The Y-DNA Haplogroups I of European Gothids
Clickable terms are red on the yellow background
Map 1. The European Spread of Nordic Littoralids (Y-hg I1) and Danubian Europoids (Y-hg I2)
Map 2. The Migration Spread of the Rugian Y-Haplogroup I2a2a-M233 (asterisk * is appended to ancient toponymy)
Map 3. The Archaeological Distribution of Swabian-Rugian Trichterbecherkultur
The Micoquians and Macrolithic Pre-Europids as Ancestors of Indo-Europeans
Nostratic. Holger Pedersen’s ‘Nostratic hypothesis’ assumed that European peasants
belonged to the same ethnic group of our Nostratic
kinsmen (from Latin nostrates ‘fellow
countrymen’) as Altaic herdsmen and Semitic goat-keepers. V. M. Illič-Svityč extended this family by adding Georgian
Kartvelians and Dravidians in
The underlying rudimentary idea was derived from Cuvier’s old classification of the white, yellow, black and red race. This popular taxonomy was based on superficial secondary traits because skin colour can change in the course of several tens of millennia. In fact, such presumptive ‘continental races’ are as intermingled as linguistic macrofamilies. Skeletal paleoanthropology relies on much more durable osteal features that preserve genetic tendencies for more than one hundred thousand years. All hybrid racial, ethnic and linguistic families have to be sorted into pure elementary components. Their labels justly denominate the dominant superstratum but wrongfully unite it with alien adstrata of heterogeneous origin.
Most important criteria of genetic reconstruction are found in the morphology
of skulls, craniofacial traits, nasal indices and femorotibial ratios. Rare skeletal digs may be inspissated by taking into account more abundant evidence
of archaeological excavations. The anthropological dichotomy of
dolichocephalous and mesocephalous races shows a
high coincidence with the division between equatorial axe-tool assemblages
and boreal flake-tool cultures. African, Caucasoid, European, Melanesian and
Amerindian farmers all belong to the ethnic group with tall, robust and
muscular constitution, dolichocephalous skulls, ABO blood type O,
herbivorous, granivorous and graminivorous
subsistence and chopping-tool industry. Their earliest ancestors exhibited
the dark complexion of Afroid, Australoid and Melanesian equatorial
races but when their hosts moved to northern
Micoquians. Traditional ethnology and comparative linguistics assume
that most ethnic families arose from a prehistoric ancestral unity by the
process of divergent bifurcation into smaller sections. The white-skinned
race of Nordids has probably descended from an
early offshoot of the black equatorial chopping-tool race exposed to contacts
with Clactonian and Levalloisian flake-tool
Pre-Europids. The term of Pre-Europids
(Pre-Europidi, called also Woodland Silvids and
Pre-Europids as Progenitors of Gothonic Nations with IJK Y-haplogroups
The most telling illustration of Pre-Europids was
discovered in the Japanese Jomonians (16,000 BP),
who combined cord-marked pottery with littoral beachcombing, gathering
shellfish seafood and pre-agricultural subsistence consisting in horticulture
and the hoe-cultivation of millet. Their genetic heritage looked translucent
in the Gê or Jê
macro-family in the eastern coasts of
Plausible solutions of the Indo-European unity seek its core in the dominant Nordic superstratum accompanied by several heterogeneous subdominant substrata and subsidiary adstrata. The dominant role has to be ascribed without doubts to manufacturers of the Linear Ware, Funnelbeaker Culture, Corded Ware and Bell-Beaker pottery. They were hardly identical to the IE subfamilies, their close interrelation suggests typological affiliation ruling among various members of the ‘Gothonic family’. Its concept was put forward by the Danish anthropologist Gudmund Schütte. He formulated a plausible theory of one Gothonic proto-nation that might have formed the backbone of Indo-European nations.1 He was an adherent of working methods of structural typology assuming that “homogeneous matter should always be presented in homogeneous columns under precisely the same headings and in the same order”. His conclusions were derived from linguistic parallels but reconstructed prehistoric travels from Ptolemy’s maps.2
opinion shell-midden cultures bring testimony of an
early differentiation of Gothonic nations making
axe-tool instruments. Their haplogroup I1-M253
pertains to Gotho-Frisians with the Corded Ware
pottery and also to the Franco-Swabian Bell-Beaker
Folk, whose ancestors were excavated in the
Traditional concepts of European tribes insist on a sort of holistic isolationism that identifies tribes with nations cast like ingots in the mould of medieval monarchies. A more sophisticated view divides Gothids into phratries (Jutes, Frisians, Angles, Saxons) denoted as Endo-Gothids, and lineages of migration streams designated as Syn-Gothids. Streams jut out of the cradleland of the tribal diaspora like tentacles of an octopus or branches of a genealogic tree growing out of one trunk. The entire genealogic tree might be referred to as a union of Pan-Gothids (Table 11).
