Europe's genetic ancestors: Cro Magnon, mid eastern farmers, Indo Euro warriors

[Fire Haired]

Europeans have a long and complicated ancestry, but less complicated than most people in the world. Geneticist understand Europeans ancestry better than any other people in the world. This is most likely because most geneticist and scientists have been European or Americans of European ancestry since the 1800's. It seems the basics of Europeans ancestry has been figured out but we may be wrong and there is defintley alot more to learn. Here is a description of Europeans ancestry through mtDNA(direct maternal lineage), Y DNA(direct paternal lineage), and globe13 austomnal DNA(tells full ancestry)
Cro Magnon
42,000 year old half man half lion statue south Germany

26,000 year old carving of Human face out of Mammoth ivory

15,000 year old La marche cave human carvings in western France (click here for more)

Reconstructions of Cro Magnon man

mtDNA
Cro Magnon is a name for all Europeans who lived over 10,000ybp. When Scientist discovered over 30,000 year old human like skulls in Europe they thought it was a extinct half man half ape. So they named it Cro Magnon. Cro magnon where not one people. They where a mix of Caucasian hunter gathers who arrived in Europe from the middle east mainly between 35,000-55,000ybp. So far we have 22 mtDNA(passed down from mother to children) samples from Humans in Europe between 37,985-10,500ybp (click here)
for full description of results).

The majority had mtDNA U and subclades U5 and U5b mtDNA. U arrived in Europe from the middle east about 55,000ybp or more and developed into U5 over 50,000ybp. While a minority had H, HV, and N. U8 and U2 subclades where found in over 30,000 year old samples in Europe and most U subclades period probably arrived in Europe over 40,000ybp.

Since a 25,000 year old sample in Russia had H17 a subclade of H, two 15,000 year old samples from Spain had H and subclade H6( I have subclade H64) also that a 28,000 year old sample in south Italy most likely had H. mtDNA H probably first migrated to Europe over 35,000ybp from the middle east H today is about 40% of most Europeans mtDNA. there was a 24,000 year old sample from south Italy that most likely had HV today HV is almost only found around Iraq but Europe has its own descendants of HV called V. V descends from HV that migrated to Europe from the middle east probably 30,000-40,000ybp.

From 26,600-19,000ybp much of central and northern Europe was uninhabitable because it was covered in glaciers so Europeans took refuge in southern Europe. mtDNA H1, H3, V, and U5b1 migrated out of Spain across Europe and north west Africa after the Glacier retreated
.

About 30-50% of modern Iberian direct maternal lineages go back to this migration and 15-30% of modern European and north west African maternal lineages.European mtDNA is north Africa may explain the very European
looking Kablye people

It also seems U5b3 migrated out of Italy, U4 and U5a out of eastern European plain, J, T, and X2 out of the middle east may have also spread acroos Europe after glaciers retreated.
Y DNA
There are no Y DNA samples in Europe or the world that are over 10,000 years old. Cro Magnon are believed to have Y DNA IJ, I, F, and C. The only for sure one Cro magnon had is I. The Cro Magnon that had Y DNA I seem to be the main ancestors of modern Europeans.

Y DNA I is only about 20% in Europe. This is because of many invasions and migrations that have occurred in Europe over the last 10,000 years. Europeans still trace most of their ancestry to the Y DNA I possibly also F and C people. Y DNA I either originated in Europe or the south caucus Iraq area 30,000-35,000ybp. If it originated in Europe it migrated as IJ probably 35,000-45,000ybp which would mean some Cro magnon had IJ.

If hg I originated in the south Caucus and Iraq area 30,000-35,000ybp that means IJ was never in Europe. I most likely migrated to Europe 30,000ybp.

Y DNA I map of Europe (for more maps click here)

Globe13 Austomanl DNA

Austomnal DNA tells ur full ancestry not just direct maternal or paternal lines (for more info click here). Almost all austomnal DNA tests say. The only group unque to Europeans is what they call north European or Atlantic Baltic because it is most popular in those areas.

In globe13 it is north European. This group is what Europeans Cro magnon ancestors would have had. It is unclear which migration of Cro magnon Europeans come from. There may have been other Caucasian aust. DNA groups that went extinct while north European is the only one that survived. the group called Mediterranean in the globe13 test may have also existed in Cro magnon but probably not and if it did it would have been much less popular than in modern Europeans.

The oldest austomnal DNA sample in the world is 42,000ybp and is from north east China. All it could tell is this person had the ancestral aust. DNA version of what modern east asians and native americans have. So When Europeans ancestors first arrived in Europe they probably had the ancestral version of north European.

North European aust. DNA brother is west Asian(click here to learn about the Human glob13 aust.DNA family tree). West Asian is centered in the caucus mountains and is also extremely popular from northern Iraq to Pakistan. So Those people are Europeans closest relatives according to aust. DNA.

Y DNA IJ most likely originated in Iran and Paleolithic European Y DNA I may have originated in the south caucus and Iraq area. Which is where west Asian is most popular. So aust. DNA north euro may come from Y DNA I and aust. DNA west Asian may come from Y DNA J.

Aust. DNA north Euro and Y DNA I may have repopulated Europe after the last glacial maximum(15,000-19,000ybp). North Euro aust DNA or its ancestral Version and Y DNA I could of migrated to Europe from the Cacus mountains about 30,000ybp.

This could explain why ethnic groups in the caucus mountains who have the highest amount of aust DNA west Asian have pale skin like Europeans. Also middle eastern and north African people who's austomnal DNA is in the same family as Europeans and have the same pale skin genes as Europeans just at much lower rate. Europeans and ethnic groups in the caucus mountains ancestors may have been dominated by those genes over 30,000ybp. Then Europeans ancestors migrated out of the caucus and repopulated Europe during after Glaciers retreated 15,000-19,000ybp.

Neolithic middle eastern farmers?


reconstruction of otzie the iceman he was killed in Alps Italy 5,300ybp. He had Y DNA G2a4/G2a1b2 L91, mtDNA K1f, Brown eyes, brown hair, and pale skin. His closest modern relatives are southern Europeans mainly Sardine people.

The reason i but a ? mark after Neolithic middle eastern farmers. Is because personally i am not sure if they came from the middle east. They had Y DNA G2a which originated around the caucus mountains and Iran so their Y DNA middle eastern. They brought mtDNA K, T2, some J, H, and U subclades all the mtDNA they brought was middle eastern. Farming began in the middle east about 11,000ybp and farming cultures from the middle east did spread to Europe. So all of that points to them being middle eastern but the thing that makes me think they where not mid eastern is their aust. DNA.

There are two aust. DNA samples from Neolithic European farmers both had over 59% Mediterranean less than 10% west Asian and less than 16% southwest asian. Also They had the same pale skin genes as modern Europeans. They obviously where not descended from Cro magnon man they where probably not European but where did they come from Mediterranean aust. DNA is more popular in Europe than any where else in the world but it originated in the middle east it is very confusing.

mtDNA

Like I said before farmers that migrated to Europe from the middle east from 10,000-8,000ybp. Then spread till 5,000ybp but i am unsure if they where genetically middle eastern. There are nearly 1,000 mtDNA samples from Neolithic European farmers so we have a pretty good idea what mtDNA they had. They had very different mtDNA from Cro magnon and hunter gathers who lived in the Neloithic age. Cro magnon samples had over 55% mtDNA U mainly subclades U5 and U5b hunter gathers during the Neloithic age had over 66% mtDNA U mainly subclades U5 and U5b. Farmers had less than 20% mtDNA U but mainly subclades U5 and U5a and U5b. This could be because we have much less mtDNA samples from Cro magnon and hunter gathers during the Neolithic age.

The farmers also brought new mtDNA haplogroups from the middle east K, I, X2?, N1a?,J?,T?, X2?, middle eastern U and H subclades. I but question marks on the ones that are not fur sure. most J and T subclades probably did arrive in Europe with Neolithic farmers. T2 Which takes up the majority of European T did come from Neolithic middle eastern farmers. Most J subclades also probably came to Europe in Neolithic but some may have come over 15,000ybp.

mtDNA H more popular in Neolithic remains but most had European born subclades like H1 and H3. That descend from H that came to Europe probably over 35,000ybp. mtDNA N1a was surprisingly popular in early Neolithic central European samples (over 6,000 years old). From 236 mtDNA samples from Neolithic Iberians dating 7,000-4,340ybp had nearly identical mtDNA haplogroup percentages to modem Iberians and modern Europeans. The biggest reason H was 41.52% and most subclades where European born even though we had very little that where tested for subclades. Same with 6,625-4,025 year old mtDNA samples from Germany. The majority of modern Europeans direct maternal lineages most likely came 35,000-55,000ybp at the most 30% in some Europeans mtDNA is from Neolithic middle eastern farmers.

