Roman/Greek Ethnicy and Physical Traits

 

Originally posted by cavalry4ever  They had not too much culturally in common with original inhabitants of Greece or Italy. Francs, Lombards, Visigoths, Ostrogoths etc were germanic tribes that invaded Greece and Rome and managed to mix in with local population

Originally posted by beorna For example if a lot of Germans or Polish share the same geges, that doesn't mean that the Polish are of German origin or Germans of Polish. It just means, that both MAY have the same ancestors, who could have belong to a completely other ethnic group, long before Polish and Germans existed..

Originally posted by Mosquito    Or rather it means that those people live close one to each other for over millenium and mix their blood. Germans have conquered the Slavs on the territories of modern Eastern Germany, germanised Slavs in Silesia and Pomerania. Great migration of Germans to the east, starting from medieval times mixed with local population in Poland. It can say actually nothing about origins or common ancestry but much about long lasted neighbourhood. If you add to this some theories that some tribes that were invading Roman empire were actually not Germanic but Slavic it mixing them all tgether even more (eg. theory that Vandals were Slavic tribe or mix of Slavs and Germans).

I hoped so much we will not come to this :) The Przeworsk-culture has some roots but probably no Slavic. Slavs share the same roots with groups that took part in the Przeworsk-culture. Please don't see it as German nazism but Slavs did never exist before (it is hard to say) 200-400 AC. I would connect the oldest Slavs with the Kiew culture.

Originally posted by cavalry4ever Originally posted by Patrinos   Originally posted by cavalry4ever  They had not too much culturally in common with original inhabitants of Greece or Italy. Francs, Lombards, Visigoths, Ostrogoths etc were germanic tribes that invaded Greece and Rome and managed to mix in with local population One correction. Germanic tribes were established and managed to take control in the Italian peninsula not in the Greek. In Greece Slavs had an impact in the gene pool. Visigoths went through Greece in 4 and 5th centuries. Reason we had these waves of migration because there was a pressure from other tribes that were still east. It is interesting to look at geographical names. Saxony named after Saxons which were pushed far west by newcomers. There are two groups that are worth mentioning: Basques and Albanians. They were in Europe before anyone else.

Visigoths passed through Greece, pillaged,vandalized... but did not settled or established any reign. They were repulsed in the Pholoe mountains in Elis,Peloponnesos.

As I said, it was the Slavs that are recorded to have migrated to mainland Greece, and they've left signs of that migrations in some toponyms,and in northern Greece the slavic element was visible at least till the population exchanges in the beginning of the previous century...

-Basques are considered pre indoeuropean, and its right. But Albanians????? 

Originally posted by Mosquito Well, notion "indoeuropean" has rather linguistic than racial meaning. Genetically many nations are different while linguistically very close. Slavic nations make good example of it. For example Poles are genetically closer to scandinavians than to Balkan slavs but languages of western, eastern and soughtern slavs are related.   This map was posted here in AE many times, so why not once more:

Mosquito, you are partly right about genetically difference through Slavic nations, but on this map as I see (may be mistake!?) Bulgarians have much more higher percent "Gotlander"- ?  than poles. Even more % "Gotlander" than Norwegians. Poles have bigger percent -
something like "Pakistani Kashmiri" gene, than everything else. This map is a mystery for me...
  BTW poles aren`t very close anthropoligical to Scans. In Poland middle eastern element is much more well present, because strong and numerous Jewish community through centuries. Today may be 1/3 of poles have jewish ancestors. There is also strong mongoloid present from Lipka Tatars 
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lipka_Tatars

Originally posted by Kanas_Krumesis

Haplogroup 2 is common in whole europe, than we have a strong Hg 1 in the West and an strong Hg 3 in the east. at the mediteranian coast we have a stronger Hg 21 and 9. Hg 8 and 22 are probably named well with sardinian and Basque but all other names are, let me be handsome, not necessary.

Originally posted by Kanas_Krumesis   Mosquito, you are partly right about genetically difference through Slavic nations, but on this map as I see (may be mistake!?) Bulgarians have much more higher percent "Gotlander"- ?  than poles. Even more % "Gotlander" than Norwegians. Poles have bigger percent - something like "Pakistani Kashmiri" gene, than everything else. This map is a mystery for me...   BTW poles aren`t very close anthropoligical to Scans. In Poland middle eastern element is much more well present, because strong and numerous Jewish community through centuries. Today may be 1/3 of poles have jewish ancestors. There is also strong mongoloid present from Lipka Tatars  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lipka_Tatars

Originally posted by cavalry4ever I messed your post again.  Linguists use geographical names to trace migrations of all groups. There are no Saxons in Saxony. They were pushed west and survived on British Islands. This is where Anglo-Saxons name came from and the name of the region they used to inhabit is still there populated by newer germanic tribes. As a matter of fact all Germans from time of struggle against Romans are not there anymore.

The Saxons weren't pushed west. They just went to the west to make their fortune. It started around 250 that people from the coastal areas of Germany, Danmark and Scandinavia went on Raids along the channel coasts. They were no single ethnos, but a group of different warrior units and at least in the beginning of the 5th century they started to conquer Britannia. Angles, Ambrones, Jutes, Frisians and others were all placed among the term Saxones, which was later displaced by the term Angli or Anglisaxones. The ethnic groups that remained in Northern Germany were also called Saxons from the Franks. But they as well build no single ethnos and at least after the French conquest under Charlemagne they were placed in one sigle reign. during the times of Henry the Lion the duchy was as a unit destroyed but there still was a smaller duchy Saxony. During the times the name wandered east to the Elbe river, where Saxons never lived.

beorna - this was interesting and very in-depth. I think I made just few assumptions about Saxons.

Edited by cavalry4ever - 05-Jan-2010 at 17:37

Originally posted by Mosquito [QUOTE=Kanas_Krumesis] The most weird interpretation of this map iv ever seen. But you hit the point with Pakistani Kashmiri. The map proves that all the indoeuropeans comes probably from the area of northern India/Pakistan.

This map is in general theory and nothing more. I see also some non-sence around Haplogroup names, which make failing conclusions. As Beorna says Haplogroup 2 is common in whole Europe, and this is a central fact in the map for me. Hg 2 is no common in "your" Pakistani Kashmiri-the true one. Also in couple another asian groups. It`s little represent through north africans. For me Haplogroup 2 is a sign of ancient indo-european connection, because we can see it in different proportion among all european population. From another hand, we can see Hg 2 is some asian (Kalash, Brahmins) and north african groups with indo-european connection, known from historical and anthropoligical sources. But as I always says, DNA is just a chemical code.