Page 9 of 55 FirstFirst ... 789101119 ... LastLast
Results 81 to 90 of 543

Thread: How far has Central European Bronze and Iron Ages pushed to the North?

  1. #81
    Registered Users
    Posts
    551
    Sex
    Location
    Moscow
    Ethnicity
    East Europe + Finland
    Nationality
    Russian
    Y-DNA (P)
    N-Z1936-Y19110
    mtDNA (M)
    H2a5b

    Russian Federation
    Quote Originally Posted by Jaska View Post
    There are many, many different R1a lineages in Estonia at the Bronze Age. See Saag et al. 2019.
    You shouldn't make assumptions based on partial data only.
    The most fully typed samples there are R1a-Z280, the rest, for example, R1a-Z645 or R1a-M417 or R1a-Z283 are simply incompletely typed samples. So there are not many there, and there are not fully typed.

  2. #82
    Registered Users
    Posts
    396
    Sex

    Quote Originally Posted by Finn View Post
    Ahah with a clear head I think bla bla bla when Udolph is wrong you have to prove the name giving is NOT the oldest one. That is either true or not. Not weak or strong!
    Then it is not true; read the critique linked here earlier.
    Happy?

    Quote Originally Posted by Finn
    They were sincerely the first Indo-Europeans that showed up in NW Europe (I guess I'm more than 60% related to that people). It was you that claimed that Corded Ware, more specific the one who went to places like Jutland, NW Germany and North Dutch, came via Finland and the Baltics. Wrong.
    No, I spoke about Sweden.
    Try not to twist my words.

    Quote Originally Posted by Finn
    In the Elbe area, you know the river that connected the ValsÝmagle and Jastorf cultures direct with the nowadays Czech area, there was in EBA already the Unetice culture, very advanced and they had contacts with Cornwell and the Wessex culture. A very sophisticated culture see:

    And the following cultures from Central (East) Europe were also advanced, front running.You must be totally blind for the context when you state that a periphery culture of Finns and Saami had a bigger effect and earlier contacts than the Celts c.s. Central European Bronze/ Iron age cultures.
    You didn't read my comment, so why do you answer?
    You cannot just decide that the Central European cultures were Germanic speaking, that is unscientific. All the relevant linguistic evidence shows us that they were not, until the Iron Age.

    Quote Originally Posted by Finn
    It's more likely that a language is derived or have leanwords from the more advanced (/dominant) culture. Simple as that! Why should the Saami/Finnic language have had bigger impact?
    You didn't read or understand what I just wrote. Please read before answering.

    Quote Originally Posted by Finn
    A introgression of (proto) germanic or IE into Finnic/Saami makes more sense. What is the urge of (proto) Germanics to copy cat the Saami/Finnic language?
    Even today this is the pattern. In NW Europe we copy more the US riddles than that of the Molodavian language... Guess why.
    I never claimed that Finnic and Saami influenced Germanic. Read what I wrote.
    I already corrected you once, now I corrected you the second time.

    Quote Originally Posted by Finn
    So what? Single Grave people and their language was one of the oldest layers of (proto) Germanic. It makes a difference if the route was through the Finnic/Baltic area or through the PC Steppe and Central-European area. In the last scenario they Finnic/Saami influence is even more diminished.
    You cannot just decide that some culture was Germanic. That is unscientific.

    Quote Originally Posted by Finn
    PS pay wall do you have a such like article on edu?
    There are example words in the articles of Petri Kallio, linked here earlier.
    But I think you won't read them, because you have made up your opinion already.

  3. The Following User Says Thank You to Jaska For This Useful Post:

     JMcB (05-08-2021)

  4. #83
    Registered Users
    Posts
    396
    Sex

    Quote Originally Posted by Finn View Post
    Of course Germanic languages are real.
    But the Germanic language (nor the people) was never a unity. If then show me, you can't.
    You clearly know nothing about languages and linguistics.
    Start by reading about Proto-Germanic.
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Proto-Germanic_language

    Quote Originally Posted by Finn
    Fine and before reindeer herding they had in Bronze and Iron Age cultures that could compeat with the ones in Central Europe?
    Of course not.
    Read what I wrote - don't make up your own interpretations.

