What does genetics say about the origin of Germanic people?

[MOESAN]

I'm K.O. You win here, Cyrus.
I avow all these subclades of Y-R1b-U106, R1a1a, I1, I2a2 in today Germanic lands have no importance.

 

[nornosh]

Look if there were great migrations in 500 BC then people in Greece, Turkey must have noticed it yet no records of it is in those countries sources.
The 2600 BC date looks more probable IMO, with possibly some less migrations in 500 BC which must have had some influences on Europe.

 

[Ygorcs]

If you remember, I talked about R1a-M17 in Germany as the source of the same haplogroup in Iran, we read in Wikipedia:

"David Anthony considers the Yamnaya culture to be the Indo-European Urheimat. According to Haak et al. (2015), a massive migration from the Yamnaya culture northwards took place ca. 2,500 BCE, accounting for 75% of the genetic ancestry of the Corded Ware culture, noting that R1a and R1b may have "spread into Europe from the East after 3,000 BCE". Yet, all their seven Yamnaya samples belonged to the R1b-M269 subclade, but no R1a1a has been found in their Yamnaya samples. This raises the question where the R1a1a in the Corded Ware culture came from, if it was not from the Yamnaya culture.

Semenov and Bulat do argue for such an origin of R1a1a in the Corded ware culture, noting that several publications point to the presence of R1a1 in the Comb Ware culture."

It means R1a came from CWC to Yamnaya, not vice versa, so Europeans migrated to the Caspian steppe and then adopted the Indo-European language, one group of these Europeans continued its way to Iran and created the Germanic culture and then came back to Europe in 500 BC.

Nonsense. CWC appears centuries later than the early phase of the Yamnaya culture, which is a direct and continuous development from the earlier Repin culture. R1a-M417 was also found centuries earlier in the Pontic-Caspian steppe, before the CWC. Also, again: haplogroups are not people, haplogroups are not one's overall ancestry. The CWC has the same origin as the Yamnaya wherever it was, but the Yamnaya-like admixture was found centuries earlier in the Pontic-Caspian region since the Eneolithic (Vonyuchka, Progress, Khvalynsk).

 

[Cyrus]

Look if there were great migrations in 500 BC then people in Greece, Turkey must have noticed it yet no records of it is in those countries sources.
The 2600 BC date looks more probable IMO, with possibly some less migrations in 500 BC which must have had some influences on Europe.

Of course nothing happened in 500 BC!! Achaemenid empire didn't exist! Persians didn't conquer and occupy Pontus, Armenia, ..., they didn't force any people to leave their land!! Scythians didn't migrate to Europe, but I don't know why no one lived in the east of Europe except Scythians because ancient Greek sources just talk about them in these regions!!

It really sounds good, there was not any great migration in 500 BC and from 2600 BC just Iranian-speaking people lived in a large part of Europe and Asia, yes?

 

[Northener]

It means R1a came from CWC to Yamnaya, not vice versa, so Europeans migrated to the Caspian steppe and then adopted the Indo-European language, one group of these Europeans continued its way to Iran and created the Germanic culture and then came back to Europe in 500 BC.

@Cyrus reminds me of Huup Huup Barbatruc.....

When i was a child there was some kind of cartoon in which creatures turned into another shape....before that they shouted huup huup barba truc (trick).

Somehow your posting reminds me of that

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hdjboFzPF-I

 

[Cyrus]

I'm K.O. You win here, Cyrus.
I avow all these subclades of Y-R1b-U106, R1a1a, I1, I2a2 in today Germanic lands have no importance.

