PDA

View Full Version : Genetic differences between West & East Germans



btree
09-06-2020, 09:11 PM
Just wondering if anyone has any data on differing admixtures between West & East Germans. For example, maybe East Germans that inhabited areas pre 1945 that are now apart of Eastern Europe may have higher Slavic admixture than West Germans.

Riverman
09-07-2020, 11:42 AM
Just wondering if anyone has any data on differing admixtures between West & East Germans. For example, maybe East Germans that inhabited areas pre 1945 that are now apart of Eastern Europe may have higher Slavic admixture than West Germans.

Of course, West Germans have usually less Slavic admixture, but going from Central to Eastern Germany, and on to the former Ostgebiete in what is now Poland and Russia, things get more tricky. Because some regions further West had significant local Slavic contribution, while some regions further East had not. That's because you have to look at the settlement history of a place. Where there local non-German inhabitants? How many? Were they integrated, did they flee or were pushed away? This is not the same anywhere. So you end up with villages in Silesia and Pommerania or East Prussia which were much more Western than places in Sachsen-Anhalt and Sachsen. Every region had its own settlement history. Where did the Germans come from mattered too. Because it made a difference whether they came from Brandenburg and Eastern Thuringia or Salzburg and Swabia for example.

Johnny ola
09-07-2020, 12:12 PM
I think the samples from Germany are limited,and since Germany is a big country i would not like to generalize.Western Germany is pretty much Germanicized-Frankicized native people of mostly Celtic roots?They are definitely more southern compared to north germanics,north dutch and Scandinavians.If you look gedmatch kits and some samples in G25 they plot closer to Belgians,Northern French and South Dutch.They do have Germanic(Probably Frankish?) admixture but overall most of their ancestry seems to be native.Eastern Germany on the other hand is more complicated IMO,and that's the reason we need samples from there especially during IA period.I think these lands were inhabit mostly by Wends and western Slavs.Later low Germanic speaking people arrived and mixed with them(Saxons).Also the Prussian legacy has definitely an impact there.Germanics come in contact with balts,slavs and movements from east to west was a frenquent phenomenon.I am pretty sure even from Phestphalia many native Germans trace their origins from eastern Prussian parts,that's why even some western germans might show some eastern shift.With a few words i would categorize western germans as Celto-Franks and eastern germans as Slavo-Saxons.Anyway,Germany is a very regionalist state and its not the best to generalize.Without samples you cannot be sure for anything!!!!

Riverman
09-07-2020, 01:10 PM
I think the samples from Germany are limited,and since Germany is a big country i would not like to generalize.Western Germany is pretty much Germanicized-Frankicized native people of mostly Celtic roots?They are definitely more southern compared to north germanics,north dutch and Scandinavians.If you look gedmatch kits and some samples in G25 they plot closer to Belgians,Northern French and South Dutch.They do have Germanic(Probably Frankish?) admixture but overall most of their ancestry seems to be native.Eastern Germany on the other hand is more complicated IMO,and that's the reason we need samples from there especially during IA period.I think these lands were inhabit mostly by Wends and western Slavs.Later low Germanic speaking people arrived and mixed with them(Saxons).Also the Prussian legacy has definitely an impact there.Germanics come in contact with balts,slavs and movements from east to west was a frenquent phenomenon.I am pretty sure even from Phestphalia many native Germans trace their origins from eastern Prussian parts,that's why even some western germans might show some eastern shift.With a few words i would categorize western germans as Celto-Franks and eastern germans as Slavo-Saxons.Anyway,Germany is a very regionalist state and its not the best to generalize.Without samples you cannot be sure for anything!!!!

Like with Eastern Germans, you can't generalise on Western Germans. There were pockets of Celto-Roman settlements which were Germanised, and there were areas in which new Germanic and Germano-Celtic from further North founded new villages. Again every region has its own settlement history. Considering the Germanic tribes involved, Franks were already and alliance of many earlier Germanic groups, uniting them under a new banner, with the South West being mainly Allemannic, for which the same is true.
The Germanic impact seems to have been fairly hair in most areas, but so it was in the regions you mentioned, like Southern Dutch-Flemish in particular, but also Walloon and Northern French. So a large part of the similarity comes not just from the common Celto-Roman root, but also from the same Germanic (mostly Frankish) contribution.

Especially in Switzerland, among German Swiss, you can observe how big the genetic, phenotypic, cultural and even dialectal differences can be. With one valley being "quite Allemannic" in character, the next one more "Welsh" (Romance). Some valleys became German speakers just recently, in the last hundreds of years, while others were new settlements founded by Allemannic settlers.

You can't generalise there too.

Johnny ola
09-07-2020, 01:27 PM
Like with Eastern Germans, you can't generalise on Western Germans. There were pockets of Celto-Roman settlements which were Germanised, and there were areas in which new Germanic and Germano-Celtic from further North founded new villages. Again every region has its own settlement history. Considering the Germanic tribes involved, Franks were already and alliance of many earlier Germanic groups, uniting them under a new banner, with the South West being mainly Allemannic, for which the same is true.
The Germanic impact seems to have been fairly hair in most areas, but so it was in the regions you mentioned, like Southern Dutch-Flemish in particular, but also Walloon and Northern French. So a large part of the similarity comes not just from the common Celto-Roman root, but also from the same Germanic (mostly Frankish) contribution.

Especially in Switzerland, among German Swiss, you can observe how big the genetic, phenotypic, cultural and even dialectal differences can be. With one valley being "quite Allemannic" in character, the next one more "Welsh" (Romance). Some valleys became German speakers just recently, in the last hundreds of years, while others were new settlements founded by Allemannic settlers.

You can't generalise there too.

I agree with all, with exception one. I dont believe Romans had a genetic impact above North Italy. They probably left Some limited influences In southern France but overall France and Western Germany does not really seems to have Roman Genetics. Bavaria and Swabia or Swiss are not the most sampled region not only about ancient but also for modern.So,i am not sure if the Roman impact there is Huge. They might have Some but not crazy things.I think Rhineland was inhabit mostly by Gauls, Belgian like people and the Romans didnt really had a big genetic impact there. Later Germanics arrived but still their impact is not Huge, Ofc much more compared to the former.

mihaitzateo
09-07-2020, 01:33 PM
Just wondering if anyone has any data on differing admixtures between West & East Germans. For example, maybe East Germans that inhabited areas pre 1945 that are now apart of Eastern Europe may have higher Slavic admixture than West Germans.

What is known from history, Germans assimilated Old Prussians, which were a Baltic people, related to Lithuanians,Latvians of our days.
Old Prussians were somewhere in NE Germany,or so.
In NE Germany are mentioned at least some West Slavic tribes,also.
I know from some private FB group, that Germans ethnics from Pomerania had around 20% or so N1 paternal lines, those being from assimilated Old Prussians.
As expected, these Old Prussians were very Eastern Europeans, as DNA.

Here is a small map that I find at a quick search on Google:
https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/1/13/Baltic_Tribes_c_1200.svg

Those Old Prussians should have been R1A-Z280 and N1 Y_DNA mostly, West Slavs, mostly R1A-M458.
All these Y DNAs were seen in Ethnic Germans from Pomerania (N1,R1A-Z280,R1A-M458).
If you look at R1A concentration in Germany, I guess it was peaking in Pomerania Germans (R1A-Z280+R1A-M458).
Depends from where in Germany you have your ancestry, I understand that Berlin area still has significant R1A.
Bavaria had some R1A-Z280 no idea about R1A-M458,but not so significant.

Riverman
09-07-2020, 01:39 PM
I agree with all, with exception one. I dont believe Romans had a genetic impact above North Italy. They probably left Some limited influences In southern France but overall France and Western Germany does not really seems to have Roman Genetics. Bavaria and Swabia or Swiss are not the most sampled region not only about ancient but also for modern.So,i am not sure if the Roman impact there is Huge. They might have Some but not crazy things.I think Rhineland was inhabit mostly by Gauls, Belgian like people and the Romans didnt really had a big genetic impact there. Later Germanics arrived but still their impact is not Huge, Ofc much more compared to their former.

I think the more data comes in, the more clear it will be that "the Romans" had a significant impact and the Germanics an even larger one. But with "Celto-Romans" I simply mean the mixture which came up after the Roman conquest. This includes both local Celts, as well as true Romans, but also people from anywhere in the Roman empire which made it to the region and even some tribal immigrants like Germanics, Thracians, Sarmatians etc. So a "rather mixed bunch" overall, with the Celtic substrate being still the dominant component in most places, but not necessarily everywhere.

Really, I would say we have to look at every place, at every region and settlement on its own. Its the same in Italy, with the Aosta valley and Bergamo being not the same even with the neighbouring regions. There were Romance speakers in parts of Western Germany up to fairly recent times, where in others there was almost a tabula rasa, with completely new settlements and the old population being largely replaced. For example Moselle Romance speakers up to the 10th-12th century:
https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moselromanische_Sprache

On the other hand there were significant Germanic settlements in areas which being now Romance speaking. So it goes both ways.

