>>54868475 hungarians aren't the huns though, were they? i thought they came from the magyars, as such we call them macar in turkey huns core was turkic, they had a lot of barbarian allies with them though
>>54868475 That's the typical map biased by a 20th Century conception of what a nation is and what borders are.
To say these people had an empire is very uninformative. Did they have political influence? Military influence over the area? Economic influence?
How deep was their control of such huge territory, given the standards of that time and age?
Did they just pillage some areas and intimated to the survivors to "swear fealty otherwise we'll come back and kill you"? Or was there an actual government, a development plan, etc.?
Arbitrary rule of tribesmen is an Empire only in the minds of those who face the Horde.
In most cases, these swarming tribes were just a moving front line... i.e. they had control only over a 100 km belt they used to sweep the land from East to West.
The colouring of such map does not have the same colouring of, say, present day America. All that brown paint smeared East of the Latin territories is a guess at best, mostly unsupported by archeological findigs. It is a Hic sunt Hunns at best.
>Vandals did not hold that much territory >Saxons and Jutes did not hold that much territory by 453 >northern England was not conquered by Jutes at all, they only conquered parts of Kent and the Isle of Wight >"Romanised Celts" >Picts did not cover anywhere near that area >Ostrogoths did not control anywhere near that much land, especially on the coast in Dalmatia >Huns did not have anywhere near as much as land as that and very little of it was under their direct control >Huns were nomadic, they did not control land north and east of the Black Sea this late >Huns did not control parts of Scandinavia >there were still dozens if not hundreds of tribes in northern Europe that were not under their control >Burgundians did not control that much land >Visigoths did not control that much land, particularly not in Armorica (Britanny) which was mostly controlled by independent bagaudae
>According to Professor of Archeology at the University of Oslo, Lotte Hedeager, the old Norwegian (and also Swedish) ruling class consisted of Huns. She argues that a new and strong social order was established with the arrival of the Huns, something that enabled them to resist the victorious Christian countries to the south.
Götaland and Gotland in southern Sweden now have the highest frequency of haplogroup Q in Europe (5%) and almost all of it belong to the Q1a2b1 (L527) subclade. The Romans reported that the Huns consisted of a small ruling elite and their armies comprised mostly of Germanic warriors. Gotland and Götaland is the presumed homeland of the ancient Goths. In the 1st century CE, some Goths migrated from Sweden to Poland, then in the 2nd century settled on the northern shores of the Black Sea around modern Moldova. The Huns conquered the Goths in the Pontic Steppe in the 4th century, forcing some of them to flee the Dnieper region and settled in the Eastern Roman Empire (Balkans). It would not be improbable that some Goths and Huns moved back to southern Sweden, either before invading the Roman Empire, or after the fall of the Western Roman Empire, displaced by the Slavic migrations to Central Europe. After all, even ancient people kept the nostalgia of their ancestral homeland and knew exactly where their ancestors a few hundreds years earlier came from.
>>54875725 >Hedeager is convinced that “the Huns’ supre - macy included parts of Scandinavia” (s. 44). This conclusion is based on a quote from a conversation between the West Roman ambassador Ro - mulus and the East Roman envoy Priscus. Ro - mu lus said that “[Attila] ruled even the islands of the Ocean” (Priscus fr. 8, see Doblhofer 1955).
That is a different independent quote and does not have anything by her. Thats based on genetic evidence which is almost impossible to fake. If Hunns werent there, why are their male lineages found only among north germanics?
>>54877238 >>54877262 We don't learn about it. That's why it's fucked up. I can prove it to you, that they were Polish/Western Slav ancestors.
For one. Vandals used to cremate their dead, something other germanics didn't do. Tacticus and Pilnius said that Vandals look different than others and have other customs. Early Western Slavs also used to cremate their dead.
Actually 100 years ago historians already saw the connection between Vandals and Poles, but it was German historians, in the times of peaking German nationalism, held that having a Germanic culture equals being Germans. And their word dominated until recently.
Yet Romans clearly described the Lugii or Vandals as looking different and having different habits. Habits closer to their Eastern neighbours the Venedi.
Also, consider: why does this tribe call themselves "Lugii" but are called a derivate of what they called their neighbours: wanderers?
The Winilli became Longobards after in battle they dressed up their women as soldiers, shaved they hair and fixed it to their chins as beards in a battle agaist the much more numerous Vandals. Everyone called them "the long beards" after that and they adopted it.
Similarly for some reason the Lugii tribes were called Wandilli/Vandals, a name they also adopted. And the Wends to the east of them also adopted the name Germans gave them.
