Auvergne genetic history

I feel they were a balto-Slavic mix, but somehow Germanic lineages got more involved and Baltic influence was much lesser.
 
Their seat of power was once Berlin so it goes well with a Germanic connection....if someone could find evidence showing them as Baltic I would appreciate it, as I don't know much about them.

Not those Prussians;
Those Prussians are Brandenburg-Preußen (Hohenzollern)
Brandenburg-Preu%C3%9Fen1688.JPG


Prussia was first lent/fief to the Margraviate of Brandenburg by the Polish King and after the battle of Warsaw 1656 - Brandenburg was granted sovereignty over Prussia by the Swedish King Karl X Gustav in Treaty of Labiau 1656; That state further expanded under Frederick II (the Great) with conquest of Silesia (Habsburg domain) etc. etc.

All of Brandenburg-Preußen was elevated to Kingdom of Prussia (i.e. Prussians) in 1701;
 
But how would they be classified?
 
But how would they be classified?

The Prussians in the Duchy [Hzm.] were Balts;
Akin to the Baltic Curonians, Lithuanians and Jatwingern;

Everything else in that region is either Germanic or Slavic;
Keeping in mind that in the Medieval times East Germany (east of Elbe) was equally Slavic (Polabian - Sorbs/Veleti/Obotrites); With among the Veleti (Winuler/pos. also Ranen) and Obotrites (Warnen) being remnant East Germanic elements;

Lausitz is still Slavic (Sorbs) but the rest was all conquered and subjugated by Germanic (mostly Saxons/Altsachsen also Alemannic/Swabians and Ripuarian Franks) in the Medieval era; Albrecht der Bär conquered the Spree(Berlin) area from Jaxa;
 
Last edited:
I feel they were a balto-Slavic mix, but somehow Germanic lineages got more involved and Baltic influence was much lesser.

this is the break down of ancient old prussians ( not germanic prussian or slavic Prussians) as per latvian and lithaunian scholars

N1c (58%)
I (29%)
R1a (7.5%)
R1b (3.5%)
BR ( 1% ) .............i do not know what this is
K ( 1% ) ..........found it to be L
 
Okay so they were high in N1c lol, different story.
 
Okay so they were high in N1c lol, different story.

why where the balts eliminated as a race, what about thracians, gallic and pelagasians..............we need to ensure they have their own race in society...others are the Kurds and Assyrians.

Maybe if Scotland win independence this year, it will be the start of a resurrection of old races in europe and then the globe.
 
I'm sure Scotland will go about their independence in a non-discriminatory fashion, although I don't support these separatist stats, nor Catalonia; makes things very complicated for "nationalistic pride", worst reason, we saw where nationalism lead the Germans in forty five. As for the rest of your question I don't even understand it.
 
I'm sure Scotland will go about their independence in a non-discriminatory fashion, although I don't support these separatist stats, nor Catalonia; makes things very complicated for "nationalistic pride", worst reason, we saw where nationalism lead the Germans in forty five. As for the rest of your question I don't even understand it.

It's simple...if you want an European Union, then we must destroy every big nation in Europe. Brussels would like 4 in italy, 5 in France etc, basically the split which they use for voting. If you want to retain big nations in Europe, then destroy the EU........you cannot have both. Nations have too much power for the EU to handle correctly.

You want democracy and you do not let certain races have what they want.........all you canadians are confusing. My cousins from Toronto, Montreal and Quebec are just as confusing to each other
 
this is the break down of ancient old prussians ( not germanic prussian or slavic Prussians) as per latvian and lithaunian scholars

N1c (58%)
I (29%)
R1a (7.5%)
R1b (3.5%)
BR ( 1% ) .............i do not know what this is
K ( 1% ) ..........found it to be L
Where is the link to these scholars. You should have realized we won't let you off the hook with these numbers. :83:
 
Trust me; they called the poles "Prussians" for a reason! R1a; think paternal origins and it becomes easy to see, as opposed to the Germans just nearby (although R1a is found at 20% or so across easternmost Germany, due to contact with poles). As for mtdna H in Poland, same as Hungary, Greece, Austria, Germany, Portugal, Latvia or Croatia and much of Europe (40-45% H on a national level). Mtdna h follows no ethnic/cultural patterns; it simply dominates in different countries ALL over Europe between 55-40%, it has a west-to-east gradient with highest frequencies in westernmost Europe (from where it would spread via Iberian ice age refugium after last ice age) and lower ones in the east, dropping to 35-25% once we reach the Moscovian plains of western Russia.
I hope you know now who the Prussians were.
Unfortunately I can't trust you anymore.
:50:
 
Their seat of power was once Berlin so it goes well with a Germanic connection....if someone could find evidence showing them as Baltic I would appreciate it, as I don't know much about them.ntey seem to have been Germanic in a sea of Slavs and let's to the north (Lithuanian types).

Since you're so fond of Wikipedia as an authority, why don't you just go there and look up "Old Prussians" and "Prussians". These two entries will explain who the Prussians were at different times, and the information seems to be fairly accurate, unlike some Wikipedia entries. The Old Prussians were a group of Baltic tribes that inhabited the lands of the southeastern Baltic Sea in the area around the Vistula and Curonian Lagoons. They spoke a language now known as Old Prussian and followed a polytheistic religion. In the 13th century, they were conquered by christian crusaders, particularly the Teutonic Knights, but only after decades of fighting. The Old Prussians were forced to give up their religion and become christians and their lands were heavily colonized by Germanic people. The new German rulers of Prussia then became known as Prussians, and eventually built up a big kingdom and managed to create modern Germany by the 19th century. So, when you talk about Prussians, in either the genetic or cultural sense, you need to indicate whether you mean the Old Prussians or the Germanic Prussians. We don't know for certain the genetic makeup of the Old Prussians but it was probably similar to that of other Balts.
 
So germanized Baltic people.....Sile postulated the old Prussians were high in N1c, is this true? What was their genetic composition, as they inhabited parts of Lithuania and Poland, eventually their seat of power was centered on Berlin. This makes it difficult to interpret who they were genetically speaking, as they inhabited Slavic, Germanic and Baltic territories.
 
It's simple...if you want an European Union, then we must destroy every big nation in Europe. Brussels would like 4 in italy, 5 in France etc, basically the split which they use for voting. If you want to retain big nations in Europe, then destroy the EU........you cannot have both. Nations have too much power for the EU to handle correctly.

You want democracy and you do not let certain races have what they want.........all you canadians are confusing. My cousins from Toronto, Montreal and Quebec are just as confusing to each other

Quebec francophones can't talk to the ROC (rest of Canada) in a manner we can understand because the Quebec French learn a fictional version of history and have a very different perception of what Canada is and how it came to be. And the huge waves of immigrants who came here in the last few decades don't necessarily understand either point of view, although some immigrants have integrated into either the Anglophone or French culture and so understand one side of the argument or the other but rarely both. From the Anglophone Canadian point of view, the Quebec French are a pain in the neck and different regions of Canada often have different interests even when not divided by language, so a looser confederacy of provinces might seem desirable. However, we can't split up Canada because the evil wolf to the south of us would gobble us up and we'd have to live like Americans, with no health care, lunatics running around with guns, a really massive income inequity and a higher crime rate. Canada is defined in part by not wanting to be Americans, mostly because a lot of those people are crazy. So, while the Quebec French have a fantasy that they could be a separate republic while still enjoying all the benefits of being part of Canada, the rest of us know better. Although some immigrants think that Canadian Anglophones are unreasonable in both our dislike of the Quebec French and our dislike of the worst aspects of American culture, and I imagine LeBrok will have something to say to me about some of my comments. We are, in a word, a nation divided and living in the shadow of a deranged elephant, although not everyone in Canada sees it that way. However, this is, I think, slightly off topic for the thread.
 
So germanized Baltic people.....Sile postulated the old Prussians were high in N1c, is this true? What was their genetic composition, as they inhabited parts of Lithuania and Poland, eventually their seat of power was centered on Berlin. This makes it difficult to interpret who they were genetically speaking, as they inhabited Slavic, Germanic and Baltic territories.

As I said, the genetic makeup of the Old Prussians was probably similar to that of other Balts, although nobody know for sure. And the Old Prussians didn't inhabit Slavic and Germanic territories - Slavs and Germans (mostly Germans) invaded Old Prussian territory. As I said, the Prussians whose capital was Berlin were the German speaking Prussians who were a mixture but probably mostly German.
 
I agree with both comments, big-Berdeen.
 
As I said, the genetic makeup of the Old Prussians was probably similar to that of other Balts, although nobody know for sure. And the Old Prussians didn't inhabit Slavic and Germanic territories - Slavs and Germans (mostly Germans) invaded Old Prussian territory. As I said, the Prussians whose capital was Berlin were the German speaking Prussians who were a mixture but probably mostly German.

I basically think it was purely a name grab by the germans and slavs to take lands that was never theirs in any time. Both germans and slavs tried settling people in the area to stake a claim. The more you claim something the more people think its yours over time. IIRC Swedish king Gustav in the tried the same thing with Pomerania and prussia , claiming it was part of the goth homeland ( ie Scandia, gotland, pomerania and prusi lands). He even had it in his title as monarch of Sweden. Unsure about now.

It similar to England staking a claim in Northern Ireland, they pushed a lot of English people to migrate and many many nobles where given lands there to establish a foothold ...............but some people resist foreign migration!
 
very sensible post, Sile! I agree.
&: English gentry made better: they used the protestant Scots (whose name came from Ireland!) to do the dirty work in Ulster!
people is forgetful: Celts and almost Celts fighting one against an other: how frightful! whe the lower classes people understand where their true enemy stands, world would be "cooler"... I'm longing to the time when people can AND support their own culture AND allow the same aim to the others, putting the "uber alles" aspect in the rubbish tin, but maybe is it too late? the "all for myself" individual concept is favoring a new model of (economic) war in evolved countries in place of the collective ones: when a thing is bad we find very quickly an other bad thing to replace it...
but I look at my watch and see it is the hour of my aperitive session: things are suddenly going better !
 

This thread has been viewed 45266 times.

Back
Top