PDA

View Full Version : Y-DNA haplogroups in Silesia before WW2



Tomenable
22-05-16, 11:17
In several Projects of Family Tree DNA I've gathered all samples from people born before WW2 in Silesia.

Most of these men lived in the 19th, 18th, early 20th, but some in the 17th, 15th, one even died in the 12th century.

In total I have found 100 Y-DNA samples from descendants of pre-war inhabitants of Silesia. Here we go:

Sample/kit # - place of origin of most distant ancestor, ancestor's SURNAME (last SNP tested):

(I list modern names of settlements, if you copy & paste a name in Google, German version will show up too):

I1-M253 haplogroup - 13 samples from Silesia:

kit #372952 - Silesia, RAUTENBERG (M253+)
kit #E14316 - Żagań, VON NAUMANN (Z58+)
kit #N11115 - Stary Kisielin/Zielona Góra, LIEHR (Z58+)
kit #468007 - Boronów, BULLA (S2077/S2078+)
kit #91645 - Dąbrówka Dolna, WELNA (Z63+)
kit #119162 - Kobyla Góra, MAGNUSKI (L1237+)
kit #188658 - Pietrzykowice, BIALEK (S2078+)
kit #228663 - Karvina, KOPEL (Z140+)
kit #268090 - Rokliny, FRANKE (M253+)
kit #115240 - Stobrawa, DEUTSCHER (Z2336/L22+)
kit #N37278 - Wrocław, DEMSKE (M253+)
kit #167103 - Sośnicowice/Tarnowskie Góry, BOTUR (Z63+)
kit #155178 - Kłodzko, ROSENBERGER (Z140+)

J2-M172 haplogroup - 5 samples from Silesia:

kit #B27771 - Suszec, JURECZKO (Z631+)
kit #278599 - Wrocław, GABEL (M92+)
kit #N27660 - Zabrze, NN (M172+)
kit #N45394 - Silesia, GILL (FGC21360+)
kit #66138 - Wrocław, ZWIEFKA (L283+)

E1b1b haplogroup - 4 samples from Silesia:

kit #E18170 - Sternalice, STEINERT (PF1975+)
kit #83418 - Racibórz, FIEGLER (V13+)
kit #233387 - Krasne Pole (Ostrava), HONHEISER (V13+)
kit #155147 - Lubin, SEIFLEIN (V13+)

G2a haplogroup - 3 samples:

kit #285720 - Gliwice, BEIDEL (Y8903+)
kit #231079 - Uszyce, KOWALSKI (P15+)
kit #265686 - Lutomia Górna, POHL (L13/L78+)

N1c haplogroup - 3 samples:

kit #N49541 - Rydułtowy, MEISEL (L1025+)
kit #N107445 - Złotoryja, NOWAK (Y4706+)
kit #E11197 - Górki, BLACH (L1025+)

G2b haplogroup - 2 samples:

kit #123331 - Bolesławiec, BRODA, (M377+)
kit #72341 - Podkamień, ADER (M377+)

J1 haplogroup - 2 samples:

kit #77418 - Praszka, GUTFRAJND (Z18271+)
kit #N13360 - Pszczyna, WARZECHA (P58+)

I2a haplogroup - only 1 sample:

kit #300972 - Laskówka, SCHINDLER (CTS5966+)

T haplogroup - 1 sample:

kit #161332 - Zielona Góra, SCHÜTZ (P322+)

Q haplogroup - 1 sample:

kit #89372 - Mikołów, DE KRUPPA (L275+)

R1b-M269 haplogroup - only 11 samples from Silesia:

kit #227479 - Cieszyn, FIEDLER (M269+)
kit #E1877 - Lower Silesia, QUADE (M269+)
kit #E2541 - Ludwigsthal, SCHIRM (U106, S10185+)
kit #132073 - Kotulin Mały, KORUS (M269+)
kit #B4978 - Ostrava, SELIGA (U152, DF103+)
kit #422423 - Oława, KARPEL (U152, Z49+)
kit #N89895 - Żagań, SCHULZ (U106+)
kit #N114363 - Nowa Sól, SCHMIDT (P312, DF99+)
kit #E4911, E14624 - Kolsko, LEFEBER (P312, L21+)
kit #N11619 - Okunin, SCHILLING (M269+)
kit #176123 - Gliwice, KONIECZNY (Z2103, BY593+)

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

R1a haplogroup - 54 samples from Silesia:

kit #464408 - Osina Mała, KUBE (M512+)
kit #40132 - Zielona Góra, WEDERICH (M417+)

Branch R1a-L664:

kit #277963 - Siemianowice Śląskie, KORFANTY (L644+)

Branch R1a-Z280:

kit #156577 - Stronie Śląskie, SZCZEPANEK (M417+, Z280?)

Z92:

kit #192545 - Głubczyce, SALZMANN (Z280>Z92+)

CTS1211:

kit #164946 - Lubliniec, SCHEMBOR (Z280>CTS1211?)
kit #249444 - Błotnica Strzelecka, MAXELON (Z280>CTS1211?)

YP343:

kit #N38418 - Krzyżowa, BULAWA (Z280>CTS1211>YP343*)

YP380:

kit #N116699 - Ochaby, STANIEK (Z280>CTS1211>YP343>YP340>YP371>YP372>YP380*)
kit #295227 - Warszowice, LASSEK (Z280>CTS1211>YP343>YP340>YP371>YP372>YP380?)

P278.2:

kit #E5412 - Opole, KLEEMANN (Z280>CTS1211>YP343>YP340>P278.2+)
kit #N35951 - Ostrava, NN (Z280>CTS1211>YP343>YP340>P278.2+)
kit #163780 - Niewiesze, KOCUR (Z280>CTS1211>YP343>YP340>P278.2+)

CTS3402>YP237:

kit #465642 - Bładnice Górne, GAZDA (Z280, CTS3402>YP237+)
kit #161130 - Wrocław, PFEILER (Z280, CTS3402>YP237>YP235?)
kit #302244 - Frydek-Mistek, NOWAK (Z280, CTS3402>YP237>YP951, YP1018+)

CTS3402>Y33:

kit #210950 - Legnica, HAMANN (Z280, CTS3402>Y33, YP4335*)
kit #N17626 - Katowice, SOBALLA (Z280, CTS3402>Y33>CTS8816>Y2898>Y2902+)