They are actually very important, we know subclades of R1a1a existed in the north of Europe long time before Yamnaya, as you read in Wikipedia: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Haplogroup_R1a, "The Rossen culture (4,600–4,300 BC), which was situated on Germany and predates the Corded Ware culture, an old subclade of R1a, namely L664, can still be found." The same thing can be said about R1b1a but in a southern part of Europe, as you read: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Haplogroup_R1b "Villabruna 1 (individual I9030), found in an Epigravettian culture setting in the Cismon valley (modern Veneto, Italy), who lived circa 14,000 years BP and belonged to R1b-L754, numerous individuals from the Mesolithic Iron Gates culture of the central Danube (modern Romania and Serbia), dating from 10,000 to 8,500 BP – most of them falling into R1b-L754"

Northern and southern parts of Europe are certainly the sources of both R1a1a and R1b1a, also I1 and I2, people from these lands migrated to the Caspian steppe and adopted an Indo-Euroepan culture, it is meaningless to say a younger culture in the steppe created old cultures in Europe.

 

[Cyrus]

Nonsense. CWC appears centuries later than the early phase of the Yamnaya culture, which is a direct and continuous development from the earlier Repin culture. R1a-M417 was also found centuries earlier in the Pontic-Caspian steppe, before the CWC. Also, again: haplogroups are not people, haplogroups are not one's overall ancestry. The CWC has the same origin as the Yamnaya wherever it was, but the Yamnaya-like admixture was found centuries earlier in the Pontic-Caspian region since the Eneolithic (Vonyuchka, Progress, Khvalynsk).

Look at my previous post, I think you know these things better than me, a subclade of R1a-M417, namely L664, has been found in Rossen culture (4,600–4,300 BC) in Germany, at least 1,000 years before Yamnaya culture (3300–2600 BC) in the steppe.

 

[Cyrus]

I think many things should be corrected about the migration map of haplogroup R1a:

 

[Silesian]

Nonsense. CWC appears centuries later than the early phase of the Yamnaya culture, which is a direct and continuous development from the earlier Repin culture. R1a-M417 was also found centuries earlier in the Pontic-Caspian steppe, before the CWC. Also, again: haplogroups are not people, haplogroups are not one's overall ancestry. The CWC has the same origin as the Yamnaya wherever it was, but the Yamnaya-like admixture was found centuries earlier in the Pontic-Caspian region since the Eneolithic (Vonyuchka, Progress, Khvalynsk).

How do you explain the many cultural/archeological[snp age dates] differences between Yamnaya R1b-Z2108/9 [R-Z2108Z2109/CTS1843 * Z2108+/- formed 5200 ybp] and CWC R1a?

 

[spruithean]

Of course nothing happened in 500 BC!! Achaemenid empire didn't exist! Persians didn't conquer and occupy Pontus, Armenia, ..., they didn't force any people to leave their land!! Scythians didn't migrate to Europe, but I don't know why no one lived in the east of Europe except Scythians because ancient Greek sources just talk about them in these regions!!

It really sounds good, there was not any great migration in 500 BC and from 2600 BC just Iranian-speaking people lived in a large part of Europe and Asia, yes?

Are you sure that the Achaemenid Empire didn't exist in 500 BC? Who conquered Egypt in 525 BC? Who conquered Lydia in 547 BC? Who were the Greeks at war with in 499 BC during the Greco-Persian War? There weren't just Iranian-speaking people living in Europe and Asia. The map you provided even acknowledges this. The Greeks mention the Scythians a fair bit because they interacted with them heavily, and the Greeks had colonies on the Black Sea coast and were directly neighboured by Scythian tribes. The Greeks however mention other people besides the Scythians like Thracians and the like.

They are actually very important, we know subclades of R1a1a existed in the north of Europe long time before Yamnaya, as you read in Wikipedia: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Haplogroup_R1a, "The Rossen culture (4,600–4,300 BC), which was situated on Germany and predates the Corded Ware culture, an old subclade of R1a, namely L664, can still be found." The same thing can be said about R1b1a but in a southern part of Europe, as you read: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Haplogroup_R1b "Villabruna 1 (individual I9030), found in an Epigravettian culture setting in the Cismon valley (modern Veneto, Italy), who lived circa 14,000 years BP and belonged to R1b-L754, numerous individuals from the Mesolithic Iron Gates culture of the central Danube (modern Romania and Serbia), dating from 10,000 to 8,500 BP – most of them falling into R1b-L754"

Northern and southern parts of Europe are certainly the sources of both R1a1a and R1b1a, also I1 and I2, people from these lands migrated to the Caspian steppe and adopted an Indo-Euroepan culture, it is meaningless to say a younger culture in the steppe created old cultures in Europe.

