That is really interesting, so a subclade of R1b-Z2103 has been also found in Sweden, as you probably know the oldest sample with this haplogroup has been found in Hajji Firuz Tepe in Iran.
What does genetics say about the origin of Germanic people?
- Thread starter Cyrus
- Start date
That is really interesting, so a subclade of R1b-Z2103 has been also found in Sweden, as you probably know the oldest sample with this haplogroup has been found in Hajji Firuz Tepe in Iran.
nornosh
Regular Member
- Messages
- 96
- Reaction score
- 4
- Points
- 8
- Location
- Kabul
- Ethnic group
- Caucasian
- Y-DNA haplogroup
- Eurasian
- mtDNA haplogroup
- Eurasian
Look theres one important thing about Germanics in 500 BC they were spread in very tiny geographical region with no big divisions so it could be because of this they keeped one common language among themselves which wouldh'v been very like common IE with minor differences, but after 500 BC their numbers grew so they spread far from this region then their languages begin to evolve and divided into several branches. So my theory is if tribes don't divide they can keep their language for very long time.
Silesian
Junior Member
- Messages
- 739
- Reaction score
- 104
- Points
- 43
- Ethnic group
- Citizen of Earth.
- Y-DNA haplogroup
- R1b-BY593
- mtDNA haplogroup
- U5b2a2
That's what I was wondering. You see the same thing at the base of R1b-z2108/z2109+. Where 3 different samples Gujarit- Southern Russia-Armenia. Southern Russia very old wagons can be found.
spruithean
Regular Member
- Messages
- 434
- Reaction score
- 118
- Points
- 43
CB Horvath never actually says there are any ancient samples, he just proposes that L664 is responsible for Rossen, however preceding cultural periods (Linear Pottery Culture from Germany to Hungary) have yielded aDNA samples, none of which are R-L664 (they are G2a, pre-I1, T1a, etc). We have R1a from early Corded Ware in Germany though, so we do need some Rossen Culture samples.
The links below are not gospel, just worth reading:
From Carlos Quiles article (I have my disagreements with some of his stuff, but it's all worth looking at):
https://indo-european.info/indo-eur...m#4_13_2_Uralic_influencebc-2&rhtocid=_6_12_1
https://indo-european.info/indo-eur....htm#4_18_3_Contacts_withbc-3&rhtocid=_6_17_2
From another source:
http://langstuff.pjm.fi/frompgtofi/
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Proto-Germanic_language#Late_Proto-Germanic (if only this wasn't wikipedia )
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Proto-Germanic_language#Loans_into_non-Germanic_languages (if only this wasn't wikipedia too
)When did I say Balto-Slavic borrowed words from proto-IE? PIE was changed into proto-Germanic? No, there was a dialect continuum, Ygorcs has gone over this several times, so we should revisit those posts.
Not denying that it is interesting, but we need to be careful with this sample due to C14 dating issues (they did it twice and failed to yield a good result), http://eurogenes.blogspot.com/2018/12/the-hajji-firuz-fiasco.html, there are claims they did it a third time and got a good result which we will see the data on when they publish the paper, which I'm really surprised is still not out. Also worth the read: https://eurogenes.blogspot.com/2018/04/likely-yamnaya-incursions-into.html
Again, I'm not denying that this is interesting and I'm not suggesting that the links I provided above about Hajji Firuz are gospel (in terms of his ancestry but his carbon-dating was revealed to have had two bad runs), I'm just saying we should be cautious with the samples carbon-dating until the study is finally published with all the corrections and the massive amount of extra samples they added.
It is usually believed that East Germanic split off early leaving a Northwest Germanic language that split off into four dialects of North Germanic, North Sea Germanic, Weser-Rhine Germanic, and Elbe Germanic.
EDIT: In regards to Hajji Firuz R-Z2103 from one of the guys on the Central/South Asia paper: https://twitter.com/vagheesh/status/1103456664324395008
spruithean
Regular Member
- Messages
- 434
- Reaction score
- 118
- Points
- 43
Yeah, I have wondered the same thing that you and Nornosh have wondered, they are on branches from the R-Y14415 node dated to 5200 ybp, so perhaps Yamnaya fits?. Do you have a link to the Gujarit-S.Russia-Armenia samples?
Silesian
Junior Member
- Messages
- 739
- Reaction score
- 104
- Points
- 43
- Ethnic group
- Citizen of Earth.
- Y-DNA haplogroup
- R1b-BY593
- mtDNA haplogroup
- U5b2a2
Go to my prior post #299 and hit R1b-Z2108 hotlinked to yfull tree. You can see three lumped together Armenia, Russia Dagestan,Gujarat India. Under those is R1b-Kms-67 found in Yamnay- and modern Italy-France-Greece.
