Results 1 to 10 of 10

Thread: DNA Shows All Europeans Descended From Belgian Tribe Who Lived 35,000 Years Ago

  1. #1
    Funding Member
    "Friend of Germanics"
    Skadi Funding Member

    Nachtengel's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Last Online
    @
    Ethnicity
    German
    Gender
    Posts
    5,862
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    78
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    669
    Thanked in
    379 Posts

    DNA Shows All Europeans Descended From Belgian Tribe Who Lived 35,000 Years Ago

    Are Europeans Descended From A Single Tribe?
    Modern humans arrived in Europe 45,000 years ago but little is known about how they spread across the continent before the introduction of farming. Now, researchers carrying out the most detailed genetic analysis of Upper Paleolithic Europeans to date have discovered a major new lineage of early modern humans.

    This group, which lived in the northwest 35,000 years ago, directly contributed to the ancestry of present-day Europeans and is believed to have been formed of the ‘founding fathers’ of Europe.

    Archaeological studies have previously found modern humans swept into Europe 45,000 years ago.

    This ultimately led to the demise of the Neanderthals, despite the fact some modern humans interbred with these cousins.

    During the Ice Age that ended 12,000 years ago, with its peak between 25,000 and 19,000 years ago when the melt started, glaciers covered Scandinavia and northern Europe all the way to northern France.

    As the ice sheets retreated at the end of the last Ice Age, the region was repopulated.

    David Reich and his colleagues from Harvard University analysed genome-wide data from 51 modern humans who lived between 45,000 and 7,000 years ago to study this repopulation.

    Remains found from this period include three 31,000-year-old skulls from Dolni Věstonice in the Czech Republic, the lower jaw of the 19,000-year-old ‘Red Lady of El Mirón Cave’ and the skull of a 14,000-year-old individual discovered at the Villabruna in northeastern Italy, among others.

    The genetic data shows that, beginning 37,000 years ago, all Europeans come from a single founding population that persisted through the Ice Age.

    The founding population has deep branches in different parts of Europe, one of which is represented by a specimen from Belgium.

    In fact, present-day Europeans can trace their ancestry back to this group of humans who lived in northwest Europe 35,000 years ago.

    However, this founding population, which was part of the Aurignacian culture, became displaced when another group of early humans, members of a different culture known as the Gravettian, arrived on the scene in many parts of Europe 33,000 years ago.

    Then, around 19,000 years ago, a population related to the Aurignacian culture re-expanded across Europe.

    It is thought these people went on to repopulate Europe after the vast ice sheets retreated.

    Based on the earliest sample in which this ancestry is observed, it is plausible this population expanded from the southwest – present-day Spain – after the Ice Age peaked.

    The second event the researchers detected happened 14,000 years ago when populations from the southeast, around Turkey and Greece, spread into Europe, displacing the first group of humans.

    Professor Reich added: ‘We see a new population turnover in Europe, and this time it seems to be from the east, not the west.

    ‘We see very different genetics spreading across Europe that displaces the people from the southwest who were there before.

    ‘These people persisted for many thousands of years until the arrival of farming.’

    The study, published in Nature, also detected some mixture with Neanderthals, around 45,000 years ago, as modern humans spread across Europe.

    The prehistoric human populations contained three to six per cent of Neanderthal DNA, but today most humans only have about two per cent.

    ‘Neanderthal DNA is slightly toxic to modern humans’ and this study provides evidence that natural selection is removing Neanderthal ancestry,’ Professor Reich added.

    Ancient specimens are frequently contaminated with microbial DNA, as well as DNA from archaeologists or lab technicians who have handled the specimens.

    To solve this problem scientists used a technique called in-solution hybrid capture enrichment.

    They used about 1.2 million 52-base-pair DNA sequences corresponding to positions in the human genome that they were interested in as bait to target specific segments of DNA.

    After they washed the ancient DNA over the 1.2 million probe sequences, the researchers sequenced the ancient DNA that was captured by the probes.

    Prior to the Harvard Medical School study there were only four samples of prehistoric European modern humans 45,000 to 7,000 years old for which genomic data were available.

    This made it difficult to understand how human populations migrated or evolved during this period.

    Using a new technique, more samples could be assessed.

    Professor Reich continued: ‘Trying to represent this vast period of European history with just four samples is like trying to summarise a movie with four still images.

