So who were they?

Proto-Germanics and proto-Slavics.

I2 like prehistoric WHG (I can't find the whole study, so I don't know their subclades). It's likely that GAC people contributed to Balto-Slavic ancestry.

Germanics are R1b and l1.

But I2 in Slavs could be from the Narva/Neman instead of GAC

Were those G2 fuckers the biggest cucks on the planet? Holy fuck, what even happened? I always thought it was the horse-riding niggers who cucked them, but they are barely in Europe even before they appeared. There are their women and I2 WHG chads.

Neolithic diffusion was mutual for the sexes and a slow absorption of original Europeans into the genepool. Unlike the steppe people who came as true Chads and fucked the shit out of everyone.

>Proto-Germanics
Nope. From Corded Ware arose Baltic, Slavic, iranic and Indian cultures. Nothing to do with any Germanics.

Germanics originate in Single Grave Corded Ware and Barbed Wire Bell Beaker fusion.
Although Single Grave already had local influence from Funnelbeaker so it was a three way mix. I1 could be from some corner of Funnelbeaker but it definitely wasn't dominant in it.

>WE

No, it came from culture spawned by Bell Beakers. It had nothing to do with Corded Ware. To call them Proto-Germanic is simple WE WUZ.

Botai were part of PIE? I think they domesticated the horse

Bell Beakers may have played the biggest role but there's continuity with Corded Ware/Funnelbeaker as well. It's very dishonest to say there's no connection to CW.

Germanic tribals.

When Bellbeaker derived Unetice culture fused with the Corded Ware derived Scandinavian Battle Axe culture, the Proto-Germanic culture was created in Denmark.

Hence modern Germanics are in between modern day Celts like the Welsh and modern day Western Slavs genetically.

Nope. Barbed Wire Bell Beakers, not Unetice.

Except for the fact that Unetice was genetically distinct from the Welsh, and that Corded Ware was genetically distinct from West Slavs. Germans being genetically between modern day Celts and West Slavs is more to do with geography than what cultural groups they derive from.

It's dishonest to call Corded Ware Proto-Germanic or straight out go like that guy

Also I should add that modern Celts derive most of their ancestry from the original Bell Beaker invaders of the British Isles. The Celts spread throughout the British Isles primarily by cultural diffusion and elite domination.

Had a talk with a guy who was more informed than me and he said that proto-Germanic came from Unetice and Battle Axe Culture.

Could be genetic drift, and even Western Germans and Dutchmen are inbetween Slavs and Celts genetically, although closer to Celts.

>dishonest to call Corded Ware Proto-Germanic
I agree with this statement. When discussing Germanic origins it should always be noted that they originate in a three way mix of Bell Beaker, Corded Ware and Funnelbeaker instead of straight up Corded Ware.

On the other hand you have screaming Polacks being upset that Germanics also have CWC ancestry.

I doubt that's true because it would mean most Germanic peoples don't have Germanic ancestry.
The mixing between Barbed Wire Bell Beakers and Single Grave happened slightly before early Unetice.
>In east central Sweden and western Sweden, barbed wire decoration characterised the period 2460–1990 BC, linked to another Beaker derivation of northwestern Europe.

>Western Germans and Dutchmen are inbetween Slavs and Celts genetically, although closer to Celts
But they're also inbetween Slavs and the French, English, and everyone else to the west of them, so this doesn't necessarily imply some kind of (British Isles)Celtic-Unetice genetic connection. Unetice culture wasn't Celtic, although ultimately the Celtic culture derives from them. The "Celts" of the British Isles derive most of their ancestry from pre-Celtic (and pre-Unetice) Bell Beaker folk who inhabited the British Isles. So the modern day Celts in the British Isles have nothing to do with continental Germanics.

Maybe this guy was right then, with Germanics being a Barbed Wire and Single grave fusion.

Germanics are I1 and I2

R1b are Celts

Gallo-Moroccan detected

Silesian detected

False, I just accept the role R1b played in the Germanic ethnogenesis and expansion

The only "Germans" with a lot of R1b are the Rhinelanders and it is because they are German speaking-French.