You're going to have to provide a citation for this "R-L664" in Rossen Culture. I'm curious as an ancient sample such as this wouldn't be ignored, especially by people that are in this research field. It's my understanding that prior to Rossen there was the LBK culture in Germany (and Hungary) and their LBK samples are all G2a2a and G2a2a1, they found that in: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5048219/ the list of haplogroups are in the Extended Data table 2 PDF. (Word of caution for all studies, we need to be clear about what ISOGG tree they are using, ISOGG is notoriously behind by about a year, this is why we use shorthand)

Do you have actual evidence of I1 moving to the Pontic Caspian steppe? I1s formation and TMRCA say otherwise. Haplogroup I in Europe is far older than steppe cultures and it was present in Europe in the Paleolithic period.

Look at my previous post, I think you know these things better than me, a subclade of R1a-M417, namely L664, has been found in Rossen culture (4,600–4,300 BC) in Germany, at least 1,000 years before Yamnaya culture (3300–2600 BC) in the steppe.

Again, provide a citation for this R-L664 in Rossen Culture. Cite the publication. Wikipedia does not cite an actual study and it simply redirects you to YFull (while claiming that YFull is FTDNA?)

I think many things should be corrected about the migration map of haplogroup R1a:

Can you explain your reasoning for this map?

 

[Cyrus]

How do you explain the many cultural/archeological[snp age dates] differences between Yamnaya R1b-Z2108/9 [R-Z2108Z2109/CTS1843 * Z2108+/- formed 5200 ybp] and CWC R1a?

As I said in another thread Proto-Indo-European was initially divided into two different branches: Satem (R1a-M17) and Centum (R1b-L23), they existed at the same time but they were different cultures, it is possible that Satem originated in Corded Ware culture and Centum in Yamnaya culture.

Modern distribution of these hoplogrops show major migration from 5,500 to 4,500 years ago:

After about 2,000 years in the 1st millennium BC, we see some cultural changes, Iranian culture was expanded to modern Iran, Armenian culture reached to modern Armenia in the south and Celtic and Germanic cultures came back to Europe. Balto-Slavic, Indian, Anatolian, Hellenic, Italic, Thracian, Albanian, ... cultures have a longer history in their own lands.

 

[Angela]

Since this seems to be a discussion mainly about genetics, and specifically about y dna, I am moving it to that part of the site.

If you like I can rename it something like Germanic ethnogenesis through yDna analysis.

 

[Cyrus]

Can you explain your reasoning for this map?

The most important point is that we know in the 1st millennium BC non-Indo-European people such as Basques, Iberians, Etruscans, Finns, ... lived in the west and north of Europe and all of them had the same haplogroups of R1a and R1b, so it can't be said that these haplogroups in Europe just relate to Indo-Europeans.

 

[hrvclv]

Since this seems to be a discussion mainly about genetics, and specifically about y dna, I am moving it to that part of the site.

If you like I can rename it something like Germanic ethnogenesis through yDna analysis.

We all know what it seems to be. I wish I knew what it really is (Sigh!).

Don't move or rename the damn thing. Dump it where it belongs and pull the chain.

 

[spruithean]

The most important point is that we know in the 1st millennium BC non-Indo-European people such as Basques, Iberians, Etruscans, Finns, ... lived in the west and north of Europe and all of them had the same haplogroups of R1a and R1b, so it can't be said that these haplogroups in Europe just relate to Indo-Europeans.

So we're just going ignore phylogeny and make broad sweeping statements then?

We all know what it seems to be. I wish I knew what it really is (Sigh!).

Don't move or rename the damn thing. Dump it where it belongs and pull the chain.

This, anything that has been said in this thread has been rejected in favour of a pseudohistory and a pet theory, any evidence that shows the pet theory is complete nonsense gets ignored.

As I said in another thread Proto-Indo-European was initially divided into two different branches: Satem (R1a-M17) and Centum (R1b-L23), they existed at the same time but they were different cultures, it is possible that Satem originated in Corded Ware culture and Centum in Yamnaya culture.

Modern distribution of these hoplogrops show major migration from 5,500 to 4,500 years ago:

After about 2,000 years in the 1st millennium BC, we see some cultural changes, Iranian culture was expanded to modern Iran, Armenian culture reached to modern Armenia in the south and Celtic and Germanic cultures came back to Europe. Balto-Slavic, Indian, Anatolian, Hellenic, Italic, Thracian, Albanian, ... cultures have a longer history in their own lands.

Haplogroups don't speak languages, pretty bold of you to assert that R-L23 is Centum and R-M17 is Satem, are we going to ignore the large amount of Yamnaya admixture in Corded Ware?

This map makes no sense. Celtic and Germanic came back to Europe? That's ridiculous and everyone is getting tired of this pseudohistorical stuff. What about Italic? Italic and Celtic are quite closely linked at a certain point, so care to explain that? Where is Balto-Slavic in all this? How did proto-Germanic influence Balto-Slavic and early Finnish if it was way far away? How did Finnish acquire some pre-proto-Germanic loanwords? Proto-Germanic most definitely arose in Northern Europe, you keep denying this. Present some real archaeological evidence that this migration "out of Iran" happened, we've already discussed the genetic aspect and how it doesn't fit your theory and you insist on ignoring that or misinterpreting the data.


Also where is the citation for an ancient sample of R-L664 in the Rossen Culture? I wouldn't trust Wikipedia as a scholarly source.

 

[nornosh]

Also where is the citation for an ancient sample of R-L664 in the Rossen Culture? I wouldn't trust Wikipedia as a scholarly source.

Yes Wikipedia got it mixed up! its actually from Corded ware culture in 2700 BC not Rossen culture BUT the point they are making is that it preceded the oldest R1b samples in W.Europe so it couldn't have been from Yamna culture which were discussed in previous threads already.

 

[Ygorcs]

How do you explain the many cultural/archeological[snp age dates] differences between Yamnaya R1b-Z2108/9 [R-Z2108Z2109/CTS1843 * Z2108+/- formed 5200 ybp] and CWC R1a?

What "many cultural/archaeological" differences are you referring to? They were close enough to be two cultures from different parts of the PIE-speaking sphere of influence. In my nMonte models, I found it pretty interesting (and plausible) that Yamnaya looks more easily modeled as Progress Eneolithic + Khalynsk Eneolithic, whereas CWC Baltic (early, with almost no extra EEF or WHG/EHG ancestry) can be easily modeled as Progress Eneolithic + Ukraine Eneolithic. Maybe CWC derives from Eneolithic Steppe-influenced Ukrainian cultures of the Late Copper Age/Early Bronze Age displaced northward (possibly first into the forest-steppe, later to the forest areas) by the Yamnaya who originally came from the east (Khvalynsk > Repin > Yamnay). They were clearly related not just genetically, but also culturally, but they were not the same, and the CWC most certainly acquired new cultural traits as it mixed with EEF and HG people in Northern Europe and adapted to a completely new environment.