  5. The Following User Says Thank You to Jaska For This Useful Post:

     JMcB (05-08-2021)

  6. #84
    Registered Users
    Posts
    396
    Sex

    Quote Originally Posted by VladimirTaraskin View Post
    The Bronze Age of the Eastern Baltic region is well explored. There, for almost 1000 years, after the departure of R1a-Z284 to Scandinavia, there is essentially one population of R1a-Z280. There is no influx of populations from the Northern Bronze Age culture. There is no inflow from the east. The first new people who appear there at the turn of 1000 BC are the N1a1 people. I, of course, do not simplify and fully admit that these people R1a-Z280 in the linguistic sense were not Balto-Slavs, but they could not be Proto-Germans. It is quite possible that they spoke an archaic IE dialect that has not survived to this day, this is the maximum reasonable assumption.
    1. There are also Finns and Estonians in Z284 branches.
    2. Ancient DNA only catches a small portion of the total diversity. You must check also the history of all the subhaplogroups found in the Finnic populations today.

  7. #85
    Registered Users
    Posts
    1,890
    Sex

    Quote Originally Posted by Jaska View Post
    1. There are also Finns and Estonians in Z284 branches.
    2. Ancient DNA only catches a small portion of the total diversity. You must check also the history of all the subhaplogroups found in the Finnic populations today.
    The other haplogroups weren't the carriers of the Uralic languages, this was N, no doubt about that. The best candidate for spreading Uralic languages as a whole and the Finnic branch in particular is Seima-Turbino and associated groups:
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Seima-Turbino_phenomenon

    Considering their age, they could have, in theory, had contact with pre-Germanic people in the North. If we compare with this presentation:
    https://www.academia.edu/12599841/Ri...ino_Phenomenon

    As I understand it, the Nordic Bronze Age people had in their latest phase contacts with Seima Turbino carriers. These could have been pre- or para-Germanic speakers, or were in any case of a related linguistic, IE formation. If we further assume, that the Hallstatt carriers were not all Celtic, not even the central German late Hallstatt groups I was talking about, this could indeed mean that the Finno-Ugrian contact predates direct Celtic by a lot, at least a couple of centuries, even if Jastorf was the primary carrier and moving up North. The whole chronology would be just much younger, but the relative chronology would hold up. Because when Jastorf Germanic-related and influenced Iron Age groups moved up, the Uralic people would have been already there. Not because they were there when Corded Ware and Battle Axe people came, that's out of question, but because of Germanics themselves coming in later, especially those with Celtic influences, which have to be dated to the first, respectively second Latenisation period.

    The extent of the Seima-Turbino = Finno-Saami influence on Scandinavia can be debated and actual finds with ancient DNA would help a lot.

  8. The Following User Says Thank You to Riverman For This Useful Post:

     Finn (05-08-2021)

  9. #86
    Registered Users
    Posts
    255
    Sex
    Omitted
    Ethnicity
    1/2 Swedish 1/2 German
    Y-DNA (P)
    N1c
    mtDNA (M)
    U2

    Quote Originally Posted by Riverman View Post
    The other haplogroups weren't the carriers of the Uralic languages, this was N, no doubt about that. The best candidate for spreading Uralic languages as a whole and the Finnic branch in particular is Seima-Turbino and associated groups:
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Seima-Turbino_phenomenon

    Considering their age, they could have, in theory, had contact with pre-Germanic people in the North. If we compare with this presentation:
    https://www.academia.edu/12599841/Ri...ino_Phenomenon

    As I understand it, the Nordic Bronze Age people had in their latest phase contacts with Seima Turbino carriers. These could have been pre- or para-Germanic speakers, or were in any case of a related linguistic, IE formation. If we further assume, that the Hallstatt carriers were not all Celtic, not even the central German late Hallstatt groups I was talking about, this could indeed mean that the Finno-Ugrian contact predates direct Celtic by a lot, at least a couple of centuries, even if Jastorf was the primary carrier and moving up North. The whole chronology would be just much younger, but the relative chronology would hold up. Because when Jastorf Germanic-related and influenced Iron Age groups moved up, the Uralic people would have been already there. Not because they were there when Corded Ware and Battle Axe people came, that's out of question, but because of Germanics themselves coming in later, especially those with Celtic influences, which have to be dated to the first, respectively second Latenisation period.