>ignoring the role R1b played in the Germanic ethnogenesis and expansion

>German-speaking French*

>ignoring the fact that Beakers in Germany were all R1b -P312 aka Celtic
>ignorig the presence of R1b-U106 among Iron Age Britons(Celtic)
>ignoring the dominance of I1 among Saxons in both Germany and Britain
>implying Germanics totally replaced the native population
>implying Germanics weren't a warrior elite that forced its language on native Celts(r1b)

Why is Germanic centum then? If it was battle axe, they would be satem like slavs.

Explain Lilla Beddinge U106 from 2100 BC Sweden

Germanic is Celtic spoken by non-IEs, obviously the original Proto-Germanic(Celts) carried R1b(U106).

>ignoring the fact that Beakers in Germany were all R1b -P312 aka Celtic
R1b-U106 came from Bell Beaker, this is an undisputed fact. A lack of samples doesn't mean we can conclude that it wasn't present. I don't see why you're focusing so much on German Bell-Beakers either, since R1b-U106 probably spread to Scandinavia from around the Netherlands, not Germany.

>ignorig the presence of R1b-U106 among Iron Age Britons(Celtic)
You are of course aware that haplogroups can be found in more than one place at once, right? And that haplogroups can be found in more than one population? How exactly does R1b-U106 being found in Celtic populations prove that it was not found in Germanic populations and that it had nothing to do with the Germanic ethnogenesis. Have you considered the possibility R1b-U106 was spread to both Britain and Scandinavia prior to the rise of the Celts and Germanics?

>ignoring the dominance of I1 among Saxons in both Germany and Britain
Let me guess, you're quoting the study that found a couple of I1 samples in Anglo-Saxon England that led everyone on Veeky Forums to conclude that the Anglo-Saxons were 100% pure I1? By the way, Saxon Germans are still R1b dominant. Even the Danes are R1b dominant.

>implying Germanics totally replaced the native population
True, but there was a significant migration. From what I understand there are less than a dozen Celtic loanwords in English, and there are barely any Celtic place names in England. Despite your autistic obsession over a single study that severely lacked samples, there is also strong genetic evidence for a large scale Anglo-Saxon migration.

>implying Germanics weren't a warrior elite that forced its language on native Celts(r1b)
This is true for much of continental Europe, but then again you could argue the same about the Celts. The Celts mainly expanded through cultural diffusion and elite domination with little genetic input, especially at the fringes of the Celtic cultural sphere.

>R1b-U106 came from Bell Beaker, this is an undisputed fact. A lack of samples doesn't mean we can conclude that it wasn't present.
No U106 was found among them. The only possiblity is that U106-carriers were low status people which would explain the lack of remains.

>I don't see why you're focusing so much on German Bell-Beakers either, since R1b-U106 probably spread to Scandinavia from around the Netherlands, not Germany.
Netherland was also a part of the Bell-Beaker Horizon.

>Have you considered the possibility R1b-U106 was spread to both Britain and Scandinavia prior to the rise of the Celts and Germanics?
Proto-Celts are far older than Proto-Germanics. In fact, archeologists consider the Beakers as Proto-Celts,

>Let me guess, you're quoting the study that found a couple of I1 samples in Anglo-Saxon England that led everyone on Veeky Forums to conclude that the Anglo-Saxons were 100% pure I1?
Tomenable mentioned a study showing Medieval Saxons(from Saxony) as being mainly I1.

>By the way, Saxon Germans are still R1b dominant. Even the Danes are R1b dominant.Danes are Cimbri and Teutons aka Gauls.
Modern Saxons are mainly descended from West Frankish colonists. Danes are mainly descended from the Celtic Cimbri and Teutons.

>True, but there was a significant migration. From what I understand there are less than a dozen Celtic loanwords in English, and there are barely any Celtic place names in England.
There are still quite a lot of them. Pic related.

