PDA

View Full Version : How Old Prussian were the East Prussian Germans?



sparkey
31-01-13, 19:41
How much of the genetics of the East Prussian Germans who left (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flight_and_expulsion_of_Germans_%281944%E2%80%9319 50%29) in the mid 20th century actually came from the native Old Prussians of the region? If it was little, these people were not native to the area, and were in many cases returning home. If it was a lot, then the expulsion displaced people whose roots extended into the region since prehistory. Which is it?

I think this is an answerable question. We have Y-DNA samples of both Old Prussian descendants (http://www.familytreedna.com/public/PrussianYatviagian/) and of East Prussian Germans (http://www.familytreedna.com/public/ostpreussen_east_prussia/), as well as a good enough understanding of the Y-DNA distribution in Northern Germany to use as a baseline. I found the following percentages for the three populations of the four main haplogroups relative to one another:

Population: R1a : R1b : N : I1
OldP: 46% : 13% : 39% : 1%
EastP: 32% : 24% : 28% : 16%
NGer: 28% : 46% : 2% : 24%
[East Prussian German percentages take into account only the apparent East Prussian Germans from the Ostpreussen project]

The distribution of all four haplogroups of the East Prussian Germans predictably falls between the Old Prussians and Northern Germans. We can then average the haplogroup distances to come to an estimate of the percentage contributed by the Old Prussians. A distance can be calculated using the formula: |(NGer% - EastP%)|/(|(OldP% - EastP%)|+|NGer% - EastP%|)

We get:
Per R1a: 22%
Per R1b: 67%
Per N: 70%
Per I1: 35%
Average: 49%

So there we have it. On the Y line, the East Prussian Germans were about half Old Prussian. Since I expect the German settlers there to have contributed disproportionately to the Y line, in terms of overall contribution, I'd be comfortable in saying that the Old Prussian contribution was at least about half.

LeBrok
01-02-13, 02:49
Interesting. I have to admit I didn't expect so high germanic influence in East Prussia.

I'm baffled by Old Prussians numbers too. For example we have figures for I1 around 6% in Poland and Russia, but importantly also 6% for Lithuania and Latvia. These are the lowest numbers for adjacent areas, because we have bigger numbers in Estonia, Finland and Germany for I1. It is hard for me too believe that somehow Old Prussia was immune against I1 haplogroup.

These are their closest Baltic cousins.
Lithuania (form Eupedia) R1a 38%, R1b 5%, N 42%, I1 6%, Latvia R1a 40, R1b 12%, N 38%, I1 6%
If Old Prussians were their true blood brothers and not only cultural, it should average for them:
R1a 41%, R1b 10%, N 42%, I1 7% (at 100%)

Now it is hard to say if Templars were mostly North or South Germans, or how many of them where mercenaries from other parts of Western Europe. I'm not sure how many Germans moved as trades/immigrants into Prussian's cities later. I know there were many in Poland at this time, I assume there were many in German speaking Prussia.
Old Prussians were the most east Balts, bordering with east Germanics for perhaps a thousand years. I would expect their N to be lower then Lithuanian's and I1 higher, and in disagreement with Old Prussian numbers from post above.

Seeing many unknown I would concentrate on N haplogroup the most, as it was almost nonexistent in Teutonic Knights and in German Immigrants. And if we can trust N percentile in Baltic area, and study of East Prussians.

When I do this formula =(N 40%-28%)*100/ N 40% = 30% shift in N.


The rest of numbers might be too speculative for good conclusions.

I'm still surprised. I didn't expect this shift to go over 20%, perhaps even as low as 10%.

zanipolo
01-02-13, 07:22
How much of the genetics of the East Prussian Germans who left (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flight_and_expulsion_of_Germans_%281944%E2%80%9319 50%29) in the mid 20th century actually came from the native Old Prussians of the region? If it was little, these people were not native to the area, and were in many cases returning home. If it was a lot, then the expulsion displaced people whose roots extended into the region since prehistory. Which is it?

I think this is an answerable question. We have Y-DNA samples of both Old Prussian descendants (http://www.familytreedna.com/public/PrussianYatviagian/) and of East Prussian Germans (http://www.familytreedna.com/public/ostpreussen_east_prussia/), as well as a good enough understanding of the Y-DNA distribution in Northern Germany to use as a baseline. I found the following percentages for the three populations of the four main haplogroups relative to one another:

Population: R1a : R1b : N : I1
OldP: 46% : 13% : 39% : 1%
EastP: 32% : 24% : 28% : 16%
NGer: 28% : 46% : 2% : 24%
[East Prussian German percentages take into account only the apparent East Prussian Germans from the Ostpreussen project]

The distribution of all four haplogroups of the East Prussian Germans predictably falls between the Old Prussians and Northern Germans. We can then average the haplogroup distances to come to an estimate of the percentage contributed by the Old Prussians. A distance can be calculated using the formula: |(NGer% - EastP%)|/(|(OldP% - EastP%)|+|NGer% - EastP%|)

We get:
Per R1a: 22%
Per R1b: 67%
Per N: 70%
Per I1: 35%
Average: 49%

So there we have it. On the Y line, the East Prussian Germans were about half Old Prussian. Since I expect the German settlers there to have contributed disproportionately to the Y line, in terms of overall contribution, I'd be comfortable in saying that the Old Prussian contribution was at least about half.

I cannot find the old pruessen project ...can you link.

-Does old prussian mean baltic-prussian from the 9th century onwards?

-Are these the main markers or all of the markers, because there was found marker G2a3* in warmia at the time of christ. associated with the Heruli, Raetian G2a3b1 and northern greeks G2a3a(?)1 .....said to be circassian people.

- according to the teutonic web site, more than 80% of germans in Prussia initially came from saxons and thuringians.
-

sparkey
01-02-13, 18:23
I'm baffled by Old Prussians numbers too. For example we have figures for I1 around 6% in Poland and Russia, but importantly also 6% for Lithuania and Latvia. These are the lowest numbers for adjacent areas, because we have bigger numbers in Estonia, Finland and Germany for I1. It is hard for me too believe that somehow Old Prussia was immune against I1 haplogroup.

These are their closest Baltic cousins.
Lithuania (form Eupedia) R1a 38%, R1b 5%, N 42%, I1 6%, Latvia R1a 40, R1b 12%, N 38%, I1 6%
If Old Prussians were their true blood brothers and not only cultural, it should average for them:
R1a 41%, R1b 10%, N 42%, I1 7% (at 100%)

I think in most cases in the Baltic, I1 is a relatively late arrival, although 1% may indeed be a bit low. I don't think 7% is correct, either, though... seems high, considering that we would also expect Teutonic influence in places like Lithuania influencing the current I1 levels. So maybe 4% would be about right... but that would only change the I1 based percentage to 40%, and the average to about 50%. I think that "about half" is the result either way.


Now it is hard to say if Templars were mostly North or South Germans, or how many of them where mercenaries from other parts of Western Europe. I'm not sure how many Germans moved as trades/immigrants into Prussian's cities later. I know there were many in Poland at this time, I assume there were many in German speaking Prussia.

This is a legitimate criticism, and indeed, I picked Northern Germans as being representative of Teutonic Knights, but that might not be the case. I can recalculate if anybody has what they think is a more appropriate baseline distribution.


Seeing many unknown I would concentrate on N haplogroup the most, as it was almost nonexistent in Teutonic Knights and in German Immigrants. And if we can trust N percentile in Baltic area, and study of East Prussians.

When I do this formula =(N 40%-28%)*100/ N 4% = 30% shift in N.

The reason I'm not relying on individual haplogroups is that my EastP sample size is too small, so the error bars would be near 100%, i.e., the number would be meaningless.

My sample sizes for the 4 haplogroups:
OldP: 82
EastP: 25
NGer: 250 to 500 (per Maciamo)

I think either way, even with the small sample size and assumptions involved, it's apparent that the East Prussian Germans had too much N to be close to "pure German" and too much I1 to be close to "pure Old Prussian."


I'm still surprised. I didn't expect this shift to go over 20%, perhaps even as low as 10%.

I suspect the numbers would be around that for mtDNA, and probably hover in the 30% German influence range for autosomal DNA. (Just a guess.) One effect that may be in play is population transfer within Prussia and the German Empire over a long period of time. Not all of this DNA has to have come from the Teutonic Knights.

sparkey
01-02-13, 18:40
I cannot find the old pruessen project ...can you link.

It's the same as the Old Prussian descendants (http://www.familytreedna.com/public/PrussianYatviagian/) link I've posted.


-Does old prussian mean baltic-prussian from the 9th century onwards?

Basically, it means the Baltic natives to the area around modern Kaliningrad. What's the significance of the 9th century?


-Are these the main markers or all of the markers, because there was found marker G2a3* in warmia at the time of christ. associated with the Heruli, Raetian G2a3b1 and northern greeks G2a3a(?)1 .....said to be circassian people.

None of these populations have significant G2a. There isn't a clear fifth haplogroup... the fifth largest among the East Prussian Germans looks to have been I2a-Din (Polish drift?).


- according to the teutonic web site, more than 80% of germans in Prussia initially came from saxons and thuringians.

What is the haplogroup distribution for Saxony+Thuringia? Maybe something like: R1a 20% : R1b 60% : N 1% : I1 19%? In that case, I get that the East Prussian Germans were about 53% Old Prussian... still about half.

zanipolo
01-02-13, 20:28
It's the same as the Old Prussian descendants (http://www.familytreedna.com/public/PrussianYatviagian/) link I've posted.



I thought you where referring to this one

http://www.familytreedna.com/public/ostpreussen_east_prussia/default.aspx





Basically, it means the Baltic natives to the area around modern Kaliningrad. What's the significance of the 9th century?



i meant these people
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Old_Prussians
http://prusowie.pl/historia/who_were_the_prussians.php





What is the haplogroup distribution for Saxony+Thuringia? Maybe something like: R1a 20% : R1b 60% : N 1% : I1 19%? In that case, I get that the East Prussian Germans were about 53% Old Prussian... still about half.

this is stated from the teutonic order site, that is regarding the germans they enlisted for prussia


in regards to 9th century, the old baltic prussians are said to have originated in majority by the aestiian people who controlled from the vistula to the redon river ( curonia lands) , had venedi inside of them on the coast, had gothones, gepids, galidians, samians, etc .......
basically from the vistula river to present latvian lands.
there where no slavic or germanic people there, there is a higher chance there where finnic and nordic people mixed with the baltic 1500 to 2000 years ago

you even have as part of the germanic Catherine the Great of Russia personnel letters , that the prussian area comprised mostly of lettish people

zanipolo
02-02-13, 21:10
How much of the genetics of the East Prussian Germans who left (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flight_and_expulsion_of_Germans_%281944%E2%80%9319 50%29) in the mid 20th century actually came from the native Old Prussians of the region? If it was little, these people were not native to the area, and were in many cases returning home. If it was a lot, then the expulsion displaced people whose roots extended into the region since prehistory. Which is it?

I think this is an answerable question. We have Y-DNA samples of both Old Prussian descendants (http://www.familytreedna.com/public/PrussianYatviagian/) and of East Prussian Germans (http://www.familytreedna.com/public/ostpreussen_east_prussia/), as well as a good enough understanding of the Y-DNA distribution in Northern Germany to use as a baseline. I found the following percentages for the three populations of the four main haplogroups relative to one another:

Population: R1a : R1b : N : I1
OldP: 46% : 13% : 39% : 1%
EastP: 32% : 24% : 28% : 16%
NGer: 28% : 46% : 2% : 24%
[East Prussian German percentages take into account only the apparent East Prussian Germans from the Ostpreussen project]

The distribution of all four haplogroups of the East Prussian Germans predictably falls between the Old Prussians and Northern Germans. We can then average the haplogroup distances to come to an estimate of the percentage contributed by the Old Prussians. A distance can be calculated using the formula: |(NGer% - EastP%)|/(|(OldP% - EastP%)|+|NGer% - EastP%|)

We get:
Per R1a: 22%
Per R1b: 67%
Per N: 70%
Per I1: 35%
Average: 49%

So there we have it. On the Y line, the East Prussian Germans were about half Old Prussian. Since I expect the German settlers there to have contributed disproportionately to the Y line, in terms of overall contribution, I'd be comfortable in saying that the Old Prussian contribution was at least about half.