Y DNA
So far we have 31 Y DNA samples from Neolithic Europe( one from central Germany 7,247ybp (F(x G,H,I,J,K), two from central Germany 7,000ybp( G2a3=1, F(G,H,I,J,K)=1), four from northern Spain (G2a=3, E1b1b V13=1) 7,000ybp 22 south western France 5,000ybp(G2a=20, I2a1a=2), central western France 4,725ybp(I2a1a=2)

overall the samples date from 7,247-4,725ybp 25 had G2a, 4 had I2a1a, one had E1b1b V13, one had a F descendant probably I2a2 or G2a, one had original F but possibly also had a descendant. So G2a was the dominate haplogroup G2a originated in either the caucus mountainous or Iran 12,000-17,000ybp and spread in the Neolithic age with farming. Only four had European Cro Magnon I2a1a. One also had E1b1b V13 which originated in north Africa 15,000-25,000ybp but spread to Europe and the middle east possibly over 10,000ybp or in the Neolithic age.

G map of Europe(for more Y DNA maps click here)

E1b1b map of Europe(for more maps click here)

About 5% of modern Europeans have Y DNA G2a and 7% have E1b1b mainly E1b1b V13. So Neolithic Y DNA lineages are not that popular in modern Europe probably because of Indo European warrior invasion. Also Y DNA E1b1b could may have mainly spread in Europe during the Greco Roman age. Since very few European farmers had European Y DNA I it seems the middle eastern farmers did not just spread the idea to European farmers they conquered them and killed off alot of native European paternal lineages.

Globe13 Austomnal DNA

There are two aust. DNA samples from Neolithic farmers in Europe. Otzie the Iceman who was killed 5,300ybp in alps Italy and Gok4 who died in southern Sweden 5,000ybp. Both had over 59% Mediterranean and less than 30% north European so they had very little Cro magnon blood. There is also aust DNA from three hunter gathers in Europe who lived in the Neolithic age all of them had over 70% north European. Both farmers had over 7% west asian and southwest asian so they had middle eastern blood that the hunter gathers did not have.

Mediterranean aust. DNA in western Europe ranges from 30-50%, about 15-30% in eastern Europe, and 0-8% in far eastern and far northern Europe(areas where farming spread last). In Iberia it is about 50-60% and in Sardine it is 71%. Sardine people are the closet genetic relatives to Otzie the Iceman.

In Aust. DNA Europeans have alot of Mediterranean so they have alot of mid eastern farmer ancestry. What does not make sense is med is highest in Europe not the mid east even though it originated in the mid east. For some reason the farmers had extremely high amounts of Mediterranean. Otzie the Iceman who technically had less than 20% real European blood had the same light skin genes as Europeans. Also modem Iberians, Sardine, Italiens, Greeks, southeast Europeans technically have more non European blood than European blood but they also have almost only light skin unlike middle eastern people. All western Europeans technically have barely over 50% real European blood but they look no different from Finnish who have over 80% real European blood.

Indo European Warriors

The reason i call them the Indo European warriors. Is because the Indo Europeans spread their language religion, and culture by warfare they had a warrior culture and their most important Gods where mainly war Gods. The Indo European warrior period in Europe lasted from about 5,000-2,00ybp (Scandinavia and parts of eastern Europe till 1,000ybp). Europe in the Bronze and Iron age where dominated by warriors. I have already made a thread about the Italo Celtic warriors that dominated Iron age western Europe. Now of course they where not all sabtoges but they spread their language by war. Also Indo European culture is very war like. SO i thought this is the best name for them.​

Indo European is not just a language it is a culture and religion a huge part of that culture is warfare. The Romans who left the traditional Indo European culture but still had the language conquered the Celts in western Europe and eventually culturally conquered Germans and Slavs. Scandinavians where some of the last Europeans to keep the Indo European culture, religion, and warrior culture which is the type of culture Vikings came out of. About 50% of European paternal lineage goes back to Indo European warriors because they killed off most of the Neolithic and Cro magnon paternal lineages. The Indo European language may have started around the caucus mountains 7,000ybp. Indo European culture began in central Russia and Ukriane the people who spread the language genetically where European they where descended mainly of Cro magnon.

mtDNA

There have not been any for sure mtDNA haplogroups in Europe spread by Indo Europeans.recently (june 2013) German scientists revived mtDNA from some of the earliest Indo European cultures in central Russia all they said is they had typical European and middle eastern haplogroups but no central or east Asian ones.

Y DNA

​

Indo Europeans spread Y DNA R1b L11/P310 and R1a1a1b subclades in Europe which take up the vast vast majority of R1 in Europe. About 50% of Europeans direct paternal line goes back to Indo European warriors

map of R1a and R1b in Europe

​

Y DNA R1 was orignalley Mongoloid it was born somewhere in central or east Asia 25,000-30,000ybp. About 20,000ybp Mongoloids inter married with European and middle eastern Caucasians. The mid eastern R1 became R1b about 18,000ybp the European R1 became R1a about 18,000ybp. R1a and R1b stayed as very unpopular in Europe and the mid east for thousands of years. The Indo European language was most likely started around the Caucus mountains 6,000-8,000ybp by probably R1b people. Then R1b migrated from the Caucus and inter married with European R1a the mix of these two people created Indo European culture about 7,000ybp. This is just a theory it may be wrong it is the best theory i have seen.

The Indo European culture was truly born in central Russia and Ukraine about 7,000ybp. By 6,000ybp most of central Russia, Ukraine and north caucus people where Indo Europeans. Like i said before German scientists recently (June 2013) have started to released DNA results from early Europeans in central Russia from 6,000ybp and 5,000ybp. They have six Y DNA samples but have not released them yet.

so far from two 4,600 year old Indo European Y DNA samples in central Germany both had R1a1a and two from the more western Part of Germany had R1b and R1b M269. Also from Indo European Y DNA samples in central Asia dating from 4,000-2,000ybp 16 had R1a1a one had C.

the proto Balto Slavic speakers with Y DNA R1a1a1b1 migrated to mainland eastern Europe from Russia about 6,000ybp. proto Italo Celtic Germanic speakers with Y DNA R1b L11/P310 migrated to western Europe from Russia about 4,500-5,000ybp. The illyrian speakers most likley spread R1a1a1b in the Balkens 4,000ybp, The Thracen and Dacen speakers most likley spread R1b L51 and R1a1a1b in modern day Bulgaira 4,000ybp, the Greek speakers most likley spread R1a1a1b 3,500-4,000ybp. Over a long processes the Indo Europeans conquered just about all of Europe except Finalnd, northern Scandnavia and that it. The Indo Iranien speaking Indo Europeans with R1a1a1b2 in central asia did the same as the Indo Europeans in Europe. Indo Europeans may be the most powerful people in human history.

globe13 Austomnal DNA

It is debatable who the very first Indo European speakers where all we know is they lived around Russia, Ukraine, and the north caucus mountains German scientists recently (June 2013) say that 6,000 year old remains from Indo European culture in Russia. Had same pale skin genes as modern Europeans and more brown eyes than the average European. They where conquered by Uralic speaking cultures north of them 5,000-4,000ybp. Today people in that area of Russia speak a Urlaic language they have pale skin and have about 80% brown eyes while the average European ethnic group has less than 70%. So modern Russians in that area of Russia today probably mainly descend from very early Indo Europeans.

Also those ethnic groups in Russia have some of the highest amount of north euro austomnal DNA in Europe. they have about 70-80%. This means that the Indo Europeans that conquered Europe would have had probably 70-80% north European aust. DNA or more.

4,000-3,800 year old DNA from Indo Iranian Indo European speakers in central Asia show they had the same genes for pale skin as modern Europeans and had mainly blonde hair and light eyes. Indo Iranian remains in west China from 3,400 and 3,000ybp some had red hair. Also later Indo Iraniens in central Asia like Sythiens and Tocherians where known by Greek, Roman, and Chinese writers for red hair and blue eyes.

red hair in Europe almost on exists in western Europe within the borders of Indo European R1b L11/P310. (click here to learn more). The light haired, light eyed, and sometimes red haired Indo Europeans would have also had around 70-80% north euro aust. DNA today the highest amount of red hair is in the Udmurts of Russia a Uralic ethnic group who most likely descends from early Indo Europeans.

Red hair most likely only existed in central Russia before 6,000ybp. Then some of the ethnic groups with red hair became Indo Europeans and spread red hair into Europe and in Asia even though today it rarely pops up in Asian Indo Europeans.