    ‘With 51 samples, everything changes; we can follow the narrative arc; we get a vivid sense of the dynamic changes over time.

    ‘And what we see is a population history that is no less complicated than that in the last 7,000 years, with multiple episodes of population replacement and immigration on a vast and dramatic scale, at a time when the climate was changing dramatically.’
    https://www.defendevropa.org/2017/he...000-years-ago/

  2. #2
    Funding Member
    "Friend of Germanics"
    Skadi Funding Member

    Elizabeth's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2016
    Last Online
    @
    Ethnicity
    European American
    Ancestry
    United Kingdom, Czechoslovakia, Netherlands, Germany, France
    mtDNA
    H1c12
    Country
    United States United States
    State
    Florida Florida
    Gender
    Zodiac Sign
    Aries
    Politics
    Nationalist
    Religion
    Folkish Heathen
    Posts
    764
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    705
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    736
    Thanked in
    360 Posts
    This is so interesting. Does it really cover all Europeans. What about Eastern Europeans?

    There is another forum called Anthrogenica that has an ancient DNA subforum. I'd like to post this news story over there.

  3. #3
    Member Indo-European's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2017
    Last Online
    Sunday, January 7th, 2018 @ 04:26 PM
    Ethnicity
    Anglo-Celtic/Indo-European
    Ancestry
    Irish/Scottish/German
    Subrace
    Keltic-Nordid
    Y-DNA
    R1b-L21
    mtDNA
    J1C5C1
    Country
    Vinland Vinland
    State
    Illinois Illinois
    Gender
    Age
    30
    Politics
    Nationalism/Traditionalism
    Religion
    Native European Spirituality
    Posts
    19
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    0
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    0
    Thanked in
    0 Posts
    I'm not a total expert on European genetics, but I've dabbled in it enough now that it doesn't sound accurate to me to describe all Europeans as being descended from just one tribe. Certainly all Europeans are related to varying degrees, but there were different waves of people who have shaped modern European genetics - the first being Stone Age hunter-gatherers, followed by Neolithic farmers who seem to have originated in Anatolia or the Near East (but they are different from modern Middle-Eastern people), and last the Proto-Indo-Europeans who migrated from the Ukrainian or Russian Steppe. It really depends on the region. In some parts of Europe, the Stone Age hunter-gatherer and Neolithic farmer male lineages seem to have been almost completely replaced.

  4. #4
    Anachronism "Friend of Germanics"
    Skadi Funding Member

    Huginn ok Muninn's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Last Online
    @
    Ethnicity
    Germanic
    Ancestry
    Germany, Norway, England
    Subrace
    Nordeby
    Country
    United States United States
    State
    Texas Texas
    Gender
    Zodiac Sign
    Leo
    Family
    Single adult
    Politics
    Farther right than you.
    Posts
    3,016
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    578
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    710
    Thanked in
    337 Posts
    I think the language is misleading. They make it sound like all Europeans are completely descended from this one tribe. What would be more accurate is to say that all Europeans have some ancestors from this tribe.
    Most people think as they are trained to think, and most people make a majority.

  5. #5
    Mein Glaube ist die Liebe zu meinem Volk. Juthunge's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Last Online
    17 Hours Ago @ 04:59 PM
    Ethnicity
    German
    Ancestry
    German
    Subrace
    Keltic Nordid-CM
    Gender
    Religion
    Religion of the Blood
    Posts
    1,572
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    286
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    464
    Thanked in
    197 Posts
    I'm fairly sure that the article didn't mean to imply, that all or even, any, Europeans are exclusively descended from that tribe. That would obviously be incorrect and is certainly not what the actual study(The genetic history of Ice Age Europe) said. Which is already a year old, btw.

    From what I've gathered over the years, generally speaking, Europeans descend largely from the same source populations but in widely differing proportions. The current populations seem to have been largely fixed in the Bronze age.

    Current Celto-Germanics, for example, are genetically a relatively homogenous group, sharing:
    • 40-50% Steppe/Yamnaya(itself being roughly half-half Eastern Hunter Gatherer and Caucasus Hunter Gatherer, with some small amounts of Ancient North Eurasian),
    • 30-40% Early European Farmer,
    • and 20-30% Western Hunter Gatherer ancestry.


