~3:18 That's not actually why White people are called Caucasian, that term goes back way before people started piecing together the Indo-European language family, and is actually a much weirder story. Basically, back in the 1780s they were still developing what we now call "scientific racism," which was basically trying to apply scientific categorization to humans, but obviously they didn't have genetics, and they were coming up with this stuff in a society with race-based slavery and other sociopolitical factors that heavily skewed how they thought about different groups of people. This guy named Christoph Meiners thought that humans could be divided into two races (which he believed to have entirely different origins), which he described as "beautiful and white" and "ugly and dark" (yes really). In 1785 he came to the conclusion that the Caucasus were the origin for the "beautiful and white race" by looking at a bunch of skulls from different places, and concluding that the skulls of people from the Caucasus were the most beautiful, which he reasoned meant that they were the original type, with everyone less beautiful either having "degenerated" over time or intermixed with the "ugly and dark" race. Hence, he labelled the whole race "Caucasian" (if you're curious, he labelled the "ugly and dark" race as "Mongolian"). Later this same category name was popularized by Johann Friedrich Blumenbach, who probably took the term from Meiners (though unlike Meiners he said there were 5 races, and that rather than having separate origins all of them descended from Caucasians who "degenerated" into the other 4 races due to differences in climate and diet). The term kept getting used in various racial models until it trickled down into our modern colloquial terminology, although most scientists have abandoned terms like that since genetics revealed those old categories to be biologically invalid.
There was also an East Germanic language family. It was spoken in eastern parts of modern Germany, in the Polabian areas, and Western Poland. The East Germanic Language Speakers went as far west and south as Ukraine and the last living speakers of an Eastern Germanic Language lived in the Crimea in the 18th century But when those peoples switched to speaking other languages, the East Germanic Language family went extinct.
You have to be careful to make a distinction between "German" and "Germanic." Anything "German" refers to the history and people of any places historically referred to as "Germany," especially since the Frankish Empire boke up into the West (France) and East (Germany). The word "Germanic" refers to a larger group of people who can trace their linguistic origins back to what appears to have been a common language at one time, perhaps 3000 to 5000 years ago. That Germanic groups of languages includes North, East, and West Germanic languages. East German dialects/varieties are direct descendants of dialects/varieties spoken in the region historically referred to as Germany. The Eastern Germanic languages (most definitely all Gothic varieties, and perhaps Vandal and Burgundian) went extinct when they were superseded by other languages spoken in their regions, although some words and perhaps even grammatic idiosyncrasies survive in the languages that superseded them. The ancestors of the Goths simply merged with the rest of the population of Spain, Southern France, Italy. The topic of East German dialects/varieties is a lot more complex (in part we just know a lot more about them) and also politically sensitive, because they involve centuries of conquest and diasporas. German speaking communities used to be much more common and more far spread over large areas of Eastern Europe. I would like to include Yiddish communities, since Yiddish is derived from German, although it is today considered a distinct language. The boundaries of Germany have varied widely. Today's Federal Republic of Germany is a relatively small part of all the parts of Europe that were at one time considered or marked as "Germany" on a map. The same of course can be said about France, Poland, Sweden, Austria, and many other nation states.
@loquidity4973 i agree with your destinctions, and so I have edited my post to reflect the destinction between german and germanic. Thanks for the clarification and additional history.
@@loquidity4973 You have some of the more intelligent readers of your contributions. Obviously, because you give us some of the more intelligent contributions.
Anmerkung zu der Differenzierung zwischen genetischer Herkunft und Sprache/Kultur: Ich habe auch mal so einen Test gemacht und komme auf einen Mix aus 40% Britisch, 60% Deutsch. Dazu über 2% Neanderthaler und Verweis auf überdurchschnittliche Verwandtschaft mit norwegischen Wikingern. Dazu kommt dann noch, dass meine Familie mütterlicherseits ursprünglich aus dem Grenzgebiet zwischen keltischer Kultur und germanischer Kultur kommt und aus einer Gegend, die erst während Caesars gallischen Kriegen (aus bisher unbekannten Gründen) von den Kelten mehr oder weniger verlassen wurde - archäologische Funde deuten eine allerdings nicht vollständige Umsiedlung nach Köln an - und die erst danach peu a peu von Germanen besiedelt wurde. Dabei geht die Archäologie aktuell wohl von einer Kontinuität der Besiedlung aus und davon, dass maximal eine kleine Oberschicht von vielleicht einigen hundert Individuen von Norden her einwanderte, die politische Herrschaft übernahm und die eigene Sprache mitbrachte. Väterlicherseits kommt meine Familie direkt vom Limes (im Ort gab es ein Kastell). Das würde erklären, warum ich väterlicherseits von einer Haplogruppe abstamme, die wohl voreiszeitlich schon in Europa weit verbreitet war und die heute vor allem auf dem Balkan (Bosnien, Albanien, Kroatien usw.) weit verbreitet ist, obgleich ich keinerlei Kenntnis über entsprechende Familienbande dorthin hätte - ich vermute daher, dass einer meiner Vorfahren römischer Legionär aus Dalmatien oder Illyrien gewesen sein wird, der sich dann am Main niederließ. Wie ich zu meinen englischen Genen komme - keine Ahnung. Ich habe allerdings Vorfahren, die sich Garth schreiben, mit th, was ja auf eine entsprechende Herkunft deuten könnte. Nix genaues weiß man aber. Auch, warum ich nun ausgerechnet mit den norwegischen Wikingern verwandt sein soll, ist mir schleierhaft, wobei ich vermute, dass da die sehr alte Haplogruppe väterlicherseits eine Rolle spielt, die vor allem in abgelegenen Regionen überlebt hat, während sie aus den wärmeren und besser zur Landwirtschaft geeigneten Gegenden - vielleicht ja durch die Indo-Germanen - verdrängt wurde und Norwegen fällt da auf alle Fälle mit rein. Historisch gesehen ist meine Herkunft also über die Jahrtausende sehr, sehr durchmischt, meine Vorfahren waren Kelten, Römer, vielleicht Illyrer und irgendwann auch Germanen. Dass wir alle nun Deutsche sind ist wohl eher eine Momentaufnahme in der Geschichte, denn Kulturen befinden sich ja stets im Wandel. Und allein schon wenn ich mir anschaue, welche Rolle Englisch als Lingua Franka unter uns bekommen hat, ist natürlich die Frage offen, ob wir in 100 oder 200 Jahren denn noch Deutsche, Amerikaner, Franzosen und Briten haben oder ob das eine generell "Westliche" Kultur sein wird, der man dann angehört, in der man Englisch spricht und in der die Menschen so über Deutsche, Amerikaner, Franzosen und Briten denken und reden, wie wir heute über Kelten, Germanen und Römer denken und reden.
Danke für den genialen Kommentar und die Zusammenfassung Ihrer eigenen Abstammungsgeschichte! Ihre gleichzeitige Verwandtschaft mit Wikingern und Briten kann ich mir nur so erklären, dass Sie wohl auch Vorfahren haben, die aus dem norddeutschen und süd-skandinavischen Raum kamen, wo natürlich auch viele Vorfahren der modernen groß-britischen Bevölkerung herkamen.
@@loquidity4973 My grandmother was actually Lithuanian, While my grandfather's father's family came to East Prussia from Berchtesgaden during the religious wars. They were the rich ones, not the Lithuanian side. My grandmother happened to be a very beautiful young woman, and my grandfather was kicked out of the family, because he insisted on marrying her. That is how they came to Essen. From my father's side, his maternal side was from the Belgium/ Germany border area, the Belgian side. His Paternal side was from Pommern, the Sorbic area. So you see, that I have the perfect, relatively modern, German mix of genes. I have often said that, since the Mongols got about as far as Pommern, there must be a few drops of Mongol blood in my veins.
@@loquidity4973 You know, I can never help but smile, when I think of my maternal grandfather's family. They felt themselves so rich and above my Lithuanian grandmother that they kicked my grandfather out of the family. They had a lot of land and a big farm, as well as a construction business. And then the Russians came and it was all gone and they ended up with nothing. The well deserved turn around. Come to think about it, I actually had the military, Prussian, passport of one of my Sorbic forefathers from the 1840s. Wow! Those long marches those guys made through Germany and France, and all the fighting they had to do. If today's Soldiers had to do that, they would probably cry.
@@Fritz999 Sounds like a case of "pride before the fall." I wish I knew more about the Silesian branch of my family, which included some Hungarians, but they thought of themselves very much as Germans. Since that branch was also Catholic, it would not be unthinkable that there may have been some intermarriages with Poles. Unfortunately, my Silesian grandfather died before I was born, so I never had an opportunity to learn anything directly from him, and my father seems to know very little. So, I could have some long lost Polish cousins.
You forgot one major daughter language which is Afrikaans. It was brought to South Africa and Namibia by Dutch/Flemish settlers and develloped its own features.
A good documentary, which is difficult to flaw. You don't get round to discussing why the current language that we know of as German is actually High German, from the highlands, as opposed to Low German. In fact, English and Dutch/Flemish are closer to Protogermanic than High German is. You also could go into the pre-IndoEuropeans of Western Europe more. The British isles, for instance, had been occupied before the last ice age, but during the time of the ice was totally empty of humans. The humans started moving back into the British Isles about 10,000 BC, as the ice receded. They would have been a mixture of different tribes, and we don't know what they called each other or what languages they spoke, because they left no written records. The Celts didn't start arriving until about 400 BC, and they were never a majority. But, I imagine, the Ancient Britons starting using Celtic as a common language between tribes, so that, by the time the Romans arrived, they appeared to be entirely Celtic, although they were not. Again, the Angles, Saxons, etc., were never a majority, so the British people to this day, other than those recently immigrating from other areas, are still mainly Ancient Britons. The other thing you should mention is that the Neanderthals left Africa many years before modern humans, and they occupied most of Europe and the Middle East before our ancestors arrived. The humans that populated the British Isles 80,000 years ago, were probably almost entirely Neanderthals, but they would have migrated back to southern Europe as the ice advanced, across the land bridge where the English Channel now is.
Greetings, my roots are in Eastern Prussian Masuria and I ofc share more genes with my Eastern European neighbors. Nevertheless my family considered themselves German for many generations, yet we kept Slavic surnames. It was always quite multi cultural in Europe and thanks to archaeogenetics we also got to know that the so called Germanic tribes or Slavic tribes were much more diverse than modern historians believed. Cultures can have many different bearers, but languages unites them.
Thanks for that valuable insight! Yes, Prussians especially absorbed lots of Slavic, Baltic, and even Finno-Ugric people. I think many Baltic and Western Slavs have absorbed many Germanic people as well. We are all a mixed bunch! 🙂
It all depends on perspective. If you believe that language is the bedrock of culture vs genetics, customs, technology, etc then you will inevitably have a different take on how you percieve the cultural cohesiveness of these Iron Age tribes.
Very good summary. It should also be pointed out that the modern form of Standard German (in Germany itself i.e. Hochdeutsch) is actually a relatively phenomenon dating from sometime in the 18th century. On the other hand, Modern English dates from the early 16th century. So, when you hear, as is often the case, “English comes from German” this is actually incorrect as modern English pre-dates modern German by at least two centuries.
This is always an overall overview important in understanding any and all Indo- European languages and their relative commonality. You may have already done the diversion of West Germanic languages and their sub dialects. I believe it would require several episodes to include all of them but still from a strictly linguistic investigation, it could be quite interesting. Dealing with the variety of vowel and consonant evolution (plus other distinctions i.e evolution of word meanings. ) over the centuries. It would also need at least a comparison of present day dialects in Germany. The Netherlands and England/ Britain in separate episodes even though there are similarities with other German dialects. Thank you for this much wider focus for today. Again, you may have already done such topics.
Thanks for your comment. This was just an attempt to explain the very basics of the topics. You are right. A thorough investigation would require an entire series of videos.
Simply what an excellent all-round concise, yet comprehensive video. Very well meaning and broad-minded. Full credit to you, and today's liberal-minded Germany. I have found many of your video uploads, esp. on the parallels between English and German, very interesting. For my work I have to have a working knowledge of printed German, in the field of academic philosophy. From Immanuel Kant's 18th-c Prussian German, to Nietzsche, Martin Heidegger and everything in between. I suppose, not that differently from how people in my work have to have a working knowledge of ancient Greek. (I actually both speak, read & write modern Greek and ancient, too.) Still, your videos are an excellent prompt to me to take my German language engagement to the next level and learn German as a living, breathing language of a country and a people and not only as a terminology of a thinker. Excellent videos, please keep uploading them.
Thank you for your kind and encouraging words! That means so much to me. I am impressed by anyone who knows ancient (and modern!) Greek in addition to the more commonly spoken modern languages.
"Eastern Europe" is more likely Slavic countries. My Slavic (13% in latest Ancestry update) is now southwestern and southern Poland. But I do wonder how the Hungarians come out on these tests. A big part of my "Germanic Europe" is Silesia (Schlesien in German, Slask in Polish). Silesia was culturally German for 800 years, with some influence from the Slavs (hence my 13%), but now, of course, it's Polish. The German population was forcibly expelled in 1945. I also have a bit of Neanderthal. These testing services have an obsession with Neanderthals.
We might be distant cousins then. My paternal grandfather was Silesian, ethnic German with a little bit of Hungarian. Of course I could also have Polish and other West Slavic ancestry, but none has been mentioned to me by members of my family.
From what I've heard, although I don't know if it's true, the population of Germany is supposedly the most genetically diverse in Europe, owed mainly to it's geographic location, being in the middle of the continent with its large stretches of flat land in the North. Conducive to migration, warfare, trade and so on, as you can see in our history. Although "most genetically diverse in Europe" still isn't that diverse, in the grand scheme of things.
And the common language has seen massive changes in the last 100 some years. Check the phone books in the Ruhrvally. Great numbers of none-German names.
One of the small languages which is still spoken to some extent is Scots. It was one of the two languages that came from Old English which is taught as a foreign language in some universities. It isn’t intelligible to English and Scots speakers today.
This posting avers to focus on the German language, but very little was said on this topic. Instead we are served a long-winded narration on how diverse German origins are, to the point that one can hardly discern any national identity. It plays down the common ancestry and national cohesion depicting ethnicity as almost irrelevant and shared history as marginal, quote:" the Roman's conquered many German tribes, but not all." The fact: Romans failed to subjugate Germans and went on rhe defensive after the shattering defeat at Teutoburg. Being German is more than a social construct, but a shared ethnicity and history.
I am a native English speaker although I have barely any ethnic English ancestry. However my ancestors spoke at least 5 different Germanic languages over the past few hundred years. I'm sure you know that there are strong regional identities in Germany that might not be so obvious to outsiders.
Oh, yes, regional dialects are still an important aspect of people's identity in Germany. Sadly, some dialects are a bit in decline and it becomes more and more difficult to find "waschechte Sprecher" . . . true dialect speakers. We also have a few distinct minority languages that are spoken in parts of Germany: Frisian, Danish, and Sorbian/Wendish. Thanks for your comment! 🙂
Oh, for sure. Then there is the fact that that a few of the old tribal German languages still exist, and are spoken. For instance: Frankish Saxon Suevi Frisian And so forth Those I mentioned I had to actually learn just to get along with the native speakers. Not Frisian, though I learned enough to understand most of it. I forgot Bavarian. Never spoke it, but understood.
@@Fritz999 Good, for you! I also always though of myself as multi-dialectal . . . if not multi-lingual. If the Wittelsbach and Habsburg families had combined their dominions and set out to form a distinct nationality, like the good people of the Netherlands, Austro-Bavarian could very well have become a distinct language in its own right.
If you listen to very few living assyrians and germans they sound similar but they picke up other languages the germans inter slavic etc thats why sound very little to a little diffrent but you could hear predominantly assyrian
Yes, I should have chosen my words more carefully. Realistically it takes generations for newcomers to become properly absorbed. I can see it even here where I live where there had been distinct waves of immigrants from specific places. Of course that depends on one's definition of cultural absorption as well. And, it is so sad to see people lose much of their identity as they become part of the mainstream. For instance, there are many Italians that settled in Pennsylvania, and most of them know only a few words in Italian.
Quite nice, specially all the pitfalls (like ancestry Language) that are mentioned. One very minor critique: East Germanic also existed. One major critique: some treatise of dialect vs standard language. Specially since the German standard language is a crafted patchwork (for bible translation purposes) of widely differing dialects, which all form a continuum together with the other continental West Germanic languages/dialects (and even English and its parts, though that is longer ago). Since "German langauge" is the core subject of the video, that caveat would have been worth mentioning IMHO.
Duly noted! Thanks for commenting! I cut out a lot of things from my original filming (I always do and have to), and the part about the now extinct Germanic languages must have fallen to the cutting knife. I think your second critique warrant a separate video and would be a very good topic to discuss. The entire dialect-versus-language discourse is as treacherous as it is fun. In this video, I really just wanted to share "some" of my major thoughts on the topic, as a essay more than a comprehensive overview. Thanks! 🙂
I am the opposite of you. I am an American and was born in the US and now live in Germany. I speak German as a second language but not as well as you speak English. So speaking of people mixing, my wife is German and I have given a large chunk of my Celtic genes to my red headed daughters.
@@egilsandnes9637 Don't underestimate cultural norms when it comes to whether people will accept you as one of their own! My recycling comment was meant to get people to laugh, but it was also meant as a serious example of an important cultural norm, especially when one compares Germans to Americans.
Great video. We share the same views on ethnicity I see. I’m French. My genetics are mainly Frankish. My father’s matches the Scordisci and my mother’s the Anglo Saxons and Franks. Quite a mix!
The Fränkisch language is still alive close to the French border. On both sides of the border. Don't let anybody tell you different. Of course it too has changed somewhat.
@@Fritz999 Thanks for explaining! I think Luxemburgish is an especially interesting exemplar of the Frankish languages and dialects, since it had been protected through the sovereignty of Luxemburg.
I have always wondered a little, how fast the change from Fränkisch to French happened when, after all, Fränkisch still exists. Even now. The Franks may not have been the Majority in the new conquered lands, but they were the conquerers and Masters.
Eines der besten Zusammenfassungen zur deutschen Ursprungserklärung! Für Amerikaner absolut notwendig, da sie deutsche Identität & Kultur doch sehr rassifiziert interpretieren (s. eines der untenstehendes Kommentare)und oft eigentümlich romantisieren. Als Afrodeutsche empfinde ich dies als sehr unangenehm, auch im Umgang mit Afroamerikaner:innen. Einer der Gründe, warum ich mich damals dagegen entschieden habe, in den USA zu leben, obwohl ich die Möglichkeit hatte. Der Witz ist das meine anderen beiden Herkunftsländer (Südafrika & Japan) sowieso eigenartige Beziehungen zu Deutschland pflegten, vor meiner Geburt. In meiner deutschen Familie gab es auch große kulturelle Unterschiede: Als norddeutsches Kind verstand ich Platt, & Missingsch aber nur mühsam das Hessisch meiner Uroma!
What does interest me is the strong prevalence of blond hair and blue eyes in the northern Germanic peoples. Probably before all the intermingling caused by contact with the expanding Roman Empire, would also have been higher in southern Germanic tribes. The reason is that blue eyes and blond hair are recessive traits, meaning that according to Medellin genetics, blond hair and blue eyes should never be more than 25% of a population, most likely in reality only around 15% of a population. Yet the prevalence of blond hair and blue eyes can reach almost 100% in certain areas and probably was that high everywhere in the Germanic peoples before intermingling began. A biological impossibility if these traits originated in dark genetic stock out of Africa. Where are the dark genes of the founder stock? And yes I have heard about a lack of sunlight and vitamin D being responsible for their prevalence, but that doesn't explain why Eskimos, Siberians and Tibetans are also not blond hair and blue eyes, if a lack of sunlight and vitamin D eradicated the dark genes from the Nordic stock leaving only the fair genes to survive. These other non Germanic peoples living at high latitudes and altitudes prove that dark genes can survive and thrive in such areas. Where are the original dark dominant genes of the Germanic peoples? The 75 - 85% representation of dark dominant genes in the Germanic/Nordic peoples. This is a question, a conundrum, that makes me think most experts are doing a thumbsuck about the origins of the human race. The fact they only decided recently that the Neanderthals were a contemporary human species and not a missing link, proves how little they really know. Two answers come to mind. One, the Germanic and possibly the Celtic people evolved separate from the other races, mainly because when blond hair and blue eyed genes are mixed with genes from other non European peoples, incomplete dominance occurs, indicating that the blond hair and blue eyes behave as dominant genes and not recessive genes when encountering non European genes. Two, it is possible that in the past, a bottleneck occurred in northern Europe where only those with blond hair and blue eyes survived, perhaps years of weak sunlight due to a major volcanic eruption, eradicated the dark genes in certain areas like northern Europe. Either way, the absence of majority dark genes along with incomplete dominance that occurs in the offspring between European and non European, indicates that blond hair and blue eyes did not originate as recessive genes from outside the European bloodline, implying a separate evolutionary story than that of a common genetic origin in Africa. In Pangaea maybe, but not Africa.
I don't have an answer to that question, but my guess is that light complexion in hair and eye color may have started as a genetic mutation that happened to be competitive amongst others for whatever reason. I do disagree that blond hair and blue eyes are strictly Germanic traits, though. They are probably not even germane to only Indo-European. I am German, and my air was very dark before it turned gray. I wonder if red hair keeps you up at night as much as blond hair. ;P
@@loquidity4973 red hair and blond hair are the same, just different expression of the same gene. I suspect that originally the Celtic people and the Germanic peoples were from the same ancestral stock. Which as I have said have to have had either a different origin or have split from the rest long before the current estimates. Long enough for what is essentially a recessive gene in the European bloodline, to behave as a dominant gene when encountering non European genes, resulting in bi-racial kids that clearly indicates that incomplete dominance has occurred. Something that is impossible with recessive genes such as blond hair and blue eyes. I must admit that I haven't studied the red hair gene as much, so I'm not sure if it behaves in the same manner or not within the European gene pool as the blond gene, but it certainly will result in incomplete dominance when crossed with non European genes. The evidence of incomplete dominance is sufficient to declare humans as different species when it occurs between two obviously and visibly different people groups. This is something science is scared to do, due to the potential political backlash. But it is obvious to all who have an understanding of genetics.
Here we have another American projecting his Rassenwahn fantasies on our country! Yes, like it or bite it - I am German - non of your „biracial“ Kind & not incomplete! You are absolutely biased! From a scientific viewpoint: Blond hair & blue eyes are not exclusively a „Germanic“ or „Celtic“ (collective terms which are Roman inventions) characteristic: Such groups had already migrated to Israel 6,500 years ago - from Zagros & Anatolia! Furthermore, it’s common among the Kalash in India or Pashtun in Afghanistan - so much for your exclusion of an Asian origin. Needless to mention the black pacific people with blond hair or North African Kabyle or „unmixed“ Africans with dark brown skin & blue eyes … The colour of hair, eyes & the skin can be caused by different alleles even the look is similar. There is more to national characteristics than looks - it took hundreds of years to forge German into a functional nation because regional rulers love their authority & autonomy- nothing has changed - proven by the incoherent corona measures which differed extremely among the Bundesländer. Anyway, keep on fantasising about the most horrible chapter in our history which didn’t allow my kind & other kind of „impure“ Germans‘ existence - sorry, to disappoint you - this „good old“ Germany doesn’t exist anymore - but over here children learn in school that Pangaea fell apart billions of years before our our species occurred - apparently our school system - far from the the best in the EU - is much better than wherever you are from
@@masehoart7569 the reason why the peoples in those Asian countries you list have blue eyes and light skin, is because they are the mixed descendants of the Eastern Germanic tribes and the Mongols and Turks who overrun and conquered them. The gene causing blond hair in that island tribe is a different mutation from the gene causing blond hair in Europeans. If anything, you bringing them up supports my question about why are recessive blond hair and blue eyes so prevalent in Europe? Look at the percentage of blond haired Islanders to non blond haired Islanders and that percentage should be reflected in the European population as well, but it is not. Thus I question this anomaly. For the record and in answer to your assumptions, I think Hitler was an idiot, if anyone tells you that Hitler was a white nationalist, ask them why over 75 million whites died because of Hitler and his failed conquest of Europe. I laugh when I see white nationalist groups praising Hitler as their hero. Idiots, Hitler is responsible for the death and suffering of more white Europeans than the black plague.
@@masehoart7569 forgot to mention the North Africans. DNA tests done on mummies in Egypt buried in the pyramids, shows that they are related to Europeans and not to Africans from south of the Sahara desert. If not for the Arab conquest and occupation of North Africa, the modern day descendants of the original North African inhabitants, would be very European in looks and coloring, as some of the more isolated Berber tribes are.
This is an interesting topic, though there are other theories about what part of the world our basic origins are. That is all they are, theories. We will most likely never know the hard facts. I enjoyed the video.
Thank you for your comment! I am inclined to agree with you in regard to the theories. New discoveries are made every day, but there will always be something left to explore.
the evidence for the Yamnaya being carriers of proto indoeuropean seems pretty solid at this point. Of course there will always be an earlier stage that we dont know about yet and maybe will never know about
I'm not sure I understood the point you made about "I have 2% neanderthal dna, therefor I have pre indoeuropean ancestors" correctly. Does that mean that indoeuropeans at some point did not have any neanderthal admixture? If so, why would that be the case?
So, since the Neanderthal people became extinct around 40,000 years ago, and Indo-Europeans came to Europe much later (probably between 5000 and 8000 years in East-central Europe), some of my ancestors must have existed in Europe well before Indo-Europeans. I must have ancestors who procreated with Neanderthal people, and for that to have happened, they must have already been in Europe at least 40,000 years ago. Does that make sense? Thanks for your question!
@@loquidity4973 The Neanderthals where wide spread in Eurasia, including the Caucasus region. It can be that the Indo-Europeans already had Neanderthal DNA before they started their journey to the west.
@@12tanuha21 Hmmmm, that's true . . . so I need to have another séance with my Neanderthal ancestors to confirm . . . no, seriously, that was an oversight on my part. It could be that I have no European roots that are older than 5000 years then. On the hand, I could have some European ancestors that go back more than 50,000 years. Yet, on another note, it is geographically nonsensical to divide Europe and Asia into two continents. Just as the concept of "race" it is a construct, helping us to see the world the way we want to see it. Thanks for your comment!
The Neanderthal were in Central Asia and the Middle East so the original Indo-European speakers could have some Neanderthal ancestry and you could have had Neanderthal DNA from them rather than the original Europeans.
The proto Indo-european is concocted lie! The real proto Aryan language is Rigvedic Sanskrit! Without which even European dont know that they evolved from common ancestor! Rigvedic Sanskrit and Sanskrit grammar helped to identifiy those Indo-european dialects and their association! AryaVartha is origin of Aryans and is Northern India where Aryans atleast living around 10000 years or more and moved away from ancient India by various time period for various reasons! Rigveda gives elaborate details on ten kings war or Dasarajna wgich paved major migration of Aryan families from ancient India which happened around 6000 years ago.Most Germanic tribes were part of that migration!
Thanks for bringing up the Sanskrit texts and language, which are incredibly important puzzle pieces to the greater picture of the Indo-European language family and the history of the peoples who have spoken them. I think calling it a concocted lie is a bit strong of an accusation. I feel that most people who study languages are open to learning new information. Are you a language scholar fluent in Sanskrit?
~3:18 That's not actually why White people are called Caucasian, that term goes back way before people started piecing together the Indo-European language family, and is actually a much weirder story. Basically, back in the 1780s they were still developing what we now call "scientific racism," which was basically trying to apply scientific categorization to humans, but obviously they didn't have genetics, and they were coming up with this stuff in a society with race-based slavery and other sociopolitical factors that heavily skewed how they thought about different groups of people. This guy named Christoph Meiners thought that humans could be divided into two races (which he believed to have entirely different origins), which he described as "beautiful and white" and "ugly and dark" (yes really). In 1785 he came to the conclusion that the Caucasus were the origin for the "beautiful and white race" by looking at a bunch of skulls from different places, and concluding that the skulls of people from the Caucasus were the most beautiful, which he reasoned meant that they were the original type, with everyone less beautiful either having "degenerated" over time or intermixed with the "ugly and dark" race. Hence, he labelled the whole race "Caucasian" (if you're curious, he labelled the "ugly and dark" race as "Mongolian"). Later this same category name was popularized by Johann Friedrich Blumenbach, who probably took the term from Meiners (though unlike Meiners he said there were 5 races, and that rather than having separate origins all of them descended from Caucasians who "degenerated" into the other 4 races due to differences in climate and diet). The term kept getting used in various racial models until it trickled down into our modern colloquial terminology, although most scientists have abandoned terms like that since genetics revealed those old categories to be biologically invalid.
Thank you for explaining!
There was also an East Germanic language family. It was spoken in eastern parts of modern Germany, in the Polabian areas, and Western Poland. The East Germanic Language Speakers went as far west and south as Ukraine and the last living speakers of an Eastern Germanic Language lived in the Crimea in the 18th century But when those peoples switched to speaking other languages, the East Germanic Language family went extinct.
You have to be careful to make a distinction between "German" and "Germanic." Anything "German" refers to the history and people of any places historically referred to as "Germany," especially since the Frankish Empire boke up into the West (France) and East (Germany). The word "Germanic" refers to a larger group of people who can trace their linguistic origins back to what appears to have been a common language at one time, perhaps 3000 to 5000 years ago. That Germanic groups of languages includes North, East, and West Germanic languages. East German dialects/varieties are direct descendants of dialects/varieties spoken in the region historically referred to as Germany.
The Eastern Germanic languages (most definitely all Gothic varieties, and perhaps Vandal and Burgundian) went extinct when they were superseded by other languages spoken in their regions, although some words and perhaps even grammatic idiosyncrasies survive in the languages that superseded them. The ancestors of the Goths simply merged with the rest of the population of Spain, Southern France, Italy.
The topic of East German dialects/varieties is a lot more complex (in part we just know a lot more about them) and also politically sensitive, because they involve centuries of conquest and diasporas. German speaking communities used to be much more common and more far spread over large areas of Eastern Europe. I would like to include Yiddish communities, since Yiddish is derived from German, although it is today considered a distinct language. The boundaries of Germany have varied widely. Today's Federal Republic of Germany is a relatively small part of all the parts of Europe that were at one time considered or marked as "Germany" on a map. The same of course can be said about France, Poland, Sweden, Austria, and many other nation states.
@loquidity4973 i agree with your destinctions, and so I have edited my post to reflect the destinction between german and germanic. Thanks for the clarification and additional history.
@@torfinnzempel6123 Thank you for the topic and the comment!
@@loquidity4973
You have some of the more intelligent readers of your contributions.
Obviously, because you give us some of the more intelligent contributions.
@@Fritz999 I try 🙂 Thanks!
Anmerkung zu der Differenzierung zwischen genetischer Herkunft und Sprache/Kultur: Ich habe auch mal so einen Test gemacht und komme auf einen Mix aus 40% Britisch, 60% Deutsch. Dazu über 2% Neanderthaler und Verweis auf überdurchschnittliche Verwandtschaft mit norwegischen Wikingern.
Dazu kommt dann noch, dass meine Familie mütterlicherseits ursprünglich aus dem Grenzgebiet zwischen keltischer Kultur und germanischer Kultur kommt und aus einer Gegend, die erst während Caesars gallischen Kriegen (aus bisher unbekannten Gründen) von den Kelten mehr oder weniger verlassen wurde - archäologische Funde deuten eine allerdings nicht vollständige Umsiedlung nach Köln an - und die erst danach peu a peu von Germanen besiedelt wurde. Dabei geht die Archäologie aktuell wohl von einer Kontinuität der Besiedlung aus und davon, dass maximal eine kleine Oberschicht von vielleicht einigen hundert Individuen von Norden her einwanderte, die politische Herrschaft übernahm und die eigene Sprache mitbrachte.
Väterlicherseits kommt meine Familie direkt vom Limes (im Ort gab es ein Kastell). Das würde erklären, warum ich väterlicherseits von einer Haplogruppe abstamme, die wohl voreiszeitlich schon in Europa weit verbreitet war und die heute vor allem auf dem Balkan (Bosnien, Albanien, Kroatien usw.) weit verbreitet ist, obgleich ich keinerlei Kenntnis über entsprechende Familienbande dorthin hätte - ich vermute daher, dass einer meiner Vorfahren römischer Legionär aus Dalmatien oder Illyrien gewesen sein wird, der sich dann am Main niederließ.
Wie ich zu meinen englischen Genen komme - keine Ahnung. Ich habe allerdings Vorfahren, die sich Garth schreiben, mit th, was ja auf eine entsprechende Herkunft deuten könnte. Nix genaues weiß man aber.
Auch, warum ich nun ausgerechnet mit den norwegischen Wikingern verwandt sein soll, ist mir schleierhaft, wobei ich vermute, dass da die sehr alte Haplogruppe väterlicherseits eine Rolle spielt, die vor allem in abgelegenen Regionen überlebt hat, während sie aus den wärmeren und besser zur Landwirtschaft geeigneten Gegenden - vielleicht ja durch die Indo-Germanen - verdrängt wurde und Norwegen fällt da auf alle Fälle mit rein.
Historisch gesehen ist meine Herkunft also über die Jahrtausende sehr, sehr durchmischt, meine Vorfahren waren Kelten, Römer, vielleicht Illyrer und irgendwann auch Germanen. Dass wir alle nun Deutsche sind ist wohl eher eine Momentaufnahme in der Geschichte, denn Kulturen befinden sich ja stets im Wandel. Und allein schon wenn ich mir anschaue, welche Rolle Englisch als Lingua Franka unter uns bekommen hat, ist natürlich die Frage offen, ob wir in 100 oder 200 Jahren denn noch Deutsche, Amerikaner, Franzosen und Briten haben oder ob das eine generell "Westliche" Kultur sein wird, der man dann angehört, in der man Englisch spricht und in der die Menschen so über Deutsche, Amerikaner, Franzosen und Briten denken und reden, wie wir heute über Kelten, Germanen und Römer denken und reden.
Danke für den genialen Kommentar und die Zusammenfassung Ihrer eigenen Abstammungsgeschichte! Ihre gleichzeitige Verwandtschaft mit Wikingern und Briten kann ich mir nur so erklären, dass Sie wohl auch Vorfahren haben, die aus dem norddeutschen und süd-skandinavischen Raum kamen, wo natürlich auch viele Vorfahren der modernen groß-britischen Bevölkerung herkamen.
My mother's parents came from Goldap in East Prussia.
Do you know how they identified ethnically? East Prussia has a very interesting history.
@@loquidity4973
My grandmother was actually Lithuanian,
While my grandfather's father's family came to East Prussia from Berchtesgaden during the religious wars.
They were the rich ones, not the Lithuanian side. My grandmother happened to be a very beautiful young woman, and my grandfather was kicked out of the family, because he insisted on marrying her.
That is how they came to Essen.
From my father's side, his maternal side was from the Belgium/ Germany border area, the Belgian side.
His Paternal side was from Pommern, the Sorbic area.
So you see, that I have the perfect, relatively modern, German mix of genes.
I have often said that, since the Mongols got about as far as Pommern, there must be a few drops of Mongol blood in my veins.
@@Fritz999 Yes, your family history is more typical than atypical for people of German background. Wow, what a history! Thanks for sharing!
@@loquidity4973
You know, I can never help but smile, when I think of my maternal grandfather's family.
They felt themselves so rich and above my Lithuanian grandmother that they kicked my grandfather out of the family.
They had a lot of land and a big farm, as well as a construction business.
And then the Russians came and it was all gone and they ended up with nothing. The well deserved turn around.
Come to think about it, I actually had the military, Prussian, passport of one of my Sorbic forefathers from the 1840s.
Wow! Those long marches those guys made through Germany and France, and all the fighting they had to do.
If today's Soldiers had to do that, they would probably cry.
@@Fritz999 Sounds like a case of "pride before the fall." I wish I knew more about the Silesian branch of my family, which included some Hungarians, but they thought of themselves very much as Germans. Since that branch was also Catholic, it would not be unthinkable that there may have been some intermarriages with Poles. Unfortunately, my Silesian grandfather died before I was born, so I never had an opportunity to learn anything directly from him, and my father seems to know very little. So, I could have some long lost Polish cousins.
You forgot one major daughter language which is Afrikaans. It was brought to South Africa and Namibia by Dutch/Flemish settlers and develloped its own features.
Yes, Afrikaans is a significant language in southern Africa and it is part of the West Germanic language family. Thanks for pointing that out!
A good documentary, which is difficult to flaw.
You don't get round to discussing why the current language that we know of as German is actually High German, from the highlands, as opposed to Low German. In fact, English and Dutch/Flemish are closer to Protogermanic than High German is.
You also could go into the pre-IndoEuropeans of Western Europe more. The British isles, for instance, had been occupied before the last ice age, but during the time of the ice was totally empty of humans. The humans started moving back into the British Isles about 10,000 BC, as the ice receded. They would have been a mixture of different tribes, and we don't know what they called each other or what languages they spoke, because they left no written records. The Celts didn't start arriving until about 400 BC, and they were never a majority. But, I imagine, the Ancient Britons starting using Celtic as a common language between tribes, so that, by the time the Romans arrived, they appeared to be entirely Celtic, although they were not.
Again, the Angles, Saxons, etc., were never a majority, so the British people to this day, other than those recently immigrating from other areas, are still mainly Ancient Britons.
The other thing you should mention is that the Neanderthals left Africa many years before modern humans, and they occupied most of Europe and the Middle East before our ancestors arrived. The humans that populated the British Isles 80,000 years ago, were probably almost entirely Neanderthals, but they would have migrated back to southern Europe as the ice advanced, across the land bridge where the English Channel now is.
Greetings, my roots are in Eastern Prussian Masuria and I ofc share more genes with my Eastern European neighbors. Nevertheless my family considered themselves German for many generations, yet we kept Slavic surnames. It was always quite multi cultural in Europe and thanks to archaeogenetics we also got to know that the so called Germanic tribes or Slavic tribes were much more diverse than modern historians believed. Cultures can have many different bearers, but languages unites them.
Thanks for that valuable insight! Yes, Prussians especially absorbed lots of Slavic, Baltic, and even Finno-Ugric people. I think many Baltic and Western Slavs have absorbed many Germanic people as well. We are all a mixed bunch! 🙂
It all depends on perspective. If you believe that language is the bedrock of culture vs genetics, customs, technology, etc then you will inevitably have a different take on how you percieve the cultural cohesiveness of these Iron Age tribes.
Very good summary.
It should also be pointed out that the modern form of Standard German (in Germany itself i.e. Hochdeutsch) is actually a relatively phenomenon dating from sometime in the 18th century.
On the other hand, Modern English dates from the early 16th century.
So, when you hear, as is often the case, “English comes from German” this is actually incorrect as modern English pre-dates modern German by at least two centuries.
This is always an overall overview important in understanding any and all Indo- European languages and their relative commonality. You may have already done the diversion of West Germanic languages and their sub dialects.
I believe it would require several episodes to include all of them but still from a strictly linguistic investigation, it could be quite interesting. Dealing with the variety of vowel and consonant evolution (plus other distinctions i.e evolution of word meanings. ) over the centuries. It would also need at least a comparison of present day dialects in Germany.
The Netherlands and England/ Britain in separate episodes even though there are similarities with other German dialects. Thank you for this much wider focus for today. Again, you may have already done such topics.
Thanks for your comment. This was just an attempt to explain the very basics of the topics. You are right. A thorough investigation would require an entire series of videos.
Very nice presentation Stephan!
Thank you, Amy! :-)
Awesome content, thank you Stephan!
Thank you, Bence!
Simply what an excellent all-round concise, yet comprehensive video. Very well meaning and broad-minded. Full credit to you, and today's liberal-minded Germany. I have found many of your video uploads, esp. on the parallels between English and German, very interesting. For my work I have to have a working knowledge of printed German, in the field of academic philosophy. From Immanuel Kant's 18th-c Prussian German, to Nietzsche, Martin Heidegger and everything in between. I suppose, not that differently from how people in my work have to have a working knowledge of ancient Greek. (I actually both speak, read & write modern Greek and ancient, too.) Still, your videos are an excellent prompt to me to take my German language engagement to the next level and learn German as a living, breathing language of a country and a people and not only as a terminology of a thinker. Excellent videos, please keep uploading them.
Thank you for your kind and encouraging words! That means so much to me. I am impressed by anyone who knows ancient (and modern!) Greek in addition to the more commonly spoken modern languages.
"Eastern Europe" is more likely Slavic countries. My Slavic (13% in latest Ancestry update) is now southwestern and southern Poland. But I do wonder how the Hungarians come out on these tests. A big part of my "Germanic Europe" is Silesia (Schlesien in German, Slask in Polish). Silesia was culturally German for 800 years, with some influence from the Slavs (hence my 13%), but now, of course, it's Polish. The German population was forcibly expelled in 1945. I also have a bit of Neanderthal. These testing services have an obsession with Neanderthals.
We might be distant cousins then. My paternal grandfather was Silesian, ethnic German with a little bit of Hungarian. Of course I could also have Polish and other West Slavic ancestry, but none has been mentioned to me by members of my family.
From what I've heard, although I don't know if it's true, the population of Germany is supposedly the most genetically diverse in Europe, owed mainly to it's geographic location, being in the middle of the continent with its large stretches of flat land in the North. Conducive to migration, warfare, trade and so on, as you can see in our history. Although "most genetically diverse in Europe" still isn't that diverse, in the grand scheme of things.
And the common language has seen massive changes in the last 100 some years.
Check the phone books in the Ruhrvally.
Great numbers of none-German names.
One of the small languages which is still spoken to some extent is Scots. It was one of the two languages that came from Old English which is taught as a foreign language in some universities. It isn’t intelligible to English and Scots speakers today.
@@joancampbell9157 Yes, I am familiar with it. It‘s often confused with Scottish English. Thanks for pointing that out!
This posting avers to focus on the German language, but very little was said on this topic. Instead we are served a long-winded narration on how diverse German origins are, to the point that one can hardly discern any national identity. It plays down the common ancestry and national cohesion depicting ethnicity as almost irrelevant and shared history as marginal, quote:" the Roman's conquered many German tribes, but not all." The fact: Romans failed to subjugate Germans and went on rhe defensive after the shattering defeat at Teutoburg.
Being German is more than a social construct, but a shared ethnicity and history.
I am a native English speaker although I have barely any ethnic English ancestry. However my ancestors spoke at least 5 different Germanic languages over the past few hundred years. I'm sure you know that there are strong regional identities in Germany that might not be so obvious to outsiders.
Oh, yes, regional dialects are still an important aspect of people's identity in Germany. Sadly, some dialects are a bit in decline and it becomes more and more difficult to find "waschechte Sprecher" . . . true dialect speakers. We also have a few distinct minority languages that are spoken in parts of Germany: Frisian, Danish, and Sorbian/Wendish. Thanks for your comment! 🙂
Oh, for sure.
Then there is the fact that that a few of the old tribal German languages still exist, and are spoken.
For instance:
Frankish
Saxon
Suevi
Frisian
And so forth
Those I mentioned I had to actually learn just to get along with the native speakers.
Not Frisian, though I learned enough to understand most of it.
I forgot Bavarian.
Never spoke it, but understood.
@@Fritz999 Good, for you! I also always though of myself as multi-dialectal . . . if not multi-lingual. If the Wittelsbach and Habsburg families had combined their dominions and set out to form a distinct nationality, like the good people of the Netherlands, Austro-Bavarian could very well have become a distinct language in its own right.
This was very interesting, thank you!
I am glad you enjoyed it!
If you listen to very few living assyrians and germans they sound similar but they picke up other languages the germans inter slavic etc thats why sound very little to a little diffrent but you could hear predominantly assyrian
interesting topic, well presented.
Thank you!
Syrian refugees have hardly been "absorbed" that's a bit premature.
Yes, I should have chosen my words more carefully. Realistically it takes generations for newcomers to become properly absorbed. I can see it even here where I live where there had been distinct waves of immigrants from specific places. Of course that depends on one's definition of cultural absorption as well. And, it is so sad to see people lose much of their identity as they become part of the mainstream. For instance, there are many Italians that settled in Pennsylvania, and most of them know only a few words in Italian.
Quite nice, specially all the pitfalls (like ancestry Language) that are mentioned. One very minor critique: East Germanic also existed. One major critique: some treatise of dialect vs standard language. Specially since the German standard language is a crafted patchwork (for bible translation purposes) of widely differing dialects, which all form a continuum together with the other continental West Germanic languages/dialects (and even English and its parts, though that is longer ago). Since "German langauge" is the core subject of the video, that caveat would have been worth mentioning IMHO.
Duly noted! Thanks for commenting! I cut out a lot of things from my original filming (I always do and have to), and the part about the now extinct Germanic languages must have fallen to the cutting knife. I think your second critique warrant a separate video and would be a very good topic to discuss. The entire dialect-versus-language discourse is as treacherous as it is fun. In this video, I really just wanted to share "some" of my major thoughts on the topic, as a essay more than a comprehensive overview. Thanks! 🙂
@@loquidity4973 Thanks for your kind words. Well, you probably know the joke that a language is a dialect with an army.
@@marcovtjev Yes, I heard that, lol.
I am the opposite of you. I am an American and was born in the US and now live in Germany. I speak German as a second language but not as well as you speak English. So speaking of people mixing, my wife is German and I have given a large chunk of my Celtic genes to my red headed daughters.
Thanks for sharing! Very interesting!
It doesn't matter if you speak German perfectly. The big question is: do you love recycling? 😜
@@egilsandnes9637 Don't underestimate cultural norms when it comes to whether people will accept you as one of their own! My recycling comment was meant to get people to laugh, but it was also meant as a serious example of an important cultural norm, especially when one compares Germans to Americans.
@@loquidity4973 Oh, I agree. The reason it was so funny is it was the _only_ cultural marker you mentioned.
Great video. We share the same views on ethnicity I see. I’m French. My genetics are mainly Frankish. My father’s matches the Scordisci and my mother’s the Anglo Saxons and Franks. Quite a mix!
Thanks for your comment! The French and Germans are both quite mixed, and they have a lot more in common with each other than meets the eye.
The Fränkisch language is still alive close to the French border. On both sides of the border.
Don't let anybody tell you different.
Of course it too has changed somewhat.
@@Fritz999 Thanks for explaining! I think Luxemburgish is an especially interesting exemplar of the Frankish languages and dialects, since it had been protected through the sovereignty of Luxemburg.
I have always wondered a little, how fast the change from Fränkisch to French happened when, after all, Fränkisch still exists. Even now. The Franks may not have been the Majority in the new conquered lands, but they were the conquerers and Masters.
@@loquidity4973
Yes it is and, for someone that is familiar with more than one Germanic tribal dialect, it is easy to understand.
Eines der besten Zusammenfassungen zur deutschen Ursprungserklärung! Für Amerikaner absolut notwendig, da sie deutsche Identität & Kultur doch sehr rassifiziert interpretieren (s. eines der untenstehendes Kommentare)und oft eigentümlich romantisieren. Als Afrodeutsche empfinde ich dies als sehr unangenehm, auch im Umgang mit Afroamerikaner:innen. Einer der Gründe, warum ich mich damals dagegen entschieden habe, in den USA zu leben, obwohl ich die Möglichkeit hatte. Der Witz ist das meine anderen beiden Herkunftsländer (Südafrika & Japan) sowieso eigenartige Beziehungen zu Deutschland pflegten, vor meiner Geburt. In meiner deutschen Familie gab es auch große kulturelle Unterschiede: Als norddeutsches Kind verstand ich Platt, & Missingsch aber nur mühsam das Hessisch meiner Uroma!
Danke schön für die netten Worte über mein Video wie auch für die sehr guten Erklärungen und Erläuterungen! 🙂
What does interest me is the strong prevalence of blond hair and blue eyes in the northern Germanic peoples. Probably before all the intermingling caused by contact with the expanding Roman Empire, would also have been higher in southern Germanic tribes.
The reason is that blue eyes and blond hair are recessive traits, meaning that according to Medellin genetics, blond hair and blue eyes should never be more than 25% of a population, most likely in reality only around 15% of a population.
Yet the prevalence of blond hair and blue eyes can reach almost 100% in certain areas and probably was that high everywhere in the Germanic peoples before intermingling began. A biological impossibility if these traits originated in dark genetic stock out of Africa. Where are the dark genes of the founder stock?
And yes I have heard about a lack of sunlight and vitamin D being responsible for their prevalence, but that doesn't explain why Eskimos, Siberians and Tibetans are also not blond hair and blue eyes, if a lack of sunlight and vitamin D eradicated the dark genes from the Nordic stock leaving only the fair genes to survive. These other non Germanic peoples living at high latitudes and altitudes prove that dark genes can survive and thrive in such areas.
Where are the original dark dominant genes of the Germanic peoples? The 75 - 85% representation of dark dominant genes in the Germanic/Nordic peoples.
This is a question, a conundrum, that makes me think most experts are doing a thumbsuck about the origins of the human race.
The fact they only decided recently that the Neanderthals were a contemporary human species and not a missing link, proves how little they really know.
Two answers come to mind. One, the Germanic and possibly the Celtic people evolved separate from the other races, mainly because when blond hair and blue eyed genes are mixed with genes from other non European peoples, incomplete dominance occurs, indicating that the blond hair and blue eyes behave as dominant genes and not recessive genes when encountering non European genes.
Two, it is possible that in the past, a bottleneck occurred in northern Europe where only those with blond hair and blue eyes survived, perhaps years of weak sunlight due to a major volcanic eruption, eradicated the dark genes in certain areas like northern Europe.
Either way, the absence of majority dark genes along with incomplete dominance that occurs in the offspring between European and non European, indicates that blond hair and blue eyes did not originate as recessive genes from outside the European bloodline, implying a separate evolutionary story than that of a common genetic origin in Africa. In Pangaea maybe, but not Africa.
I don't have an answer to that question, but my guess is that light complexion in hair and eye color may have started as a genetic mutation that happened to be competitive amongst others for whatever reason. I do disagree that blond hair and blue eyes are strictly Germanic traits, though. They are probably not even germane to only Indo-European. I am German, and my air was very dark before it turned gray. I wonder if red hair keeps you up at night as much as blond hair. ;P
@@loquidity4973 red hair and blond hair are the same, just different expression of the same gene.
I suspect that originally the Celtic people and the Germanic peoples were from the same ancestral stock.
Which as I have said have to have had either a different origin or have split from the rest long before the current estimates.
Long enough for what is essentially a recessive gene in the European bloodline, to behave as a dominant gene when encountering non European genes, resulting in bi-racial kids that clearly indicates that incomplete dominance has occurred. Something that is impossible with recessive genes such as blond hair and blue eyes.
I must admit that I haven't studied the red hair gene as much, so I'm not sure if it behaves in the same manner or not within the European gene pool as the blond gene, but it certainly will result in incomplete dominance when crossed with non European genes.
The evidence of incomplete dominance is sufficient to declare humans as different species when it occurs between two obviously and visibly different people groups.
This is something science is scared to do, due to the potential political backlash. But it is obvious to all who have an understanding of genetics.
Here we have another American projecting his Rassenwahn fantasies on our country! Yes, like it or bite it - I am German - non of your „biracial“ Kind & not incomplete! You are absolutely biased! From a scientific viewpoint: Blond hair & blue eyes are not exclusively a „Germanic“ or „Celtic“ (collective terms which are Roman inventions) characteristic:
Such groups had already migrated to Israel 6,500 years ago - from Zagros & Anatolia! Furthermore, it’s common among the Kalash in India or Pashtun in Afghanistan - so much for your exclusion of an Asian origin. Needless to mention the black pacific people with blond hair or North African Kabyle or „unmixed“ Africans with dark brown skin & blue eyes … The colour of hair, eyes & the skin can be caused by different alleles even the look is similar. There is more to national characteristics than looks - it took hundreds of years to forge German into a functional nation because regional rulers love their authority & autonomy- nothing has changed - proven by the incoherent corona measures which differed extremely among the Bundesländer. Anyway, keep on fantasising about the most horrible chapter in our history which didn’t allow my kind & other kind of „impure“ Germans‘ existence - sorry, to disappoint you - this „good old“ Germany doesn’t exist anymore - but over here children learn in school that Pangaea fell apart billions of years before our our species occurred - apparently our school system - far from the the best in the EU - is much better than wherever you are from
@@masehoart7569 the reason why the peoples in those Asian countries you list have blue eyes and light skin, is because they are the mixed descendants of the Eastern Germanic tribes and the Mongols and Turks who overrun and conquered them.
The gene causing blond hair in that island tribe is a different mutation from the gene causing blond hair in Europeans. If anything, you bringing them up supports my question about why are recessive blond hair and blue eyes so prevalent in Europe?
Look at the percentage of blond haired Islanders to non blond haired Islanders and that percentage should be reflected in the European population as well, but it is not.
Thus I question this anomaly.
For the record and in answer to your assumptions, I think Hitler was an idiot, if anyone tells you that Hitler was a white nationalist, ask them why over 75 million whites died because of Hitler and his failed conquest of Europe.
I laugh when I see white nationalist groups praising Hitler as their hero.
Idiots, Hitler is responsible for the death and suffering of more white Europeans than the black plague.
@@masehoart7569 forgot to mention the North Africans.
DNA tests done on mummies in Egypt buried in the pyramids, shows that they are related to Europeans and not to Africans from south of the Sahara desert.
If not for the Arab conquest and occupation of North Africa, the modern day descendants of the original North African inhabitants, would be very European in looks and coloring, as some of the more isolated Berber tribes are.
This is an interesting topic, though there are other theories about what part of the world our basic origins are. That is all they are, theories. We will most likely never know the hard facts. I enjoyed the video.
Thank you for your comment! I am inclined to agree with you in regard to the theories. New discoveries are made every day, but there will always be something left to explore.
the evidence for the Yamnaya being carriers of proto indoeuropean seems pretty solid at this point. Of course there will always be an earlier stage that we dont know about yet and maybe will never know about
@@atroprinx Interesting!
I'm not sure I understood the point you made about "I have 2% neanderthal dna, therefor I have pre indoeuropean ancestors" correctly. Does that mean that indoeuropeans at some point did not have any neanderthal admixture? If so, why would that be the case?
So, since the Neanderthal people became extinct around 40,000 years ago, and Indo-Europeans came to Europe much later (probably between 5000 and 8000 years in East-central Europe), some of my ancestors must have existed in Europe well before Indo-Europeans. I must have ancestors who procreated with Neanderthal people, and for that to have happened, they must have already been in Europe at least 40,000 years ago. Does that make sense? Thanks for your question!
@@loquidity4973 The Neanderthals where wide spread in Eurasia, including the Caucasus region. It can be that the Indo-Europeans already had Neanderthal DNA before they started their journey to the west.
@@12tanuha21 Hmmmm, that's true . . . so I need to have another séance with my Neanderthal ancestors to confirm . . . no, seriously, that was an oversight on my part. It could be that I have no European roots that are older than 5000 years then. On the hand, I could have some European ancestors that go back more than 50,000 years. Yet, on another note, it is geographically nonsensical to divide Europe and Asia into two continents. Just as the concept of "race" it is a construct, helping us to see the world the way we want to see it. Thanks for your comment!
doesnt mean you dont have pre indo european ancestors though (we all have), just that having neanderthal dna isnt an argument for it
'Many thousands of years ago'? Five or six thousands years ago is not many thousands of years ago.
Its assyrian and indo ancesory
The Neanderthal were in Central Asia and the Middle East so the original Indo-European speakers could have some Neanderthal ancestry and you could have had Neanderthal DNA from them rather than the original Europeans.
Thanks for the clarification!
I don’t believe in the African origin of all
The proto Indo-european is concocted lie! The real proto Aryan language is Rigvedic Sanskrit! Without which even European dont know that they evolved from common ancestor! Rigvedic Sanskrit and Sanskrit grammar helped to identifiy those Indo-european dialects and their association! AryaVartha is origin of Aryans and is Northern India where Aryans atleast living around 10000 years or more and moved away from ancient India by various time period for various reasons! Rigveda gives elaborate details on ten kings war or Dasarajna wgich paved major migration of Aryan families from ancient India which happened around 6000 years ago.Most Germanic tribes were part of that migration!
Thanks for bringing up the Sanskrit texts and language, which are incredibly important puzzle pieces to the greater picture of the Indo-European language family and the history of the peoples who have spoken them. I think calling it a concocted lie is a bit strong of an accusation. I feel that most people who study languages are open to learning new information. Are you a language scholar fluent in Sanskrit?
The out of Africa theory has been debunked so many times.
By who?
When?
And where?
Show us the literature.
@@Langwigcfijul not playing that game. Do your own research. DNA...