The common Gothonic
starting-point may be found in the farmers
of the Danubian Linear Ware (5500–4500 BC), who
seem to have coincided with the Y-DNA haplogroup
The Indo-European anthropological variety calls for reviving several long-forgotten terms for Campignian, Abbevillian and Chellean cultures. The Campignian origins link the Corded Nordics and their boat-shaped battle-axes (Bootäxte and Streitäxte)5 with prehistoric axe-tool cultures based on choppers, hand-axes and axe-tools industry. They must be coordinated and synchronised with Acheuleans because typological comparisons of their anthropology and archaeology prove close interrelations with Anatolian and Iranian Neolithic farmers of the Afghan type. As is well-known, Colin Renfrew advanced theories about the origins of Danubian agriculture from Anatolian farmers. Their common features are endogamous marriages, sacred marital games hieros gamos, quantitative prosody and rich vocalic quantity with the cardinal a-i-u triangle vocalism, the SVO word order and similar ethnonyms and tribal structure. Moreover, they are linked by common descent from Acheulean roots and the Y-DNA haplogroup IJK. Their principal difference concerns domestic architecture: Danubian peasantry inhabited collective quadrangular longhouse on riverside dunes, whereas Anatolian and Persian farmers dwelt in multi-cellular flat-roofed labyrinth houses out of dry clay bricks and pisé on tell-mounds.
genetically prior to tribes, language families and nations and so it
impossible to speculate that the tall dolichocephalous Nordids
split into tall brachycephalous Dinarids,
shorter mesocephalous Mediterranids
and short-sized stocky brachycephalous Alpines
within a few centuries. Haplogenetic comparisons
prove that these ethnic components must have infiltrated into
Some layers were due to early prehistoric populations of Levalloisians and Aurignacians living as nomadic fishers on the shores of lakes. Map 8 demonstrates remains of lacustrine settlements pertaining to Pelasgoid and Tungusoid lake-dwellers. Their racial component is perceptible in Greek Pelasgians, the French Chassey-Lagozza-Cortaillod group, Karelian lake-dwellers and Hyperboreans of the Ladogan racial variety. Much more populous superstratum is formed the later floodtide of immigrant importing Magdalenian, Maglemosian, Azilian, Beuronian and Tardenoisian cultures. Their northern Maglemosian stream consisted of bog-people (Y-DNA haplogroup R1a) with sack-shaped textile vessels that later turned into pottery with pointed bottoms. Their southern kinsmen were nomadic fishers, reindeer hunters and later also herders of ovicaprids. They lived in natural or artificial rock-hewn caves attributable to Iberians, Eburones, Eburovices and the Irish Hiberni (legendary cliff-dwellers fomoire). Their Y-DNA haplogroup was R1b accompanied by mtDNA haplogroups H1 and H3. Tacit classified Germans as a tribal block of tribes called Irminones or Herminones1. Ptolemy mentioned their brotherly kin of Κίμβροι or Cimbri2 and Plinius wrote about their relatives Teutones3.
Extract from P. Bělíček: The Analytic Survey of European Anthropology. Prague 2018, pp. 45-49
1 Joseph Greenberg: Indo-European and its Closest Relatives. The Eurasiatic Language Family. Stanford University, 2000.
2 B. Lukács: Nostratic or Vostratic? 2004; http://www.rmki.kfki.hu/~lukacs/LAKA.htm.
3 Alfredo Trombetti: L'unità d'origine del linguaggio. Bologna: L. Beltrami, 1905.
4 Merritt Ruhlen: The Origin of Language: Tracing the Evolution of the Mother Tongue. New York: John Wiley & Sons 1996, p. 103.
1 Nougier, L.-R.: Les Civilisations campigniennes en
1 Gudmund Schütte: Our Forefathers: The Gothonic Nations: Volume 1: A Manual of the Ethnography of the Gothic, German, Dutch, Anglo-Saxon, Frisian and Scandinavian People I-II, Cambridge Univ. Press, 1929-1933.
2 Gudmund Schütte: Ptolemy's maps of northern Europe : a reconstruction of the prototypes. Royal Danish Geo-graphical Society, 1917.
3 C. Blake Whelan: Studies in the Significance of the Irish Stone Age: The Campignian Question. Proceedings of the Royal Irish Academy: Archaeology, Culture, History, Literature. Vol. 42 (1934/1935), pp. 121-143.
4 C. Schuchhardt: Das technische Element in den Anfängen der Kunst. Prähist. Zeits., I, 37.
5 N. Aberg: Die nordischen Bootaxte. Praehistorische Zeitschrift IX. Berlin & New York, 1917.
1 Tacitus, Germania 2,2,
2 Ptolemy, Geography 2.11.7.
3 Plinius, Naturalis historia 37,35.