>>54877574 I'm not giving much to national epos/myth BS, genetics, especially autosomal, is where it's at in 2016 I also noticed those clinging hardest to such creation stories are peoples who got their writing very late so they have to associate themselves with some ancient mystical "we wuz kangs" people, case in point Albos with their "muh Illelryans" crap
So I'd much rather look at PCAs and admixture analyses desu
>>54877795 By the picture you gave me Poles are closer to Norwegians than to Russians. Also look at Belarusians. Would fit perfectly the fact that "Goths" were from Scandinavia but migrated to modern day Belarus, that's why Balts called Belarusians "Gudai/gudi">>54872053
>>54877333 >Vandals used to cremate their dead, something other germanics didn't do. >"Thus he (Odin) established by law that all dead men should be burned, and their belongings laid with them upon the pile, and the ashes be cast into the sea or buried in the earth. Thus, said he, every one will come to Valhalla with the riches he had with him upon the pile; and he would also enjoy whatever he himself had buried in the earth. For men of consequence a mound should be raised to their memory, and for all other warriors who had been distinguished for manhood a standing stone; which custom remained long after Odin's time." -Ynglinga saga
>>54877959 Florin Curta in his work mentions that Early Western Slavs and Przeworks culture(Vandals) and before that Lengyel Culture(Lengyel is what Hungarians call Poles) used to pray to Freya. So would also fit perfectly.
>>54877902 Also what I want to say is that language is overrated, it changes much quicker than genetics, just check Hungary which isn't anywhere near Finland let alone T*rks (Ural-Altaic isn't accepted much anyway these days), but exactly between their neighbours
>>54878062 >When you say Germanics people automatically think of Germans, not Scandis. You probably shouldn't use the word "people" when referring to Poles. All Germanics are descendants of Scandinavians. We are "THE" Germanics.
>>54878388 Poles have more European admixture than Swedes. If we're not white, then no one is.
Yet again, your only arguments are insults and pseudo-nationalistic swedish thoughts. All you can do is bark on korean image board, because you have no balls to fight for your homeland, for your own women that get raped on every possible turn they take.
Here's your superiority, dying under barbarian islamic boot.
>>54878213 The problem is how to exactly define what's "Germanic". Limited to speakers 500BC? Also including modern day ones? It's not like they came south here and killed/replaced all the native Celts or whatever, it's hard to tell how much % which peoples decends from the Germanics at the time of ethnogenesis, but I don't think it's too high and most were just "converted" language wise like it was with the Hungarians, else we wouldn't score that close to some "Celtic" peoples such as French or British on K15
>>54878359 Croats, like every people from an area that has been, conquered, reconquered, raided and settled countless times throughout history are mutts who cannot be traced back to a single people. Yes, you have some Ostrogoth in you, but you have a bit of everything in you.
>>54878463 You're talking about that K12 (I think) based map some Pole totally unbiasedly made a while ago? Well he included "Caucasian" (=churka) but excluded "West Asian" at the same time, kinda arbitrary desu
>>54878690 Well both are only "peripheral European" at best in my book I also made a K12b one myself some time ago with two numbers >lower strictly European Atlantic Med + N European >upper broadly "white" the above + Gedrosia + Siberian + NW African + SW Asian + Caucasus
>>54878531 Of course the locals weren't all genocided or driven off. There was a fair bit of mixing going on, peaceful or otherwise. Thus non-Scandinavian Germanics are more accurately described as Germanic/Celtic mixtures (sometimes with some Slavic), that speak Germanic languages. However, the closeness with the French and the Brits come not only from the Celtic side, but also from Germanic admixture in France (named after a Germanic people as I'm sure you're aware) and the British isles (Angles, Saxons, Normans, Norsemen, etc.).
>>54880016 Also, it's just a coincidence that German capital was founded by so called """"""slavs"""" not by pure """""germanics"""".
>https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hevelli >West Slavic tribes ("Wends") had settled in the Germania Slavica region from the 7th century onwards. The Hehfeldi as they were called by the Bavarian Geographer about 850 built their main fortification at Brenna (later to become Brandenburg an der Havel German version of history smells like shit, I tell you.
If that is true, that Hevelli arrived in 9th century and in that century build Brandenburg, that would mean that """"Germanics"""that were there before them, were absolute useless cunts that couldn't build anything.
>>54881170 1. You are not European just because you're a citizen of a European country. 2. You are not "one of us" just because you're European. There is no "us" for Europe any more than there is an "us" for Afroeurasia.
All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective parties. Images uploaded are the responsibility of the Poster. Comments are owned by the Poster.
This is a 4chan archive - all of the shown content originated from that site. This means that 4Archive shows their content, archived. If you need information for a Poster - contact them.
If a post contains personal/copyrighted/illegal content, then use the post's [Report] link! If a post is not removed within 24h contact me at email@example.com with the post's information.