, but they started to settle south of the Danube (in Balkans "proper") only since around 545. First settlements from ca. 545 - 550 were established in eastern Bosnia, Lower and Upper Moesia, and Little Scythia - including the regions of Ulmetum and Adina. Around the same time (ca. 550) first Slavic immigrants probably reached what is now Slovenia (they could be the same tribe which had besieged Durazzo in 547). Second wave of Slavs came to Slovenia after 568 (this time from the north, most probably from Moravia). According to John of Ephesus and Menander Protector another major wave of Slavs (Menander wrote that their strength was 100,000 but he didn't specify whether that included only warriors or all people) broke into Thrace and Thessaly as far as the Great Walls of Constantinople in period 577 - 580, and settled in vast areas. Sources mention that those Slavs were led by a war chief named Ardagast or Radogost (Ардагаст), and a king named Musokios. They could also reach as far as Greece "proper" already by ca. 580, when they sacked Athens, for which there is archaeological evidence (other sources indicate that Slavs started to settle in Attica and the Peloponnese only later, around 610). In 599 Pope Gregory I in a letter to Exarch of Italy wrote that Slavs had already seized most of Istria, and were penetrating into the Italian Peninsula. After mentioned invasions by Slavs, in 584 AD Byzantine Emperor Maurice sent emissaries to the Khagan of the Avars - Bayan I -, asking him for help against Slavs. The Avars initially worked as Byzantine allies against the Slavs. In 584 Ardagast with his Slavs besieged Constantinople but was repulsed by combined Byzantine-Avar forces, and later lost two more battles against Byzantine and Avar forces led by certain Comentiolus (the battle of Erginia River and the battle of Ansinon, near Hadrianopole). Comentiolus also pushed the Slavic settlers out of the region of Astica. In 585 the Byzantines-Avars decided to attack the original South Slavic lands across the Danube - forces under command of Priscus and Gentzon crossed the river at Dorostolon (present-day Silistra) and surprise-attacked the Slavs in their native territory (as most of their forces had long been campaigning in the Byzantine part of Balkans). They attacked at midnight and defeated the Slavs, Ardagast fell on a tree stump and was almost captured, luckily he was near a river and eluded the attackers. But later alliances switched - the Avars abandoned their Byzantine allies and instead started to cooperate with the Slavs, having subordinated some of their tribes (most notably the southern branch of Dudlebes), and having signed alliances with other tribes. So the conquest and colonization of most of the Balkans by the Slavs could be completed with Avar help in the early 600s. Avars were not very numerous but they were excellent horsemen, while Slavs comprised all of the infantry and crews of the navy, as well as some of the horsemen too.

But despite repeated attempts the Slavs-Avars never managed to capture two heavily fortified coastal cities - Constantinople and Thessalonica.

Croats and Serbs is another story. They came to the Balkans much later, in the 2nd half of the 7th century, invited by the Byzantines to fight against Avars and South Slavic tribes (ancestors of modern Bosniaks, Herzegovinians, Montenegrins, Macedonians, Bulgarians) in Dalmatia. Croats and Serbs were originally West Slavs. Slovenes emerged from two waves of Slavic immigration - one from the east (South Slavs) and one West Slavic - from the north - but which came earlier than Serbo-Croatian speakers. Before coming to the Balkans, Croats had established their tribal state somewhere around the Carpathian Mountains. It was called White Croatia. Ancestors of Serbs on the other hand, migrated in two directions - one wave settled in Germany (those became Sorbs), one in the Balkans.*

==============================

*Chronological differentiation of Slavic languages (Starostin 2004):

Dates along the X axis represent time since Common Slavic, while dates within the tree represent years:

Serbian could as well be named Serbo-Croatian: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Serbo-Croatian



According to this diagram, Common Slavic started to differentiate itself already between 130 AD and 270 AD.

This only supports written sources (Jordanes, Procopius, etc.) which say that Slavs were divided into several nations already in the 6th century.

So Slavs were not culturally monolithic by that time, and there already existed several distinct Slavic dialects / languages.

Polish language started to differentiate from Czecho-Slovak already around 780 AD according to this data.

=========================

An anthropological paper about Croats:

https://ariets.files.wordpress.com/2009/07/15311416.pdf




> (...) Our results showed marked craniometrical similarities between early medieval Croat and medieval Polish series. Among all of the 39 analyzed European sites, the two exhibiting the greatest similarities were Nin, a site representing the nucleus of the early medieval Croat state (72), and Cedynia, a Polish site located approximately 75 km south of the Baltic Sea. Conversely, the 5 analyzed Iranian sites exhibited no similarity with the early medieval Croat sites and were all located in the diametrically opposite part of the scatter plot. These results suggest that early medieval Croats were of Slavic ancestry, and that early medieval Croats and Poles at one time shared a common homeland. Recent genetic analyses of the nonrecombining Y chromosome from 25 extant European and Middle Eastern populations support the Slavic affiliation of the Croats, and also indicate significant genetic similarities between modern Croats and Poles (1). (...)

