Romans said that Gauls were more civilizable than Germanic barbarians,

>>73757434
Well, civilization originated in West Asia.

>>73757434
>burger education >>73757464

>>73757464

In your opinion, how does finnish character differ from English or french?

>>73757434

>West Asian

Not the same as modern West Asian. They killed off the civilized people there.

>>73757434
Nice BS pic

Yamnaya was R1b like the French and the Spaniards while the guys on your map are said to be closer from them despiste not being their sons

>>73758715

pre-R1b French were miserable turbocucks and turbosluts so they didn't manage to compete with the R1b but still passed on their cuck genes to you which explains your actions in WW2

File: R1b Master Race.png (2MB, 7056x7456px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 7056x7456px

>>73758942

>t. surrender your land to russian

We regained our land, while you're here impotently watching Russian purchasing your land and nigger fucking your women in interracial night-club

>>73758942
Fuck off, Pekka, during your whole history, you were the bitch of another country

Franks/Troy autist fuck off. The only thing you're right about is that R1b is superior.

File: pca.png (104KB, 821x492px) Image search: [Google]

104KB, 821x492px

>>73757434
Neolithic farmer DNA isn't West Asian, they were isolated Anatolians mixed with WHG

>>73758015
Genetics say otherwise. West Asian ancestry increases as you get closer to, well, West Asia. Even in modern populations.

>>73758715

You sound butthurt, but paternal ancestry =/= genetic relatedness.

>>73757434
Romans said arabs made best slaves and Germans the worst, makes you think.

>>73759274
Romans also said Sardinians and Corsicans made horrible slaves considering they either killed their masters or themselves rather than being subjugated

File: bergamo.jpg (92KB, 998x397px) Image search: [Google]

92KB, 998x397px

>>73757434
>Bergamo

Truly a mysterious people

>>73759274

It's funny that your inferiority complex made you assume certain things about me that aren't true.

Like that I was using "barbarian" in a negative context.

>>73759247

Early Neolithic farmers in Europe came from Anatolia but represented a genetic type that is extinct except in Sardinia. Balkanoids and Italians are mixed with modern Middle Easterners though and they aren't exactly the dominant force in western civilization at the current era.

>>73759247
>t. bastard

Patrilineal line is everytime

As a R1b in can rightfully that i'm the one that conquered Europe, while non-R1b can't

>>73759232
We're pure Pannonians

>>73759613
>Early Neolithic farmers in Europe came from Anatolia but represented a genetic type that is extinct except in Sardinia.

True, but also true for everything else that existed at that time; not a meaningful statement.

My actual "point" was that maybe there's something inherent to this DNA that makes people tamer and more "civilizable". Not trying to have a dick measuring contest like most of the replyers are.

>Balkanoids and Italians are mixed with modern Middle Easterners though and they aren't exactly the dominant force in western civilization at the current era.

S. Italians sure, dunno about Balkanites, but N. Italians have very little modern ME ancestry. Definitely a lot of ancient WestAsian though.

Also, Blue Banana says pretty much the same of high HG ancestry groups. Something like 80% of European civilization came from areas with substantial WA ancestry and relatively low HG ancestry. Scandinavians also have relatively low IQs compared to Anglos:

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/220014360_Rindermann_H_Sailer_M_and_Thompson_2009_The_impact_of_smart_fractions_cognitive_ability_of_politicians_and_average_competence_of_peoples_on_social_development_Talent_Development_and_Excellence_1_3-25

Finland actually matches up to Anglos.

>>73760175

Italy also groups in perfectly with Scandinavia, despite high amounts of Arab/Maghrebi blood in the south. I'd suspect the north Italian average should be on par with Anglos.

>>73760175
>y actual "point" was that maybe there's something inherent to this DNA that makes people tamer and more "civilizable"

Not really, considering Sardinians were a pain in the ass for Roman for several centuries despite being outnumbered, also read this:

>>73759385

File: l1 hunter-gatherer.png (66KB, 817x384px) Image search: [Google]

66KB, 817x384px

>>73759232
I highly doubt it is.

