The Northern and Western Europeans (Germans, Celts, etc.) come from what was called the Kurgan civilization in the Russian Steppes around 3000BCE. These are also known as the Aryans and Scythians even Sarmatians sometimes. They were the first to domesticate the horse, and invent the chariot. They migrated south creating people in India and the Middle East. Then they moved north to the slavic lands of nowadays creating Slavs. The Celts and Germanics are direct descendents of these Kurgan people and moved into Europe. Germanics migrated to modern Northern Europe, meanwhile the Celts (Keltoi) moved to Spain and France. Until 100BCE the Keltoi moved to Ireland. Some Celtic Irish monks came into Scotland creating Celt in Scotland. Those are the migrations of modern Northern Europeans, and Western Europeans.

BIBLIOGRAPHY:

http://www.tartanplace.com/tartanhistory/tartanhisear.html - Http://www.tartanplace.com/tartanhistory/tartanhisear.html

http://www.angelfire.com/biz/JardinSilvestre/Celts.html - http://www.angelfire.com/biz/JardinSilvestre/Celts.html

http://www.geocities.com/gardenofdanu/the_kurgan_waves.htm - http://www.geocities.com/gardenofdanu/the_kurgan_waves.htm

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kurgan_culture - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kurgan_culture

It is ok, I have helped excavate the Sarmatian/Scythian (Kurgan) burial sites in Eastern Europe and Kazakhstan and all over Russia. I also found the Keltoi`s (Celts) art was extremely similar aswell.

Yet again the Kurgan is a very promising proven theory. This might help,

http://mockingbird.creighton.edu/english/worldlit/jpegs/migr ate.jpg - http://mockingbird.creighton.edu/english/worldlit/jpegs/migr ate.jpg

http://www.geography.uc.edu/~weisner/courses/216/webmap1/kurgan.gif - http://www.geography.uc.edu/~weisner/courses/216/webmap1/kurgan.gif

I think the point of Exarchus post was to say that southern France is ethnically not composed of Franks, it only was politicaly Frank. and I completely agree with that.

as Komnenos already said, most people migrating were Germanic people, but Alans of Sarmatian origin also had quite some record, together with the Vandals they reached the Iberian peninsula where after what i've read once, the Vandal king did betray them and slaughtered them all, but still carried on teh title Rex Vandalorum et Alani or somethign like that. Romans have also settled Alans in parts of France as Foederati, for example Armorica (Bretagne) whose horsemen were said to have had armorued horses and fought with javelisn from horseback. as well as the Alans setteld at Chalons were they fought udner Sangiban at the battle of teh Catalaunian fields agaisnt the Husn with whom they wanted to side, but Aetius arrived first on the scene and forced them to fight for him. there are also some traces of Sarmatians in britain, like the Artus tale and warfare (Draco standards etc)

The Kurgan also may have been the ancestors of the Hittetes. Since the Migrated south as Kurgans later known as Indo-Iranians.

http://mockingbird.creighton.edu/english/worldlit/jpegs/migrate.jpg - http://mockingbird.creighton.edu/english/worldlit/jpegs/migr ate.jpg

There are many blue-eyed and fairskinned poeple in Tunisia and in neighboring countries. Are they perhaps descendants of the Vandals?

To me the age of migrations is one of the most interesting chapters in history, we're currently studying that period in my history class. I also recently read a book about the battle of Adrianople 378, which spurred my interest.

I like the names of the first frankish kings - Chilperik, Childerik, Dagobert, Pippin - they're quite funny

I have never heard of that show before HAHA.

My country? Yes the Kurgans did come through a root through modern Slavic lands. Creating the Germanics when they settled in Northern Europe. Hope that answers it. The only people in my land were the Sarmatians which died off as well as the Scythians. Then again Poland, and Ukrainians through the middle ages were greatly influenced by Germany, especially Poland.

http://mockingbird.creighton.edu/english/worldlit/jpegs/migr%20ate.jpg - http://mockingbird.creighton.edu/english/worldlit/jpegs/migr %20ate.jpg

KurganRatnik I daresay that the theory you present is un-scientific, out-dated and false. The crucial mistake you have made is:

YOU CAN NOT MAKE LINGUISTICAL CONCLUSIONS BASED ON ARCHAELOGY! You are saying, that the Kurgans came to Europe, and created the languages of modern Europe, and you're even backing it up with the Gimbutas theory! Gimbutas made her conclusion concerning a culture, not a language. There is a difference. It may be, that the Kurgans spoke proto-Indo-European, but atleast use the correct terms! Please don't mix linguistical results with archaelogical in the future. Besides, the "Kurgans" didn't invent the wheel, the Sumerians did. That is how the proto-Indo-European language is traced to north Caucasia, studying the language's loanwords based on chariots and wheels.

On the topic: Did the Franks, Visigoths, Lombards and Burgundians speak Germanic languages still in the 7th century? Or was it a mixture of Latin and their own languages? Or just Latin?

Originally posted by Polish-UkrainianCanadian Where the hell did Germans come from??

From present day Germany

Originally posted by Polish-UkrainianCanadian I meant the Germanic tribes i am sure they came from Indo-European land in Central Asia.