>Despite your autistic obsession over a single study that severely lacked samples, there is also strong genetic evidence for a large scale Anglo-Saxon migration.
Not really
Anglos do not cluster with Germanics like Swedes or Danes, but they cluster with Celts like Scotts, Welsh, and Irish,

1/2

They were Neolithic Farmers genetically with 20%~ WHG admixture, there's a few samples from a study on Southeastern Europe.

Weren't WHG wide-faced and robust? How the fuck were GA numales then?

Balts and Slavs have wide faces and brachy skulls from WHG I think.

...

>This is true for much of continental Europe, but then again you could argue the same about the Celts.
Not really. Welsh, Irish and Scotts cluster with Iron Age and Roman-era Britons.

>The Celts mainly expanded through cultural diffusion and elite domination with little genetic input, especially at the fringes of the Celtic cultural sphere.
French cluster with Bronze Age Pannonian Celts. From Gaul(western fringe) to Pannonia(eastern fringe), all Celts were racially similar.

2/2

>Globular Amphora
Who came up with that, sounds like a bacteria

>No U106 was found among them.
It was found in Bell Beaker samples from the Netherlands, though. Also again, you have to answer the question - if R1b-U106 didn't come from Bell Beaker, where else did it come from?

>The only possiblity is that U106-carriers were low status people which would explain the lack of remains.
Not only is this ridiculous, but it also conflicts with your earlier statement that R1b-U106 was brought to Scandinavia by dominant ruling class Celts.

>In fact, archeologists consider the Beakers as Proto-Celts
"No."

>Tomenable mentioned a study showing Medieval Saxons(from Saxony) as being mainly I1.
Don't mention T*menable's name in my presence unless it's censored. Also his theory on R1b-U106 is laughable. Suppose he's right and the Saxons were originally I1 dominant before being genocided and replaced by R1b Franks, why would the Danes be R1b dominant? They were unaffected by the Franks. It would make no sense for them to be R1b dominant with the Saxons south of them being majority I1.

>Modern Saxons are mainly descended from West Frankish colonists.
Laughable theory. I explained this to you yesterday, but I'll go over it briefly again. Thousands of Saxons were killed, not millions. There was no major Frankish migration to Saxony. Danes are majority R1b, not I1, and they were untouched by the Franks.

>Danes are mainly descended from the Celtic Cimbri and Teutons.
Even more laughable. Putting obvious falsehoods aside, the respective homelands don't even match up. The Cimbri and Teutones came from Jutland, while the Danes came from Zealand and southern Sweden.

>There are still quite a lot of them. Pic related.
Interesting image, I'll admit I underestimated the amount of Celtic toponymy in England.

1/2

>Anglos do not cluster with Germanics like Swedes or Danes, but they cluster with Celts like Scotts, Welsh, and Irish
Not true, north-west Europeans as a whole cluster very, very closely together. This include insular Celtic populations and Germanic populations. If you want to break it down further, then East English populations fall between Celtic populations and the Dutch. The Scots can't be considered a "Celtic" population by the way, since there's considerable Germanic influence in the Lowlands.

>Not really. Welsh, Irish and Scotts cluster with Iron Age and Roman-era Britons.
I know, but I never said otherwise. I said that the Celts had a fairly minimal genetic impact on the British Isles when they spread there.

>all Celts were racially similar
Wrong, Insular Celts cluster nowhere near Continental Celts.

>Germanics like Swedes or Danes
To be clear, Danes are Germanic in the sense that a signifiant ammount(around 30-40%) of their genes derive from Germanics.

U106+I1+Z284 is more than that, and that's just the main lines we can associate with P-Germanics.

Earliest Z284 was found in Latvia dated to late Bronze age, although it's virtually absent in that region there, but it can hardly be Germanic since it's TMRCA is 4300YBP, it's likely one of the Corded Ware waves that ended up in Scandinavia.

aka Balto-Slavs raping Swedish farmers :) names of Aesir gods are Satemic :)

This lunatic again.

Proto-Germanic dates to about 500 BC. It's bullshit to say Proto-Germanics were 30% Germanic, isn't it? It couldn't be anything but 100%.