It was mostly R1a that conquered l1 people in Scandinavia and later made them raid entire Europe.

Anglo-Saxons were originally l1, not R1b like native Celtic population of Britain. So R1b-U106 can't be considered "Germanic".

File: moot activate it.jpg (12KB, 251x198px) Image search: [Google]

12KB, 251x198px

>>73757434

>civilizable

i.e. compatible with Roman culture

You're not looking far down enough the line. Genetically similar people tend to carry the same cultural memes, especially back then, when there was no internet and people seldom had access to the cultural memes of others who lived hundreds of miles away.

It's a no brainer that people who had similar culture to Romans were more easily integrated. It's also why the EU is retarded in allowing millions of Muslims who are incompatible with European values to """stay""" as refugees (read: settle). For all the shit I hate about South Americans and Mexicans, at least they're Catholic.

File: file.png (2MB, 1204x784px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 1204x784px

>>73759171
>We regained our land, while you're here impotently watching Russian purchasing your land

>France

>>73760641

english are even more r1b than france though

>>73760641
We didn't sell our land, we simply sold our colony, and we had the Whole Europe to fight as a reason


>>73760046
THIS

>>73760877

You retarded, /pol/cuck? I'm not talking about haplogroups, I'm talking about the unintentional hilarity of a Frenchman whining about others buying/selling land.

>>73760428
>It was mostly R1a that conquered l1 people in Scandinavia and later made them raid entire Europe
If you're using R1a conquering I1 as an argument for why R1b isn't superior, then you clearly didn't read your own image. It says there that R1b came to Scandinavia after R1a, leading to the Nordic bronze age and ultimately Proto-Germanic. This means that R1b in effect conquered the R1a Indo-Europeans who had previously conquered the I1 Scandinavians.

So if anyone was "using" the conquered I1 people to raid Europe, it was the R1b conquerors. Although this is ridiculous because in actuality they would have been simply assimilated into Indo-European society and that would have been the end of it.

Also it's wrong to imply that Anglo-Saxons were "originally I1", they were clearly a mix of I1, R1b and to a lesser extent R1a. In all likelihood they would have had more R1b than I1 as well.

File: Martiniano_etal_Table_1.png (210KB, 3014x570px) Image search: [Google]

210KB, 3014x570px

>>73760877
Nope you're around 50% while we are around 60-80%

>>73760960
R1b was already brought with Corded Ware. With the second expansion they were simply assmilated, just like Celts in Germany.

SAXONS WERE l1. And nothing will change that.

>>73761122
>SAXONS WERE l1

l2b

>>73761171
Saxons that came to Britain were l1, not l2b.

>r1a r1b cucks hurr I'm "aryan"

Let me introduce you to the POO PILL.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Haplogroup_R1

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Haplogroup_R2

All this shit you're talking about (pun intended) is irrelevant in the face of the POO PILL.

It's fine to talk about stuff that happened 10k years ago, but go back another 18k and you find out that R haplos are LITERAL POO IN LOOS

Please don't pollute my pristine I1 genetics with your inferior poo. The "aryan" invasion was bad enough, and gave us the shitty world we have today.

>>73761266

m8

do you even know where the term "aryan" is from?

>>73761266
Why do you intend to speak in the subjects you have no idea of?

>>73757434
me in the middle

>>73761122
>R1b was already brought with Corded Ware.
No it wasn't, or at least not in any significant amount. R1b and R1a are roughly equal in frequency in modern Scandinavia, while R1a in corded ware held a strong majority. The fact is that the vast majority of R1b in Scandinavians came later, after Corded Ware, bringing with it Pre-Proto-Germanic.

Also stop being so stupid, no population by the time of the Anglo-Saxons was purely I1, not even Scandinavian ones, they were all mixed heavily with R1a and R1b. Anglo-Saxons were majority R1b and I1, not exclusively I1.

>>73761343

Iran or something? It's irrelevant, it's all poo. Anyway, I'm talking about deep genetic lineage, not superficial linguistic stuff that happened 4k years ago.