----------


## Tomenable

> Slavic R1a could be brought to Italy after year 598, when Slavic people penetrated into Italy through Istria.
> 
> That was reported for example by Pope Gregory I in his letter (dated 599 AD) to Exarch of Italy:
> 
> *"(...) It deeply afflicts and disquiets me the Slavic nation that menace us. It afflicts me from what I already suffer from you, it disquiets me because they have already started to penetrate into the Italic Peninsula through Istria. (...)" - Pope Gregory I*


Also later there were Slavic raids against Italy, and some settlements were established in Italy by Slavic pirates coming across the Adriatic Sea.

Some episodes are mentioned for example in "Historia Langobardorum" written by Paul the Deacon in the 8th century AD:
*
"Historia Langobardorum", Book 4, chapter XLIV:*




> Then on the death of Arichis, who had held the dukedom fifty years, Aio, his son, was made leader of the Samnites, [1] and still Radoald and Grimoald [2] obeyed him in all things as their elder brother and lord. When this Aio had already governed the dukedom of Beneventum a year and five months, the Slavs came with a great number of ships and set up their camp not far from the city of Sipontum (Siponto). They made hidden pit-falls around their camp and when Aio came upon them in the absence of Raduald and Grimoald and attempted to conquer them, his horse fell into one of these pit-falls, the Slavs rushed upon him and he was killed with a number of others.


*"Historia Langobardorum", Book 6, chapter XXIV:*




> When Ado who we said was caretaker [1] had died at Forum Julii, Ferdulf, a man tricky and conceited, who came from the territories of Liguria, obtained the dukedom. Because he wanted to have the glory of a victory over the Slavs, he brought great misfortune upon himself and the people of Forum Julii. He gave sums of money to certain Slavs to send upon his request an army of Slavs into this province, and it was accordingly done. But that was the cause of great disaster in this province of Forum Julii. The freebooters of the Slavs fell upon the flocks and upon the shepherds of the sheep that pastured in their neighborhoods and drove away the booty taken from them. The ruler of that place, whom they called in their own language "sculdahis," [2] a man of noble birth and strong in courage and capacity, followed them, but nevertheless he could not overtake the freebooters. Duke Ferdulf met him as he was returning thence and when he asked him what had become of these robbers, Argait, for that was his name, answered that they had escaped. Then Ferdulf in rage thus spoke to him: "When could you do anything bravely, you whose name, Argait, comes from the word coward," [3] and Argait, provoked by great anger, since he was a brave man, answered as follows: "May God so will that you and I, duke Ferdulf, may not depart from this life until others know which of us is the greater coward." When they had spoken to each other in turn, these words, in the vulgar tongue [4] it happened not many days afterwards, that the army of the Slavs, for whose coming duke Ferdulf had given his sums of money, now arrived in great strength. And when they had set their camp upon the very top of a mountain and it was hard to approach them from almost any side, duke Ferdulf, coming upon them with his army, began to go around that mountain in order that he could attack them by more level places. Then Argait of whom we have spoken thus said to Ferdulf: "Remember, duke Ferdulf, that you said I was lazy and useless and that you called me in our common speech a coward, but now may the anger of God come upon him who shall be the last of us to attack those Slavs," and saying these words, he turned his horse where the ascent was difficult on account of the steepness of the mountain, and began to attack the fortified camp of the Slavs. Ferdulf, being ashamed not to attack the Slavs himself, through the same difficult places, followed him through those steep and hard and pathless spots, and his army too, considering it base not to follow their leader, began also to press on after him. Consequently the Slavs, seeing that they were coming upon them through steep places, prepared themselves manfully, and fighting against them more with stones and axes [1] than with arms they threw them nearly all from their horses and killed them. And thus they obtained their victory, not by their own strength, but by chance. There all the nobility of the Friulans perished. There duke Ferdulf fell and there too he who had provoked him was killed. And there so great a number of brave men were vanquished by the wickedness and thoughtlessness of dissension as could, with unity and wholesome counsel, overthrow many thousands of their enemies.


==========================

One of most important Italian bases of ethnically Slavic pirates and settlers in Central Italy was Bari. 

There were also some Slavic settlements in Calabria - Slavic language was spoken there until the 12th century.