    Iberians are roughly 70-80% Early European Farmer and 20-30% Steppe/Yamnaya with apparently little Hunter Gatherer ancestry.

    The French are between us and the Iberians, the Northwestern and Eastern French tending towards the former, the Central and Southern French tending towards the latter.

    The Italians are basically the genetically most disjointed people in Europe. They share a big Early European Farmer substrate in the range of 60-90% but Northern Italians are shifted somewhat towards the Celto-Germanic cluster, yet clearly divided from it(the Alps are a pretty successful genetic barrier, it seems), whereas Central and especially southern Italians are extremely shifted towards the Levant. They are genetically closer to it than even the geographically much closer Balkans.
    The Sardinians on the contrary, are an almost perfect fit for Early European Farmer ancestry. Certainly one of the most striking continuities in Europe.

    The Balkans are generally similar to the Italians though but have a somewhat higher Steppe input due to the Slavic migrations.

    West Slavs, Ukrainians, Belarusians, Slovenians, Croatians and Hungarians, on the other hand, seem a mixture of Eastern Hunter Gatherer(proper, on top of the one entailed in Steppe ancestry), Steppe, Western Hunter Gatherer ancestry, with a relatively moderate Early European Farmer input. This seems to be the cluster closest to us.

    The Balts and Estonians have about 50% Steppe, 40% Eastern Hunter Gatherer and 10% Early European Farmer ancestry.

    A rather complicated PCA(basically, a genetic map) but it's quite informative to visualise the diverse movements that led to the current genetic makeup of Europe, which seems mostly fixed since the Bronze Age. Click to enlarge:



    The Celto-Germanic cluster are the grey dots at the "Late" of where it says Late Neolithic. West Slavs etc are to the north of that, Iberians to the south, Italians and the Balkan to the east.
    And the day they sold us out, Our hearts grew cold
    'Cause we were never asked, No brother, we were told!
    What do they know of Europe, Who only Europe know?



    Ancient DNA: List of All Studies analyzing DNA of Ancient Tribes and Ethnicities(post-2010)


  6. #6
    Senior Member Ediruc's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Last Online
    Thursday, August 1st, 2019 @ 05:29 PM
    Status
    Available
    Ethnicity
    German-American
    Ancestry
    German-American and proud
    Subrace
    Alpinid-Nordid
    Country
    United States United States
    Gender
    Posts
    1,298
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    0
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    7
    Thanked in
    7 Posts
    ‘Neanderthal DNA is slightly toxic to modern humans’ and this study provides evidence that natural selection is removing Neanderthal ancestry,’ Professor Reich added.
    I think I want to call BS on that statement. Can't really find any evidence to suggest it is "toxic" in anyway. The European peoples came about through probable selective breeding. There was intention there to breed with Neanderthals. Before Homo-Sapiens arrived, Neanderthals had a civilization. They had towns, rituals, and a way of life. They survived well in the harsh climate that was in Europe at the time. I'm almost certain Neanderthals had a greater contribution to Germanic and other European groups than we give them credit for.

    Scientists have already mapped out thousands of genomes and see a significant trace of Neanderthal DNA.

  7. #7
    Mein Glaube ist die Liebe zu meinem Volk. Juthunge's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Last Online
    17 Hours Ago @ 04:59 PM
    Ethnicity
    German
    Ancestry
    German
    Subrace
    Keltic Nordid-CM
    Gender
    Religion
    Religion of the Blood
    Posts
    1,572
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    286
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    464
    Thanked in
    197 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by Ediruc View Post
    I think I want to call BS on that statement. Can't really find any evidence to suggest it is "toxic" in anyway.
    “Toxic” might be the wrong word in that context but we have certainly become much less Neanderthal than our more ancient ancestors. That suggests much of the Neanderthal DNA wasn't helpful for us.

    The European peoples came about through probable selective breeding. There was intention there to breed with Neanderthals.
    I doubt some archaic Hunter Gatherer Homo Sapiens had the foresight to conciously mix with Neanderthals. It's more likely the mixing came about simply through rape.

    Before Homo-Sapiens arrived, Neanderthals had a civilization. They had towns,
    Where’s the evidence for that?

    rituals, and a way of life. They survived well in the harsh climate
    So do Papuans. But that’s no sign of greatness or civilization.