Ygorcs
Active member
- Messages
- 2,259
- Reaction score
- 812
- Points
- 0
- Ethnic group
- Multiracial Brazilian
Maybe Afanasievo remnants, who were basically identical to the Yamnaya (not necessarily coming directly as Afanasievo people, but perhaps as absorbed clans into the later Sintashta/Andronovo/Srubnaya MLBA populations)? Or it could also be related to absorption by MLBA steppe people (who settled South Asia) of Poltavka-Potapovka and Catacomb populations that also neighbored CWC-derived peoples to their north and BB-derived peoples to their west, and via them those haplogroups may have reached Northern Europe eventually.
Proto-Germanic is a Centum language but Corded Ware culture is the source of Satem language, in fact in the first step proto-IE in the north of Eurasia was changed to Satem, the proto-Finnic word for "hundred" is sata which is from the same word satem "hundred". It is impossible that proto-Germanic was derived from Satem.
CB Horvath never actually says there are any ancient samples, he just proposes that L664 is responsible for Rossen, however preceding cultural periods (Linear Pottery Culture from Germany to Hungary) have yielded aDNA samples, none of which are R-L664 (they are G2a, pre-I1, T1a, etc). We have R1a from early Corded Ware in Germany though, so we do need some Rossen Culture samples.
There links below are not gospel, just worth reading:
From Carlos Quiles article (I have my disagreements with some of his stuff, but it's all worth looking at):
https://indo-european.info/indo-eur...m#4_13_2_Uralic_influencebc-2&rhtocid=_6_12_1
https://indo-european.info/indo-eur....htm#4_18_3_Contacts_withbc-3&rhtocid=_6_17_2
From another source:
http://langstuff.pjm.fi/frompgtofi/
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Proto-Germanic_language#Late_Proto-Germanic (if only this wasn't wikipedia )
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Proto-Germanic_language#Loans_into_non-Germanic_languages (if only this wasn't wikipedia too
When did I say Balto-Slavic borrowed words from proto-IE? PIE was changed into proto-Germanic? No, there was a dialect continuum, Ygorcs has gone over this several times, so we should revisit those posts.
We know the Finns and Sami people lived in the north of Europe from at least 2,000 BC, there are many words from Satem languages (Balto-Slavic, Indo-Iranian and especially proto-Armenian) in both proto-Finnic and proto-Samic languages, of course we see proto-Germanic words in these languages but after 500 BC, is there any word from a Centum language in them too? Please mention some of them, if you know.
halfalp
Regular Member
- Messages
- 1,499
- Reaction score
- 222
- Points
- 0
- Ethnic group
- Swiss
- Y-DNA haplogroup
- R-L2
- mtDNA haplogroup
- J1c5a
I dont understand what you mean there. You keep making the point that CWC was Proto-Satem and Proto-Germanic a Centum Languages. So if there is Proto-Germanic loanwords in Uralic languages, isn't it your Centum link?
Proto-Germanic is tied to Balto-Slavic and tied to Italo-Celtic. Proto-Germanic probably came in Scandinavia with R1b-U106 at some point, in the Bronze Age. Corded Ware is transitional to the Germanic ancestry.
Proto-Germanic is a Centum language, not Centum itself, it is believed that before 500 BC a language almost the same as Centum existed in the north of Europe which was changed to proto-Germanic in 500 BC but we see almost all loanwords in proto-Finnic and proto-Samic languages are from Satem, not Centum.
The only relation between proto-Germanic and Italic and Celtic languages is that they are Centum, nothing can be said about proto-Germanic and Balto-Slavic other than they are IE languages!
By considering the number of common IE origin words, I actually think proto-Germanic is closer to Hittite, Ancient Greek and Tocharian, especially if we look at those words which seem to be younger than others, like proto-IE *spadʰ "spade" or *adʰes "adze".
