R1b L51-L11 Germanic Italo Celts: Rulers and conqueres of Bronze-Iron age west Europe

[Degredado]

LOL this thread has gotten funny. Hey, maybe all of the cyclic historical outbursts of violence and plundering by Northern Europeans against Western Europe have been triggered by a subconscious ancestral desire for revenge, from the I1 people?

 

[tjlowery87]

Let me apologize on behalf of my fellow hg. I brethren for not humbly lining up to be massacred like the unfortunate natives of both Australia and the Americas. We hg. I members should have realized early on that R1b was the ultimate gift to this planet; and we should have dutifully given our lives so that R1b members could thrive untethered and unhampered through their new European lands. And yes F.H., the fierce Celtic battle technique has been fully enhanced by your group's brilliant red hair and glowing alabaster skin. Your R1b ancestral freckles have served only to further highlight your tribes' stunning whiteness.Please remember, R1b has not only ushered the savage sport of golf to the forefront of mankind's psyche, you all have also introduced the hyper-masculine kilt for all to um, enjoy.Thank you again my trusty R1b leaders. We would be lost without your forceful guidance.

now,THATS funny

 

[Mikewww]

Degredado i think there is no doubt that Indo Europeans spread their language, culture,religion, and y dna by conquering because they were extremly agressive and had good weapons. It was the same story every time....

Firehaired, I'm just asking you to deomonstrate your points with some data. Perhaps you could research the archaeological finds and build a math model to show the number of deaths of one group or another by battle, disease, starvation, old age. Quoting a famous Celtic leader means about as much as the sound bites our politicians give us.

It's okay to speculate, but if you are presenting your speculation and the most probable alternative, please try to demonstrate logically and with data your points. To do otherwise, is just blowing smoke.

 

[Mikewww]

Hg I retaliates against Hg R1b

...........lets see if R1b can make a come back

What's the point of "haplogroup wars"? I don't get the big deal. I've got my favorite football and baseball teams, and tennis and golf players. There is plenty of real sport out there and even betting if you are really serious about it. There is no need to conjure some kind of DNA based competitions.

We don't need the ghosts of "incredible" warriors and when there are plenty of stoic military folks, policemen, firemen, heroes and incredible athletes available today to cheer and admire to one's heart's contents.

We all have warriors in our ancestry, as well as kings, paupers, crimnals, farmers, craftsmen, merchants, teachers and the like. Who is to say who is better or more incredible?

 

[Nobody1]

What's the point of "haplogroup wars"?

PURE ADRENALINE

 

[nordicwarrior]

Mikewww, were you artfully trying to throw F.H. a life-line earlier in this thread? Me thinks so. Don't worry though because I like this kid and will take it relatively easy on him... HOWEVER if we are going to honestly assess the whole Nordic vs. Celtic slavery issue my R1b cousins may not appreciate the results. Especially when considering the last thousand/fifteen hundred years or so (ie. Ireland, Iceland, even England).

 

[Mikewww]

PURE ADRENALINE

If this is what you (EDIT: or whoever if the video is pointed to someone else) are looking for you should join a band. As I mentioned earlier, I like sporting events. I played football in college and got a good dose of violence and energy in that... and some arthritic joints, but it was clearly a worthwhile experience. I think the band guys and gals would say the same.

 

[Mikewww]

Mikewww, were you artfully trying to throw F.H. a life-line earlier in this thread? Me thinks so. Don't worry though because I like this kid and will take it relatively easy on him... HOWEVER if we are going to honestly assess the whole Nordic vs. Celtic slavery issue my R1b cousins may not appreciate the results. Especially when considering the last thousand/fifteen hundred years or so (ie. Ireland, Iceland, even England).

It is what it is. I am not initiating these issues. If you want to talk anything related to Y DNA R1b on the R1b category I think that is fair. I just ask that posters do their research and try to make the conversation meaningful with evidence and logic. Otherwise, we are just blowing smoke, or tooting our horns!

BTW, I hope we all recognize that our paternal lineage is only one very thin lineage. If you go six generations back, your direct paternal lineage only contributed 1/64th of who you are. How many Europeans, think they have know Hg I lineages in them, or R1b or R1a? or probably various J or E, etc?

I also hope you recognize there may have been a lot of R1b in the Nordic mix, both U106 and P312. Not many large historic timeframe cultures were probably pure much of anything.

 

[Nobody1]

If this is what you are looking for you should join a band. As I mentioned earlier, I like sporting events. I played football in college and got a good dose of violence and energy in that... and some arthritic joints, but it was clearly a worthwhile experience. I think the band guys and gals would say the same.