>names of Aesir gods are Satemic :)
Can you say which ones, and how you came to the conclusion that they were Satemic?

Good to see you've dropped the part about them being R1a Aryan warlords, by the way.

truth doesn't fear the investigation :)

>It was found in Bell Beaker samples from the Netherlands, though. Also again, you have to answer the question - if R1b-U106 didn't come from Bell Beaker, where else did it come from?
As said above, they may have been low status Beakers.

>Not only is this ridiculous, but it also conflicts with your earlier statement that R1b-U106 was brought to Scandinavia by dominant ruling class Celts.
The body of a starved camel is still bigger than a living horse.

A low status people among IEs can indeed become the ruling-class of the racially inferior pre-IEs.

>"No."
"Yes."
Atlantic Europe in the First Millennium BC: Crossing the Divide
>In more recent publications, Almagro-Gorbea links the origins of what he calls the proto-Celtic culture with the Bell Beaker phenomenon and explains the Celtic ethnogenesis as a fluid polymorph model rather than a cumulative one (Almagro-Gorbea 2004).

>Don't mention T*menable's name in my presence unless it's censored.
What about : "I'm not the Silesian-guy." ?

>Suppose he's right and the Saxons were originally I1 dominant before being genocided and replaced by R1b Franks, why would the Danes be R1b dominant?
Teutons and Cimbri.
Google "Gaesorix", "Boiorix", "Lugus", and "Maurimarusam", and you'll understand.

>Thousands of Saxons were killed, not millions.
Saxons weren't millions, and Franks raided them on a daily basis.

>There was no major Frankish migration to Saxony. Danes are majority R1b, not I1, and they were untouched by the Franks.
Yes there was. As for Danes, it is true that there were no Frankish presence there but there were Gauls, and later on, French Hugenots and Walloons workers.

>Even more laughable. Putting obvious falsehoods aside, the respective homelands don't even match up. The Cimbri and Teutones came from Jutland, while the Danes came from Zealand and southern Sweden.
Teutons and Cimbri.

1/2

>Can you say which ones, and how you came to the conclusion that they were Satemic?
Thor, Loke, Odin, Tyr. those are all Satem names.
>Good to see you've dropped the part about them being R1a Aryan warlords
but they were. and they came from baltic region by boats. specifically, latvia, lithuania and north poland.

Corded Ware people were Nordics, as I said many times :)

just like them, right?

this is m*Dshit from globural amphora, not Corded Nordic.

he's still a horseface, just like your nordic ideal :)

He has worse skull development, Nordic skulls are perfect as you can see in these CWC individuals

Not that guy you replied too, but it's really idiotic to assume whole Bell Beaker horizon spoke Proto-Celtic, it is very likely that Celtic was one of the language that disseminated from Beakers succeeding cultures, but same can be said about Italic and Germanic languages.

And besides you can't even speak of Proto-Celtic 2900-1800BC of Proto-Celtic when Beaker culture existed.

no, they're the same horsefaces like GA had :) your nordic ideal is just some middle eastern shitskin.

"horseface" is much better than niggerface when applied to Nordic individuals.

but you dumb nigger. horseface came from middle east. native euros were all brachy and wide faced :)

>A low status people among IEs can indeed become the ruling-class of the racially inferior pre-IEs.
The people living in Scandinavia before the arrival of the R1b folk weren't pre-IEs.

>"Yes."
"No."
Bell Beaker is ancestral to the Celtic, Germanic and Italic languages, and possibly other extinct languages. I'll take Mallory and a multitude of others over "Almagro-Gorbea".

>What about : "I'm not the Silesian-guy." ?
I'm literally not him. But honestly I prefer him to T*menable because at least he keeps his shit contained within Veeky Forums and doesn't try to spread it as far as possible.

>Teutons and Cimbri.
If you're claiming they are responsible for Denmark being R1b, then Zealand, southern Sweden, southern Norway, etc. shouldn't be R1b dominant, but they are.

>Saxons weren't millions, and Franks raided them on a daily basis
Raids aren't enough to destroy an entire population.

>there were Gauls, and later on, French Hugenots and Walloons workers.
Not enough to explain R1b literally being the dominant haplogroup there. That would be some extreme population replacement.

>Teutons and Cimbri.
?
They came from Jutland, the Danes came from Zealand and southern Sweden. They aren't the same people.

Nope, facial progressiveness was developed independently by Eastern Hunther Gatherers :)

Then they conquered the m*Doid and n*Tivoid races and spread their noble bloodline :)

>Thor, Loke, Odin, Tyr. those are all Satem names.
How are they Satem? And if this is the result of "Balto-Slavic" rape, why do Balto-Slavic Gods have completely different names? Dievas can be linked with Tyr, but that's about it as far as I'm aware.

>Maurimarusam
Morimarusam*

It is the Cimbri/Teuton word for the Baltic Sea, and it mean "dead sea" according to Pliny. Morimarusam does indeed mean "dead sea" in Gaulish but not in Germanic.

>Not true, north-west Europeans as a whole cluster very, very closely together. This include insular Celtic populations and Germanic populations.
"No."
French(Western Gauls) and Western German(Eastern Gauls) are close but that's it.

>If you want to break it down further, then East English populations fall between Celtic populations and the Dutch.
True, but the rest of the English are basically Celts.

>The Scots can't be considered a "Celtic" population by the way, since there's considerable Germanic influence in the Lowlands.
Scotts are actually more Celtic than Welsh. Pic related.

>I know, but I never said otherwise. I said that the Celts had a fairly minimal genetic impact on the British Isles when they spread there.
Gauls had a fairly minimal genetic, but prior Celtic migrations, like those of the Gaels had an heavy impact

>Wrong, Insular Celts cluster nowhere near Continental Celts.
True.

1/2

>How are they Satem?
they just are. even Thor Heyerdahl woudl tell you the same.
>And if this is the result of "Balto-Slavic" rape, why do Balto-Slavic Gods have completely different names? Dievas can be linked with Tyr, but that's about it as far as I'm aware.
maybe because germanics came from elp culture that enforced themselves onto battle axe? elp was centum not satem.
sure thing, nigger :) fuck off back to middle east. baltic people are the closest to aryans as you can get.

>baltic people are the closest to aryans as you can get.
Wrong. Corded Ware folk had European skull shape, not mongoloid like b*Ltoids.

>they just are
Wow, very convincing.

>maybe because germanics came from elp culture that enforced themselves onto battle axe? elp was centum not satem.
So you're claiming that Germanic god names come from Balto-Slavic, but simultaneously claiming that they come from Elp culture? Interesting theory.

nah, you're just a retard that ignores primary sources to fit your westernoid agenda.
balts don't have mongoloid skulls, in fact there is no mongoloid admixture among baltic people.

>in fact there is no mongoloid admixture among baltic people.
Here is where you are wrong :)

Fjörgynn father of Odin is likely derived from same Perkwunos - Perkūnas and other derivatives.

>French(Western Gauls) and Western German(Eastern Gauls) are close but that's it.
Wrong, the peoples of the British Isles, Norwegians, Danes, the Dutch, Belgians, etc cluster very close together.

>True, but the rest of the English are basically Celts.
Debatable, but I won't really press the issue.

>Scotts are actually more Celtic than Welsh. Pic related.
Irish =/= Celtic. Ironically the English more "Celtic" than the Irish since they cluster closest to the originally Celts of central Europe. The Irish are essentially the Bell Beaker inhabitants of Ireland that got Celticised through cultural diffusion and elite dominance.

>Gauls had a fairly minimal genetic, but prior Celtic migrations, like those of the Gaels had an heavy impact
Source?

You really shouldn't talk about R1b dominant Sweden, or Norway. Southern Sweden is heavily I1.
Some of the R1b especially in Norway is of the Gaelic type and comes from Gael slaves.
There has been R1b in Scandinavia for over 4000 years but not majority or dominant.

