The Origin and Spread of Germanic Folk: NEW DNA evidence

In this Jive Talk I shall discuss the findings presented in the preprint of the new paper from McColl and colleagues entitled ‘Steppe Ancestry in western Eurasia and the spread of the Germanic Languages’. What does it tell us about where Germanic has its roots, how it spread in the Bronze Age, Iron Age and Migration era? How Germanic were the Lombards and Ostrogoths? Lots of new information is revealed. A huge breakthrough in Germanic studies!
End music: Ansuz Society - Fuþorc 

Please support me: https://linktr.ee/SurvivetheJive

Episode Transcript

(00:19):
I think we're live. I thinkit's give talk, and I think we're
going to be discussing a really excitingnew paper that has changed the field of
Domanic studies forever with all kinds offascinating findings, some of which have been
confirmed in are confirming what's been foundin earlier papers, and some of which
are completely new. I don't knowif I'm even gonna have time to go

(00:42):
over everything that has been found inthis paper or it's been proposed. It's
only the preprint, but yeah,there's so much to go over in just
one hour. But I've got alot to say, and I'm really excited.
I think it's a great paper.There's something I disagree with. It's
the main actual thesis they're presenting aboutthe very origin of I won. But
it's still a really interesting thesis andit could be right. I'm not saying

(01:03):
it's wrong. I'm just not sureabout it. But yeah, I'm going
to go over exactly what they're sayingabout the very origins of Germanic people and
the Germanic languages, and also whatthey say about the later dispersals of Germanic
in the migration era. Before themigration era and in the Viking era,
and how that actually confirms what contemporaryhistorians were saying in about the migration era

(01:26):
and the post Roman Germanic migrations,and basically how historians for the last thousand
years have mostly been right about theGermanic peoples and their migrations and origins,
and the twentieth century of people havebeen wrong, which is great. But
yeah, I have also time atthe end will go over some of your
superchats. I will course read superchats as I always do. Everyone.

(01:49):
I'm stringing on X gooday for thepeople down and under who I can see
someone and it's saying good day.I don't know what time it is down
under, but good to see someAusies here. And also i'm drive talk
on YouTube now. The name ofthe paper is step Ancestry in Western Eurasia
and the Spread of Germanic Languages,and the first named author on the paper

(02:12):
is Hugh McCole, so I referto it as McColl and Colleagues twenty twenty
four and thenceforward. How are wedoing? No need for me to be
right. I've got my green schemebehind me, so you can see what
I've got here and yeah, I'llbe putting up some useful bits and bobs.
Get this one out of the way. Obs use annoying software. You

(02:36):
have to have this thing open apparentlyright the paper I did ride up on
my blog a problem with the mainthesis to try and go over it quickly.
The paper suggesting The first part I'mgoing to talk about is the corded
ware culture influences on Germanic and theScandinavia, the history of genetics of Scandinavia

(02:58):
and how it relates to the Ione Happler group. And then after that
I'll talk about the Iron Age SouthScandinavian genetic signal and how this is integral
to understanding the migrations of Germanic peoplein the migration era. So basically it's
identifying early on, around two hundredyears ago, the first Indo European people

(03:21):
arrive in Scandinavia and they are avariant of the corded ware culture called the
battle axe culture by archaeologists, andusing IBD sharing we see that the that
the basically you can see the generalcorrespondences of the archaeological cultures associated with yam

(03:44):
Nya, cordedware and Bellbeaker marked herein blue green and muddish green. Now
IBD sharing is then is for usuallyin like genetic studies, they're like looking
at the very clearly delineated like rootraces of the Europeans, the hunter gatherers,
western alagaras, the yam Nile orwestern steppoders, and the related people's

(04:06):
like bell Beaker and corded web andthe early European farmers, and you can
tell easily those apart because they're quitedistinct populations. But then when you go
into later Bronze as and Iron ages, it gets a bit more complicated because
everyone in Europe by then is amixture of those three populations. So when
you're trying to differentiate the populations,you're just genetics have been looking at hapler

(04:28):
groups, which is one way tosort of see things, and another is
just looking at the varying amounts ofadmixture those ancient populations to try and distinguish
populations. But that's not a fullproof method because some different populations can have
very similar amounts of those different admixturelevels, so that doesn't help. So
the paper here is relying on ibeomethiccalled IBD sharing and some interesting thing from

(04:48):
their model, that mixture modeling.You can see the colored areas of the
map here refer to the different areasof the archaeological culture of the Bellbeaker,
and the little dots are the actualsamples, and you can see clearly,
okay, the blue dot roundbits arefound in the areas where the archaeological cultures

(05:09):
are. So the genetic group recognizedby IBD sharing for Bell Beeker people categorizes
all these blue circles, these skeletonsin that thing, and those correspond exactly
to where the bell Beaker culture archaeologicallyis identified. Pots are people. Despite
what progressive archaeologists and people have beentrying to push in recent decades, there

(05:31):
are some crossover areas here in CentralEurope course, where the corded ware and
the Yamnai and the Bellbeak are allsort of mixed together. But these three
populations of the Bronze Age Europe Yamnai, a corded Whare, and Belbka are
the three vectors for Indo European cultureseverywhere in the world today, there are
no Indo European cultures that don't descendfrom one of those three. In the

(05:55):
world. Now there may be thereare some ancient ones that did, but
let's not go into that. Nowthat's complicated do with Germanic. But here's
what's cool. If you go backirritating, it's gone. If you go
to this lower one. So herethis was the Bronze Age, five thousand
years they see. Another thing aboutthe paper I don't like is that they
refuse to use BC or even BCE. They use BP before present. So

(06:19):
you have to try and do littlemaths in your head every time to figure
out what date they're talking about.So five thousand years before present, four
thousand BC, yeah, three thousandBC. And here linguistic borders in the
Germanic night, so like about fourthousand years ago ninety nineteen hundred years before

(06:43):
present, sorry, about two thousandyears ago at the time of you know,
the Roman Empire, the Celtic andthe Germanic regions thousands of years after
like the early Indo Europeans, butthey still correspond pretty closely to what they
had been earlier. So like theGermanic areas are generally form accorded ware areas,

(07:04):
and the Celtic areas are former Bellbykerareas. Now of course it's not
one hundred percent, but it's veryvery similar, considering that like this is
a long time later, different languages, different cultures, different archaeological groups,
but there has been like a veryinteresting continuation of that, which is why
I guess to begin with in thetitle and beginning the stream, we're talking

(07:24):
a little bit about the Indo Europeanperiod that the Bronze Age before going into
the relevant parts of history where wecan talk about Germanic people, because certainly
you can't talk about Germanic people existingat the time accorded where a background on
Germanic languages, so Germanic all theGermanic languages now descend from a language called
Proto Germanic, which started to diversifyinto different Germanic languages sometime around five hundred

(07:48):
BC. Prior to that, inthe five hundred odd years prior to that,
there's a period by the way ProtoGermanic is reconstructed. We have early
languages like Germanic language like Proto Norseand some Runic conscriptions that are very close
to Proto Germanic and basically on mostProto Germanic, but it's still a reconstructed
language. But it's reconstructed very reliablebecause we have so many different Germanic language