Concerning Eastern Germany, this is an old map from Wikipedia (1905), I know better ones, but this one still gives an impression:
https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/a/a2/Deutsche_Ostsiedlung.jpg

You can see that some zones from the German settlement of the East were more mixed than others, like Southern East Prussia more so than Northern or Southern Pommerania more than the core of Silesia and Northern Bohemia. Silesia is particularly interesting, as inside of the wider Silesian region, the differences could be huge, with some settlements being almost exclusively German derived, while others were heavily mixed or even remained so up to modern tims and to this day in some cases.

alexfritz
09-07-2020, 10:32 PM
I agree with all, with exception one. I dont believe Romans had a genetic impact above North Italy. They probably left Some limited influences In southern France but overall France and Western Germany does not really seems to have Roman Genetics. Bavaria and Swabia or Swiss are not the most sampled region not only about ancient but also for modern.So,i am not sure if the Roman impact there is Huge. They might have Some but not crazy things.I think Rhineland was inhabit mostly by Gauls, Belgian like people and the Romans didnt really had a big genetic impact there. Later Germanics arrived but still their impact is not Huge, Ofc much more compared to the former.

i wouldnt exclude the Veeramah et al ACD-type people (female exogamy) as playing a notable role, along with, but lesser than, rest provincials as also seen in Veeramah et al rather than pre-roman pops Excluding individuals with ACD and two women with Greek/Anatolian ancestry, our samples from Early Medieval Bavaria can be genetically characterized as typically northern/central European. It is perhaps surprising that no local individual was found to share recent common genetic ancestry with a Roman soldier living in the same area ∼200 y earlier

keeping in mind that the collapse of the Roman frontier also included a thourough abandonment beg. with the Limes (Limesfall) 259/60 and lastly under Odoacer's brother Hunulf leading 'the exodus' after defeating the ever raiding Rugii; in other words, concerning South germany, a development of the EMA by populations as seen in Veeramah et al (https://www.pnas.org/content/115/13/3494)

and not forgetting the Slavic(Wendish) element as NE Bavaria and East germany was not just 'somewhat slavic' but fully Slavic, proper homeland, though the former part of the Empire since Charlemagne


Bavaria had some R1A-Z280 no idea about R1A-M458,but not so significant.

not significant but presentable
only published data i know (*pre-war pop.) 2013 Rębała et al (https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3598329/)

Bayern (n=218)
_ 12.3% R1a1a M17+/M198+
__ 4.5% R1a1a M17*+ 10/218
___ 7.7% R1a1a1b1a1 M458+ 17/218

*not corupted by post-war refugees as other data
app. swabian(?augsburg) part of Bavaria

Riverman
09-08-2020, 12:00 AM
@Alex: I think Roman provincials played a big part. Its actually primarily in some Slavic regions the continuity was more disrupted. This is particularly evident from place names. Germanic broke the cities down, but left many villages and towns largely intact if they didnt bothers them and could be used. Slavs and especially the Avars teared more down.

The place name as well as settlement continuity was much stronger in only Germanic regions with less of a change after the initial takeover. The big exception for large scale local survival in a clarify Slavic territory is especially Western and Southern Bohemia, which seems to have been more indirectly Slavicised probably.

Johnny ola
09-08-2020, 12:03 AM
i wouldnt exclude the Veeramah et al ACD-type people (female exogamy) as playing a notable role, along with, but lesser than, rest provincials as also seen in Veeramah et al rather than pre-roman pops Excluding individuals with ACD and two women with Greek/Anatolian ancestry, our samples from Early Medieval Bavaria can be genetically characterized as typically northern/central European. It is perhaps surprising that no local individual was found to share recent common genetic ancestry with a Roman soldier living in the same area ∼200 y earlier

keeping in mind that the collapse of the Roman frontier also included a thourough abandonment beg. with the Limes (Limesfall) 259/60 and lastly under Odoacer's brother Hunulf leading 'the exodus' after defeating the ever raiding Rugii; in other words, concerning South germany, a development of the EMA by populations as seen in Veeramah et al (https://www.pnas.org/content/115/13/3494)

and not forgetting the Slavic(Wendish) element as NE Bavaria and East germany was not just 'somewhat slavic' but fully Slavic, proper homeland, though the former part of the Empire since Charlemagne



not significant but presentable
only published data i know (*pre-war pop.) 2013 Rębała et al (https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3598329/)

Bayern (n=218)
_ 12.3% R1a1a M17+/M198+
__ 4.5% R1a1a M17*+ 10/218
___ 7.7% R1a1a1b1a1 M458+ 17/218

*not corupted by post-war refugees as other data
app. swabian(?augsburg) part of Bavaria

I was actually wrong and i want to correct it.The eastern parts of Germany and more specifically Pomerania were inhabit first by Germanics(probably east germanics).During barbarian migrations,most of the infamous east germanics tribes left those lands and Slavs arrived.Slavs come later and mixed with the native germanic population,witch their origins are not well known.I am not sure if the germanics there were saxons or eastern germanics(i mean when Slavs-Wends arrived).

Riverman
09-08-2020, 12:15 AM
@Johnny: You don’t need to mind the later Germanic groups too much, because most were re-arranged tribal alliances smwhich didn't exist in that form before.
Like West and minor East Germanic and Celto-Roman groups.
The names often tell it, which didnt existed before, while the old tribes disappeared. Allemanni means just "all fighting men" probably. Older ethnic and religious identities were left behind in the migration period.

Johnny ola
09-08-2020, 12:20 AM
@Johnny: You don’t need to mind the later Germanic groups too much, because most were re-arranged tribal alliances smwhich didn't exist in that form before.
Like West and minor East Germanic and Celto-Roman groups.
The names often tell it, which didnt existed before, while the old tribes disappeared. Allemanni means just "all fighting men" probably. Older ethnic and religious identities were left behind in the migration period.

I am very curious to see the genetics of east germanics and if they are in some way a little bit close to Slavs or Balto-Slavs.East Germanics are the most important to me,since they are responisble for the decline of the Roman Empire.They might had an eastern shift...thought!!!

Generalissimo
09-08-2020, 12:25 AM
I am very curious to see the genetics of east germanics and if they are in some way a little bit close to Slavs or Balto-Slavs.East Germanics are the most important to me,since they are responisble for the decline of the Roman Empire.They might had an eastern shift...thought!!!

Asiatic East Germanics (https://eurogenes.blogspot.com/2019/07/asiatic-east-germanics.html)

Johnny ola
09-08-2020, 12:28 AM
Asiatic East Germanics (https://eurogenes.blogspot.com/2019/07/asiatic-east-germanics.html)

I have read it before and i agree with your statement.I am just waiting for more samples.They definitely had an eastern shift and i am pretty sure tribes like goths etc had come in contact with balkan folks on their way.

alexfritz
09-08-2020, 01:19 AM
I was actually wrong and i want to correct it.The eastern parts of Germany and more specifically Pomerania were inhabit first by Germanics(probably east germanics).During barbarian migrations,most of the infamous east germanics tribes left those lands and Slavs arrived.Slavs come later and mixed with the native germanic population,witch their origins are not well known.I am not sure if the germanics there were saxons or eastern germanics(i mean when Slavs-Wends arrived).

depends i guess sofar its only Poprad, a description of Wielbark samples and Chernyakhov but Wielbark is said to have extended and then moved from the Vistula to the Black sea area becoming Chernyakhov so its a bit of a Matroschka; to include would also be VM_2 from the Balkans, a Gepid, classic Eastgermanic of the Migrationperiod infact

the Elbe lands settled by Sorbs, Czechs and Lechites(Veleti/Lusici and Obodrite confeds.) would have been prev. "Irminonic" or Elbegermanic from the lower-elbe Longobards* to Bohemia Markomanni

*some were indeed Saxon-like when excavated in Pannonia and Italy
Amorim et al (https://www.nature.com/articles/s41467-018-06024-4)


@Alex: I think Roman provincials played a big part. Its actually primarily in some Slavic regions the continuity was more disrupted. This is particularly evident from place names. Germanic broke the cities down, but left many villages and towns largely intact if they didnt bothers them and could be used. Slavs and especially the Avars teared more down.

The place name as well as settlement continuity was much stronger in only Germanic regions with less of a change after the initial takeover. The big exception for large scale local survival in a clarify Slavic territory is especially Western and Southern Bohemia, which seems to have been more indirectly Slavicised probably.

this is indeed an exciting topic for future papers
sofar its just one and maybe the sampling focused on the most Baiuvarian necropoli with thus little remaining Provincial presence but this will be seen in future papers -broader sampling

Riverman
09-08-2020, 07:22 AM
I have read it before and i agree with your statement.I am just waiting for more samples.They definitely had an eastern shift and i am pretty sure tribes like goths etc had come in contact with balkan folks on their way.