    The extent of the Seima-Turbino = Finno-Saami influence on Scandinavia can be debated and actual finds with ancient DNA would help a lot.
    I don't think Seima-Turbino can explain any of these early contacts. S-T has been re-dated using carbon isotopes to 2300-1900BCE, making its latest stage earlier than the formation of the Nordic Bronze Age.

    Also, the Seima-Turbino materials in Fennoscandia are all stray finds. Some of which, are buried in local sub-Neolithic contexts. In other words, they don't seem to reflect the arrival of people.

    Unfortunately there will never be any aDNA to directly confirm Y-hg N was spread by S-T west of the Urals. There are no human remains in any of their European necropli.

    Instead, the "early Finnic package" may be represented by the early-Tarand graves, which appear in coastal Estonia, SW Finland and Central Sweden alongside, Tapiola Ware and fortified settlements (800-500BC).

    Akozino-Malar axes may be connected to this wave, or reflect trade with the more advanced Akozino-Akhmylovo culture in the Mid-Volga.
    Last edited by Zelto; 05-07-2021 at 09:46 PM.

  10. The Following 6 Users Say Thank You to Zelto For This Useful Post:

     AgeDY (05-08-2021),  Bygdedweller (05-08-2021),  parastais (05-07-2021),  Riverman (05-07-2021),  Ryukendo (05-11-2021),  VladimirTaraskin (05-08-2021)

  11. #87
    Gold Class Member
    Posts
    5,532
    Sex
    Location
    Groningen
    Ethnicity
    SGC+TRB Creool
    Nationality
    NL
    Y-DNA (P)
    E-V22

    Netherlands
    Then it is not true; read the critique linked here earlier.
    Happy?
    My state of mind is not connected with the critics on Udolph....
    I have not seen evidence that Udolph was wrong when he stated that the oldest Germanic speakers were to be found in nowadays central-eastern Germany. So if then give the right quote please.

    No, I spoke about Sweden.
    Try not to twist my words.
    You are right my bad in the case of Sweden.
    So Corded Ware went through Central Europa on the way to NW Europe incl. Jutland except to Southern Sweden, that went through Saami/Finnic area before it settled in Scania? Is that correct?

    You didn't read my comment, so why do you answer?
    You cannot just decide that the Central European cultures were Germanic speaking, that is unscientific. All the relevant linguistic evidence shows us that they were not, until the Iron Age.
    Yes I did. You undo languages from time, place and people. That may sound scientific, but can produce anachronistic, a-historic results. Blind eyed for context.

    You didn't read or understand what I just wrote. Please read before answering.
    Jaska can read my mind, are you a scientist or see-er?

    I never claimed that Finnic and Saami influenced Germanic. Read what I wrote.
    I already corrected you once, now I corrected you the second time.
    You have stated that it early influenced proto Germanic, even earlier than (proto) Celtic.

    You cannot just decide that some culture was Germanic. That is unscientific.
    The grammophon has a tic.

    There are example words in the articles of Petri Kallio, linked here earlier.
    But I think you won't read them, because you have made up your opinion already.
    No I haven't (made up my opinion) but as you don't react on my statements and questions you don't make it easy to make up my mind. You have'rounded' opinions, not open for new or other insights.

    So in an attempt I have some questions for you:

    1. Do you agree that the oldest (proto) Germanic speakers and the first Germanic speaker according to the first law of Grimm are to be found in the Jastorf iron age culture and area? So Schleswig-Holstein, Mecklenburg Vorpomnmern, East Lower Saxony, Saxon-Anhalt, Thuringen? And if not....why? And were are they to be placed?
    2. What was the urge for the (proto) Germanic speaker to have leanwords from Saami-Finnic? What are those leanwords, can you give some examples (not beyond pay wall)?
    3. Isn't it plausible that the (proto) Celtic cultures c.q. the Central European Bronze Age and Iron Age cultures that were in that time, very advanced and sophisticated did have a tremendous influence on the (proto) Germanics and their language?