(08:11):
groups, like the West Germanic languagesand the North Germanic languages, so you
can tell quite a lot about whatthat language was like two thousand years ago
when people spoke Protetamanic. But beforethat, Palaeo Germanic was spoken, and
Paleo Germanic in the first millennium BC, between like one thousand BC and five
hundred BC, that's when a lotof the interesting stuff happened in Germanic that

(08:35):
it took on loanwords from Celtic butalso gave loan words into Finish. So
that tells us that the Germanic peopleand that time had contacts with the Celts
in Germany to the south, andwith the Finnic people probably in Finland as
well, which is tantalizing information.But this paper is going into what was

(09:01):
even like before then. So beforePaleo Germanic, the Domanic branch of Indo
European languages had already broken off,probably in the Corded Whare period, but
it wouldn't have been a recognizable Doermanicsounding but it was, you know,
ancestral to all Germanic languages because itwas ancestral to Paleo Domanic and because although
the first Indo Europeans come into Scandinaviaaround twenty eight hundred BC, there are

(09:26):
subsequent migrations of Indo European peoples allthrough the Bronze Ads, like in the
Bellbeaker related people's come in the singleGrave culture, comes in from the south
in the Nordic Bronze Age, andthe Nordic Bronze AI. By the time
of the Nordic Bronze Age, likeso sixteen hundred BCS, that kind of
period, you're actually seeing a differentlandscape from what was the original in the

(09:50):
European languages, So the original andthe Indo European language speakers of Scandinavia,
because all the original in the Europeanlanguage speakers of Scandinavia who came from the
corded where culture's battle axe variant andall of them had R one a pretty
much happy group. But then bythe time it got to the Nordic Bronze
Age, there's a pretty even splitof a from the first Indo Europeans in

(10:11):
Scandinavia, R one b brought inby southerners of Belbeker related Southerners and I
one, the origin of which isstill mysterious and disputed, and that is
going to be a crucial part ofthe stream we have to discuss because this
paper suggests that the introduction of Ione was the introduction of the Germanic branch

(10:31):
of the Indo European languages, andthe I one is the primary paternal lineage
associated with its introduction to Scandinavia.The question is where does I one come.
They have a novel and never beforeproposed theory for where I one comes
from. I dispute it, butit's very interesting and we'll talk about that
today. But let's just go aboutdiscuss the association they have using the IBD

(10:56):
sharing method of the I one lineagewith a newly identified group of Scandinavians called
the East Scandinavian cluster according to theirmodel, now the East Scandinavian Cluster,
here we go, the clustering ofeastern, northern, Western Scandinavian subclusters.
I'll just make a bit smaller somy head's not in the way anymore.
Within the corded where North cluster Imeaning battle axe people and the stephands used

(11:20):
to be models corded where East pointsto a shared history as part of the
corded ware expandents. However, thefirst detection of Eastern Scandinavians, this new
group they'd referring to East Scandinavians,which basically means somewhere around Sweden, you
know, talking about round Lake MalarMelerun. Eight hundred years after the corded
where people got to Scandinavia, Soyou're talking about four thousand years ago.

(11:43):
So the cordware people got their foodeight hundred years ago to Scandinavia, and
eight hundred years later this new groupcertainly corded where another corded ware group distinct
from according to IBD sharing method othercorded whare people in Scandinavia, and they
are distinct because they have the presenceof a hunter gatherer ancestry, which they

(12:05):
claim is not local to Scandinavia,pointing to an additional later rival into Scandinavia
by the ancestors of the Eastern Scandinavians. Now that's quite controversial. So yeah,
the first major steps, so somepeople say that belbiker culture to Jutland
and Norway around two thy two hundredBC is the moment when this language group
was introduced. That was probably whatI thought to be honest Germanic languages coming

(12:30):
in with the Belbek related people whoentered Jutland and Norway around two thousand,
two hundred BC and brought R oneB with them, and that around that
time that you start to see Ione appear as well. That I still
kind of think that's what's happened.But in contrast with the older hypotheses,
an East Scandinavian population which is notdetected for another four hundred day hundred years,
is revealed here as an alternative vectorfor the introduction of Germanic, allowing

(12:52):
for the proposition of a revised modeland like saying like while the other quarter
where people have Western hundre gatherer ancestrythey've caught locally, probably the Eastern Scandinavians
are modeled with Lithuanian or Latvian huntergatherer ancestry indicative of the Late Neolithic cross
Baltic migration into Scandinavia. No suchmigration has to our knowledge been identified in

(13:15):
the archaeological record. It hasn't asfar as I know either. So this
is a problem because one they're sayinghere is that somehow this you've got the
quarter where people coming in with ourOnna. And you can see in this
IBD clustering map the initial people RNA. All the Norwegians samples have NA,

(13:37):
all the Norwegian battle axe culture sampleshave our one A. Everyone had Arna
in the early Indo European Scandinavia.And then letty, you've got Belbek of
related people bringing our one b inand then you also see some i Wan.
And then they're saying later on youget this influence of what they call
East Scandinavians, and they will haveI one which is my habergroup, and
they reckon this is Germanic. AndI do believe they're right to say it's

(14:00):
Germanic. But what I don't understandis why they want to say it's from
the East and not just something thatcame in with the Belby correlated people.
I do believe your pardon, letme turn this off, rude to call
me do any well? So thispopulation is a less to form around two
thousand and two thousand BC. Theauthor suggests a possible migration across the Baltic
Sea to explain this East Scandy group, despite there being no evidence for it.

(14:24):
In the archaeological record, and theypoint out that the timing coincides with
the introduction of a new Late Neolithicsheep breed to Scandinavia. But sheep are
not likely to have been brought overby Lithuanian hunter gatherers by boat across the
Baltic which is an enormous crossing bythe way. And also you get a

(14:46):
new burial burial right of gallery Graysin South Sweden with like the kind of
shivak thing with like kissed burials orwhatever, but that's in the south of
Sweden, so that's also looking Bothof those things don't look at it look
like they're coming from the east fromBaltic. They both look like coming from
the south new house type and thefirst durative Bronze networks, well, the
network's often trading with Britain for tinto the west, so again that doesn't

(15:11):
look like something to do with LithuaniansLatvian hunter gatherers at all, so it's
not proof of anything. As wellas the end of the east West dividan
scandinaviaet. None of these arrivals theylist necessarily come across the Baltic Sea.
This is my words now, Sothe feasibility of a mass migration of a
people across the Baltic at this periodin history is questionable. They're suggesting it,

(15:33):
but they're not suggesting that they've provenit, because they haven't even got
any proof to offer. Sea crossingsfrom the south are far more plausible because
you just hop over the islands.I mean, now, it's even a
bridge. You can drive straight overfrom Copenhagen to Sweden. It's just a
it's not that far. Whereas theBaltic. I've crossed even from Stockholm to
Helsinki by ferry via Orland, andit's an overnight crossing, like it's all

(15:56):
night. It's hours and hours andhours. It's not an easy crossing,
it's like whereas the crossing from Denmarkto Sweden is like nothing. I mean,
you could probably even walk it incertain cold winters. The Yeah.
Their figure four point four point a, which is on screen now, shows
the geographical distribution of individual samples belongingto the three Scandinavian clusters they identified existing

(16:18):
prior to eight hundred BC, afterwhich they will merge together. I'll get
into that merging later. So theysay there's a strong correspondence between the clusters
and specific happler groups as follows.One the early Scandinavian including the oldest Swedish
Backlade culture R and A, thenthe Southern Scandinavian cluster restricted the Denmark and
the southern tip of Sweden, whichis mostly with R and B and SMI

(16:40):
one, and then a later EasternScandinavian cluster spread across Sweden, overlapping with
that of the Southern Scandinavian cluster,which is dominated by I one and third
map of the so called Eastern Scandygroup shows mainly samples from the south,
and the I one distribution is notdemonstrated to have come from the east.
In fact, it appears from theday to have come from the south.
In my opinion, we already havean I one sample or a related to

(17:06):
I one sample close to it fromNorth General dating to three thousand, three
hundred BC, which is older thanthese samples. So by trying this to
trying this newly identified group to theI one Hapler group, they have brought
into question their own claim that hasa Baltic origin, and that will only
really be settled by the discovery ofan I one sample in accorded ware context

(17:27):
from the route from that period aftertwo thousand, eight hundred BC, when
they got there the battle ax people, and before it became a dominant Happler
group in the brock Nordic Bronze Age, there's this big period where it's not
sampled. An I one is mysteriouslyjust pops up, which that's why we
don't really know yet. And theyadmit that it's necessary to confirm the proposed
Bronze Age source of the East Scandinaviansalong the Baltic coast because there is no

(17:49):
known possible source in the Baltic thatit could be. And my own view
is that the elevated Eastern hunder gathererancestry that they found that distinguishes this East
Scandinavian group recorded where people from theother corded where people in Scandinavia may incorrectly
have been identified as Latvian and originmerely due to a lack of samples from
local hunder gatherer populations. So theremay be a local hunder gatherer population which

(18:14):
would more clearly fit in their modelas the source of this EHG. It's
just that their own their model isfinding that Latvian and Lithuanian hunter gatherers are
closer fit than local hunter gatherers becausethere aren't that many samples, and the
sample biases led to this mismatch.That's what I consider to be more likely

(18:36):
than that there was this language familymigrates over from the Baltic because one archaeologically
no evidence too, it's implausible.It's a very long way, not something
hunting gatherers likely to do. Threethe corded where people in the Baltic aren't
actually I don't think they've got thattip like elevated levels of EHG that would
make them like a suitable source populationhere. And also like the Baltic languages

(18:59):
aren't really that close to Germanic,which is like there's also the Keentum Satem
and distinction, like Germanic's not thesame even like if you even believe in
Kentem Sartem having any currency anymore,because some people don't, and I'm not
a linguist so I can't comment onit, but yeah, they're quite distinct
groups of Indo European languages, soit just doesn't work for me. For

(19:19):
me, a more clear explanation wouldjust be that they haven't got a decent.
They haven't got sufficient samples from localScandinavian hunder gatherers to be able to
identify the elevated EHG source in EasternScandinavians. However, it's very exciting that
they identify this group of East Scandinaviansas being important because everything about them that

(19:40):
they say which follows the formation ofthis group is very relevant and changes everything
we understand about the way at Germaniclanguages developed. I'll go into as well
that the Southern Scandinavian thing later,but so I'm more convinced by what they
talk about what happens later Paleo Germaniclanguage in the period between ten to fifty
BC and five hundred B when itborrowed from Celtic and Interfinic. And they

(20:02):
show that after two thousand BC,the East Sandy group expanded into Denmark and
Norway. And basically that's why becauseof that, it's dominant, and it's
the one Scandinavian of the three groupsof South Scandies, West Scandies and East
Scandies, East is the one that'sspread everywhere and is ancestral to all the
Germanic speakers. And so that's theone that's obviously the real introducer of Germanic

(20:25):
language group family branch, not theother South Scandies or West Candies. So
I in that case the I onecarriers of East Scandy because the East Scandy
IBD cluster is associated with I one, and the East Scandy one is the
one that causes it is the onethat's ancestral to all Germanic, so it's
reasonable for them to make this conclusion. I think a mixing of the East
Scandies with the South Scandies is datedbetween seventeen hundred BC and fourteen hundred BC,

(20:49):
and that spans both Nordic Bronze's periodone and two, directly preceding the
construction of the Shivik Tomb, whichI did a video all about you should
watch to learn about. What welearn about this is like the beginning of
the Germanic culture in this period aroundsix fourteenth BC, where you've got chariots
and lots of very Indo European symbols, of solar symbols and horses and stuff

(21:11):
like this. And the mixing eventformed a new group that they call in
this paper iron Age Scandinavian South ironA South Scandinavians, and by the Iron
Age, Jutland can be entirely modeledwith the admixed Danish Bronze aid source,
while iron A's Norway and Danish Islandshave also additional East Scandinavian admixture on top

(21:33):
of the initial East Scandinavian stuff theygot from the first Bronze Age mixing event.
So the East Scandinavian dominated multiple periodsof the Bronze as coming in waves
out into other parts of the NordicGermanic world. So it's pretty clear cut
that they're the big shots of theScandinavian world, the East Scandys from around
Lake Mala. And actually that's whathappens in the historical period as well.

(21:56):
Sweden is the region of Scandinavi thatdominated all the others. It still is
by far the most populous part ofthe Nordic countries, and the region of
Sweden where everyone most lives and asthe richest and is you know, the
region around Lake Mala still was whereStockholm is, So it makes sense.
It's a it's a good area forfarming, it's it's a good area for

(22:18):
sea trade, it's a good it'sjust generally a good part of Scandinavia to
live and and and for people toflourish. So that would that would completely
I completely believe that. And Iwould say that the origins of Germanic probably
do come from around Lake Malar somewhere, and this East Scandy group carrying the
iwe Happler group going to be thevector of it. And they say this

(22:41):
ad mixed iron aide Scandinavian Southern Scandinaviangroup is central to understanding the Germanic dispersals,
and I agree with that too.And we can trace the spread of
the iron ade South Scandinavian ancestry,which is the mixture of the bronze South
Scandinavian and bronze as East Scandinavian,into Germany, Britain and the nether during
the migration era, as well asto Italy with the Langabarts. We'll get

(23:03):
into that later. Yeah, Butso fifteen of the sixteen bronze eight samples
in Norway our one and one isI one, So there is a little
bit of I one in Norway eventhen as well. That's worth pointing out.
And it does look like the originalGermanic. We're rich in I one.
I'm just gonna say that it's veryplausible. Now that's the case,

(23:25):
So I one reconsidered on this basis. Here's my problems. Okay, so
some persons I spoke to Stirler Illenbaughabout this, and he reckons, as
you can see in this map,that it makes sense that it could be
even from Finland that they crossed over, because he's saying, look, there's
quite actually you can see in thismap here that there's quite a high proportion

(23:48):
of I one in modern day Ostrobothniain western Finland. But I don't agree
with him. I don't think itcomes from western Finland. I don't think
Germanic languages came from western Finland,because that I one in there is almost
definitely the result of firstly Viking Ageincursions into Finland, because Vikings did settle

