The genetic history of Scandinavia from the Roman Iron Age to the present

[JonikW]

The Nordic Bronze Age and its successor cultures were, first and foremost, networking systems including a bunch of highly individuated, regional cultures within their borders (VERY important to the question of Proto-Germanic), so these represent a broad and continuous archaeological horizon; in my opinion it is a non sequitur that Proto-Germanic developing in one area of the Nordic Bronze Age necessarily detaches other regions because it was interregional interactions that helped to spread innovations in material culture, social organization, religion, and language within this horizon (genes too?). In the case of the Elp and Hoogkarspel cultures and the question of their Harpstedt-Nienburg > Frankish descendants, these groups were in direct contact with the whole of Scandinavia, and this rather complex system of contact and convergence is clear when considering the wholesale abandonment of tumuli burials in favour of Germanic cinerary urns by the Early Iron Age, the convergence of farming methods in the form of three-aisled farmhouses, and the use of waterways for navigation (in the case of the northern Dutch Bronze Age groups and their Scandinavian contacts, especially via the Rhine and Weser rivers). So this was not simply a couple odd correspondences, but shared ideas about religion and social organisation that could very reasonably be connected to gene flow from Scandinavia into the northern Netherlands (especially because of prolonged contact); it is something I have started to warm up to a bit (but am not strongly invested in), especially because if I am not mistaken some of the Netherlands_BA and IA samples end up in a position on the PCA proximate to where Norwegians and Orcadians plot, so in a mixed British/Scandinavian-like mode. As a genetic base, IIRC the Veluwe Bell Beaker population (ancestral to the Dutch Bronze Age cultures) was directly related to the Bell Beaker groups which migrated to Britain, so it would not be crazy to think that a British-like population could have shifted toward that Norwegian/Orcadian-like profile because of admixture with other Nordic Bronze/Early Iron Age groups (especially via female exogamy), but this could have happened over time and then a few sound shifts could have shifted the language of these Dutch groups into something we can clearly call “Germanic”, especially if they wanted to imitate the speech patterns of a more prestigious group that they had some sort of relationship with. The regions outside of Central Sweden are in fact not disconnected from the history of Germanic identity, culture, language, etc. in this framework, but represent patches of Para-Germanic (and perhaps some unique Nordwestblock) dialects that were well connected to the wealthy areas further north and which actively facilitated the ethnogenesis and spread of Germanic culture by continuing to participate within this network. I do not want to repeat myself ad nauseam with Harpstedt-Nienburg and its formation + spread so I will leave it at that for now.

I would also like to point out that I remember a time when people insisted that Anglo-Saxons had at most a 10-30% impact on the genetic structure of England (some going as far as to say that there was no genetic impact whatsoever when I was doing my undergrad), which never made much sense to me anyway based on what I had researched; our knowledge is always something that can be improved upon with more aDNA, especially as it concerns a potential Scandinavian/Swedish introgression into different pre-Germanic populations of the Nordic Bronze Age subgroups.

Some very strong points there Ambiorix. Sorry that I'm including your entire post by hitting reply here when I'm only referring to part of it, but I always mess up the formatting when I try to edit. I'd like to know more about three-aisled farmhouses and how they tie in with this if you have any reading tips. I'd spotted a while back that the distribution and dating I'd noticed suggested they might be meaningful for PGmc but couldn't find any good info on them beyond a map of western Europe and Scandinavia with some very intriguing/suggestive dates.

This is the question I asked on another thread last spring (as part of a bigger post and got no replies on this particular issue): "On Jastorf, Scandinavia and the question of North to South and/or South to North, has anyone read up on three-aisled longhouses in the Bronze Age? These sprang up from quite an early date across the wider later Germanic region from Norway to the Netherlands as far as I know (perhaps further afield too) and an understanding of where exactly they started and how they spread might add something interesting. Homes often have something to tell us about movements that trade doesn't."

[Finn]

The Nordic Bronze Age and its successor cultures were, first and foremost, networking systems including a bunch of highly individuated, regional cultures within their borders (VERY important to the question of Proto-Germanic), so these represent a broad and continuous archaeological horizon; in my opinion it is a non sequitur that Proto-Germanic developing in one area of the Nordic Bronze Age necessarily detaches other regions because it was interregional interactions that helped to spread innovations in material culture, social organization, religion, and language within this horizon (genes too?). In the case of the Elp and Hoogkarspel cultures and the question of their Harpstedt-Nienburg > Frankish descendants, these groups were in direct contact with the whole of Scandinavia, and this rather complex system of contact and convergence is clear when considering the wholesale abandonment of tumuli burials in favour of Germanic cinerary urns by the Early Iron Age, the convergence of farming methods in the form of three-aisled farmhouses, and the use of waterways for navigation (in the case of the northern Dutch Bronze Age groups and their Scandinavian contacts, especially via the Rhine and Weser rivers). So this was not simply a couple odd correspondences, but shared ideas about religion and social organisation that could very reasonably be connected to gene flow from Scandinavia into the northern Netherlands (especially because of prolonged contact); it is something I have started to warm up to a bit (but am not strongly invested in), especially because if I am not mistaken some of the Netherlands_BA and IA samples end up in a position on the PCA proximate to where Norwegians and Orcadians plot, so in a mixed British/Scandinavian-like mode. As a genetic base, IIRC the Veluwe Bell Beaker population (ancestral to the Dutch Bronze Age cultures) was directly related to the Bell Beaker groups which migrated to Britain, so it would not be crazy to think that a British-like population could have shifted toward that Norwegian/Orcadian-like profile because of admixture with other Nordic Bronze/Early Iron Age groups (especially via female exogamy), but this could have happened over time and then a few sound shifts could have shifted the language of these Dutch groups into something we can clearly call “Germanic”, especially if they wanted to imitate the speech patterns of a more prestigious group that they had some sort of relationship with. The regions outside of Central Sweden are in fact not disconnected from the history of Germanic identity, culture, language, etc. in this framework, but represent patches of Para-Germanic (and perhaps some unique Nordwestblock) dialects that were well connected to the wealthy areas further north and which actively facilitated the ethnogenesis and spread of Germanic culture by continuing to participate within this network. I do not want to repeat myself ad nauseam with Harpstedt-Nienburg and its formation + spread so I will leave it at that for now.

I would also like to point out that I remember a time when people insisted that Anglo-Saxons had at most a 10-30% impact on the genetic structure of England (some going as far as to say that there was no genetic impact whatsoever when I was doing my undergrad), which never made much sense to me anyway based on what I had researched; our knowledge is always something that can be improved upon with more aDNA, especially as it concerns a potential Scandinavian/Swedish introgression into different pre-Germanic populations of the Nordic Bronze Age subgroups.

First of all my objections against Angles absoluteness about PGmc are what you can call 'metholodogy'. When you talk about an (linguistic) Urheimat, you talk about a time and place, about history. When you pinpoint an Urheimat to an area, you have to have sources that underline your narrative. That is absolute basic in history.
In the case of PGmc we have no sources, which is no wonder because it's a prehistoric language. So no sources. So you can't pinpoint the occurance of Verner's law let's say about 500 BC not in Sweden, not in Denmark, not along the Elbe. We can have speculations, educated guesses, all well but no absolutions like Angles preaches.

With regard to Harpstedt-Nienburg, there are indices they spoke a kind of NW block language (see Kuhn 1962, Kuzmenko 2011). But also there no certainties, just speculations...nevertheless little chance they spoke a language that was also common in mid Sweden. At least no indices.

What we do know about introjection is that in BA there was likely a migration of groups with R1b U106 from the Dutch-Danish range towards for example Finland or Lithuania. Modern archeologist like VandKilde have stated that the Dutch-Jutish Sögel-Wohlde culture had a severe impact on NBA. Are there qualified indices that in BA there was a vice versa movement?

My two cents go to the Danish/ Schleswig-Holstein area with regard to be an epicenter of the (proto) Germanic development.....but not in splendid isolation. Look at Koch, the trackrecord of the development of (proto)Germanic is very long and isn't restricted to mid Sweden, what was in EBA a 'major epicenter' in the development of (proto) Germanic, is not necessary that in IA.

Anyhow, this absoluteness has no ground:

All these elements converge towards a single credible hypothesis: the PGmc formed in a region in constant contact with the coastal regions of the Eastern Baltic. This region cannot be located elsewhere than in middle Sweden.

[Ambiorix]

Some very strong points there Ambiorix. Sorry that I'm including your entire post by hitting reply here when I'm only referring to part of it, but I always mess up the formatting when I try to edit. I'd like to know more about three-aisled farmhouses and how they tie in with this if you have any reading tips. I'd spotted a while back that the distribution and dating I'd noticed suggested they might be meaningful for PGmc but couldn't find any good info on them beyond a map of western Europe and Scandinavia with some very intriguing/suggestive dates.

This is the question I asked on another thread last spring (as part of a bigger post and got no replies on this particular issue): "On Jastorf, Scandinavia and the question of North to South and/or South to North, has anyone read up on three-aisled longhouses in the Bronze Age? These sprang up from quite an early date across the wider later Germanic region from Norway to the Netherlands as far as I know (perhaps further afield too) and an understanding of where exactly they started and how they spread might add something interesting. Homes often have something to tell us about movements that trade doesn't."

No worries JonikW! Fokkens (2003), “The longhouse as a central element in Bronze Age daily life” is a good resource that I have brought up before (the bibliography looks to have many good texts too), here is a link: https://scholarlypublications.univer...dle/1887/19826

Of note are the fact Fokkens makes mention of the Early Iron Age shift toward the cinerary urns, the expansion of housing toward married sons establishing their own houses but retaining the right to communal burial sites (even across large distances), and the supernatural and alliance-building importance of cattle (+ all these elements in relation to changing social dynamics in the Early Iron Age). So there is a common and widespread focus on cattle within the sociopolitical and religious organisation of the northern Netherlands, Denmark, and Sweden in the Bronze Age which necessitated humans and cattle dwelling in the same enlarged spaces and therefore the transition toward the three-aisled house happening roughly within the same period in Scandinavia and Frisia (i.e., in the Montelius I period). Connected to this might be the exclusive privilege the patriarch of the Bronze Age community had in accessing trade relations and therefore affirming power, another aspect I did not consider until now might be the possibility of elite fosterage practises between these northern communities as another dimension of sharing innovations. A quote from the text regarding the martial aspect of Bronze Age longhouses:

“Thus cattle represented an important economic, social and ideological factor in the daily life of the Bronze Age farmer. My suggestion is that this fact may have been the most important reason for bringing farmer and his livestock together underneath one roof. No only ‘love’ for the animals plays a role here, but also protection against raids (Harsema 1993: 106; Louwe Kooijmans 1998: 333). If cattle were such an important element, cattle raids could be expected in the Bronze Age communities of the lowlands. From other sources – for instance grave goods, rock engravings and hoards - we know for a fact that a strong martial ideology existed in this era (Fokkens 1999; Fontijn in press). In the framework of this article I cannot elaborate on this aspect much further, but I merely want to point out that the concept of martiality implies that its application is often ideologically defined. Martiality does not mean pure aggression or defence, but should be seen as an integral and important constituting part of being a person, or – rather – a man (Bazelmans 1996; Fokkens in prep.; Fontijn in press). Not for nothing do we speak of martial arts, arts that enable men to demonstrate their power, courage, honesty, etc. In many tribal societies, therefore, a kind of small-scale warfare or raiding is endemic. These conflicts are never territorial, but always about other things (Louwe Kooijmans 1993, 1998; Otterbrein 1985). Cattle raids fit very well in that picture” (Fokkens 2003, pp. 9-10).

Unfortunately I do not have any reading tips other than to suggest looking through Dutch and German university sites for available texts

[Finn]

No worries JonikW! Fokkens (2003), “The longhouse as a central element in Bronze Age daily life” is a good resource that I have brought up before (the bibliography looks to have many good texts too), here is a link: https://scholarlypublications.univer...dle/1887/19826

Of note are the fact Fokkens makes mention of the Early Iron Age shift toward the cinerary urns, the expansion of housing toward married sons establishing their own houses but retaining the right to communal burial sites (even across large distances), and the supernatural and alliance-building importance of cattle (+ all these elements in relation to changing social dynamics in the Early Iron Age). So there is a common and widespread focus on cattle within the sociopolitical and religious organisation of the northern Netherlands, Denmark, and Sweden in the Bronze Age which necessitated humans and cattle dwelling in the same enlarged spaces and therefore the transition toward the three-aisled house happening roughly within the same period in Scandinavia and Frisia (i.e., in the Montelius I period). Connected to this might be the exclusive privilege the patriarch of the Bronze Age community had in accessing trade relations and therefore affirming power, another aspect I did not consider until now might be the possibility of elite fosterage practises between these northern communities as another dimension of sharing innovations. A quote from the text regarding the martial aspect of Bronze Age longhouses:



Unfortunately I do not have any reading tips other than to suggest looking through Dutch and German university sites for available texts

Friesland didn't exist in the Bronze Age, the terps were from about 500 BC. So when you talk about Northern Netherlands in the Bronze Age than this is NE Dutch (Drenthe/ Overijssel).

As said in NBA the major impuls came from Sögel-Wohlde towards Valsømagle (see the works of VandKilde). I wouldn't see the development of the three-aisled house as something cc Northern Netherlands from Sweden or such like. As fare as I know Fokkens hasn't made such conclusions.

What is really interesting is how the more R1b (U106) Sögel Wohlde mingled with may be the more I-M253 of Valsømagle.

What could be the case, hunch, is that NW IE of the Sögel-Wohlde area stood model for the Valsømagle one. Imo Koch hints also at that direction:


May be an exaggeration but may be we can even have a link with Schrijver in this respect: NW IE (from Sögel-Wohlde) meets the Valsømagle language.....a major push for the development of Germanic?

[Ambiorix]

First of all my objections against Angles absoluteness about PGmc are what you can call 'metholodogy'. When you talk about an (linguistic) Urheimat, you talk about a time and place, about history. When you pinpoint an Urheimat to an area, you have to have sources that underline your narrative. That is absolute basic in history.
In the case of PGmc we have no sources, which is no wonder because it's a prehistoric language. So no sources. So you can't pinpoint the occurance of Verner's law let's say about 500 BC not in Sweden, not in Denmark, not along the Elbe. We can have speculations, educated guesses, all well but no absolutions like Angles preaches.

With regard to Harpstedt-Nienburg, there are indices they spoke a kind of NW block language (see Kuhn 1962, Kuzmenko 2011). But also there no certainties, just speculations...nevertheless little chance they spoke a language that was also common in mid Sweden. At least no indices.

What we do know about introjection is that in BA there was likely a migration of groups with R1b U106 from the Dutch-Danish range towards for example Finland or Lithuania. Modern archeologist like VandKilde have stated that the Dutch-Jutish Sögel-Wohlde culture had a severe impact on NBA. Are there qualified indices that in BA there was a vice versa movement?

My two cents go to the Danish/ Schleswig-Holstein area with regard to be an epicenter of the (proto) Germanic development.....but not in splendid isolation. Look at Koch, the trackrecord of the development of (proto)Germanic is very long and isn't restricted to mid Sweden, what was in EBA a 'major epicenter' in the development of (proto) Germanic, is not necessary that in IA.

Anyhow, this absoluteness has no ground:

I do not feel like the temporal and spatial aspect of Proto-Germanic is at odds with what Angles talks about, especially considering what I shared here + in my post about Bronze and Iron Age interactions in the Malaren Valley over at “The Harbour of the Old North” (not least of which is how Central Sweden continued to be privileged due to its direct contacts/access with the East Baltic). It is the coalescence of many evidence types that we should come to any sort of conclusion on the matter at hand, so in the absence of something like a formal written record, we can track, e.g., phonology, archaeological evidence, loan words between different language groups, genetic evidence, etc., all of which I feel like others have addressed in detail previously. Also find it hard to see Sogel-Wohlde as such a foundational element when Unetice is supposed to be a pan-European trade network encompassing a wide range of groups if I am not mistaken? At least I do not see it as comparable to, e.g., the Baltic contacts that Central Sweden had, or the Nordic Bronze Age as a whole where there was a lot of shared ideas (and shared changes) in social organisation, religious practises, etc. among the regional cultures, but I am welcome to reading more.