    I'm almost certain Neanderthals had a greater contribution to Germanic and other European groups than we give them credit for.

    Scientists have already mapped out thousands of genomes and see a significant trace of Neanderthal DNA.
    Depends on whether 2-5% are really that significant for you. The former being the more likely estimate for Europeans, with (South-)East Asians and Oceanians having a higher contribution.
    That's because most of the mixing probably happened before the initial spread of Homo Sapiens(well, the Homo Sapiens admixed with Neanderthal) somewhere in Western Asia and not in Europe, anyway. With the non-European Eurasian groups encountering more Neanderthal-like populations in the regions they migrated to.


    That being said, the contribution might actually be higher because they use Sub-Saharan Africans as proxy for original Homo Sapiens.
    But there are some hints, that (a) backflow(s) from Eurasia into Sub-Saharan Africa happened or that Africans mixed with local archaic neanderthal-like Humans, after the ancestors of the Eurasians had already left Africa, which drew them closer to the latter again.
    And the day they sold us out, Our hearts grew cold
    'Cause we were never asked, No brother, we were told!
    What do they know of Europe, Who only Europe know?



    Ancient DNA: List of All Studies analyzing DNA of Ancient Tribes and Ethnicities(post-2010)


  8. #8
    Senior Member Ediruc's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Last Online
    Thursday, August 1st, 2019 @ 05:29 PM
    Status
    Available
    Ethnicity
    German-American
    Ancestry
    German-American and proud
    Subrace
    Alpinid-Nordid
    Country
    United States United States
    Gender
    Posts
    1,298
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    0
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    7
    Thanked in
    7 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by Juthunge View Post
    “Toxic” might be the wrong word in that context but we have certainly become much less Neanderthal than our more ancient ancestors. That suggests much of the Neanderthal DNA wasn't helpful for us.


    I doubt some archaic Hunter Gatherer Homo Sapiens had the foresight to conciously mix with Neanderthals. It's more likely the mixing came about simply through rape.
    Well, I don't necessarily have any defining study on it, but, from my understanding, Europeans in general most likely came about through selective breeding, when you account for our various hair colors, eye colors, body shapes, etc...

    I also recall Neolithic women with blonde hair usually had the advantage over women who had brown or dark hair (in terms of mates preferring them).

    For example: red hair. I've never really read anything pinpointing red hair's exact origin, but, I'm under the assumption it came about through selective breeding among the phenotypes that have the gene.

    As for the rape explanation: at first researchers thought maybe it was a violent takeover by Homo Sapiens entering Neanderthal territory, but evidence seems to suggest it was more of a gradual acceptance over time.

    But, I'm not saying genocide didn't happen back then.

    So do Papuans. But that’s no sign of greatness or civilization.
    But, it's still a sign of intelligence and rationality that a sub-species exhibited. Being able to do something like that can mean intelligence can go a long way.

    Where’s the evidence for that?
    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencete...oth-bones.html

    ^Obviously, not all pockets of Neanderthals lived in towns, but others would most likely move around and become innovative of their particular shelter. If they found what appears to be a home, I would think pockets of them would form small communities (towns).

  9. #9
    Senior Member Ediruc's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Last Online
    Thursday, August 1st, 2019 @ 05:29 PM
    Status
    Available
    Ethnicity
    German-American
    Ancestry
    German-American and proud
    Subrace
    Alpinid-Nordid
    Country
    United States United States
    Gender
    Posts
    1,298
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    0
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    7
    Thanked in
    7 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by Juthunge View Post
    Depends on whether 2-5% are really that significant for you. The former being the more likely estimate for Europeans, with (South-)East Asians and Oceanians having a higher contribution.
    That's because most of the mixing probably happened before the initial spread of Homo Sapiens(well, the Homo Sapiens admixed with Neanderthal) somewhere in Western Asia and not in Europe, anyway. With the non-European Eurasian groups encountering more Neanderthal-like populations in the regions they migrated to.


    That being said, the contribution might actually be higher because they use Sub-Saharan Africans as proxy for original Homo Sapiens.
    But there are some hints, that (a) backflow(s) from Eurasia into Sub-Saharan Africa happened or that Africans mixed with local archaic neanderthal-like Humans, after the ancestors of the Eurasians had already left Africa, which drew them closer to the latter again.
    I haven't found research that has tried to make any direct links between the progression of racial civilizations and their ancestry (obviously, because, leftist scientists won't go near that kind of topic) but, just from my own research of the spread of sub-species and genetic links, I like to assume sub-species like Neanderthal, Denisovans, and Cro-Magnons had a significant impact on how European and Asian civilizations developed.