It's not a coincidence that the BEST European countries to live in have the LEAST "aryan" ancestry.

R haplogroups BTFO.

File: haplogroups-timeline.png (51KB, 760x870px) Image search: [Google]

51KB, 760x870px

>>73761266
If R1 are pooniloos then I1 are Arabs

>>73761510
Romans, Greeks, French, british, Persians, Hindus all had aryan identities.

>>73761683
>French, british
R1berians are not Aryan

>>73761171
Nope we have anglo saxon samples from England and and they were I1, Thuringians are I2

>>73761720
Aryan countries are the best in the world, no matter where aryans go.

>>73761481
You're the one fucking stupid here.

They literally digged out samples in England and Saxons were l1 mostly.

>>73761893
Mostly is a very broad word. What are we talking here? 50%? 60% 95%?

>>73761481
>Anglo-Saxons were majority R1b and I1
No, they were I1. Brits have an excess of R1b because of C*lts.

>>73761953
We have a saxon sample in England and it is I1 while Roman Britain show all kind of R1b, and we also have Saxon samples from Germany and Saxons were around 50-70% I1

>>73761958

Are you fucking retarded?
Danes have more R1b than I1

>>73761953
The samples arent even in the double digits, but the french and polish poster here have some kind of identity issue where they obsess over there haplogroup so they use it as some kind of proof that only I1 is germanic and R1b and R1a can't be

>>73762020
>a saxon sample
>a
>1 (one)

>>73762087
>conveniently "forgot" the next part

Saxons were I1, stop being butthurt about you're Celtic ancestry

>>73762059
You're the one here who doesn't understand shit.

R1b-U106 in England is Celtic, doesn't matter what anyone says, it isn't Germanic.
No one ever claimed R1a and R1b can't be Germanic, since they've both created Germanic people from l1 paleolithic hunter-gatherers, Cro-Magnons from pre IE expansions. R1a and R1b were obviously an elite and brought war-like culture with them. Doesn't change the fact that Ancient Germanis was mostly l1 and it became R1b majority due to Celtic Expansions.

Stop being a fucking twat and read more.

>>73762087
That's enough to entice him and his delusional fantasy, you have to understand a lot of posters here don't care about science, they don't care about history, they dont care about facts. They have identity and emotional problems and haplogroups help them we wuz and make them feel powerful than their virgin selves

>>73762174

Ancient Germans were G

>>73762180
I fucked read that stupid polack(we wuz germanic) posts for months, yours too. You don't understand basic shit and yet decide to spout your non-sense while insulting others.

Fuck off back to reading basic shit and untill then don't even try to speak about things you have no idea of.

>>73762054
Danes are mosly Cimbrians and Teutons, both were Celts, spoke a Celtic languages(see above), and worshiped Celtic Gods(see gundestrup cauldron)

Cimbrians called the Baltic Sea in their language "Morimarusam which" is Gaulish for "Dead Sea", and their names are Celts :

Cimbrians = Com brogos = Compatriot
Teutones = Teuta = People

>>73762174
>R1b-U106 in England is Celtic
>doesn't matter what anyone says, it isn't Germanic.
So basically you're saying you have to be right no matter what? Okay we got it, perfectly ties into this>>73762174

>No one ever claimed R1a and R1b can't be Germanic
Yes there is a french and polish and """swedish""" poster who all say this there is even another thread up about this on /int/ by the diaspora in sweden

>Doesn't change the fact that Ancient Germanis was mostly l1 and it became R1b majority due to Celtic Expansions.
That's another assumption by you, majority of samples from bronze age Germany are R1b and R1a. Zero I1 has been found in ancient Scandinavia and the celts and slavs didnt even exist until after the proto germanic groups

>Stop being a fucking twat and read more.
Stop being butthurt

>>73762054
They're obviously Celt rapebabies too

>>73762315
Educate yourself and then participate in a discussion. You have no basic knowledge about any of this whatsoever.

If you claim that things that were already proven are false because you think they are, then we have nothing to talk about.