(24:10):
in western Finland in a thousand yearsago or more, and also more recently,
this was a part of Sweden's empirein the Golden Age of Swedenish history,
and that's why they speak Swedish inparts of western Sweden and Finland western
Finland. So I really wouldn't saythat that could be reliably said to be
the origin of Iran based on that, So I don't agree with him there

(24:30):
unless I see evidence of more evidencefor its dispersal and spread from Finland in
the Bronze Age. Now I'm goingto just defend the different my own position
on Iran's dispersal first, So onehundred Ancient Genomes show repeated population turnovers in

(24:52):
Neolithic Denmark by Alan toft at All, which was also released this year,
although the preprint came out ages ago, and that paper found that in late
Dagger period from two thousand BC,a distinct cluster of Scandinavians with iwon Happa
group spread they allege from the southto the north, so they were focusing
mainly on Denmark. So yeah,it looks like from their perspective, I

(25:15):
one entered Denmark from Sweden and perhapsin later de Bronze A's that's true to
some extent, But they're thinking ofthese kiss burials like Shievik being like this
northern thing coming down Scandinavian into thesouth that is, but they didn't find
any decent evidence for that, likefor its north from it's dispersed off from
the north and it's sort of becomesa dominant lineage according to them, associated

(25:41):
with these stone kissed burials, andthis race after it comes in is the
same as the Vikings three thousand yearslater. They say this was the formation
of the Germanic people when the Ione'sintroduced, and that's pretty much what this
paper's finding. And I'm thinking that'strue. I agree with that, but
and it's consistent with the new paperabout I one East Scandinavians coming to the
south of Scandinavia from the east,similar thing they're saying. The two papers

(26:03):
are sort of in sync. Butthe Alentov paper provides no clear evidence of
the northern origin of I one carriers, and the new paper provides no evidence
of this cross Baltic thing. SoI'm still not sure about what they're saying.
I don't think you should be sureabout it. So the three main
theories right now for I one's origins, I'll go over them all and give
them all a fair shake, soyou can make your own mind up on

(26:25):
what you think. Right now,there's a neolithic skeleton from Germany's TVK or
funnel beaker culture, and that's beenfound with a paternal hack route which is
very closely related to the Nordic BronzeAge. I one, and it has
fifty two out of the sixty twomutations of the I one that I have
or that the Bronze Age Scandinavians have. Like when we talk about I one

(26:45):
today, everyone who's got I onetoday me included is the same ones that
the Viking had and the Nordic BronzeAge kings had. There's this one group
of I one, but before theNordic Bronze Age there must have been other
ones, other groups, and thisone is a divergent what it's divergent,
but it's not very divergent, soit belongs to a happergroup IL eight for

(27:06):
zero and this sample is called OSTzero zero three OUST, which means cheese.
But I don't think that's on folks. That it dates to three thousand
As we talked about another cheddarman,is this Sweden's cheddarman. It dates to
three thousand, two hundred to threethousand BC, so it's before recorded where
in you know, in Scandinavia.And it's surprisingly despite it being buried in

(27:30):
the Neolithic farmer context, that healso had some hunter gatherer tools and his
ancestry was mostly WHG so he's raciallyon most for the most part, and
he seems to have been some kindof like semi integrated TBK person, like
a hunter gatherer who was integrated intothe TBK lifestyle, had some farmer ancestry

(27:53):
and was probably farming, but hewas still living hunder gatherery a lifestyle,
and he was mainly racially of huntergathered ancestry. He comes from the Austorff
tannen Da burial site, a specialgroup within Neolithic northern Germany, and the
cemetery contained twenty six individuals and theentire burial is within a Neolithic context of
earth and flat burials. Let meshow you what I'm talking about. So

(28:17):
here's the skeleton I'm talking about.That's what he looked like. Robust,
wide cheekbones, excellent teeth. Thisis typical Western hunder gatherer. And here
is a reconstruction by the beaker ladyof what he might have looked like.
So I think that because of this, it looks like Western hunter gatherers related

(28:38):
to this guy had the ancestral cladeof I, one that became the one
in the Germanic and we just haven'tsampled yet because this one he does not
have the haplogroup ancestor to Germanic Ione. He doesn't have that, so
his existence is not proof of onebelonging to WHG. But because it's such
a closely related clade, I thinkis very likely that we're gonna look for

(29:00):
I one in Western hunter gatherers inGermany. That's my opinion. But I'm
not saying that his existence is proofof that. I'm saying it's suggestive of
that. So he's from before themost recent common ancestor of I one,
either at a closely rated branch orthe closest thing to an ancestral carrier we
have so far. There's there's anothersample which is an actual a Scandinavian hunter

(29:25):
gatherer called SF SF eleven. Ans F eleven also has a distant relative
of I one, even more distantfrom the Germanic I one than the one
this WHG carries, And some peoplethink that because of SF eleven, therefore
that I one must be a nativeScandinavian Happera group from Scandinavian hunter gatherers,

(29:45):
which is also a possibility. However, if this guy from Germany isn't proof
of German hunder gatherer origin, forfor I one. Then the Scandinavian hunter
gatherer is even less useful as evidencebecause his subclade is even is even more
distant from modern I one. Sobut both of them are suggestive of a
native I one. These are thetwo closest we can get to ancient like

(30:08):
to prehistoric to like neolithic I onethat we've got, and ones in Scandinavia
and ones in Germany, none ofthem in the Baltic, none of them
in Lithuania or Latvia. So I'mI'm going to go over them now.
So thirty one. My preferred theorysouthern origin for two reasons. Firstly,
majority of early EYE one samples areall in southern Scandinavia, as I showed

(30:30):
all the Bronze Age like actual youknow, ancestral to Germanic ones are in
southern Scandinavia, not anywhere else,not northern Scandinavia. And secondly, you've
got OST zero zero three. There'sthis good looking dude who doesn't have the
ancestral I one but does show thata related subclade is in Germany and that
it was preserved in among neolithic farmersin Germany, and those neolithic farmers in

(30:53):
Germany are known to have had agenetic input on Scandinavian so that's to me
is a big hint, and itwould have entered Scandinavia from Germany in the
Bronze Age, if I'm right.That's my favorite theory, not proven yet.
Second theory is that it comes fromnative Scandinavian hunter gatherers, but there's
even less proof of that. Andthe third is a new theory in this

(31:15):
paper by mccol and colleagues, whichinstead posits an eastern origin that's not based
on any Happler group evidence, buton the strontium isotope analysis of some early
samples which fall into this East ScandinavianIDB cluster sharing this ibd's sharing cluster that
they've identified, and they since theyhave this cluster is associated with the iwon

(31:37):
Habra group and their strontium analysis indicatesthat they probably grew up in eastern,
Central or northern Sweden, so thereforethey're calling it the Eastern Scandinavian cluster instead
of the South Scandinavian cluster, whichperhaps they should be calling but who knows.
Here Again, the evidence is inconclusive, especially as there is not enough
data to prove where where these iWon carriers came from. Really at this

(32:00):
stage, and proposing a cross Balticroute I think just does not have any
archaeological merit, like there's no evidencefor anything like that, kind of like
you know, cross cross Baltic tradeat that period in history, although it
does there is plenty of like Balticpresence in Gotland later on, very much