 Apart from the fact, that there is no Indo-European land, yes, the Germanic languages cam from the alleged Indo-European homeland in northern Caucasus mts. We cannot say "the Germanics come from the Kurgans", because this is false. The Kurgans were a culture between 6000-3000BCE, and even though it is now verified, that proto-Indo-European was spoken in that culture, the result was made independently, because language and culture cannot be mixed.

Originally posted by Polish-UkrainianCanadian Holy ****, I meant the Germanic tribes i am sure they came from Indo-European land in Central Asia.

As Komnenos said, the Germanic culture appeared in southern Scandinavia and Northern Germany. The very oldest archaeological traces are from around 700BC in Southern Sweden and the Prussia iirc, and the earliest written record is from 300BC, when Pyteas placed the Teotones in what now is Sweden. There is no point in trying to say the Germanic people came from this or that place, since the word denotes the culture that appeared in Scandinavia/Germany as a probable mix of original inhabitants and immigrants. Similarly, there is no point in saying the Americans come from England, just because quite a few Americans traces their heritage to the English isles.

The linguistic researchers point out the central role of the Armenian language in the I-E languages family.

That's exactly what I wanted to say. Developmet of the particular languages took place much later. I was always suprised that German languages are relatively close to Slavonic ones, however these last were "more conservative".

Originally posted by Styrbiorn Originally posted by Polish-UkrainianCanadian Holy ****, I meant the Germanic tribes i am sure they came from Indo-European land in Central Asia. As Komnenos said, the Germanic culture appeared in southern Scandinavia and Northern Germany. The very oldest archaeological traces are from around 700BC in Southern Sweden and the Prussia iirc, and the earliest written record is from 300BC, when Pyteas placed the Teotones in what now is Sweden. There is no point in trying to say the Germanic people came from this or that place, since the word denotes the culture that appeared in Scandinavia/Germany as a probable mix of original inhabitants and immigrants. Similarly, there is no point in saying the Americans come from England, just because quite a few Americans traces their heritage to the English isles.

Didn't the teutones come from Jutland?

eastern Goths also lived in the Ukraien for some time, i'll never figure out how they could a) defeat teh Sarmatians already living there (if they did, amybe they were co-exisitign peacefully there) and b) survived there without adopting nomadic lifestyle (or maybe they did?)

Well at least the goths were famous for their cavalry, and they had Alan auxiliaries at the battle of Adrianople 378 

The Crimean Goths were remants of Ermanarich's Ostrogothic realm that was based in the Russian Steppe and fell to the Huns in the 370s.  They remained as a distinct entity at least until the 16th century, when an ambassador from Constantinople visited the area and notice the locals speaking a Germanic language.  No idea what happened to them after this though...

Linguistically, the Goths (both Ostrogoths and the Visigoths) were a part of the now extinct East-Germanic language family, along with perhaps the Rugians and the Gepids.

All in all, the entire story of the Völkerwanderung is quite interesting, lasting from 376 to 568.

 Although everything was aspired from the romans systems, the Franks did bring some change in the french language, architecture  and way of war. Basically without the Frank factor, their is no France as we know it today (ile de France was the real France in history). Que voulez-vous? (translate as What do you want), verbs before pronouns, one influence the Franks brought.  Plus before the Franks, the french spoken was very different from after the Frank.

 One thing do you think there is a remote possibility that europeans (not all the celts and germanic, god only knows how they differ) are endemic to Europe rather than they came from somewhere else. THey've migrated there like 30,000 years ago and they evolved with the climatic condition.

 Breton were pure celt, after they invaded the area. No other people have been able to invade them, not even Charlemagne in his glory.

Originally posted by Cywr The Bretons left Britain to get away from the Anglo-Saxons, and now, 1500 years later, the modern day English are migrating to Brittany, buying up old farms and cottages there, driving up local housing prices and making some of the locals unhappy. Oh the Irony

 Hehehehe, what goes around comes around.

Sarmatian tribes have been settled there like in other parts of modern day France, if you want to accept it or not, and note: i did not say bretons were not pure aryan celts, i just said Sarmatians were settled in Bretagne, ok...?

 WHat is an aryan celts?? This is a NAZI philosophy. Hey, I'm not saying anything against the Alans, the Alans did settle in France  (I'm not sure if they had any durable influence). the Alans were formidable cavalry warriors with their trademark dogs. but sincerely I've never heard of them in Armorica. again I could be ignorant about that fact.

 You may have a wrong image of me, but I'm not a racist.

Originally posted by Styrbiorn Originally posted by Polish-UkrainianCanadian Holy ****, I meant the Germanic tribes i am sure they came from Indo-European land in Central Asia. As Komnenos said, the Germanic culture appeared in southern Scandinavia and Northern Germany. The very oldest archaeological traces are from around 700BC in Southern Sweden and the Prussia iirc, and the earliest written record is from 300BC, when Pyteas placed the Teotones in what now is Sweden. There is no point in trying to say the Germanic people came from this or that place, since the word denotes the culture that appeared in Scandinavia/Germany as a probable mix of original inhabitants and immigrants. Similarly, there is no point in saying the Americans come from England, just because quite a few Americans traces their heritage to the English isles.

What archaeological evidence from around 700BC is connected to the Germanic tribes? And who have made the connection?