German eastern territories

>German eastern territories
>German

yeah they were mostly polacks in the east.
but they needed the liebensraum for the aryans, bro.

>Sample size of 3000 at this scale

Prussians used to be a proto-slavic tribe. They got their shit together and they germanized and also made themselves the core of the Deutschtum. That's why the R1a haplotype was wide-spred in the east. Polacks were a minority.

it was a baltic tribe and they were savage swamp people who were at best peasants in german prussia
>implying polacks from silesia and pomerania weren't considered german by hitler

unlike slavic countries, russia is a great example, the germanic people did not replace other groups living there, which is genocide

Eastern colonisation was mostly rich nobles taking over local tribes and establishing cities with westerners. So this is exactly what you would expect. Some Slavic tribes were actually never conquered but converted to Christianity and joined the Empire with their leaders ruling until 1918 (Obrodithes).
Not even Hiler did deny that Germany assimilated huge numbers of Slavic people. That's why he wanted to increase the North Germanic share by state funded programs.

If this is something new to you, you have no idea about Germany history and especially it's federal character in the earliest beginning.

>tfw mostly Prussian ancestry

Come home Slav man.

All ancestors back to the Great Nordic war came from north of the Eider river. I've pure Germanic genes, but not German ancestry. Your concept lacks the difference between German and Germanic.

Like Wojtech already said, they were Balts, like Lithuanians and Latvians (though linguistically these represent one side of the wider Balto-Slavonic family). But you are mistaken on Polish genetics too: they are massively R1a, to the point where this is the main Slavonic haplogroup, seen in Russia too.

From the map, it appears that a truly distinctive Germanic haplogroup is the I1. The R1b comes largely from absorbing Celts by the Rhine and Danube, while much of the R1a is from absorbing Wends in the east.

tfw my own grandfather was I1, from Bernician Roxburghshire. Proper Angle, straight off the boat from the Urheimat.

>they were savage swamp people who were at best peasants in german prussia
They had an aristocracy, which assimilated, like their Slavonic predecessors in Mecklenburg and Brandenburg had done. That's why so many of the old Prussian officer class had those great big wide heads, like Hindenburg and so on. This is the west baltid anthropological type, not something from Germany proper.

CK2 Old Gods or Charlemagne start will explain everything

Please m8 we sent all the Britons to Britanny. Anglo masterrace does not fuck around.

fuck off
Preussen sind Deutsch

based moravia

Had come to say this, but ausie was too fast. You would get similar result if you checked austria. Stayer and eastern ostereich would be massively slavic. They are slavic people who learned to speak german and forgot their own language. This is why they are such sour assholes, hellbent on racial purity. Because living in state of denial is a bitch.
All being said, Sloveninans are probably some kind of world champions in haploid genes mixture, if i had learned anything from history.

>samples taken after the german genocides

We're actually surprisingly high on Slavic admixture

Also, this picture explains everything

>Prussia
>Any connections with Russia
lad....

Not massively surprising. Your very name hints at the pretty simple make up of your founders, and the area is small enough not to include too many substrate populations. It was close enough to Italy for many romanised native Celts and Illyrians to just flee there. The other South Slavs obviously have their Iranian element (as seen even in their names), but are also out east enough to have trapped and absorbed enough Romanised locals who had nowhere to run to. Not to mention no Ottoman impact. Those non-Slavs absorbed by your ancestors would mostly have been in areas that were subsequently germanised or magyaricised anyway.

Ok, thats strange, I had always considered that since we simply stumbled into emptiness left behind Huns, Lombards and such, our ancestors had mixed heavily with enclaves of Latins. Even some paganic traditions like Kurent, hold much resemblance to roman pagan cults. And considering, Uskoki imigration, Romans on coast and long tradition of germanic feudal lords, it looks decent. Guess only legal born to Slavic fathers were alowed to procreate or some shit. Seem we were more alpha back then than we give credit.

>joke
>-------------
>your head
That being sad, Eastern Germany belongs to West Slavs.

>bavarians dont have huge heads

lot of autists itt

I think it really does support the theory of migration. We were not here earlier than the 6th century AD, we came in two waves and most of all - in masses. We (Slavs) made a significant genetic impact on the population.
Some people speculate that we were extremely violent and oppressive to the locals so not much has remained of them, this has to do with our national character which has now internalized this anger towards ourselves - the suicide rates, the high expectations, the alcoholism might in fact speak of it.

Nobody ever questioned the migration idea until the last retarded few decades, with all the politicisation of history they brougth. You don't need to imagine anything too drastic - like apartheid or anything! - it's all easily achieved by better birthrates for the incomers. If conquering victorious Slavoslav slavovich had ten kids who all grew to maturity, healthy and presitigious, while lowly relegated Iulio could only manage to raise three scrawny peasant kids in his hovel, it's clear who's going to have the biggest impact on the later population.