The best representatives of East Germanics proper are unmixed Szolad Lombards and they are, strictly speaking, just typical Northern-Central Europeans with little Eastern shift. The Goths were in part more mixed, even earlier on, but primarily with Skytho-Sarmatians, which is of course Slavic-like. Concerning some findings of very untypical individuals, we have to consider, like in the Szolad and Collegno Lombards, but even much more so for the Goths, that they had mixed and completely foreign allies. Like we know from various battles of the Goths that man Romans joined their ranks. At first this didn't make them Goths, but just part of the contingent. On the long term some of these could become part of the tribe and assimilated, but most of this seems to have happened fairly late. This is also evident by the fact that many of the very untypical individuals seem to have left the group too.
And this can be again easily explained by historical accounts, because what you read is that for example a group of Sarmatian horsemen at one point joint this Germanic ally, at another that, the next time they split up themselves, because they couldn't decide what to do, some went into Eastern Roman service, the others stayed with the Visigoths, the next preferred the Vandals and so on. The fate of many of these allies and mixed group was not always fixed, yet if analysing some general remains from burials during a campaign, you might find them among Goths. But like in Szolad and Collegno again, probably in a specific part of the burial ground, while the Germanic core group had its own burial place on the cemetery.

The Lombard study was, in this respect, really the standard maker. Only at their level of resolution such conclusions could be made with any certainty, by reconstructing familial relationships. Otherwise you just find unrelated individuals on a cemetery, what can you conclude from that if a Germanic-led alliance was on the march? Same with Avars and other people, always look at the core group, the elite and how the families were organised. I mean if a Roman in 2nd century BC had a Phoenician slave, it doesn't mean the slave was representative of Romans either. But in the 4th century some of these slaves descendents might have become part of the general Roman population. It was kind of simlar with Germanics in the migration period, until they themselves assimilated into the locals.

Chnodomar
09-08-2020, 07:40 AM
The best representatives of East Germanics proper are unmixed Szolad Lombards and they are, strictly speaking, just typical Northern-Central Europeans with little Eastern shift.
The Langobards were part of the Suebians/Elbe Germanics and originally lived at the mouth of the Elbe, so they were West Germanic. That's also what the (limited) linguistic evidence shows and they even shared (or even started) the High German consonant shift.

But at least in the beginning this likely made little difference, looks increasingly like all (continental) Germanics were relatively homogenous.

Riverman
09-08-2020, 08:32 AM
The Langobards were part of the Suebians/Elbe Germanics and originally lived at the mouth of the Elbe, so they were West Germanic. That's also what the (limited) linguistic evidence shows and they even shared (or even started) the High German consonant shift.

But at least in the beginning this likely made little difference, looks increasingly like all (continental) Germanics were relatively homogenous.

The problem is we have little other truly East Germanic material and the Lombards shared the fate, place and migration with their East Germanic kinsmen and where, in some ways, the most "East Germanic-like" group of which we have such good data.

As for the High German shifts, my personal opinion is that this change was caused by the contact with Celto-Romance speakers, so I wouldn't consider it all too important, but its of course one additoinal proof for putting them into the rather West Germanic context indeed. But the reason for the linguistic shift might have been the same substrate, rather than the same origin:

Im Jahr 1949 postulierte der deutsche Sprachforscher Karl Meisen, die hochdeutschen Dialekte hätten sich erst in der Zeit der Völkerwanderung im ehemals germanischen Kolonialgebiet Süddeutschlands auf hauptsächlich keltischer Grundlage (d. h. auf einem Substrat) entwickelt.[9] Stefan Sonderegger hielt es für denkbar, dass die Hochdeutsche Lautverschiebung als Folge germanischer Superstratsiedlung auf galloromanischem Substrat nördlich der Alpen entstanden sei.[10] Norbert Richard Wolf war der Meinung, dass ein (unspezifiziertes) sprachliches Substrat am wahrscheinlichsten sei

https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zweite_Lautverschiebung#M%C3%B6gliche_Ursachen

This makes even more sense as related tribal Germanics started to use the shifts more or less rather depending on geography rather than based on origin elsewhere too. So if a tribe split, with one group staying North of the line, the other went South, the one who went South was developing it, the other not. That's peculiar and can be interpreted in favour of the substrate or contact hypothesis in my opinion, like a cultural transmission which happened in a given environment (only).

The German Wikipedia article wrote about the Lombards and how they might relate to High Germans, there again contact seems to have been more important than ancestry, regardless of the direction of the influence, with who is source and who is recipient, which we might never know.

alexfritz
09-08-2020, 09:43 AM
the Longobards being Eastgermanic actually stems from Tolkien
based on a passage in the Origo (or Historia) mentioning Longobards easily conversing with the Gepids; there ought to come more Longobard sites in future papers highlighting what a migrating group in the migrationperiod actually looked like; and how much new values, like christianity, played a part in new social structures; Collegno already hinted at it

the ACD samples in Veeramah et al could also very well be from the Eastgermanic, underscoring germanic, sphere as the gravegoods do not differ to the non-ACD Baiuvarii

mihaitzateo
09-08-2020, 10:23 AM
East Prussia German ethnics Y-DNA:
https://www.familytreedna.com/public/Ostpreussen_East_Prussia?iframe=yresults

But is hard to find results from West Germany.
SW Germany has even more than 50% R1B - most is R1B-S21/U105 second is R1B-U152.
There is I1 ,E,G etc.
Think E and G are higher in West than in East Germany same about J2.

Riverman
09-08-2020, 11:04 AM
East Prussia German ethnics Y-DNA:
https://www.familytreedna.com/public/Ostpreussen_East_Prussia?iframe=yresults

But is hard to find results from West Germany.
SW Germany has even more than 50% R1B - most is R1B-S21/U105 second is R1B-U152.
There is I1 ,E,G etc.
Think E and G are higher in West than in East Germany same about J2.

I don't know, but this FTDNA project is full of people which are not even German. The Germany-YDNA project is more helpful, there you can find a lot of Prussians.

Haplogroup E is present with different clades at a higher frequency than in some Central German regions in this small sample, but only in Northern East Prussia, which is generally more German it appears, more R1b of Western/Germanic origin and I1 too. The South of East Prussia was comparatively more Balto-Slavic going after these testers, with more N and R1a. So the German : Balto-Slavic percentage being reflected by R1b/I1/E vs. R1a/N. Though for the R1a one has to look at the subclades too of course.

Northern East Prussians from the project:
I1: 4
R1b: 2
R1a: 2
N: 2
E-V13: 2
G: 1

South West is similar with I1 and R1b and everywhere in East Prussia appears N in this very small sample, which can be interpreted as Baltic/Uralic heritage of the region.

Alain
09-08-2020, 12:51 PM
It is generally said that the Germanic were of north-central European origin, but in the course of time they interacted and assimilated with other groups as an example of the paper Eurogenesblog (East Germanic), I think there will be some more new results in the next few years, so you can see that Most of the East Germanic tribes have merged into today's Eastern European population like Poles, Czechs, Romanians ... And even there is a low percentage in today's Tunisian population with Y-DNA that can be referred to Germanic / Baltoslavic, even my male Baltoslavian line becomes Sicily found (migration period)

Johnny ola
09-08-2020, 01:45 PM
It is generally said that the Germanic were of north-central European origin, but in the course of time they interacted and assimilated with other groups as an example of the paper Eurogenesblog (East Germanic), I think there will be some more new results in the next few years, so you can see that Most of the East Germanic tribes have merged into today's Eastern European population like Poles, Czechs, Romanians ... And even there is a low percentage in today's Tunisian population with Y-DNA that can be referred to Germanic / Baltoslavic, even my male Baltoslavian line becomes Sicily found (migration period)

YOU mean from Vandals?

Riverman
09-08-2020, 01:51 PM
YOU mean from Vandals?

Most Germanics in North Africa were Vandals, but there could have been some Suebians, Sarmatians and possibly even Slavics too which accompanied them, even if just at very low numbers. And after the Islamic conquest and again after the Reconquista, some Goths and Suebians came to North Africa, or better people with such ancestry, mostly mixed muslims.

Johnny ola
09-08-2020, 01:56 PM
Most Germanics in North Africa were Vandals, but there could have been some Suebians, Sarmatians and possibly even Slavics too which accompanied them, even if just at very low numbers. And after the Islamic conquest and again after the Reconquista, some Goths and Suebians came to North Africa.

Imagine Berbers with Eastern European shift xD...!

Btw the Vandals dissapeared for good when the Byzantine army destoeyed them with Justain if i am not mistaken.They might assilimated into the North African communities of those days, while others might become Byzantines or mercenaries.

Alain
09-08-2020, 02:15 PM
forum.vgd.ru › ...
Web results
Помещики земли Орловской :: Орловская область :: Россия ...

Here is a folder of the Y-DNA R1A Z280 Y33 through Germanic groups (Vandals, Suebians and later the territory of the Eastern Gothic empire ) to Sicily brought the Baltoslavic groups acted or assimiled

Alain
09-08-2020, 02:20 PM
39462

Here better map

Riverman
09-08-2020, 02:47 PM
forum.vgd.ru › ...
Web results
Помещики земли Орловской :: Орловская область :: Россия ...

Here is a folder of the Y-DNA R1A Z280 Y33 through Germanic groups (Vandals, Suebians and later the territory of the Eastern Gothic empire ) to Sicily brought the Baltoslavic groups acted or assimiled

There were also direct Slavic settlements in Italy, but rather small in size and numbers. Even more Albanians.