S18681:

kit #E8695 - Wrocław, MASUR (Z280, CTS3402>Y33>CTS8816>S18681)
kit #N156262 - Wrocław, WIANCKO (Z280, CTS3402>Y33>CTS8816>S18681, YP314+)
kit #329518 - Brody (Pförten), KAKOSCHKE (Z280, CTS3402>Y33>CTS8816>S18681, YP314>YP1409+)

Branch R1a-M458:

Clade L260:

kit #188725 - Mysłowice, PATALONG (M458, L260?)
kit #349840 - Katowice, ROSTEK (M458, L260?)
kit #172283 - Wałbrzych, DINTER (M458, L260?)
kit #124617 - Oleśnica, LASSOTA (M458, L260?)
kit #N33335 - Budziska, GRZESIK (M458, L260?)
kit #N18946 - Żywiec, TOMASZEK (M458, L260?)
kit #N13715 - Komprachcice, SAKRY (M458, L260+)
kit #363910 - Międzyrzecze, ROLKA (M458, L260+)
kit #E1842 - Stare Karmonki, FREYER (M458, L260+)
kit #N3865 - Laskowice, PACH (M458, L260+)
kit #114248 - Srebrna Góra, KRUSZKA (M458, L260+)
kit #E4579 - Czerwona Woda, NN (M458, L260+)
kit #173783 - Zielona Góra, VOGT (M458, L260+)

YP1337:

kit #288504 - Rostkowice, STRZODA (M458, L260>YP1337+)

YP254:

kit #N111740 - Kałki, SCHULZE (M458, L260, YP256>YP254?)
kit #53667 - Wilamowice, SCHNEIDER (M458, L260, YP254+)
kit #376660 - Brzęczkowice, CHECHELSKI (M458, L260, YP254>YP414+)
kit #154913 - Niemodlin, HANNAK (M458, L260, YP254>YP414>YP610+)

Y2905:

kit #439329 - Mikołów, SZKOWRON (M458, L260, YP254>Y2905+)
kit #338484 - Świniary, MIRKE (M458, L260, YP254>Y2905+)
kit #260299 - Głubczyce, BERNATEK (M458, L260, YP254>Y2905>YP1364+)
kit #329542 - Wrocław, WARKUS (M458, L260, YP254>Y2905>YP1364+)
kit #N77026 - Panki, KONARSKI (M458, L260, YP254>Y2905>YP1364>YP3927+)

Clade L1029:

kit #178329 - Chorzów, BENTKOWSKI (M458, CTS11962?, L1029?)
kit #102574 - Wałbrzych, SCHOBER (M458, CTS11962?, L1029?)
kit #373829 - Głubczyce, LEX (M458, CTS11962>L1029+)
kit #E11879 - Raszowa, GONDRO (M458, CTS11962>L1029+)
kit #271280 - Milicz, SCHWABE (M458, CTS11962>L1029+)
kit #199575 - Wrocław, Piotr WŁOSTOWIC (M458, CTS11962>L1029>YP593+)
kit #97621 - Wrocław, JUNG (M458, CTS11962>L1029>YP263>Y2921+)

Branch R1a-Z93:

kit #E7096 - Rościsławice, BAUM (Z93, Z94-)
kit #232033 - Krapkowice, SCHARON (Z93, Z2124>Z2123, Y934*)
kit #N103033 - Silesia, CHRISTMANN (Z93, Z2124>Z2122, CTS6+)

Tomenable
22-05-16, 11:23
Summary of Silesian (pre-1939) Y-DNA haplogroups:

Sample size = 100

R1a ---- 54
I1 ------ 13
R1b ---- 11 (surprisingly low)
J2 ------ 5
E1b ---- 4
G2a ---- 3
N1c ---- 3
J1 ------ 2
G2b ---- 2
I2a ----- 1 (surprisingly low)
T ------- 1
Q ------- 1

Total - 100

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

I placed this thread in "Ancient DNA" subforum because these 100 people lived in past centuries.

One person in this sample of 100 men - Piotr Włostowic - even lived in the 11th & 12th centuries:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Piotr_W%C5%82ostowic

Most of them, however, were born during the 19th and the early 20th centuries (all before WW2).

Of course Y-DNA samples were collected from modern paternal descendants of these 100 men.

Tomenable
22-05-16, 12:30
And R1a subclades:

Z283 - 48/54
--Z280 - 18/48
----Z92 - 1/18
----CTS1211* - 8/18
------CTS3402 - 8/18
--M458 - 30/48
----L260 - 23/30
----CTS11962** - 7/30
Z93 - 3/54
L664 - 1/54
M417+ - 1/54
M512+ - 1/54

*Without CTS3402
**Mostly L1029+

Tomenable
22-05-16, 13:16
Subclades of R1a-Z283 in Silesia and in the "Polish Project" (PL-LT Commonwealth Project):

1) "Polish Project" FTDNA:

R1a-Z283+ in total - 1167, including:

--Z280 - 595/1167
----Z92 - 119/595
----CTS1211* - 102/595
------CTS3402 - 363/595
--M458 - 556/1167
----L260 - 300/556
----CTS11962** - 247/556

2) Silesian sample FTDNA:

R1a-Z283+ in total - 48, including:

--Z280 - 18/48
----Z92 - 1/18
----CTS1211* - 8/18
------CTS3402 - 8/18
--M458 - 30/48
----L260 - 23/30
----CTS11962** - 7/30

*Without CTS3402
**Mostly L1029+

Tomenable
23-05-16, 13:55
It seems that this map validates that the sample of 100 posted above is representative:

The map is from Robert Gabel's website: http://www.robertgabel.de/

It also can be found here: https://www.familytreedna.com/groups/germany/about/results

http://www.robertgabel.de/haplosgermany_e.png

Though my Silesian sample of 100 includes men from both German and Polish Projects.

Greying Wanderer
23-05-16, 16:00
just from that previous map it looks like either

1) R1b from west and R1a from the east

or

2) R1b expanded from the east first and then R1a expanded over them

with y dna I either

1) being there first but holding on the most strongly in the north

or

2) being there first and losing out everywhere but with a bit of a reconquista in the north from Scandinavia

LeBrok
23-05-16, 19:16
Good job Tomenable.

Is there a way to split results into lower and upper Silesia? I wonder if there is a difference?

Tomenable
23-05-16, 20:32
Is there a way to split results into lower and upper Silesia?

If I have time I will make a map with all 100 samples, so we will see how it looks like geographically.

As for this sample:

KUBE (born 1832), M512+, Osina Mała (German: Wenig Nossen), #464408


Kube is most likely Y2902. I've found even more samples but to some of them I have no access at all.