    Just three simple questions, piece of cake isn't it?
    Last edited by Finn; 05-08-2021 at 07:50 AM.

  12. #88
    Gold Class Member
    Posts
    5,532
    Sex
    Location
    Groningen
    Ethnicity
    SGC+TRB Creool
    Nationality
    NL
    Y-DNA (P)
    E-V22

    Netherlands
    Quote Originally Posted by Jaska View Post
    You clearly know nothing about languages and linguistics.
    Start by reading about Proto-Germanic.
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Proto-Germanic_language


    Of course not.
    Read what I wrote - don't make up your own interpretations.
    Ad hominem.
    So fare I keep up with a good linguist our member Pijlsteen, short but imo to the point:
    Quote Originally Posted by Pylsteen View Post
    I keep it brief today, some ideas I have, similarities IMO are more likely to be due to a loose type of Sprachbund, both groups influencing each other but also due to a third party ancient Scandinavian tongue, perhaps the substrate in Saami, it might have influenced Germanic phonology ( the vocabulary not so much though)
    Last edited by Finn; 05-08-2021 at 07:32 AM.

  13. The Following User Says Thank You to Finn For This Useful Post:

     Riverman (05-08-2021)

  14. #89
    Gold Class Member
    Posts
    2,901
    Sex
    Location
    Florida, USA.
    Ethnicity
    English, Scottish & Irish
    Nationality
    American
    Y-DNA (P)
    I-FT80854
    mtDNA (M)
    H1e2
    mtDNA (P)
    K1

    England Scotland Ireland Germany Bayern Italy Two Sicilies France
    Quote Originally Posted by Finn View Post
    … 1. Do you agree that the oldest (proto) Germanic speakers and the first Germanic speaker according to the first law of Grimm are to be found in the Jastorf iron age culture and area? So Schleswig-Holstein, Mecklenburg Vorpomnmern, East Lower Saxony, Saxon-Anhalt, Thuringen? And if not....why? And were are they to be placed?
    2. What was the urge for the (proto) Germanic speaker to have leanwords from Saami-Finnic? What are those leanwords, can you give some examples (not beyond pay wall)?
    3. Isn't it plausible that the (proto) Celtic cultures c.q. the Central European Bronze Age and Iron Age cultures that were in that time, very advanced and sophisticated did have a tremendous influence on the (proto) Germanics and their language?


    Just three simple questions, piece of cake isn't it?

    Hello Finn,

    I think you might get a better idea of what Jaska is proposing, if you read the articles he posted earlier in the thread. They’re actually pretty interesting and not all that long. So it won’t take that much time.

    Quote Originally Posted by Jaska View Post
    … Udolph totally ignores the fact, that the Germanic lineage has had long-lasting contacts with Finnic and Saami: NwIE > Pre-Germanic > Paleo-Germanic > Proto-Germanic > Nw-Germanic > Proto-Nordic.

    Here are two articles by Petri Kallio about these loanwords; in the first one he criticizes Udolph:
    https://www.academia.edu/13615139/Th...ords_in_Finnic
    https://www.sgr.fi/sust/sust266/sust266_kallio.pdf

    While I’m at it, I would like to thank all those who posted links in this thread. They’ve made for some interesting reading!
    Paper Trail: 42.25% English, 31.25% Scottish, 12.5% Irish, 6.25% German, 6.25% Sicilian & 1.5% French. Or: 86% British Isles, 6.25% German, 6.25% Sicilian & 1.5% French.
    LDNA(c): 86.3% British Isles (48.6% English, 37.7% Scottish & Irish), 7.8% NW Germanic, 5.9% Europe South (Aegean 3.4%, Tuscany 1.3%, Sardinia 1.1%)
    BigY 700: I1-Z140 >I-F2642 >Y1966 >Y3649 >A13241 >Y3647 >A13248 (circa 620 AD) >A13242/YSEQ (circa 765 AD) >FT80854 (circa 1650 AD).