Among Muslim invaders of Southern Italy and Sicily, there were also Slavic mercenaries and people of ethnic Slavic descent:




> (...) In the third decade of the 10th century, due to Byzantine threat, * came from Tripoli Emir Masud the Slav (Masud Sāqlābi) - of Slavic descent* - and together with his druzhina he captured the strategically important castle of Santa Agata. From the same period we have information about Slavic settlements on Sicily - one of them was called Sclafani - and about the district of Palermo called Hārat as-Sāqāliba. Also bases of Slavic pirates existed on that island - those could be pirates from the South Slavic tribe of Narentines, who during their pirate raids plundered even the coasts of Spain. Last information about Slavs in that region is from the 12th century. (...)

----------


## Vallicanus

> Vallicanus have you some hidden psy problem?


No do you?

----------


## Tomenable

> Also most white Americans who take up over 60% of the U.S. population are mainly of Germanic ancestry


White Americans are mostly R1b. I have data on U.S. haplogroups if you are interested. Unfortunately no data on subclades (and I don't think that this data is fully representative - it is too small a sample and not from all 50 states, but only from some states - and as we know various states greatly differ in terms of ethno-ancestral composition of their populations). American Y-DNA seems to match the British Isles best. They have much more R1b than Germans and Scandinavians.

So it seems (from haplogroup frequencies) that American population is mostly British-derived and this makes them rather Celto-Germanic.

There is also fragmentary data on specific ancestry groups in the USA. For example Underhill 2014 published data on R1a among Czech-Americans.

I think one of major sources for R1a in the USA are Polish-Americans (who are also the most numerous of Slavic ancestries there).

Unfortunately the source from which I have my data on haplogroups in the USA, does not have info on subclades, IIRC.

I have no data on Canada but it is surely more Italo-Celtic than the U.S. due to its large population of French origin.

I have also detailed data on ancestry responses in the U.S. census of 2000 (and less detailed from other censuses since 1980). But this data has large gaps because first of all most people are already of mixed ancestry (and they report what they think is coolest to report), and secondly there is a large group of people who do not report any ancestry (in the census of 2000 almost 54 million Americans - 53,673,566 - did not provide any answer to the question about ancestry at all).

Many people of course report more than one ancestry, but it seems that U.S. Census Bureau counts only 1st and 2nd answers, and no more.

I have data from 2000 census divided into numbers for 1st ancestry and 2nd ancestry (wikipedia articles always give the summ of both).

Ancestry question was first introduced in 1980 and - interestingly - in the first census English ancestry was the most numerous one.

Later English ancestry for some declined as if someone exterminated half of English-Americans. This is illustrated below:



Here is what I meant, when I wrote that English ancestry declined as if someone exterminated English-Americans:*

"English" ancestry (self-reported, both 1st and 2nd answers):

1980 - 49,60 million
1990 - 32,65 million
2000 - 24,51 million
2010 - 25,93 million*

And this decline in self-reported English ancestry cannot be explained simply by increase of "American" ancestry:

*"American" ancestry (self-reported, both 1st and 2nd answers):

1980 - 13,30 million
1990 - 12,40 million
2000 - 20,19 million
2010 - 19,98 million*

The increase in "American" ancestry does not compensate for entire loss in "English".

Especially between 1980 and 1990 we can see, that both "American" and "English" ancestries declined in numbers.

----------


## Hauteville

I don't know what kind of problems has Vallicanus, but he just disturbs this thread. By the way, some Slavs settled in Italy in the Byzantine era and it's historically documented.
In Molise there is a community who speak Croat. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Molise_Croats
Friuli Venezia Giulia has a Slavia Friulana. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Slavia_Friulana
Slavs in the Byzantine Calabria. http://www.academia.edu/6488810/Gli_...bria_bizantina
Slavs settlement around Ragusa/Siracusa. http://www.europaorientalis.it/uploa...983/1983.1.pdf

I will find other sources.

----------


## Vallicanus

Another psychologist from the ITALIC ROOTS website!

I'm entitled to my opinion which is that some South Italians think they are German

----------


## Hauteville

Do you have some problems with Italians?Stop to insult all the Italians here.

----------


## Tomenable

> I don't know what kind of problems has Vallicanus, but he just disturbs this thread. By the way, some Slavs settled in Italy in the Byzantine era and it's historically documented.
> In Molise there is a community who speak Croat. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Molise_Croats
> Friuli Venezia Giulia has a Slavia Friulana. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Slavia_Friulana
> Slavs in the Byzantine Calabria. http://www.academia.edu/6488810/Gli_...bria_bizantina
> Slavs settlement around Ragusa/Siracusa. http://www.europaorientalis.it/uploa...983/1983.1.pdf
> 
> I will find other sources.


