PDA

View Full Version : Hitler's Y-DNA?



rms2
24-08-10, 16:06
The article doesn't say whether any of the relatives tested were in Hitler's own y-dna line, but it seems likely, since the y haplogroup (E1b1b1) is mentioned.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/world-war-2/7961211/Hitler-had-Jewish-and-African-roots-DNA-tests-show.html (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/world-war-2/7961211/Hitler-had-Jewish-and-African-roots-DNA-tests-show.html)

Does anyone out there have further information?

Wilhelm
25-08-10, 14:35
To say he had jewish and african roots apart from being untrue it's very sensationalist, childish and unsicentific. Belonging to haplogroup E is not a prove that he had jewish nor african ancestry. This haplogorup is common in the Austria area (about 9 % )

Cambrius (The Red)
25-08-10, 14:52
To say he had jewish and african roots apart from being untrue it's very sensationalist, childish and unsicentific. Belonging to haplogroup E is not a prove that he had jewish nor african ancestry. This haplogorup is common in the Austria area (about 9 % )

It is obvious that the people who presented this story did little DNA research. The report is filled with exaggeration.

weissmacht
08-01-12, 23:57
That could easily mean he had Roman ancestors.He came from Austria-Central Europe not Northern Europe.The Romans had contact with the Danubian Germanioc tribes for hundreds of years-he easly could have picked up some Roman blood.The typical Jewish modal the Cohen Modal is J1 and J2-E1b1 is a non-semitic north african type-It means Hitler is as Jewish as Italians or Ancient Egytpians are.Plus its just his Y_dna-know one has ever said what his full genome is.The Y-dna is just one single line of amcestry you have-a needle in a geneological haystack.We are so into the Y-dna becuase it can be easily read and with great detail but in reality its only one line of your total background-it means Hitler-out of all his ancestors who ever walked the earth-had just one ancestor who had the E1b1 type.He had one single ancestor with this Y-dna type but thats nothing to do with the bulk of his ancestry.It means he is about 2% north african-thats all.

Yaan
07-02-12, 00:12
That could easily mean he had Roman ancestors.He came from Austria-Central Europe not Northern Europe.The Romans had contact with the Danubian Germanioc tribes for hundreds of years-he easly could have picked up some Roman blood.The typical Jewish modal the Cohen Modal is J1 and J2-E1b1 is a non-semitic north african type-It means Hitler is as Jewish as Italians or Ancient Egytpians are.Plus its just his Y_dna-know one has ever said what his full genome is.The Y-dna is just one single line of amcestry you have-a needle in a geneological haystack.We are so into the Y-dna becuase it can be easily read and with great detail but in reality its only one line of your total background-it means Hitler-out of all his ancestors who ever walked the earth-had just one ancestor who had the E1b1 type.He had one single ancestor with this Y-dna type but thats nothing to do with the bulk of his ancestry.It means he is about 2% north african-thats all.
First of all I totally disagree with J2 being Jewish, nations do not own genes let aside religions. Greeks, Turks and Kavkaz people have a lot more J2 than the Jews. So it is insulting to claim J2 is Jewish and only Jewish, it is as if I say R1b is Cameroonian or Turkish because both nations have a lot of it.
Second E(V13) is European,E(V12) is North African and E(V22) is Med, which of these was Adolf Hitler? E(V13) would make the most sense and it is neither African nor Jewish.
Third genes are a lot older than the concept of nations.So according to you all Germanics that are not I1 or I2b are not real German,all Slavs that are not I2a or R1a are not really Slav and all Jews that are not G2c and J1 are not Jews?It is not like this! I am nationalist myself and understand and value the concept of pride in your own but blood groups and genes are something different. If for example some 10 % of Austrians are E(V13) this means that this haplogroup plays a role in Austrian ethnogenesis,not that the people that carry it are not Austrians. So Hitler was what he was 100% Germanic and more precise South German /Austrian. His persona is a matter of an other discussion that has nothing to do with genes! Regards from a J2 Slav!

Carlos
07-02-12, 01:58
I am 100% Spanish, does anyone doubt it? obviously every country has its particular mix. We will end up catching flies.

Athelti Albanoi
17-06-13, 21:07
To say he had jewish and african roots apart from being untrue it's very sensationalist, childish and unsicentific. Belonging to haplogroup E is not a prove that he had jewish nor african ancestry. This haplogorup is common in the Austria area (about 9 % )

its a newspaper and they are permanent lying somehow they have to sell it ofcourse they have to put some crazyass titel so people read it

Noman
22-08-13, 00:30
First of all I totally disagree with J2 being Jewish, nations do not own genes let aside religions. Greeks, Turks and Kavkaz people have a lot more J2 than the Jews. So it is insulting to claim J2 is Jewish and only Jewish, it is as if I say R1b is Cameroonian or Turkish because both nations have a lot of it.
Second E(V13) is European,E(V12) is North African and E(V22) is Med, which of these was Adolf Hitler? E(V13) would make the most sense and it is neither African nor Jewish.
Third genes are a lot older than the concept of nations.So according to you all Germanics that are not I1 or I2b are not real German,all Slavs that are not I2a or R1a are not really Slav and all Jews that are not G2c and J1 are not Jews?It is not like this! I am nationalist myself and understand and value the concept of pride in your own but blood groups and genes are something different. If for example some 10 % of Austrians are E(V13) this means that this haplogroup plays a role in Austrian ethnogenesis,not that the people that carry it are not Austrians. So Hitler was what he was 100% Germanic and more precise South German /Austrian. His persona is a matter of an other discussion that has nothing to do with genes! Regards from a J2 Slav!

But it's definitely recently african in origin. I don't think hitler would be pleased with that. Or actually I think he probably didn't buy into his own rhetoric, several of his staff were known to secretly have jewish roots. It was all a con job to get the peasants whipped into a frenzy.

But I disagree about the jewishness. Obviously jews had certain founding lines. Since the cohen modal haplotype is j2 then you can't say that people who have J2 outside of jewish religion or area are totally unrelated. If you share paternal or materal dna you can't just totally discount your relation to someone, whether they are in cameroon or luxemburg.

E1b is pretty mixed into several groups but if it's in austria it's probably directly jewish anyway. If you see e1b near J2 then you know that's the case. If you see e1b nearby lots of G then it's likely neolithic farmers that have been there a very long time.

There's also possibility of romans but jews were not allowed to do many jobs or hold land when austria came to power and so they tended to go from urban area to urban area of whatever place had an economic boom or fleeing whatever place had expelled them. And of course austria qualifies on that count more than anywhere in its heyday.

Wilhelm
22-08-13, 01:17
It's not jewish nor african, nor recent origin. It's from the Neolithic. This haplogorup E-V13 has been found in early neolithic remains actually.

Noman
22-08-13, 04:09
It's not jewish nor african, nor recent origin. It's from the Neolithic. This haplogorup E-V13 has been found in early neolithic remains actually.

You don't come from the neolithic, that's impossible. It came from africa some time before neolithic but it's heavily found in the levant and wherever you find jews as well. It probably corresponds to the samaritans.

Yaan
22-08-13, 08:41
E-V13 is a European group, there is not a single non European population that has more then 1-2% of it(there was some mix up with the druze) some years ago. E-V13 did not come from Africa, but its father come from Levant. But so did originally the father of all groups, come from Africa. If Hitler was E-V13 he had typcial European group, which originates in the Neolith and spread culture and civilization in Europe,

Noman
22-08-13, 12:41
E-V13 is a European group, there is not a single non European population that has more then 1-2% of it(there was some mix up with the druze) some years ago. E-V13 did not come from Africa, but its father come from Levant. But so did originally the father of all groups, come from Africa. If Hitler was E-V13 he had typcial European group, which originates in the Neolith and spread culture and civilization in Europe,

Which means, it came from...africa.



But so did originally the father of all groups, come from Africa.

So the theory goes, but since there's tons of E in africa I am sure hitler would be upset. Even if it's not his specific E he can trace his daddy back to africa.

Ike
22-08-13, 13:39
Adolf Neolith Hitler ?

Wilhelm
22-08-13, 13:59
Which means, it came from...africa.


So the theory goes, but since there's tons of E in africa I am sure hitler would be upset. Even if it's not his specific E he can trace his daddy back to africa.
You are just twisting things up just because you want to call Hitler an African. Well E-V13 is a European haplogorup, not african since it's rare in Africa , and reaches it's peak in the Balkans, especially in Kosovars with near 40%. Now, if you want to go back in time and say this haplogroup originates in Africa, then all haplogroups do and all of humanity.

Carlos
22-08-13, 14:52
But who can believe today that the Germans or those calls Aryan races, and all fishing Vikings are superior? Top? Do? is to pee with laughter if we all know where we come from and how we have been at some times and other and what we had and no longer have.


Superiors are the good people of noble hearts that are not four doodles all day on the L'Oreal and blue eyes as an argument.


Got a box full of different colored Hamsters you think that red-eye golden hamster are superior to gray, brown or white?


Drop bastard bit me one!

Hitler was a poor man a coward who committed suicide before I cojieran that makes him a coward and he believed one of the words he would have thought if it would not have killed himself like a coward.

Noman
22-08-13, 22:02
You are just twisting things up just because you want to call Hitler an African. Well E-V13 is a European haplogorup, not african since it's rare in Africa , and reaches it's peak in the Balkans, especially in Kosovars with near 40%.


Sorry but this is completely ridiculous. Your haplogroup is your parentage. You can't say you have no relation to somebody with the same clade or a parent clade, it came to be in europe in the neolithic, and can trace to living africans. Now if it came to existence in europe that's another story, like created by god. But it came to europe from levant and before that from africa, it's just fact.



Now, if you want to go back in time and say this haplogroup originates in Africa, then all haplogroups do and all of humanity.
So you are completely inconsistent then? The only thing wrong here is that it assumes there's really an out of africa even which I don't believe is necessarily true. But virtually everyone can pick out people in africa with their same immediate clade and everyone can ultimately trace to someone in africa or for that matter to almost anywhere. No one can say they have zero africa relation, but if you are of E then you have a very quick trace back to africa.

Whereas hitler would probably say that africans are virtually another species. I wonder if he knew his y-DNA and had the info we do today if he's have stil been so crazy, or maybe it would have just put him in another direction.

Knovas
22-08-13, 23:07
┬┐And what if E came to Africa from another source? You're just assuming it is there since the begining of times when it has been discussed here on many occasions that only haplogroups A and B are purely African in origin. The fact is we don't know yet when E became dominant in Africa, specially among Northern Africans. So following your pattern, maybe we find out someday that haplogroup E traces back somewhere out of Africa. Then what? how would this match your assertion?