So it seems the early Indo Europeans that spread acroos Europe from Russia some where very dark haired and eyed and some where very light haired, red haired, and light eyed but all had 70-80% north Euro aust. DNA. So if anything the Indo Europeans increased the amounts of north Euro aust. DNA.
I know this is long
I know this is very long thank u for anyone who reads this. It is a summary of the ancestry of European people. There is some stuff i did not include like Uralic ethnic groups in Russia and Scandinavia have been living in those areas for about 10,000 years. But have not inter married much with othe people since then pretty mcuh only Siberian Mongloid people because they spread to Uralic language to Europe 8,000ybp so Uralic speaking ethnic groups in Europe have almost 100% Cro magnon blood aka 100% European with some Mongoloid admixture.

Also Italiens, Greeks, and south east Europeans have a significant amount of middle eastern ancestry(not extremely significant but it matters). In the Greco Roman age They where the only civilizations in Europe and had alot of contact with civilizations in the middle east that is where in the inter marriage occured. south Italians and Greeks have about 20-24% west asian and 15-18% southwest Asian in aust. DNA. north Italians and southeast Europeans including Yugoslavians have about 15-18% west Asian and 12-15% southwest asian. They also have much higher rates of middle eastern and north African E1b1b, J1, and J2. All other Europeans except Finnish, Sami and other Uralic ethnic groups have at least some middle eastern blood. at average about 5-9 west asian and 1-2% southwest Asian but most came in Neloithic age 6,000-10,000ybp not Greco roman. ​

 

[Maciamo]

Nice summary. I congratulate you for your effort (although you really should use more your spell checker).

 

[Fire Haired]

Nice summary. I congratulate you for your effort (although you really should use more your spell checker).

I know i write way to fast and a don't organize it i was so shocked when i saw how long this thread was when i finished.

I think it was a great idea of yours when u made the R1b S116 Italo Celtic map, and the Germanic map. even though i dis agree with adding all non Finnish I1, and R1a Z284 both are pre Germanic and not all was spread by Germans.

I know this is hard work for. i think it is a good idea if u made the following y dna maps

Balto Slavic and Indo Iranien aka proto Indo European R1a1a1b S224

Germanic Italo Celtic R1b L11/P310

R1b L11/P310 and R1a1a1b1 map of Europe aka Indo European lineages.

Balto Slavic/ Corded ware culture R1a1a1b1

Indo Iranien R1a1a1b2

R1b L23 and subclades map it could give an idea where Germanic italo Celts came from

If u did maybe dont just show Europe and small areas of Asia and Africa. For Indo Iranian almost all of it will be in Asia. I bet it can give an idea how Indo Iranians migrated. It seems they came out of Siberia and west china and migrated to India and Iran because the oldest Indo Iranian remains like tarium mummies are in that area.

Also i made this point earlier on my Indo Iranian DNA thread. Why did the Indo Iranian remains have 60% light brown/blonde hair and 75% blue or green eyes. The only people with these hair color percentages are Scandinavians, Northwest Russians, and Baltic's. This might give an idea of the ethnic origins of Indo Iranians.

Also why did 6,000 and 5,000 year old Indo European and Uralic's in Russia and Ukraine have by far mainly brown eyes. Even though they came from the same sources as Indo Iraniens. This means Indo Europeans 6,000ybp in Russia and Ukraine where not one ethnic group. They where a mix of different European ethnic groups in that area. Also i think non Slavic ethnic groups in Russia direct descend from Yamna Culture because Yamna was conquered by Uralics. Non Slavic's in Russia are Uralic and Yamna remains had mainly brown eyes so do the Uralic ethnic groups in Russia.

Thank u for making all the maps and other articles on this website.

 

[ElHorsto]

Also why did 6,000 and 5,000 year old Indo European and Uralic's in Russia and Ukraine have by far mainly brown eyes. Even though they came from the same sources as Indo Iraniens. This means Indo Europeans 6,000ybp in Russia and Ukraine where not one ethnic group. They where a mix of different European ethnic groups in that area. Also i think non Slavic ethnic groups in Russia direct descend from Yamna Culture because Yamna was conquered by Uralics. Non Slavic's in Russia are Uralic and Yamna remains had mainly brown eyes so do the Uralic ethnic groups in Russia.

Or maybe the amount of light eyes was lower in the past in general than today, for random reasons like drift, etc.

 

[Fire Haired]

Or maybe the amount of light eyes was lower in the past in general than today, for random reasons like drift, etc.

did u read the part where 3,800 and 4,000 year old Indo Iranians in south Siberia and west china had majority blue or green and eyes and a percentage only found in modern Scandinavians, Baltic, and northwest Russians. They migrated out of Russia about 5,000-6,000ybp so their an example of an extremely light eyed group of Europeans 6,000ybp also modern Europeans don't descend from them at all because they migrated to Asia.

Also Scandinavians have been genetically separated from polish for probably over 10,000 years but both have mainly blue and green eyes. Europeans ancestors where already very separated and spread out 6,000ybp so i doubt one genetic drift 6,000ybp could cause a difference in all modern Europeans.

Indo European migrations 6,000-5,000ybp is the most recent thing that unites most Europeans like Irish and polish. But it seems very different Indo European groups migrated to Ireland and Poland so i guess that might not be true. Also i don't think it is luck that a suspected Uralic culture had conquered these 6,000 year old Indo Europeans that people in that area today speak a Uralic language and have over 80% brown eyes like the remains.''

non Slavic ethnic groups in Russia probably descend from Yamna culture people and probably trace most of their ancestry in that area back over 10,000 years.

 

[ElHorsto]

did u read the part where 3,800 and 4,000 year old Indo Iranians in south Siberia and west china had majority blue or green and eyes and a percentage only found in modern Scandinavians, Baltic, and northwest Russians. They migrated out of Russia about 5,000-6,000ybp so their an example of an extremely light eyed group of Europeans 6,000ybp also modern Europeans don't descend from them at all because they migrated to Asia.

I missed that. Do you have a source at hand? Thanks.

Also Scandinavians have been genetically separated from polish for probably over 10,000 years but both have mainly blue and green eyes.

I don't think that's completely true, however.

 

[Fire Haired]

I missed that. Do you have a source at hand? Thanks.

http://www.buildinghistory.org/distantpast/ancientdna.shtml also i did not just include the ones from 3,800 and 4,000ybp i included the Indo Iranians in Asia all the way to 2,000ybp. They all consitantley had the same mtDNA, Y DNA, hair color and eye color, and culture. So i knew they where the same people so i added it together total 75% had light eyes and 60% had light brown hair or blonde hair.

U have probably heard of the Tarium mummies in west China the oldest are are 4,000 years old. they all had brown or black hair so probably mainly brown eyes. They also had alot of east asian blood and almost all east asian mtDNA haplogroups so i did not count them. Also black hair almost never exists in Europeans so i knew they got that from the east Asian side. Brown hair is almost only in Caucasians and true black hair is also rare in mid easterns and north Africans.

Also in later Tarium mummies light hair was very popular two had red hair they where 3,400 and 3,000 years old. So to me this meant the Indo Iranians where extremely light eyed and light haired and they migrated out of Russia 6,000-5,000ybp. They have almost no modern day European descendants only Asian ones. There are almost no full blooded Indo Iranians left. which means there probably was not a genetic drift in Europe 5,000ybp that brought more light eyes. The the nomad horse riding people in central Asia like Sythiens and Tocherians that Romans, Greeks, and Chinese knew they where very late Indo Iranians.

The Indo Iranien language spread all over the India Iran area but when i say Indo iranien blood i am talking blood from the first Indo iranien speakers who came from Russia.

I don't think that's completely true, however.

I know it is not for sure but i think there is a good chance. I1a2 dominates Germanic Scandinavia and Uralic Scandinavia Finalnd. There is no evidence of a Neolithic or Bronze age culture that existed in Sweden, Norway, and Finalnd in the last 10,000 years no traces of a migration that could have spread I1a2. Uralic Kunda culure conquered Finalnd 8,000ybp. Uralics where Mongoloids from Siberia the native Finnish were Caucasian and almost defintley where Finnish today get I1a2 from. Germanic R1b S21 and Native central European I2a2 spread to Scandinavia with Germanic languages and The Nordic bronze age 4,000ybp. I1a2 is pre Germanic and Pre Uralic it is from over 8,000 year old Scandinavians.

The first major human settlement in Scandinavia came 11,000ybp i think they brought I1a which later became I1a2. Also I1 in the rest of Europe is almost never I1a2 it is I1a1, Ia3, I1a4 and in I1b is sometimes found in Germany and the Netherlands. I1a would have been probably very popular in central Europeans 10,000-15,000ybp. I1a then migrated to Scandinavia and became I1a2 the I1a that stayed became I1a1, I1a3, I1a4 and I1b split much earlier.

This is just my opinon

 

[ElHorsto]

http://www.buildinghistory.org/distantpast/ancientdna.shtml also i did not just include the ones from 3,800 and

Thanks.

There is no evidence of a Neolithic or Bronze age culture that existed in Sweden, Norway, and Finalnd in the last 10,000 years

In the neolithic there were Funnel Beaker farmers from south europe:

http://dienekes.blogspot.de/2012/04/ancient-dna-from-neolithic-sweden.html

And in bronze age also Corded Ware reached Scandinavia.

 

[Fire Haired]

In the neolithic there were Funnel Beaker farmers from south europe:

http://dienekes.blogspot.de/2012/04/ancient-dna-from-neolithic-sweden.html

And in bronze age also Corded Ware reached Scandinavia.

well Funnel beaker and Corded ware never reached to northern Scanavia where I1a2 is still popular. Also Corded ware was almost defintley proto Balto Slavic speakers. Slavic culture just 1,000ybp descend from it and two 4,600 year old Corded ware y dna samples had R1a1a it seems they spread R1a1a1b1 in Europe including in Scandnavia. Scandinavians have a brother R1a1a1b1 branch to Slavics and Baltic which means the most likely got it from Corded ware culture and that I1a2 comes from a different source.

Also Funnel beaker comes from i think central Europe maybe before that southern Europe. The farmers that spread acroos Europe from 6,000-10,000ybp spread a group austomnal DNA( basically tells full ancestry) usuelly calls Mediterranean and they spread Y DNA G2a possibly E1b V13. I am basing this own austomnal DNA and Y DNA we have of these farmers. Farmer in south swedan from 5,000ybp was very unrelated to modern Scandinavians and was mainly Mediterranean in all forms of aust dna tests like otzie the oce man a 5,300 year old farmer from alps italy. The funnel beaker farmers are almost defintley not the main ancestors of modern Scandinavians.

Since two 5,000 year old hunter gather from south Swedan was almost 100% north European in aust. DNA tests. Scandinavians descend from hunter gathers that already lived in Scandinavia before funnel beaker culture. and Funnel beaker did not exist in Finalnd and only in south Scandinavia so it probably is not where I1a2 comes from.

I think I1a2 and Scandinavians main ancestors arrived over 10,000ybp.

 

[ElHorsto]

Since two 5,000 year old hunter gather from south Swedan was almost 100% north European in aust. DNA tests. Scandinavians descend from hunter gathers that already lived in Scandinavia before funnel beaker culture.

I'd bet 20% neolithic, 30% hunter-gatherer and 50% Indo-european (equally related to both r1a and r1b). While IE and hunter-gatherers are more similar. That would explain how and why they differ from Finns and Saami.

and Funnel beaker did not exist in Finalnd and only in south Scandinavia so it probably is not where I1a2 comes from.

I think I1a2 and Scandinavians main ancestors arrived over 10,000ybp.

Possible. I did not made a statement about that.

 

[Fire Haired]

So ur saying modern Scandinavians are 20% Neolithic, 30% hunter gather, and 50% Indo European. I think they are defintley mainly hunter gather. Because Scandinavians have over 60% blonde hair no one else in Europe besides Baltics and northwest Russians have that percentage. and when i say Scandinavia i include Finnish who have almost no Indo European blood also it is only southern Scandinavians., That is where Germanic speakers settled 4,000ybp. The red hair in Scandinavia comes from Indo european Germanic's but the blonde hair defintley is from the hunter gathers who came over 10,000ybp.

i am not saying all the blonde hair but over 60% is like a marker of Scandinavians. Also the Indo Europeans that spread the language where almost 100% descended from hunter gathers.

 

[Marko94]

Good job, is rlly interesting.

 

[Angela]

Geno 2.0 population portraits:

Germans-
Mediterranean-36
N.European-46
S.W.Asian-17

Danes-
Mediterranean-30
N.European-53
S.W.Asian-16

Finns-
Mediterranean-17
N.European-57
S.W. Asian-17
N.E.Asian-7

Wiki now lists all of the available ones from the project.

 

[Fire Haired]

Geno 2.0 population portraits:

Germans-
Mediterranean-36
N.European-46
S.W.Asian-17

Danes-
Mediterranean-30
N.European-53
S.W.Asian-16

Finns-
Mediterranean-17
N.European-57
S.W. Asian-17
N.E.Asian-7

Wiki now lists all of the available ones from the project.

i uselly look at alot of diff aust. dna tests like globe13 or K12b. my dad's results on the geno 2.0 test was
meditreaen-40
N.european-35
S.W. asia-15
Native Aamerican-5
Sub African-3
Oceania-2