RE: Frisia – apologies, slip of the tongue!

[Finn]

I do not feel like the temporal and spatial aspect of Proto-Germanic is at odds with what Angles talks about, especially considering what I shared here + in my post about Bronze and Iron Age interactions in the Malaren Valley over at “The Harbour of the Old North” (not least of which is how Central Sweden continued to be privileged due to its direct contacts/access with the East Baltic). It is the coalescence of many evidence types that we should come to any sort of conclusion on the matter at hand, so in the absence of something like a formal written record, we can track, e.g., phonology, archaeological evidence, loan words between different language groups, genetic evidence, etc., all of which I feel like others have addressed in detail previously. Also find it hard to see Sogel-Wohlde as such a foundational element when Unetice is supposed to be a pan-European trade network encompassing a wide range of groups if I am not mistaken? At least I do not see it as comparable to, e.g., the Baltic contacts that Central Sweden had, or the Nordic Bronze Age as a whole where there was a lot of shared ideas (and shared changes) in social organisation, religious practises, etc. among the regional cultures, but I am welcome to reading more.

RE: Frisia – apologies, slip of the tongue!

Ambiorix how sympathetic as such that, 'your feeling' is that Angles is not wrong. I guess you must agree that can't replace real evidence. And wasn't it Angles himself who refutes "emotional appeals"?

It is the coalescence of many evidence types that we should come to any sort of conclusion on the matter at hand, so in the absence of something like a formal written record, we can track, e.g., phonology, archaeological evidence, loan words between different language groups, genetic evidence, etc., all of which I feel like others have addressed in detail previously

No they can't replace that. Not when you want to pinpoint Verner's law exactly in time and place. The noble science of history doesn't have many principles, nevertheless this is the biggest and basic one.

Besides that the conditions that are described, the seafaring (also towards the Baltics), the spread of R1b U106 (mind some subclades of R1b U106 are connected between Dutch/Denmark and Finland/ Lithuania!), the mixture or R1b U106 and I-M253, the mixture of Single Grave Culture and Funnelbeakers. Gudme as the oldest and important central place, this all makes clear that Denmark and Schleswig-Holstein (Angeln!), have at least the same cards or even better!

[anglesqueville]

Just a reminder: https://genomicatlas.org/2022/07/15/...chaeogenetics/

[anglesqueville]

I admire your patience.

Kärsivällisyyteni on lopussa.

[Finn]

Just a reminder: https://genomicatlas.org/2022/07/15/...chaeogenetics/

Excellent read, perfect done!!!

Just two things, two adds.

First of all when the Ostorf I1 is indeed pre stage I-M253 (thanks Jonik and CopperAxe!), than there is likely a link with Ertebølle and the "Tiefstich TRB" which made a tremendous expansion about 3400 BC.


https://adnaera.com/2018/09/09/a-fir...st-group-adna/

And an add to the map of the Germanic tribes in 475:


some adds:
- the anglo-saxons, were also present in Friesland and Drenthe at that time;
- Frankish territory is too much NW wards

Versloot (2021):



More or less in add to the Anglo-Saxon stream, we see that the site publishes this:

and


When we look at the core Anglo-Saxons Hiddestorf and Issendorf:



and the Dutch:



We can clearly see that the Frisians, and the (Friso) Saxons (Finns, Waldpyk, Afke, Creatags) are basically Anglo-Saxon derived. With in the case of the (Friso) Saxons, Finns (esp Finn mom), Creatags a high HG that may even can have a relationship (hunch!) with the Tiefstisch TRB. May be Frisians Waldpyk, Afke, Elske can have had added Danish Vikings influx (very high Steppe, low EEF) and or the Anglo-Saxons met more empty land?

You clearly see that the southerners the fam Kellebel (Pao, Ella, Kellebel, from Limburg) have a differentiated genetic profile, with a higher EEF and lower Steppe amount.....


Add to the tribal situation in the fifth century (Pieter Geyl 1930/1962):

[Creatag]

Note that I'm 50% Overijssel and 50% border South-Holland/Noord-Brabant