How much of the N marker is due to Prussian territory still being a Russian enclave today?

dublin
15-02-13, 18:20
This is a legitimate criticism, and indeed, I picked Northern Germans as being representative of Teutonic Knights, but that might not be the case. I can recalculate if anybody has what they think is a more appropriate baseline distribution.


Formed at the end of the 12th century in Acre (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Acre,_Israel), in the Levant (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Levant), the medieval Order played an important role in Outremer (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Outremer), controlling the port tolls of Acre. After Christian forces were defeated in the Middle East, the Order moved to Transylvania (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Burzenland) in 1211 to help defend the South-Eastern borders of the Kingdom of Hungary (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kingdom_of_Hungary) against the Kipchaks (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kipchak_people). The Knights were expelled by force of arms by king Andrew II of Hungary (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Andrew_II_of_Hungary) in 1225, after allegedly attempting to place themselves under Papal (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pope) instead of the original Hungarian sovereignty.[3]
(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Teutonic_Knights#cite_note-3)In 1230, following the Golden Bull of Rimini (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Golden_Bull_of_Rimini), Grand Master (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grand_Master_of_the_Teutonic_Knights)Hermann von Salza (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hermann_von_Salza) and Duke Konrad I of Masovia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Konrad_I_of_Masovia) launched the Prussian Crusade (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prussian_Crusade), a joint invasion of Prussia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prussia_(region)) intended to Christianize the Baltic Old Prussians (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Old_Prussians). The Knights had quickly taken steps against their Polish hosts and with the Emperor's support had changed the status of Chełmno Land (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Che%C5%82mno_Land) (also Ziemia Chelminska or Kulmerland), where they were invited by the Polish prince into their own property. Starting from Chełmno Land the Order created the independent Monastic State of the Teutonic Knights (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monastic_State_of_the_Teutonic_Knights) adding continuously the conquered Prussian's territory, and subsequently conquered Livonia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Livonia). The Kings of Poland (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Poland) accused the Order of holding lands rightfully theirs, specifically Chełmno Land and the Polish Kingdom's lands conquered later, such as Pomerelia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pomerelia) (also Pomorze Gdańskie or Pomerania), Kujawy (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kujawy), Dobrzyń Land (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dobrzy%C5%84_Land) etc..

so teutonic knights were coming from the south and i see no reason for them to be I1. i would say they were mostly R1b.

also you are forgetting 30 years war and what it had done to east germany. here is a map of depopulation. have a look at the prussian lands. the darker the color the bigger depopulation and later population replacement. so basically we have no way of knowing what the population was in today's eastern germany before the 30 years war based on today's genetics. and there were many more wars and population shifts it that areas since. based on history and archaeology i would say that original population was mostly r1a + I2 + N with very little I1...R1b came with germanic invasions from the west.

5822



in regards to 9th century, the old baltic prussians are said to have originated in majority by the aestiian people who controlled from the vistula to the redon river ( curonia lands) , had venedi inside of them on the coast, had gothones, gepids, galidians, samians, etc .......
basically from the vistula river to present latvian lands.
there where no slavic or germanic people there, there is a higher chance there where finnic and nordic people mixed with the baltic 1500 to 2000 years ago

i would not agree with this. i believe the population was mixed both genetically and culturally with common balto slavic (wendish) languages being spoken. they were probably also some scandinavians present as well.

sparkey
15-02-13, 20:01
so teutonic knights were coming from the south and i see no reason for them to be I1. i would say they were mostly R1b.

First of all, I misworded what I meant a bit. I don't think that the Germanic contribution to the East Prussian Germans was all from the Teutonic Knights. Secondly, I'm not claiming that they were I1 entirely, I'm trying to make a calculation based on an approximate distribution. My numbers have R1b as higher than I1, also. Even if the baseline we use for I1 contribution from Germanic peoples is less than the amount we see in our sample of East Prussian Germans, we'll still likely find them to be intermediate between German and Old Prussian distributions. What do you think the approximate R1a : R1b : N : I1 distribution was of all the Germanic people who moved to East Prussia over time? I'll run the numbers again if you have some you like better.


also you are forgetting 30 years war and what it had done to east germany. here is a map of depopulation. have a look at the prussian lands. the darker the color the bigger depopulation and later population replacement. so basically we have no way of knowing what the population was in today's eastern germany before the 30 years war based on today's genetics. and there were many more wars and population shifts it that areas since. based on history and archaeology i would say that original population was mostly r1a + I2 + N with very little I1...R1b came with germanic invasions from the west.

But I'm interested in the East Prussian German haplogroup distribution immediately prior to the flight and expulsion, not immediately prior to the 30 Years War.

zanipolo
15-02-13, 20:17
so teutonic knights were coming from the south and i see no reason for them to be I1. i would say they were mostly R1b.

also you are forgetting 30 years war and what it had done to east germany. here is a map of depopulation. have a look at the prussian lands. the darker the color the bigger depopulation and later population replacement. so basically we have no way of knowing what the population was in today's eastern germany before the 30 years war based on today's genetics. and there were many more wars and population shifts it that areas since. based on history and archaeology i would say that original population was mostly r1a + I2 + N with very little I1...R1b came with germanic invasions from the west.

5822




i would not agree with this. i believe the population was mixed both genetically and culturally with common balto slavic (wendish) languages being spoken. they were probably also some scandinavians present as well.

teutonic knights as per link mostly came from saxons and thuringians

http://www.imperialteutonicorder.com/


your fragmentation map has no prussia on it .........its only Poland. Its a map of the slavs butchering the historical people who resided there
(http://www.imperialteutonicorder.com/)http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Baltic_culture_in_Pomerania
original baltic people where butchered by the slavs in the darkages.

The teutonic knights where brought in by the pope on the request of the polish king because he had already lost 2 wars against the baltic prussians and could not stop the inland invasion by them especially in mazovia.

moving to modern times
The first Germans and Saxons arrived to the area with the Teutonic Order in order to Christianise Lithuanians and Prussians in the medieval period. However, the process of Germanisation was especially strong in the area only in the 18th-20th centuries, and therefore many German and Saxon speaking people were in fact germanised ethnic Prussians, Lithuanians or Masurians. Only German Hansetic merchants established a foothold in Prussia in the medieval period.
The Treaty of Visby (http://ib.frath.net/w/index.php?title=Treaty_of_Visby&action=edit&redlink=1) of 1949 ceded East Prussia to the Republic of the Two Crowns (http://ib.frath.net/w/Republic_of_the_Two_Crowns) and most of it became Prussia province of Veneda (http://ib.frath.net/w/Veneda). Initially the issue of Prussia created some discontent between Veneda and Lithuania as Lithuania seeked to acquire Lithuania Minor (http://ib.frath.net/w/index.php?title=Lithuania_Minor&action=edit&redlink=1), which the snorist Lithuanian State controlled in 1947-1949.

LeBrok
15-02-13, 21:00
original baltic people where butchered by the slavs in the darkages.


Any documents from Dark Ages proving your hypothesis?



The teutonic knights where brought in by the pope on the request of the polish king because he had already lost 2 wars against the baltic prussians and could not stop the inland invasion by them especially mazovia.


Poland had no king at this time, only many princes ruling smaller regions.

zanipolo
15-02-13, 23:58
Any documents from Dark Ages proving your hypothesis?

yes, which part , that baltic tribes did not live in pomerania ?



Poland had no king at this time, only many princes ruling smaller regions.

:confused2::startled:

There was a Polish King around 1000AD

Bolesław I Chrobry (aka Bolesław I the Brave or the Valiant) (Czech (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Czech_language): Boleslav Chrabrý) (http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/8/8a/Loudspeaker.svg/11px-Loudspeaker.svg.png (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Pl-Boles%C5%82aw-I-Chrobry.ogg) Polish (http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/2/2f/Pl-Boles%C5%82aw-I-Chrobry.ogg) (help (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Media_help)·info (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Pl-Boles%C5%82aw-I-Chrobry.ogg)); 967 – 17 June 1025), in the past also known as Bolesław I the Great (Wielki), was a Duke (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Duke) of Poland (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Poland) in 992–1025 and the first King of Poland (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/King_of_Poland) from 19 April 1025 until his death. He also ruled as Boleslav IV, Duke of Bohemia during 1002–1003.

LeBrok
16-02-13, 01:18
Do you have a problem with comprehensive reading?


yes, which part , that baltic tribes did not live in pomerania ?

I specifically asked you to clarify this claim:

original baltic people where butchered by the slavs in the darkages.




:confused2::startled:

There was a Polish King before 1000AD

Bolesław I Chrobry (aka Bolesław I the Brave or the Valiant) (Czech (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Czech_language): Boleslav Chrabrý) (http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/8/8a/Loudspeaker.svg/11px-Loudspeaker.svg.png (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Pl-Boles%C5%82aw-I-Chrobry.ogg) Polish (http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/2/2f/Pl-Boles%C5%82aw-I-Chrobry.ogg) (help (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Media_help)·info (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Pl-Boles%C5%82aw-I-Chrobry.ogg)); 967 – 17 June 1025), in the past also known as Bolesław I the Great (Wielki), was a Duke (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Duke) of Poland (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Poland) in 992–1025 and the first King of Poland (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/King_of_Poland) from 19 April 1025 until his death. He also ruled as Boleslav IV, Duke of Bohemia during 1002–1003.


Aren't we talking about 1226 AD, when first Templars arrived in Poland to fight Prussians?
What king who lived 200 years ago has to do with it???! Are you time traveling again zanipolo?

So let me stress it this time, there was no polish king in 1226AD, and in whole 13th century! Also Poland didn't exist as a country or a state at this time either, till unification of 14 century.

zanipolo
16-02-13, 02:44
Do you have a problem with comprehensive reading?



I specifically asked you to clarify this claim:





Aren't we talking about 1226 AD, when first Templars arrived in Poland to fight Prussians?
What king who lived 200 years ago has to do with it???! Are you time traveling again zanipolo?

So let me stress it this time, there was no polish king in 1226AD, and in whole 13th century! Also Poland didn't exist as a country or a state at this time either, till unification of 14 century.

Before I present it, I want to ask what part of eastern europe are you from.......Poland!

in regards to Polish kings..........Polish site say there where kings from 960AD to 1790AD...is this BS?

http://info-poland.buffalo.edu/web/history/kings/link.shtml

LeBrok
16-02-13, 04:06
Before I present it, I want to ask what part of eastern europe are you from.......Poland!

in regards to Polish kings..........Polish site say there where kings from 960AD to 1790AD...is this BS?

http://info-poland.buffalo.edu/web/history/kings/link.shtml

There were kings, but does it say continuously?

It is all there, just read the details.
http://encyclopedia.thefreedictionary.com/Timeline%20of%20rulers%20of%20Poland
Scroll to 13th century, do you see a king? All Dukes.

dublin
16-02-13, 13:52
zanipolo you said:


original baltic people where butchered by the slavs in the darkages.


Before I present it, I want to ask what part of eastern europe are you from.......Poland!

and now i have to say: what is your problem? are you racist in general or do you just hate slavs? your posts are more like political pamphlets then historical discussion. and who do you support in your political campaign? do you actually know who you are or do you just know who you would like to be? i see that you describe yourself as venet? no one in the world know for sure who venets were but you know that you are one? how pretentious can you get?

sparkey


First of all, I misworded what I meant a bit. I don't think that the Germanic contribution to the East Prussian Germans was all from the Teutonic Knights. Secondly, I'm not claiming that they were I1 entirely, I'm trying to make a calculation based on an approximate distribution. My numbers have R1b as higher than I1, also. Even if the baseline we use for I1 contribution from Germanic peoples is less than the amount we see in our sample of East Prussian Germans, we'll still likely find them to be intermediate between German and Old Prussian distributions. What do you think the approximate R1a : R1b : N : I1 distribution was of all the Germanic people who moved to East Prussia over time?

the reason i posted the depopulation map after the 30 years war is just to show you what one war can do to the population. 30 years war was waged during the period 1618–1648. the slavic crusade started in the 8th century. during this crusade slavic and baltic population from the suth baltic region was systematically destroyed or converted. huge amount of frankish population was settled in today's eastern germany and poland. so even before the teutonic knights arrived a major population shift was happening. i don't even want to go to the period before the 5th century. no one knows who rally lived in the east baltic at that time and before. my guess is balto slavic celtic nordic mix (N, R1a, I2, I1). you can see who i associate with which genetic type. i believe that the I2 haplogroup was the original la tene haplogroup and that R1b has nothing to do with it. i know that this basically introduces two type of "celts" but this explains a lot of things that sticking to R1b as "la tene" group can't.

i believe that R1b is the intruder haplotype in the central eaurope, which came from the south west. this is why you have a split between "celtic" languages and "celtic" material culture. R1b - I2. but this is only my opinion. and yes we can discuss it if you want.

sparkey
17-02-13, 08:04
the reason i posted the depopulation map after the 30 years war is just to show you what one war can do to the population. 30 years war was waged during the period 1618–1648. the slavic crusade started in the 8th century. during this crusade slavic and baltic population from the suth baltic region was systematically destroyed or converted. huge amount of frankish population was settled in today's eastern germany and poland. so even before the teutonic knights arrived a major population shift was happening. i don't even want to go to the period before the 5th century. no one knows who rally lived in the east baltic at that time and before. my guess is balto slavic celtic nordic mix (N, R1a, I2, I1). you can see who i associate with which genetic type. i believe that the I2 haplogroup was the original la tene haplogroup and that R1b has nothing to do with it. i know that this basically introduces two type of "celts" but this explains a lot of things that sticking to R1b as "la tene" group can't.

i believe that R1b is the intruder haplotype in the central eaurope, which came from the south west. this is why you have a split between "celtic" languages and "celtic" material culture. R1b - I2. but this is only my opinion. and yes we can discuss it if you want.

OK, so your challenge isn't with the "EastP" sample distribution, but with the "OldP" sample distribution. I'd agree that that is the more questionable of the two, because we have to ask: How many who claim Old Prussian ancestry are actually of Old Prussian ancestry?

Let's take an extreme of your position that they had no R1b; lots of N, R1a, and I2; and a bit of I1. So we get something like:
Population: R1a : R1b : N : I1
My OldP: 46% : 13% : 39% : 1%
Dublin's OldP: 40% : 0% : 40% : 20%

Based on that, I get:
Per R1a: 33%
Per R1b: 48%
Per N: 68%
Per I1: 100%
Average: 62%

So your hypotheses give a little more Old Prussian influence, with larger error bars.

zanipolo
18-02-13, 01:38
@Dublin

Racist, WTF ....the racist is you who have these nationalistic traits that everything is slavic.
proto-slavic is BS, proto-this is BS, proto-that is BS.......do we say proto-greek for areas of catalonia, marseilles, corsica, italy etc etc because Greeks where there.? Do we call them Greeks.
- lets see, illyrians are slavs, thracians are slavs, baltic people are slavs, scandinavians are slavs, irish are slavs.......what else did you say?

all tribes/peoples before migration of slav people are not slavs, the ancient tribes of Poland as an example are extinct. neither slav nor germanic. none are slav, all are slav, none are germanic, all are germanic, none are balts, all are balts.

And ...the term balto-slavic means a linguistic terminology, not ethnic, it can be spoken by people who are neither baltic or slavic.
as an example, Latin was spoke by people who where not Roman or "Italian". They are not proto-Roman.

So, you need to stop reciting the slav propaganda you where taught at school, a book which I have already noted in this site many times.

Next time, name the slav tribe you talk about and we will see

nordicwarrior
18-02-13, 03:31
I think Zanipolo may have specified the ninth century because of Charlemagne. Charlemagne (died 814 A.D.) did more to re-arrange the deck chairs of Germanic y-DNA than anyone else until the WWI/WWII era.

I agree that the Teutonic Knights were massively R1b, as were the Templars. I imagine many would have had genetic ties to R1b France?

al-kochol
25-04-13, 02:59
all tribes/peoples before migration of slav people are not slavs, the ancient tribes of Poland as an example are extinct. neither slav nor germanic. none are slav, all are slav, none are germanic, all are germanic, none are balts, all are balts.

What migration of Slavs? Where from? Weren't post-Scythian or proto-Slavic tribes living on the territory of modern Poland for ages?

zanipolo
25-04-13, 03:09
What migration of Slavs? Where from? Weren't post-Scythian or proto-Slavic tribes living on the territory of modern Poland for ages?

this is the late bronze-age

http://img802.imageshack.us/img802/8258/figure10.jpg (http://imageshack.us/photo/my-images/802/figure10.jpg/)

Uploaded with ImageShack.us (http://imageshack.us)

do not talk about linguistic slavs as being slavs, because they are not genetic slavs. IF linguistic means they are slavs , then we are both English because we are communicating to each other in English.

adamo
25-04-13, 03:16
Prussians where predominantly ancient Slavic Russians migrated to Poland and then acquiring certain minor Germanic or Baltic elements, with the Slavic element forever heavily dominating.

zanipolo
25-04-13, 04:39
Prussians where predominantly ancient Slavic Russians migrated to Poland and then acquiring certain minor Germanic or Baltic elements, with the Slavic element forever heavily dominating.

russians are not slav..........they are only slav by language, which count for zero in genetics

adamo
25-04-13, 04:53
I believe Russians are Slavs considering patrilineally they are 50% R1a.....that fits in just well with other high R1a nations such as Poland, Belarus, the Ukraine etc....but I may be wrong......? : ) to me they are Slavs genetically, culturally and even linguistically.

zanipolo
25-04-13, 05:36
I believe Russians are Slavs considering patrilineally they are 50% R1a.....that fits in just well with other high R1a nations such as Poland, Belarus, the Ukraine etc....but I may be wrong......? : ) to me they are Slavs genetically, culturally and even linguistically.

what....no marker belongs to no ethnicity.

are we all english on this forum coz we speak english?

by your way of thinking if you where to speak slav you would be a slav......makes no sense.

adamo
25-04-13, 05:43
no not if you speak a Slavic tongue, that's false, as linguistic influence from one culture to another is common occurrence throughout history, usually the victor in any given circumstance imposes cultural elements or linguistic ones upon a dominated culture. But if you are R1a patrilineally, that's a very good sign of Slavic genetic influence! : )

zanipolo
25-04-13, 06:12
no not if you speak a Slavic tongue, that's false, as linguistic influence from one culture to another is common occurrence throughout history, usually the victor in any given circumstance imposes cultural elements or linguistic ones upon a dominated culture. But if you are R1a patrilineally, that's a very good sign of Slavic genetic influence! : )

its not ethnicity...the roman conquered most of europe...where they all romans after learning Latin?

R1a came from R1 which came from R.....R1b cam from the same R.........are we all slav

your method makes no sense for genetic history, .....slavs are more than just R1a,
-these other slavs who are R1b or E or I etc also means these markers are slav markers too, going by your methods .......is this what you are saying?

adamo
25-04-13, 06:49
Yes but R1a and R1b split off a long time ago and took different time periods/migratory routes into Europe. This is what differentiates them, the split and the different final movement/ destination. Those other Slavs you mention that have R1b or E or I, they , paternally, have a different point of origin and arrival/ migration route to where they are now, they are not "Slavs" per say, genetically speaking.

zanipolo
25-04-13, 07:51
Yes but R1a and R1b split off a long time ago and took different time periods/migratory routes into Europe. This is what differentiates them, the split and the different final movement/ destination. Those other Slavs you mention that have R1b or E or I, they , paternally, have a different point of origin and arrival/ migration route to where they are now, they are not "Slavs" per say, genetically speaking.

I do not know why you make this illogical argument, there is no sound logic in wht you say. R1a was before the creation of any slav, any german, any gaul, any greek, any "everything" . R1a is in many many different ethnic people.

NO marker belongs to any nation, culture, ethnicity, language etc etc...........its fact, that's how it is.

Now some ..........alleles, SNP could have a majority of one ethnicity, but that's another story

LeBrok
25-04-13, 07:58
this is the late bronze-age

http://img802.imageshack.us/img802/8258/figure10.jpg (http://imageshack.us/photo/my-images/802/figure10.jpg/)

Uploaded with ImageShack.us (http://imageshack.us)

do not talk about linguistic slavs as being slavs, because they are not genetic slavs. IF linguistic means they are slavs , then we are both English because we are communicating to each other in English.


I have no idea why you would cite this map as a proof that Slavs existed in bronze age. Do we have any written document from around 1000 BC stating the location and existence of Slavs? Perhaps it would be different if they've talked about Proto-Slavs or Balto-Slavs, and in very unspecified location.

Furthermore, we have this map, that describes the area of, what they call, Baltic Culture. We have not slightest clue if this culture have anything to do with today's Balts, do we? Are yo sure that this Baltic culture has any continuity with Baltic tribes of iron age?

And yes, the language is a part of a culture. On other hand genetics can't describe Slavs exactly either. It is all in realm of statistics and self designation. I believe we had this conversation some time ago. You want to be a Venet, but are you really? Or maybe you are, because you really want to be?
I don't really care,... lol. But this is life, blurry lines, unspecified borders, incomplete definitions, lots of blending and grey areas. And everything is in flax of constant changes, that blurs things even further.

adamo
25-04-13, 08:34
There's also R1a in northern India, it arrived there via central Asian Slavs...R1a ( Slavs) also pushed into Europe, coming from the east, long after R1b men that had already penetrated deep into Europe at this time. These Slavs pushed into east-central Europe, reaching as far as Czech Republic, Slovenia, Poland etc. and bringing their genes and culture with them from the steppes of Russia and Ukraine....these R1a men, eventually developed into the Slavs we know today. How is that incorrect? I'm trying to solidify a link between a genetically homogenous/similar group of men and the stretch of territory they would eventually inhabit. "Slav" is just an indicatory name for these genetically homogenous men that share the same paternal migratory story and thus haplogroup and that spread themselves at different frequencies over certain territories over time. Since you refer to "Slavs" as being an abusive "generalization", I will now refer to these men as the men of R1a

zanipolo
25-04-13, 09:08
I have no idea why you would cite this map as a proof that Slavs existed in bronze age. Do we have any written document from around 1000 BC stating the location and existence of Slavs? Perhaps it would be different if they've talked about Proto-Slavs or Balto-Slavs, and in very unspecified location.

Furthermore, we have this map, that describes the area of, what they call, Baltic Culture. We have not slightest clue if this culture have anything to do with today's Balts, do we? Are yo sure that this Baltic culture has any continuity with Baltic tribes of iron age?

And yes, the language is a part of a culture. On other hand genetics can't describe Slavs exactly either. It is all in realm of statistics and self designation. I believe we had this conversation some time ago. You want to be a Venet, but are you really? Or maybe you are, because you really want to be?
I don't really care,... lol. But this is life, blurry lines, unspecified borders, incomplete definitions, lots of blending and grey areas. And everything is in flax of constant changes, that blurs things even further.


first of all, do not be ignorant as you supplied the map years ago - clearly this map irritates the Poles. Oh well,

2- we have spoken in private and I do not converse with super-nationalistic people as there is no point to the conversation.

3 - you want to say something to me, u know my email

I care little about your nationalistic views that you have as well....lol. WWII is over , move ahead.

If u have an issue with the map, then its supported by russians, but not by other slavs

Language is part of culture, but not part of genetics.......understand the not!

ElHorsto
25-04-13, 10:42
There's also R1a in northern India, it arrived there via central Asian Slavs...


There is no evidence for slavs in central asia except the recent Russian migrations and R1a history is much more complex.

adamo
25-04-13, 11:11
Wether they where culturally Slavs or not, they where R1a and must have possessed aryan features and blue eyes, they came from the Russian steppes of Central Asia and affected linguistically and culturally to a certain degree, northern Indians in particular have about 30% R1a. It's not R1b, its not southern continental Indian R2, its straight-up R1a. India's southern peninsula and lower social castes are higher in R2 ( the sinhalese of sri lanka have 40% R2 whereas it ususlly doesnt pass 20% even on the southern indian continent) whereas some regions of northern India have up to 50% R1a that mixed in with local matrilineal lineages such as mtdna M subclades for example, which Certain of them are especially prominent across the Indian peninsula. There are also notable frequencies of R1a in Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, the Pashtun of Afghanistan, TajiksTajiks and several other central Asian regions....it was brought here by R1a men but they mixed in with local mtdna haplogroups that differ from European ones.

LeBrok
25-04-13, 16:32
first of all, do not be ignorant as you supplied the map years ago - clearly this map irritates the Poles. Oh well,

2- we have spoken in private and I do not converse with super-nationalistic people as there is no point to the conversation.

3 - you want to say something to me, u know my email

I care little about your nationalistic views that you have as well....lol. WWII is over , move ahead.

If u have an issue with the map, then its supported by russians, but not by other slavs

Language is part of culture, but not part of genetics.......understand the not!

I'm claiming that there were no Slavs in Bronze Age, and you are telling me that I have nationalistic agenda???!!! Your logic always amazes me.

Atasas
30-05-13, 12:13
at sparkey

I would rather avoid dublin's post or opinions and actual discussion is moving off the topic
Knowing Aistian/Aestian/Baltic tribes being in the area for over 5000 years, I have no doubt about spread of the DNA to other regions, however real Prussian DNA had remained present in great numbers (especially in EastP) until 1947.
I am doubtful as actual DNA specimen is that genuine Prussian, knowing that German/Christian occupation wiped out native language and tradition in majority as in written/confirmed factors to the nation in the area.
Would you be able to provide anymore details about it please? (source, test sample origin)

sparkey
30-05-13, 17:04
I would rather avoid dublin's post or opinions and actual discussion is moving off the topic
Knowing Aistian/Aestian/Baltic tribes being in the area for over 5000 years, I have no doubt about spread of the DNA to other regions, however real Prussian DNA had remained present in great numbers (especially in EastP) until 1947.
I am doubtful as actual DNA specimen is that genuine Prussian, knowing that German/Christian occupation wiped out native language and tradition in majority as in written/confirmed factors to the nation in the area.
Would you be able to provide anymore details about it please? (source, test sample origin)

I'm a bit confused about your particular worry. Are you saying that you doubt OldP, and you suspect that it would be closer to EastP if it was a more reliable sample? Implying that Old Prussian influence on the East Prussian Germans is much higher than the ~49% I get?

My source for "genuine Prussian" (OldP) is the Prussian and Yatviagian Native DNA Project (http://www.familytreedna.com/public/PrussianYatviagian/). So, it's basically people who claim to be "genuine Prussian." I agree that this is my least reliable sample, and I wouldn't be surprised if my percentage is a bit too small as a result. But the high N and low I1, to me, indicates that it's probably not too far off. Those numbers square with other Balts, despite the fact that many samples in that project come from Poland.

Atasas
30-05-13, 18:03
Thanks!
(unfortunately I am not a member of family tree DNA), hence I get to see header only.
As regarding sample as who says who one is... so called German Prussian is no more 50%( by probability of occupation and assimilation, through centuries) real Prussian as test sample is meant to be... perhaps I am wrong, but having Latvian DNA altered with influx of R1b (Slavic) through similar timescale is present there greatly.
So yes, I believe, as for German Prussian- one, for real Prussian completely different result is expected.
As to WestP and EastP expectancy of being real representative Prussian meaning discounting both Slavic from Poland and German from Teutonic intermixes.
Thanks for the answers none the less!

Tomenable
13-10-14, 19:54
What is this formula you used? (HG higher % - lower %) * 100 / higher % = % shift in HG.

But this doesn't work when you have several HGs to compare. You would need to adjust to size of HGs.

Simple average is wrong. If you have one population with 4% of certain HG and another with 0% then distance is 100%.

But this is a relatively minor HG so you need to adjust your average to this fact, somehow.

On previous page you simply added up % for each of 4 HGs, and divided by 4. Not a good method.

sparkey
13-10-14, 20:20
What is this formula you used? (HG higher % - lower %)*100 / higher % = % shift in HG.

I posted the formula: |(NGer% - EastP%)|/(|(OldP% - EastP%)|+|NGer% - EastP%|)

The average was just an average of the four, you're right.


But this doesn't work when you have several HGs to compare. You would need to adjust to size of HGs.

Simple average is wrong. For example if you have one population with 4% of certain HG and another with 0% then distance is 100%.

But this is a relatively minor HG so you need to adjust your average to this fact, somehow.

On previous page you simply added up % for each of 4 HGs, and divided by 4. Not a good method.

The percentages are the percentage of Old Prussian contribution in East Prussian Germans suggested by each haplogroup independently. I left out minor haplogroups because they were more likely to be statistically unreliable, especially with the small sample size of EastP.

With that, if I adjust the average to account for relative percentage, I get an average of 47%. Drops a little from the 49% unadjusted average, but doesn't change the analysis really. Feel free to try out a different formula yourself.

Tomenable
16-10-14, 20:41
Ok thank you for explaining. BTW - here is the approximate extent (ca. 65,800 km2) of the pre-conquest territory of Prussian tribes:

http://s18.postimg.org/oouweh5qx/Prusai_Map.png

During years and centuries following the conquest of Old Prussians by Teutonic Knights with help of German, Polish, Russian and other European crusaders, groups of settlers started to settle in Prussia (some of those settlers of course eventually started to intermingle with local Old Prussian population):

- western and northern parts were destinations for mostly German settlers
- southern and eastern parts became destinations for mostly Polish settlers
- north-eastern parts became destinations for mostly Lithuanian settlers

I can give you some estimates for numbers of each group of settlers, as well as some maps showing distrubution of these three groups of settlers.

Tomenable
16-10-14, 21:22
Here are approximate directions of colonization by various ethnic groups of settlers: Polish settlers settled in regions which later became known as Masuria / Mazury (due to the fact that Poles who settled there were mostly Mazurs - that is, people from Mazovia), southern Warmia (Ermland), Powisle, southern Suvalkija and Podlasie. Lithuanian settlers settled in regions which later became known as Klein Litauen (Lithuania Minor / Prussian Lithuania / Mažoji Lietuva), Suvalkija and Memelland. Some Belarusians / East Slavs settled in Podlasie as well:

http://oi62.tinypic.com/301og7o.jpg

German-made ethnic map from year 1847 showing divisions for German-majority, Lithuanian-majority and Polish-majority areas in East Prussia:

Red line = border of East Prussia:

Green colour (in the north-west) = territories with German-speaking majority
Yellow colour (in the south) = territories with Polish-speaking majority
Grey colour (in the north-east) = territories with Lithuanian-speaking majority

http://s27.postimg.org/6cn08uk3n/1847.png

Of course it shows only majorities in each area. But each group extended also beyond areas where they were majority.

For example when Prussia was Poland's vassal state, in 16th - 17th centuries, Poles were 30% of inhabitants of the city of Konigsberg.

Sile
16-10-14, 23:19
Here are approximate directions of colonization by various ethnic groups of settlers: Polish settlers settled in regions which later became known as Masuria / Mazury (due to the fact that Poles who settled there were mostly Mazurs - that is, people from Mazovia), southern Warmia (Ermland), Powisle, southern Suvalkija and Podlasie. Lithuanian settlers settled in regions which later became known as Klein Litauen (Lithuania Minor / Prussian Lithuania / Mažoji Lietuva), Suvalkija and Memelland. Some Belarusians / East Slavs settled in Podlasie as well:

http://oi62.tinypic.com/301og7o.jpg

German-made ethnic map from year 1847 showing divisions for German-majority, Lithuanian-majority and Polish-majority areas in East Prussia:

Red line = border of East Prussia:

Green colour (in the north-west) = territories with German-speaking majority
Yellow colour (in the south) = territories with Polish-speaking majority
Grey colour (in the north-east) = territories with Lithuanian-speaking majority

http://s27.postimg.org/6cn08uk3n/1847.png

Of course it shows only majorities in each area. But each group extended also beyond areas where they were majority.

For example when Prussia was Poland's vassal state, in 16th - 17th centuries, Poles were 30% of inhabitants of the city of Konigsberg.

thanks

But the area was always west-baltic culture, they then became prusi who where again a west-baltic race, they then lost to the teutonic knights from saxony and thuringia after a 60 year war, they remained this baltic race and even when the last person stopped speaking ancient prussian , they where still noted as a baltic race....................................What % remains of this ancient race would be a fantastic answer to find

LeBrok
17-10-14, 02:55
Here are approximate directions of colonization by various ethnic groups of settlers: Polish settlers settled in regions which later became known as Masuria / Mazury (due to the fact that Poles who settled there were mostly Mazurs - that is, people from Mazovia), southern Warmia (Ermland), Powisle, southern Suvalkija and Podlasie. Lithuanian settlers settled in regions which later became known as Klein Litauen (Lithuania Minor / Prussian Lithuania / Mažoji Lietuva), Suvalkija and Memelland. Some Belarusians / East Slavs settled in Podlasie as well:



German-made ethnic map from year 1847 showing divisions for German-majority, Lithuanian-majority and Polish-majority areas in East Prussia:

Red line = border of East Prussia:

Green colour (in the north-west) = territories with German-speaking majority
Yellow colour (in the south) = territories with Polish-speaking majority
Grey colour (in the north-east) = territories with Lithuanian-speaking majority

http://s27.postimg.org/6cn08uk3n/1847.png

Of course it shows only majorities in each area. But each group extended also beyond areas where they were majority.

For example when Prussia was Poland's vassal state, in 16th - 17th centuries, Poles were 30% of inhabitants of the city of Konigsberg.

Thank you for explaining ethnic mixture of Prussia. I have to admit I knew nothing about Poles living in Warmia and Mazuria before 1945, although I was educated in Poland in 70s and 80s. For some unexplained reason nothing was mentioned much about Polish settlers there. To my understanding, after last Prussian speaker died around in eighteenth century, it was all uniform german culture since.
I was always wondering why in Mazury there are many polish sounding geographic names, either villages or lakes. I thought that German names were substituted by Polish ones after last war. However I couldn't explain why they were inconsistent in name changing and left out many still German sounding cities. Thanks to you I have my explanation now.

One thing baffles me though. If Polish and Lithuanian minorities in Prussia could exercise some cultural tolerance and survive till WW2. Why is that ethnic Prussians disappeared?
Was Prussia before very sparsely populated?

LeBrok
17-10-14, 03:07
thanks

But the area was always west-baltic culture, What is your definition of always? Pre 12th century? Last few hundred years it was German culture.



they then became prusi who where again a west-baltic race, Could you be more precise when expressing your thoughts? You are addressing the post with 1847 ethnic divisions! We are not in your head and we don't have a clue what you mean by Always or Then.


, they remained this baltic race and even when the last person stopped speaking ancient prussian , they where still noted as a baltic race Who did refer to them as a Baltic Race? As you can see from Tomenable explanation, population of Prussia consisted mainly of Poles, Lithuanians and Germans, not necessarily in this order.
Are you saying that you know more about population of Prussia than Prussian cartographer who created this map?

Sile
17-10-14, 03:33
[QUOTE=LeBrok;441909]What is your definition of always? Pre 12th century? Last few hundred years it was German culture.

:wary2:might depend on the nation..........i was born in australia with dual citizenship and my sons are dual as well, so, I guess 2 to 3 generations after the last person has disappeared. But then again, nationalism brought in a lot of lies into society in regards to ethnicity.
Then again, the scots seem to have lasted as a seperate identity even without a nation for over 200 years.

you let me know



Could you be more precise when expressing your thoughts? You are addressing the post with 1847 ethnic divisions! We are not in your head and we don't have a clue what you mean by Always or Then.

1,847 what


Who did refer to them as a Baltic Race? As you can see from Tomenable explanation, population of Prussia consisted mainly of Poles, Lithuanians and Germans, not necessarily in this order.
Are you saying that you know more about population of Prussia than Prussian cartographer who created this map?

american historian/archeologists Maria G.

What do you think the original prusi where?
Old Prussians

Ethnic group
The Old Prussians or Baltic Prussians were an ethnic group of indigenous Baltic tribes that inhabited Prussia, the lands of the southeastern Baltic Sea in the area around the Vistula and Curonian Lagoons.

states baltic tribes to me:grin:

LeBrok
17-10-14, 04:04
[QUOTE]

american historian/archeologists Maria G.

What do you think the original prusi where?
Old Prussians

Ethnic group
The Old Prussians or Baltic Prussians were an ethnic group of indigenous Baltic tribes that inhabited Prussia, the lands of the southeastern Baltic Sea in the area around the Vistula and Curonian Lagoons.

states baltic tribes to me:grin: And what this has to do with 1847 Prussia?

arvistro
17-10-14, 15:17
One thing baffles me though. If Polish and Lithuanian minorities in Prussia could exercise some cultural tolerance and survive till WW2. Why is that ethnic Prussians disappeared?
Was Prussia before very sparsely populated?
This thread shows that modern East Prussian ancestry people have 28% of N. Which would imply that more or less the same people (ok, according to Sparkey about 50% of male lineages) stayed there for centuries before and after crusades and changed their language to German (N is Balts thing here, neither immigrants from Poland, nor Germany had it in numbers). One problem though is we can't differentiate Prussian Balts from Lithuanian Balts...

btw, Sparkey, do you know of their surnames? Are they all Germans now?

Sile
17-10-14, 19:17
[QUOTE=Sile;441910] And what this has to do with 1847 Prussia?

Posts 41 and 42 go together

Tome* stated in #41
I can give you some estimates for numbers of each group of settlers, as well as some maps showing distrubution of these three groups of settlers.
then he continued it in #42, did'nt you read it?

Sile
17-10-14, 19:23
This thread shows that modern East Prussian ancestry people have 28% of N. Which would imply that more or less the same people (ok, according to Sparkey about 50% of male lineages) stayed there for centuries before and after crusades and changed their language to German (N is Balts thing here, neither immigrants from Poland, nor Germany had it in numbers). One problem though is we can't differentiate Prussian Balts from Lithuanian Balts...

btw, Sparkey, do you know of their surnames? Are they all Germans now?

surnames would not help as many due to nationalism where forced to change their surnames ( happens in every country)

but, I agree, lithuanian balts and prussian balts are similar ..........more so than with polish or german.

Aslo ancient "prussian balts" had flat bed graves which is also found from east of lower vistula river to as far north as somogotia ......This system is noted as west-baltic culture

LeBrok
17-10-14, 19:46
Posts 41 and 42 go together

Tome* stated in #41
I can give you some estimates for numbers of each group of settlers, as well as some maps showing distrubution of these three groups of settlers.
then he continued it in #42, did'nt you read it?
Who argues that they don't go together? They are very well written by Tomenable.
On other hand your post #43 is from another temporal dimension, with extremely incoherent and vague meaning and claims. Reread your post and tell us how it fits in 1847 Prussia.

Can you substantiate this claim:
when the last person stopped speaking ancient prussian , they where still noted as a baltic race Or is it your own invention? Once you at it, could you share with us your definition of race, and difference between Baltic race and Slavic for example?

arvistro
17-10-14, 20:37
surnames would not help as many due to nationalism where forced to change their surnames ( happens in every country)e
I'd argue that for N people there German surnames would mean Old Prussian origin, Lithuanian ones later immigration from Lithuania. Just assumption.

Sile
18-10-14, 02:55
I'd argue that for N people there German surnames would mean Old Prussian origin, Lithuanian ones later immigration from Lithuania. Just assumption.

ok,

there are a few surnames here
https://www.familytreedna.com/public/ostpreussen_east_prussia

sparkey
18-10-14, 06:37
I'd argue that for N people there German surnames would mean Old Prussian origin, Lithuanian ones later immigration from Lithuania. Just assumption.

Actually this is a pretty good point, it seems that the frequency of non-German names in EastP is greatest in haplogroup N, which could suggest that the amount of Old Prussian is being overstated. N was the high end outlier anyway. R1b seems to also be somewhat overstated by some people who probably don't belong in the project. In general though, the EastP data needs to be improved, there's no doubting that.

arvistro
18-10-14, 23:30
I checked Sile's link and surnames by haplo.

I1 - Miller, Fett, unknown, Baltrusch, Gatzke.
N - Wannagat, Lukoševičius, Baltrusch, Darge, Bannuscher, couple unknowns
R1a - a lot of surnames, and looks valid for most. Franz Pallaschke b.1883 is the best example on how I expect Germanized Old Prussian. Pallaschke is Pelašķis, plant used in herbal teas.
R1b - more Britts than others, including John Kennedy (?), but some valid German data.

Actually I was wrong on surnames. Prussian Lithuanians had Germanized Baltic ones, and I believe Old Prussians had also German/Germanized Baltic. See below, behindthename has some examples of Germanic surnames from Old Prussian language:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prussian_Lithuanians#Personal_names
http://surnames.behindthename.com/submit/names/usage/german-east-prussian

So, it is quite a mess. I don't think it is possible to tell Old Prussian from Lithuanian genetically, also both surnames for Old Prussians and Prussian Lithuanians are Baltic ones Germanized.. So best we could do is find a) ethnic Germans who claim East Prussian ancestry; and b) find if there are Baltic genes in them. But we won't be able to tell where those Baltic genes came from.
Btw - Lithuanian proportion of R1a and N is the same as in Old Prussian reference sample. OldP used in this thread has more R1b, but given how much strange R1b is added to East Prussian project, it could be same for R1b in Old Prussian estimate. So maybe assumption can be made that all Baltic tribes shared at least on 1200 AD and still share ~ the same R1a+N1c proportion.

sparkey
19-10-14, 02:37
Good analysis arvistro, let me know if you want me to get new estimates based on different percentages, like maybe excluding all other than the ones you find likely to genuinely belong to a proper EastP group. I suppose that such a group would be relatively high in R1a, which makes sense considering that the unfiltered group has lower R1a compared to what we would actually expect.

arvistro
19-10-14, 13:45
I will look through that once I have time. In the meantime I was caught by this guy:
Joannes Reihs, ca. 1800, Bischofstein, Ostpreußen.

His surname is intriguing. This is from unrelated wiki article: "Gothic reihs compared to Latin rex". I could not find in google origins for that surname, people with this surname live in Germany (origin from East Prussia), Poland and Latvia. Etimology must be of that of rex, 'reich' has to do with ruling in German, so those giving him the surname should have known the meaning. It has Baltic -s ending though. Also in Baltic languages similar words are attested - 'Rīks' is a 'tool' in modern Latvian, 'rīkot' is 'to organize' in Latvian, 'izrīkot' to rule out.

His haplo is intriguing. It is N1C1 Baltic L1025+, but is negative for known subgroups in eupedia (L591-, L551- Gediminids/Jagellons, L1027- Prince Giedrus clan).

So, we have a guy with surname of meaning of Gothic ruler, haplo ancestral to Baltic nobility and then there is this Old Prussian legend mythology of "According to the legend, Widewuto and Bruteno were kings of the Cimbri (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cimbri).[3] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Widewuto#cite_note-beres-3) Driven out by the Goths (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Goths) from their homeland, the Cimbri arrived to Ulmiganea, inhabited by rather primitive people who had no agriculture or cities.[4] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Widewuto#cite_note-mle2-4) Widewuto and Bruteno civilized the region and named it Prussia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prussia_%28region%29) after Bruteno (Pruteno)." Events according to legend dated about 6th century AD.

Interesting, although 1) how come Cimbri rulers were N1c1? Maybe those were not Cimbri, maybe those were variangians. 2) maybe the surname means nothing. Some local guy just wanted to feel important :)

arvistro
19-10-14, 22:01
Joannes Reihs, ca. 1800, Bischofstein, Ostpreußen.
There is a good chance his surname was actually Reiß, with etimology - tear, rip, drag. If so, unfortunately magic is lost.

arvistro
21-10-14, 11:32
Good analysis arvistro, let me know if you want me to get new estimates based on different percentages, like maybe excluding all other than the ones you find likely to genuinely belong to a proper EastP group. I suppose that such a group would be relatively high in R1a, which makes sense considering that the unfiltered group has lower R1a compared to what we would actually expect.
Ok, I will keep only German/Germanized surnames there.
I1 - Miller, Fett, Baltrusch, Gatzke (dropped unknown)
I2 - Oberst, Ruse, Nath, Hertel, Hering (I dropped Rimek, that is Polish surname)
N - Dunkel, Malmgren, Dargel, Reihs, Wannagat, Baltrusch, Darge, Bannuscher (I dropped Lithuanian surnames)
R1A - Glass, Schoenbach, Ermis, Krantz, Lichtenstein, Kaubre, Patz, Nisleit, Kurschus, Schroeder, Pallaschke (dropped Polish/Lithuanian/unknown)
R1B - Ursinus (?), Preuschoff, buchner, Krause, Quiring, Arlhofer, Völkner, Buchner, Pack (dropped Brittish, unknowns, but kept some Austrian German + Finnic Ursinus who descended from Prussia)

In total we have
4 I1 - 11%
5 I2 - 14%
8 N - 22%
11 R1A - 30%
9 R1B - 24%
Total - 37

I bolded those who seemed to me least Germanic or had Preus something, some of them for sure Germanized Baltic. If we only count those surnames, then
2 I1 - 13%
1 I2 - 7%
6 N - 40%
5 R1A - 33%
1 R1B - 7%
Total - 15

Guys with Germanized Baltic/Prussian surnames looks similar to Lithuanians. Big sample however has more R1B. Nothing surprising :)

LeBrok
21-10-14, 17:42
Ok, I will keep only German/Germanized surnames there.
I1 - Miller, Fett, Baltrusch, Gatzke (dropped unknown)
I2 - Oberst, Ruse, Nath, Hertel, Hering (I dropped Rimek, that is Polish surname)
N - Dunkel, Malmgren, Dargel, Reihs, Wannagat, Baltrusch, Darge, Bannuscher (I dropped Lithuanian surnames)
R1A - Glass, Schoenbach, Ermis, Krantz, Lichtenstein, Kaubre, Patz, Nisleit, Kurschus, Schroeder, Pallaschke (dropped Polish/Lithuanian/unknown)
R1B - Ursinus (?), Preuschoff, buchner, Krause, Quiring, Arlhofer, Völkner, Buchner, Pack (dropped Brittish, unknowns, but kept some Austrian German + Finnic Ursinus who descended from Prussia)

In total we have
4 I1 - 11%
5 I2 - 14%
8 N - 22%
11 R1A - 30%
9 R1B - 24%
Total - 37

I bolded those who seemed to me least Germanic or had Preus something, some of them for sure Germanized Baltic. If we only count those surnames, then
2 I1 - 13%
1 I2 - 7%
6 N - 40%
5 R1A - 33%
1 R1B - 7%
Total - 15

Guys with Germanized Baltic/Prussian surnames looks similar to Lithuanians. Big sample however has more R1B. Nothing surprising :)

Interesting. If I understood right it will make Germen blood rich in R1b, which is no surprise, but also same R1a level as original Prussians, and with rather low N.

sparkey
21-10-14, 17:45
Thanks, I'll use the "total" numbers. Scaling out I2, I have:
R1a: 34%
R1b: 28%
N: 25%
I1: 13%
Maybe I shouldn't do this, but I2 hasn't been so large in any sample group until now. I2 isn't that helpful unless we divide it into I2-M223 and I2a-Din, and then the percentages drop. I think that the I2a-Din is mainly indicative of Polish input anyway, rather than Old Prussian input, so a future calculation with better samples groups may have to try to take 3 source populations into account. N still seems to be the main indicator of Old Prussian input.

Anyway, we get:
Per R1a: 30%
Per R1b: 55%
Per N: 62%
Per I1: 48%
Average: 49%
Adjusted average: 48%

About the same, but less noisy.

arvistro
25-10-14, 21:19
I am trying to find something on Livonian (modern Latvian/Estonian) nobility. To find how much of Baltic German barons were from Order brothers and how much if any from locals.
Have not found anything yet.

Tomenable
30-10-14, 00:23
Sorry for absence, I'm busy in RL recently, I will answer your questions and give more info on East Prussia's population's origins as soon as possible.

BTW - I posted one new post in another thread and I got a message that it is awaiting moderator's approval before it apears. What's the reason for this?

I later wanted to edit that post (change a few things and add some new stuff) but I couldn't because it is still not there (still awaiting approval perhaps).

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

Edit: Here I got no such message (in this thread moderator's approvals are not required?).

LeBrok
30-10-14, 00:40
BTW - I posted one new post in another thread and I got a message that it is awaiting moderator's approval before it apears. What's the reason for this?
No reason. Sometimes it happens even for moderators.

Melancon
20-11-14, 21:33
So there we have it. On the Y line, the East Prussian Germans were about half Old Prussian.

When you mention "Old Prussian", do you mean, as in Baltic? Not German Prussians? (Extinct Prussian Balts: Relative to Lithuanians?)

I can certainly see the possibility that East Germans and Northern Polish people could share some Prussian/Baltic DNA. (From what I gathered, the original Prussians were Balts relative to Lithuanians and Latvians; although their culture and language is far extinct.)

Alfhari
09-12-14, 15:06
Hello arvistro,

it is quite amusing to find one's own data (the tested Y-Haplogroup and the name of my great-great-great-great grandfather) in a public forum.

If You'd like to learn a bit more (although there is not that much to be learned, I am afraid) just give me a shout.

Kind regards,


Oliver Rei (Reiss, Reihs, ...)

arvistro
09-12-14, 22:54
Hello arvistro,

it is quite amusing to find one's own data (the tested Y-Haplogroup and the name of my great-great-great-great grandfather) in a public forum.

If You'd like to learn a bit more (although there is not that much to be learned, I am afraid) just give me a shout.

Kind regards,


Oliver Rei� (Reiss, Reihs, ...)
For starters do you know original or first attested version of the surname?
It looks to me Old Prus/Latvian -s ending on top of root. Reih+s or Reis+s. But I could also be wrong since you had politician Wawereit I guess who is also Prussian/Lithuanian but without -s.
Also which place does he come from exactly? I guess you have not found anyone of deeper ancestry? Do you know his occupation?
Sorry for millions of questions :) Reih-s is a ruler in Gothic and Reik-s in Old Prussian, so this option is intriguing. Reiss on other hand might not be so fun.

vigilantexplorer
10-12-14, 22:41
prussians were originally baltic russians, prussia is the shortcut of POBALTSKAJA RUS in language
no wonder when the modern so called germans have a lot of slavic and celtic blood, the original germanic tribes were haplogroup I
the slavs and celts are haplogroup R, just look which haplogroup is the most dominant in germany. it is the haplogroup R
in fact most german cities were slavic settlements before germany came to be
lipsko/leipzig, chemnica/chemnitz, drezdjany/dresden, roztok/rostock, pomorje/pommern, brlina/berlin

Taranis
10-12-14, 23:12
prussians were originally baltic russians, prussia is the shortcut of POBALTSKAJA RUS in language

Sorry, that is wrong. The Old Prussians clearly were speakers of a Baltic, not a Slavic one. Other than Polish (there were Poles present in the area of southern Masuria already in the times of the Kingdom of Prussia), there was no (significant) presence of Slavic speakers before 1945.


no wonder when the modern so called germans have a lot of slavic and celtic blood, the original germanic tribes were haplogroup I
the slavs and celts are haplogroup R, just look which haplogroup is the most dominant in germany. it is the haplogroup R

That's a very simplified (and wrong, at that) view of Haplogroups R1a and R1b. Both Haplogroup R1a and R1b clearly were present in Central Europe much earlier: the earliest attestation, to my knowledge, of R1a in Central Europe is from Eulau, ca. 2600 BC (Corded Ware culture), and likewise, of R1b from Kromsdorf, ca. 2600-2500 BC (Bell Beaker Culture).

Its plausible that both R1a and R1b were tied with the expansion of the Indo-Europeans, but to equate R1a with "Slavic" and R1b with "Celtic" gives a completely incorrect picture.


in fact most german cities were slavic settlements before germany came to be
lipsko/leipzig, chemnica/chemnitz, drezdjany/dresden, roztok/rostock, pomorje/pommern, brlina/berlin

For the area of eastern Germany (where all the cities, and the region of Pommerania, that you enumerated, are located), as well as the eastern part of modern Schleswig-Holstein (Lübeck, notably), this is indeed true. Most towns there date from the early medieval ages and were founded by the West Slavic tribes which settled there during the migration period. However, for the rest of Germany this isn't the truth, because there never was a large scale West Slavic settlement west of the rivers Elbe and Saale (the Thuringian Saale river, that is). Further, west of the Rhine and south of the Danube, towns in Germany largely date from the Roman period (as these areas were part of the Roman Empire), and in addition to Latin (eg. "Köln" - Colonia Agrippina and "Regensburg" - Castra Regina), you also often have Celtic names in these area (e.g. "Neumagen" - Noviomagus, "Worms" - Borbetomagus). Beyond that, most town names in Germany are, who might have guessed, of German(ic) origin... :-p

Sile
11-12-14, 19:08
Sorry, that is wrong. The Old Prussians clearly were speakers of a Baltic, not a Slavic one. Other than Polish (there were Poles present in the area of southern Masuria already in the times of the Kingdom of Prussia), there was no (significant) presence of Slavic speakers before 1945.



That's a very simplified (and wrong, at that) view of Haplogroups R1a and R1b. Both Haplogroup R1a and R1b clearly were present in Central Europe much earlier: the earliest attestation, to my knowledge, of R1a in Central Europe is from Eulau, ca. 2600 BC (Corded Ware culture), and likewise, of R1b from Kromsdorf, ca. 2600-2500 BC (Bell Beaker Culture).

Its plausible that both R1a and R1b were tied with the expansion of the Indo-Europeans, but to equate R1a with "Slavic" and R1b with "Celtic" gives a completely incorrect picture.



For the area of eastern Germany (where all the cities, and the region of Pommerania, that you enumerated, are located), as well as the eastern part of modern Schleswig-Holstein (Lübeck, notably), this is indeed true. Most towns there date from the early medieval ages and were founded by the West Slavic tribes which settled there during the migration period. However, for the rest of Germany this isn't the truth, because there never was a large scale West Slavic settlement west of the rivers Elbe and Saale (the Thuringian Saale river, that is). Further, west of the Rhine and south of the Danube, towns in Germany largely date from the Roman period (as these areas were part of the Roman Empire), and in addition to Latin (eg. "Köln" - Colonia Agrippina and "Regensburg" - Castra Regina), you also often have Celtic names in these area (e.g. "Neumagen" - Noviomagus, "Worms" - Borbetomagus). Beyond that, most town names in Germany are, who might have guessed, of German(ic) origin... :-p

We must presume that baltic language is far older than slavic language and that slavic is a southern branch of Baltic. I see no ancient historian having known about any slavic , so its only IMO a language that was around in a small pocket in northern Ukraine pre year zero and florished in AD times to breakout in the darkages as we see

Goga
11-12-14, 19:48
We must presume that baltic language is far older than slavic language and that slavic is a southern branch of Baltic. I see no ancient historian having known about any slavic , so its only IMO a language that was around in a small pocket in northern Ukraine pre year zero and florished in AD times to breakout in the darkages as we see
This is new to me!

vigilantexplorer
12-12-14, 03:03
We must presume that baltic language is far older than slavic language and that slavic is a southern branch of Baltic. I see no ancient historian having known about any slavic , so its only IMO a language that was around in a small pocket in northern Ukraine pre year zero and florished in AD times to breakout in the darkages as we see
come on slavic is one of the oldest languages in the world it is completely rooted in sanskrit! all INDOeuropeans came out of INDIA and migrated into europe this is why now the haplogroup R is so dominant in western and eastern europe and of course our urheimat in india.. ever wondered why we resemble strongly indians?!

http://www11.pic-upload.de/12.12.14/yxt76wrdm.jpg

in fact slavs are the most dominant ethnic group of europe!


Its plausible that both R1a and R1b were tied with the expansion of the Indo-Europeans, but to equate R1a with "Slavic" and R1b with "Celtic" gives a completely incorrect picture.
if you compare the haplogroup map of europe with the languages in those areas it makes a logical sense to conclude haplogroup I1 is the root of germanic tribes, R1b of celtic and R1a of slavic tribes. it is obvious!

vigilantexplorer
12-12-14, 03:45
Well, both the Baltic and Slavic languages are often said to be from a common Balto-Slavic tongue descended from the original Indo-European tongue. The Balto-Slavic speech diverged into separate Baltic and Slavic branches each of which gave rise to new languages in turn. Certainly, the dividing line between Balt and Slav was never clear and distinct.

While the Baltic-speaking Old Prussians were absorbed by the Germans, the Baltic-speaking peoples of what is now Belarus were absorbed by the Slavs. The East-Baltid racial type is common among the North Slavs and among Balts such as Latvians and Lithuanians. The pagan Slav deity Perun is essentially the same as the Baltic Perkunas/Perkons.

More importantly, while the name “Prussia” originally referred only to the land between the rivers Vistula and Memel (and was thus Baltic-speaking) the political entity under the Hohenzollerns called “Prussia” would later expand to take in areas which were indubitably once Slavic. Slavic languages were once spoken over much of what later became Germany, as far west as the rivers Elbe and Saale and beyond, as the Slav Wagrians of Holstein attest.

A Slav language was spoken on the island of Rügen until around AD 1400, this island having pagan Slav shrines. The Slav Obodrite people of Mecklenburg retained their language until the Eighteenth Century. All these peoples were assimilated by the Germans. The Slavic Sorbs (Wends) of the Lausitz region to the east of Dresden retain their language and identity to this day, the northern Sorb dialect being like Polish, the southern Sorb dialect is like Czech.

The Slavs have left a legacy of placenames throughout what was once Prussia. Pomerania (once again Slavic) derives its name from the old Slavic tribe the Pomoryanie, whose name means “by the sea,” which renders into modern Polish as Pomorze, a more accurate transcription from the old Slavic than the German “Pommern” which was a corruption of this. Leipzig was once the Slavic Lipsk from “Lipa” (lime tree). Chemnitz derives from the Slavic root “Kamien” (stone).

Placenames of Slavic origin include those ending with the suffixes –ow, -in (as in Berlin), -au (as in Spandau) and –itz (as in Colditz and Auschwitz).

Sile
12-12-14, 07:52
come on slavic is one of the oldest languages in the world it is completely rooted in sanskrit! all INDOeuropeans came out of INDIA and migrated into europe this is why now the haplogroup R is so dominant in western and eastern europe and of course our urheimat in india.. ever wondered why we resemble strongly indians?!

http://www11.pic-upload.de/12.12.14/yxt76wrdm.jpg

in fact slavs are the most dominant ethnic group of europe!


if you compare the haplogroup map of europe with the languages in those areas it makes a logical sense to conclude haplogroup I1 is the root of germanic tribes, R1b of celtic and R1a of slavic tribes. it is obvious!

your scenario does not fit with Roman or greek historians ..........

vigilantexplorer
12-12-14, 15:13
your scenario does not fit with Roman or greek historians ..........
it does not have to because genetics and linguistics prove my point.. i do not believe mainstream history i first prove the accuracy of history through science because anyone could write anything to fit his agenda.

vigilantexplorer
12-12-14, 15:40
your scenario does not fit with Roman or greek historians ..........
more proof:

you can compare her by dna to any slavic, germanic or celtic woman except she is not depigmented!
6925

6927

6922

6926

6923

The Roman historian Cornelius Tacitus (56-118 A.D.) said this about the Germanic tribes (Not the same as Germans): All have fierce blue eyes, red hair, huge frames, fit only for a sudden exertion. (by the way the romans and greeks were originally from the haplogroup J and their enemies from haplogroup R(the so called red haired barbarians) sacked in from the east and north europe!
https://farm9.staticflickr.com/8253/8676203150_d05bfca903.jpg

this depigmented indian child fits nicely into roman history description..
6924

Sile
12-12-14, 18:50
more proof:

you can compare her by dna to any slavic, germanic or celtic woman except she is not depigmented!
6925

6927

6922

6926

6923

The Roman historian Cornelius Tacitus (56-118 A.D.) said this about the Germanic tribes (Not the same as Germans): All have fierce blue eyes, red hair, huge frames, fit only for a sudden exertion. (by the way the romans and greeks were originally from the haplogroup J and their enemies from haplogroup R(the so called red haired barbarians) sacked in from the east and north europe!
https://farm9.staticflickr.com/8253/8676203150_d05bfca903.jpg

this depigmented indian child fits nicely into roman history description..
6924

since 1970 when a private family donated the original tacitus papers to a museum in Rome , access to texts has been given to certain scholars, the concensus is that tacitus does not know what he is talking about, that he was never in the vicinity etc etc......... we are only left with ptolemy as the most accurate historian in the area we are speaking about.
watch for the future as scholars disect tacitus works............IMO it will not be as bad as Jordanes, but it will be close.

vigilantexplorer
12-12-14, 21:10
http://www.utexas.edu/cola/centers/lrc/general/ie-lg/Balto-Slavic.html

Alfhari
04-01-15, 11:03
For starters do you know original or first attested version of the surname?
It looks to me Old Prus/Latvian -s ending on top of root. Reih+s or Reis+s. But I could also be wrong since you had politician Wawereit I guess who is also Prussian/Lithuanian but without -s.
Also which place does he come from exactly? I guess you have not found anyone of deeper ancestry? Do you know his occupation?
Sorry for millions of questions :) Reih-s is a ruler in Gothic and Reik-s in Old Prussian, so this option is intriguing. Reiss on other hand might not be so fun.

Hello,

as there is quite a bit of family history involved I sent you a direct message.

In short: our name is supposed to be from South Germany.


Kind regards,


Alfhari

vandalorum
04-01-15, 16:28
So Veneti were/are R1a M-558, Germans were R1a M-458 (look at Herodotus map - down, right corner) and Balts were N1c + M558 people? When Celts (and Normans with I1) won over west "German" tribe they named themselves "Germans" and mixed language?

I have a friend with Gajda name. it could be not only from bagpipe music instrument but also from old prussian Gaidys which means cock or wheat.

arvistro
04-01-15, 22:24
Hello,

as there is quite a bit of family history involved I sent you a direct message.

In short: our name is supposed to be from South Germany.


Kind regards,


Alfhari
Like I replied you in private. There is some interesting thing going on in geni.com, where part of possibly Baltic Reihs is managed by someone named von Zmuda, who comes from these guys:
http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Schmude_%28Adelsgeschlecht%29

Apparently they got related at some point, I could not find in geni.com how and why.

Von Zmuda/Schmude apparently were noble family, and to me sounds like they were from Samogitia (Lithuania) originally (Samogitia= "Zhmud" in ancient Russian texts).

vandalorum
04-01-15, 22:34
Samogitia = Żmudź in polish language, so von Zmuda = von Żmuda. Only Poles have word dużo (much/many, a lot) in use. Other Slavs use word "mnogo", we Poles only as "mnożyć" = multiply. We have a few other old-prussian words in polish language.

edit:
in latvian - daudz
in lithuanian - daug
it sound similar to "dużo"

arvistro
06-01-15, 09:57
It is the same duzho - daug/daudz.
1) au - u
Draugs/draugas - drug
Sauss/sausas - suhoi
Ausas/auss - uho
2) g - zh (Slavic); g - dz (Latvian)
Gyvoti - zhitj/zhivatj; gyvoti - dzīvot

It is possible early form was smth like daugiai (because for g-dz/g-zh change g sound should have been followed by i/e; in draugas/draugs/drug such change did not happen since it was followed by a originally).

vandalorum
06-01-15, 14:23
It is the same duzho - daug/daudz.
1) au - u
Draugs/draugas - drug
Sauss/sausas - suhoi
Ausas/auss - uho
2) g - zh (Slavic); g - dz (Latvian)
Gyvoti - zhitj/zhivatj; gyvoti - dzīvot

It is possible early form was smth like daugiai (because for g-dz/g-zh change g sound should have been followed by i/e; in draugas/draugs/drug such change did not happen since it was followed by a originally).

We Poles have word "druh" - companion in scout organisations. But we use word "kolega" not "druh" in everyday speaking.
On the other side Balts have plenty of fe(i)nno-ugrian languages, for example and from YT sources:
"
Происхождение летувисского языка:

Корни летувисского языка происходят от корней финоугорских языков народов Урала.
И. Ласков: -"Близкое соседство в прошлом с пермскими наречиями имеет и летувисский язык... Ещё одно хранилище пермских слов-язык латышский. Причём в нём встречаются такие слова которых нет в летувисском языке: например, riets "заход" (солнца) -коми рыт "вечер". В тоже время в латышском языке пермизмов заметно меньше, чем в летувисском языке. Это ясно указывает, что летувисские пермизмы пришли не через латышский язык с востока, а непосредственно из пермских диалектов.



Примеры слов летувисского языка слева, справа слова коми-зырянского и коми-пермяцкого языков обозначаемые буквой «к.», удмуртские буквой «у.».


Е в летувисском языке звук близкий к «я», ė-«e», y длинное «и», č –«ч», š –«ш», ž – «ж».


ramus (тихий, спокойный) к. рам (тихий)


Mazgoti (мыть пол, посуду) к. мыськыны (мыть)


Vyras (мужчина, муж) к. верöс (муж)


Erdvas (просторный) к. эрд (поляна в лесу)


Kurti (топить в печи) к. гор (печь)


Akėti(бороновать) к. агас (борона)


Šaunus (бравый, удалый, к. шань (славный, добрый)


славный)


Kutė (хлев) к. гид (хлев)


Lupa (губа) к. льöб (губа)


Meilė (любовь) к. мыл (желание)


Kopti(подниматься, лезть) к. кыпöдны (поднимать)


Ežia (граница) к. эжа (невспаханная земля)


Tošis (береста) к. туис (сосуд из бересты)


Turis (объём) к. турас (объём)


ačiu, древн. форма attiu (спасибо) к. аттьö (спасибо)


tekas(баран) к. така (баран)


gaselis (прим. лампа) к. гас (лампа)


ubas (поле опред. разм.) к. ыб (поле)


alsys (утомительный) у. альсыраны (утомлять)


andai (недавно) к. öнтай (недавно)


ardyti (распарывать) к. орйодлыны (рвать)


arti (около) к. орд (около)


baras (участок) к. бор (участок)


bigas (куцый) к. пегыш (маленький, низкорослый)


birus (сыпучий) к. пыриг (крошки)


brungzti (гудеть) к. брунгыны (гудеть)


burgėti (бить струёй) к. боргыны (течь)"

Sorry it was wrote in russian (so not slavic, russian is only 30% slavic) language. All nationalities are genetic soup now. I don't want to be misunderstood, it should not be taken as offensive. Maybe this one word is "летувиски язык" - but I am also not an expert of russian language.

arvistro
06-01-15, 14:44
It shows cognates of Baltic vs Permic, some of those not even cognates. It is obviously done by either amateur or agenda linguist. Some linguist proffessional with free time should take a closer look on who borrowed from whom. My intuition tells me it was Perm language who borrowed those words and also it tells me it might have borrowed those either from Lithuanians, Dniepr Balts, Slavs (?) or even some old Indo-Iranian tribes.
Rāms, Vīrs - those are in Sanscrit
Most others sound Baltic. Give me 5 random words from there, I will check them randomly to test this hypothesis, because I dont want to waste time on whole list.
Kipodni - seems to rather be cognate to podnjatj, not to kāpti :)

The only word which makes me wonder is aču (attiu). Need to check in etimological sources. Hm:
http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/a%C4%8Di%C5%AB
"Etymology unclear. Related to Belarusian (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Belarusian_language) dialectal а́цю (http://en.wiktionary.org/w/index.php?title=%D0%B0%D1%86%D1%8E&action=edit&redlink=1) (ácju, “thank you”), а́цiць (http://en.wiktionary.org/w/index.php?title=%D0%B0%D1%86i%D1%86%D1%8C&action=edit&redlink=1) (ácicʹ, “to thank”), Polish (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Polish_language) dialectal aću (http://en.wiktionary.org/w/index.php?title=a%C4%87u&action=edit&redlink=1), aciu (http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/aciu#Polish) (“thank you”) , although these may be Balticisms (http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/Balticism)."

This might have come from Uralic languages, someone needs to check with Uralic cognates. Latvians use Paldies (help God!), Russians Spasibo (help God!).

vandalorum
06-01-15, 14:54
Thanks for explanation. When I copied this, there was no answer over this youtube post. I wanted to find something but then I changed my goals for I1 and R1b people. It is a pity that I can not find money for genetic tests, so one time I try to be Celt, second - R1a and even N1c. But with my white pigmentation, gray eyes I should stay in North (west or east) Europe.

Sile
07-01-15, 04:30
So Veneti were/are R1a M-558, Germans were R1a M-458 (look at Herodotus map - down, right corner) and Balts were N1c + M558 people? When Celts (and Normans with I1) won over west "German" tribe they named themselves "Germans" and mixed language?

I have a friend with Gajda name. it could be not only from bagpipe music instrument but also from old prussian Gaidys which means cock or wheat.

The venedi where too minor in numbers to be R1a-M558........but as stated by polish genetics, they where R1a-Z92

vandalorum
07-01-15, 11:10
I belive more my... intuition. And others, who are looking for true. Genetic data still changing. And for that I started to belive that "Old Germans" so I Y-DNA people came to Balkans, and east germanic tribes have I2a-DIN. It is from this thread (by ClintCG): http://www.eupedia.com/forum/threads/26903-How-did-I2a-Din-get-to-the-Balkans/page31

Tomenable
20-01-15, 00:11
I will give more info on East Prussia's population's origins

As promised - based on several good history books and other sources I made a preliminary estimate of the origin of East Prussian population. My estimate is for population of originally ethnic Prussian territory, which later (after 1283) was located within the borders of the Teutonic Order's state in Prussia. So my estimate doesn't include descendants of Prussians and Yotvingians who stayed outside of those borders and it also doesn't include areas within those borders which were not originally part of ethnic Old Prussian territory. If we go by 1816 administrative borders then this area includes almost entire East Prussia - apart from the Memel county, and also seven north-eastern counties of West Prussia (Elbing, Marienburg, Stuhm, Rosenberg, Löbau, Marienwerder and Graudenz).

Basically we are talking about violet area located within blue political borders (map below):

http://s18.postimg.org/ugrj31r1l/Prussians.png

I stopped counting at 1816 because around that point in time (1815-1816) population of this area reached about 1 million people.

So I would need another graph for years after 1816, because natural growth was high and population was rocketing.

Also, in the 19th century (especially the 2nd half of it) emigration from this area considerably exceeded immigration to it (for the first time in history) - so probably proportions of various ancestries did not change much after 1816, at least not due to immigration.

Here is the result of my calculations - as of 1816 (the end of the period for which I made estimates): 32-33% Old Prussian ancestry, 28-29% German, 19-20% Polish, 16-17% Lithuanian, 1-2% Dutch & Scottish, 1-2% Huguenot & French, 1-2% other:

Estimated percentage of each ancestry within the total population pool throughout time:

http://s4.postimg.org/7dv2gfcgd/East_Prussians.png

And size of the population during 600 years from the early 1200s to the early 1800s:

http://s17.postimg.org/5z2blsm33/East_Prussians_B.png

This estimate is rather quite optimistic for Prussians, though - I actually expected to arrive at a lower figure of around 25% percent, but not lower than 20%. So consider 32% or 1/3 as high estimate (but probable one according to this model), 25% as medium estimate and 20% as low estimate. Some of Old Prussians were assimilated by Polish and Lithuanian immigrants to East Prussia throughout history. Later, however, most of Prussian Lithuanians and most of Prussian Poles became Germanized, so most of this ancestry is today in Germany anyway. But some of their descendants still live in Poland and Lithuania.

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

Now when it comes to languages:

During first 25 years of the 19th century only about 49-50% up to 60-64% of this area's population spoke German as first language. The rest spoke Polish (32/31% - 24/23%) and Lithuanian (19% - 13/12%) as first languages. Often German as secondary. Of course not everyone who spoke Polish or Lithuanian had purely Polish or Lithuanian ancestry. They had also assimilated groups of Prussians.

LeBrok
20-01-15, 00:35
Great job, very interesting. I actually counted on original Prussian population being around 80%. I didn't expect so many emigrants coming from Germany, Poland and Lithuania.

What happened in 1711? First graph shows decline only of Lithuanian population, percentage wise. Some disaster mostly felt by Lithuanian population?

What happened in 1660? Another big crises, but this time affecting all populations equally?

Sile
20-01-15, 00:57
Great job, very interesting. I actually counted on original Prussian population being around 80%. I didn't expect so many emigrants coming from Germany, Poland and Lithuania.

What happened in 1711? First graph shows decline only of Lithuanian population, percentage wise. Some disaster mostly felt by Lithuanian population?

What happened in 1660? Another big crises, but this time affecting all populations equally?

this for 1711

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


this for 1660

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Second_Northern_War (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Northern_War_plague_outbreak)

Tomenable
20-01-15, 00:57
So, if my estimate is correct, then what approximate proportions haplogroups would a population of mixed origin like this have?

Tomenable
20-01-15, 00:59
What happened in 1711? First graph shows decline only of Lithuanian population, percentage wise. Some disaster mostly felt by Lithuanian population?

Yes, it was a plague which affected eastern part of East Prussia more than other parts, and Lithuanians were unfortunate to be the majority of population there. So percent of Lithuanians decreased after that plague, and natural growth + immigration of new Lithuanians did not restore the pre-prague percent. Polish-speaking Masurians in southern part of East Prussia also suffered slightly more than average.


What happened in 1660? Another big crises, but this time affecting all populations equally?

It was the war of 1655 - 1660 and a plague plus a famine that followed.

Yes, it affected all populations more equally than the plague of 1708-1711. But slightly more affected were Polish-speakers in southern regions and Lithuanian in eastern, due to Tatar raids against those regions. Many people were killed and even more captured by Tatars.

Between 1405 and 1466 there were 5 wars against Poland-Lithuania and 3 plagues of epidemic diseases.

In 1226 - 1283 there was the original Prussian crusade during which they were conquered.

That crusade caused about 1/3 - 35% population loss (from 170,000 to 110,000) - including also refugees who escaped abroad.

Twilight
13-10-15, 03:46
How much of the genetics of the East Prussian Germans who left (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flight_and_expulsion_of_Germans_%281944%E2%80%9319 50%29) in the mid 20th century actually came from the native Old Prussians of the region? If it was little, these people were not native to the area, and were in many cases returning home. If it was a lot, then the expulsion displaced people whose roots extended into the region since prehistory. Which is it?

I think this is an answerable question. We have Y-DNA samples of both Old Prussian descendants (http://www.familytreedna.com/public/PrussianYatviagian/) and of East Prussian Germans (http://www.familytreedna.com/public/ostpreussen_east_prussia/), as well as a good enough understanding of the Y-DNA distribution in Northern Germany to use as a baseline. I found the following percentages for the three populations of the four main haplogroups relative to one another:

Population: R1a : R1b : N : I1
OldP: 46% : 13% : 39% : 1%
EastP: 32% : 24% : 28% : 16%
NGer: 28% : 46% : 2% : 24%
[East Prussian German percentages take into account only the apparent East Prussian Germans from the Ostpreussen project]

The distribution of all four haplogroups of the East Prussian Germans predictably falls between the Old Prussians and Northern Germans. We can then average the haplogroup distances to come to an estimate of the percentage contributed by the Old Prussians. A distance can be calculated using the formula: |(NGer% - EastP%)|/(|(OldP% - EastP%)|+|NGer% - EastP%|)

We get:
Per R1a: 22%
Per R1b: 67%
Per N: 70%
Per I1: 35%
Average: 49%

So there we have it. On the Y line, the East Prussian Germans were about half Old Prussian. Since I expect the German settlers there to have contributed disproportionately to the Y line, in terms of overall contribution, I'd be comfortable in saying that the Old Prussian contribution was at least about half.

Is there any chance that you have any ancestrydna percentages for the East Prussian Germans? If this hypothesis holds up, then the East Prussian Germans should have an average of 1/4 Finland/NW Russian & over 1/4% East European.

F117stealth
22-01-16, 15:30
In case that is not speficied yet, Old Prussian, were mostly N- Y Z16981, ca. 2600 years old mutation. Most likely what is representative to them is also L 550 (2900 y BP) and L 1025 (2600 y BP) mutations. Old prussian are of finno ugric provenance (N1c1). Their culture (at least the language) is extinct but their genes not. Closest cousins are modern balts: lithuanian and latvians. So everytime that carries N Z16981 mutation most likely is a direct descendent of one of the following tribes: Pomesanians (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pomesanians), Warmians (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Warmians), Pogesanians (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pogesanians), Natangians (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Natangians), Sambians (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sambians), Nadruvians (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nadruvians), Bartians (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bartians), Skalvians (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Skalvians), Sudovians (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sudovians) - Yotvingian (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yotvingians), Galindians (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Galindians).

arvistro
22-01-16, 21:01
In case that is not speficied yet, Old Prussian, were mostly N- Y Z16981, ca. 2600 years old mutation. Most likely what is representative to them is also L 550 (2900 y BP) and L 1025 (2600 y BP) mutations. Old prussian are of finno ugric provenance (N1c1). Their culture (at least the language) is extinct but their genes not. Closest cousins are modern balts: lithuanian and latvians. So everytime that carries N Z16981 mutation most likely is a direct descendent of one of the following tribes
That Z16981 thing is based on what?

On a side note:
According to ftdna N project 7 of 8 (9) known N Latvians are under z16981.

F117stealth
26-01-16, 17:33
That Z16981 thing is based on what?

On a side note:
According to ftdna N project 7 of 8 (9) known N Latvians are under z16981.

Well, FTDNA says so. 17 out of 17 BIG Y tested have Z16981 and it is considered to be the ground mutation for western balts.

arvistro
26-01-16, 18:56
Well, FTDNA says so. 17 out of 17 BIG Y tested have Z16981 and it is considered to be the ground mutation for western balts.


That would mean we are West Balts in Latvia. But I dont think majority of us come from Prussian tribes.

sparkey
26-01-16, 22:18
That would mean we are West Balts in Latvia. But I dont think majority of us come from Prussian tribes.

It would seem reasonable to me to suggest that N-Z16981 was an important haplogroup among Old Prussians, but was not exclusive to them.

arvistro
26-01-16, 23:30
It would seem reasonable to me to suggest that N-Z16981 was an important haplogroup among Old Prussians, but was not exclusive to them.
It is rather interesting haplogroup with its own story that I hope is told some day.
Right now to me it looks like there lived one group of Balts somewhere East Prussia/Modern Lithuania - Z16981 folk. Then arrived folk from East (the Lithuanian subclades of Baltic M2782+) and Z16981 like in billiard got pushed in all directions. Part into Latvia, other part into Prussia, some got as far South as Czech/Slovak, some stayed in place.

edit: of course another alternative is Z16981 expansion from West Baltic area into territories of modern Lithuania and more so Latvia.

F117stealth
27-01-16, 14:45
That would mean we are West Balts in Latvia. But I dont think majority of us come from Prussian tribes.

Yep, baltic latvians are not only west balts, but also eastern balts and perhaps fennoscandians (L 1025).

arvistro
27-01-16, 16:19
Yep, baltic latvians are not only west balts, but also eastern balts and perhaps fennoscandians (L 1025).
Do you know East Baltic cases in Latvia? I so far have seen only 9 Latvian N with known sub haplo. 7 of them under West Baltic (77%), 2 under East Baltic (23%). Those 2 both are from East Latvia (Latgale).
Let's see what new data brings.

F117stealth
27-01-16, 18:04
Do you know East Baltic cases in Latvia? I so far have seen only 9 Latvian N with known sub haplo. 7 of them under West Baltic (77%), 2 under East Baltic (23%). Those 2 both are from East Latvia (Latgale).
Let's see what new data brings.

Yep. There are some. You could check some baltic data bases for some key SNP mutations within N projects like: L551, L591, L1027, Z16975.

onforward
20-04-16, 02:40
Hey, I have read a lot of the posts on this thread to help answer questions on family origins.

First, my background. My father was from Germany originally and moved over to the United States in 1980. My father pointed out that the family was Prussian. Our last name is Ruddies and there isn't really too many Ruddies left after the World Wars. I have been my family's genealogical detective since I was 18. My mother's side is Norwegian and the family has been very good at recording our history. My father's side not so much. Even when he was alive, he knew nothing about the family history. Just that we came from what would be northern Poland today.

Now, I am familiar with the Germans coming into the region in the fourteenth century and the Germanization of the region over the years. And I am familiar with how the region has had a lot of admixture from different ethnic groups. So I always assumed I had a strong German background.

Well, I was wrong. About a year ago, I did DNA test. I expected some strong western European influence in my DNA. But when the results came back, it turned out that I had none. Aside from the Norwegian and a bit of Irish, I was primarily eastern European. I have a strong feeling that I am more closely related to modern day Lithuanians than Polish or any other Slavic groups.

With this information, I am inclined to assume that my family may have been in the area for a very long time. Though Germanized but ethnically Prussian.

I suppose the reason why I am leaving a post is in hopes that some light could shined on my family origins and maybe even the origin and meaning of the Ruddies surname.

But further research is needed and I do need to find a very comprehensive DNA test that will go more into depth of the genetic history of my family.

Any help would be greatly appreciated.

Alexander.

Mordred
11-08-16, 00:21
Can't answer your questions but as far as I know the majority of people living within the Prussian borders where Poles. The larger cities where inhabited by German, or Prussians in this case. The countryside by poles. I do wonder though if poles living within The Prussian borders would identify as Prussians or Poles or both..

Sent from my SM-T815 using Tapatalk

sparkey
11-08-16, 16:33
Can't answer your questions but as far as I know the majority of people living within the Prussian borders where Poles. The larger cities where inhabited by German, or Prussians in this case. The countryside by poles. I do wonder though if poles living within The Prussian borders would identify as Prussians or Poles or both..

Sent from my SM-T815 using Tapatalk

There definitely seems to be some Polish input into the sample populations that I wasn't able to extract out cleanly, as evidenced by the fact that the next-most-common haplogroup besides the ones I used to calculate was I2a-Din.

Rustik
02-09-20, 09:09
Hi, Tomenable!
The graph you mentioned above appears no more:

"Estimated percentage of each ancestry within the total population pool throughout time:"

Could you be so kind and post it again?

PS. I've been reading your posts about the investigation you made on the colonization of Prussia on other forums, it's amazing.

Rustik
02-09-20, 09:13
Hi, Tomenable!
The graph you mentioned above appears no more:

"Estimated percentage of each ancestry within the total population pool throughout time:"

Could you be so kind and post it again?

PS. I've been reading your posts about the investigation you made on the colonization of Prussia on other forums, it's amazing.