I dont trust the non N. European, Med, and S.W. asian these tests are not completly accurate. Aust. DNA is very complicated i have looked at any countries results and everyone will have like 1% of soething u know they dont like indians have 1% native american in the globe13 test. My dad is about 74% German, Scottish, English, and Irish German like u said have 46% north euro the rest of them have over 50% and the meditreaen is in the low 30's then the rest of my dad;s blood is norwiegan which has even more north euro and less med. even when u include the native american, african, and oceanai med is 40% that doesnt make sense if u look at my dad's ancestry.

something our family does not understand is my dad his uncle and some of his cousins literally have brown skin. darker than the average iraqi because we know many iraqi people. we dont know where the dark skin came from it rarely pops up but its there i think the high amount of med has something to do with it. maybe that med repsents mid eastern blood a diff type of aust. dna test will show if there is alot of mid eastern. we know the dark skin came at the most recent from my dads great grandparents i am guessing the german side but i dont know. do u have any ideas

 

[Wilhelm]

Otzi was not a neolithic farmer.

 

[Fire Haired]

Otzi was not a neolithic farmer.

Otzie was chaloithic he descended from Neolithic farmers who brought G2a to europe. That is why 7,000 year old Neolithic Europeans in Germany and spain had G2a and why he had G2a. Same reason i have R1b L11/P310(i dont know what subclade) just like Germanic tribes and Insular Celtic tribes did. It is like saying I am not Iron age Germanic and Insular Celtic or your not a CeltIberian. because i grew up in 21st century America. My blood is from those iron age people just like otzie blood is from Neolithic Europeans.

 

[Questions]

Europeans have a long and complicated ancestry, but less complicated than most people in the world. Geneticist understand Europeans ancestry better than any other people in the world.​

Do we have to assume that ALL Europeans migrated from somewhere else? just because
the Germans and Celts and Slavs came from the East with the Basques and other Steppe people?​

 

[TaktikatEMalet]

This is wrong, r1b didn't conquer all of Europe - South Europe (Ilyrians/Dacians etc) v13, j2b l283, (Greeks) j2a kept them out just like i1 did in North.

Also, how do you explain where r1 split into r1a and r1b and why it was pure r1b that moved away into Europe? Did r1a push them out? How is it i1 allowed r1b to move west instead of holding them east and keep the west for themself?

For me looking at it logically r1b must have started from the west in Spain to explain the expansion it had. Also to explain the darker features r1b had (which Spaniards still have today) and by moving east r1b people received lighter features (mostly from i1 and early i2 people) which is why you find r1b in Spain with darker features than r1b in North Europe with lighter features

In terms of indo european, why is this given to r1b? Surely i1, G and i2 are the indo Europeans?

 

[Riverman]

This is wrong, r1b didn't conquer all of Europe - South Europe (Ilyrians/Dacians etc) v13, j2b l283, (Greeks) j2a kept them out just like i1 did in North.

Rather those haplogroups were conquered or early allies of the steppe people (R1a+b dominated), survived, and spread from within. So they were conquered, at some point, but made it in the new societal system established by the steppe people, which makes a difference. From where they were spreading exactly however is still not completely solved, especially for E-V13 and I1. In some places of Northern or Central and South Eastern Europe, E-V13 and I1 actually replaced earlier groups which were dominated by I2 or R1b+a. So its not really a defence.

 

[TaktikatEMalet]

Rather those haplogroups were conquered or early allies of the steppe people (R1a+b dominated), survived, and spread from within. So they were conquered, at some point, but made it in the new societal system established by the steppe people, which makes a difference. From where they were spreading exactly however is still not completely solved, especially for E-V13 and I1. In some places of Northern or Central and South Eastern Europe, E-V13 and I1 actually replaced earlier groups which were dominated by I2 or R1b+a. So its not really a defence.

It cannot work, being conquered and early allies in the steppe would mean these subclades would have also have equally spread to places like spain if we go with the steppe theory. This isnt factual, r1b is super strong in Western Europe with nonexistant/irrelevant and probably recent r1a to boot whereas v13, j2a etc are strong in South Europe in differing regions. This smells of a separation not a unified movement

For me, either r1b started in Spain and spread out killing off/outnumbering i2 and g until they hit a brick wall in i1 North Europe, j2a Greeks, v13 etc South Europeans and also r1a in steppe

OR

R1b came out of steppe for some reason without any r1a input, managed to push i1 out the way moving them further north to proceed west killing/outnumbering i2 and G but hitting a brick wall in South Europe which had tribes of peoples who came from West Asia