No kidding;
Thats what i wrote a few months ago on a diff thread;

unproductive debate. Regions across Europe who either have a higher frequency of Hg I or a higher frequency of Hg R1b have pretty much the same share of merits concerning civilization and productivity. And its a debate that would span at least ~5000 years of History (with points in time where one region might have been more sophisticated than the other) and no culture or ethnicity was ever exclusively only part of one and the same Haplogroup to begin with.


PS: i take my haplogroub wars upmost seriously (post#18) .... and i will never join a band;

 

[Mikewww]

No kidding;
Thats what i wrote a few months ago on a diff thread;

unproductive debate. Regions across Europe who either have a higher frequency of Hg I or a higher frequency of Hg R1b have pretty much the same share of merits concerning civilization and productivity. And its a debate that would span at least ~5000 years of History (with points in time where one region might have been more sophisticated than the other) and no culture or ethnicity was ever exclusively only part of one and the same Haplogroup to begin with.

Agreed, 100%.

PS: i take my haplogroub wars upmost seriously (post#18) .... and i will never join a band;

Sometimes its hard to tell what's productive or not sometimes. Humour is good and sarcasm is also humour, but sometimes they can swamp a thread and distract it. I'm not sure what Eupedia's policies are on this stuff, but I would guess they have a "corner lounge" category or something where people can chit-chat or exchange cool videos or whatever.

As far as Fairhaired goes, I think his posting to kick off this thread is mostly serious. May be not. As I said, it's hard to tell sometimes.

Mikewww and Lebrok u know i exaggerated the conquering and warrior part of R1b L11-L51 Germanic Italo Celts. The reason is because that sounds alot cooler than talking about how they made beakers. ...

... i should not exaggerate i did a little....

I realize I'm not as humorous as I should be, but I do think we have to recognize that as newbies join a long with us and may get a distorted view from time to time. Also, some people get offended if they think their genetic groupings are being characterized in manners that are somewhat unbalanced.

 

[nordicwarrior]

I hear what you're saying Mikewww. Please note I didn't comment after his initial post... I very much enjoyed reading it as well. But F.H. had three "at bats" before I called foul. Maybe I had heard a few too many "incredible warriors" and "extremely aggressive" comments when referencing other population declines. However, I will let my first comment stand on it's own merit... this is a public thread and anyone reading it can and should gain from multiple viewpoints. And on a side note... I do have a really high percentage of R1b in my autosomal-- and am very familiar with paternal, maternal, and autosomal admixtures.

 

[Fire Haired]

Since my account is barely working and when i make a thread it gets all deformed so i want to get people's opinion on this. I am trying to find the Paloithic Cro magnon ancestry in modern Europeans. There is no doubt what makes Europeans a distinct ethnic group(DNA proves it please dont get politically correct on me there is a such think as ethnic groups and races) is they come from the same Paloithic Cro magnon family.

mtDNA​

mtDNA in mod euro's which for sure arrived and started to devlope in europe over 30,000ybp U(U5(all U5 subclades), U8, U2), HV, H(H1 and H3 possibly H17 or H27), Hv(V daughter of HV). Over all over 50% on average of direct maternal lineages in Europe arrived over 30,000ybp. H1, H3, V, and U5b1(not all U5b1) were spread out of Iberia acroos Europe and northwest africa after the last Glacial Maximum which lasted from 26,000-19,000ybp. on Average 15-30% of euro;s direct maternal lineages go back to this and around 40% of Iberians.

Aust DNA​

aust DNA i go by globe13 test but almost all tests say the same thing on this issue. the group called north Euro repsents Paloithic group in Euro which arrived over 30,000ybp. North Euro is in Caucasin family with southwest asian - med and north euro - west asian. The way its brother west asian is distrubted probably means euro's ancestors orignally came from around Caucus, Anatolia, and north Iraq. Before Neolithic age starting 10,000ybp Europeans were just like Native Americans they were all the exact same ethnicity from the same original Paloithic family and all had 100% north Euro.

Y DNA​

Y DNA I is the only for sure one in Europe to be from Paloithic age and has been in Europe fro at least 30,000 years. It either orignated around Iraq 30,000-40,000ybp or Europe. It might have orignally come as IJ 40,000-50,000ybp. There may be some F and C subclades that came to Europe over 50,000ybp with the first migrations. The reason why the vast majority of Euro's ancestry came over 30,000ybp and most direct maternal lineages but not paternal lineages. Is because when a people group losses a war alot of time their direct male lines are lessened because the men are killed in battle. Hg I was first invaded by G2a, E1b1b V13, and maybe J1 in the Neolithic age from 10,000-6,000ybp then Indo European R1b L51 and R1a1a1 M417 in bronze and Iron age from 6,000-2,500ybp.

Here are my custome made Y DNA I migration maps. I hope it is readible. I dont know exactley were but i think I1 and I2 split 25-35 thousend years ago. hg I(after I1 and I2 split) probably took refuge somewhere in south europe then migrated into central Europe 15-20,0000ybp forming into I1. The reason i think I1 orignated in central Europe is because Scandnavian I1 is mainly I1a2 central European I1 is mainly I1a1, I1a3, and I1a4 it does not come from a Scandinavian source. Also I1b which is very rare is only found around the Netherlands and central Germany it defintley does not have a Scandinavian source so since non Scandinavian I1a subclades and I1b are popular in central Europe iut makes sense I1 itself originated there.

I1a most likely came with the first human settlement in Scandinavia. Since N1c came to Finland about 7,000-8,000ybp and the Uralic's with N1c were Mongliod bu Finnish are Caucasoid were is the native Caucasian haplogroup obvisouly I1a2 is which means it was in Finland over 7,000ybp. I think the I1a age tests are total BS and it is the orignal Y DNA haplogroup of Scandinavia it does not represent any migrations in the last 8,000 year it was lessened by N1c, G2a, R1a, and R1b which came later.

I1

I2 i know these maps are sloppy. For I2 i think it orignated around central Europe because that is where I2c and I2b are
found. The rest i kind guessed i think I2a1a, I2a1b, and I2a2 were major haplogroups in repopulating Europe after the galciers retreated 10,000-19,000ybp.

What really gets annoying is what Y DNA did pre Insular Celts in Britaina nd Ireland have. R1b L21 like completely killed of off their male lineages and maybe even killed off the native people. There is a I2a1b subclade in Britain and Ireland and they have their own I2a2a subclade but those also could have come from later migrations. They do have some G2a which is defintley from before Insular Celts.

 

[Fire Haired]

nordicquuarrler, i understand i include incredible warriors to the reason people groups become extinct to much. But with Indo Europeans that is how they spread their language by warfare.

When u look at history almost all major power changes are determined by the winner's in war. The only way to make someone do ur will is by forcing them to do it to a whole group of people the best way is by conquering. I think u underestimate how war is extremely important in how things turn out in history. It may seem that is all i talk about when in history but when it comes to the spread of Indo European languages it is extremely important. There is no doubt the reason Germanic Italo Celtic languages spread is mainly aggressive warfare and great weapons. I will try to not only talk about war when it comes to history or exaggerate it. But i will not lie and say Indo European languages spread mysteriously many things did go into factor but in the end it came down to warfare.

I think both of us need to realize we don't know who these people were how they thought about the world. The Indo Europeans and Germanic Italo Celtic tribes came from a completely diff culture than us. Neither of us can say for sure who they were. They could have been extremely violent neither of us know what it is like to be in a tribal society were we are not controlled as much.

 

[tjlowery87]

I believe i1 started in central Europe,but the northern part of central europe

 

[nordicwarrior]

nordicquuarrler, i understand i include incredible warriors to the reason people groups become extinct to much. But with Indo Europeans that is how they spread their language by warfare.

When u look at history almost all major power changes are determined by the winner's in war. The only way to make someone do ur will is by forcing them to do it to a whole group of people the best way is by conquering. I think u underestimate how war is extremely important in how things turn out in history...

I hear what your saying F.H. But realize that some groups may be even more savage than yours when pushed against a wall. Now I'm out of this thread, it should be returned to the initial idea.

 

[Fire Haired]

nordicquarrler I never said my group is the most savage. I made this thread trying to be unbiased showing how the R1b L51-L11 Germanic Italo celts spread their Y DNA, language, and culture, I did not include their religion. They were a extremely powerful people group that spread almost only in pre history so we don't hear about them in history books. They were incredible good at warfare much higher than the average because they were able to conquer all of west Europe and take away almost 50% of the native male lineages. I tried to show them to be the greatest I could so it would be interesting to read but that does not completely take away how accurate it was. I would write the same way about the Mongols or Indo Iranian tribes. I was thinking about making a thread called the Indo European's Greatest people of Bronze-Iron age Eurasia. I know that would bet u P.O.ed but it is kind of true. Think about it nearly 50% of European Y DNA is of Indo European origin, around 30-50% of people around the Indus valley and northern India have Indo European Y DNA. It is incredible language family and culture has ever conquered and dominated so many areas of the world. The INdo Europeans in my opinion are maybe the most powerful people in human history. I know they were not one unifed ethnic group all we know is the language, culture, and religion started around Russia, Ukriane, and caucus. Then started to spread out of mainly Russia and Ukriane 6,000-5,000ybp.

 

[nordicwarrior]

It hasn't dominated the Nordic countries though. Check your percentages... Peace out!