(32:21):
so you know, in Bronze AgeGotland there definitely was a Baltic presence.
So it's all three of them couldbe true. I'm not saying any of
them are wrong, but one ofthem is. One of them is true.
Maybe it could be none of themare true, but if any three
of them could be true, orall three of them could be wrong and
something else could be true. ButI don't think all three of them are
wrong. I think that one ofthem is right, and I think that

(32:43):
the most likely is the first one, not the third one that the paper
proposes. Let me know in thecomments which one you think is most likely.
The oldest Iwan samples have a verysouthern Scandinavian distribution now, and that's
probably also because that's where most ofthe samples come from, and there are
no samples from East Sweden, wherethe Alentov paper claims I one cluster originates

(33:05):
based on strong teum and isotopein ratioanalysis, or is it the mccol papers
claiming. But anyway, at thisstage no one can claim the matter settled.
So don't let anyone say we knowfor sure now, because we don't
know for sure yet. This paperdoes not prove for sure what the origin
of I want is. It justproves very well that these I one carrying
east so called East Scandinavian cluster isthe most likely vector of Germanic language branch

(33:29):
over the Bronze Age and into theNordic Bronze Age. Now, before I
go over some of the other pointsabout what happened in you know, the
migration era and after the Bronze Age, I just go through some of the
comments that I've got from you.Oh what's going on here? Oh this
doesn't look good? Am I notstreaming anymore? You can all see me

(33:52):
still, people are still commenting,I guess, so it's all good.
But I can't see any of thesuper chats I wrote down a couple earlier.
So I'll thank you for everyone who'sgiven super chance grim Wolf gave a
ten pound donation. He said,Heimdel rig gave his seed to the three
classes of man, Odin villian vbreathed spirit and body into the first Gemanic
people. Ask and Embler, weare the children of the gods? Is

(34:15):
that not? Whence we came?Good point for pagan's listening? And are
those who listening and just want toknow about DNA? A Grimwolf was bringing
up like the theological origin myths ofthe Germanic people, and he's saying he's
concerned that this data might conflict withthe religious view. Actually he's mixing up
some of them. He's mixing upsome different myths there. So you've got

(34:36):
three. You've got the Rigsula mythin with Trig, who's probably the god
Heimdel distinguished mankind. He didn't givebirth to mankind, but he fathered the
three casts of men to differentiate differenttypes of man. And then you got
Invertisport, we got the myth withusk and like the first man and woman
who are pieces of wood on thebeach given life by Odin, Lauther and

(35:01):
Nir. And then there's another versionthan those where the pros in the prose
ender where Odin and his brothers Viliand Thee who may be Lautherer and n
by other names, use Imir tofashion the world, kill Imran first sacrifice
fashion the world. And then alsothere's a fourth thing where Takeus mentions two

(35:23):
thousand years ago, like the Germanicpeople descend from the god Twist though via
another god Manus, and Manus birthedthree different tribes of Germanic people, the
Vianus, irmin on Us and Istvianus, and they're probably descending. Those are
probably, you know, founded bythree gods. Ist Vi don't know about

(35:45):
that god Ingui, which is IngwiThreer who's well attested god, and Irmin
who's probably Odin. So all allthese different Germanic origin myths have a clear
ascribe a divine origin to the Germanicpeople's different way. I like that the
Takitas myth has three different branches likedivine origin, in which case you could

(36:07):
say that the three happler groups ofthe Germanic people I one are one,
B and R one over three differentones and some one of the England and
dynasty, which is descent. Theyclaimed descent from the god King of the
England Dnasty and found in a burialin Estonia recently is shown to have I
one Hapa group. In that case, the ing would be I one if

(36:30):
you want to believe a divine origin. But the problem is all three of
the groups are supposed to all descendfrom Manus, so they should all have
the same hapagroup if you apply scienceto mythology. But there's a problem here
because profane science and metaphysics don't gotogether perfectly. But we know that all
three Happa groups are associated with theGermanic people, but that I one was
the original one, so it's aspecial one for Germanic people in that sense.

(36:54):
But they're all there from the verybeginning of Germanic languages. Really,
they're all in Scandinavia and the BronzeBut thank you for your donation, grimwol
on Liquid Oxygen says, would yoube willing to review the archaeological details in
concert with the genetics. Well,I have been trying to do that as
I go along. I hope it'sinsufficient. The understanding always evolving, and
I think a review of the variouscultural interactions developments such as Funnel Beaker Battle

(37:17):
as culture single Grave Yarsdorff could beuseful. I'll try and go over the
archaeological cultures as we go, butit's only one hour, so it's really
not I'm just trying to match thegenetics for the people who aren't familiar,
because each one will require an explanationand it would just go well over an
hour. The key things I'm curiousfor refreshers are the alleged founding of battle
Axed culture by corded Ware migrants.Well, that's not really alleged. It's

(37:38):
very well documented, and he crossedthe Baltic in boats. Oh here's a
misunderstanding there. He's not saying allbattle Axed culture comes from the Baltic.
It's just saying that this late EasternScandinavian variant of corded where Batles culture was
across Baltic. That's the It's notclaiming that the western South Scandies are cross
Baltic migrants. The relationship with singleGrave to bb See and Scandinavian scandy cultures,

(38:01):
Yes, well I kind of coveredthat because that's the berbiker culture related
migrants carrying our one be up fromthe South coming into in the Bronze Age.
I covered that. The lack ofone to one continuity between Bronze Age
culture and Nordic Bronze Age. That'salso true because the early Battlezed culture is
all our one and the Nordic BronzeAge is more diverse in its lineages.

(38:23):
And also the autosomal makeup of Scandinaviansin the Nordic Bronze Age is more southern
shifted, so there's influence from thecontinent coming in from Germany. And the
bifurcation of Nordic Bronze Age into Jastovand the Nordic Iron Age. Well,
rather than talk about that archaeologically,I think we'll just stick to what the
genetic papers talking about, because itdoes discuss how post Nordic Bronze Age the

(38:45):
genetics change, and it shows usa lot about what would have happened to
give birth to Jostav culture. Ihope we can get into some of that
irrational recreation asks. I think thatusing high level Y happeners can in general
be mislead because the error bars ontheir a estimates are quite broad and they
could pre date the period in questionby one thousand do odd years. I

(39:07):
know this paper seems to be usingIDF twenty nine, using I one as
a shorthand for I one A,no big deal, but it might well
be picking up a correlation with adownstream snip that is more relevant. Like
IL twenty two. They could beseparated by five hundred years, which is
significant. Perhaps drilling down into thedata sets will reveal what snips were tested

(39:30):
for, but that's for someone withtime on their hands. Secondly, a
genetic signal for the Paleogermanic group shouldbe detectable in Finland. No. I
think it's understood and confirmed by thisrecent preprint that three of the four main
y Happer groups in Finland N oneA, one, I one A and
R one a all have an eastwest client, consistent with migration from the

(39:53):
west and east. They're not sureabout R and B in that paper,
which they say could be a signsites issue. I believe that automal admixtures
are also east to west. PaleoGermanic had a very significant influence on what
was to become finished, and Iwould expect this to be driven by a
genetically distinct population with a north southclimb rather than east west. Is that

(40:16):
reasonable? Has it been eradicated inthe present day population by subsequent migrations and
so leaving us with only a hopefor future finish ad and a samples for
proof. Could it be that thefocus on the high level y HP HAPA
group is masking something downstream of Iwan a w I think that's going to
go over the heads of a lotof my viewers. But yeah, he's

(40:37):
making some asking some interesting questions thatI don't think I've got time to answer
or able to answer. Off thebat. The introduction of the influence of
Paleo Germanic finish is something that happens, as I said earlier, after one
thousand BC, So it's not todo with this East Germanic cluster because that
didn't really that had already happened alongone thousand years old. So yeah,

(41:01):
but yeah, more sampling is alwaysneeded. It's funny because Scandinavia is like
a not very populous area of theworld and it's very well sampled for ancient
ancient samples ancient DNA, far morethan other parts of the world. But
even so, it's still that un'tanswered questions. But I mean, we're
knowing, we're learning a lot aboutthe origins of Germanic people. Now let's
go on with the journey of discussion. Here I can see more. I

(41:23):
can see now, Okay, Reinhardvon Leuwengrin gives five pounds, thank you
very much and whatever. I can'tsee any of the other fan funding.
Here we go. I got itnow, I can see it all.
I've got Vromwolfi bomani Igloos gives tendollars and says new to jive. Nietzscha

(41:44):
led me to question my Catholic morality. Is it possible to continue on my
pagan journey without relinquishing respect for Christor the historical church? Yes, you
don't have to disrespect other religions.Don't have time to go into a discussion
of Nietzsure or Catholicism in the streamabout this paper. I'm afraid it is
too much to talk about in thehour. Now. I thank you also

(42:05):
e SMD for fifty US dollars.He just says our one B and nothing
else. I guess that means thatyou have our one B and you're proud
of it, and why not?Our one B is a proud lineage.
Now I'll probably go over time becausethere's so much more to talk about,
and I must go over it becausewe've only just discussed this East Scandinavian cluster,
and there's so much interesting stuff totalk about, the Lombards, the

(42:28):
Goths, the Anglo Saxons and theVikings and how and stuff they talk about
here. So I'm just going todo as much as i can in the
next well, I've got ten minutesleft, but I'm just going to go
until I finished this basically, soby looking at IBD sharing, let me
get this one. By looking atIBD sharing, the authors show the genetic
borders for the Corded, where Belbekercults have already done that. The Goths

(42:51):
of the well Wielbach culture were EastScandinavian in origin East Sweden. In contrast,
the Lake To cultural descendants, theOstrogoths and Visigoths in Southern Europe,
in Ukraine and in Spain respectively,are predominantly of local Ukrainian and Iberian ancestry,

(43:12):
implying the adoption of Gothic culture.So that means that both the old
fashioned gothicismists that like Swedish sort ofchauvinistic eighteenth century movement where they say everything
came from the Goths were they wereright as far as Poland that the Goths
were from Sweden, and they didmove into Poland, and they remained Swedish

(43:32):
in Poland. The Goths in Polandwere of Swedish origin and was Swedish genetically.
But as the Goths continued their journeyacross Europe and even into Africa,
they did not remain Swedish. Suchby the time they got to Spain they
were they mixed with the Spaniards orthe Iberians, and when they went to
Ukraine they mixed with locals. Andwe already knew that the Ostro Goths mixed

(43:53):
with locals. We got quite alot from our older papers of Ostro Goths
clearly taking Asiatic girlfriends as people doin this form of huns on the step.
So yeah, that's interesting. Itshows that yes, the Germanic people
and the migrations could remain Germanic andresist mixing with outsiders in some circumstances,

(44:15):
as they did in Poland, butalso in other circumstances they do mix with
the locals, as they did inSpain and Ukraine. And that suggests an
elite cultural dominance model, where youhave an elite that enforces a cultural norm
on the wider population without affecting amassive genetic change on the population, and
that does happen in certain cases likethe Normans. The Normans did not leave

(44:38):
a genetic a significant genetic effect onthe British Isles. French DNA is in
the British Isles, but not directlyfrom the Norman conquest anyway. So from
seventeen hundred to fourteen hundred BC,in the Nordic Bronze Age, that,
as I said, the South andEast Scandies mixed together in Denmark. They

(44:59):
think somewhere in Denmark to make anew group called Iron Age South Scandinavians.
Now South Scandinavians are really important,it says here central to understanding the Germanic
dispersal. So after that, afteryou're talking about post Noonic Bronze Age,
we're not talking about the East Scandiesanymore. We're talking about a mixed race

(45:20):
population of mixed races, the samerace really, but you know, like
mixed ethnic population of which is nowcalled the Iron Age Southern Scandinavians. And
they, yeah, they went everywhere, and the Iron Age South of Scots
and they them. South Scandinavians canthen further be divided into two groups using
this IBD sharing cluster method, onefocused on Jutland and the other on Mecklenburg

(45:45):
in Germany. The replacement of theold East Scandinavian like like Zeeland population the
island of Zeeland where that had apeople on it who were mostly East Scandinavian
origin, but they got replace inthe Proto Germanic period after six hundred BC
with ancestry from Sweden, Norway,Jutland and the continent even with Celtic like

(46:07):
DNA that happened later, and Jutlandin that same period received additional Ea Scandinavian
DNA but kept YEAH but kept itslocal DNA two. So it's South scandinat
Jutland had South Scandinavian Iron Age ancestry, but then also received additional East Scandinavian

(46:30):
DNA on top of that of whatit already had in the original Bronze Age
mixture during the Iron Age. Soit shows there's lots of mixing events that
history has never recorded and archaeology wecan't see it in the archaology, and
it's long before historic history, andwe're seeing like quite turbulent population turnovers within
the Germanic world in the prehistoric period, during the migration period fifteen seventy five

(46:53):
to twelve hundred bp BP. Whata stupid thing. We find evidence of
this should admixed Southern Scandinavian population representingthe Western Germanic Anglo Saxon migrations into Britain
and Langabards into Southern Europe. Sowhat it's found is that while the Gretzinger
and Or paper about Anglo Saxon DNAfrom twenty twenty two or about which I

(47:15):
did a stream you can watch.It's the really big paper on Anglo Saxon
DNA. It's fascinating, and theyreckon the sources for Anglo Saxons in Britain
were from as far away as Sweden. They said that the main regions that
the Anglo Saxons came from were goingto be Jutland and Germany, which is
what bead that the Anglo Saxon sourceslike Anglo Saxon Chronicle and b did the

(47:36):
venerable beads say anyway, and that'swhat everyone's always believed. But they also
say, you know, some ofthem could have come from as far away
as Sweden, but this paper saysno. Actually they're using their IBD method,
they say the Anglo Saxons were mostlyfrom just North Germany and a minority
from Jutland, so just most ofthem are Saxon and a few Angles and

(47:58):
Utes not Swedes as I as regrettingof paper kind of hinted might be the
case, which would mean that beadis one hundred percent accurate. Really interesting,
like the eighth century historians just beatthe f out of the twentieth century
historians. So Langobards, which isa Germanic group, obviously with Nordic origins,

(48:22):
the medieval origin myths of the Langerbardssay they came from Scandinavia and guess
what they did. The post Romanhistorians were right that they founded this too,
So they're looking at Langerbards from Czechia, Hungary, and Italy modeled as
primarily Southern Scandinavian iron Age, consistentwith post classical origin legends. However,

(48:43):
three outline Langerbards from the Czech Republic, Hungary and East and Hungary are of
Eastern Scandinavian origin, so that's interesting. So most of them are from this
mixed Scandinavian South Scandinavian iron Age groupthat I mentioned that formed in the Bronze
Age, but some of them twoout liars would have come from Sweden and
ones in Czech Republic and one ofthree outlines sorry, in the Czech Republic

(49:05):
and Hungary, but none of theseSwedish, so that I mean the South
Scandinavian one's probably going to be fromsouthern Sweden and Denmark, and that's where
most Langerbard's origins are, except forthe few Langerbards who have a more clearly
East Scandinavian origin, which is interesting. It like the Langerbards had some Nordic
diversity, if you want to callit diversity. They came from different parts

(49:28):
of Scandinavia. The major population shiftin South Scandinavia between the Roman and the
Viking periods was not solely driven bythe climate events or Justinian plague, but
instead likely took hold between fifteen fiftyand fourteen fifty BP, which is like
five hundred AD migration here and wasassociated with the establishment and subsequent expansion of

(49:50):
what became the Danes. So they'retalking about like an ethnogenesis of the Danish
group the Danish people around the sixthcentury. Fascinating. So these pre migration
like pre sixth fifth century, presixth century, there was so many population

(50:13):
tumultuous population turnovers in Jutland and Zealandand the other Danish islands that they're thinking
that the actual Danish ethnic group couldhave had an ethnogenesis around around the five
hundreds. Amazing, amazing if trueSouth Scandinavian population around yea, the South
Scandy population in eight hundred a dthat's a Viking Age changes, with lots

(50:37):
of southern ancestry from Germany and Britainentering in the Viking Age, with what
they call a virtually complete population replacementon the Danish islands. So first off,
you've got like the Danish ethnic groupforming in at the beginning of the
migration at the end of the Mygationera, and then you're saying in the

(50:58):
Viking Age it completely is replaced bySoutherners coming in of German Germanic people from
the south, and also like theinfluence on the Viking Age of British DNA
as well in Scandinavia. That's fascinatingbecause now we're talking about the historical period
and we're still finding things out,but we have seen in other previous papers
as well a lots of evidence,especially in Norway, of British DNA in

(51:19):
Scandinavia, such as Viking aided Scandinavianswere more British, I mean, Viking
As Scandinavians were less Scandinavian than modernScandinavians are. The modern day like native
Scandinavians are pretty much pure Scandinavian,but the excluding immigrants of course. But
the Viking As Scandinavians often had Britishadmixture, and as now this one's showing
also German admixture. So here we'vegot the we can now reject the Danish

(51:43):
Isles and Sweden as a source areafor the Anglo Saxons in Britain, as
they were dominated by Eastern Scandinavia priorto the Viking Age. That's interesting,
That's what that's what are just goingover, And I said, they're what
these different quotes say. Admixture betweenBronze A's southern and east and Scandavians likely
occurred in Jutland and the Danish Islesduring the Bronze Nordic Bronze Age and leading

(52:06):
to the Formation. I've already saidthat. Yeah. Yeah. The Late
Bronze Age is the period during whichPalaeo Germanic donated late Nordic Bronze Age,
which is not what most people otherparts of the world mean by they say
Bronze Age because Nordic Bronze ages aftermost country regions of the world have a
Bronze Age or most like the MediterraneanBronze Ages earlier. That's when they donated
to finish and got vocabulary from Celtics, such as the word for iron comes

(52:30):
from Celtic and the finished word forking comes from Germanic, suggesting it was
spoken widely among East Scandinavians distributed betweenSweden and Denmark in that period three thousand
years ago. In the Danish Islands, it shift amounts to virtually complete population
replacement. That's that's wild. Ican't believe that complete population replacement in the
Danish Islands in the in the inthat period. In that period, So

(52:54):
in Jutland during the Iron Age,individuals tend to fall within the Southern Scandinavian
cluster and a model with fifth southernand forty five percent Eastern Scandinavian DNA.
Further east, individuals of more easternon the Danish Isles, their models twenty
percent southern and eighty percent Eastern,and in Sweden people are mostly one hundred
percent Eastern. This graphic is reallycool as we want to talk about this

(53:15):
one before we stop. It's showinglike the time age of they are different
groups. You've got the color showingRoman iron Age, migration period, Late
iron Age and Viking period. Thoseare like the historical periods of historians and
archaeologists refer to. Here you go, you can show where the Eastern Scandinavians
dominate the Gray period of mixture,and then Southern Scandinavian iron Age is the

(53:37):
consequence in the as a dominant inthe Viking era. This timeline shows the
genetic shifts in the Danish Isles andsouthern Sweden. This tumultuous area where so
much population change is happening we didn'teven know about, like it's not recorded
in legends or anything. Even so, North Germanic is spoken more in the
Roman iron Age, and then Northand it becomes Syncopey period and then Old

(53:59):
North some of the it doesn't sayhere, but some of the regions,
like some Danes don't like that.In Jutland they find like the oldest Runic
inscriptions in Jutland aren't North Domanic,and I'm not ancestral to Danish language.
They're West Germanic. And now thisDNA stuff is showing as well, like
and the paper talks about it.I can't go over all in detail now
because they've got time now. Butthe West Germanic was the language of Jutland,

(54:22):
and there was a Western Manic dialectthere, and there's like later on
the Viking Ads population the North Germanicpeople come back. It's like North Germanic
people were probably dominating it and thenWestern Manic dominated it, and then it
got taken back by North Gumanics,which is why, like you know,
everyone speaks Danish there now, whichis North Germanic language, but it certainly
would have at one point. Imean, the ruins show that the Runic

(54:44):
inscriptions like bracteate evidence and stuff fromparts of you know, Denmark, Jutland
is demonstrating the West Germanic were spokenthere. And now we know that this
change from West to Northern Yomanic isaccompanied by population turnovers. They were brutal
Bruce times, no doubt about it. The Roman iron age has agricultural stability,

(55:06):
and then you have this period fromthe like migration era, where it's
concentration in favorable areas and then reoccupationof agricultural areas in the late Iron Age,
so there's tumultuous time. There's adecline in the population size at the
late migration period. And this likemigration period is coincides with the arrival of
the Odin as the main god religion, like the Germanic religion as we understand

(55:30):
it, Odin or Woden can bereliably understood to have been the main god
of Germanic people prior to the migrationera, prior to the dispersal of like
Anglo Saxons and God, because allof them have Odin or Woden or Godan
as their main god. So it'snot the actual migration era itself that brought

(55:50):
Odin, because Odin's already like dominantin all of these places, so it's
it predominates that. And this isalso the period when the South Scandinavians adopt
this new animal style art, whichis all these twisting, interlocking creatures grasping
and biting each other, and it'svery influenced by Scutian artwork for some reason
which no one seems really to understand. How it happened. But yeah,

(56:15):
that's that artwork isn't really there inNordic Bronze Age times and Nordic Bronze A's
times are the times when Scuthians existed, so Scuffians and the art that animal
art didn't really exist at that time, like four hundred a d. When
it starts a salin style one beginsat that time, but that's when the

(56:37):
Germanics start to switch towards it,and partly probably why Greeks and southern Southern
some southern people referred to Germanic peoplelike Goths and even later Vikings as Scuthians
because they saw that they wore trousersand had Scuffian style art, similar looking
kind of people and thought maybe theywere Scuthians, but they were not Scuffians.

(56:59):
They do not have any Scuthian DNA. We know that there's no Scithian
genetic influence on the Germanic people,but we can definitely see a cultural influence,
and the exact way that was mediatedis not clear. That would be
a very interesting area of research forthe future. So yeah, like then
after the migration, it's towards theend of the migration period you get up
here at listing like the volcanic eruptionsthat caused like very very very bad winters,

(57:22):
the Justinian plague, and the dispersalsof Domanic people, which obviously could
have been made worse for like interms of Southern European there may have been
push factors caused by these, butalready that stuff is happening all before all
these disasters, and there has beena massive cultural change in the Germanic world

(57:44):
which resulted in this militant ideology withOdin as the main god and Domanic people
emerging on the world stage. That'swhen people start to have historical references to
them, and that's when people eventuallyit results in people referring to Scandinavia as
the womb of nations, because itgives birth to the Franks, it gives
birth to the Langabards, it givesbirth to the Goths, the Anglo Saxons,

(58:07):
it gives birth to so many differentraces that became like the dominant peoples
who founded Europe as we know it. Charlemagne was a Frank, the English,
that the Langerbards in Italy, thatVisi Goths in Spain, like the
whole of Europe is dominated by peoplewho were born from the Scandinavian Peninsula.
So that this idea of a wombof nations has been which is a medieval

(58:28):
expression, I think is definitely vindicatedby modern genetic science. I don't think
I can really go over much more. Let me just check your comments.
Indo Europeans used the A word aboutthemselves, No, they did not.
The A word is an Indo Iranicword, but it may derive from a

(58:50):
Proton European word arios, but that'sa contested etymology, and I can't say
with any authority whether it's a goodone or not. Burglar Akoli arks on
X. Wasn't Stockholm also part ofthe Hanseatic League with German settlers helping the
economy there. Yes, it was. Gotland was a massive part of the
Hansiatic League. Gotland is so interestingbecause now it's probably quite south shifted the

(59:14):
Gotland population because it was, youknow, so many Germans there. Earlier
it was very very Nordic and hadextremely high Doant dominance of Iwan happler groups.
But if you go into the BronzeAge you can also see that it
was very Baltic and there were alot of like, you know, Lithuanian
like cultural artifacts there. So it'sbeing in the middle of the Baltic has
made it a very important strategic placeand it still is today. It very

(59:37):
very strategic that American troops will beon Gotland very soon, there will be
America. I don't want to toomuch about it, but Russia has his
eyes on Gotland, America has hiseyes on Gotland. The Gotland's position has
always made it extremely central for variousreasons. Better not go too much into
it. I don't really fresh us. I don't really get the Alentoft conclusions

(59:59):
on Iran. There's only nine people, eight I one and one ir one.
B. Don't get how I onewould have decreased so much in the
last two thousand years. More likelydoes sampling errors. Well, they also
despise their new samples. They gotothers. They've got lots of samples,
and not just those ones. It'sprofessional looking, not as bad as the
Norman bolcut you had a few weeksago, says Alisdair. This is the

(01:00:20):
same haircut. I just haven't hadmy haircut since then. It's just grown
a bit, that's all. Itwas a bad haircut and I'm just growing
it out so I can get itcut properly. That's why it doesn't look
great. I wanted a bowl cut. I did actually ask for a ball
cut, but it was bad aboutbowl cut. I might keep the bowl
cut for a while. I'm notsure yet. What about Odin being based
on a Tiller of the Hunt,that's nonsense, Absolutely no way, because

(01:00:44):
the influence of a tilla In onthe Germanic world post dates the periferation of
the open cult, so it's notpossible. Arrogance Invictus says, Germanics do
have scuffy and DNA. I heardit in a blood memory sleep session.
It's hard to I didn't know aboutthat. I didn't check those sources of

(01:01:04):
blood memory sleep walking. There's alot of zoomorphic Latain Celtic artwork that are
more likely root, says Peter Juliahan. I disagree. Lataine Celtic artwork is
not the source of Slin style onethat I can see because Latain, I'm
not even maybe, if you're right, it might not have seen the relevant
sources that you're talking about. ButLataine star artwork is generally not zoomorphic.

(01:01:29):
It's very much fine work and itcomes and whereas the Germanic I've done a
whole video on the origin of Celticnetwork coming out of Germanic network. So
actually most of what we call Celticnetwork is derivative of Germanic network, and
Germanic notwork. It might have someLatin influences, but not very clearly.
It's not obviously based on Latain.And it's also it emerges a long time

(01:01:52):
after Latain stopped being used in theCeltic world, so it's like, you
know, this is after the autas the Roman Empire is the Western Roman
Empire is crumbling, that's the momentwhen the Germanic people switch to this style.
And its epicenter is not in thecontinent, it's in Scandinavia. So
I don't know if to me itseems more likely that the vector is a

(01:02:15):
Turkic people, that they were tradingwith some Turkic people who would have Skepian
roots perhaps, and I'm not awareof their artistic traditions. Maybe, and
that's why I'm not able to say, or it could be a Baltic people
because Baltic I understand Baltic people dohave influences from Iranic artwork as well,
but I don't know it's something archaeologistsshould look at because this silent style art

(01:02:38):
is definitely a big break from previousGermanic art, and it's something it ties
in with the beginning of like thewhole Oding Cold and all these tumultuous changes
genetically within Scandinavia. So something BIG'shappening. Then it's very interesting. Well,
my friends me old chumps, thankyou for watching jive Talk, and

(01:02:59):
I hope you found this interesting anda good summary of the paper. And
I'll continue to lucidate findings from papersas much as they can here on jive
talk. And I'm soon going tobe launching a for those of you who
actually interest in Germanic paganism, orheathenry as it's called. I will soon
be launching a distance learning online coursewhich will teach you exactly how to get

(01:03:22):
started with practicing heathenry at home orcommunally. And the course will be called
Starting heathen Ry. So watch thisspace if you want to learn exactly how
to do it. Also make sureyou subscribe to this channel jive talk on
YouTube if you want to make sureyou see all my other streams, or

(01:03:45):
to the main channel survive the Jiveif you want to see my normal edited
videos. Thanks a lot for everyone. Also to those who are listening later
on on podcast, thank you verymuch. Also goodbye everyone and thanks against

(01:04:06):
fag Gez's far sargonntther fasie peaz faargonnather fa twos spree fag pea soup or

(01:04:49):
contrather movie in faye test face setupcontent to steal fi soup organ face spicele

(01:05:56):
fees soup is to toss fright tagledcount rorss R hack ou so argo so

(01:07:32):
yeahs bots right our so or fatherhere fsgo stare pos right tack out this

(01:08:19):
us stars right is so stagg here