Alain
09-08-2020, 02:55 PM
There were also direct Slavic settlements in Italy, but rather small in size and numbers. Even more Albanians.

That's right there is a large Albanian minority in Sicily and Southeast Italy but I think that Y33 in particular did not come with them but during the migration period

Dewsloth
09-08-2020, 03:19 PM
the Longobards being Eastgermanic actually stems from Tolkien
based on a passage in the Origo (or Historia) mentioning Longobards easily conversing with the Gepids; there ought to come more Longobard sites in future papers highlighting what a migrating group in the migrationperiod actually looked like; and how much new values, like christianity, played a part in new social structures; Collegno already hinted at it

the ACD samples in Veeramah et al could also very well be from the Eastgermanic, underscoring germanic, sphere as the gravegoods do not differ to the non-ACD Baiuvarii

STR220 is ACD, but she looks like the average of DEU_MA samples. So it would seem some Germanic (Ostrogoth?) tribes practiced ACD but autosomally resembled Center-West Germans.

mihaitzateo
09-08-2020, 03:21 PM
What I remember is that Lower Saxony has highest I1 and R1B-U106 from Germany.
Something like 30% I1, 30% R1B-U106 .
https://www.eupedia.com/forum/threads/37470-German-Regional-Y-DNA-Distribution
https://www.eupedia.com/forum/threads/32226-Y-DNA-from-Germany-in-the-300s-400s-AD-shows-58-frequency-of-I1-and-not-much-R1b

Riverman
09-08-2020, 04:00 PM
Typical for NW Germany is indeed R1b-U106 and I1. Everything else appears to be a smaller fraction, like I2, R1a, G, E going after the project. But these haplogroups are dominant in other regions of Germany too, just not as strikingly.

JerryS.
09-09-2020, 12:21 AM
I have German ancestry from lower Saxony. I've often got the German/French listing, Frisian, Dutch, or even Danish when this part of my ancestry was listed. however, lately a lot of DIY models with G25 data and even a few pay DNA sites have given me a large piece of generalized Eastern European, something I've never had before. Some calculator models even go as far as listing Russian or similar regional references as part of my ancestry but have not gone as far as saying Slavic. At this point I'm really skeptical on population models. I've read of one popular pay DNA company that had non Turks included in their Turkish sample, resulting in yet another update needing to be done.

digital_noise
09-09-2020, 01:30 AM
I have German ancestry from lower Saxony. I've often got the German/French listing, Frisian, Dutch, or even Danish when this part of my ancestry was listed. however, lately a lot of DIY models with G25 data and even a few pay DNA sites have given me a large piece of generalized Eastern European, something I've never had before. Some calculator models even go as far as listing Russian or similar regional references as part of my ancestry but have not gone as far as saying Slavic. At this point I'm really skeptical on population models. I've read of one popular pay DNA company that had non Turks included in their Turkish sample, resulting in yet another update needing to be done.

The pending update has nothing to do with this, if its actually true or not. 23&Me tends to release updates annually, and reference populations are constantly being added to, reviewed etc... There is nothing about this that resulted in needing to do an update. And if it is true it would def. not be the first time a source reference turned out to be not the best for the respective ethnic category.

JerryS.
09-09-2020, 02:08 AM
The pending update has nothing to do with this, if its actually true or not. 23&Me tends to release updates annually, and reference populations are constantly being added to, reviewed etc... There is nothing about this that resulted in needing to do an update. And if it is true it would def. not be the first time a source reference turned out to be not the best for the respective ethnic category.

I guess people should just be glad they recognized this mistake, though after it was used...

Riverman
09-09-2020, 08:37 AM
I have German ancestry from lower Saxony. I've often got the German/French listing, Frisian, Dutch, or even Danish when this part of my ancestry was listed. however, lately a lot of DIY models with G25 data and even a few pay DNA sites have given me a large piece of generalized Eastern European, something I've never had before. Some calculator models even go as far as listing Russian or similar regional references as part of my ancestry but have not gone as far as saying Slavic. At this point I'm really skeptical on population models. I've read of one popular pay DNA company that had non Turks included in their Turkish sample, resulting in yet another update needing to be done.

In one update they used Germans from Romania and Serbia for "Balkan" and Germans from Russia and the Ukraine for "Eastern European", giving those used in the reference 90 % plus for the respective (wrong) category. 23andme concentrates more on geography and doesn't care too much for ethnicity, and they struggle with the more complicated situation in Central, South Eastern and Eastern Europe, where different ethnicities with different ancestry can come from the very same region. They did improve on that though. I don't know if they were dropped as reference completely as outliers, but I would assume so. At least their personal results got back to normal (50-90 percent NW/F&G instead of 90+ percent Balkan/Eastern European).
I guess that such false references have an effect on people with the same German ancestry (like Swabian) not part of the colonists, if let's say 10 such ethnic Germans were included. The same applies to every such ethnicity, minority used as a false reference, like Albanians from Anatolia, Croats from Austria, Sorbs from Germany etc.

btree
09-09-2020, 07:52 PM
In one update they used Germans from Romania and Serbia for "Balkan" and Germans from Russia and the Ukraine for "Eastern European", giving those used in the reference 90 % plus for the respective (wrong) category. 23andme concentrates more on geography and doesn't care too much for ethnicity, and they struggle with the more complicated situation in Central, South Eastern and Eastern Europe, where different ethnicities with different ancestry can come from the very same region. They did improve on that though. I don't know if they were dropped as reference completely as outliers, but I would assume so. At least their personal results got back to normal (50-90 percent NW/F&G instead of 90+ percent Balkan/Eastern European).
I guess that such false references have an effect on people with the same German ancestry (like Swabian) not part of the colonists, if let's say 10 such ethnic Germans were included. The same applies to every such ethnicity, minority used as a false reference, like Albanians from Anatolia, Croats from Austria, Sorbs from Germany etc.

23andme gave my East German grandma 1/3 Eastern European with the rest generally being F&G (both French and German ancestry included). Her familial line all comes from Chemnitz, or at least as far as we have gone up (around 3 generations which isn't much). 23andme put Prague as a location for her Eastern European which may be masked as Eastern German admix as it perhaps couldn't assign that 1/3 to F&G due to an Eastern shift or whatever reason.

Riverman
09-09-2020, 08:21 PM
23andme gave my East German grandma 1/3 Eastern European with the rest generally being F&G (both French and German ancestry included). Her familial line all comes from Chemnitz, or at least as far as we have gone up (around 3 generations which isn't much). 23andme put Prague as a location for her Eastern European which may be masked as Eastern German admix as it perhaps couldn't assign that 1/3 to F&G due to an Eastern shift or whatever reason.

Many Germans have Slavic ancestry without recent other ethnic contributions. Especially Saxony has a lot of course. So it depends. But I know the ancestral proportions (roughly) of my German ancestral groups, and for them its all low, because they are rather Western shifted, which means my Eastern European comes for the most part from my recent Czech ancestors. Its different for Saxons, Silesians etc., which might have gotten their Slavic contribution from assimilated Slavic ancestors in Medieval times, without recent one.

Tomenable
04-04-2021, 02:43 PM
For example, maybe East Germans that inhabited areas pre 1945 that are now apart of Eastern Europe may have higher Slavic admixture than West Germans.

I am especially curious about Germans from Eastern Pommern. This area painted in red basically:

Counties:
Lauenburg (Lębork), Bütow (Bytów), Stolp (Słupsk), Rummelsburg (Miastko) & Schlawe (Sławno)

But it is very hard to find people with 100% ancestry from these five counties who did a DNA test.

https://i.imgur.com/5kjfAdF.png

This area had significant Slavic presence until the 1800s, even 1900s, they were assimilated late:

https://i.imgur.com/iBjqdHe.png

https://i.imgur.com/9W9rFj6.png

In Kluki & other villages around Lebasee & Garder See Slavic Pomeranians survived till after WW2:

https://i.imgur.com/VkaZVV4.png

https://i.imgur.com/Mt2IpFF.png

Tomenable
04-04-2021, 04:12 PM
Interesting book (in German) from year 1887 about the origins of German Silesians:

Karl Weinhold, "Die Verbreitung und die Herkunft der Deutschen in Schlesien" (1887):

https://archive.org/details/bub_gb_CqpCAAAAIAAJ

Some fragments:

https://i.imgur.com/RAabwco.jpg

More fragments:

https://i.imgur.com/KT8GiUE.jpg

https://i.imgur.com/HCVyCO7.jpg

JerryS.
04-04-2021, 07:54 PM
since this came up as a revisit.... how different are the North Germans from the South Germans? I've been able to trace my German ancestry back to the early mid 1800s to three major cities: Bremen, Hamburg, and Mecklenburg. commercial sites have given me some Scandinavian, and most of the G25 diy models people use show a leaning that way as well. when trying to come up with a supervised selection model on my own I found that Danish samples work well in order to allow my English and Scottish to show in the same model. I was able to find a German sample that was north shifted and didn't interfere with my B.I. ancestry also. this has me thinking how difficult it would be to find a model using a south German sample that doesn't bleed into Switzerland or Austria.

Riverman
04-04-2021, 09:14 PM
since this came up as a revisit.... how different are the North Germans from the South Germans? I've been able to trace my German ancestry back to the early mid 1800s to three major cities: Bremen, Hamburg, and Mecklenburg. commercial sites have given me some Scandinavian, and most of the G25 diy models people use show a leaning that way as well. when trying to come up with a supervised selection model on my own I found that Danish samples work well in order to allow my English and Scottish to show in the same model. I was able to find a German sample that was north shifted and didn't interfere with my B.I. ancestry also. this has me thinking how difficult it would be to find a model using a south German sample that doesn't bleed into Switzerland or Austria.

I think there are two important facts to realise:
No 1: There are no big, fixed genetic borderlines between German speakers. German speakers in France, Switzerland and Baden-Württemberg are generally very close, part of the Allemannic people of the Medieval times. Same is true for Bavarians and Austrians. There are of course differences between regions within these sphere, but the regional differences by far exceed those of the countries, which leads us to
No 2: Regional differences between German regions and settlements can be huge, even within a given state or larger region, dialectal and ethnic zone. How individuals will score depends on the settlement history of a place, and of course their very own family history.
Like there were Slavic settlements up to Denmark, in Franconia-Bavaria, even in parts of Tyrol. At the same time there were very Eastern regions, which received a lot of settlers from the Western fringe regions. The same is true for a more Southern, Celtic-Romance ancestry vs. the old Germanic settlers. There were pockets of Romance speakers along the Rhine for example, up to Medieval times, and there were newly founded Germanic settlements in some Swiss valleys, which received a lot of newly incoming Germanics with a quite Northern profile.

If you consider these two facts, you can still follow general trends, but do not rely too much on general geographic directions. There are of course some Northern German regions which were just part of the Germanic core zone and received little admixture afterwards, but to just throw everyone into categories like "Northern German, Southern German, Eastern German, Austrian and Swiss German", will fall short every time and fail to grasp reality.
If it would be that easy, the companies would give you that kind of analysis, I'm sure they would have nothing against splitting up Germans into regional clusters of ancestry. However, its even difficult to distinguish Germans from non-German speaking neighbours properly, but its even more difficult to absolutely impossible to come up with meaningful regional clusters which really fit. There are some, there are regions with a more clearly defined profile, but many regions are just mixed down to the villages and old marriage networks. If people work with general, larger clusters, there will be people which will score very differently from their known regional ancestry and be relatively way more "Northern, Eastern or Southern" respectively.

Tomenable
04-04-2021, 09:25 PM
I think there are two important facts to realise:
No 1: There are no big, fixed genetic borderlines between German speakers. German speakers in France, Switzerland and Baden-Württemberg are generally very close, part of the Allemannic people of the Medieval times. Same is true for Bavarians and Austrians. There are of course differences between regions within these sphere, but the regional differences by far exceed those of the countries, which leads us to
No 2: Regional differences between German regions and settlements can be huge, even within a given state or larger region, dialectal and ethnic zone. How individuals will score depends on the settlement history of a place, and of course their very own family history.
Like there were Slavic settlements up to Denmark, in Franconia-Bavaria, even in parts of Tyrol. At the same time there were very Eastern regions, which received a lot of settlers from the Western fringe regions. The same is true for a more Southern, Celtic-Romance ancestry vs. the old Germanic settlers. There were pockets of Romance speakers along the Rhine for example, up to Medieval times, and there were newly founded Germanic settlements in some Swiss valleys, which received a lot of newly incoming Germanics with a quite Northern profile.

If you consider these two facts, you can still follow general trends, but do not rely too much on general geographic directions. There are of course some Northern German regions which were just part of the Germanic core zone and received little admixture afterwards, but to just throw everyone into categories like "Northern German, Southern German, Eastern German, Austrian and Swiss German", will fall short every time and fail to grasp reality.
If it would be that easy, the companies would give you that kind of analysis, I'm sure they would have nothing against splitting up Germans into regional clusters of ancestry. However, its even difficult to distinguish Germans from non-German speaking neighbours properly, but its even more difficult to absolutely impossible to come up with meaningful regional clusters which really fit. There are some, there are regions with a more clearly defined profile, but many regions are just mixed down to the villages and old marriage networks. If people work with general, larger clusters, there will be people which will score very differently from their known regional ancestry and be relatively way more "Northern, Eastern or Southern" respectively.

Some companies already divide Germans into clusters, including LivingDNA.

As for 23andMe their "French&German" peaks in Switzerland, and Northern Germans tend to score high amounts of "Scandinavian" instead (because they are much closer to Scandinavians than to Swiss Germans).

"French&German" mostly includes South German and West German reference samples.

Also East Germans tend to score up to about 1/2 "Eastern European" in 23andMe.

Riverman
04-04-2021, 09:28 PM
Some companies divide Germans into clusters, including Living DNA.

I know, they try ;)
They don't even get the map right, let alone the results.

Tomenable
04-04-2021, 09:35 PM
They don't even get the map right, let alone the results.

Which part of their map is wrong? It is generally/broadly correct.

Based on my own research, Germans form at least three groups:

Northwest German cluster:

- Schleswig
- Holstein
- Niedersachsen
- Bremen
- Hamburg
- Nordrhein-Westfalen
- Western Mecklenburg

Southwest German cluster:

- Rheinland-Pfalz
- Saarland
- Baden-Württemberg
- Unterfranken
- Mittelfranken
- Bayern
- Hessen
- Alsatians
- Swiss Germans

Eastern German cluster:

- Vorpommern
- Eastern Mecklenburg
- Brandenburg
- Berlin
- Sachsen-Anhalt
- Thüringen
- Sachsen
- Oberfranken
- Ehemalige Ostgebiete

https://mapchart.net/europe-detailed.html

https://i.imgur.com/UjgphJT.png

^^^ This is broadly correct and it is really not as complicated as you claim.

Of course you can split these major clusters furtther into smaller sub-groups.

=====

Austria is like South Germans but mixed with Slavs (and similar eastern populations), so also close to East Germans.

But it depends on region e.g. Vorarlberg & Tirol don't have Slavic admixture.

Tomenable
04-04-2021, 10:04 PM
^^^
There are, of course, going to be some outliers and some exceptions to these patterns.

But I challenge you to find, for example, a German with all 4 grandparents born in Niedersachsen who scores like a South German in GEDmatch calcs (for example).

There may be some "transitional zones" of course (e.g. North Hessen, NW Thuringia, etc.).

=====

BTW:

"Central Germans" do not exist in genetic sense (except for individuals with grandparents from different regions, recently mixed ones with diverse regional origins).

Riverman
04-04-2021, 10:07 PM
Which part of their map is wrong? It is generally/broadly correct.

Their Southern Germanic borders include Western Bohemia, but not Lower Austria and Burgenland. It includes Tessin-Southern Switzerland, but not South Tyrol and Alsace-Lorraine. The West of Belgium or even French Switzerland is much more German-like than the Tessin. The borders just don't make any sense. Either they just go by states, or they make it based on ethnic-genetic borderlines, which are, especially towards Italian-speakers, pretty clear cut.
The other categories are not better mapped, German and non-German ones alike. All the borderlines are crap. Its like if a child was playing around with regions.




Based on my own research, Germans form at least three groups:

North-West German cluster:

- Schleswig
- Holstein
- Niedersachsen
- Bremen
- Hamburg
- Nordrhein-Westfalen
- Western Mecklenburg

South-West German cluster:

- Rheinland-Pfalz
- Saarland
- Baden-Württemberg
- Unterfranken
- Mittelfranken
- Bayern
- Hessen
- Alsatians
- Swiss Germans

Eastern German cluster:

- Vorpommern
- Eastern Mecklenburg
- Brandenburg
- Berlin
- Sachsen-Anhalt
- Thüringen
- Sachsen
- Oberfranken
- Ehemalige Ostgebiete


This is broadly correct, but just broadly if looking at fine scale results. I agree with you, these are the three basic categories and most regions belong to one of these categories or are a mix of it. But the "mix of it" is more common than you might think and this is what complicates references and individual results. Especially because the varying degrees of Germanic, Celtic, Romance, Slavic, Baltic and Balkan admixture, to name the main ones, vary a lot. Like there are regions you included in the Eastern cluster which have a low but significant amount of Slavic admiture, whereas some regions are predominantely Slavic derived. And the difference between "Slavic admixture" and "Slavic dominated" can be a transition between 4 villages.


^^^ This is broadly correct and it is really not as complicated as you claim.

I didn't say the basic components are complicated, but any kind of reference is. What kind of reference you use, it will be wrong for many places, because some of the varying percentage of the ingredients between the regions within these bigger groupings you made up.


Of course you can split these major clusters furtther into smaller sub-groups.

But that's my point, its not just you can, but you have too. Especially if considering former Eastern territories as well, in which were places with a much higher Slavic and Baltic input.


Austria is like South Germans but mixed with Slavs (and similar eastern populations), so also close to East Germans.

But it depends on region e.g. Vorarlberg & Tirol don't have Slavic admixture.

That's an issue, because first Austrians differ a lot, with some Upper Austrian regions having less Slavic admixture than Eastern Bavaria and Franconia, while at the same time the mix of Bavarian-like with more Southern shifted Slavs is not exactly the same as more Northern Germans with Czech-Polish-like. Because Eastern Germans have much less of the Romance and Balkan component, usually, but at the same time more Slavic than any German speaking Austrian region has.
The highest Slavic percentage is in Carinthia, but even Carinthians have no Slavic input as high as in most of Eastern Germany, let alone some former Eastern territories. Instead they have more Italian-Balkan like input, which however other Austrians don't have as much. So the differences between Austrians are way bigger than between Southern Germans and Austrians in general. Rather than fixed clusters there are clines, but these clines get broken every here and there, because of different settlement patterns and old pockets of minority or assimilated groups. That's why some former Eastern territories were more Western than Saxony, whereas the neighbouring territory was more Slavic than any modern German region is now.


^^^
There are, of course, going to be some outliers and some exceptions to these patterns.

But I challenge you to find, for example, a German with all 4 grandparents born in Niedersachsen who scores like a South German in GEDmatch calcs (for example).

There may be some "transitional zones" of course (e.g. North Hessen, NW Thuringia, etc.).

=====

BTW:

"Central Germans" do not exist in genetic sense (except for individuals with grandparents from different regions, recently mixed ones with diverse regional origins).

There are not just "some transitional zones", but a lot of German speaking territory is "one transitional zone". Niedersachsen is of course very close to the "old Germanic core zone", so yeah, that's more difficult. But go to Nordrhein-Westfalen und it gets more complicated again. Then again, I'm not saying there are no German clusters or bigger regional differences, but its not safe, like Northern vs. Southern European. You usually don't get Southern Europeans which score Scandinavian, not even close, or Scandinavians which score Southern European, not even close. The same can't be said for Germans at all.

Tomenable
04-04-2021, 10:09 PM
Their Southern Germanic borders include Western Bohemia, but not Lower Austria and Burgenland. It includes Tessin-Southern Switzerland, but not South Tyrol and Alsace-Lorraine. The West of Belgium or even French Switzerland is much more German-like than the Tessin. The borders just don't make any sense. Either they just go by states, or they make it based on ethnic-genetic borderlines, which are, especially towards Italian-speakers, pretty clear cut.

OK, so they are wrong outside of the territory of present-day Germany, in neighbouring countries.

But within the present-day Germany they mapped divisions between the 3 clusters quite correctly.

=====

BTW, Danube Swabians and Transylvanian Saxons are rather "Southwest Germans" not "East Germans".

The same applies to Volga Germans. So in theory "South German cluster" goes as far east as the Volga!

And Vistula Delta Mennonites are also genetically not "East Germans", but "Northwest Germans/Dutch".


Especially if considering former Eastern territories as well, in which were places with a much higher Slavic and Baltic input.

Even between the Elbe and the Oder there are such places - Sorbs in Niederlausitz/Oberlausitz; likely the island of Rügen too.

Prussian Lithuanians in Kleinlitauen could be very Baltic (where in Germany did most of them settle after 1945, by the way?).


some Upper Austrian regions having less Slavic admixture than Eastern Bavaria and Franconia

I don't think Eastern Bavaria has noticeable Slavic admixture. Unless you mean North-Eastern (which is actually Oberfranken).


Like there are regions you included in the Eastern cluster which have a low but significant amount of Slavic admiture

Which ones? Thüringen & Sachsen-Anhalt still have a lot, despite their "relatively western" geographic location.

Riverman
04-04-2021, 10:26 PM
OK, so they are wrong outside of the territory of present-day Germany, in neighbouring countries.

But within the present-day Germany they mapped divisions between the 3 clusters quite correctly.

Well no, because such borders along this line don't exit. If at all, the Bohemian region is closer to Saxony. If they put Western Bohemian into the Germanic category, what kind of borderline is that? Its all crap and if they did get close to reality with that map somewhere, its again like a child playing aroudn with regions. Occasionally, they will do right by chance, but there is no systematic approach in it at all. They just wanted to create some kind of map and didn't care for genetic clusters, political, historical or ethnolinguistic borders. Its just colors on a European map which roughly point in the right direction, but in detail, on the regional level, everything is wrong.


BTW, Danube Swabians and Transylvanian Saxons are rather "South Germans" not "East Germans".

Danube Swabians are not rather, but they are South Western Germans.


The same applies to Volga Germans. So in theory "South German cluster" goes as far east as the Volga!

Well, that's what My Heritage did, they tried to go for genetic clusters and some of these include regional groups you mentioned. Of course, this can't be properly put in a map, but just proves my point. Because you had the same in the former and current German territories. You had Swabian colonists in Western Prussia, Salzburger in East Prussia, Frankish people in Lower Austria and Burgenland and so on. And for some regions its no small influence, but a big one. That's why, if you map all current and former German speaking regions and localities, you get sometimes "holes and leaps", because for example on small region being just Germanised, whereas the next one, more Eastern, being more colonised by German settlers from the West, being more Western than the some regions in between.
And the same is true for Western Germany, Switzerland and Austria as well, because of the varying degrees of Romance speaker assimilation primarily. An example being:
https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moselromanische_Sprache

The stronger Romance speaking influence on different regions explains, in part, why some parts of Nordrhein can sometimes, depending on the references you use, score more Southern German shifted relatively. At the same time, like explained, the differences between different Swiss and Austrian regions can be really huge in this respect as well, with quite different ratios of the participating components.


Which ones? Thüringen & Sachsen-Anhalt still have a lot, despite their relatively "western" geographic location.

Yes they all have a significant amount, I totally agree with you. But you will agree that there is a difference between having about 10 - 25 - 50 - 75 - 90 percent of the Eastern components? Very significant to a lot might be considered everything above 25 percent, but even then, 25 vs. 90? That's still a lot of difference and seems to be possible to score that way, as low as 10 to as high as 90 for Eastern German speakers.

Tomenable
04-04-2021, 10:36 PM
Danube Swabians are not rather, but they are South Western Germans.

Yes, I wrote rather because I also saw a few self-identified Danube Swabians scoring high Eastern European admixtures.

But they are probably mixed with Hungarians/Romanians/Serbs etc. in recent generations, and therefore outliers.

As a population, they did not mix much with the non-German locals and that's why they are SW Germans (on average).


Yes they all have a significant amount, I totally agree with you. But you will agree that there is a difference between having about 10 - 25 - 50 - 75 - 90 percent of the Eastern components? Very significant to a lot might be considered everything above 25 percent, but even then, 25 vs. 90? That's still a lot of difference and seems to be possible to score that way, as low as 10 to as high as 90 for Eastern German speakers.

There're some Thuringians who are more Slavic-admixed than some Germans from Siilesia, for example. Despite geography.

I sent you in a PM a few examples.


But you will agree that there is a difference between having about 10 - 25 - 50 - 75 - 90 percent of the Eastern components? Very significant to a lot might be considered everything above 25 percent, but even then, 25 vs. 90?

Well even Mennonites have ~10% Eastern components and I don't count them as East Germans:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nb_V-N7CETM - Mennonite who scored 8% Eastern Europe (including Poland) in 23andMe

I count as East Germans in autosomal terms those with at least >25% of "Eastern components".


That's still a lot of difference and seems to be possible to score that way, as low as 10 to as high as 90 for Eastern German speakers.

I do not think that it is possible to score as low as 10% "Eastern components" for Eastern Germans.

Any examples? Maybe some Baltic Germans (but they are not typical East Germans as you know).

Riverman
04-04-2021, 10:52 PM
Yes, I wrote rather because I also saw a few self-identified Danube Swabians scoring high Eastern European admixtures.

A lot of those self-identified Danube Swabians are of course Danube Swabians to me and every reasonable person, if they identify as such, because what else should they be if living their culture and having German ancestry? But genetically and genealogically they are usually half-Hungarian or mixed with the local Czech settlers if they score that way. But that's like a self-identified Rheinländer with a Polish gp. Still a Rheinländer, but with a more complicated family history - vice versa the same for Poles with German ancestors and all kind of people with (minority) admixture. Their identity is clear, but they don't qualify as genetic references, to put it that way.


But they are probably mixed with Hungarians/Romanians/Serbs etc. in recent generations, and therefore outliers.

That's the case. If they have no more than the amount of one ggp, they might still be considered reference or typical, but if its more than that, like half Eastern European or the like, then no more.


As a population, they did not mix much with the non-German locals and that's why they are SW Germans (on average).

For some there are even complete trees, going back to the first settlement. So you can, on paper, not just say they are generally South Western German, but from which region they came from. There were Banat settlers which were more French inclined, founding French or dual French-German speaking settlements at first, then there were Swabians, which were the majority, but also people from Hessen, Rheinland-Pfalz, Bavaria and so on. But also Czech settlers, which formed their own settlements, of which many still exist today. Anyway, in those areas the intermixture usually happened, if at all, since it was rare, if excluding rare events, between people of the same religion. So its more likely Orthodox Romanians and Serbs mixed, or Catholic Hungarians, Germans, Czechs and Poles, or Protestant Hungarians, Czechs and Germans, or Ashkenazi and Sephardi Jews, rather than any kind of people of a different religion even if they were from the same village. This was different only later and mainly in the cities, not the villages.

Tomenable
04-04-2021, 11:05 PM
That's still a lot of difference and seems to be possible to score that way, as low as 10 to as high as 90 for Eastern German speakers.

I think 25-75 is the range for the vast majority of East Germans.


the differences between different Swiss and Austrian regions can be really huge in this respect as well, with quite different ratios of the participating components

Grisons Canton used to be >50% Romansh-speaking 200 years ago. I suppose they are still autosomally mostly Swiss Romansh despite language shift to German.

Riverman
04-04-2021, 11:36 PM
I think 25-75 is the range for the vast majority of East Germans.

Agreed, but that's in part why I started the debate. This means that in the "Eastern cluster" there are Germans with just one quarter and others with three times as much. That's hardly "one cluster", but at best a cline with breaks and regional subdivisions, of which some are closer to other geographical regions than their neighbouring ones.


Grisons Canton used to be >50% Romansh-speaking 200 years ago. I suppose they are still autosomally mostly Swiss Romansh despite language shift to German.

That's actually a good example as to why it can go down to the village-level. From the German Wikipedia-entry:

Die deutschen Mundarten Graubündens gehören zu zwei Gruppen des Schweizerdeutschen:

Dem hochalemannischen Bündnerdeutsch, das in der Region Chur, in der Bündner Herrschaft, den Fünf Dörfern und seit dem 19. und 20. Jahrhundert auch im Domleschg gesprochen wird; diese Dialekte verbreiteten sich im Hochmittelalter und der Neuzeit von Norden (Bodensee und Rheintal) bzw. von Nordwesten (Walensee-Seeztal) her und überlagerten ursprünglich rätoromanisches Siedlungsgebiet.
Dem höchstalemannischen Walserdeutsch, das in den im Hochmittelalter vom Wallis her besiedelten Walserdörfern gesprochen wird, nämlich im Prättigau, der Landschaft Davos und dem Schanfigg sowie in den ursprünglichen Sprachinseln Avers, Mutten, Rheinwald, Safiental, Vals, Tschappina und Obersaxen, die infolge des Rückzugs der rätoromanischen Sprache heute allerdings teilweise räumlichen Anschluss an das Hochalemannische gefunden haben.
Die Mundart von Samnaun gehört hingegen, als einziger Dialekt in der Schweiz, zum Bairischen, speziell zum Tirolerischen.

https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kanton_Graub%C3%BCnden

Sometimes dialects don't matter that much, but another time they do matter for genetics. Because if in the midst of a different dialect a special group settles down, and stays mostly among themselves, keeping their own ways, they can differ significantly from the surrounding people. Honestly I don't know in detail how much these differences matter in Graubünden, but what's clear is that there are formerly Romance speaking villagers in the very same canton with little German admixture, which just got assimilated, neighbouring villages which were settled from German regions, with incoming German speaking settlers building new villages, which might have much more German admixture. And it was pretty much the same in Eastern Germany, which explains why the differences can be so big between bigger regions, but also between groups of villages within a region.

Here a short TV report about the Samnaun-valley people, which speak like Tyroleans, build houses like Tyroleans and look like them too:
https://www.srf.ch/play/tv/srf-bi-de-luet---live/video/samnauner-dialekt?urn=urn:srf:video:2350162a-8759-464b-85ab-db20df516710

If you would test them, I guess they would be closer to Tyroleans than Swiss Germans, and for sure not closer to Romance-Swiss, as well.

Tomenable
04-04-2021, 11:43 PM
That's hardly "one cluster"

But that's probably a Bell Curve so most of them are around the 35-60/65 percent mark.

They will still cluster together if you compare them to other German samples (the ones with no, or negligible, Slavic admixture).

Just the fact of having significant Eastern admixture is making them distinct from West Germans, and forming a distinct cluster.

Another thing is that if you add their Eastern neighbours to comparison, some may switch clusters to Non-German neighbours.

Riverman
04-04-2021, 11:49 PM
They will still cluster together if you compare them to other German samples (the ones with no, or negligible, Slavic admixture).

Just the fact of having significant Eastern admixture is making them distinct from West Germans, and forming a distinct cluster.

Another thing is that if you add their Eastern neighbours to comparison, some may switch clusters to Non-German neighbours.

Some do, others don't. But yes, any significant amount of Slavic admixture will make them somewhat different from all (Northern and Southern) Western Germans on many PCAs. Insofar you are right, even though they can be subdivided and the transition is fluent, even to the West. There is no clear cut border, also because there was gene flow between the German regions, which means that absolutely no Slavic admixture, so really zero Slavic, is also a specific characterisation. Because people did not just move from the West to the East, even though this was the primary mode of migration, but also in the opposite direction from early times on.

For example with my old, most basic model, I know its not that much worth, but just to get an impression, about one third of the total German sample in G25 score no ancient Slavic, while about 2/3 do and less than 10 percent old Slavic is still a relative minority.

Tomenable
07-11-2021, 08:34 AM
Some do, others don't. But yes, any significant amount of Slavic admixture will make them somewhat different from all (Northern and Southern) Western Germans on many PCAs. Insofar you are right, even though they can be subdivided and the transition is fluent, even to the West. There is no clear cut border, also because there was gene flow between the German regions, which means that absolutely no Slavic admixture, so really zero Slavic, is also a specific characterisation. Because people did not just move from the West to the East, even though this was the primary mode of migration, but also in the opposite direction from early times on.

For example with my old, most basic model, I know its not that much worth, but just to get an impression, about one third of the total German sample in G25 score no ancient Slavic, while about 2/3 do and less than 10 percent old Slavic is still a relative minority.

I've found a German kit 100% from what is now Kaliningrad Oblast, who obviously has a lot of Baltic Old Prussian admixture:
[all ancestors in GEDCOM tree have German-sounding surnames and all are from German-speaking counties of East Prussia]

Eurogenes K15:

Admix Results (sorted):

# Population Percent
1 Baltic 27.08
2 North_Sea 26.83
3 Eastern_Euro 18.27
4 Atlantic 17.98
5 West_Asian 3.33
6 West_Med 2.43
7 East_Med 1.92
8 South_Asian 1.35
9 Oceanian 0.55
10 Sub-Saharan 0.28

Single Population Sharing:

# Population (source) Distance
1 Estonian 5.44
2 Polish 5.64
3 South_Polish 6.2
4 Ukrainian 7.16
5 Ukrainian_Lviv 7.52
6 Finnish 8.11
7 Belorussian 8.31
8 Russian_Smolensk 8.45
9 Southwest_Finnish 8.46
10 Southwest_Russian 8.88
11 Estonian_Polish 9.24
12 Ukrainian_Belgorod 9.49
13 Lithuanian 10.62
14 East_Finnish 10.7
15 Hungarian 11.54
16 Croatian 12.07
17 East_German 12.12
18 Kargopol_Russian 12.18
19 La_Brana-1 13.01
20 Austrian 13.67

Mixed Mode Population Sharing:

# Primary Population (source) Secondary Population (source) Distance
1 67.5% Belorussian + 32.5% Swedish @ 2.47
2 57.1% Lithuanian + 42.9% North_Swedish @ 2.58
3 63.9% Lithuanian + 36.1% Norwegian @ 2.61
4 61.5% Lithuanian + 38.5% Swedish @ 2.61
5 72.4% Belorussian + 27.6% West_Norwegian @ 2.75
6 63.5% Belorussian + 36.5% North_Swedish @ 2.77
7 66.7% Lithuanian + 33.3% West_Norwegian @ 2.77
8 65.2% Lithuanian + 34.8% Danish @ 2.78
9 70% Belorussian + 30% Norwegian @ 2.85
10 65.7% Lithuanian + 34.3% North_Dutch @ 2.96
11 69.8% Lithuanian + 30.2% Orcadian @ 2.98
12 66.3% Southwest_Russian + 33.7% Swedish @ 3.06
13 79.4% Estonian + 20.6% North_German @ 3.16
14 72.5% Estonian + 27.5% East_German @ 3.16
15 75.2% Estonian + 24.8% Austrian @ 3.22
16 62.8% Lithuanian + 37.2% North_German @ 3.22
17 82.3% Estonian + 17.7% West_German @ 3.29
18 71.8% Estonian + 28.2% Hungarian @ 3.3
19 82.2% Estonian + 17.8% South_Dutch @ 3.3
20 65.5% Estonian_Polish + 34.5% Swedish @ 3.35

Eurogenes K13:

Admix Results (sorted):

# Population Percent
1 Baltic 44.04
2 North_Atlantic 34.31
3 West_Med 6.38
4 East_Med 6.08
5 West_Asian 5.13
6 South_Asian 1.94
7 Oceanian 0.77
8 Siberian 0.72
9 Sub-Saharan 0.45
10 Amerindian 0.18

Single Population Sharing:

# Population (source) Distance
1 Polish 5.83
2 South_Polish 5.86
3 Belorussian 6.9
4 Russian_Smolensk 7.47
5 Southwest_Finnish 7.74
6 Estonian_Polish 7.88
7 Ukrainian 7.9
8 Southwest_Russian 8.35
9 Ukrainian_Lviv 8.57
10 Estonian 8.58
11 Ukrainian_Belgorod 8.77
12 Finnish 8.95
13 Lithuanian 10.83
14 East_Finnish 11.72
15 Kargopol_Russian 11.79
16 North_Swedish 12.43
17 Croatian 12.63
18 East_German 13.23
19 Hungarian 13.24
20 Erzya 14.98

Mixed Mode Population Sharing:

# Primary Population (source) Secondary Population (source) Distance
1 74.8% Belorussian + 25.2% North_German @ 2.68
2 76.7% Belorussian + 23.3% Danish @ 2.69
3 77.3% Belorussian + 22.7% North_Dutch @ 2.9
4 76.7% Belorussian + 23.3% Norwegian @ 2.97
5 73.5% Belorussian + 26.5% Swedish @ 2.97
6 80.4% Belorussian + 19.6% West_Scottish @ 3.1
7 79.6% Belorussian + 20.4% Southeast_English @ 3.12
8 79.9% Belorussian + 20.1% Irish @ 3.12
9 79.3% Belorussian + 20.7% Orcadian @ 3.14
10 81.2% Belorussian + 18.8% Southwest_English @ 3.39
11 61% Southwest_Russian + 39% North_Swedish @ 3.4
12 66.6% Belorussian + 33.4% North_Swedish @ 3.41
13 59.7% Ukrainian_Belgorod + 40.3% North_Swedish @ 3.44
14 78.7% Belorussian + 21.3% West_German @ 3.54
15 74.7% Estonian_Polish + 25.3% Danish @ 3.57
16 72.7% Estonian_Polish + 27.3% North_German @ 3.61
17 69.5% Southwest_Russian + 30.5% Swedish @ 3.62
18 71.1% Estonian_Polish + 28.9% Swedish @ 3.67
19 79.5% Belorussian + 20.5% South_Dutch @ 3.67
20 74.5% Estonian_Polish + 25.5% Norwegian @ 3.71

Based on GEDCOM all ancestors are from what is today Kaliningrad Oblast.

All great-grandparents are from the following six counties of East Prussia:

A - Kreis Konigsberg (Kaliningrad)
B - Kreis Labiau (Polessk)
C - Kreis Ragnit (Neman)
D - Kreis Heiligenbeil (Mamonovo)
E - Kreis Preußisch Eylau (Bagrationovsk)
F - Kreis Friedland (Pravdinsk)

https://i.imgur.com/up8qCFD.png

I found also few other German kits 100% from Kaliningrad Oblast, but they're less Balto-Slavic & more Germanic than this one.

Sebbo
09-14-2021, 01:41 PM
I've found a German kit 100% from what is now Kaliningrad Oblast, who obviously has a lot of Baltic Old Prussian admixture:
[all ancestors in GEDCOM tree have German-sounding surnames and all are from German-speaking counties of East Prussia]

Eurogenes K15:

Admix Results (sorted):

# Population Percent
1 Baltic 27.08
2 North_Sea 26.83
3 Eastern_Euro 18.27
4 Atlantic 17.98
5 West_Asian 3.33
6 West_Med 2.43
7 East_Med 1.92
8 South_Asian 1.35
9 Oceanian 0.55
10 Sub-Saharan 0.28

Single Population Sharing:

# Population (source) Distance
1 Estonian 5.44
2 Polish 5.64
3 South_Polish 6.2
4 Ukrainian 7.16
5 Ukrainian_Lviv 7.52
6 Finnish 8.11
7 Belorussian 8.31
8 Russian_Smolensk 8.45
9 Southwest_Finnish 8.46
10 Southwest_Russian 8.88
11 Estonian_Polish 9.24
12 Ukrainian_Belgorod 9.49
13 Lithuanian 10.62
14 East_Finnish 10.7
15 Hungarian 11.54
16 Croatian 12.07
17 East_German 12.12
18 Kargopol_Russian 12.18
19 La_Brana-1 13.01
20 Austrian 13.67

Mixed Mode Population Sharing:

# Primary Population (source) Secondary Population (source) Distance
1 67.5% Belorussian + 32.5% Swedish @ 2.47
2 57.1% Lithuanian + 42.9% North_Swedish @ 2.58
3 63.9% Lithuanian + 36.1% Norwegian @ 2.61
4 61.5% Lithuanian + 38.5% Swedish @ 2.61
5 72.4% Belorussian + 27.6% West_Norwegian @ 2.75
6 63.5% Belorussian + 36.5% North_Swedish @ 2.77
7 66.7% Lithuanian + 33.3% West_Norwegian @ 2.77
8 65.2% Lithuanian + 34.8% Danish @ 2.78
9 70% Belorussian + 30% Norwegian @ 2.85
10 65.7% Lithuanian + 34.3% North_Dutch @ 2.96
11 69.8% Lithuanian + 30.2% Orcadian @ 2.98
12 66.3% Southwest_Russian + 33.7% Swedish @ 3.06
13 79.4% Estonian + 20.6% North_German @ 3.16
14 72.5% Estonian + 27.5% East_German @ 3.16
15 75.2% Estonian + 24.8% Austrian @ 3.22
16 62.8% Lithuanian + 37.2% North_German @ 3.22
17 82.3% Estonian + 17.7% West_German @ 3.29
18 71.8% Estonian + 28.2% Hungarian @ 3.3
19 82.2% Estonian + 17.8% South_Dutch @ 3.3
20 65.5% Estonian_Polish + 34.5% Swedish @ 3.35

Eurogenes K13:

Admix Results (sorted):

# Population Percent
1 Baltic 44.04
2 North_Atlantic 34.31
3 West_Med 6.38
4 East_Med 6.08
5 West_Asian 5.13
6 South_Asian 1.94
7 Oceanian 0.77
8 Siberian 0.72
9 Sub-Saharan 0.45
10 Amerindian 0.18

Single Population Sharing:

# Population (source) Distance
1 Polish 5.83
2 South_Polish 5.86
3 Belorussian 6.9
4 Russian_Smolensk 7.47
5 Southwest_Finnish 7.74
6 Estonian_Polish 7.88
7 Ukrainian 7.9
8 Southwest_Russian 8.35
9 Ukrainian_Lviv 8.57
10 Estonian 8.58
11 Ukrainian_Belgorod 8.77
12 Finnish 8.95
13 Lithuanian 10.83
14 East_Finnish 11.72
15 Kargopol_Russian 11.79
16 North_Swedish 12.43
17 Croatian 12.63
18 East_German 13.23
19 Hungarian 13.24
20 Erzya 14.98

Mixed Mode Population Sharing:

# Primary Population (source) Secondary Population (source) Distance
1 74.8% Belorussian + 25.2% North_German @ 2.68
2 76.7% Belorussian + 23.3% Danish @ 2.69
3 77.3% Belorussian + 22.7% North_Dutch @ 2.9
4 76.7% Belorussian + 23.3% Norwegian @ 2.97
5 73.5% Belorussian + 26.5% Swedish @ 2.97
6 80.4% Belorussian + 19.6% West_Scottish @ 3.1
7 79.6% Belorussian + 20.4% Southeast_English @ 3.12
8 79.9% Belorussian + 20.1% Irish @ 3.12
9 79.3% Belorussian + 20.7% Orcadian @ 3.14
10 81.2% Belorussian + 18.8% Southwest_English @ 3.39
11 61% Southwest_Russian + 39% North_Swedish @ 3.4
12 66.6% Belorussian + 33.4% North_Swedish @ 3.41
13 59.7% Ukrainian_Belgorod + 40.3% North_Swedish @ 3.44
14 78.7% Belorussian + 21.3% West_German @ 3.54
15 74.7% Estonian_Polish + 25.3% Danish @ 3.57
16 72.7% Estonian_Polish + 27.3% North_German @ 3.61
17 69.5% Southwest_Russian + 30.5% Swedish @ 3.62
18 71.1% Estonian_Polish + 28.9% Swedish @ 3.67
19 79.5% Belorussian + 20.5% South_Dutch @ 3.67
20 74.5% Estonian_Polish + 25.5% Norwegian @ 3.71

Based on GEDCOM all ancestors are from what is today Kaliningrad Oblast.

All great-grandparents are from the following six counties of East Prussia:

A - Kreis Konigsberg (Kaliningrad)
B - Kreis Labiau (Polessk)
C - Kreis Ragnit (Neman)
D - Kreis Heiligenbeil (Mamonovo)
E - Kreis Preußisch Eylau (Bagrationovsk)
F - Kreis Friedland (Pravdinsk)

https://i.imgur.com/up8qCFD.png

I found also few other German kits 100% from Kaliningrad Oblast, but they're less Balto-Slavic & more Germanic than this one.

Some of the ancestor's of this person come from former Lithuania minor where there was a strong Baltic settlement so a Balto-Slavic influence would seem natural. Although I must admit that typically I would have expected German East Prussians to be more like 1/4 to 2/3 Balto-Slavic. How Balto-Slavic were the other kits from within the Kaliningrad region?