I think Wilhelm's point makes perfect sense. Y-DNA only tells information about a single ancestor, what really matters is autosomal DNA if the focus is finding clear connections between groups. I don't care about Hitler's "African" genes but, in order to prove it, more than a single marker is definitely required to reach the goal.

Noman
23-08-13, 01:08
I don't assume it's been there from the beginning of time but in the case of E, considering it's the heaviest "black" clade and because of its distribution and long association there I do think it has been in africa and levant a long, long time.

Also, it's untrue this "european" E clade exists only in europe, and untrue it originated there. Natufian DNA (first farmers in levant) has been found to have that exact version, so we know right where it came form.

So what I'm saying is you can deny all humans came out of africa but can't deny being related to the humans in africa with the E clade any more than the people with r1b can deny at least a little relation to the r1b in cameroon. That doesn't mean you are brothers or even cousins but you can't deny it completely, and I am sure hitler would have had a fit. Or from the results here, maybe not, he would claim to be wholly unrelated anyway perhaps.

Ike
23-08-13, 09:25
Haven't we concluded somewhere that Egyptians were E in major, up to Arab conquest?

American Idiot
20-11-13, 13:25
I think this Y-DNA result proves that Hitler's paternal ancestors wore their hair in corn-rolls and love fried chicken n watermelon.
Or maybe that he really was descended from Jesus-Christ himself.....you know both of 'em being Jews n all.......

LOL!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

martiko
03-02-14, 21:13
nobody knows the paternal line of this salopard, since its paternal grandfather is unknown, Hitler is a bastard by his birth.

RobertColumbia
15-04-15, 20:37
To say he had jewish and african roots apart from being untrue it's very sensationalist, childish and unsicentific. Belonging to haplogroup E is not a prove that he had jewish nor african ancestry. This haplogorup is common in the Austria area (about 9 % )

Yes, this. Having y-haplogroup E doesn't mean much except that his far-distant paternal line is more likely to have spent more time in north Africa rather than mesolithic Europe (haplogroup I) or the Eurasian steppes (haplogroup R). Haplogroups aren't races. Many people from Cameroon have R1b. Does that mean that they are Celts?

HQ420832
16-04-15, 21:28
"Having y-haplogroup E doesn't mean much", well, it depends for whom... Don't forget that Hitler was a racist like most of the Germans and Austrians at that time.

Not so long ago, in the US, the powerful 'one-drop' rule dominated thinking about race, in which 'one drop' of non-white blood was sufficient to exclude someone from the white race. And Americans were not Nazis. So we can imagine what such a Y-DNA could have represented for the Nazis....

Haplogroups aren't races for sure, not sufficient to include someone in a group, but for sure sufficient for racists to exclude someone from their group....

So it just means that Hitler's Y-DNA (his paternal line) wouldn't have been considered as "Aryan" by Nazis.... Therefore Hitler would have probably been deported (or at best excluded from the elite) like the other 9% of Austrians and all other Europeans who also belong to that E haplogroup (whatever their autosomal DNA)...

LeBrok
17-04-15, 02:51
"Having y-haplogroup E doesn't mean much", well, it depends for whom... Don't forget that Hitler was a racist like most of the Germans and Austrians at that time.

Not so long ago, in the US, the powerful 'one-drop' rule dominated thinking about race, in which 'one drop' of non-white blood was sufficient to exclude someone from the white race. And Americans were not Nazis. So we can imagine what such a Y-DNA could have represented for the Nazis....

Haplogroups aren't races for sure, not sufficient to include someone in a group, but for sure sufficient for racists to exclude someone from their group....

So it just means that Hitler's Y-DNA (his paternal line) wouldn't have been considered as "Aryan" by Nazis.... Therefore Hitler would have probably been deported (or at best excluded from the elite) like the other 9% of Austrians and all other Europeans who also belong to that E haplogroup (whatever their autosomal DNA)...

Good point HQ.

Maleth
17-04-15, 11:10
"Having y-haplogroup E doesn't mean much", well, it depends for whom... Don't forget that Hitler was a racist like most of the Germans and Austrians at that time.

Not so long ago, in the US, the powerful 'one-drop' rule dominated thinking about race, in which 'one drop' of non-white blood was sufficient to exclude someone from the white race. And Americans were not Nazis. So we can imagine what such a Y-DNA could have represented for the Nazis....

Haplogroups aren't races for sure, not sufficient to include someone in a group, but for sure sufficient for racists to exclude someone from their group....

So it just means that Hitler's Y-DNA (his paternal line) wouldn't have been considered as "Aryan" by Nazis.... Therefore Hitler would have probably been deported (or at best excluded from the elite) like the other 9% of Austrians and all other Europeans who also belong to that E haplogroup (whatever their autosomal DNA)...

I watched an interview a holocaust surviver of a concentration camp. The official kept asking the people with fair complexion and blue eyes, "are you really Jewish?". This means that the Nazi understanding of race was simply how they looked. Of course DNA was not known at the time so I would hardly imagine that they would have acted accorded to the alphabetical letter it produced as to current classifications.

Angela
17-04-15, 14:10
I watched an interview a holocaust surviver of a concentration camp. The official kept asking the people with fair complexion and blue eyes, "are you really Jewish?". This means that the Nazi understanding of race was simply how they looked. Of course DNA was not known at the time so I would hardly imagine that they would have acted accorded to the alphabetical letter it produced as to current classifications.

Just more proof of what morons they were...

Did you ever see the movie Europa, Europa? A young Jewish boy survives by pretending to be German. He winds up in a prestigious Hitler Youth School, where, after they measure his skull and face he is pronounced a perfect "Aryan" specimen!:grin: It's based on an actual life story.

So much for racial science.

Yetos
17-04-15, 15:10
I watched an interview a holocaust surviver of a concentration camp. The official kept asking the people with fair complexion and blue eyes, "are you really Jewish?". This means that the Nazi understanding of race was simply how they looked. Of course DNA was not known at the time so I would hardly imagine that they would have acted accorded to the alphabetical letter it produced as to current classifications.

Global conspiracy say that Mengele (angel of Death) knew many about DNA, and many as the clone production are after his lost notebooks,
although Global conspiracy

Maleth
17-04-15, 15:15
Just more proof of what morons they were...

Did you ever see the movie Europa, Europa? A young Jewish boy survives by pretending to be German. He winds up in a prestigious Hitler Youth School, where, after they measure his skull and face he is pronounced a perfect "Aryan" specimen!:grin: It's based on an actual life story.

So much for racial science.

I haven't watched it Angela, but I am pretty sure that is what mattered most for people with such a mindset and not so much a dna reading. Having said that I am not sure why they looked down on the Poles so much and exterminated so many of them as they should have filled the "Aryan" criteria in my opinion, but maybe there were other reasons for it to happen :sad-2:

John Doe
17-04-15, 15:43
I haven't watched it Angela, but I am pretty sure that is what mattered most for people with such a mindset and not so much a dna reading. Having said that I am not sure why they looked down on the Poles so much and exterminated so many of them as they should have filled the "Aryan" criteria in my opinion, but maybe there were other reasons for it to happen :sad-2:

The Poles of the Gorals in southern Poland and northern Slovakia were considered German by the Nazis. Many Polish children with fair features were snatched from their parents and raised as Germans.

Angela
17-04-15, 16:12
I haven't watched it Angela, but I am pretty sure that is what mattered most for people with such a mindset and not so much a dna reading. Having said that I am not sure why they looked down on the Poles so much and exterminated so many of them as they should have filled the "Aryan" criteria in my opinion, but maybe there were other reasons for it to happen :sad-2:

Here is a link about it...it's really good.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Europa_Europa

I don't know if this will work for you...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JqMBNCo7LPE

The Nazis classified Slavs as subhumans. Plans had been drawn up to exterminate them once they finished with the Jews and other "undesirables".

Part of their stated goal was to take all of that farmland so that Germans could expand in terms of population. The Fascist powers in general were big on increasing the birthrate, which had already begun to fall in Europe.

It's true, as John Doe said, that exceptions were sometimes made for blonde, blue eyed Poles. It just goes to show they really understood nothing about genetics.

They did have some rudimentary idea about autosomal Dna sort of "washing out" after a certain amount of time. I think the cut off in most cases for Jewish ancestry was that you were considered a Jew if one of your grandparents was Jewish.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mischling

So theoretically, I suppose, if you were 1/8 Jewish you could live. If you were 1/4 Jewish, blonde or not you died. Ironically, as we know from all the work done at 23andme, in the case of Ashkenazim, you can still see the signature even at 1/32, because they were so bottlenecked.

Weren't there rumors that Reinhard Heydrich had a Jewish great grandparent? It actually wouldn't surprise me at all. I know a lawyer of German Jewish descent who looks like his doppelganger. He also comes from a very musical family. The physical similarity has been pointed out to him, much to his dismay.
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/a/a5/Bundesarchiv_Bild_146-1969-054-16,_Reinhard_Heydrich.jpg/166px-Bundesarchiv_Bild_146-1969-054-16,_Reinhard_Heydrich.jpg

Anyway, I still don't think Hitler would have been pleased with his yDna haplogroup designation. We know a lot more about Dna nowadays, and I've still seen racist comments about E-V13 bearers. Some kinds of lunacy refuse to die.

epoch
17-04-15, 19:44
Here is a link about it...it's really good.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Europa_Europa

I don't know if this will work for you...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JqMBNCo7LPE

The Nazis classified Slavs as subhumans. Plans had been drawn up to exterminate them once they finished with the Jews and other "undesirables".

Part of their stated goal was to take all of that farmland so that Germans could expand in terms of population. The Fascist powers in general were big on increasing the birthrate, which had already begun to fall in Europe.

It's true, as John Doe said, that exceptions were sometimes made for blonde, blue eyed Poles. It just goes to show they really understood nothing about genetics.

They did have some rudimentary idea about autosomal Dna sort of "washing out" after a certain amount of time. I think the cut off in most cases for Jewish ancestry was that you were considered a Jew if one of your grandparents was Jewish.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mischling

So theoretically, I suppose, if you were 1/8 Jewish you could live. If you were 1/4 Jewish, blonde or not you died. Ironically, as we know from all the work done at 23andme, in the case of Ashkenazim, you can still see the signature even at 1/32, because they were so bottlenecked.

Weren't there rumors that Reinhard Heydrich had a Jewish great grandparent? It actually wouldn't surprise me at all. I know a lawyer of German Jewish descent who looks like his doppelganger. He also comes from a very musical family. The physical similarity has been pointed out to him, much to his dismay.
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/a/a5/Bundesarchiv_Bild_146-1969-054-16,_Reinhard_Heydrich.jpg/166px-Bundesarchiv_Bild_146-1969-054-16,_Reinhard_Heydrich.jpg

Anyway, I still don't think Hitler would have been pleased with his yDna haplogroup designation. We know a lot more about Dna nowadays, and I've still seen racist comments about E-V13 bearers. Some kinds of lunacy refuse to die.

One of the most interesting things I heard is that the German navy had high officers that were Jewish. From what I have heard from a personal story the German navy fiercely resisted purges and a number of these officers maintained in office even during the war, refusing to break their vow to defend Germany. I found a story online which seems similar:

http://www.avalanchepress.com/admiral_lutjens.php

Angela
17-04-15, 21:12
One of the most interesting things I heard is that the German navy had high officers that were Jewish. From what I have heard from a personal story the German navy fiercely resisted purges and a number of these officers maintained in office even during the war, refusing to break their vow to defend Germany. I found a story online which seems similar:

http://www.avalanchepress.com/admiral_lutjens.php

Very interesting, Epoch. I didn't know that, although I knew that Hitler had no great love for the German Navy. Didn't he always believe that Admiral Canaris was dealing with the Allies behind his back?

I certainly hope that Lutgens didn't know about what was going on in the camps and the fields of eastern Europe. Otherwise, I don't know how he slept at night knowing that people of his grandmother's blood were being slaughtered there and he was fighting for the country that conceived and was carrying it out.

Well, I don't know how any of the ones who knew of it slept at night but that's another issue.

So short slighted in so many ways. I'm sure there were any number of German Jews who were very nationalistic and would have supported Germany if they hadn't been excluded from the society and marked for slaughter, although I'm sure the numbers were lower than in Italy.

One of the less well known stories of Italian Fascism is how many of the early fascists were Italian Jews, and how long many of them held on to their beliefs...to the moment of their own deaths, in some cases. Delusions die hard.

John Doe
17-04-15, 22:03
Here is a link about it...it's really good.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Europa_Europa

I don't know if this will work for you...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JqMBNCo7LPE

The Nazis classified Slavs as subhumans. Plans had been drawn up to exterminate them once they finished with the Jews and other "undesirables".

Part of their stated goal was to take all of that farmland so that Germans could expand in terms of population. The Fascist powers in general were big on increasing the birthrate, which had already begun to fall in Europe.

It's true, as John Doe said, that exceptions were sometimes made for blonde, blue eyed Poles. It just goes to show they really understood nothing about genetics.

They did have some rudimentary idea about autosomal Dna sort of "washing out" after a certain amount of time. I think the cut off in most cases for Jewish ancestry was that you were considered a Jew if one of your grandparents was Jewish.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mischling

So theoretically, I suppose, if you were 1/8 Jewish you could live. If you were 1/4 Jewish, blonde or not you died. Ironically, as we know from all the work done at 23andme, in the case of Ashkenazim, you can still see the signature even at 1/32, because they were so bottlenecked.

Weren't there rumors that Reinhard Heydrich had a Jewish great grandparent? It actually wouldn't surprise me at all. I know a lawyer of German Jewish descent who looks like his doppelganger. He also comes from a very musical family. The physical similarity has been pointed out to him, much to his dismay.
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/a/a5/Bundesarchiv_Bild_146-1969-054-16,_Reinhard_Heydrich.jpg/166px-Bundesarchiv_Bild_146-1969-054-16,_Reinhard_Heydrich.jpg

Anyway, I still don't think Hitler would have been pleased with his yDna haplogroup designation. We know a lot more about Dna nowadays, and I've still seen racist comments about E-V13 bearers. Some kinds of lunacy refuse to die.

I just watched the whole movie, left me quite speechless. I listen to Israeli news from time to time, and I heard that this bloke participated in the state ceremony of the Holocaust memorial day there a couple of days ago. Apparently the Nazis didn't see him as "Pure Nordic Aryan" but as so called "East Baltic Aryan" due to admixture of the ethnic Germans of the east with Slavs, a waste of time to meddle on that type of BS IMO. After the war, he reunited with his brother, and they moved to Palestine where he served in the Haganah in the 1948 war.

Angela
17-04-15, 22:17
I just watched the whole movie, left me quite speechless. I listen to Israeli news from time to time, and I heard that this bloke participated in the state ceremony of the Holocaust memorial day there a couple of days ago. Apparently the Nazis didn't see him as "Pure Nordic Aryan" but as so called "East Baltic Aryan" due to admixture of the ethnic Germans of the east with Slavs, a waste of time to meddle on that type of BS IMO. After the war, he reunited with his brother, and they moved to Palestine where he served in the Haganah in the 1948 war.

The movie made a huge impression on me, so much so that I remember whole parts of it years and years after first having seen it. He was and is an extraordinary person. Truth can indeed be stranger than fiction can't it?

I have to say that stories like this come to mind when I read things like the threads over at 23andme about how autosomal Dna can be used to "track" Ashkenazi ancestry even to the 1/32 level, which can still show up as approximately 5% Ashkenazi. What if the kind of antisemitism that seems to be making a comeback in certain parts of Europe was adopted by a political party that came to power. Now their evil would have better tools at its disposal. They wouldn't have to rely on public records or even ambiguous y Dna signatures.

Maleth
18-04-15, 09:27
Here is a link about it...it's really good.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Europa_Europa

I don't know if this will work for you...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JqMBNCo7LPE

The Nazis classified Slavs as subhumans. Plans had been drawn up to exterminate them once they finished with the Jews and other "undesirables".

It did thanks, looks very interesting. It seems I can even watch the movie online. I will do it when more relaxed. Wow Slavs as subhumans?. Not sure if there is any logical understanding for this type of weird sociological behaviors (which apparently seems to exist in many other communities. (Rwanda genocides?)). In the meantime I classify it as pure madness.


Anyway, I still don't think Hitler would have been pleased with his yDna haplogroup designation. We know a lot more about Dna nowadays, and I've still seen racist comments about E-V13 bearers. Some kinds of lunacy refuse to die.

Indeed, lots of undertones and read between the lines type of sentiments ignoring the human timeline and facts to a more shallow 'our clan against yours' type of arguments. I understand it can be sad, but it can also be funny and exposes a type of crude intellect that can hardly be taken seriously.........unless as you say it would be nurtured by some head of state with lots of power. May goodness forbids :distrust:. However if Hitler was aware of today's knowledge I believe he would find a good way around it.

The Irony is that I believe the Nazis had some kind of fascination for the 'E Sub humans folks?' that built the great pyramids and such a sophisticated culture. It just gets more complicated :thinking:

Maleth
18-04-15, 09:33
The Poles of the Gorals in southern Poland and northern Slovakia were considered German by the Nazis. Many Polish children with fair features were snatched from their parents and raised as Germans.

Such a complex mind set and situation! :sad-2:

Rethel
25-04-15, 13:11
The Poles of the Gorals in southern Poland and northern Slovakia were considered German by the Nazis.

But it was more political than rasist, because Gorals are mostly in dinaric type :laughing:
And only few of them have had interest in that proposal called Gorallenvolk.
After the war, most of them were kill for treason.

Rethel
25-04-15, 13:15
One of the most interesting things I heard is that the German navy had high officers that were Jewish. From what I have heard from a personal story the German navy fiercely resisted purges and a number of these officers maintained in office even during the war, refusing to break their vow to defend Germany. I found a story online which seems similar:

In wehrmacht faught many thousands
of Jews, probably even 150.000. This
is a large number of people. And they
were often in NSDAP too...

John Doe
25-04-15, 14:46
In wehrmacht faught many thousands
of Jews, probably even 150.000. This
is a large number of people. And they
were often in NSDAP too...

What you mean is that at least 150,000 Jews fought in the Wehrmacht? That is partially accurate, at least a 150,000 soldiers in the Wehrmacht had partial Jewish ancestry, but no more than half, only 1 or 2 grandparents, the full Jews or those with 3 Jewish grandparents were kicked out of the army by 1935, with the institution of the racial laws.

John Doe
25-04-15, 14:48
But it was more political than rasist, because Gorals are mostly in dinaric type :laughing:
And only few of them have interest in that proposal called Gorallenvolk.
After the war, most of them were kill for treason.

I'm not suggesting this is accurate, the Nazis got many things wrong for political reasons. Another good example was when they claimed the Croats weren't Slavic but Germanic or Iranic because they were on the side of Germany.

Diurpaneus
25-04-15, 15:49
1)But it was more political than rasist, because Gorals are mostly in dinaric type :laughing:
And only few of them have interest in that proposal called Gorallenvolk.

2)After the war, most of them were kill for treason.

1)The Moravian Vlachs.
Note:even the Devil is Dinaric.

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/0/06/Valach_1787.jpg

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xkbus8kihEo

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=306tgCa4zaA


Vlad:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:VladOriginal.jpg

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Vlad_Tepes_002.jpg


Seriously now, they are "devils" only in the innocent way;as you said it ,they got caught in this shit.



2)Of course they were killed,but now they're fine,right?

According to the Polish historians there were over 500 Vlach villages in 1600, spreading along the S(Carpathian) Poland,using Lex Antiqua Valachorum.
They settled in the 12th century,coming mostly from Transylvania ,but also from Hungary,because the Polish royalty knew very well of their bravery and used them as border guards.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vlach_law

Angela
25-04-15, 16:55
No, 150,000 "Jews", as defined by the Germans, did not serve in the German forces, even if you accept Professor Riggs' conclusions at face value. They would have been Mischlinge of one degree or another.

The exact definitions and standards can be found in the sources cited below. Generally speaking, if you were 1/2 Jewish and had ever participated in Jewish communal life or even if you had converted but had married someone who was Jewish, you were still a Jew and subject to all the persecutions that would follow. Half Jews who were converts married to non Jews and one quarter Jews were mishlinge of one sort or another. Of course, the Nazis never let racial purity stand in the way of money, so you could bribe your way out in certain instances.

See Wiki article on Mischling:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mischling

Mischling Test:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mischling_Test

See also:
http://www.owlnet.rice.edu/~rar4619/nuremburg.html

There were only about 200,000 Mischlings in total in Germany according to some estimates I've seen, which would include women, children, and men above conscription age, so how could 150,000 "part Jews" in total have served? If the number is accurate, perhaps it also contains crypto Jews and perhaps also people with 1/8 or even less Jewish ancestry.

See article on Bryan Mark Riggs:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bryan_Mark_Rigg

"Other scholars, like Richard J. Evans (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Richard_J._Evans), history professor in Cambridge (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cambridge), and Omer Bartov (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Omer_Bartov), history professor at Brown University (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brown_University), consider the titles of Rigg's books, such as Hitler's Jewish Soldiers, misleading, because the books are not about Jews as the term is commonly understood, but in almost all cases about Mischlinge (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mischlinge) ("half-"Jews and "quarter-"Jews) as defined by the Nuremberg laws (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuremberg_laws) but not according to Jewish religious law (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Who_is_a_Jew).[13] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bryan_Mark_Rigg#cite_note-13) The few exceptions, like Shlomo Perl (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Europa_Europa) (see above), were crypto-Jews hiding behind 'Aryan' assumed identities."

Even half Jews who had ever participated in Jewish communal life, or even half Jews who were converts but had married a Jew, were classified as Jews for the purposes of the Nuremberg Laws.

Rethel
25-04-15, 23:38
What you mean is that at least 150,000 Jews fought in the Wehrmacht? That is partially accurate, at least a 150,000 soldiers in the Wehrmacht had partial Jewish ancestry, but no more than half, only 1 or 2 grandparents, the full Jews or those with 3 Jewish grandparents were kicked out of the army by 1935, with the institution of the racial laws.

Something like that, but depending how and who define jewishness
they probably all were (in some definition) viewing as a pure jews.
But for nazis, if it was necessary, they could be 100% jew in one
night and go to extermination.


According to the Polish historians there were over 500 Vlach villages in 1600, spreading along the S(Carpathian) Poland,using Lex Antiqua Valachorum.
They settled in the 12th century,coming mostly from Transylvania ,but also from Hungary,because the Polish royalty knew very well of their bravery and used them as border guards.

This is probably to much general saying.
Villages established according to vallachian law, doesn't mean that they were vallachian as ethnicity.
Most of them were probably ruthenian, polish and in some cases could be even german.
But of course, some of them were vallachian too.



I'm not suggesting this is accurate, the Nazis got many things wrong for political reasons. Another good example was when they claimed the Croats weren't Slavic but Germanic or Iranic because they were on the side of Germany.

But better case was with Japans, Hindu and muslims...:smile:

Diurpaneus
27-04-15, 13:56
This is probably to much general saying.
Villages established according to vallachian law, doesn't mean that they were vallachian as ethnicity.
Most of them were probably ruthenian, polish and in some cases could be even german.
But of course, some of them were vallachian too.



Fair enough,the Vlachs were not the only inhabitants of the area.
Still,this figure(the article clearly states,"Romanian villages") is quite impressive.

"Pe la 1600, actele poloneze aminteau existenta a peste 500 de sate romanesti"

http://www.gazetademaramures.ro/goralii-poporul-pierdut-7684

Translation:"The Polish papers from 1600 recorded over 500 Romanian villages..."

Salmon
27-04-15, 19:56
They have to find his DNA. Napoleon's nephew was allegedly the product of adultery. His brother was cuckolded. Napoleon is believed to be an E but his alleged "patrilineal" nephew is an I.

E is not Jewish. The original Jews were allegedly Canaanites who were likely a J dominated people. Both Ashkenazi and Sephardic Jews are J haplogroup dominant.

IJK haplogroups are all closely related. They lack the DE mutations found on isolated Indian Ocean/Pacific Islanders and E haplogroup Africans.

The original African belonged to the A and B haplogroups. C haplogroup ended up in Asia and mutated. Those with the DE "YAP" mutations migrated back to Africa and became dominant.

Those with the IJK mutations share a male common ancestor they do not share with DE males.

DE males were off doing their own thing while IJK were doing their thing in Eurasia. Then the K haplogroups from IJK went all over the world. The K haplogroups spread into western Europe, East Asia, and the Americas. The K haplogroups are the most global.

Where did E's among Jews come from? Assyrians and Middle Eastern people were notorious for taking slaves and kidnapping people. One common practice of agricultural peoples was domesticating animals and enslaving people. All through Eurasia, slavery was common. Mesopotamians did it, Chinese did it, Japanese did it. The Q haplogroup dominated MesoAmericans enslaved people in the Aztec, Mayan, and Incan civilizations.

The E1b1b could have been indirectly bred into prominence in North Africa by Eurasian invaders. The E1b1b could have been the descendents of African men who
adapted to Eurasian invaders and managed to find a niche in the imported Eurasian world either by surviving slavery or getting good enough at what Eurasians did.

The Jews are not the only ones with populations of E haplogroup males. They're found in pockets in Europe. The highest concentrations are found among populations in Kosovo and Greece where they could be above 30% of all males. Hitler could be descended from a minority amongst Kosovars if he was an E.

Maleth
01-05-15, 19:37
They have to find his DNA. Napoleon's nephew was allegedly the product of adultery. His brother was cuckolded. Napoleon is believed to be an E but his alleged "patrilineal" nephew is an I.

E is not Jewish. The original Jews were allegedly Canaanites who were likely a J dominated people. Both Ashkenazi and Sephardic Jews are J haplogroup dominant.

Cananites covered an area from Modern Lebanon down to present day Israel. What gives you the idea that there were no E haplogroups at the time? Natufians inhabited the area prior to other civilizations that were formed later absorbing peoples that were already in the area for thousands of years before



Where did E's among Jews come from? Assyrians and Middle Eastern people were notorious for taking slaves and kidnapping people. One common practice of agricultural peoples was domesticating animals and enslaving people. All through Eurasia, slavery was common. Mesopotamians did it, Chinese did it, Japanese did it. The Q haplogroup dominated MesoAmericans enslaved people in the Aztec, Mayan, and Incan civilizations.

No need to think slavery all the time. Its most probable that E haplogroup was in the area before anyone started some kind of slave trade. You need to become familiar with timespans and time of haplogroups mutations to be able to compare with archelogical evidense and written history ;)


The E1b1b could have been indirectly bred into prominence in North Africa by Eurasian invaders. The E1b1b could have been the descendents of African men who
adapted to Eurasian invaders and managed to find a niche in the imported Eurasian world either by surviving slavery or getting good enough at what Eurasians did.

Slavery again?


The Jews are not the only ones with populations of E haplogroup males. They're found in pockets in Europe. The highest concentrations are found among populations in Kosovo and Greece where they could be above 30% of all males. Hitler could be descended from a minority amongst Kosovars if he was an E.

Well some Kosovars could have migrated to other parts of Europe some 7000 years ago :). Kosovo is a name given for a region created by the Ottomans in the 1800's for a plain that was known with the same name.

You are making too many illogical assumptions. Get to know more about the subject, there is much more to learn ;)

Hauteville
24-05-15, 10:45
Ahahah that video is wonderful


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1ZVeAAUaD0M

Maleth
24-05-15, 12:06
[QUOTE=Hauteville;457709]Ahahah that video is wonderful

Haha it is a good one. However (bit out of subject I know) this is my favorite from the funny series of vids.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jKqxJ6Z8tyI[/URL]

:grin:

Fluffy
29-05-15, 18:10
Ahahah that video is wonderful


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1ZVeAAUaD0M


lol this video is gold.

Fluffy
29-05-15, 18:15
Here is a link about it...it's really good.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Europa_Europa

I don't know if this will work for you...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JqMBNCo7LPE

The Nazis classified Slavs as subhumans. Plans had been drawn up to exterminate them once they finished with the Jews and other "undesirables".

Part of their stated goal was to take all of that farmland so that Germans could expand in terms of population. The Fascist powers in general were big on increasing the birthrate, which had already begun to fall in Europe.

It's true, as John Doe said, that exceptions were sometimes made for blonde, blue eyed Poles. It just goes to show they really understood nothing about genetics.

They did have some rudimentary idea about autosomal Dna sort of "washing out" after a certain amount of time. I think the cut off in most cases for Jewish ancestry was that you were considered a Jew if one of your grandparents was Jewish.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mischling

So theoretically, I suppose, if you were 1/8 Jewish you could live. If you were 1/4 Jewish, blonde or not you died. Ironically, as we know from all the work done at 23andme, in the case of Ashkenazim, you can still see the signature even at 1/32, because they were so bottlenecked.

Weren't there rumors that Reinhard Heydrich had a Jewish great grandparent? It actually wouldn't surprise me at all. I know a lawyer of German Jewish descent who looks like his doppelganger. He also comes from a very musical family. The physical similarity has been pointed out to him, much to his dismay.
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/a/a5/Bundesarchiv_Bild_146-1969-054-16,_Reinhard_Heydrich.jpg/166px-Bundesarchiv_Bild_146-1969-054-16,_Reinhard_Heydrich.jpg

Anyway, I still don't think Hitler would have been pleased with his yDna haplogroup designation. We know a lot more about Dna nowadays, and I've still seen racist comments about E-V13 bearers. Some kinds of lunacy refuse to die.

There were rumors about Heydrich being part Jewish.

John Doe
29-05-15, 19:30
There were rumors about Heydrich being part Jewish.
True, whether or not twas the case, it explains his fanatical brutality, so much so that after his assassination by British trained Czech agents, the operation which saw the mass deportation to Treblinka was named "Aktion Reinhard" in his memory.

Fluffy
29-05-15, 20:02
True, whether or not twas the case, it explains his fanatical brutality, so much so that after his assassination by British trained Czech agents, the operation which saw the mass deportation to Treblinka was named "Aktion Reinhard" in his memory.

Didn't know that. Interesting. He was brutal though. Very Anti-Semitic and one of the major players in the final solution as he attended and was the head of the Wannsee conference.

khufu
03-06-15, 13:20
there Difference between a Nazi and new nazi

new nazi Based on racism nothing else

And ye all the information you take from enemies of Hitler

Filled your heads of the information false

The man has errors such as other

But informative article could benefit from his enemies

Talk about the colors does not help with Hitler

Italy was the ally

Russia was an enemy

LeBrok
03-06-15, 16:46
there Difference between a Nazi and new nazi

new nazi Based on racism nothing else

And ye all the information you take from enemies of Hitler

Filled your heads of the information false

The man has errors such as other

But informative article could benefit from his enemies

Talk about the colors does not help with Hitler

Italy was the ally

Russia was an enemy
You must have most sever form of ADHD ever. It seems you can't keep attention long enough to finish a decent sentence. Never mind sentences creating a logical argument. I doubt that anyone understood your point. Try again.

Fluffy
03-06-15, 19:18
You must have most sever form of ADHD ever. It seems you can't keep attention long enough to finish a decent sentence. Never mind sentences creating a logical argument. I doubt that anyone understood your point. Try again.

lol this is true.

Salmon
29-06-15, 17:55
Cananites covered an area from Modern Lebanon down to present day Israel. What gives you the idea that there were no E haplogroups at the time? Natufians inhabited the area prior to other civilizations that were formed later absorbing peoples that were already in the area for thousands of years before


No need to think slavery all the time. Its most probable that E haplogroup was in the area before anyone started some kind of slave trade. You need to become familiar with timespans and time of haplogroups mutations to be able to compare with archelogical evidense and written history ;)



Slavery again?



Well some Kosovars could have migrated to other parts of Europe some 7000 years ago :). Kosovo is a name given for a region created by the Ottomans in the 1800's for a plain that was known with the same name.

You are making too many illogical assumptions. Get to know more about the subject, there is much more to learn ;)



The E haplogroup is characterized by their YAP mutations which are found in the DE macro-haplogroup. Most populations with a high percentage of E or D y-chromosomes live in Africa and Indian ocean. A percentage of Ainu and some people deep in the mountains of Tibet have these mutations, too.

The E haplogroup is rare outside of Africa and Island populations south of Asia in the Indian ocean. The ancestor of most E haplogroup peoples were likely adapted to hotter, humid climates, and possibly aquatic lifestyles.

Why do I think that slavery was possible?

The E haplogroup is not found deep in Central Asia where the origins of civilization likely sprouted. Y-haplogroups with YAP mutations are not found in high concentrations where wolves were first domesticated and where the earliest crops were domesticated in Asia.

People in central Asia could have evolved aggression to other hominids and humans because of their proximity to Neanderthals and other large hominid species.

Would a group of Eurasians who settled in ancient Canaan and had with them dogs, crops, and aggression integrated a population of E haplogroup peoples they probably couldn't communicate with?

Angela
29-06-15, 18:00
The E haplogroup is characterized by their YAP mutations which are found in the DE macro-haplogroup. Most populations with a high percentage of E or D y-chromosomes live in Africa and Indian ocean. A percentage of Ainu and some people deep in the mountains of Tibet have these mutations, too.

The E haplogroup is rare outside of Africa and Island populations south of Asia in the Indian ocean. The ancestor of most E haplogroup peoples were likely adapted to hotter, humid climates, and possibly aquatic lifestyles.

Why do I think that slavery was possible?

The E haplogroup is not found deep in Central Asia where the origins of civilization likely sprouted. Y-haplogroups with YAP mutations are not found in high concentrations where wolves were first domesticated and where the earliest crops were domesticated in Asia.

People in central Asia could have evolved aggression to other hominids and humans because of their proximity to Neanderthals and other large hominid species.

Would a group of Eurasians who settled in ancient Canaan and had with them dogs, crops, and aggression integrated a population of E haplogroup peoples they probably couldn't communicate with?

Please use the search engine for yDna "E". It has now been found in Neolithic Europe.

Salmon
29-06-15, 18:15
Please use the search engine for yDna "E". It has now been found in Neolithic Europe.

What exactly am I looking for? Neolithic is period between 10000BC and 4000 BC. That doesn't mean much. They would have encountered populations from Asia having dogs, goats, wheat, legumes, and oxen who they couldn't speak to and were thirsty to claim land.

These populations may not have been integrated but wiped out by aggressive Eurasians.

I'd like to believe there was ancient altruism but ancient peoples were kind of violent.

EDIT:
Found an article here in Eupedia. E haplogroup y-chromosomes are not found in Neolithic farmers. There is an entry about some G haplogroup farmers integrating a small populations of E haplogroup males in Italy but they did not belong to E1b1b. These integrated male lines could have gone extinct.

LeBrok
29-06-15, 19:28
I'd like to believe there was ancient altruism but ancient peoples were kind of violent. Have you been on vacation when they taught First and Second WW, or Soviet Revolution, or Chinese or Khmer Rouge, or recent Uganda or ISIS terror etc. We are so peaceful, not alike the ancient barbarians.
EDIT:

Found an article here in Eupedia. E haplogroup y-chromosomes are not found in Neolithic farmers. So articles were written few years ago, now we found it. Perhaps you want to argue recent scientific papers about their mistake?
Please read them and spend few days re-evaluating your wiled hypotheses, then we can talk again.

Salmon
29-06-15, 19:32
Have you been on vacation when they taught First and Second WW, or Soviet Revolution, or Chinese or Khmer Rouge, or recent Uganda or ISIS terror etc. We are so peaceful, not alike the ancient barbarians.
EDIT:
So articles were written few years ago, now we found it. Perhaps you want to argue recent scientific papers about their mistake?
Please read them and spend few days re-evaluating your wiled hypotheses, then we can talk again.

Okay. Where are these papers?

Can anyone provide link or reference? From what I've been reading it was haplogroup G that had a dominant presence in neolithic times.

In ancient times slavery was the norm. Farmers were territorial, they still are. Throughout history agricultural peoples have treated hunter-gatherers as pests. Ancient times were brutal. Mesopotamians had slaves. In the earliest records of mankind, slavery was being documented.

Lots of people are defensive about the E haplogroup y-chromosome issue.

E1b1b is apparently did not develop from E haplogroups that could have been present in Neolithic Europe.

LeBrok
29-06-15, 19:58
Okay. Where are these papers?

Can anyone provide link or reference? From what I've been reading it was haplogroup G that had a dominant presence in neolithic times.

In ancient times slavery was the norm. Farmers were territorial, they still are. Throughout history agricultural peoples have treated hunter-gatherers as pests. Ancient times were brutal. Mesopotamians had slaves. In the earliest records of mankind, slavery was being documented.

Lots of people are defensive about the E haplogroup y-chromosome issue.

E1b1b is apparently did not develop from E haplogroups that could have been present in Neolithic Europe.

here is one:http://www.eupedia.com/forum/threads/31362-Neolithic-western-Carpathian-Basin-356-pages

The truth is that probably no major haplogroup developed in Europe, except maybe I? We don't have enough data yet to conclude true European haplogroup. They all might be from immigrants.
Also keep in mind that Y chromosome is just 2% of whole human genome and have very little to do if any with how people behave. It is mostly about differentiation between sexes.

Salmon
29-06-15, 20:55
here is one:http://www.eupedia.com/forum/threads/31362-Neolithic-western-Carpathian-Basin-356-pages

The truth is that probably no major haplogroup developed in Europe, except maybe I? We don't have enough data yet to conclude true European haplogroup. They all might be from immigrants.
Also keep in mind that Y chromosome is just 2% of whole human genome and have very little to do if any with how people behave. It is mostly about differentiation between sexes.

The area in question is in Hungary.

This researcher concludes that the subjects in the Carpathian Basin originated in the Near East and hunter gatherers had negligible contribution to the maternal and paternal gene pool. They were rather homogeneous. Early Neolithic people there belonged to G, F, and I. During them middle/late neolithic period foreign populations moved in. Three new y-chromosome haplogroups were seen... J, C, and E1b1b at certain sites. 5000BC to 4000BC.


32 individuals tested. Two remains had E1b1b out of 32 total. There were found at 2 sites. 1 at Sopot and 1 at Lengyel. These 2 sites had the most "diverse" bodies lying around. The E1b1b y-haplogroup originates in Africa and author of the paper makes note of that.

All the samples are dated between 5790 BC and 3900 BC.

E1b1b remains were found among cultures that lived between 5000-4800 BC and 5000-4300BC.

According to other data and other research the author of the paper concludes that the E1b1b did not have a significant presence in the area. The neolithic farmers were of Asian/Eurasian origin.

Nothing in the study contradicts what I wrote before.

LeBrok
29-06-15, 23:45
The area in question is in Hungary.

This researcher concludes that the subjects in the Carpathian Basin originated in the Near East and hunter gatherers had negligible contribution to the maternal and paternal gene pool. They were rather homogeneous. Early Neolithic people there belonged to G, F, and I. During them middle/late neolithic period foreign populations moved in. Three new y-chromosome haplogroups were seen... J, C, and E1b1b at certain sites. 5000BC to 4000BC.


32 individuals tested. Two remains had E1b1b out of 32 total. There were found at 2 sites. 1 at Sopot and 1 at Lengyel. These 2 sites had the most "diverse" bodies lying around. The E1b1b y-haplogroup originates in Africa and author of the paper makes note of that.

All the samples are dated between 5790 BC and 3900 BC.

E1b1b remains were found among cultures that lived between 5000-4800 BC and 5000-4300BC.

According to other data and other research the author of the paper concludes that the E1b1b did not have a significant presence in the area. The neolithic farmers were of Asian/Eurasian origin.

Nothing in the study contradicts what I wrote before.

Technically it doesn't. My point was that E was found in Neolithic Europe. I had a feeling that you hoped that it wasn't.

Edit:
Actually you did say the contradiction, but in different thread:

They were not in Europe before 4900-3000 BC.
http://www.eupedia.com/forum/threads/30376-Was-E1b1-very-first-inhabitants-in-Europe-42-000-YPD-or-Saami-U5-haplogroup?p=461211&viewfull=1#post461211

Salmon
30-06-15, 00:27
Technically it doesn't. My point was that E was found in Neolithic Europe. I had a feeling that you hoped that it wasn't.

Edit:
Actually you did say the contradiction, but in different thread:

http://www.eupedia.com/forum/threads/30376-Was-E1b1-very-first-inhabitants-in-Europe-42-000-YPD-or-Saami-U5-haplogroup?p=461211&viewfull=1#post461211

They were not there in the early Neolithic. This is no evidence of a sizable population, just 2 bodies found in Hungary that could have come from anywhere. They could have been taken there by J haplogroup dominated groups that wandered there from North Africa and the Middle East.


Eurasian crops and livestock had reached the Middle East and North Africa prior to 5000BC. Eurasians invaded North Africa 12,000-10,000 years ago, long before these people in the Carpathian Basin lived.

The Eurasian agricultural practices and animals were important in Ancient Egyptian culture. They grew wheat, barley, Eurasian legumes, and they had dogs (which originated in Eurasia). Before the Egyptians there were likely Eurasians farming the land with their Eurasian crops and livestock.

If Eurasians walked into Africa 12,000-10,000 B.C. they had a long time to set up routes and networks into Eurasia. There could have been trade or interaction between the people in the Carpathian Basin and people in other places. Native Africans had 5000 years to learn Eurasian ways. By the time 5000-3000 BC came along, some E1b1b haplogroup males could have hitched a ride with a caravan.

Maleth
30-06-15, 01:05
They were not there in the early Neolithic. This is no evidence of a sizable population, just 2 bodies found in Hungary that could have come from anywhere.

I dont think that thousands of skeletons have been studied so far :grin:


They could have been taken there by J haplogroup dominated groups that wandered there from North Africa and the Middle East.

Like hoovered the caves and fed the dogs :grin:



Eurasian crops and livestock had reached the Middle East and North Africa prior to 5000BC. Eurasians invaded North Africa 12,000-10,000 years ago, long before these people in the Carpathian Basin lived.

How interesting.


If Eurasians walked into Africa 12,000-10,000 B.C. they had a long time to set up routes and networks into Eurasia. There could have been trade or interaction between the people in the Carpathian Basin and people in other places. Native Africans had 5000 years to learn Eurasian ways. By the time 5000-3000 BC came along, some E1b1b haplogroup males could have hitched a ride with a caravan.

or maybe got a free ride on the train...you never know

LeBrok
30-06-15, 01:11
They were not there in the early Neolithic. This is no evidence of a sizable population, just 2 bodies found in Hungary that could have come from anywhere. They could have been taken there by J haplogroup dominated groups that wandered there from North Africa and the Middle East.Well, you said Neolithic before, now you claim you meant Early Neolithic. In this case you base your argument on pure assumption.



Eurasian crops and livestock had reached the Middle East and North Africa prior to 5000BC. Eurasians invaded North Africa 12,000-10,000 years ago, long before these people in the Carpathian Basin lived.So what, do you have their haplogroups?


The Eurasian agricultural practices and animals were important in Ancient Egyptian culture. They grew wheat, barley, Eurasian legumes, and they had dogs (which originated in Eurasia). Before the Egyptians there were likely Eurasians farming the land with their Eurasian crops and livestock. The earliest example of domestication of dog/wolf comes is from 20kya from Europe, hunter gatherer society. It has nothing to do with Near Eastern husbandry. Otherwise I don't know where you going with this example.


If Eurasians walked into Africa 12,000-10,000 B.C. they had a long time to set up routes and networks into Eurasia. There could have been trade or interaction between the people in the Carpathian Basin and people in other places. Native Africans had 5000 years to learn Eurasian ways. By the time 5000-3000 BC came along, some E1b1b haplogroup males could have hitched a ride with a caravan. It is possible that E1b1b went into Europe with consecutive Neolithic waves of farmers during Neolithic. It is as valid, at the moment, as them being in first wave, in small undetectable so far, proportions. We don't have enough samples to be completely sure. It is also possible that they showed up during Mesolithic as hunter gatherers in South Europe, and where picked up by farmers, the same way I2 was. All we know for sure they were in Central Europe during mid Neolithic, that's the fact. The rest is only speculation.
What I can't get is why you are so strongly clinging to your speculation, ignoring equally possible other scenarios? For some reason you hate the idea that E1b1b could have been in Europe earlier. Why is that?

Salmon
30-06-15, 01:20
Well, you said Neolithic before, now you claim you meant Early Neolithic. In this case you base your argument on pure assumption.


So what, do you have their haplogroups?

The earliest example of domestication of dog/wolf comes is from 20kya from Europe, hunter gatherer society. It has nothing to do with Near Eastern husbandry. Otherwise I don't know where you going with this example.

It is possible that E1b1b went into Europe with consecutive Neolithic waves of farmers during Neolithic. It is as valid, at the moment, as them being in first wave, in small undetectable so far, proportions. We don't have enough samples to be completely sure. It is also possible that they showed up during Mesolithic as hunter gatherers in South Europe, and where picked up by farmers, the same way I2 was. All we know for sure they were in Central Europe during mid Neolithic, that's the fact. The rest is only speculation.
What I can't get is why you are so strongly clinging to your speculation, ignoring equally possible other scenarios? For some reason you hate the idea that E1b1b could have been in Europe earlier. Why is that?

The domestication of dogs is controversial. Many studies link dogs to Central Asia around 50,000-30,000 years ago.
http://gu.com/p/495my/stw
Study that claims dogs could have been domesticated 35,000 years ago.


http://www.nature.com/hdy/journal/v108/n5/full/hdy2011114a.html
Here is a study claiming they come from Southern East Asia.



E1b1b is not present in Europe prior or near the beginning of the Neolithic Revolution in Eurasia. It's just not there. In the Carpathian study it shows up between 5000-3000 BC, 5000-7000 years after the beginning of the Neolithic Revolution.

LeBrok
30-06-15, 02:04
The domestication of dogs is controversial. Many studies link dogs to Central Asia around 50,000-30,000 years ago.
http://gu.com/p/495my/stw
Study that claims dogs could have been domesticated 35,000 years ago.


http://www.nature.com/hdy/journal/v108/n5/full/hdy2011114a.html
Here is a study claiming they come from Southern East Asia. Yes we are still learning, and the point was that dogs were domesticated by hunter gatherers. The rest of animals by farmers, and at least 10 thousands years later. Other words, domestication of dog has nothing to do with domestication of farm animals. It means that nobody looked at domesticated dog and figured out how to domesticate pigs. Dogs were hunting with people, dogs were not in enclosure to be eaten. A very different function and purpose.




E1b1b is not present in Europe prior or near the beginning of the Neolithic Revolution in Eurasia. It's just not there. Oh, because we didn't find it yet it didn't exist?! You have to admit, it is not very sound logic, nor a scientific approach. Moment ago you claimed that it didn't exist in Neolithic in Europe, till you learned that it was just found. You should have learned by your first mistake.


In the Carpathian study it shows up between 5000-3000 BC, 5000-7000 years after the beginning of the Neolithic Revolution.What this has to do with haplogroup E? We still don't know if it was one of minority original farmer clade or was picked up from hunter gatherers in Europe, Near East or Africa, maybe picked up few times independently by farmers on different continents? Please don't create a fact from unknown history. At the moment we can talk about hypothetical scenarios, many of them, not only the one you believe in.

Salmon
30-06-15, 02:11
Yes we are still learning, and the point was that dogs were domesticated by hunter gatherers. The rest of animals by farmers, and at least 10 thousands years later. Other words, domestication of dog has nothing to do with domestication of farm animals. It means that nobody looked at domesticated dog and figured out how to domesticate pigs. Dogs were hunting with people, dogs were not in enclosure to be eaten. A very different function and purpose.



Oh, because we didn't find it yet it didn't exist?! You have to admit, it is not very sound logic, nor a scientific approach. Moment ago you claimed that it didn't exist in Neolithic in Europe, till you learned that it was just found. You should have learned by your first mistake.

What this has to do with haplogroup E? We still don't know if it was one of minority original farmer clade or was picked up from hunter gatherers in Europe, Near East or Africa, maybe picked up few times independently by farmers on different continents? Please don't create a fact from unknown history. At the moment we can talk about hypothetical scenarios, many of them, not only the one you believe in.

The people who domesticated dogs went on to become farmers. Dog domestication was the first step to agriculture.

From breeding dogs, prehistoric man likely learned to breed other animals.

All agricultural civilizations have dogs, even the meso-americans had dogs. The Aztecs, Incas, Mayans had dogs, yet lacked sheep, goats, cows that weren't available in the Americas. They used them for hunting, protection, and for food. They went on to domesticate native American animals like llamas, turkeys, salamanders. They also domesticated American plant species that give us maize, tomatoes, potatoes, peppers, quinoa, etc.

Meso-American civilization were very successful farmers even though they lacked beasts of burden like oxen, donkeys, and horses. The only domesticated species they had from Eurasia was the dog.


As for haplogroup E, we can't assume they existed in pre-Neolothic or early Neolothic Europe because there is no evidence of them being present.

We have a few skeletons that date around 5000-3000 BC... towards the very end of the Neolithic, towards the Bronze Age.

LeBrok
30-06-15, 02:17
The people who domesticated dogs went on to become farmers. Dog domestication was the first step to agriculture.

From breeding dogs, prehistoric man likely learned to breed other animals.

All agricultural civilizations have dogs, even the meso-americans had dogs. The Aztecs, Incas, Mayans had dog when they lacked sheep, goats, cows that weren't available in the Americas. They used them for hunting, protection, and for food. You mean that people looked at dogs for at least 10 thousand years if not 30 (by some research) before they got the idea to domesticate others?! Man, I'm losing hope in human genius.

Angela
30-06-15, 02:22
There's one down side to this increase in our knowledge...the fact that E-V13 was in Europe for probably at least 7,000 years and maybe more would have given Hitler, that spawn of Satan, some comfort.

Salmon
30-06-15, 02:45
You mean that people looked at dogs for at least 10 thousand years if not 30 (by some research) before they got the idea to domesticate others?! Man, I'm losing hope in human genius.

It's probably how it happened. Took a long time to get to the next step.

LeBrok
30-06-15, 04:02
There's one down side to this increase in our knowledge...the fact that E-V13 was in Europe for probably at least 7,000 years and maybe more would have given Hitler, that spawn of Satan, some comfort.lol, good one.

Maleth
30-06-15, 11:33
There's one down side to this increase in our knowledge...the fact that E-V13 was in Europe for probably at least 7,000 years and maybe more would have given Hitler, that spawn of Satan, some comfort.

:grin:....need to get the next episode :grin:


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iqd4eupmYm8

Fluffy
30-06-15, 16:54
:grin:....need to get the next episode :grin:


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iqd4eupmYm8

Lol nice Maleth.

Maleth
30-06-15, 18:42
Lol nice Maleth.

:grin: credit goes to Hautville who posted it earlier on this thread. This is somehow a different version tho :grin:

Sonnenburg
05-10-15, 23:43
I think that genetics may work deeper( just an idea). In a 'cartoonish' way: WWII was about R1a against R1b; G and E 'directored' as an 'outsiders' to each chosen R. I1 didn't like any of them ( being 'original' to the Land); D supported E still having own 'ideas' about who is smarter.
If Napoleon was E, that makes it even more interesting: Adolf, Napoleon...Einstein ( who 'promoted' A-Bomb so much). It is not serious, I know, just what would happen if we could test every past and present 'leader' and give some of them advice not disregard advice from their Generals about the wars they about to start?

Fluffy
06-10-15, 00:55
I think that genetics may work deeper( just an idea). In a 'cartoonish' way: WWII was about R1a against R1b; G and E 'directored' as an 'outsiders' to each chosen R. I1 didn't like any of them ( being 'original' to the Land); D supported E still having own 'ideas' about who is smarter.
If Napoleon was E, that makes it even more interesting: Adolf, Napoleon...Einstein ( who 'promoted' A-Bomb so much). It is not serious, I know, just what would happen if we could test every past and present 'leader' and give some of them advice not disregard advice from their Generals about the wars they about to start?

Interesting read. Great post man!

MtDNA
06-10-15, 01:37
Wait, weren't ancient egyptians bringing many sub-saharan african men to be mercanaries? And, there was also African coming to europe for a long time, via the nautical trade routes. Y-dna is like that, one man can completely change the composition, since each man has a larger reproductive potential than each woman. For E being in Jews, what if Jewish woman, who can marry non-Jews, chose to marry these mercanaries, maybe because of their attractiveness or financial resources. Also, back then, a man could have many wives. Also, for E being prevalent in South Europe, It can be described by traders from Africa having many Europeean wives because of their wealth or manly strong physique.

RobertColumbia
06-10-15, 16:56
I think that genetics may work deeper( just an idea). In a 'cartoonish' way: WWII was about R1a against R1b; G and E 'directored' as an 'outsiders' to each chosen R. I1 didn't like any of them ( being 'original' to the Land); D supported E still having own 'ideas' about who is smarter.
If Napoleon was E, that makes it even more interesting: Adolf, Napoleon...Einstein ( who 'promoted' A-Bomb so much). It is not serious, I know, just what would happen if we could test every past and present 'leader' and give some of them advice not disregard advice from their Generals about the wars they about to start?

Interesting idea, but I'm not so sure it was an R1a vs. R1b battle. Let's look into the major players and their major haplogroups:

Allies:

USA: R1b, I1
UK: R1b, I1
France: R1b
USSR: R1a, N (though Stalin himself was a G)

Axis:

Germany: R1b, R1a (both), I1, I2
Italy: R1b, J
Japan: O

sparkey
06-10-15, 18:29
I think that genetics may work deeper( just an idea). In a 'cartoonish' way: WWII was about R1a against R1b; G and E 'directored' as an 'outsiders' to each chosen R. I1 didn't like any of them ( being 'original' to the Land); D supported E still having own 'ideas' about who is smarter.
If Napoleon was E, that makes it even more interesting: Adolf, Napoleon...Einstein ( who 'promoted' A-Bomb so much). It is not serious, I know, just what would happen if we could test every past and present 'leader' and give some of them advice not disregard advice from their Generals about the wars they about to start?

The question of Y-DNA haplogroups affecting behavior is an interesting one, but I'm firmly in the skeptics' camp. Are you imagining a correlation, where people tend to pass down ideas of what their lineage once was, or an actual causation, where Y-DNA haplogroups tend to have certain effects on a man's personality?

I don't see either a causation or correlation myself; rather, I see haplogroup distributions in WWII actors (or whatever) reflecting the haplogroup distributions of the populations they came from, nothing more and nothing less.

Although, out of curiosity, what traits would you assign to Haplogroup I2, given the famous people thought most likely to have carried it (http://www.eupedia.com/forum/threads/27655-Searching-for-famous-I2-carriers)?

Aaron1981
06-10-15, 18:33
I think that genetics may work deeper( just an idea). In a 'cartoonish' way: WWII was about R1a against R1b; G and E 'directored' as an 'outsiders' to each chosen R. I1 didn't like any of them ( being 'original' to the Land); D supported E still having own 'ideas' about who is smarter.
If Napoleon was E, that makes it even more interesting: Adolf, Napoleon...Einstein ( who 'promoted' A-Bomb so much). It is not serious, I know, just what would happen if we could test every past and present 'leader' and give some of them advice not disregard advice from their Generals about the wars they about to start?

R1a against R1b? Germany is overwhelmingly R1b, especially the western and south-central regions. The frequency does drop as you move eastwards but R1b is still the most numerous group of them all. R1b correlates negatively with Slavic speakers, so as you approach Slavic speaking regions, and even Slavic groups in Germany the R1b is considerably lower.

@RobertColumbia, I don't think I2 is at an appreciably higher level in Germany than it is in UK.

Angela
06-10-15, 19:06
Wait, weren't ancient egyptians bringing many sub-saharan african men to be mercanaries? And, there was also African coming to europe for a long time, via the nautical trade routes. Y-dna is like that, one man can completely change the composition, since each man has a larger reproductive potential than each woman. For E being in Jews, what if Jewish woman, who can marry non-Jews, chose to marry these mercanaries, maybe because of their attractiveness or financial resources. Also, back then, a man could have many wives. Also, for E being prevalent in South Europe, It can be described by traders from Africa having many Europeean wives because of their wealth or manly strong physique.

E-V13 or its immediate precursor have been in Europe since at least the Neolithic, so no need for fanciful speculation.

The oldest one is in a Cardial West Med site. There's also this:
http://www.eupedia.com/forum/threads/30814-Where-did-E-V13-originate/page4?highlight=E-v13+sopot


(http://www.eupedia.com/forum/threads/30814-Where-did-E-V13-originate/page4?highlight=E-v13+sopot)

Sonnenburg
30-10-15, 08:02
Interesting. I just looked at it from the other angle: 'Leaders' of WWII representing small % of population they 'represent' and influence, why? Stalin-G; Adolf-E...they both were 'philosophers' of war. They both overruled Military commanders, both made mistakes, because of that: not pressing Air-Attack on Britain-Adolf's error; not starting the War for 'liberation of proletariat' before Germany re-armed-Stalin's miscalculation. At the end, Churchill's trick in convincing US to enter the WWII ( for purely practical reasons on USA's part) worked. Is it because Churchill shared genetic makeup with the larger % of population he represented and because of that trusted Military more to be able do their job.
It could be applied to Napoleon too. Being in minority % of Aristocracy he wasn't exactly the 'product' of the French Military Tradition. Napoleon was more of the 'talented commissar' of post revolutionary France using opportunity to advance his career. At the end, Professionals: Prussian Blucher and British Wellington, won the Europe back.
Just thinking...

Sonnenburg
22-11-15, 03:26
"There has so far been ancient Y-DNA analysis from only four Neolithic cultures (LBK in Germany, Remedello in Italy and Cardium Pottery in south-west France and Spain), and all sites yielded G2a individuals, which is the strongest evidence at present that farming originated with and was disseminated by members of haplogroup G (although probably in collaboration with other haplogroups such as E1b1b, J, R1b and T)- This from Eupedia. My interest is related to the idea that 'originals' versus 'indo-Europeans' is one of keys explaining why leaders of European conflicts were G, E, T or I Y-DNA. We have Stalin-G; Adolf-E; Vikings-I; Jeferson, Thomas the American-T. All were 'philosophers of conflict'. I Y-DNA were the original Europeans hunters; G with E probably original farmers in cooperation with T. They all lived 'next' to each other and it was enough space not to dominate totally by killing off 'just because'. It all ended, first, with R1b arrival; next-R1a came even in larger numbers. I know that's 'cartoonish' expectation, I know. Anyway, R1b pushed R1a from Europe to 'Ukraine' in original conflict becoming dominant in Europe. I1- went to 'Scandinavia'; I2 - up to the Balkan mountains; G2 to Sardinia, Corsica and Tyrol; E1b mingled in 'Bavaria'... They all 'genetically' remembered how 'nice' life used to be... Fast forward- E1b became 'instigator' for Alemanic 'push back' with cooperation of R1b; G2- took control over R1a ( seriously took control); I1 - 'instigated' Vikings expeditions to the former 'homelands'...T - wasn't happy with R1b's Royal treatment and 'took away' colony on philosophical grounds. Let's not forget J's, both of them, J1 and J2 - aren't they troublemakers to this day?
It used to be so nice between 'The Originals' I, G, E, T..etc, in good old pre-Indo-Whatever days.

Arban Hoti
28-11-15, 05:51
This makes sens to me .


https://youtu.be/jLQa3vy4X5k

It sounds like he is talking about today.

Sonnenburg
03-06-16, 21:28
Ancient people being violent? Really? Battle is between R1a and R1b ( generalized), I am not taking into account later splits and mutations because we're discussing 'ancient'.
I1, I2, G, E...lived in small numbers on big territory next to each other, compared to 'modern' times. I1 kept sons rate of birth at two. Hunting was main source of food. No overpopulation. Women were important ( archeological figurines of 'mother' most common).
Now, R1b and R1a enters the scene - 'horses and Warriors', milk and grain, ethos of 'heroic conqueror' ( archeology finds ' bull' replacing 'mother' figurines) becomes dominant. How that makes 'ancients' more violent than 'modern' Europeans?
The 'payback' for that R ( generalized) invasion was 'Vikinging' from Scandinavia onto their original lands by displaced I1. That's the origin of myth of 'violence' of the ancient Europeans. Yes that was 'not pleasant'... Also, there was a reason it happened. Now we have another invasion of (I presume J's ) into the Europe. Since R1b is dominant in modern Europe, they need to protect 'their' women, right? Since they 'inherited' old mtDNA women (I1, G, E...'followers'-no disrespect, just a term) H,U mostly, R1 has responsibility for women's safety, right? I guess, no. Look how 'protective' modern European men are of 'their' women? Why is that? Any 'alternative' lifestyle is more 'liked' in modern Europe than regular woman/mother and her family. Low birth rate; no more exclusive status for motherhood and family; promotion of anything but 'regular' marriage... This why many women are 'welcoming' the very 'invaders' that assolt them later, isn't that sad? So, 'warrior on the horse' attitude toward women R 'inherited' by 'displacing' ( exterminating) original native hunters, is not working for local women, I guess? It reminds me of stories about 'new world' pilgrim women escaping back to native 'Indians' after they were rescued by their strict Puritan husbands...
I am I1 Z 140 (Rhein boat-branch).After, genetically, surviving Ice-age, I don't care much about where to live... Just, when I hear someone's talk about how violent the 'ancients' were, I think about how 'brutality fair' nature is - R1a and R1b will dissapear genetically from the European map because of their disrespect and neglect of 'our' women...and I am still here. I have six children ( only two sons, of course) and - 'no matter where you go, there you are'.
Best wishes to all and don't take it too seriously...
Alex von Naumann.

firetown
09-09-16, 15:03
First of all I totally disagree with J2 being Jewish, nations do not own genes let aside religions. Greeks, Turks and Kavkaz people have a lot more J2 than the Jews. So it is insulting to claim J2 is Jewish and only Jewish,

What am I not getting here? A group can call itself whatever they want, but what counts is genetic ancestry. The tribe. As in the tribes of the ancient Hebrews whose genes float within parts of other populations as well.
Plus J1c for example is common amongst the Cohens, as in the Bedouins of the Sinai. And throughout the Arab world J2 also exists quite frequently.

Religious beliefs do not alter your gene pool. And this is not about disagreement or belief, but rather avoiding misunderstandings and misinterpretations not clarifying what exactly the word "Jewish" means to you from a scientific standpoint.

ESpraguer
02-03-17, 03:12
"Some people deep in the mountains of Tibet"? "A percentage of Ainu"! LOL. The Japanese are 40% y-haplogroup D. 40%. Not just Ainu. All Japanese people. Also, Ainu are like 70-80% haplo D. But the Japanese on the whole, as a population, are dominated by Y-haplogroups D & O (40% & 50% respectively). That's not "some Ainu". That's like all Ainu, all Andaman Islanders, & a lot of Japanese & Tibetan people. The Tibetans are 50% haplo D. Haplogroup D is also fairly common in much of South-China & other parts of South-East Asia, ranging from trace proportions in some populations to 20, 30% in others. It really depends upon the population.
Haplogroup E dominates the North-African plain & much of Sub-Saharan Africa. E carriers essentially conquered the entirety of Africa over the last 50,000 years. E is also very common in Europe. E-V13, the European branch (since the V13 mutation likely occurred on site in Europe) basically predominates in Greece & the Balkans. It is found in significant numbers pretty much everywhere in Europe. Apart from haplogroups R1a & R1b, E1b1b is probably the most common haplogroup in Europe.
Haplogroup E has been a stunningly successful haplogroup, not just within Europe, but worldwide. Haplogroup D has also done fairly well for itself.
"The E haplogroup is not found deep in central Asia where the origins of civilization likely sprouted." Umm... civilization did not sprout deep in central Asia. The Fertile Crescent is the Near-East & has plenty of E Y-DNA. Also, some of the haplogroups that predominate there now did not necessarily predominate there 10,000 years ago. If I had to guess, I'd guess much of the J1 in "Mesopotamia" today wasn't there 10,000 years ago. This is an Arab conquest marker. Needless to say, E-M123 & E-M78 were likely present in the Fertile Crescent when civilization began, & J1, which predominates there now, likely did not predominate in the Fertile Crescent when human civilization took root.
Moreover, the Ancient Greeks & the Ancient Egyptians, some of the oldest & most successful civilizations ever were dominated by different clades of E-M78 (V13 is downstream from E-M78, the mutation that dominates ethnic Egyptians, even today). The Greeks are probably the most prolific intellectual civilization in human history. And E-V13 is essentially a Greek marker. It is especially prevalent in continental Greeks, vis a vis Islanders (again, where most of the notable accomplishments took place). So...

ESpraguer
02-03-17, 03:31
The area in question is in Hungary.

This researcher concludes that the subjects in the Carpathian Basin originated in the Near East and hunter gatherers had negligible contribution to the maternal and paternal gene pool. They were rather homogeneous. Early Neolithic people there belonged to G, F, and I. During them middle/late neolithic period foreign populations moved in. Three new y-chromosome haplogroups were seen... J, C, and E1b1b at certain sites. 5000BC to 4000BC.


32 individuals tested. Two remains had E1b1b out of 32 total. There were found at 2 sites. 1 at Sopot and 1 at Lengyel. These 2 sites had the most "diverse" bodies lying around. The E1b1b y-haplogroup originates in Africa and author of the paper makes note of that.

All the samples are dated between 5790 BC and 3900 BC.

E1b1b remains were found among cultures that lived between 5000-4800 BC and 5000-4300BC.

According to other data and other research the author of the paper concludes that the E1b1b did not have a significant presence in the area. The neolithic farmers were of Asian/Eurasian origin.

Nothing in the study contradicts what I wrote before.

All haplogroups at their base originate in Africa because mankind originated in Africa. Haplo DE likely left Africa with CF 50-60,000 years ago.
According to what other data and what other research? LOL. This is a very commonly held misconception/intuition about haplogroup E, especially E-V13. There is this sense that "it just doesn't belong" in Europe. Yet all the evidence that has emerged over the last ten or fifteen years contradicts this belief.
Haplogroup E-V13 is massively & in all likelihood originally European.
Given that E-V13 was also found in Spain from around the same time period, it's hard to argue that it didn't have a significant presence in Europe at the time. E-V13 clearly had a significant presence in central & southern Europe 7000-8000 years ago, given that it has been found on opposite sides of the continent in the same time period.
Some branches of E are essentially non-African. E-V13 & E-M123 are good examples. The Phoenicians were Levantine peoples, but they had ample E-M123. They also spread that E-M123 around the Mediterranean. Thus, just because farmers or others were Asian or Eurasian in origin, doesn't mean some of them didn't carry haplogroup E. Greeks are like the original Europeans, & they are very well represented by haplogroup E.

ESpraguer
02-03-17, 03:43
Interesting idea, but I'm not so sure it was an R1a vs. R1b battle. Let's look into the major players and their major haplogroups:

Allies:

USA: R1b, I1
UK: R1b, I1
France: R1b
USSR: R1a, N (though Stalin himself was a G)

Axis:

Germany: R1b, R1a (both), I1, I2
Italy: R1b, J
Japan: O

Japan is O & D, not sure I'd include "N" in USSR, and not so sure about I1 for US. I1 is likely under 10% in US.

drroots
25-04-17, 10:01
The most E1b1b1* haplogroup spread in EU is E-V13. If Hitler terminal haplogroup belonged to E-V13 branch, which is spread from up north in Scandinavia down to a higher percentage in southern EU, then his haplogroup is not an African one due to African origin of E1b1b1*. E-V13 is indeed an European haplogroup derived from a North-African parent (E-M78), in the same way R1b* derived from its semi-asiatic/anatolian parents.... Or relating it to Viking "Aryans", same way as Vikings Haplogroup I1* derived from western euroasia parent, the I-M170 haplogroup....

So, in other words, Hitler wound't be less "Aryan" b/c his haplogroup E-V13 originated from a north africa parent otherwise excactly the same argument can be said for I1* which originated from a parent from euroasia.

Except for I2* (that derived from I1*), same thing can be said for all European Haplogroups.

Regardless of Hitler belonged to E-V13 (an European branch) or to any other non-European E1b1b1* sub-clads, only an autosomal DNA would have revealed his full ethnicity. Not sure why is that important, dictators have come from all haplo-groups.

drroots
25-04-17, 10:17
>>>But it's definitely recently african in origin. I don't think hitler would be pleased with that>>>

E-V13 has been in EU since 7000 years ago, found in Spain. E-V13 parent (E-M78) left Africa 20'000 years ago. Would you think Hitler would have been better pleased with R1b* that has Anatolian/semi-asiatic parents ? OR the Viking's I1*, that originated from I-M170, another eurasian origin ?

Or being a I2a*, a slavic one/caucus area , which is indeed the most European haplogroup, because it derived from I1* ???

drroots
26-04-17, 00:22
Unfortunately YES !

drroots
26-04-17, 03:54
Noman,
E-V13 is a mutation that occurred in EU at least 8000 years ago, same patern as all other European haplogroups.

Same analogy for I1* with an african/euasian father (I-M170), 11000 years ago. The only haplogroup in EU that comes from an European haplogroup is the I2*, the slavs.

If Hitler was I1* (the Viking one) than the same thing would have been said about I1* about its parent the I-M170, that Hitler came from eurasia and Hitler 'has mongolian' DNA in him.... again if Hitler os R1b* than same analogy would be said that R1b parent from Anatolian/Asiatic tribes.

All halogroups trace back to Africa, not sure what difference would have made if Hitler was E,I, or R1* ???? Same argument would have been said for all of these haplogroup. All these haplogroups moved out from Africa, at least 15000-20000 years ago..... while these main branches were being mutated in EU, same their African cousins created their own branches....

If Hitler had an E-V22 haplogroup (which could be the case), then it's different argument, b/c E-V22 is not an European mutation branch. But even then, what's most import is his autosomal DNA.

If you keep pushing your point towards of E-V13 being closer to African than I1 to I*, R1* to R one then the question is : Can we measure the distance or the mass of the mutation and compare ? Remember, when E-V13 mutation in Europe occurred , all europeans were dark skin still.

drroots
26-04-17, 04:04
I have seen the movie, and they always doubted he was a Jewish (especially the mother of his girlfriend). Plus Jewish in Germany were very much mixed with Germans. Still though, not all germans were blonds or blue eyes, but for a jewish to be blond and with blue eyes, it means with very very high probability that this person shares western European ancestry. If not, it's a new mutation. And this is science.

drroots
26-04-17, 04:35
You are confusing autosomal DNA with Y DNA. The only E haplogroup that is present in europe (north or south) is E-V13 (I should say mainly), and that is not found in Africa, (or is found very very low percentage, spread probably through greek settlements or balkan ottoman soldiers). E-V13 is not even found in Turkey except for those x-greek settlements.

As for "E being prevalent in South Europe, It can be described by traders from Africa having many Europeean wives because of their wealth or manly strong physique." .... historically never heard such massive DNA contribution to Europe from the african traders but even if this is TRUE, then the haplogroups these africans traders may have spread in Europe is not E-V13, it could be E-V22, or other subclades ....some can be found in south spain or south Italy from Roman times.....

LeBrok
26-04-17, 04:40
You are confusing autosomal DNA with Y DNA. The only E haplogroup that is present in europe (north or south) is E-V13 (I should say mainly), and that is not found in Africa, (or is found very very low percentage, spread probably through greek settlements or balkan ottoman soldiers). E-V13 is not even found in Turkey except for those x-greek settlements.

As for "E being prevalent in South Europe, It can be described by traders from Africa having many Europeean wives because of their wealth or manly strong physique." .... historically never heard such massive DNA contribution to Europe from the african traders but even if this is TRUE, then the haplogroups these africans traders may have spread in Europe is not E-V13, it could be E-V22, or other subclades ....some can be found in south spain or south Italy from Roman times..... Please use Replay With Quote button when responding the a post. The way I did in this post. Otherwise we have no idea who you are responding too.
Welcome to Eupedia Drroots.

Tarrooq
26-04-17, 06:08
Dear Brothers:

Actions are the physical results of beliefs, not genes !!!

So who cares if a criminal half a century ago was of E or J haplogroup?

So please use your knowledge and energies wisely !!

Thanks and regards.

drroots
26-04-17, 06:10
lol :) what was Hitler's terminal SNP ? Any info ? Would have been really funny if it was let say E-V22.... other than that, this video seems to be left wing sponsoring ... if Hitler was I1 or R1b, they still would have made this funny video portraying Hitler as having asiatic/caucasian DNA :) :)

Gheg
19-02-18, 11:33
I think there are sick people with every haplogroup. Not to mention there are women who are sick and have no Y chromosome at all. I do believe certain traits may be programmed in the Y Chromosome, but insanity is a disease not a trait.