Steppe Ancestry in western Eurasia and the spread of the Germanic Languages

I think you didn't read the article, it says modern scholarship have questioned these lines of evidence, both the first homeland in Scandinavia and the second one in Poland (Wielbark culture).
I agree with yourself, their homeland was from modern gdansk to the Nogat river
but swedish authors, like the book
The well spring of the Goths place them in Scania and Gotland before their "polish migration "
 
The Ostrogoths were not conquered by Longobards but by Justinian's East Roman (Byzantine) generals Belisarius and Narses.

Gothic names survived for centuries in the Byzantine Exarchate of Ravenna.

The Longobards were politically very divided and no match for the Franks, becoming first their vassals and later their subjects (post-774).

Longobards in the South (based at Benevento) remained largely autonomous but split into 3 principalities which were a prey to any strong Byzantine Emperor and to Muslim pirates.
They were finally subsumed by Norman mercenaries in the 11th century.
ok

but the difference to admixture for Italy in regards to these people is limited, ..... that the ostrogoths brought into Italy, men, women and children ( even though they spent 400 years plus in southern Ukraine before heading to Italy ) .............while the Lombards only came with men, absorbing Ostrogoths populace and any other locals in northern Italy before founding the region of Benevento
 
So where was the homeland of Goths?


However, most later individuals associated with the originally East Germanic-speaking groups, the Ukrainian
Ostrogoths and the Visigoths of Iberia, appear to be locals (Supplementary Note 6.9.6). Two exceptions are from Goths from Iberia, who genetically fall on the Northeast-Southeast Baltic cline (one of which carries a Northern European Y haplogroups), suggesting an origin in North East Europe, but not Eastern Scandinavia specifically.

I cannot find in Supp info the Note 6.9.6. The paper refers to Ostrogoths and Visigoths from Iberia, and that seems wrong to me because only Visigoths was the name given to those who ended up in Iberia.

The homeland of Goths? This is not a question that can be solved with a handful of samples from Iberia, it is not a question that can be solved by geneticists only. Geneticists, with respect to such complex topics, are like a bull in a china shop.
 
I cannot find in Supp info the Note 6.9.6. The paper refers to Ostrogoths and Visigoths from Iberia, and that seems wrong to me because only Visigoths was the name given to those who ended up in Iberia.

The homeland of Goths? This is not a question that can be solved with a handful of samples from Iberia, it is not a question that can be solved by geneticists only. Geneticists, with respect to such complex topics, are like a bull in a china shop.
Did you not quote Ukrainian Ostrogoths in post 23 above?
 
You're right, I hadn't noticed it, Ukrainian Ostrogoths and Visigoths of Iberia, it's in the quote anyway.
Basically does the paper see both sets of Goths as more South European (Balkan?) by the time they reached Italy and Spain?
 
Its not even true for Iberia, because we have a couple of finds which are non-local by autosomal and uniparental results. From the Iberian results of various papers we already know that the Visigoths in Iberia brought in an alliance of Germanics, mixed Germanics, Carpatho-Balkan and steppe people, as well as more local Southern Europeans/Gallo-Romans.
It depends on the social class, clan, region and even down to the settlement or cemetary. The more Gothic remains will be analysed, the bigger the variation in it will be.

Like the non-locals in Iberia had among them an E-V13 which was Germanic with Southern European and Baltoslavic admixture. This points to even Baltoslavic, not just Sarmatian and Carpatho-Balkan, elements being brought to Iberia by the Goths.

With Gothic and Langobard cemetaries it will depend on the exact site and context in question what you find.
 
IMG_1718.jpeg


IMG_1716.jpeg

IMG_1717.jpeg
 
In contrast, the later cultural descendants, the Ostrogoths and Visigoths are predominantly of Southern European ancestry implying the adoption of Gothic culture.

Both Ostrogoths in the east and Visigoths in the west had Southern European ancestry, doesn't it mean Goths had the same ancestry?
 
Goths were originally Scndinavian but became more South Eur
Both Ostrogoths in the east and Visigoths in the west had Southern European ancestry, doesn't it mean Goths had the same ancestry?
Goths were originally Scandinavian but became much more South European by mixing with the Balkan population of pre-Slavic times.
 
I've never had any broad issue with regular Northern Europeans, and I've always respected their background so long as they've been willing to pay the same type of respect to my own, but Nordicist/WASP types are a different breed of clueless fanatics. Some seem totally oblivious to the fact that the more they push their nonsense, the more enemies they are making who are associating their proclivity to slander with Northern European countries on the whole. In my humble opinion an increase in Nordicist drivel is going to functionally create more nationalistically driven Southern Europeans whose predictable reaction will be taking further interest and dignity in the ancestral populations they come from. They are in effect accelerating a process of cultural balkanization which will bring them no benefit.
It's hilarious, at least on athrofora, most of those sharing that agenda aren't even of European background. And they seem to have a very strong interest in Italian genetics over other southern Euro countries, too.
 
Last edited:
Both Ostrogoths in the east and Visigoths in the west had Southern European ancestry, doesn't it mean Goths had the same ancestry?
No, because they mixed with different people at different times.
The Ostrogoths of Crimea seem to have mixed with Greeks and stayed there, they are not representative for Goths as a whole, most likely not even for other Ostrogoths. That was a peculiar community.

Visigoths on the other hand mixed or assimilated Carpathian people first and other Eastern European and Balkan people second.
That's why they brought E-V13 with minor Slavic-like ancestry to Iberia.
 
Concerning "nordicism", I see nothing todate in this abstract nor in other "northern" works (a mix of diverse countries scientists) whocould allow us to speak of "nordicists" IMO... And to deny some (slight) Near-Eastern input in ancient Italy isn't safe, I think. The question are: were they truly integrated and have they left visible remnants in the today Italy pop?
I'm assuming no one else is objecting (I hear "crickets") to the casting of this slur (tantamount to being called a Aryanist, Fascist, Nazi, White Nationalist, etc.), because they don't want it to be cast at them. I can only assume that his intention is to poison any open discussion of the merits (or demerits) of this study. Utter and total bullshit.

My Y-DNA is from Hunter Gatherer stock (I2a1b1), so I don't have an axe to grind. I don't really care what slurs he wants to throw my way.
 
I'm assuming no one else is objecting (I hear "crickets") to the casting of this slur (tantamount to being called a Aryanist, Fascist, Nazi, White Nationalist, etc.), because they don't want it to be cast at them. I can only assume that his intention is to poison any open discussion of the merits (or demerits) of this study. Utter and total bullshit.

My Y-DNA is from Hunter Gatherer stock (I2a1b1), so I don't have an axe to grind. I don't really care what slurs he wants to throw my way.
I couldn't care less what your Y haplogroup is, nor do I have any issue with your ethnic background and until now I have yet to mention you, much less call you any slur. If you feel personally attacked by what I said because you happen to believe in any number of Nordicist fairy tales then that is regretfully an active choice on your part as opposed to some integral component to your ethnic identity which is very different than the real ethnic slurs and myths which Nordicists of the past and present have directed at Southern Europeans.

Many of us, myself included are well interested in the results of the study, but many of us also do not accept every single figure the authors have put forth. This critique and analysis of the material presented by the authors is necessarily part of the process of an "open discussion" by any definition. If you take offense to what has been said you can rather address me directly and perhaps clarify exactly what you find so offensive about it.
 
Last edited:
There are some Hittite loanwords in Gothic and other Germanic languages, like Hittite compound hulpant "humpback, camel", compare Gothic ulbandus and Old English olfend, Hittite was spoken in Anatolia and it became extinct by 1200 BC, logically Gothic language shouldn't be too far from this region.
 
I couldn't care less what your Y haplogroup is, nor do I have any issue with your ethnic background and until now I have yet to mention you, much less call you any slur. If you feel personally attacked by what I said because you happen to believe in any number of Nordicist fairy tales then that is regretfully an active choice on your part as opposed to some integral component to your ethnic identity which is very different than the real ethnic slurs and myths which Nordicists of the past and present have directed at Southern Europeans.

Many of us, myself included are well interested in the results of the study, but many of us also do not accept every single figure the authors have put forth. This critique and analysis of the material presented by the authors is necessarily part of the process of an "open discussion" by any definition. If you take offense to what has been said you can rather address me directly and perhaps clarify exactly what you find so offensive about it.
I was not responding directly to you. You are the one who cast the slur at the authors of the study, basically calling them "Nordicist" racists. How does that contribute to an open and fair discussion of the merits (and demerits) of the study? It doesn't, but is an attempt to poison and torpedo the discussion.

Did I say I was "personally attacked" by you? As I predicted, however, you have now directed the slur at me:
If you feel personally attacked by what I said because you happen to believe in any number of Nordicist fairy tales then that is regretfully an active choice on your part...
As if only a "Nordicist" racist could possibly object to your slurring the authors as "Nordicist" racists. Slur away. Personally, I don't give a damn.
 
Its not even true for Iberia, because we have a couple of finds which are non-local by autosomal and uniparental results. From the Iberian results of various papers we already know that the Visigoths in Iberia brought in an alliance of Germanics, mixed Germanics, Carpatho-Balkan and steppe people, as well as more local Southern Europeans/Gallo-Romans.
It depends on the social class, clan, region and even down to the settlement or cemetary. The more Gothic remains will be analysed, the bigger the variation in it will be.

Like the non-locals in Iberia had among them an E-V13 which was Germanic with Southern European and Baltoslavic admixture. This points to even Baltoslavic, not just Sarmatian and Carpatho-Balkan, elements being brought to Iberia by the Goths.

With Gothic and Langobard cemetaries it will depend on the exact site and context in question what you find.
is not this mix you refer to where called the Vandals ..................who held parts of Iberia and North Africa .................sacking Rome from Tunisia ??
 
is not this mix you refer to where called the Vandals ..................who held parts of Iberia and North Africa .................sacking Rome from Tunisia ??
The Vandals and the Goths had similar paths.
 
Angela: thanks for the post and good for seeing you posting again. Maybe I have missed some of your posts in the last several months but I question that as I usually read what you post here.

Buona giornata, PT
 

This thread has been viewed 4859 times.

Back
Top