>>73762286

So you're saying Anglo-Saxons were Celts now?

File: y DNA phylogenetic tree.jpg (790KB, 1506x2045px) Image search: [Google]

790KB, 1506x2045px

>>73761643

Not really; I diverged from J waay earlier than R1 diverged from whatever unique subclades were present in India/Afghanistan.

Arabs are far better than Indians anyway. If Amerikike wasn't jewed so hard Islamic terrorism wouldn't even exist.

>>73762315
it's true tho

Ancient Germans were mostly a mix of Pre-IEs and various IE invaders, they also borrowed their languages/gods/cultures from these invaders

>>73762280
>I fucked read that stupid polack(we wuz germanic) posts for months, yours too.
I have no idea what you're talking about here. I never post about genetics unless I see one of the delusional tards here bring it up

>ou don't understand basic shit and yet decide to spout your non-sense while insulting others.
No I just correct when you people go into your fantasies based on inferiority towards Germans or who knows what else, I dont even want to know

>Fuck off back to reading basic shit and untill then don't even try to speak about things you have no idea of.
Your made up fantasies arent "basic shit" sorry

>>73762247
More like I1 and I2, first G2a cucked them and then R1

>>73761785

POO IN LOO

LEARN TO POO

>>73762386
Nope

Saxons come from Germany and were I1, i'm just saying that the celtic tribes settled in Denmark explain why Danes have more R1b than other Scandis

>>73762286
Teuta isn't stricly Celtic word, it has cognate in Germanic, Italic and Baltic languages.

https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/Reconstruction:Proto-Indo-European/tewt%C3%A9h%E2%82%82

>>73762359
Again just because you like to indulge yourself with the fantasy that ancient Germanic groups didnt have R1b and R1a because you inherently dislike germans and you have some inferiority complex towards them doesnt make it basic knowledge.

File: Haplogroup-R1b-S21.gif (84KB, 800x546px) Image search: [Google]

84KB, 800x546px

>>73762174
>R1b-U106 in England is Celtic
No it isn't. It's existence in pre-Saxon Roman Britain can be explained by a number of factors:
1. low sample size
2. R1b-U106 appearing in low numbers Celtic populations
3. Germanic peoples being brought over as slaves or as part of the Roman army to defend Roman Britannia against Celtic raids.

Now, onto why R1b-U106 is primarily Germanic. Don't you find it a bit odd that R1b-U106 peaks in populations that aren't Celtic? Scandinavia was never Celtic except for a number of Irish slaves brought over to Norway, explaining why it's slightly higher there compared to Sweden. The Netherlands was never Celtic except for the very south. R1b-U106 is virtually non-existent in France, Spain and Ireland despite these being core Celtic territories. Moreover, the areas in which R1b peaks in continental Europe are the areas where the Anglo-Saxons primarily migrated from. The spread of R1b-U106 also matches perfectly with the Germanic migrations of the Migration Period, a great example of this being North-Western Iberia which the Suebians migrated to. Signs of Germanic expansion even show up in the Baltic states, most likely due to the Teutonic Knights.

>>73762474

Angles came from Denmark. Old Saxonland is by the German Baltic shore.

>>73762573
The funny thing is that I've taken a genetics test and I received R1b-U106 and they even say in the test that it is germanic and that the specific subclade I have is most common in Norway yet this french guy reads on some blog(yes a blog, that's where he found this theory) that it is celtic and denies it

>>73762573
Also I'd just like to add that R1b is surprisingly low in modern day Denmark because its original Anglo-Saxon inhabitants mostly migrated to England and were essentially "replaced" by the more I1-heavy Danes.

>>73762654
Yeah it's ridiculous. Not surprising either that this bullshit is coming from a Pole and a Frenchman either, two nationalities known for their hatred of Germanic peoples.

File: Nordid.png (19KB, 900x550px) Image search: [Google]

19KB, 900x550px

>>73762654
Pic related is genuine Germanic DNA

It match with the Germanic Expansion + the Traditional Germanic Homeland, ad for R1b, it match the Celtic Expansion + the Traditional Celtic Homeland

>>73762797
Have you ever considered the idea that there might be more than one genetic marker for Germanic peoples?