    Again, I have no verified link on this, but, I think it's suspicious that populations with greater Neanderthal, Denisovan, and other Sub-species genetics had advanced far faster and culturally than Sub-Saharan African/Homo Sapien civilizations. It's just a theory of mine.

    They found evidence that Neanderthal's had bigger brains, as well, but, that never implied they were more intelligent than incoming Homo Sapiens. So, I can't really say for sure if that matters.

  10. #10
    New Member Theodelinda's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2018
    Last Online
    Thursday, November 22nd, 2018 @ 04:43 AM
    Ethnicity
    H-mDna
    Ancestry
    Welsh, Scots, English, German, French, other
    Country
    United States United States
    State
    California California
    Location
    Los Angeles
    Gender
    Age
    64
    Family
    Grandparent
    Occupation
    Anthropologist
    Politics
    Unknown
    Religion
    Tribal
    Posts
    8
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    0
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    12
    Thanked in
    5 Posts
    While Neanderthals were certainly not stupid, to me, the differences between N and Hs are striking and considerable.

    From the 1970's to the early 2000's, it was constantly stated in anthropology textbooks (based on one set of archaeological finds in the Middle East) that Neanderthal was the first to show religious sentiment, because they buried their dead. Then, findings not too far from the N. burials were found among H.s, and they were 40,000 years older. The evidence hints strongly that H.s. was first and perhaps N. copied them (we see a lot of this; H.s. is making necklaces of gradated beads and shells very early, N. is not making much jewelry, but after contact with us, begins to string rocks with holes in them around their necks). Neanderthal may have been very adept at using local plants as medicines, perhaps earlier than H.S. Study after study shows that N. was exceedingly good at using materials found close to their dwellings, but that their overall range was not large. Most of the items they used were found within 10 miles of their homebase/cave, with some things coming from 20-30 miles away.

    H. sapiens is different. By the time FMHS gets to the Black Lake region, they routinely store goods of various kinds from up to 200-300 miles away, and from ecosystems that are challenging (like deserts). Neanderthals' trails lead directly to resources (in a nearly straight line, necessitating feats of climbing that would have been difficult for women and children to accomplish). Cro Magnon, OTOH, goes around obstacles (and has less evidence of broken bones). Cro Magnon preferred portable housing and hilltops, and moved around a lot. Presumably, Cro Magnon traveled as a group, with women and children.

    One of the advantages of meeting and mating with N. would have been to use N's bases as outposts to explore the surrounding region, before bringing in the rest of the family...

    N's brains were definitely bigger, but we don't know the number of neurons. We do know that a bigger brain may be slightly slower at processing, and it would be great to know whether N used the same columnar structure that H.s. has in its cortex. At any rate, N rarely or never hafted tools, rarely or never made multi-part tools (FMHS comes to the North Sea with spear throwers that rapidly become harpoons). N never figures out awls, much less needles. N. never had ladders (which appear 120KYA in Africa, near cliffside source of flint).

    Cro Magnon knew where the flint resources were (most modern humans would have a hard time finding them) but they had so many ways of making tools without stones that it was a kind of revolution. The fact that these materials were readily available to N, but N never used them, seems to me to say that N was, at the very least, less creative or inventive. N. almost certainly had better perceptual apparatus (bigger sinuses and noses, more cortex devoted to smell, perhaps a slight larger visual cortex that would have aided in both vision and memory).

    At any rate, Cro Magnon on entering Europe is an explosive cultural force (changed the course of prehistory). The eastward migrants (into northern Asia and eventually the New World) migrated more readily, lived on a smaller group of resources, and did not end up being the kind of culture or gene pump that their European cousins would be.

Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 16
    Last Post: Sunday, October 2nd, 2016, 02:05 AM
  2. Replies: 1
    Last Post: Thursday, May 5th, 2016, 09:47 PM
  3. Replies: 1
    Last Post: Monday, March 12th, 2012, 09:06 AM
  4. Replies: 9
    Last Post: Tuesday, February 28th, 2012, 10:35 AM

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •