the earlist Germanic

kgnju

Regular Member
Messages
65
Reaction score
1
Points
0
In Genetics, as modern ethnicity as concerned, which country could best represent the earlist Germanic people? Denmark, Norway, Sweden or Holland?
Should I put Germany into the list undoubtly?
 
Sorry,no reply.Uhh,do you have any information, Maciamo?
 
Sorry,no reply.Uhh,do you have any information, Maciamo?

just a bet - I should say the Danish people: I think (like others) Denmark has been the cradle of the melting that gave way to the germanic genesis after an acculturation by the South or South East (Corded Y-R1a and Bell Beakers, but with a core population of R1b-U102 and I1, concerning the Y-DNA... I'm not sure at all that Corded gave their language I see better as a kind of Satem one. Maybe Bell Beakers spite their small numbers there played a moreimportant role in the indo-europeanization of pre-germanic peoples -
 
I'm not sure at all that Corded gave their language I see better as a kind of Satem one. Maybe Bell Beakers spite their small numbers there played a moreimportant role in the indo-europeanization of pre-germanic peoples -

The Corded Ware period, in my opinion, predates the Centum-Satem split, due to the fact that you have common Germanic/Balto-Slavic vocabulary that predates the split (eg. English 'gold' vs. Latvian 'zelts' vs. Russian 'zoloto').

In my opinion, the earliest that could be vaguely recognized as 'Germanic' would have emerged during the Nordic Bronze Age.
 
The Corded Ware period, in my opinion, predates the Centum-Satem split, due to the fact that you have common Germanic/Balto-Slavic vocabulary that predates the split (eg. English 'gold' vs. Latvian 'zelts' vs. Russian 'zoloto').

In my opinion, the earliest that could be vaguely recognized as 'Germanic' would have emerged during the Nordic Bronze Age.

predate, OK - but what signifies this common vocabulary? - and what proves the corded language was not yet a 'satem' one? it's difficult to know where the flood of words was coming from in the loans and - if we don't have palatized 'satem' words in germanic, it don't prove the shift was not made yet - it could only prove that germanics did'nt loan a lot of words on proto-satem languages - for someones a 'satem' language was spoken in Lappland before the arrival of finnic speakers (substratums of 'satem' and of a kind of basque for this finnic land) -
nevertheless I recognize I'm not a specialist on the common proto-germanic-proto-slavic-baltic languages - I 'll go to fish some more items
good luke
 
In Genetics, as modern ethnicity as concerned, which country could best represent the earlist Germanic people? Denmark, Norway, Sweden or Holland?
Should I put Germany into the list undoubtly?

It is not sure there ever was a homogenous Germanic people. I think Germanics have been heterogeneous from the beginning. The hybrid genesis of Germanics supports this view.
Denmark is a good candidate, but in my view a bit too much western genetically.
I'd prefer Norway, because even today it is genetically diverse, in a local sense, despite it probably was not the epicentre of Germanic enthnogenesis. But its isolated location makes it even more a candidate.

Take Tröndelag for example (region around Tondheim), which has a strangely high R1a level, without any known slavic or recent eastern influx. Despite I'm rather sceptical about racial classifiactions of authors like Coon, it is remarkable that Coon identified the so-called Trönder type, found predominantly in Tröndelag. It is even more impressive that Coon proposed Trönder to be a mixture of Brünn (considered as "palaeolithic") with Corded type. And we know that Corded ware culture is believed to have been predominantly R1a! One mystery though is that those R1a clades in Norway have been found to have closest matches in Central Asia, not Eastern Europe. I have no clue why is that.
At the same time, Norway has regions with high R1b concentration, and others with mostly I1. There are almost no other Haplogroups, as opposed to neighboring Sweden (N) and Denmark (R1b, J2).

Conclusion: first candidate is Norway.

An alternative but less likely candidate could be the fertile plains of northern germany, because few authors believe it to have been tha cradle of Germanic ethnics and the local population has not been replaced or mixed significantly since the Saxons, except in Northeast Germany. To be more exact: Lower Saxony, Schleswig-Holstein and parts of Mecklenburg-Pomerania are good candidates. Westphalia might be already too celtic.
 
It is not sure there ever was a homogenous Germanic people. I think Germanics have been heterogeneous from the beginning. The hybrid genesis of Germanics supports this view.
Denmark is a good candidate, but in my view a bit too much western genetically.
I'd prefer Norway, because even today it is genetically diverse, in a local sense, despite it probably was not the epicentre of Germanic enthnogenesis. But its isolated location makes it even more a candidate.

Take Tröndelag for example (region around Tondheim), which has a strangely high R1a level, without any known slavic or recent eastern influx. Despite I'm rather sceptical about racial classifiactions of authors like Coon, it is remarkable that Coon identified the so-called Trönder type, found predominantly in Tröndelag. It is even more impressive that Coon proposed Trönder to be a mixture of Brünn (considered as "palaeolithic") with Corded type. And we know that Corded ware culture is believed to have been predominantly R1a! One mystery though is that those R1a clades in Norway have been found to have closest matches in Central Asia, not Eastern Europe. I have no clue why is that.
At the same time, Norway has regions with high R1b concentration, and others with mostly I1. There are almost no other Haplogroups, as opposed to neighboring Sweden (N) and Denmark (R1b, J2).

Conclusion: first candidate is Norway.

An alternative but less likely candidate could be the fertile plains of northern germany, because few authors believe it to have been tha cradle of Germanic ethnics and the local population has not been replaced or mixed significantly since the Saxons, except in Northeast Germany. To be more exact: Lower Saxony, Schleswig-Holstein and parts of Mecklenburg-Pomerania are good candidates. Westphalia might be already too celtic.

I do not know about the gennetic of Germanic people,
but from Linguistic if IE is a Caucasian language, then Germanic root must come from there
possibility that IE split around Pannoni Basin and around Romania
means that Germanic or pre-Germanic if you like first spoken at areas more and far east than Norway and modern Germany
maybe proto-Germanic where developed there you mention with a return backwards and finalize the forms and soynds of later called Germanic languages.

a possible case that Germanic are Anatolian Branches might connect them with lower Balkans Thracians and Dacians, I mean that if Anatolian IE might pass from Balkans as far pre-Germanic and transform to proto Germanic at another areas.
 
I do not know about the gennetic of Germanic people,
but from Linguistic if IE is a Caucasian language, then Germanic root must come from there
possibility that IE split around Pannoni Basin and around Romania
means that Germanic or pre-Germanic if you like first spoken at areas more and far east than Norway and modern Germany
maybe proto-Germanic where developed there you mention with a return backwards and finalize the forms and soynds of later called Germanic languages.

a possible case that Germanic are Anatolian Branches might connect them with lower Balkans Thracians and Dacians, I mean that if Anatolian IE might pass from Balkans as far pre-Germanic and transform to proto Germanic at another areas.

You mention a hypothetic linguistic root of pre-Germanic. But those hypothetic pre-Germanic speakers (R1b?) where only one of several contributors to the stock of final Germanics. Consequently, pre-Germanic language is likely to differ from final Germanic language, though I'm not familiar with linguistics. As I learnt here, the Germanic language matches well the tri-hybrid haplogroup composition (R1b,R1a,I1). Even if that is a coincidence, I don't believe those three haplogroups coexisted already among those hypothetic pre-Germanics.

Regarding your balkan hypothesis, I wonder why exactly those assumed Thracian/Dacian HGs (J2, E) are almost missing exactly in scandinavia then. The presence of I1 in balkans can be rather explained by later Germanic migrations towards the Balkans. Even the celts presumably carried some J2 and E. But I have yet to learn more about germanic R1b and why it did not carry more southern HGs to the north.

I agree that there are also native satem words in scandinavian languages, for instance 'gaate' (riddle) and 'paa' (at/on). But I believe this comes either from Corded Ware or Iranian Languages from the east.
 
predate, OK - but what signifies this common vocabulary? - and what proves the corded language was not yet a 'satem' one? it's difficult to know where the flood of words was coming from in the loans and - if we don't have palatized 'satem' words in germanic, it don't prove the shift was not made yet - it could only prove that germanics did'nt loan a lot of words on proto-satem languages - for someones a 'satem' language was spoken in Lappland before the arrival of finnic speakers (substratums of 'satem' and of a kind of basque for this finnic land) -
nevertheless I recognize I'm not a specialist on the common proto-germanic-proto-slavic-baltic languages - I 'll go to fish some more items
good luke

What signifies common vocabulary is that you have words that do apply to centum/satem sound laws respectively. In the case of the example I gave, the common Germanic-Balto-Slavic word for 'gold' derives from the common PIE root *g´hel- which is also for example found in Old Irish "gel" (white) and Greek "chlōros" (green). Additionally, the word was borrowed into the Finnic languages (Finnish "kulta"). It's actually easier than you think to find out in regard for loanwords because you cannot reversely centumize/satemize a word when you loan it. The oldest written evidence for the Centum/Satem split are Mycenean Greek (for Centum) and the "Mitanni" Indo-Iranic loanwords found in Hurrian (for Satem), both which date from the mid 2nd millennium BC. Since the Corded Ware period was about 1000-1500 years earlier, my opinion is that the Centum/Satem split only occured between the late 3rd millennium BC and the early 2nd millennium BC.
 
I believe that germanic commenced with I1 from around southern sweden, southern denmark/german area and odense island chain and firstly progressed northwards. The area was "invaded" via poland by R1a and this enabled germanic people to reach the black sea. Is it not strange that no Finnish N made no impression in scandinavian areas and was not carried by any migrational people or barbarian invasions
 
What signifies common vocabulary is that you have words that do apply to centum/satem sound laws respectively. In the case of the example I gave, the common Germanic-Balto-Slavic word for 'gold' derives from the common PIE root *g´hel- which is also for example found in Old Irish "gel" (white) and Greek "chlōros" (green). Additionally, the word was borrowed into the Finnic languages (Finnish "kulta"). It's actually easier than you think to find out in regard for loanwords because you cannot reversely centumize/satemize a word when you loan it. The oldest written evidence for the Centum/Satem split are Mycenean Greek (for Centum) and the "Mitanni" Indo-Iranic loanwords found in Hurrian (for Satem), both which date from the mid 2nd millennium BC. Since the Corded Ware period was about 1000-1500 years earlier, my opinion is that the Centum/Satem split only occured between the late 3rd millennium BC and the early 2nd millennium BC.

OK for the dating of the split - I spend some time trying (to play) to find common roots between west present day I-E languages and slavic ones - as you say it's easy to find some lona words after the diverse phonetic shifts occurred - BUT BEFORE THAT??? my purpose was to discuss the reality of loan words in germanic from 'satem' languages BEFORE the palatizing of these last ones AND (it's differetnt) the so called 'proto-germanic-proto-slavic language community' someones seam to hold on (I'm not found of this hypothesis)
 
I think early Germanic's were I2b and R1a(more I2b) in Europe and I1 and R1a(more I1) in Scandinavia. They assimilated the R1b Celts. The elite were warriors and the citizens were R1b, so after a lot of war eventually R1b come to prevail
 
OK for the dating of the split - I spend some time trying (to play) to find common roots between west present day I-E languages and slavic ones - as you say it's easy to find some lona words after the diverse phonetic shifts occurred - BUT BEFORE THAT??? my purpose was to discuss the reality of loan words in germanic from 'satem' languages BEFORE the palatizing of these last ones AND (it's differetnt) the so called 'proto-germanic-proto-slavic language community' someones seam to hold on (I'm not found of this hypothesis)

You seem to have a misconception about the Centum/Satem split. You have to consider that neither Centum nor Satem is the original state. You have to consider that we are talking about a set of three different sounds called the palatovelars (*k´, *g´and *g´h) which are merged with the plain velars in the Centum languages (*k, *g, *gh), whereas they are turned into fricative sounds in the Satem languages. Since both Centum and Satem languages have plain velars (*k, *g, *gh) and a fricative inherited from PIE (*s) that correspond to each other regardless of their centum/satem affiliation (though they are obviously subject to individual sound laws in the respective language / language family).

My point with the above example was that this is a word that requires a common root word from before the Centum/Satem split.
 
You mention a hypothetic linguistic root of pre-Germanic. But those hypothetic pre-Germanic speakers (R1b?) where only one of several contributors to the stock of final Germanics. Consequently, pre-Germanic language is likely to differ from final Germanic language, though I'm not familiar with linguistics. As I learnt here, the Germanic language matches well the tri-hybrid haplogroup composition (R1b,R1a,I1). Even if that is a coincidence, I don't believe those three haplogroups coexisted already among those hypothetic pre-Germanics.