 

[Armatus]

There isn't any evidence for a war or conquest. There are far more logical reasons why R1b is the dominant lineage in some parts of europe. The indigenous population of europe was fairly small like all hunter-gatherer civilizations . The R1b people who came from plain steppes settled mostly in plain areas ,where they were used to the geography. In these areas the higher sperm count of R1b people led to a higher male offspring percentage. Basically in these areas I lines (which were already not very numerous before the IE invasion due to their lifestyle) got more often daughtered out than R1b lines. And i also don't see how R1b dominates areas like Northern Europe, Southeastern Europe or Sardinia.

 

[Fire Haired]

The indengnouis west euro's when R1bL51-L11 Germanic Italo celts first arrived 5,000ybp. Had already by farmers for about 3,000 years. U need to look up Neolithic age on Wikipedia or something hunter gather's in west Europe were way before this time period. If they were hunter gathers they most likely were not a civilization. It gets annoying when people miss use this word and call Celts a civilization or Native American tribes. Civilization is a type of society Germanic Italo celts and just about everyone in the world 5,000ybp was tribal. What evidence do u have R1b people settled in mainly plain areas. We know Indo European began to conquer Bell Beaker culture of west euro 5,000-4,000ybp forming into Unetic culture in central Europe and later the nordic bronze age culture in northern northern central europe and South southern Scandinavia. If there real scientfic prove that R1b males have more sperm. For one think R1b was a mid eastern haplogroup till just 5,000-8,000ybp when it inter married with Europeans in either southeastern Europe or Ukriane and Russia. So why dident high spermed R1b people dominte those area's too. Besides don't all guys have like unlimited sperm why does it matter. West europe was NOT mainly hg I 5,000ybp. G2a farmers had started to doninte. From 31 Y DNA samples in west Europe their ages range from 7,000 and 4,725ybp 24 had G2a, 4 had I2a1a. 1 had E1b1b V13, one had possibly F*, one had F or one of its descendants. G2a became the dominte hg of France, Spain, and Italy, possibly also Britain and Ireland. E1b1b v13, J1, and some J2 also became popular. What lifestyle caused the native's of west euro to be less numerous. Was it because they were farmers. There has been Human settlment in west Europe for over 45,000 years. 5,000ybp it would have been just as densly populated and as numerous as any major region of the world. Why did almost all the old languages of west europe do extinct and why did almost 50% of their male lineages die out. Do u really think they just said to the Germanic Italo Celts. U guys are so cool we will now worship ur Gods, have ur culture, 50% of our males wont have any sons, we will forget jus about all of our tradtions because we love u Germanic Italo Celts. NO the Germanic Italo Celts conquered them. That is why most maternal lineages in west Europe are Paloithic arriving over 30,000ybp but paternal lineages are almost all Neloithic and Bronze-iron age. In battle the Germanic Italo Celts dominted and one the wars. It is very simple men die in wars the native men died. The GErmanic Italo Celts then probably killed any threat so young boys too. Then they as high ranking people could rape and take as manyw omen as they wanted. In ancient times powerful kings could have 1,000's of women that they own and they dont need the girls will. So that in my opinon is how they spread R1b.U dont think conquest is a logical explanation. I know it is simple but it is defintley the main way they spread their language, culture, religion, and y dna.

 

[Armatus]

I think you got it wrong, the reason why I people were a small population when the IE arrived was their hunter gatherer origin. Most of their clades adopted farming, but their initial population was relatively small and therefore it is logical that they were still a small population compared to others when the IE arrived .Basically their very small pre-farming population led to a small farming-population. There's evidence that most I lines spread very lately (can't post links as i have less than 10 posts , simply google it). Another proof is the former domination of G2a in Western Europe. This line is now a pretty small haplogroup in europe. Even I-M26 ,a clade found together with G2a at a 6:1 frequency has nowadays a 1:1 frequeny with G2a. That can't be explained by IE. Did they made dna tests and killed only G2a people ?
There's also a thread at eupedia about the higher sperm count and the higher male offspring rates of R1b. I'm sure there were acts of war in some areas, but it wasn't a conquest like america nor a genocide like you portray it. There are no slaughtered skeletons or something similar that has been found. And it's logical that there are less ydna lines than mtdna lines from the paleolithic. Men always do dangerous things whereas women don't. These lines simply did out because they either were killed during hunting/etc. or they were replaced by farmers or the IE. But the 50% mark is way to high. I would guess due to the IE maybe 10-15% of the I lines died out due to "war". The rest was done by the higher sperm count or/and maybe disease (Indians died mostly of diseases not bullets) to an already relatively small population. Fyi a higher sperm count leds to a higher probablity to father a son.