>>73762395
>I diverged from J waay earlier than R1 diverged
What difference does that make when the distance between R1 and the rest is already 30,000+ years?
>India/Afghanistan.
R is obviously from Central Asia, like P and Q.
>Arabs are far better than Indians anyway
But they can't beat Aryans, no.

>>73762797
Recent ethno-linguistic groups don't solely own haplgtoups and their subclades that are older then them by thousands of years, try and comprehend this fact first

>>73762797
How can it be Germanic if it's pre-Indo-European and those people certainly didn't speak Indo-European language prior the arrival of R1a/R1b people? l1 are mere aborigines of that region who assimilated. Are you seriously so dumb?

>>73762906
He believes that the french are trojans, so yes he is that dumb.

>>73762947
We are U N I Q U E !

>>73762827
Germans were described as homogenous by ancient writters and claim to the descent of one ancestor, thus, Actual Germans come from one bloodline

>be more than one genetic marker for Germanic peoples?

The markers you try to claim are either Celts or Slavs, you're just butthurt because you "WUZ NOT PURE" as claimed

>>73762906

It's from an aboriginE who assimilated. A single guy who lived maybe in Netherlands or something.
All known I1 has a tmrca of under 5k years. If it was so fucking common where are the subclades outside the tmrca?

I2 is the actual aboriginal haploshit of Scandinavia.

>>73763080
Well to be fair nearly all of European R1a/R1b dates to bronze age.

>>73762906
They simply adopted the langage of the IE, some perhaps even mixed with them but it does not give them the rigtht to claim other people's Haplogroup as Germanic

>>73763059
>Germans were described as homogenous by ancient writters and claim to the descent of one ancestor, thus, Actual Germans come from one bloodline
So because Tacitus who had never even met a german in his life or been to the region claimed that germans had one ancestor it means that there's is only germanic haplogroup? Very sharp, we need more historians like you in the field.

>>73763160
>claim other people's Haplogroup as Germanic
No one is doing that. You're the one who is always posting claiming that every subclade of R1b is exclusively French. Do not project on to others what you believe.

>>73763080
t. butthurt abbonigger

File: Franks & Gauls & Germans.png (2MB, 3012x3188px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 3012x3188px

>>73763169
>Tacitus

Not just Tacitus EVERY AUTHORS be it Romans, French, Arabs, Byzantines, described the Germans as blond and red haired

Even the Germanic themselves did so

>>73763294
And hair colour is related to haplogroups how, exactly?

>>73763294
feels good being a Frank

I feel sorry for non-Franks

>>73763126

They still have related subclades which exist somewhere.
People blow out I1's significance, it's either just a big coincidence it's common or natural selection. There was never any "I1 people" anywhere, no more than few dozen anyway but some people think they were the source of Germanic culture and linguistic substrate.

File: Germans 3.jpg (2MB, 2484x1500px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 2484x1500px

>>73763169
Germans around 11th century AD

>>73763294
No idea what you're getting at here but for sure now we begin to enter the realm of pseudo-science and we begin to abandon all reason. I hope you know slavs, sarmatians, scythians, celts and thracians were also described as red haired. Cato was as well, maybe he was german too

>>73763169
He actually believes ancient authors weren't biased and were experts in haplogroups. They could simply determine your haplogroup just by looking at you.

>>73763438
Basically his entire beliefs are based around medieval paintings and hair color, he might be legitimately sick because he posts about this constantly across three separate boards.

>>73763376
>There was never any "I1 people" anywhere
This is a fantasy I1 aboriginals tell themselves, they'd rather be conquerors rather than the cucked. But the fact of the matter is, I1 is thwarted by R1 in all countries.

>>73763330
>And hair colour is related to haplogroups how, exactly?

Like that

>Nordic are tall, fair eyed, and fair haired
>Nordic are 1
>Germanic were described as Nordic(fair eyes, fair hair)
>Germanic are Nordic
>Germanic are I1

>>73763622
By this logic the ancient Gauls, who you love to claim all had fair hair and blue eyes, must have been I1 as well. lmao.

>>73763622
There are zero scientific studies that positively correlate haplogroups with hair color, eye color etc. I hope you realize what you're saying sounds like complete gibberish to anyone but yourself right now

>>73763438
So

You're saying that a nigger from Africa isn't A, B or E ?

Or that a chink isn't O ?

Don't be in denial, Haplogroup and Phenotype are related

>>73763376
I'm not saying they were everywhere. Probably as you said somewhere around Northern Germany/Netherlands/Denmark and it's in high proportions today solely because of population bottleneck.

File: 1484418046895.gif (2MB, 320x240px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 320x240px

>>73763734
>Don't be in denial, Haplogroup and Phenotype are related


This nigga.

>>73763685
The Gauls were indeed I, in fact, Strabo said that they and the Germans were the same people

>>73763734
>Don't be in denial, Haplogroup and Phenotype are related
No not according to geneticists at least. The y-chromosome is the smallest chromosome and is actually deformed and misshapen(hence why it is shaped like a y) and constantly shrinking. It's only value as far as we cant determine scientifically is determining sex in humans

Not even going to respond to that. You're clearly baiting, which somehow makes this all the more disturbing. I can imagine a retarded person spamming this shit every day across multiple boards, but a sane person going to all this effort just to bait? Kind of fuck 2bh.

Aren't haplotypes used to track diseases?

>>73763879
*kind of fucked

>>73763835
I'm not saying that haplo influence phenotype

I'm saying that it is an Ethnic-Racial marker

>>73763893
Yes, that is not the same thing as your y-dna haplogroup though which exclusively refers to your y chromosome

>A haplotype is a set of DNA variations, or polymorphisms, that tend to be inherited together. A haplotype can refer to a combination of alleles or to a set of single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) found on the same chromosome.

>>73763739

I've put some thought into it, I think they were just some random fishermen who adopted the Bell Beaker culture at the North Sea and began to experience extreme rates of population growth thanks to it which enabled them send settlers to Scandinavia.

If I'm right then I1 related to extant I1 should never be found in Scandinavia prior to Bell Beaker culture influence around 2300-2200 BC.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Beaker_culture#Jutland

>>73763949
>I'm not saying that haplo influence phenotype
Your whole argument before was that fair looking people had to I1 and germanic, I should probably let this thread die though you honestly need some kind of mental help

>>73764035
Wasn't there l1 found in Linear Pottery culture in Hungary?

>>73764105
My whole argument was about the fact that the Nordic Marker is I1, and since Germanic were described as Nordic they were certainly I1

>>73764120

Probably just contamination.

>>73764169
>My whole argument was about the fact that the Nordic Marker is I1, and since Germanic were described as Nordic they were certainly I1
That is a very weak argument.

Don't take my word for it though because I know you won't, email David Reich or one of the prominent geneticists who deal their whole lives with this work. Send them your theory and ask them what they think of it.

Say "My whole argument is about the fact that the Nordic Marker is I1, and since Germanic were described as Nordic they were certainly I1" and show them the little pictures you made to back it up. I'm sure they'll be very impressed

>>73764377
>ad autoritam argument

You mean the same geneticists who believed until recently that R1b was Pre IE ?

This kind of non-argument do not work.

Especially when we have samples of Ancient samples of Saxons and Thurngians who were both I1 and I2


The fact is that you're just a celt in,denial if you're R1b and "Germanic"

>>73764676
>Especially when we have samples of Ancient samples of Saxons and Thurngians who were both I1 and I2

Especially when we have ancient samples of Saxons and Thurngians who were both I1 and I2

fix'd

>>73763294
Wait if Franks come from northern Belgium/Germany/Dutchland how come they were black haired ? You'd assume proto-Belgians would all be blonde blue eyed back then and this far north, no ?

Wouldn't this black haired Frenchman just be descended from the Romans instead ?

File: image.jpg (75KB, 642x454px) Image search: [Google]

75KB, 642x454px

>>73765098
>Romans
Romans had a few colonies but they weren't numerous enough to colonize Gauls

And the "Roman" haplos(Ev-13 + J2) are limited among French

>>73765422
Not affirming anything, just curious
How come Franks were all black hair then btw ?
It'd make like a little pocket of darker people surrounded by blonde people to the north east west and south.

>>73765098
Franks come from Pannonia

What you're saying is directly the fruit of Germanic Romanticism who claimed various non-Germanic people as "their"

qupte related is the actual history of the Franks

This is the evidence that the historians who have been named have left us about the Franks, and they have not mentioned kings. Many relate that they came from Pannonia and all dwelt at first on the bank of the Rhine, and then crossing the Rhine they passed into Thuringia, and there among the villages and cities appointed longhaired kings over them from their first or, so to speak, noblest family. This title Clovis' victories afterwards made a lasting one, as we shall see later on. We read in the Fasti Consulares that Theodomer, king of the Franks, son of Richimer, and Ascyla his mother, were once on a time slain by the sword. They say also that Chlogio, a man of ability and high rank among his people, was king of the Franks then, and he dwelt at the stronghold of Dispargum which is within the borders of the Thuringians. And these parts, that is, towards the south, the Romans dwelt as far as the Loire. But beyond the Loire the Goths were in control; the Burgundians also, who belonged to the sect of the Arians, dwelt across the Rhone in the district which is adjacent to the city of Lyons. And Chlogio sent spies to the city of Cambrai, and : they went everywhere, and he himself followed and overcame the : Romans and seized the city, in which he dwelt for a short time, and he seized the land as far as the river Somme. Certain authorities assert that king Merovech, whose son was Childeric, was of the family of Chlogio.
https://sourcebooks.fordham.edu/basis/gregory-hist.asp#book3

>>73765544
>How come Franks were all black hair then btw ?

I don't know

What i know tho is that Germs and Gauls were all described as blond-red haired and tall

While Franks were never described as tall nor blond-red haired and their represention show them as Brown-Dark haired or French-looking to put it bluntly

>>73765974
blond doesn't translate well into english or french. What the romans and greeks meant by "blond" may very well have meant auburn, or not so dark brown, etc.

File: Germans 1.jpg (2MB, 2484x1444px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 2484x1444px

>>73766100
It would be true if we didn't have representation of Germans circa 11-12 century AD

And they are all blond-red haired

>>73762834

>What difference does that make when the distance between R1 and the rest is already 30,000+ years?

By that logic, you should ignore everything that happened 5,000 years ago, hell even 500 years ago.

File: 0gn64Jp.png (371KB, 337x495px) Image search: [Google]

371KB, 337x495px

>>73766715
bitches never change

>>73759704
t. I'm bragging about something I share with half my countrymen

Do you brag about being "related to Charlemagne" too?

>>73763949

By that logic:

lactose intolerant people aren't white

lactose tolerant Africans, Arabs, Indians, hell even Chinese are white.

The world was a very different place a few thousand years ago, but internet racists don't want to accept this because it means that the identity politics bullshit they use for dick-measuring contests is largely intellectually bankrupt.

>>73763294
Why do all germs look alike?

>>73769441

germ theory: germs parasitize larger beings for profit, depriving the original being of resources.

: ^ )

>>73769427
Haplogroup can be used to trace back bloodline you can't compare it with this kind of genes

>>73769441
Because genuine germs are the result of one ancestor who was blond haired and blue eyed, and they practiced incest to preserve their blond hair and blue eyes

>>73760175
why go that far back? later migration and selection

but you're right, it's basically an area from Central Italy to the southern UK (including Germany)

North Italy is shitskin central but has IQ as high as Finland

>>73769606
>Haplogroup can be used to trace back bloodline you can't compare it with this kind of genes

Sure you can. Mutations survive and reproduce along with humans, even when the human carrying them changes appearance. Lactose tolerance is pretty much the same thing, except it was more directly selected for.

For instance, r1a1 was brought to Europe by Indoeuropeans from southern Russia/west Kazakhstan. Go further back, and R itself came from India or even SE Asia.

You're right that it traces bloodline, but you're emotionally invested in this for no rational reason.

>>73769923

Yeah, it could be completely unrelated, but that's just not my suspicion.

We do know for a fact that melanin makes neurosignaling more efficient, blondes (read: HGs) are stereotypically thought of as dumb, men are darker than women, and the lightest europeans contributed much less than darker ones, despite living in colder climates.

Even the lightest pigmented intellectuals have this "dark" look about them; dirty blonde/brown hair, or dark blue eyes.

>>73771002
>and the lightest europeans contributed much less than darker ones, despite living in colder climates

there were other reasons for that too though. the population of northernmost Europe was insignificant for most of history, for example

at the most extreme, Finland had barely 100k people until early modern times

but I do agree with you. with few exceptions, the densest areas of achievement and estimated IQ at that are in westcentral-northwest europe, not most of the area with the blondest or most light-eyed people

I guess something interesting must have happened throughout history

File: Blond untermench.png (3MB, 1000x2662px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 1000x2662px

>>73771002
>>73771169

there were other reasons for that too though. the population of northernmost Europe was insignificant for most of history, for example

no trust me, blonde people really are subhuman incapable of proper thought

>>73771602
meme aside, the American makes interesting points

moving north + relatively big historical population size seems to work well. the northermost populations of the world (e.g. Siberians, Eskimos) usually don't have particularly impressive IQs for their latitude

maybe that's what made west-central Europe 'intellectually superior' to the northeast south of Estonia. the Ukrainians have more combined 'northern' ancestry than the English, yet...

perhaps there was faster replacement and downwards mobility during medieval times in those areas too which also lead to higher IQs

>>73757434
What does this mean for Estonia? Least amount of orange and biggest amount of blue?

>>73775468
I think it means you are subhuman

File: cephalic index global.jpg (695KB, 3081x1723px) Image search: [Google]

695KB, 3081x1723px

>>73771862

Another pet peeve of mine (with less objective evidence) is that head shape is related to achievement.

achievements of long heads: they're "fundamental" and "formative". Numerals, algebra, calculus, taxonomy, Newtonian mechanics, were all developed in dolichocephalic India/Mideast/Greece/England. The concept of an alphabet itself may be a dolicho invention.

achievements of broad heads: less creative and more practical, they "advance an existing framework". High quality engineering and manufacturing are stereotypical of Germany, Switzerland, and Japan.

The ASPM gene has an allele that underwent strong selection in the Mideast about 6000 years ago, coincident with the spread of alphabetic writing, and non-tonal language:

http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/gnxp/2007/05/aspm-microcephalin-tonal-languages/#.WPatr2eE3wo

Tonal languages are the norm in brachycephalic Asia. Indoeuro languages are usually non-tonal, but the European languages that conserve tone are overwhelmingly from high HG ancestry, brachycephalic populations:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tone_(linguistics)#Indo-European_languages

The only Indian IE languages with tone are in Punjab and Kashmir, the far north and relatively brachycephalic. Dravidian languages are non-tonal.

Alphabets follow the general "formative" trend of dolichocephalic achievement. My suspicion is that if you sampled that allele all throughout Europe, it would peak in the south and west. Unfortunately, this data does not exist, and the figure used for Europeans comes from a British sample.

>>73776078
>>73771862

Another tidbit:

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/projects/SNP/snp_ref.cgi?rs=41310927

the only confirmed effect right now is the ability to perceive tones more easily.

This fits in well with the fact that Asians display perfect pitch more often than Caucasians.

File: finn laughing.png (270KB, 602x338px) Image search: [Google]

270KB, 602x338px

>>73775468

It doesn't "mean" anything, just that your ethnic group has less of this neolithic ancestry on average.

Functionally, it could mean a higher amount of gluten intolerance, or something like that, along with great likelihood of looking like pic related.

>>73776722

would bang