>le 58% non-N1c face

>There has been R1b in Scandinavia for over 4000 years but not majority or dominant.
This isn't entirely true, since R1b is the dominant haplogroup in Denmark. And I know I accidentally used the word "majority" in an earlier post, but I meant to say "dominant".

Regardless, the Cimbri and Teutones can't explain R1b's dominance in Denmark.

>The people living in Scandinavia before the arrival of the R1b folk weren't pre-IEs.
Racially inferior non-R1b.*

>Raids aren't enough to destroy an entire population.
They slowly grind it away making it easier to build colonies.

>Not enough to explain R1b literally being the dominant haplogroup there
France at that time was the home of 20 million Frenchmen while the rest of Europe had 15-30 million people at most. French bred like rabbits.

>They came from Jutland, the Danes came from Zealand and southern Sweden. They aren't the same people.
It is true that the Proto-Danes came from Zealand, but Modern Danes also include the Native Gauls.

>Wrong, the peoples of the British Isles, Norwegians, Danes, the Dutch, Belgians, etc cluster very close together.
Nope
If you look at any PCA :
-British cluster together.
-Danes, Norwegians and Dutch cluster together.
-French, Belgians, Swisses, and Western Germans cluster together.

>The Irish are essentially the Bell Beaker inhabitants of Ireland
Thus Celts.

>Gauls had a fairly minimal genetic, but prior Celtic migrations, like those of the Gaels had an heavy impact
Since Welsh(P-Celts) and Cornish(P-Celts) do not cluser with French(Gauls/P-Celts) but with Irish and Scotts(Q-Celts), it is obvious that they are more influenced by the earlier Gael migrations, rather than by the later Gallic migrations.

R1b folk was racially similiar to R1a folk.

oh please. balts are more whg but at the same time they're more ane than scandinavians. it's clear to everyone that baltic people are the closest to indo europeans autosomally. your skulls are irrelevant.

>Nope
Yes, even if you do an image search for "pca europe" you'll find the vast majority of agree with what I wrote.

>Thus Celts.
Bell Beaker =/= Celtic. Bell Beaker was ancestral to Celtic, but also Germanic, Italic and possibly others.

>Since Welsh(P-Celts) and Cornish(P-Celts) do not cluser with French(Gauls/P-Celts) but with Irish and Scotts(Q-Celts), it is obvious that they are more influenced by the earlier Gael migrations, rather than by the later Gallic migrations.
Or alternatively it was like the majority of Iron Age migrations in Europe, that is, with minimal genetic impact. The genetic difference between insular Celts and continental populations is something that was established in the Bronze Age.

>it's clear to everyone that baltic people are the closest to indo europeans autosomally
Wrong again. Norwegians are the closst to Indo-GERMANICS autosomally, not baltomongols :)

not at all. perhaps their bastard offspring in central europe was. corded ware came from khvalynsk culture and yamna overtaking it for a brief period of time, doesn't mean yamna was the source of indo european people.

yamna was overtaken as well.
that's an outdated study. the closest people to indo europeans are estonians, latvians, finns and lithuanians.

In your dreams brachycephalic subhuman.

Norwegians even look like authentic Aryans, not like 42% N1c mutts modern b*Ltoids are... :)

i won't argue with a retard that can't tell difference between brachy WHG european people and some doli faces of ENF monkeys.

fyi, estonians truly are the most steppe in Europe.

>brachy WHG european people
Nope, WHG had mean cephalic index 72,6, not over 81 as br*Choids :)

your little dick has cephalic index of 10cmx4cm. don't respond to me retard, you're a worm beneath my boot.

>estonians
mongoloid joke just like fingols

Both should be deported to Siberia immediately :)

>your little dick has cephalic index of 10cmx4cm
>t. m*Doid with too small skull to understand what cephalic index is

Friendly reminder that mesocephaly is the master race.

Dolichocephaly = niggerdom
Brachycephaly = chinkdom
Mesocephaly = Aryan European

Mesocephaly is dolichocephaly in denial.
Corded Ware folk was doli, which means that the most ideal Nordics should be doli too.