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.