Who are Germanics. How did they came to be.

>>3191137
SUBSAHARAN BLACKS THAT LOST THEIR MELANIN AS THEY WENT FURTHER TOWARDS THE NORTHERN HEMISPHERE.

aren't they basically balto-slavic, celtic, native-nord mixture?

>>3191151
kys retard

>>3191137
They originated in Scandinavia and exapanded from there southwards

>>3191151
kys retard

>>3191137
They originated in Scandinavia and expanded from there southwards

>>3191160
>>3191161
but they originated from nordic natives, balto-slavs and celts mixing together

>>3191137
A bunch of Old European farmers-herders from Scandinavia that got conquered and accultured by Indo-European speaking warbands that came from mainland Europe. Over time the conquerors imposed their own warrior culture and patron-client type of society. Gradually the native popularisation also adopted thr newcomers' language. However the language underwent a significant pidginisation before it got accepted, as evidenced by relatively simplicistic grammar and scores of words that relate to agriculture and daily life that don't have any Indo-European etymology.

Over time, the newly emerged tribes started to expand, moving southward into Germany displacing or absorbing Celts and whoever lived there. The rest is well-known history.

>>3191188
>However the language underwent a significant pidginisation before it got accepted, as evidenced by relatively simplicistic grammar and scores of words that relate to agriculture and daily life that don't have any Indo-European etymology
Tell me more.

>>3191191
There is evidence for a non-indoeuropean substratum in the germanic languages.

>>3191212
Go on

>>3191215
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Germanic_substrate_hypothesis

Read this, I'm not gonna pretend to be an expert on the subject.

>>3191137
>Who are Germanics. How did they came to be.
A Celt kicked a monkey across the Rhine river

Daily reminder that Funnelbeaker culture were not "native Nords" but Neolithic farmers from Anatolia with admixture from German hunter gatherers.

Native "Nords" of the Pitted Ware culture did not contribute genes to modern Scandinavians or Finns except for some individual alleles which had a selective advantage.

http://www.biorxiv.org/content/early/2017/07/17/164400

>>3191264
>German hunter gatherers.
so who?

>>3191268

Dark skin, blue eyes like other hunter gatherers of the same "race".
Scandinavia was different since there was a donation of white skin genes from a northeastern population, and selection favored them.
Still, there is no non-marginal relationship between modern day Germanics and the indigenous Scandinavians.

>>3191212
>>3191219
The substrate theory lacks one thing: Evidence which supports its claims. The hypophyses put forth in favor of it have so far not matched what we know about the world at the time. Not to mention that Grimm's Law explains most of the changes in Proto-Germanic without involving a substrata.

As for the list of non-IE words in that wiki article: It would have been far more convincing if the non-Germanic words had actually been cognates with each other.

>>3191137
Amalek raiders who settled in. It's ironic that germanics were attacking Jews even in biblical times. Fucking eternal krauts. No wonder God wants them wiped out

>>3191137
Odin's chosen people, he created them in their image using nothing but the snow and lightning before him.