Thanks, very interesting info! I will check these links.

----------


## BaltoHeritageNorway

When you (Maciano) write "celto-germanic" as ethnic ancestry, are you referring to cymrian/kimbrian heritage (North Jylland tribe giving rise to the name of Wales in welsh- Cymru, who spoke a middleversion of protogermanic and celtic) or a more general suggested heritage from genetic tests compared to knowledge of human migrations history?

----------


## BaltoHeritageNorway

> Is there something wrong with Phoenician or Greek or Arabic mixture?


Comment: That depends on what part of Italy there is talk about, for what time of history. There was never an "italian" ethnic group. Sicilia was mostly inhabited by greeks during the early roman age, and the Central Italy mostly by etruscans. Northern Italy has been a natural area of temporary stay for really many tribes through history, most of them proto-germanic and celtic. Most people in most countries including also many political leaders, tend to simplify their background or ethnic identity, due to modern national state borders ,religions, or due to other features of the society that is not directly relevant to Genetic and elder cultural history. We also see this effect in minority groups within nations.

----------


## giuseppe rossi

> Comment: That depends on what part of Italy there is talk about, for what time of history. There was never an "italian" ethnic group. Sicilia was mostly inhabited by greeks during the early roman age, and the Central Italy mostly by etruscans. Northern Italy has been a natural area of temporary stay for really many tribes through history, most of them proto-germanic and celtic. Most people in most countries including also many political leaders, tend to simplify their background or ethnic identity, due to modern national state borders ,religions, or due to other features of the society that is not directly relevant to Genetic and elder cultural history. We also see this effect in minority groups within nations.


Etruscans lived only in Tuscany, Emilia Romagna, Latium and parts of Campania and Umbria. And they were from the German Urnfield culture, so nothing exotic or Anatolian about them.

The rest of Central Italy was inhabited by various Celtic and Italic populations. Italics were also Indo Europeans who came from Central Europe.

----------


## giuseppe rossi

I've remade the map with the correct data for Italy.

----------


## Vallicanus

> Etruscans lived only in Tuscany, Emilia Romagna, Latium and parts of Campania and Umbria. And they were from the* German* Urnfield culture, so nothing exotic or Anatolian about them.
> 
> The rest of Central Italy was inhabited by various Celtic and Italic populations. Italics were also Indo Europeans who came from Central Europe.


Central European Urnfield, not "German".

Etruscan art was strongly influenced by Phoenician and other Near Eastern motifs so there was something exotic about Etruscans. (Even setting aside their much disputed genetic ties)

There was no Germanic ethnos in Bronze Age Central Europe, only groups speaking languages ancestral to Celtic and Italic.

----------


## giuseppe rossi

More off topic from this t-roll.

Etruscans evolved from the Villanova culture which came from German Urnfield Culture.

The only close population to Etruscans were the Rhaetians which inhabited Tyrol, Austria and Southern Germany.

Etruscan art was copied by the Greek one.

Phoenicians colonized only Sardinia and Western Sicily.

----------


## Angela

> Central European Urnfield, not "German".
> 
> Etruscan art was strongly influenced by Phoenician and other Near Eastern motifs so there was something exotic about Etruscans. (Even setting aside their much disputed genetic ties)
> 
> There was no Germanic ethnos in Bronze Age Central Europe, only languages ancestral to Celtic and Italic.


What? When a culture is strongly influenced by another culture, often one with which it trades, and adopts motifs from that culture into their art, that means that the adopting culture is itself necessarily exotic or looks like the people from whom it is borrowing certain motifs? Sorry, but I don't see any logic in that statement whatsoever. 

In the 19th century, trade with the Orient resulted in the adoption of many "eastern" motifs. See below. I have one much like it; it's one of my most prized possessions. Does that mean that the English looked Chinese or that I do?



Or, let's look at Russian Orthodox iconography. This is a famous Russian icon. Does the fact that they painted saints in this manner or bought art painted in this manner have anything to do with Russian phenotypes? Do these people look Russian to you?



Etruscan art went through various phases. In the beginning it is virtually indistinguishable from Greek art and artifacts even when it is made by Etruscan artisans. As time passed it became more realistic. Would you like me to provide you with links to papers about it? I'll be happy to do so in a PM, but your commentary is, of course, off topic for this thread.

----------


## Angela

> I've remade the map with the correct data for Italy.


If that is your map and not Maciamo's, then it shouldn't be labeled a "Eupedia" map.

----------


## giuseppe rossi

^^

Hoping that it will be posted in the Eupedia genetic section.

----------


## Sile

> Central European Urnfield, not "German".
> 
> Etruscan art was strongly influenced by Phoenician and other Near Eastern motifs so there was something exotic about Etruscans. (Even setting aside their much disputed genetic ties)
> 
> There was no Germanic ethnos in Bronze Age Central Europe, only groups speaking languages ancestral to Celtic and Italic.


there was "german" in the bronze-age...but only in Northern Germany and Denmark ...........no germans in central or southern germany


Yes etrucans mainly traded ouside ot Italy , basically with Phoencians and Greeks only...........the greeks, was usually for pottery. Archeologists can tell a rich etruscans house by the greek pottery found there.

----------


## Vallicanus

> More off topic from this t-roll.
> 
> Etruscans evolved from the Villanova culture which came from German Urnfield Culture.
> 
> The only close population to Etruscans were the Rhaetians which inhabited Tyrol, Austria and Southern Germany.
> 
> Etruscan art was copied by the Greek one.
> 
> Phoenicians colonized only Sardinia and Western Sicily.


What is wrong with correcting your anachronistic use of the term "German"?

BTW Etruscans learned more from Greece, even their alphabet, than vice versa.

Phoenician and Urartian elements were also common through trade and cultural diffusion.

----------


## giuseppe rossi

OK OK

I've made a mistake.

I meant that Etruscans copied the Greeks art, which was influenced by the Phoenicians and the Egyptians.

----------


## Hauteville

http://www.nationalgeographic.it/pop...a_noi-1499113/

----------


## Vallicanus

> What? When a culture is strongly influenced by another culture, often one with which it trades, and adopts motifs from that culture into their art, that means that the adopting culture is itself necessarily exotic or looks like the people from whom it is borrowing certain motifs? Sorry, but I don't see any logic in that statement whatsoever. 
> 
> In the 19th century, trade with the Orient resulted in the adoption of many "eastern" motifs. See below. I have one much like it; it's one of my most prized possessions. Does that mean that the English looked Chinese or that I do?
> 
> 
> 
> Or, let's look at Russian Orthodox iconography. This is a famous Russian icon. Does the fact that they painted saints in this manner or bought art painted in this manner have anything to do with Russian phenotypes? Do these people look Russian to you?
> 
> 
> ...


Thank you for the offer, but I have books about the Etruscans.

You agree though that Etruscan art generally has Greek antecedents?

BTW I was only trying to correct an anachronistic use of the term "German".

----------


## Angela

The adoption by the Etruscans of Greek motifs in their art and artifacts has nothing to do with the phenotype of the Etruscans, which in turn has nothing to do with a map of "Germanic" lineages. 

Are you forgetting the rules again, Vallicanus?

----------


## giuseppe rossi

It's just an excuse for tro.lling Italians.

Vallicanus is on the same league as the Transexual from Boston.

----------


## Angela

> It's just an excuse for tro.lling Italians.
> 
> Vallicanus is on the same league as the Transexual from Boston.


Leave the sexual orientations of others out of discussions, if you please.

----------


## giuseppe rossi

LOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOL!

----------


## Tomenable

> Early anthropologists classified both England and Latvia as 60% Germanic.


Your map does not show "Germanic" but "Nordic race", which are two completely different things.

The fact that the map shows areas with no Germanic population as inhabited by "Nordic race" should already tell you this.

"Nordic race" corresponds much better to Yamnaya autosomal admixture than to Germanic populations.

----------


## Tomenable

> "Nordic race" corresponds much better to Yamnaya autosomal admixture than to Germanic populations.


*"The original Indo-European facial type - East Nordid":*

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=REZlM021s_8




============================================

*BTW:*

*Modern populations most similar in autosomal DNA to prehistoric Pre-Germanic Scandinavians are 1) Poles and 2) Swedes:*

http://eurogenes.blogspot.de/2012/04...cally.html?m=1

*Allele sharing with prehistoric hunters of Sweden (most shared DNA with them have modern Poles, 2nd come modern Swedes):*




> But why is it that Poles show higher similarity to these Neolithic Scandinavians than Swedes do? Firstly, it's important to realize that the differences aren't that great. Note, for instance, that Swedes are the second most similar population to the hunter-gatherers after Poles.

----------


## Angela

Bronze Age warrior found in context of post-Corded Ware local Strzyżów culture...dark haired, dark eyed, and with "darker" complexion.

----------


## Hauteville

> LOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOL!


Little ot

'I'm not sicilian' (for informations this thread is the beginning of the reputation ruin and humilation for southern Italians in the world of anthroforums, sadly) Damn t.roll.

----------


## giuseppe rossi

He/she stole milions of photos from facebook. Without him we would have destroyed all the stereotypes...

----------


## Tomenable

I checked Y-DNA haplogroups of Germans from former German territories which are now part of Poland.

I included individuals from Western Pomerania, Southern East Prussia and Silesia listed in these projects:
(these are links to maps - each individual is marked with a pin in a place where he was born):

https://www.familytreedna.com/public/polish?iframe=ymap

https://www.familytreedna.com/public...rn?iframe=ymap

https://www.familytreedna.com/public...x?section=ymap

https://www.familytreedna.com/public...ny?iframe=ymap

I did not include individuals with either unknown or evidently Polish names and surnames. Here are the results (it is possible that I missed several persons) - in total I counted 87 persons (probably I missed several people, I will re-count it later):

*R1a haplogroup - 53 individuals (60,9%):*

Johann Friedrich Lietzke - born in year 1827 in Darzewo/Darsow, R-CTS3402, R-Z280
Wilhelm Michelske, Denzin (Dębczyno), Pommern - R-L365, R-Z280
Wilhelm August Selke, born 1849, Przystawy, Western Pomerania, R-L1029, R-M458
Gotthilf Marcks, born 1817, Wittenfelde (Bielice), Western Pomerania, R-CTS3402, R-Z280
Friedrich Wendt, born 1862, Dominikowo R-M512, R-M417
Peter Hundt, born 1844 Wałcz, R-CTS3402, R-M417
Daniel Lehmann - born 1785 Alt Lietzegoericke, R-M512, R-M458
Christian Friedrich Tuerk, born 1690 Gorzów Wielkopolski, R-L260, R-M458
Christian Friedrich Abraham, born 1824 Eichberg (Zatom Nowy), R-M512, R-Z280
Schmerse, born 1500, R-M512, R-M417
Johann Paeschke, born 1757 fr Kalzig (Kalsko) - R-M512, R-M417
George Zaretzke, born 1734, Nowy Tomyśl, R-M512, R-M458
Willy Wederich, born 1921, Zielona Góra R-M512, R-M417
Johann Christoph Schulze - Kałki, R-L260, R-M458
Nickolas Yambarske born 1830 Gdansk R-M198
Gottlieb Baum, born 1833 Rościsławice R-Z93
Joseph Lassota born 1820 Oleśnica R-M512, R-M417
Schwabe born 1836, R-L1029, R-M458
Gottfried Runge, born 1720 Rawitsch R-M512, R-M458
Ernst Johann Karl Thiede, born 1885, Friedland (Debrzno) R-L366, R-Z280
Theodore Brunke, born 1868, Lauenburg, R-L365, R-Z280
Daniel Kopittke, born 1810 Zwartowo, R-L365, R-Z280
Theophil Sabisch, born 1855 Klein Platenheim, R-M458
Johann Michael Sommerfeld born 1750 Tujsk R-L365, R-Z280
Schoenbach born 1849 Deutsch Crone R-Z293
Benjamin Wedel, Malbork near Stężyca (Stendsitz) born 1796 R-CTS3402, R-Z280
Samuel Liedtke born 1853 Kaltwangen (Kalwagi) R-L260, R-M458
Friedrich Mattern died 1717 born Miłakowo R-CTS456 R-Z280, R-Z92
George Glass born 1810 Babięty R1a-M417
Martin Brandt ur. 1845 Swaroszyn, Lubiszewo Tczewskie, R-M198, R-M458
Fedrinand Quandt born 1817 Wierzchowo R-M512
Gottlieb Zemke born 1820 Neustettin R-M198
Herbert Hinz born 1914 Szczecin R-M512
Paul George Schober, born 1863, Altwasser (Wałbrzych), R-M458
Thomas Sakry born 1783 Komprachcice R-M198, R-M458
Johann Hannak born 1776 Falkenberg R-L260, R-M458
Stephan Pach born 1857 Laskowice (near Nysa / Neisse) R-M458, R-L260
Willi Kleemann born 1925 Oppeln R-P278, R-Z280
Reinhold Salzmann born 1873 Głubczyce R-Z92, R-Z280
Martin Maxelon born 1708 Błotnica Strzelecka R-M512, R-M417
Johann Schembor born 1666 Lubliniec R-M512, R-M417
Gregor Freyer born 1753 Stare Karmonki R-M198, R-M458, R-L260
Valentine Kruszka born 1843 Srebrna Góra R-L260, R-M458
Ludwig Ermis born 1822 Gruenwalde, R-CTS456, R1a
Johann Piasetzki born 1860 Sensburg R1a-CTS3402
Scheffrahn Rastenburg R1a-M417
Franz Pallaschke born 1883 Buddern (Budry) R1a-CTS1211
Jakob Pawellek born 1853, Szczytno, R-L365, R1a
Martin Kiehl born 1760 Stobbendorf R-M512 R-M458
Felyx Pruhs born 1826 Bratjan, R-M198, R-M417
Michael Flatau born 1800 Alt Christburg (Stary Dzierzgoń), R-M512, R-M417
Theodor Klagge, born Kołtki, R-CTS11962, R-M458
Carl Poch, born early 1800s, Rummelsburg (Miastko), R-L365, R-Z280

*R1b haplogroup: 11 individuals (12,6%):*

Erdmann Kniephoff, born 1763, Maszewo - R-M269
Willi Otto Robert Hermann Schmidt born 1900, Nowa Sól, R-P312
Friedrick Wilhelm Schulz, born 1820, Żagań, R-CTS2509, R1b-U106
Christian Nikel, born Zabrowo 1780 R-CTS10893
Peter Johann Quiring, born 1792 Piecewo R1b-L48
Carl Ludwig Herman Ginnow born 1827 R-M269
Carl Gustav Meyer born 1782 Stargard Szczeciński R-M269
Karl August Adolph Quade born 1836 R-M269 Wrocław
Gustav Klose born 1850 Wrocław R-M269
Johann Voelkner born 1748 Redenau (Rodnowo) R1b-M269
Marcus Wolsleger born before 1599 Brzezie (Eickfier), R-L150, R1b-Z2103

*I1 and I2 haplogroups: 11 individuals (12,6%):*

Moses Leiser, born 1820 Dobrzany I-P37
Bernhardt Noffz born 1830 Niemica I-M253
Albert Martin Hermann born 1846, Treblin Pomerania, I-M253
Gustav Schedlinski born in Seedorf (Jeziorowskie) near Lyck I-M253
Liefhold, born Stolp I-Z138
Wilhelm Heinrich Riewe born 1834 Drawsko Pomorskie I-M253
Christoph Kortbein born 1730 Choszczno I-CTS9352
Jozef G Doppke, Gniewowo, I-M253
Johann Christoph Rosenberger born 1720 Kłodzko I-Z140, I-M253
Michael Rimek born 1723 Szczytno (Ortelsburg), I-P37
Carl L. Nath born 1820 Osterode I-M423

*G haplogroup: 2 individuals (2,3%):*

Moses Broda, born 1584 - Bunzlau - G-M201, G-M377
Leib Ader born 1889 Podkamien (near Nysa / Neisse) G-M377

*T haplogroup: 2 individuals (2,3%):*

William Fleischfresser born 1846 in Gross Justin T-L208
Michael Hohenfeld in Tolkmicko (Tolkemit) T-M70

*E haplogroup: 1 individual (1,2%):*

Christian Ahlmann, born in Braunsberg E-L117

*N haplogroup: 7 individuals (8,0%):*

Peter Zwiefka born 1855 Wrocław J-L283, J-M12
Norbert Gabel born 1936 Breslau J-M172
Albert Gill born 1863 Breslau J-M67, J-M172
Yakov Gutfrajnd born 1790 Praszka J-P58, J-M267
Wolf Zimak alias Simon Freybuschewitz died 1884 born Dąbrówno J-PF5456, J-M172
Joannes Reihs born 1800 Bischofstein (Bisztynek) N-L1025
Jons Maczullatis [Prussian Lithuanian] born 1745 Skaisgirren (Skajzgiry), N-L550
Johann Groening born 1800 Krzewiny (Horsterbusch) N-L731
Jan Łozowski ur. 1850 Giżycko N-L551, N-L550
August Darge born 1870 Bartenstein (Bartoszyce), N-M178

----------


## Tomenable

If this sample is representative then most of Germans from Pomerania, Silesia and East Prussia were in fact Germanized Slavs and Balts.

----------


## Rethel

> I did not include individuals with either unknown or evidently Polish names and surnames.


Not exactly 

100% polish names:

Johann Friedrich Lietzke - born in year 1827 in Darzewo/Darsow, R-CTS3402, R-Z280
Wilhelm Michelske, Denzin (Dębczyno), Pommern - R-L365, R-Z280
Wilhelm August Selke, born 1849, Przystawy, Western Pomerania, R-L1029, R-M458
Christian Friedrich Tuerk, born 1690 Gorzów Wielkopolski, R-L260, R-M458
Johann Paeschke, born 1757 fr Kalzig (Kalsko) - R-M512, R-M417
George Zaretzke, born 1734, Nowy Tomyśl, R-M512, R-M458
Nickolas Yambarske born 1830 Gdansk R-M198
Joseph Lassota born 1820 Oleśnica R-M512, R-M417
Theodore Brunke, born 1868, Lauenburg, R-L365, R-Z280
Daniel Kopittke, born 1810 Zwartowo, R-L365, R-Z280
98, R-M458
Johann Hannak born 1776 Falkenberg R-L260, R-M458
Johann Schembor born 1666 Lubliniec R-M512, R-M417
Valentine Kruszka born 1843 Srebrna Góra R-L260, R-M458
Johann Piasetzki born 1860 Sensburg R1a-CTS3402
Franz Pallaschke born 1883 Buddern (Budry) R1a-CTS1211
Jakob Pawellek born 1853, Szczytno, R-L365, R1a
Felyx Pruhs born 1826 Bratjan, R-M198, R-M417
Gustav Schedlinski born in Seedorf (Jeziorowskie) near Lyck I-M253
Michael Rimek born 1723 Szczytno (Ortelsburg), I-P37
Moses Broda, born 1584 - Bunzlau - G-M201, G-M377
Peter Zwiefka born 1855 Wrocław J-L283, J-M12
Albert Gill born 1863 Breslau J-M67, J-M172
Wolf Zimak alias Simon Freybuschewitz died 1884 born Dąbrówno J-PF5456, J-M172
Jan Łozowski ur. 1850 Giżycko N-L551, N-L550

90% polish 10% german names

Gustav Klose born 1850 Wrocław R-M269
Theophil Sabisch, born 1855 Klein Platenheim, R-M458
Gottlieb Zemke born 1820 Neustettin R-M198
Thomas Sakry born 1783 Komprachcice R-M1
Stephan Pach born 1857 Laskowice (near Nysa / Neisse) R-M458, R-L260
Martin Kiehl born 1760 Stobbendorf R-M512 R-M458

50:50 polish:german

Jozef G Doppke, Gniewowo, I-M253
August Darge born 1870 Bartenstein (Bartoszyce), N-M178[/QUOTE]
Gotthilf Marcks, born 1817, Wittenfelde (Bielice), Western Pomerania, R-CTS3402, R-Z280
Friedrich Wendt, born 1862, Dominikowo R-M512, R-M417
Christian Friedrich Abraham, born 1824 Eichberg (Zatom Nowy), R-M512, R-Z280
Schmerse, born 1500, R-M512, R-M417
Carl Poch, born early 1800s, Rummelsburg (Miastko), R-L365, R-Z280
Christian Nikel, born Zabrowo 1780 R-CTS10893
Carl Ludwig Herman Ginnow born 1827 R-M269
Bernhardt Noffz born 1830 Niemica I-M253
Albert Martin Hermann born 1846, Treblin Pomerania, I-M253
Norbert Gabel born 1936 Breslau J-M172





> If this sample is representative then most of Germans from Pomerania, Silesia and East Prussia were in fact Germanized Slavs and Balts.


Of course. This was always obvious, long before genetic studies. :Rolleyes:

----------


## Tomenable

> polish names


Well, East Germans often tend to have surnames of Slavic or Baltic origin.

And if you take all Germans, then around 15% have surnames of Slavic origin.

----------


## Tomenable

I added some new entries and corrected some mistakes - but I opened a new thread about this:

*"Y-DNA of Germans from Silesia, Pomerania, Pomerelia and Prussia":*

http://www.eupedia.com/forum/threads...ia-and-Prussia

----------


## Sigfrido

From FTDNA Italy:

Out of 27 R1a haplogroups:

Six are R-M512 (Slavic)
Four are R-Z283 (Germanic-Balto-Slavic)
Two are R-Z93 (Sarmatian)
One is L1029 (Slavic)
One is CTS1211 (Balto-Slavic)
One is CTS3402 (Balto-Slavic)
One is SRY10831 (Slavic)
One is YP617 (Slavic)

The rest a random R1a subclades. They still to be properly tested.

https://www.familytreedna.com/public/Italy?iframe=yresults

----------


## Maciamo

> From FTDNA Italy:
> 
> Out of 27 R1a haplogroups:
> 
> Six are R-M512 (Slavic)
> Four are R-Z283 (Germanic-Balto-Slavic)
> Two are R-Z93 (Sarmatian)
> One is L1029 (Slavic)
> One is CTS1211 (Balto-Slavic)
> ...



That confirms my hypothesis that most R1a in Italy came with the Goths (i.e. Slavs assimilated by the Goths in eastern Europe).

----------


## Sigfrido

> That confirms my hypothesis that most R1a in Italy came with the Goths (i.e. Slavs assimilated by the Goths in eastern Europe).


Most of those R1a has not been tested yet....

----------


## redeyednewt

Thank you for posting this. My father has a German heritage but I have yet to do a full YDNA test on him as the tests are expensive.

----------