 

[Silesian]

What "many cultural/archaeological" differences are you referring to? They were close enough to be two cultures from different parts of the PIE-speaking sphere of influence. In my nMonte models, I found it pretty interesting (and plausible) that Yamnaya looks more easily modeled as Progress Eneolithic + Khalynsk Eneolithic, whereas CWC Baltic (early, with almost no extra EEF or WHG/EHG ancestry) can be easily modeled as Progress Eneolithic + Ukraine Eneolithic. Maybe CWC derives from Eneolithic Steppe-influenced Ukrainian cultures of the Late Copper Age/Early Bronze Age displaced northward (possibly first into the forest-steppe, later to the forest areas) by the Yamnaya who originally came from the east (Khvalynsk > Repin > Yamnay). They were clearly related not just genetically, but also culturally, but they were not the same, and the CWC most certainly acquired new cultural traits as it mixed with EEF and HG people in Northern Europe and adapted to a completely new environment.

Could you please be so kind and post all your working/viable nMonte models in regards to this subject. So we can have some common understanding and to communicate.

 

[Silesian]

As I said in another thread Proto-Indo-European was initially divided into two different branches: Satem (R1a-M17) and Centum (R1b-L23), they existed at the same time but they were different cultures, it is possible that Satem originated in Corded Ware culture and Centum in Yamnaya culture.

Modern distribution of these hoplogrops show major migration from 5,500 to 4,500 years ago:

After about 2,000 years in the 1st millennium BC, we see some cultural changes, Iranian culture was expanded to modern Iran, Armenian culture reached to modern Armenia in the south and Celtic and Germanic cultures came back to Europe. Balto-Slavic, Indian, Anatolian, Hellenic, Italic, Thracian, Albanian, ... cultures have a longer history in their own lands.

Okay have a look at this. I was wondering what is going on with some of these R1b samples. I'm going to be very specific.

As you might already know markers downstream from R1b-Z2108+-Z2109+ are linked directly with Yamnaya/Afansievo/Catacombe/Poltavka/Eastern Bell Beaker[R1b-KMS67 https://www.yfull.com/tree/R-KMS67/].
https://www.yfull.com/tree/R-Z2108*/

What is of interest is R-Y14415 this 5200+/- year old marker[roughly 300+/- years older than the R1a marker above # R-Y17491FGC86403 * Y17491formed 4900 ybp, TMRCA 4600 ybpinfo] is found among Punjabi's[R-Y35099] while at the same time it is also found in Swedes under R-Y14512. How can this be? Recent immigration ?
https://www.yfull.com/tree/R-Y14415/

 

[Cyrus]

So we're just going ignore phylogeny and make broad sweeping statements then?



This, anything that has been said in this thread has been rejected in favour of a pseudohistory and a pet theory, any evidence that shows the pet theory is complete nonsense gets ignored.



Haplogroups don't speak languages, pretty bold of you to assert that R-L23 is Centum and R-M17 is Satem, are we going to ignore the large amount of Yamnaya admixture in Corded Ware?

This map makes no sense. Celtic and Germanic came back to Europe? That's ridiculous and everyone is getting tired of this pseudohistorical stuff. What about Italic? Italic and Celtic are quite closely linked at a certain point, so care to explain that? Where is Balto-Slavic in all this? How did proto-Germanic influence Balto-Slavic and early Finnish if it was way far away? How did Finnish acquire some pre-proto-Germanic loanwords? Proto-Germanic most definitely arose in Northern Europe, you keep denying this. Present some real archaeological evidence that this migration "out of Iran" happened, we've already discussed the genetic aspect and how it doesn't fit your theory and you insist on ignoring that or misinterpreting the data.


Also where is the citation for an ancient sample of R-L664 in the Rossen Culture? I wouldn't trust Wikipedia as a scholarly source.

About L664 in the Rossen Culture, look at
"R1a subclades" by CB Horvath, it mostly talks about this haplogroup.

I don't know what you mean by proto-Germanic influence on Balto-Slavic and early Finnish! Proto-Germanic language didn't exist in the north of Europe before 500 BC, you believe a language almost the same as proto-Indo-European existed in the north of Europe and in 500 BC this language was changed to proto-Germanic, now do you want to say Balto-Slavic borrowed some words from proto-IE?!