By the way - FTDNA Silesian Project will be established in a few weeks:


I will be possibly included as an admin to the Silesian DNA project (which is to be opened in the next few weeks). We will gather as many "safe" samples as we can and many autochtonous Silesians are to be tested thanks to the Silius Radicum association.

I did some searching, and it is a very interesting association indeed:

http://siliusradicum.pl/category/genealogia-genetyczna/

http://siliusradicum.pl/strony-poswiecone-dna/

http://siliusradicum.pl/dna-naszych-przodkow/

https://www.facebook.com/siliusradicum/

All in Polish, but there is: http://free-website-translation.com/?en

ElHorsto
24-05-16, 01:42
It seems that this map validates that the sample of 100 posted above is representative:

The map is from Robert Gabel's website: http://www.robertgabel.de/

It also can be found here: https://www.familytreedna.com/groups/germany/about/results

http://www.robertgabel.de/haplosgermany_e.png

Though my Silesian sample of 100 includes men from both German and Polish Projects.
Thanks, interesting map. But I'm not entirely convinced.
From the abstract of an article discussed in Dienekes blog 2012 (http://dienekes.blogspot.de/2012/09/polish-and-german-y-chromosomes.html): "Admixture estimates showed minor Slavic paternal ancestry (~20%) in modern eastern Germans and hardly detectable German paternal ancestry in Slavs neighbouring German populations for centuries." Or maybe the study is not up-to-date?

I have also difficulties to imagine such a sharp demarcation between R1a east of the Elbe and I1/I2b west of the Elbe.
The map also shows too low R1a for the Sorbs (https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lausitz#/media/File:Location_LUS2.svg), who are officially Slavs. I've read somewhere in an older study that Sorbs stick out by having much higher R1a, compared to the surrounding population. Or did they test only the non-Sorbs?

Tomenable
24-05-16, 08:09
Thanks, interesting map. But I'm not entirely convinced.
From the abstract of an article discussed in Dienekes blog 2012: "Admixture estimates showed minor Slavic paternal ancestry (~20%) in modern eastern Germans
Or maybe the study is not up-to-date?


Rebala's 2012 study is more or less up-to-date, but only as long as we remember what was actually studied there, and what was not studied.

For example, the idea that Rebala studied "modern" eastern Germans is wrong - he studied only Germans with pre-WW2 ancestry in Mecklenburg and Bavaria, without taking into account Germans who came to present-day East Germany in 1945+ from former "Ostgebiete".

So Rebala's study examined not modern but "pre-1939" Germans, and only native Germans from two regions: Mecklenburg - much (or even most) of which according to Helmold's chronicle (Latin title: "Chronica Slavorum") was cleansed from its Pagan Slavic inhabitants and settled by Flemings, Frisians, Saxons, etc. - and Bavaria - an area which had never really been settled by Slavs except for its north-eastern corner ("Bavaria Slavica"). So no surprise, that Rebala found only ~20% of Slavic ancestry in pre-war Germans of these regions.

The map by Robert Gabel actually shows Mecklenburg as mostly I1 + R1b, and Bavaria as mostly R1b.

So there is no contradiction between Rebala's study and Gabel's map as far as these two regions are concerned.

And let's stress once again, that Rebala's study examined only Germans with pre-WW2 roots in these two regions.

In 1945+ there was a considerable influx of Germans from the east to Mecklenburg, which increased R1a frequency in the area (today in samples from various cities of Mecklenburg R1a stands at around 30%, plus/minus a few percent depending on city, but in Mecklenburg before 1945 it was closer to 15% - so the influx of Germans from behind the Oder-Neisse increased the frequency of R1a twice).


and hardly detectable German paternal ancestry in Slavs neighbouring German populations for centuries."

First of all - Rebala did not examine neighbouring German populations, because these populations no longer exist intact since 1945 (I mean, they do exist, but these people are now dispersed all over Germany, more than half of them are actually in Western Germany today).

Secondly - Rebala detected supposedly no "German" paternal ancestry in Slavs with surnames of German origin (and found no significant genetic differences as far Y-DNA is concerned between Slavs with Slavic surnames and Slavs with German surnames), and therefore he concluded that those Slavs were not descended from German-speakers, but rather from Slavic-speakers who had been given German surnames.

However, historical sources do not confirm his hypothesis that German surnames were acquired "culturally" rather than "demographically" (i.e. through genealogical descent) by Slavs. Rather, historical sources indicate that if a Polish/Kashubian person has a German surname, then such a person inherited it from a German-speaker who was among his ancestors.

Acquisition of surnames was usually along linguistic lines - that is, if your ancestor spoke Slavic as "Muttersprache" by the time he acquired his surname, then it would be highly unlikely for him to adopt a German surname. Similarly, German-speakers would not adopt/receive Slavic surnames, even if centuries or decades before the time period when surnames became popular in a particular region their ancestors had been Slavs or Old Prussians, who only later became Germanized ("Eindeutschung" is the proper word, IIRC ?).

Therefore what really explains lack of significant genetic differences in Y-DNA between for example Kashubians with Slavic surnames and Kashubians with German surnames, is not lack of German-speaking ancestors for the latter group during the last several centuries (in times when surnames started to be used in this part of Europe), but rather the fact that those German-speakers had been mostly of R1a haplogroup in the first place / to begin with.

Y-DNA data from FTDNA and Robert Gabel's map actually seem to confirm this.

Remember, that Rebala did not test Y-DNA of Germans from Pomerania - i.e. former neighbours of Slavs (Kociewiaks and Kashubians) in these areas -, because since 1945 they live dispersed all over present-day Germany. However, Family Tree DNA has info about places of origin of most distant paternal ancestors (and these most distant ancestors were in 99% of all cases born before WW2), which means that we can reconstruct the genetic landscape in formerly German-speaking regions.


I have also difficulties to imagine such a sharp demarcation between R1a east of the Elbe and I1/I2b west of the Elbe.

Well, the Slavs never advanced much to the west of the Elbe, so this high percent of R1a-Z283 reflects ancestry from Germanized Slavs (and Balts in case of East Prussia), and this ancestry - before most recent migrations (when mobility of people increased due to urbanization and industrialization) - was concentrated to the east of the Elbe.

Of course, there is some Non-Balto-Slavic R1a in Germany as well, but it is not very numerous, AFAIK (for example, Non-Balto-Slavic subclades are Z284 and L664).

As for I1/I2b - check my thread about Migration Period DNA from Central or maybe East-Central Germany:

http://www.eupedia.com/forum/threads/32226-Y-DNA-from-Germany-in-the-300s-400s-AD-shows-58-frequency-of-I1-and-not-much-R1b

In samples from Görzig dated to 300s-400s AD - so before Slavic immigration - there was almost no R1a, and mostly I1. Later, Görzig found itself in Slavic-colonized territory, so we can expect a significant increase in R1a there after 600s AD.

On the other hand it will be also interesting to learn how common was R1a among East Germanic tribes.


Or did they test only the non-Sorbs?
This data is from FTDNA, so it comes from individual people.

Later I will check what samples are there from Lusatia.

Tomenable
24-05-16, 09:22
Here is the 2012 study in question:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3598329/

German populations studied were:

Pre-1939 Mecklenburg (sample = 131)
Pre-1939 western Bavaria (sample = 218)

So we can't say that they were "neighbours" of studied Polish populations, such as Kashubs and Kociewiaks:

http://s32.postimg.org/fg919ieyt/Ka_Ko.png

^^^ Here are Y-DNA frequencies for Kashubians (Ka) and Kociewiaks (Ko):

Y-DNA haplogroup - Kaszubi / Kociewiacy:

R1a ----- 170 (63.4%) ----- / ----- 89 (56.3%)
I1 ------- 35 (13.1%) ----- / ------ 13 (8.2%)
R1b ----- 24 (9.0%) ------- / ----- 28 (17.7%)
I2a ------ 8 (3.0%) ------- / ------- 9 (5.7%)
I2b ------ 3 (1.1%) ------- / ----- - 3 (1.9%)
E1b ------ 9 (3.4%) ------ / ------- 6 (3.8%)
J --------- 6 (2.2%) ------- / ------ 3 (1.9%)
G -------- 4 (1.5%) ------ / ------- 1 (0.6%)
N1c ------ 3 (1.1%) ------ / ------- 3 (1.9%)
Q1a ------ 2 (0.7%) ------ / ------- 0 (0.0%)
other ----- 4 (1.5%) ----- / ------- 3 (1.9%)

Total --- 268 (100%) --- / --- 158 (100%)

These Polish populations were further divided by surnames (Slavic/Germanic/other surnames):


The pre-WWII Polish samples were additionally divided into three subgroups, depending on surnames of the tested individuals. The first group comprised individuals carrying surnames with roots revealing Slavic/eastern European etymology or origin. Accordingly, males with surname roots indicating German/western European etymology or origin were included in the second group. The third group contained surnames with unclear or hybrid etymology. For each surname, the assignment was based on linguistic analysis provided in etymological dictionaries.

The conclusion was: no genetic difference between people with German and Slavic surnames:


Comparison of Y chromosomes associated with etymologically Slavic and German surnames (with frequencies provided in Table 1) did not reveal genetic differentiation within any of the three Polish regional populations for all three (FST, ΦST and RST) genetic distances. Moreover, the German surname-related Y chromosomes were comparably distant from Bavaria and Mecklenburg as the ones associated with the Slavic surnames (...)

And the author hypothesized, trying to explain this:


As German surnames are frequently encountered among the modern Poles, we have searched for such differentiation within the Polish pre-WWII regional populations. Both Slavic and German surname carriers revealed regional Y chromosome homogeneity and comparable genetic distances from the German populations, which suggests that etymologically German surnames in the studied populations may result, at least partially, from foreign administration and linguistic adaptation (eg, translation, common until the end of the 19th century and attested also in the 20th century)

But there is actually no evidence that adopting German surnames by Slavic-speakers was a common thing.

Nearly always having a German surname in the studied region means that a man had a German-speaking ancestor. Of course that man with German "Muttersprache" could be descended from Germanized Slavs, but that's another thing.

Tomenable
24-05-16, 09:41
Here is where Rebala's "Paternal landscape" 2012 study German samples were from:

7 - Mecklenburg (only pre-WW2 inhabitants)
8 - western Bavaria (as above)
5 - Slavic Sorbs (as above)

7+8 = German samples (discussed in 2012 by Dienekes) / Y-DNA from Gabel's map:

http://s33.postimg.org/4ntdd0xdr/Meck_Bav.pnghttp://i.imgur.com/0Plxrlm.png

So Rebala found "significant differentiation" because he sampled only these regions.

Artmar
24-05-16, 22:59
Hello Tomenable.

I generally agree on the point but you seem to be too bold with some of the statements. Let me refer to one of them, that I found the most out of place.



In 1945+ there was a considerable influx of Germans from the east to Mecklenburg, which increased R1a frequency in the area (today in samples from various cities of Mecklenburg R1a stands at around 30%, plus/minus a few percent depending on city, but in Mecklenburg before 1945 it was closer to 15% - so the influx of Germans from behind the Oder-Neisse increased the frequency of R1a twice)

I disagree with this statement. Such influx was too low to increase the frequency of R1a twofold.



In the German Democratic Republic in 1950 3.6 out of 18.4 million GDR citizens were postwar refugees and expellees.
Source of a citation:
-Münz, Rainer, and Ralf E Ulrich. Changing Patterns of Migration to Germany, 1945-1997,Berkeley: Center for German and European Studies, 1998.

Postwar refugees and expelees made up ~20% of a population in GDR. Even if we assume that they were always twice as likely to be R1a than locals (what's rather unlikely), their presence wouldn't have doubled frequency of R1a. Let's say that 30% of the immigrants were R1a (although we lack the proper data to begin with). 30% from the total of 20% would've made 6% addition of an R1a.
Considering that we trust the sample of Rebala, they could've increased an R1a to maximum ~20 % in a global scale.

But taking aside a simple maths (as life is much more complicated than that), we have to admit that we know very little of the specifics. We have no idea how many % of those refugees and expelees actually chose Mecklenburg. Maybe their participance in settling Mecklenburg was significantly lower than in the Saxony, for instance. We don't know which regions were presented by those who fled or immigrated to Mecklenburg. Finally, we have no idea how their Y-DNA composition actually looked depending on a region. Were they mostly townsmen or villagers? Were townsmen less likely to be R1a than villagers or does it depend on a particular case/region? Were Pomeranians the people who mostly fled to Mecklenburg or Pomeranians combined with people from Lower Silesia? Maybe actually people from former Neumark were those who dominated? Again, how their Y-DNA composition looked like? FTDNA is not enough.

I can ask such questions endlessly. We don't know it. I don't know it and you don't know it as well. A difference between you and me is, that I'm more skeptical. I wasn't born a skeptic, it's an experience that taught me that. And time spent thinking.

The same actually applies to the sample chosen by Rebala. I have no doubt that he tested lineages of people who represent pre-WWII population. The question actually is - to which degree they represent pre-WWII lineages. Again. Were the townsmen or villagers those, who got mostly tested? Are there any differences between villagers and townsmen in that matter and if so, how big those differences are?
Could've some of the villages be almost completely descended from Polabians whereas some of the villages completely descended from Frisians, Walloon people, Saxons and others?
Were there any mixed villages and if so - to which degree were they mixed? Which types of villages- with people descended from Polabians or with people descending from others - were the ones who dominate? If so, in which degree? Endless questions, endless skepticism. Would've sample of 500 changed the picture significantly? If there are some particular differences arising out of the history of Mecklenburg - it may be very likely.
I have no reason to take a sample of Rebala as an evidence for twofold increase of R1a by WW2 migrants.

By the way, if post-WW2 expelees were even more likely to migrate further from GDR to the Federal Republic of Germany, their contribution today is even smaller.

Tomenable
24-05-16, 23:49
Hi Artmar,


Such influx was too low to increase the frequency of R1a twofold.

It was probably not too low, really.

As of year 1950, "Vertriebene" were 42% or 45% (another source) of entire population of Mecklenburg:

1) This map shows 871,000 of them in Mecklenburg-Vorpommern in 1950 (so 41.7% of the total population):

http://s33.postimg.org/ehr9vu7mn/Karte_Vertriebene.jpg

2) But this table claims an even higher number - 981,000 (which is 45% of the total population as of 1950):

https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heimatvertriebene#Aufnahme_in_Deutschland

http://s33.postimg.org/jd9d0hg67/Mecklenburg.png

And exact percentages for West Germany in 1950 and in 1961 can be found here:

https://books.google.pl/books?id=ud0Ixsj0yUMC&pg=PA64&lpg=PA64&dq=Vertriebene+und+Fluchtlinge+in+den+Bundesl%E4nd ern+1961&source=bl&ots=Ip2g5-aHBc&sig=Tc21QT0wP80L-yYqAH2BHsJemY4&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0CEkQ6AEwBmoVChMIjKuf6tmexwIVgVRyCh180AD-#v=onepage&q&f=false

(from 1950 to 1961 many of them moved from East Germany to West Germany):

http://s11.postimg.org/5kxi31kyb/West_Germany.png

http://s16.postimg.org/njbt8y26d/Definition.png

Tomenable
25-05-16, 00:03
^ Assuming that the total male population of Mecklenburg-Vorpommern in 1950 was 200, there were:

110 natives with pre-war roots (55% of the total pop.), including ca. 16 with R1a (~15%)

90 "Vertriebene" (45% of the pop.) who came since 1945, including - hypothetically - ca. 44 with R1a (~49%)

Total male population (in this model) - 200 - including ca. 60 (16 + 44) with R1a (or around 30%).

This shows how the frequency of R1a could perhaps increase twofold in Mecklenburg from 1944 to 1950.

Tomenable
25-05-16, 00:09
In the German Democratic Republic in 1950 3.6 out of 18.4 million GDR citizens were postwar refugees and expellees.

This book has the following number of refugees and expellees in 1950:

https://books.google.pl/books?id=ud0Ixsj0yUMC&pg=PA64&lpg=PA64&dq=Vertriebene+und+Fluchtlinge+in+den+Bundesl%E4nd ern+1961&source=bl&ots=Ip2g5-aHBc&sig=Tc21QT0wP80L-yYqAH2BHsJemY4&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0CEkQ6AEwBmoVChMIjKuf6tmexwIVgVRyCh180AD-#v=onepage&q&f=false

West Germany - 8,065,000
East Germany - 3,950,000 (so slightly more than according to the quotation above)

However, Mecklenburg stands out, because there newcomers were 42-45% of the total population.

So that region took more newcomers (relatively to its pre-war population size) than other regions.

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

But you are of course right, that mos of those people settled in West Germany (even as of 1950).

And since 1950 there have been constant migrations from Communist/post-Communist DDR to BRD.


Postwar refugees and expelees made up ~20% of a population in GDR.

On average, yes. But in Mecklenburg-Vorpommern, they made up >40% of all inhabitants.

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

As for the rest of your post, I concur. :wink:

Tomenable
25-05-16, 00:39
Could've some of the villages be almost completely descended from Polabians whereas some of the villages completely descended from Frisians, Walloon people, Saxons and others? Were there any mixed villages

Yes, this is very likely. And mixed settlements also existed.


But taking aside a simple maths (as life is much more complicated than that), we have to admit that we know very little of the specifics. We have no idea how many % of those refugees and expelees actually chose Mecklenburg. Maybe their participance in settling Mecklenburg was significantly lower than in the Saxony, for instance. We don't know which regions were presented by those who fled or immigrated to Mecklenburg. Finally, we have no idea how their Y-DNA composition actually looked depending on a region. Were they mostly townsmen or villagers? Were townsmen less likely to be R1a than villagers or does it depend on a particular case/region? Were Pomeranians the people who mostly fled to Mecklenburg or Pomeranians combined with people from Lower Silesia? Maybe actually people from former Neumark were those who dominated? Again, how their Y-DNA composition looked like? FTDNA is not enough.

I can ask such questions endlessly. We don't know it. I don't know it and you don't know it as well. A difference between you and me is, that I'm more skeptical. I wasn't born a skeptic, it's an experience that taught me that. And time spent thinking.

The same actually applies to the sample chosen by Rebala. I have no doubt that he tested lineages of people who represent pre-WWII population. The question actually is - to which degree they represent pre-WWII lineages. Again. Were the townsmen or villagers those, who got mostly tested? Are there any differences between villagers and townsmen in that matter and if so, how big those differences are?
Could've some of the villages be almost completely descended from Polabians whereas some of the villages completely descended from Frisians, Walloon people, Saxons and others? Were there any mixed villages and if so - to which degree were they mixed? Which types of villages- with people descended from Polabians or with people descending from others - were the ones who dominate? If so, in which degree? Endless questions, endless skepticism. Would've sample of 500 changed the picture significantly? If there are some particular differences arising out of the history of Mecklenburg - it may be very likely.

These are all hard questions, but there is a good book about it in Polish:

Jan M. Piskorski, "Kolonizacja Wiejska Pomorza Zachodniego", Poznan 2005.

It is also describes events in Mecklenburg-Vorpommern and Brandenburg.

If we believe Piskorski - page 86 - then the "most Slavic" areas of Mecklenburg should be the regions of Jabel, Weningen and Darzing, where no any German settlers came, and which remained Slavic-speaking for a relatively long time.


By the way, if post-WW2 expelees were even more likely to migrate further from GDR to the Federal Republic of Germany, their contribution today is even smaller.

You may be right.

And if so, it would mean that % of post-WW2 ancestry in modern Mecklenburg is lower than in 1950 (lower than 42-45%).

ElHorsto
25-05-16, 02:27
And if so, it would mean that % of post-WW2 ancestry in modern Mecklenburg is lower than in 1950 (lower than 42-45%).

Older people told me that the post-WW2 refugees were rather unwelcome in Mecklenburg, so many of them moved further west, but I don't know how many.

Keep up the good work!

LeBrok
25-05-16, 02:59
Hello Tomenable.

I generally agree on the point but you seem to be too bold with some of the statements. Let me refer to one of them, that I found the most out of place.



I disagree with this statement. Such influx was too low to increase the frequency of R1a twofold.



Source of a citation:
-Münz, Rainer, and Ralf E Ulrich. Changing Patterns of Migration to Germany, 1945-1997,Berkeley: Center for German and European Studies, 1998.

Postwar refugees and expelees made up ~20% of a population in GDR. Even if we assume that they were always twice as likely to be R1a than locals (what's rather unlikely), their presence wouldn't have doubled frequency of R1a. Let's say that 30% of the immigrants were R1a (although we lack the proper data to begin with). 30% from the total of 20% would've made 6% addition of an R1a.
Considering that we trust the sample of Rebala, they could've increased an R1a to maximum ~20 % in a global scale.

But taking aside a simple maths (as life is much more complicated than that), we have to admit that we know very little of the specifics. We have no idea how many % of those refugees and expelees actually chose Mecklenburg. Maybe their participance in settling Mecklenburg was significantly lower than in the Saxony, for instance. We don't know which regions were presented by those who fled or immigrated to Mecklenburg. Finally, we have no idea how their Y-DNA composition actually looked depending on a region. Were they mostly townsmen or villagers? Were townsmen less likely to be R1a than villagers or does it depend on a particular case/region? Were Pomeranians the people who mostly fled to Mecklenburg or Pomeranians combined with people from Lower Silesia? Maybe actually people from former Neumark were those who dominated? Again, how their Y-DNA composition looked like? FTDNA is not enough.

I can ask such questions endlessly. We don't know it. I don't know it and you don't know it as well. A difference between you and me is, that I'm more skeptical. I wasn't born a skeptic, it's an experience that taught me that. And time spent thinking.

The same actually applies to the sample chosen by Rebala. I have no doubt that he tested lineages of people who represent pre-WWII population. The question actually is - to which degree they represent pre-WWII lineages. Again. Were the townsmen or villagers those, who got mostly tested? Are there any differences between villagers and townsmen in that matter and if so, how big those differences are?
Could've some of the villages be almost completely descended from Polabians whereas some of the villages completely descended from Frisians, Walloon people, Saxons and others?
Were there any mixed villages and if so - to which degree were they mixed? Which types of villages- with people descended from Polabians or with people descending from others - were the ones who dominate? If so, in which degree? Endless questions, endless skepticism. Would've sample of 500 changed the picture significantly? If there are some particular differences arising out of the history of Mecklenburg - it may be very likely.
I have no reason to take a sample of Rebala as an evidence for twofold increase of R1a by WW2 migrants.

By the way, if post-WW2 expelees were even more likely to migrate further from GDR to the Federal Republic of Germany, their contribution today is even smaller.

Good argumenting and reasoning. Lot's of time is going to fly by till we get all genetic data to be sure how it went around. Well, at least we have fun guessing now, and check who was right later.

PS. Hey neighbor, I used to live in Siedlce.

Tomenable
25-05-16, 10:01
By the way, here is a good series of PDF e-books about the history of Silesia, in English:

Vol. 1. (years c. 950-1526) - http://www.bibliotekacyfrowa.pl/Content/49790/Cuius_regio_vol_1.pdf

Vol. 2. (years 1526–1740) - http://www.bibliotekacyfrowa.pl/Content/73766/Cuius_regio_vol_2.pdf

Vol. 3. (years 1740-1918) - to my knowledge, this volume has not been published yet.

Vol. 4. (years 1918-1945) - http://www.bibliotekacyfrowa.pl/Content/64229/Cuius_regio_vol_4.pdf

Vol. 5. (years 1945-2015) - http://www.bibliotekacyfrowa.pl/Content/76597/Cuius_regio_vol_5.pdf

Artmar
25-05-16, 12:39
Hello Tomenable. I'm not convinced but to end this offtopic I will make my last post concerning Mecklenburg. You can reply to me using PM in a matter concerning this post :).

Hi Artmar,

It was probably not too low, really.

As of year 1950, "Vertriebene" were 42% or 45% (another source) of entire population of Mecklenburg:

1) This map shows 871,000 of them in Mecklenburg-Vorpommern in 1950 (so 41.7% of the total population):

2) But this table claims an even higher number - 981,000 (which is 45% of the total population as of 1950):

<LINK REMOVED - I can't post them and quote them>


Allright, so we now know something more. A simple fact - Mecklenburg was a region with higher participance of migrants. However, was it possibly connected with another fact, that this region remained relatively peaceful during the last months of WW2 in Europe? Maybe it's also connected with a fact, that many migrants were transported with a ships and it's a coastal region? Hamburg was bombed and so were other significant ports - Bremen and Kiel.

And again - were they just registered there and gathered in some kind of transit camps and later went elsewhere or they rather stayed? How many of them stayed? Have they settled mostly in cities/towns or on a countryside? Was there enough place to take ~40-45 % of new inhabitants? I guess not, because Mecklenburg wasn't affected by warfare - there weren't many perished people to be replaced.
Please also remember that it's 1950 and authorities had greater concerns than building block housing. It started later.

Mecklenburg had to be crowded. Migrant's didn't have a good perspectives there:

Older people told me that the post-WW2 refugees were rather unwelcome in Mecklenburg, so many of them moved further west, but I don't know how many.

So, if they didn't have enough place and were not welcome, they likely got displaced to other regions (or chosen to do so) after 1950. If not to West Germany with better opportunities, then probably to re-populate big cities which undergone a considerable loss of "human factor" - like Dresden or Berlin, among others.



And exact percentages for West Germany in 1950 and in 1961 can be found here:

<LINK REMOVED - I can't post them and quote them>

(from 1950 to 1961 many of them moved from East Germany to West Germany):


And here we are. How many of them actually left Mecklenburg after 1950? How many of them stayed until today or the moment of sampling a populations of Mecklenburg? What was their Y-DNA composition? We have to be sure that they had much of an R1a to double its frequency in that region.

Sample of Rebala consisted of 131 individuals for the whole region of Mecklenburg and it's considered to be representative. Sample for two single cities -Rostock and Greifswald, although we can't be certain on how many descendants of migrants were sampled here, numbered 200.

I'm well aware that migrants could've risen a frequency of R1a, since I have an eye on ~5000 R1a samples. The question is - was it a really significant rise? Do we know enough to say anything more than - "well, slight rise is likely but significant rise is in question"? We don't :). It remains a possibility but I have my own reasons to feel skeptical about it. Data that we have doesn't suffice.


Good argumenting and reasoning. Lot's of time is going to fly by till we get all genetic data to be sure how it went around. Well, at least we have fun guessing now, and check who was right later.
Thanks!

I may sound like a lingerer sometimes but I'm just long enough "in the topic". I've seen many population studies and how significantly the % can actually change depending on a sample and sampling methods. Tomenable may be right eventually but I feel a need of pacifying him a bit.
There is nothing wrong in saying "I don't know" or "I'm not sure".


PS. Hey neighbor, I used to live in Siedlce.
Pretty much unexpected, how come? You can write a PM to me :)

LeBrok
25-05-16, 18:07
I may sound like a lingerer sometimes but I'm just long enough "in the topic". I've seen many population studies and how significantly the % can actually change depending on a sample and sampling methods. Tomenable may be right eventually but I feel a need of pacifying him a bit. I thought it was my job here, lol. On other hand I love his energy and enthusiasm, and many good ideas.

There is nothing wrong in saying "I don't know" or "I'm not sure".Agree, likewise there is nothing wrong with using "perhaps" and "maybe" presenting new ideas or acknowledging shortcomings of our understanding.



Pretty much unexpected, how come? You can write a PM to me :)I should find some time after work.

Tomenable
27-05-16, 00:19
Frequencies of R1a in samples from East German and Austrian (Graz) cities:

Graz - 42,9%
Dresden - 32,6%
Rostock - 32,4%
Halle (Saale) - 30,3%
Leipzig - 27,1%
Berlin - 22,3%
Magdeburg - 21%
Greifswald - 19,2%
Hamburg - 16,8%

^ This data is from: Immel 2005; Kayser 2005, Roding 2007, Wiik 2008.

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

In Rebala's sample from pre-war Mecklenburg, there was 13,7% of R1a.

In a modern sample from Rostock in Mecklenburg, there is 32,4% of R1a.

Greifswald has a lower share, but it is in Vorpommern, not Mecklenburg.

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

The sample from Halle (an der Saale) has 30,34% R1a and 29,06% R1b:

R1a - 71 out of 234
R1b - 68 out of 234

Other haplogroups from this sample of 234:

I1 - 30
I2a - 18
J2a - 11
J2b - 7
J2 - 1
E1b - 12
G - 8
N - 3
J1 - 2
T - 1
H - 1
C - 1

Tomenable
27-05-16, 00:22
As for Austria, frequencies of R1a differ vastly depending on region. For example:

The city of Graz - ca. 43% of R1a
North-East Tyrol - ca. 16% of R1a
South-East Tyrol - ca. 0% of R1a

Here a map illustrating this (R1a frequencies for East Tyrol are from Berger 2012):

http://s22.postimg.org/9t0mzpre9/Austria_R1a.png

Tomenable
20-06-16, 23:19
Good job Tomenable.

Is there a way to split results into lower and upper Silesia? I wonder if there is a difference?

Yes there is.

I made a map with 96 samples (4 have no exact location given so I couldn't place them):

https://s31.postimg.org/m55t8jgor/Map_Silesia.png

https://s31.postimg.org/m55t8jgor/Map_Silesia.png

Tomenable
20-06-16, 23:38
One R1b sample could not be placed on the map because its location is only described as "Lower Silesia".

Out of the remaining 10 samples which could be placed, as many as 4 are in the region around Grünberg:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zielona_Góra

So it seems that percent of R1b among Y-DNA was relatively high in North-Western part of Lower Silesia.

Tomenable
21-06-16, 02:12
Historical border between Upper and Lower Silesia was more or less like this:

https://s32.postimg.org/6op30x89h/Lower_and_Upper.png

https://s32.postimg.org/6op30x89h/Lower_and_Upper.png

This map shows it in a more accurate way:

http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-y0xiVjGh3mM/UQ2Rid2-q0I/AAAAAAAAANA/AtE3zQle544/s1600/historyczny+%C5%9Blask.jpg

Tomenable
21-06-16, 03:37
^ If we apply that line of divide, we get:

Upper Silesia - 48 samples of which 30 R1a = 62,5%
Lower Silesia - 48 samples of which 23 R1a = 47,9%

However:

Grünberg region - 11 samples of which 4 R1a = 36,4%
Rest of Lower Silesia - 37 samples of which 19 R1a = 51,4%

Tomenable
21-06-16, 17:58
Subclades of R1a (excluding CTS6) in FTDNA "Polish Project" and in Silesian sample:

https://s32.postimg.org/52mo7wbit/R1a_PL_SL.png

L260 is known as P-Type ("Polish Type") as it was named by Peter Gwozdz long ago.

Tomenable
18-09-16, 02:23
I collected data on German Y-DNA haplogroups from peer-reviewed studies about modern populations, and from Family Tree DNA. Data from Family Tree DNA represents people who lived in the past - every customer provides information about place of birth of his oldest known ancestor. Thanks to this we can trace each customer's Y-DNA lineage to a particular place in the past. Samples from FTDNA represent frequencies of haplogroups in pre-1914 populations - effects of modern migrations are not visible.

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

Here is a comparison of % of haplogroup R1a in various populations. You will see that there are large regional differences - and that East Germans have much more of R1a than West Germans. Also South-East Germans have more than North-East Germans:

I added data on R1a among some West Germanic, Celtic, Slavic and Baltic populations for comparison.

Samples for Lithuanians and Latvians refer to ethnic groups - minorities like Poles in Lithuania or Russians in Latvia aren't included.

Westgermanen-Kelten:

Population (Zeit) ----------- % Haplogruppe R1a (Stichprobenumfang)

Flandern (heutzutage) ---------------------------- 4,3% (695)
Brabant (heutzutage) ----------------------------- 4,0% (große)
Wallonien (heutzutage) -------------------------- 4,0% (74)
England (vor 1914) ------------------------------- 4,0% (1830)
England (heutzutage) ----------------------------- 4,5% (>5000)
Irland (heutzutage) ------------------------------- 2,5% (>5000)
Wales (heutzutage) ------------------------------- 1,0% (411)

Balten-Nordwestslawen:

Population (Zeit) ----------- % Haplogruppe R1a (Stichprobenumfang)

Kaschuben (einheimische) ------------------------ 63,4% (268)
Kleinpolen (heutzutage) -------------------------- 63,2% (212)
Kurpie (einheimische) ----------------------------- 61,4% (158)
Kociewie (einheimische) -------------------------- 56,3% (158)
Großpolen (heutzutage) -------------------------- 54,8% (343)
Litauer (heutzutage) ------------------------------ 42,2% (301)
Letten (heutzutage) ------------------------------ 40,0% (große)

Deutschland (regional):

Population (Zeit) ----------- % Haplogruppe R1a (Stichprobenumfang)

Sorben (einheimische) ---------------------------- 65,0% (123)
Oberschlesien (vor 1914) ------------------------- 63,0% (48)
Brandenburg an der Havel (vor 1914) ---------- 50,0% (14)
Niederschlesien (vor 1914) ----------------------- 48,0% (48)
Ostpreußen (vor 1914) ---------------------------- 45,2% (84)
Graz, Österreich (heutzutage) -------------------- 42,9% (große)
Dessau–Roßlau (vor 1914) ------------------------ 42,9% (7)
Chemnitz (vor 1914) ------------------------------ 40,0% (10)
Dresden (heutzutage) ----------------------------- 32,6% (große)
Rostock (heutzutage) ------------------------------ 32,4% (96)
Halle an der Saale (heutzutage)* --------------- 30,3% (234)
Leipzig (heutzutage) ------------------------------ 27,1% (144)
Mecklenburg-Vorpommern (vor 1914) ---------- 25,8% (31)
Berlin (heutzutage) ------------------------------- 23,7% (232)
Sachsen (vor 1914) ------------------------------- 22,0% (41)
Bern (heutzutage) -------------------------------- 21,4% (???)
Magdeburg (heutzutage) ------------------------- 21,0% (100)
Greifswald (heutzutage) ------------------------- 19,2% (104)
Sachsen-Anhalt (vor 1914) ---------------------- 17,7% (34)
Kassel (vor 1914) --------------------------------- 17,7% (17)
Hamburg (heutzutage) -------------------------- 16,8% (161)
Oberpfalz (vor 1914) ---------------------------- 16,7% (6)
Nord Osttirol -------------------------------------- 16,0% (235)
Köln (heutzutage) -------------------------------- 15,6% (96)
Braunschweig (vor 1914) ----------------------- 14,3% (14)
München (heutzutage) ------------------------- 14,3% (112)
Thüringen (vor 1914) ---------------------------- 13,2% (38)
Unterfranken (vor 1914) ------------------------ 11,5% (26)
Freiburg im Breisgau (vor 1914) ---------------- 10,8% (102)
Lüneburg (vor 1914) -----------------------------10,0% (20)
Schleswig-Holstein (vor 1914) ----------------- 10,0% (20)
Niedersachsen (vor 1914) ----------------------- 9,8% (82)
Lausanne (heutzutage) -------------------------- 9,4% (???)
Bayern (vor 1914) -------------------------------- 8,6% (93)
Hessen (vor 1914) -------------------------------- 8,5% (82)
Mainz (heutzutage) ------------------------------ 8,4% (95)
Weser-Ems (vor 1914) -------------------------- 8,3% (24)
Hannover (vor 1914) ---------------------------- 8,3% (24)
Münster (heutzutage) -------------------------- 7,8% (102)
[Münster (vor 1914) ---------------------------- 9,1% (11)]
Rheinhessen-Pfalz (vor 1914) ------------------ 7,8% (64)
Gießen (vor 1914) ------------------------------- 7,1% (14)
Karlsruhe (vor 1914) ---------------------------- 6,7% (60)
Düsseldorf (vor 1914) -------------------------- 6,7% (15)
Darmstadt (vor 1914) --------------------------- 5,9% (51)
Oberfranken (vor 1914) ------------------------ 5,9% (17)
Baden-Württemberg (vor 1914) -------------- 5,7% (176)
Tübingen (vor 1914) ---------------------------- 5,3% (19)
Rheinland-Pfalz (vor 1914) -------------------- 5,2% (116)
Stuttgart (vor 1914) ---------------------------- 4,4% (68)
Mulheim (heutzutage) -------------------------- 3,4% (59)
Nordrhein-Westfalen (vor 1914) -------------- 2,8% (72)
Koblenz (vor 1914) ------------------------------ 2,7% (37)
Oberbayern (vor 1914) ------------------------- 0,0% (20)
Arnsberg (vor 1914) ----------------------------- 0,0% (17)
Saarland (vor 1914) ----------------------------- 0,0% (16)
Trier (vor 1914) ---------------------------------- 0,0% (15)
Detmold (vor 1914) ----------------------------- 0,0% (14)
Schwaben (vor 1914) --------------------------- 0,0% (11)
Mittelfranken (vor 1914) ----------------------- 0,0% (10)
Bremen (vor 1914) ------------------------------ 0,0% (5)

* Data for inhabitants of Haale an der Saale includes only 234 men with German and German-Slavic surnames. The total sample was 419 - including 234 men with German or mixed German-Slavic and 185 men with purely Slavic surnames. However, among those with Slavic surnames there were probably also some recent immigrants, not only descendants of local Wends. Having German surname does not mean that ancestor wasn't Slavic in the Middle Ages - it just means that he became Germanized before surnames became popular. In East Germany, peasants started commonly using surnames only after Medieval times, in the Early Modern Era.

Based on that, I made a map of R1a in Germany (Mulheim not included, because I found this data after I made the map):

https://s13.postimg.io/7p2j8pnat/R1a_Germany_Austria.png


https://s14.postimg.io/cpv1fymhd/R1a_Germany_Austria.png