Regarding your balkan hypothesis, I wonder why exactly those assumed Thracian/Dacian HGs (J2, E) are almost missing exactly in scandinavia then. The presence of I1 in balkans can be rather explained by later Germanic migrations towards the Balkans. Even the celts presumably carried some J2 and E. But I have yet to learn more about germanic R1b and why it did not carry more southern HGs to the north.

I agree that there are also native satem words in scandinavian languages, for instance 'gaate' (riddle) and 'paa' (at/on). But I believe this comes either from Corded Ware or Iranian Languages from the east.


Maybe becausse Gothic starts from Crimaia and Romania Staring Point?
Maybe cause Strabo clarifies Visigotjs at Balck sea at early 1rst Millenium AD,
or you do not Consider Goths as Germanic family speaking,
maybe cause centum satem is not that old in IE?

and at least dacian seems to be a link among modern Germanic and modern Slavic,
Centum-satem split in North should be that old, as you believe,
we probably have movements of population much near today than we believe to modern languages, even at known Historical times,
besides the typical R1a = Slavic is tottaly wrong
since we have very low ratio in areas of South Balkans, although we have south slavic languages,
by reading Herodotus we find 2 groups in Thracian the Getae and the Thracians
that probably is the time of split to Centum-satem
and these languages especially Getae should be at the move of Germans to west (already had started but did not finish at Herodotus times)

Considering that Herodotus mentions them as the 2nd Biggest nation in the world and from the Geografy Herodotus knew, he means either the Slavs either the Germans (all branches)

Just think the wallachians the Bastarnae and the Crimea
Gothic were spoken until 1900 at Crimea,

except if you believe that all the above were remnants of Viking invasion at Volga river and their settling at Ucraine,
 
You seem to have a misconception about the Centum/Satem split. You have to consider that neither Centum nor Satem is the original state. You have to consider that we are talking about a set of three different sounds called the palatovelars (*k´, *g´and *g´h) which are merged with the plain velars in the Centum languages (*k, *g, *gh), whereas they are turned into fricative sounds in the Satem languages. Since both Centum and Satem languages have plain velars (*k, *g, *gh) and a fricative inherited from PIE (*s) that correspond to each other regardless of their centum/satem affiliation (though they are obviously subject to individual sound laws in the respective language / language family).

My point with the above example was that this is a word that requires a common root word from before the Centum/Satem split.

I have a small request. Can you make a thread with explanation of the sounds. I'm not sure often what are the sounds you are referring too. Is there a website on internet with these sounds recorded, so we can hear them?
 
Maybe becausse Gothic starts from Crimaia and Romania Staring Point?
Maybe cause Strabo clarifies Visigotjs at Balck sea at early 1rst Millenium AD,
or you do not Consider Goths as Germanic family speaking,
maybe cause centum satem is not that old in IE?

and at least dacian seems to be a link among modern Germanic and modern Slavic,
Centum-satem split in North should be that old, as you believe,
we probably have movements of population much near today than we believe to modern languages, even at known Historical times,
besides the typical R1a = Slavic is tottaly wrong
since we have very low ratio in areas of South Balkans, although we have south slavic languages,
by reading Herodotus we find 2 groups in Thracian the Getae and the Thracians
that probably is the time of split to Centum-satem
and these languages especially Getae should be at the move of Germans to west (already had started but did not finish at Herodotus times)

Considering that Herodotus mentions them as the 2nd Biggest nation in the world and from the Geografy Herodotus knew, he means either the Slavs either the Germans (all branches)

Just think the wallachians the Bastarnae and the Crimea
Gothic were spoken until 1900 at Crimea,

except if you believe that all the above were remnants of Viking invasion at Volga river and their settling at Ucraine,

there is still gothic spoken in the crimea today

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crimean_Gothic
 
You should have put your comment in quotation marks and added (Busbecq) at the end :)=)))
 
Zanipolo, I think you don't read what you link us to.
It says that Gothic, or some form of it, was extinct by 18 century there.

maybe I need to supply you with more infor than just wiki. Since I thought you clever enough to realise that this gothic in the crimea is from ancient times and not modern times .............or are you saying the Gothic raised its head in the 18th century and never existed before in the Crimea!
If this is what you believe then let me know where this 18th century gothic derived from?
 
First of all cool down, concentrate and read again what I wrote.
 

This thread has been viewed 32252 times.

Back
Top