Hitler's Y-DNA?

I think that genetics may work deeper( just an idea). In a 'cartoonish' way: WWII was about R1a against R1b; G and E 'directored' as an 'outsiders' to each chosen R. I1 didn't like any of them ( being 'original' to the Land); D supported E still having own 'ideas' about who is smarter.
If Napoleon was E, that makes it even more interesting: Adolf, Napoleon...Einstein ( who 'promoted' A-Bomb so much). It is not serious, I know, just what would happen if we could test every past and present 'leader' and give some of them advice not disregard advice from their Generals about the wars they about to start?

The question of Y-DNA haplogroups affecting behavior is an interesting one, but I'm firmly in the skeptics' camp. Are you imagining a correlation, where people tend to pass down ideas of what their lineage once was, or an actual causation, where Y-DNA haplogroups tend to have certain effects on a man's personality?

I don't see either a causation or correlation myself; rather, I see haplogroup distributions in WWII actors (or whatever) reflecting the haplogroup distributions of the populations they came from, nothing more and nothing less.

Although, out of curiosity, what traits would you assign to Haplogroup I2, given the famous people thought most likely to have carried it?
 
I think that genetics may work deeper( just an idea). In a 'cartoonish' way: WWII was about R1a against R1b; G and E 'directored' as an 'outsiders' to each chosen R. I1 didn't like any of them ( being 'original' to the Land); D supported E still having own 'ideas' about who is smarter.
If Napoleon was E, that makes it even more interesting: Adolf, Napoleon...Einstein ( who 'promoted' A-Bomb so much). It is not serious, I know, just what would happen if we could test every past and present 'leader' and give some of them advice not disregard advice from their Generals about the wars they about to start?

R1a against R1b? Germany is overwhelmingly R1b, especially the western and south-central regions. The frequency does drop as you move eastwards but R1b is still the most numerous group of them all. R1b correlates negatively with Slavic speakers, so as you approach Slavic speaking regions, and even Slavic groups in Germany the R1b is considerably lower.

@RobertColumbia, I don't think I2 is at an appreciably higher level in Germany than it is in UK.
 
Wait, weren't ancient egyptians bringing many sub-saharan african men to be mercanaries? And, there was also African coming to europe for a long time, via the nautical trade routes. Y-dna is like that, one man can completely change the composition, since each man has a larger reproductive potential than each woman. For E being in Jews, what if Jewish woman, who can marry non-Jews, chose to marry these mercanaries, maybe because of their attractiveness or financial resources. Also, back then, a man could have many wives. Also, for E being prevalent in South Europe, It can be described by traders from Africa having many Europeean wives because of their wealth or manly strong physique.

E-V13 or its immediate precursor have been in Europe since at least the Neolithic, so no need for fanciful speculation.

The oldest one is in a Cardial West Med site. There's also this:
http://www.eupedia.com/forum/threads/30814-Where-did-E-V13-originate/page4?highlight=E-v13+sopot


 
Interesting. I just looked at it from the other angle: 'Leaders' of WWII representing small % of population they 'represent' and influence, why? Stalin-G; Adolf-E...they both were 'philosophers' of war. They both overruled Military commanders, both made mistakes, because of that: not pressing Air-Attack on Britain-Adolf's error; not starting the War for 'liberation of proletariat' before Germany re-armed-Stalin's miscalculation. At the end, Churchill's trick in convincing US to enter the WWII ( for purely practical reasons on USA's part) worked. Is it because Churchill shared genetic makeup with the larger % of population he represented and because of that trusted Military more to be able do their job.
It could be applied to Napoleon too. Being in minority % of Aristocracy he wasn't exactly the 'product' of the French Military Tradition. Napoleon was more of the 'talented commissar' of post revolutionary France using opportunity to advance his career. At the end, Professionals: Prussian Blucher and British Wellington, won the Europe back.
Just thinking...
 
"There has so far been ancient Y-DNA analysis from only four Neolithic cultures (LBK in Germany, Remedello in Italy and Cardium Pottery in south-west France and Spain), and all sites yielded G2a individuals, which is the strongest evidence at present that farming originated with and was disseminated by members of haplogroup G (although probably in collaboration with other haplogroups such as E1b1b, J, R1b and T)- This from Eupedia. My interest is related to the idea that 'originals' versus 'indo-Europeans' is one of keys explaining why leaders of European conflicts were G, E, T or I Y-DNA. We have Stalin-G; Adolf-E; Vikings-I; Jeferson, Thomas the American-T. All were 'philosophers of conflict'. I Y-DNA were the original Europeans hunters; G with E probably original farmers in cooperation with T. They all lived 'next' to each other and it was enough space not to dominate totally by killing off 'just because'. It all ended, first, with R1b arrival; next-R1a came even in larger numbers. I know that's 'cartoonish' expectation, I know. Anyway, R1b pushed R1a from Europe to 'Ukraine' in original conflict becoming dominant in Europe. I1- went to 'Scandinavia'; I2 - up to the Balkan mountains; G2 to Sardinia, Corsica and Tyrol; E1b mingled in 'Bavaria'... They all 'genetically' remembered how 'nice' life used to be... Fast forward- E1b became 'instigator' for Alemanic 'push back' with cooperation of R1b; G2- took control over R1a ( seriously took control); I1 - 'instigated' Vikings expeditions to the former 'homelands'...T - wasn't happy with R1b's Royal treatment and 'took away' colony on philosophical grounds. Let's not forget J's, both of them, J1 and J2 - aren't they troublemakers to this day?
It used to be so nice between 'The Originals' I, G, E, T..etc, in good old pre-Indo-Whatever days.
 
Ancient people being violent? Really? Battle is between R1a and R1b ( generalized), I am not taking into account later splits and mutations because we're discussing 'ancient'.
I1, I2, G, E...lived in small numbers on big territory next to each other, compared to 'modern' times. I1 kept sons rate of birth at two. Hunting was main source of food. No overpopulation. Women were important ( archeological figurines of 'mother' most common).
Now, R1b and R1a enters the scene - 'horses and Warriors', milk and grain, ethos of 'heroic conqueror' ( archeology finds ' bull' replacing 'mother' figurines) becomes dominant. How that makes 'ancients' more violent than 'modern' Europeans?
The 'payback' for that R ( generalized) invasion was 'Vikinging' from Scandinavia onto their original lands by displaced I1. That's the origin of myth of 'violence' of the ancient Europeans. Yes that was 'not pleasant'... Also, there was a reason it happened. Now we have another invasion of (I presume J's ) into the Europe. Since R1b is dominant in modern Europe, they need to protect 'their' women, right? Since they 'inherited' old mtDNA women (I1, G, E...'followers'-no disrespect, just a term) H,U mostly, R1 has responsibility for women's safety, right? I guess, no. Look how 'protective' modern European men are of 'their' women? Why is that? Any 'alternative' lifestyle is more 'liked' in modern Europe than regular woman/mother and her family. Low birth rate; no more exclusive status for motherhood and family; promotion of anything but 'regular' marriage... This why many women are 'welcoming' the very 'invaders' that assolt them later, isn't that sad? So, 'warrior on the horse' attitude toward women R 'inherited' by 'displacing' ( exterminating) original native hunters, is not working for local women, I guess? It reminds me of stories about 'new world' pilgrim women escaping back to native 'Indians' after they were rescued by their strict Puritan husbands...
I am I1 Z 140 (Rhein boat-branch).After, genetically, surviving Ice-age, I don't care much about where to live... Just, when I hear someone's talk about how violent the 'ancients' were, I think about how 'brutality fair' nature is - R1a and R1b will dissapear genetically from the European map because of their disrespect and neglect of 'our' women...and I am still here. I have six children ( only two sons, of course) and - 'no matter where you go, there you are'.
Best wishes to all and don't take it too seriously...
Alex von Naumann.
 
First of all I totally disagree with J2 being Jewish, nations do not own genes let aside religions. Greeks, Turks and Kavkaz people have a lot more J2 than the Jews. So it is insulting to claim J2 is Jewish and only Jewish,

What am I not getting here? A group can call itself whatever they want, but what counts is genetic ancestry. The tribe. As in the tribes of the ancient Hebrews whose genes float within parts of other populations as well.
Plus J1c for example is common amongst the Cohens, as in the Bedouins of the Sinai. And throughout the Arab world J2 also exists quite frequently.

Religious beliefs do not alter your gene pool. And this is not about disagreement or belief, but rather avoiding misunderstandings and misinterpretations not clarifying what exactly the word "Jewish" means to you from a scientific standpoint.
 
"Some people deep in the mountains of Tibet"? "A percentage of Ainu"! LOL. The Japanese are 40% y-haplogroup D. 40%. Not just Ainu. All Japanese people. Also, Ainu are like 70-80% haplo D. But the Japanese on the whole, as a population, are dominated by Y-haplogroups D & O (40% & 50% respectively). That's not "some Ainu". That's like all Ainu, all Andaman Islanders, & a lot of Japanese & Tibetan people. The Tibetans are 50% haplo D. Haplogroup D is also fairly common in much of South-China & other parts of South-East Asia, ranging from trace proportions in some populations to 20, 30% in others. It really depends upon the population.
Haplogroup E dominates the North-African plain & much of Sub-Saharan Africa. E carriers essentially conquered the entirety of Africa over the last 50,000 years. E is also very common in Europe. E-V13, the European branch (since the V13 mutation likely occurred on site in Europe) basically predominates in Greece & the Balkans. It is found in significant numbers pretty much everywhere in Europe. Apart from haplogroups R1a & R1b, E1b1b is probably the most common haplogroup in Europe.
Haplogroup E has been a stunningly successful haplogroup, not just within Europe, but worldwide. Haplogroup D has also done fairly well for itself.
"The E haplogroup is not found deep in central Asia where the origins of civilization likely sprouted." Umm... civilization did not sprout deep in central Asia. The Fertile Crescent is the Near-East & has plenty of E Y-DNA. Also, some of the haplogroups that predominate there now did not necessarily predominate there 10,000 years ago. If I had to guess, I'd guess much of the J1 in "Mesopotamia" today wasn't there 10,000 years ago. This is an Arab conquest marker. Needless to say, E-M123 & E-M78 were likely present in the Fertile Crescent when civilization began, & J1, which predominates there now, likely did not predominate in the Fertile Crescent when human civilization took root.
Moreover, the Ancient Greeks & the Ancient Egyptians, some of the oldest & most successful civilizations ever were dominated by different clades of E-M78 (V13 is downstream from E-M78, the mutation that dominates ethnic Egyptians, even today). The Greeks are probably the most prolific intellectual civilization in human history. And E-V13 is essentially a Greek marker. It is especially prevalent in continental Greeks, vis a vis Islanders (again, where most of the notable accomplishments took place). So...
 
Last edited:
The area in question is in Hungary.

This researcher concludes that the subjects in the Carpathian Basin originated in the Near East and hunter gatherers had negligible contribution to the maternal and paternal gene pool. They were rather homogeneous. Early Neolithic people there belonged to G, F, and I. During them middle/late neolithic period foreign populations moved in. Three new y-chromosome haplogroups were seen... J, C, and E1b1b at certain sites. 5000BC to 4000BC.


32 individuals tested. Two remains had E1b1b out of 32 total. There were found at 2 sites. 1 at Sopot and 1 at Lengyel. These 2 sites had the most "diverse" bodies lying around. The E1b1b y-haplogroup originates in Africa and author of the paper makes note of that.

All the samples are dated between 5790 BC and 3900 BC.

E1b1b remains were found among cultures that lived between 5000-4800 BC and 5000-4300BC.

According to other data and other research the author of the paper concludes that the E1b1b did not have a significant presence in the area. The neolithic farmers were of Asian/Eurasian origin.

Nothing in the study contradicts what I wrote before.

All haplogroups at their base originate in Africa because mankind originated in Africa. Haplo DE likely left Africa with CF 50-60,000 years ago.
According to what other data and what other research? LOL. This is a very commonly held misconception/intuition about haplogroup E, especially E-V13. There is this sense that "it just doesn't belong" in Europe. Yet all the evidence that has emerged over the last ten or fifteen years contradicts this belief.
Haplogroup E-V13 is massively & in all likelihood originally European.
Given that E-V13 was also found in Spain from around the same time period, it's hard to argue that it didn't have a significant presence in Europe at the time. E-V13 clearly had a significant presence in central & southern Europe 7000-8000 years ago, given that it has been found on opposite sides of the continent in the same time period.
Some branches of E are essentially non-African. E-V13 & E-M123 are good examples. The Phoenicians were Levantine peoples, but they had ample E-M123. They also spread that E-M123 around the Mediterranean. Thus, just because farmers or others were Asian or Eurasian in origin, doesn't mean some of them didn't carry haplogroup E. Greeks are like the original Europeans, & they are very well represented by haplogroup E.
 
Last edited:
Interesting idea, but I'm not so sure it was an R1a vs. R1b battle. Let's look into the major players and their major haplogroups:

Allies:

USA: R1b, I1
UK: R1b, I1
France: R1b
USSR: R1a, N (though Stalin himself was a G)

Axis:

Germany: R1b, R1a (both), I1, I2
Italy: R1b, J
Japan: O

Japan is O & D, not sure I'd include "N" in USSR, and not so sure about I1 for US. I1 is likely under 10% in US.
 
No detailed data is given for Hitler's DNA other than high up haplogroup level E1b1b1

The most E1b1b1* haplogroup spread in EU is E-V13. If Hitler terminal haplogroup belonged to E-V13 branch, which is spread from up north in Scandinavia down to a higher percentage in southern EU, then his haplogroup is not an African one due to African origin of E1b1b1*. E-V13 is indeed an European haplogroup derived from a North-African parent (E-M78), in the same way R1b* derived from [FONT=Helvetica Neue, arial, sans-serif]its semi-asiatic/anatolian parents.... Or relating it to Viking "Aryans", same way as Vikings Haplogroup I1* derived from western euroasia parent, the I-M170 haplogroup....

So, in other words, Hitler wound't be less "Aryan" b/c his haplogroup E-V13 originated from a north africa parent otherwise excactly the same argument can be said for I1* which originated from a parent from euroasia.

Except for I2* (that derived from I1*), same thing can be said for all European Haplogroups.

Regardless of Hitler belonged to E-V13 (an European branch) or to any other non-European E1b1b1* sub-clads, only an [/FONT]
autosomal DNA would have revealed his full ethnicity. Not sure why is that important, dictators have come from all haplo-groups.
 
>>>But it's definitely recently african in origin. I don't think hitler would be pleased with that>>>

E-V13 has been in EU since 7000 years ago, found in Spain. E-V13 parent (E-M78) left Africa 20'000 years ago. Would you think Hitler would have been better pleased with R1b* that has Anatolian/semi-asiatic parents ? OR the Viking's I1*, that originated from I-M170, another eurasian origin ?

Or being a I2a*, a slavic one/caucus area , which is indeed the most European haplogroup, because it derived from I1* ???
 
Unfortunately YES !
 
Noman,
E-V13 is a mutation that occurred in EU at least 8000 years ago, same patern as all other European haplogroups.

Same analogy for I1* with an african/euasian father (I-M170), 11000 years ago. The only haplogroup in EU that comes from an European haplogroup is the I2*, the slavs.

If Hitler was I1* (the Viking one) than the same thing would have been said about I1* about its parent the I-M170, that Hitler came from eurasia and Hitler 'has mongolian' DNA in him.... again if Hitler os R1b* than same analogy would be said that R1b parent from Anatolian/Asiatic tribes.

All halogroups trace back to Africa, not sure what difference would have made if Hitler was E,I, or R1* ???? Same argument would have been said for all of these haplogroup. All these haplogroups moved out from Africa, at least 15000-20000 years ago..... while these main branches were being mutated in EU, same their African cousins created their own branches....

If Hitler had an E-V22 haplogroup (which could be the case), then it's different argument, b/c E-V22 is not an European mutation branch. But even then, what's most import is his autosomal DNA.

If you keep pushing your point towards of E-V13 being closer to African than I1 to I*, R1* to R one then the question is : Can we measure the distance or the mass of the mutation and compare ? Remember, when E-V13 mutation in Europe occurred , all europeans were dark skin still.
 
I have seen the movie, and they always doubted he was a Jewish (especially the mother of his girlfriend). Plus Jewish in Germany were very much mixed with Germans. Still though, not all germans were blonds or blue eyes, but for a jewish to be blond and with blue eyes, it means with very very high probability that this person shares western European ancestry. If not, it's a new mutation. And this is science.
 
You are confusing autosomal DNA with Y DNA. The only E haplogroup that is present in europe (north or south) is E-V13 (I should say mainly), and that is not found in Africa, (or is found very very low percentage, spread probably through greek settlements or balkan ottoman soldiers). E-V13 is not even found in Turkey except for those x-greek settlements.

As for "E being prevalent in South Europe, It can be described by traders from Africa having many Europeean wives because of their wealth or manly strong physique." .... historically never heard such massive DNA contribution to Europe from the african traders but even if this is TRUE, then the haplogroups these africans traders may have spread in Europe is not E-V13, it could be E-V22, or other subclades ....some can be found in south spain or south Italy from Roman times.....
 
You are confusing autosomal DNA with Y DNA. The only E haplogroup that is present in europe (north or south) is E-V13 (I should say mainly), and that is not found in Africa, (or is found very very low percentage, spread probably through greek settlements or balkan ottoman soldiers). E-V13 is not even found in Turkey except for those x-greek settlements.

As for "E being prevalent in South Europe, It can be described by traders from Africa having many Europeean wives because of their wealth or manly strong physique." .... historically never heard such massive DNA contribution to Europe from the african traders but even if this is TRUE, then the haplogroups these africans traders may have spread in Europe is not E-V13, it could be E-V22, or other subclades ....some can be found in south spain or south Italy from Roman times.....
Please use Replay With Quote button when responding the a post. The way I did in this post. Otherwise we have no idea who you are responding too.
Welcome to Eupedia Drroots.
 
Dear Brothers:

Actions are the physical results of beliefs, not genes !!!

So who cares if a criminal half a century ago was of E or J haplogroup?

So please use your knowledge and energies wisely !!

Thanks and regards.



 
M215 came 'recently' from paleothic area

lol :) what was Hitler's terminal SNP ? Any info ? Would have been really funny if it was let say E-V22.... other than that, this video seems to be left wing sponsoring ... if Hitler was I1 or R1b, they still would have made this funny video portraying Hitler as having asiatic/caucasian DNA :) :)
 
Last edited:

This thread has been viewed 81662 times.

Back
Top