nornosh
Regular Member
- Messages
- 96
- Reaction score
- 4
- Points
- 8
- Location
- Kabul
- Ethnic group
- Caucasian
- Y-DNA haplogroup
- Eurasian
- mtDNA haplogroup
- Eurasian
Look Germanics settled the North from southern Germany so they didn't have contact with Finns early on for centuries yet Corded ware culture's location is next to Finns, Balts so maybe this is why they influenced each other from early on yet Germanics only came in to contact with Finns in the first millenium BC so their influence is much later on Finnic languages. The 500 BC influence could only be from Scythians from Ukraine region who could have settled Western Europe yet with minimal numbers. Suppose your theory is right(Germanics) then Celts, Latins too must have settled W.Europe from 500 BC onwards how is your view on this?:sad-2:
Of course there is no evidence about the existence of Celtic and Italic people in Europe before the 1st millennium BC too, in fact we know before 500 BC in Italy the main languages were Etruscan, Camunic, Picenian, Ligurian, Sicanian, Paleo-Sardinian, ... which ere not Indo-European, in Germany, Austria, Switzerland, ... people spoke Rhaetian language which is believed to be a Tyrsenian language, not Indo-European, and in the west of Europe the main languages were Vasconic, Aquitanian, Iberian and Tartessian languages. R1b has still the highest frequency among Basques who are not an Indo-European people.
nornosh
Regular Member
- Messages
- 96
- Reaction score
- 4
- Points
- 8
- Location
- Kabul
- Ethnic group
- Caucasian
- Y-DNA haplogroup
- Eurasian
- mtDNA haplogroup
- Eurasian
Yet genetic samples in W.Europe point to BA settlement by IEs not Iron age, which is hard to ignore! so more studies needed to reconcile linguistic with genetic results.
nornosh said:
What are these genetic samples? R1b has the highest frequency in the west of Europe where Basques and other non-Indo-European people lived, the oldest samples of R1b has been also found in Europe which date back to 14,000 years ago, it is very clear that this haplogroup came from west to east.
I can't understand how it is possible that in the 1st millennium BC the languages of most of people who lived in the west of Europe were non-Indo-European but we relate haplogroup R1b which had the highest frequency among them to Indo-Europeans?!
Northener
Elite member
- Messages
- 2,008
- Reaction score
- 522
- Points
- 113
- Location
- Groningen
- Ethnic group
- NW Euro
- Y-DNA haplogroup
- E1b1b/ E-V22
@Cyrus your initial question was this:
IMO the (Proto) Germanic origin lasy in the Nordic LN-BA. Germanic people of the iron age are a product of a mixture between Funnelbeakers (TRB/ I-M253 incorporated) and Single Grave Culture/ NW Bell Beakers. The Germans of the Iron Age share basically the Nordic LNBA genetic profile. Nothing more nothing less.
See for some more about this:
https://www.eupedia.com/forum/threa...andinavian-DNA?p=579158&viewfull=1#post579158
IMO the (Proto) Germanic origin lasy in the Nordic LN-BA. Germanic people of the iron age are a product of a mixture between Funnelbeakers (TRB/ I-M253 incorporated) and Single Grave Culture/ NW Bell Beakers. The Germans of the Iron Age share basically the Nordic LNBA genetic profile. Nothing more nothing less.
See for some more about this:
https://www.eupedia.com/forum/threa...andinavian-DNA?p=579158&viewfull=1#post579158
Last edited:
spruithean
Regular Member
- Messages
- 434
- Reaction score
- 118
- Points
- 43
Right, I see them.
That thread was deleted because you were warned by one of the moderators to stop posting tin-foil hat pseudo-history stuff. There is no conspiracy to hide any historical evidences of anything, what you were using as evidence was not (and is not) evidence, you are coming across as a t-roll.
First, that is bold claim to assert that Corded Ware is the source of only Satem. Second no one ever said that proto-Germanic was Satem. You are again ignoring links provided that show pre-proto-Germanic contacts with Finnish as well as proto-Germanic contacts. You do this countless times in this thread because it is evidence that your theory is nonsense. You are also making an extremely bold (and inaccurate) statement that Corded Ware contained Satem languages only, when we know that is extremely unlikely as Indo-Iranian precursors were spoken further east (Sintashta), Centum and Satem dialects were likely in a broad spread.
You can read some interesting things pertaining to Uralic here: https://www.sgr.fi/sust/sust266/sust266_parpola.pdf search for "Northwest Indo-European", and "Germanic branch". Interesting quotes from this author:
“Presumably the language of the Corded Ware people (who were mobile pastoralists) was Proto-Northwest-Indo-European, the common ancestor of the later Celtic, Italic, Germanic and Balto-Slavic branches, which was still quite close to Late PIE (cf. Oettinger 1997; 1999; 2003; in press).”
"The Nordic Bronze Age culture (c. 1750–600 BCE) in the Jutland peninsula up to Schleswig-Holstein and southern Scandinavia goes back to the local Corded Ware culture, which from about 2800 BCE replaced the cairns of the TRB culture in these parts. This is the generally assumed homeland of the Germanic branch of Indo-European (cf. Ramat 1998). In the Early Iron Age, the Nordic Bronze Age culture expanded southwards, to form the Jastorf culture (c. 600–0 BCE) of northern Germany between the Rhine and the Oder. This is close to the location of the Germanic tribes described by Tacitus in his Germania in 98 CE(cf. Mallory 1989: 84–87; Wikipedia s. v. Jastorf culture). The Nordic Bronze Age culture exerted a strong influence on coasts of Finland and on Estonia, especially the western island of Saaremaa c. 1500–500 BCE (cf. Salo 1997: 14–17;Kriiska & Tvauri 2007: 96–116); these areas may have been bilingual at this time, with a Proto-Germanic speaking elite. The East Germanic Goths originally came from Sweden and moved from the East Baltic to the Black Sea in the late second century CE. The Germanic loanwords have had a very important role in the study of the historical development of the Uralic languages of the Baltic region and Fennoscandia (cf. Posti 1953; Hofstra 1985; Koivulehto 1999a;1999b; Aikio 2006; Kallio in this book)."
"The Nordic Bronze Age culture, correlated above with early Proto-Germanic, exerted a strong influence upon coastal Finland and Estonia 1600–700 BCE. Due to this, the Kiukais culture was transformed into the culture of Paimio ceramics (c. 1600–700 BCE), later continued by Morby ceramics (c. 700 BCE – 200 CE). The assumption is that clear cultural continuity was accompanied by linguistic continuity. Having assimilated the language of the Germanic traders and relatively few settlers of the Bronze Age, the language of coastal Finland is assumed to have reached the stage of Proto-Finnish at the beginning of the Christian era. In Estonia, the Paimio ceramics have a close counterpart in the contemporaneous Asva ceramics"
I provided links showing both influences of Finnic/Samic on early Germanic and proto-Germanic (even pre-proto-Germanic) influence on Finnic/Samic languages, yet you've ignored it and instead cite the use of sata in Finnish. We already know that Uralic languages acquired Indo-Iranian influence due to the likely proximity of early proto-Uralic populations to the predecessors of Indo-Iranian cultures prior to migrations of Uralic people further to places such as Finland or the Baltic coast of Northeastern Europe. You ignore chronology and ignore information people share in this thread, your pseudohistorical nonsense is tired.
You ignore this fact that proto-Germanic (and pre-proto) had an influence on Finnic/Samic languages because it shows that proto-Germanic most likely formed in Northern Europe and that is something your theory has not accounted for.
You've not seen the recent papers on Uralic and associated Y-haplogroups have you?
Any word from a centum language in Finnic/Samic?
Germanic loanwords in Finnic that arrived PRIOR to long a raising:
Finnish hake- from PGmc *sākija-
Finnish raha from PGmc *skrahā
Finnish kavio from Pre-PGmc *kāpa-
Finnish lieka from Pre-PGmc *lēgā-
(PRE-proto-Germanic loans right there)
Early Finnic & Samic Germanic loanwords demonstrating earlier *e prior to i-mutation
Finnish teljo from PGmc *þeljō
Finnish menninkäinen from PGmc *menþingō
Northern Sami deahkki from early PGmc *þekkwiz
Northern Sami jievja from early PGmc *heują
Finnish rengas from early PGmc *hrengaz
Or what about Finnish ruhtinas from PGmc *druhtinaz? Will you ignore these?
Or Finnic *kuningas from Proto-Germanic *kuningaz, or this same word *kuningaz being the influence for Northern Sami: gonagas and other variants in various Sami languages. What about Proto-Germanic *lambaz found in Proto-Finnic *lambas (descendants are found in Estonian to Votic) which is also shared with Samic languages and this isn't even a full list of the Germanic loanwords in Finnic/Samic languages.
spruithean
Regular Member
- Messages
- 434
- Reaction score
- 118
- Points
- 43
No evidence for Celtic or Italic? Stop t-rolling.Of course there is no evidence about the existence of Celtic and Italic people in Europe before the 1st millennium BC too, in fact we know before 500 BC in Italy the main languages were Etruscan, Camunic, Picenian, Ligurian, Sicanian, Paleo-Sardinian, ... which ere not Indo-European, in Germany, Austria, Switzerland, ... people spoke Rhaetian language which is believed to be a Tyrsenian language, not Indo-European, and in the west of Europe the main languages were Vasconic, Aquitanian, Iberian and Tartessian languages. R1b has still the highest frequency among Basques who are not an Indo-European people.
So you are ignoring the chronology of R1b samples and their phylogeny. Also, Pictish was most likely a Celtic language, so it was IE.
Pretty bizarre to place Tyrrhenian all the way up there when the Tyrrhenian Sea is further south.
Last edited:
This thread has been viewed 162372 times.