  15. The Following 7 Users Say Thank You to JMcB For This Useful Post:

     anglesqueville (05-08-2021),  Brent.B (05-09-2021),  Bygdedweller (05-08-2021),  Finn (05-08-2021),  Radboud (05-08-2021),  Riverman (05-08-2021),  Ruderico (05-11-2021)

  16. #90
    Gold Class Member
    Posts
    5,532
    Sex
    Location
    Groningen
    Ethnicity
    SGC+TRB Creool
    Nationality
    NL
    Y-DNA (P)
    E-V22

    Netherlands
    Quote Originally Posted by JMcB View Post
    Hello Finn,

    I think you might get a better idea of what Jaska is proposing, if you read the articles he posted earlier in the thread. They’re actually pretty interesting and not all that long. So it won’t take that much time.




    While I’m at it, I would like to thank all those who posted links in this thread. They’ve made for some interesting reading!
    Thanks JmcB!

    I have read them. But I guess it's legitimate to differ on this issue.

    First of all I can understand this:
    First of all, they totally destroy the theory advocated by some German scholars (e.g. Udolph 1994) that Germanic was spoken nowhere in Scandinavia until the Iron Age (see Koivulehto forthcoming).
    The Finnic researchers have a point regarding the Germanic loanwords in Finnic/Saami and so the presence of Germanic in (Southern) Scandinavia JmcB.

    Also the link provided by Angles, a paper from Harald Bichlmeier about Udolph in which is stated that modern linguist have to do the job of Udolph again is clear.

    Nevertheless that doesn't mean the opposite namely that "Germanic speaking heartland" is not right trough the middle of Germany. Because Udolph is certainly not the only one who places the Germanic speaking heartland there. So de facto in the Jastorf area. And now we get to the core, I mis argumentation why Jastorf wasn't the heartland. The only argumentation, as fare as I can see (but please correct me!)

    I can only detect:
    " not to mention the notion that Germanic would have expanded more than one thousand kilometres to the north during the Pre-Roman Iron Age when global climate conditions became cooler and wetter.As the Germanic maritime vocabulary is a further argument for a coastal rather than an inland origin, I still prefer to locate the Germanic homeland in Denmark and adjacent areas."

    Single Grave (2850 BC) had connections between Czech, North Dutch and Jutland. Unetice (EBA) also and even connections with Wessex! So imo the thousand kilometers is not the thing. And maritime words are in Jastorf with the mound of the Elbe in the North Sea and Mecklenburg on the the shore of the Baltic Sea within reach. So really I don't get it.

    And with just one a look at the map you can see why. Jastorf stretches from the outmost NW Germany, to deep into Central-East inland of Germany!

    https://www.academia.edu/10276827/Ja...storf_Culture_

    And as the Jastorf area is still a likely Germanic heartland option early contacts with the Celtic sphere c.q. the Bronze Age and Iron Age cultures from Unetice to LaTene had from early on intensive contact (and sometimes conflicts?) with Jastorf/ Central-East Germany (sometimes even overlapping!).
    The Finnic researchers are imo fare too resolute in a kind of 'njet'. Saami/Finnic relationships were earlier than Celtic ones, according to Jaska. Imo that would only make sense if you shift the heartland exclusive to Sweden.

    So please I'm all ears, but I can't hide that I don't share all his arguments, but correct me if I'm wrong (as long as it not ad hominem but in your case this is never in doubt!).

    Last but not least If I'm well member Radboud has made a contribution two years ago, it's in Dutch but it's worth to google translate it:
    https://taaldacht.nl/2019/08/24/die-urheimat/
    Last edited by Finn; 05-08-2021 at 09:18 PM.

  17. The Following 5 Users Say Thank You to Finn For This Useful Post:

     CopperAxe (05-09-2021),  JMcB (05-08-2021),  Michał (05-09-2021),  Radboud (05-09-2021),  Riverman (05-08-2021)

Page 9 of 55 FirstFirst ... 789101119 ... LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 93
    Last Post: 07-23-2020, 05:39 PM
  2. Replies: 121
    Last Post: 07-08-2020, 07:59 AM
  3. Replies: 10
    Last Post: 06-22-2020, 03:10 PM
  4. Impact of Unetice or Central European Bronze Age!?
    By Finn in forum Autosomal (auDNA)
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 04-08-2018, 01:12 PM
  5. Replies: 0
    Last Post: 04-08-2017, 05:07 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •