The germanic peoples began moving towards the east, as part of a great migration and conquests. The historical beginnings of Prussia and Austria are quite interesting. Prussia was essentially founded by the Teutonic knights, an order of germanic warrior monks who had early been established to fight in the Crusades. The Austrian monarchs, through a long series of strategic marriage alliances managed to gain possessions all over europe. The Austrian monarch was able to obtain the title of Holy Roman Emperor, a legacy of the confederation of states left behind by Charlemagne many centuries before. In both cases, Austria and Prussia were described by contemporary historians as basically a military with a state, rather than the other way around. This likely had to do with the two states having historically been founded by conquest to begin with, so their political structures were fundamentally militarized. In both cases, the german language and culture was imposed as the dominant one. Both Austria and Prussia would go on to carve out empires out of a diverse group of peoples. Prussia consolidated it's power in the east, encouraging more german migration, while "germanizing" the subjugated Baltic people, and was eventually able to unite the original german states. Austria reigned over a much more diverse empire, through an early political union with the kingdom of Hungary, though the union was never an equal one. This culminated in the German Empire and Austria-Hungary, which were defeated in the first World War. Both Empires created magnificent capitals, in Konigsburg and Prague. The architectural marvels of Prague still stand as a testament to Austria's Imperial past, while every last trace of the Prussian history of Konigsburg was intentionally obliterated by the Russian Soviet occupation after the second world war. During the time of Hitler there were still numerous magnificent Teutonic Castles and great Prussian monuments commemmorating war victories. While Prague had always been famous for hosting a diversity of different peoples in the empire, the city became much more homogenous after the fragmentation of the empire. Historically, it is really no surprise that Hitler wanted to annex Austria. It was a germanic state, and with Germany's Prussian origins, which were quite recent in fact, it was only obvious to want to reunite with the remnant of Prussia's sibling geramic empire. This was a time of Nationalist ideology, it should be remembered. While Nationalism had contributed to the unification of the german states, it was also the fundamental reason for the breakup of the Austrian Empire. In conclusion, the states of Austria and Prussia had many historical parallels, and both left behind an influential legacy in the existence of the modern political boundaries in central-eastern europe. It should be remembered that both Prussia and Austria were really part of a german migration and subjugation of Slavic peoples to the east. In both cases, there was a deliberate attempt to "germanize" the occupied slavic peoples, as their culture, language, and political institutions were believed to be inferior.
Haplogroup I is a subclade of haplogroup N, which have arisen in Eurasia between 17,263 and 24,451 years before present (Behar 2012b). Outside of Europe, the highest frequencies of haplogroup I are observed in northern Kenya (17-23%), which shows that haplogroup I originated in Kenya. 23.6-37.5% of German males carry the haplogroup I mutation M223 and its frequency is also high in Sardinia (37%), which points to northern European migration to the Italian island, and Sardinia was invaded by the Ostrogoths in 551.
A large number of Swedish Vikings traveled on long river routes to the Ukraine for trading purposes, explaining the higher distribution of markers there. Many Ukrainians also look like they are partly Swedish, so it is really little surprise. The high concentration in Yugoslavia appears quite inexplicable. They are definitely Slavs though, not germanic. There does, however, seem to be a high incidence of light-haired individuals is Bosnia and Croatia however, from the pictures I have seen. And this could be quite ancient; the Greeks left written accounts of blue-eyed war-like peoples to their north. Of course, Nazi anthropologists had theories that these where remnants of an ancient (Aryan) people who once covered a vast region in central Asia and central northeastern region of Europe, before later Slavic migrations (and others) displaced them. If I can make a possible suggestion, it might be that the marker distribution is so high in Yugoslavia because of the long Austrian occupation. The Austro-Hungarian Empire was pretty ruthless, and it might be that Austrian men stationed in the provinces had some type of economic competitive advantage over the native men when it came to reproducing with the local females. There could have been a bottle-neck effect also, where the high frequency arose through chance just because of the small number of original males who contributed Y-chromosomes. These things can be complicated, with the countless migrations throughout history and all the mixing.
Prussians ware Balts . i´d change the topic to "Germanic well-preplanned genocides in the Eastern Europe : Austria and Prussia " inferior? First slaves pushed Germanic people then GP pushed Slaves a bit. RIP Baltic Prussians
The Goths, one of the oldest germanic peoples came from the region of the todays Ukraine. The migration towards east is henceforth dependent on the specific century, because the Goths migrated west. One of many germanic peoples who would do that before the year 500. After WW2 you again have a westbound German migration. Austrian Monarchs, starting with elected King Rudolf I. in 1273 of Habsburg won Austria from Ottokar II. who wanted to be the King of Germany himself. Through marriage primarily the Habsburg family gained possessions until the family's power peaked with Karl V. in the 16th century, who didn't speak German himself and who split the possessions with his brother. Then you have a Spanish and Austrian line of the Habsburg family. In all this time I don't see any evidence of a "military with a state" you speak of, nor do I see for a militarized "Austrian" society. Prussia didn't exist till 1525, so you must refer to the time after that. It moving from a Teutonic Order into a worldly possession can be primarily seen in regards to the reformation and a loosing war against Poland. Either way it went into Polish fief. But I do not understand your point of German culture and and language. The most powerful Habsburg emperor Karl V. didn't even speak German. On the other hand you have Prussia which under a worldly duke became basically Polish. Neither language nor culture was "German" as neither really existed at that time. These two things developed very slowly over the next few centuries. Just to give you an idea: In 1555 German could be used as official language - that doesn't mean that the vast majority instantly switched though. Before that Latin was the official language in the Holy Roman Empire. In Hungary Latin was the official language till 1867 - not German or Hungarian. It is hard to know what your point is in all of this. You jump through centuries too much. The meaning of being "German" before 1806 primarily refers to people living under a German King, emperor, duke, etc., not their language or culture. Defining people by their language and culture is an idea of the French Revolution. Before that people defined themselves with their estates of the realm. It didn't matter what language they spoke or if they shared a culture. So people in the nobility didn't consider themselves close to the clergy or peasants even if they spoke the same language or shared the culture. In the case of Prussia it's even more obvious as the nobility was speaking primarily German while the peasants spoke Polish, Baltic or another language. Before the 19th century, nobody ever thought of making people "German". Making them Christian to save their souls, yes. But let me ask you this: Which country was not founded with conquest in these years? Any country come to mind which was founded without conquest before 1800? I seem to miss the point of this entire topic.
sound very reasonable but what effectually has happened to the real Prussians? dont say they moved to Chicago
"Real Prussians" is a very vague term and let me explain why: A historian by the name of Thaller used the computer and tied to find people "who were Prussians, less than 50 years old and owned more than 1000 units of the currency they had." With this example he wished to show the limitations of technology. Seems simple, but it shows the basic problem. The border (and spelling of the word) of Prussia kept changing, people didn't know sometimes what year they were born and rounded their age to what the person looked like and even the currency might have different or even the same names but was worth less or more throughout the region. This example shows the problem. As I said people prior to the French Revolution did only feel they have something in common with the people in their estates of the realm. And it took quite some time before the idea came to Prussia, that somehow people who speak the same language are connected even if they are in two different estates of the realm. And even as this idea spread, it doesn't mean everybody was a fan of it instantly. It took a few decades before Prussia was full of "Prussian" people. So we have look at two different "Prussians" throughout history. One prior to the French Revolution and one which developed after until somewhat today... The first is quite simple compared to the second. Where a duke or king ruled and claimed it was Prussia, people were Prussians independent from their heritage or language. Even if it was for a brief period in their lives. You could be in the same country and go through various dukes and kings, and you would define yourself first to the estates of the realm and then you would merely say who the duke or king was. Whether you were living in Poland or Prussia made only a difference in taxes you payed and the laws your local landlord kept. It might even be the same people because the borders kept changing in one way or the other. So it very well could happen that the people remained the same while their leaders and therefore their "identification" in todays sense was changing. You see the first universal laws which were valid for all people in a country came to be in the 18th century. So even the laws might have not been different as the local landlord might not have changed while the entire region went under new leadership. Who was the king or duke made little difference to the people. In other words whether the border moved one direction or another made little difference on the determination of the people for calling themselves Prussians or even speaking another language. Not much changed for them. So "Real Prussians" can only mean something which grew from the mid 19th century until today. However we have a problem as individuals change their positions in that. If you were born in the town I was born in in 1900 and you never left till 1950, you had 4 citizenships and 2 official languages. And that is not even the most extreme example. Prussian all of the sudden should be people with the same heritage and language with this new perception. But they cant be as the border of Prussia kept changing over a few centuries and some people never left yet spoke another language. With this new perception comes a new nationalism which makes out of neighbors suddenly enemies. "Real Prussians" who may speak German or Polish or another Language suddenly are forced to leave their home and move to another country which indeed uses their language. This continues still today. You may have "Real Prussians" who really stayed home but now they have to call themselves Russians, Polish, etc. The German speaking Prussians moved usually towards the west. But then again the question still remains: Who considers himself or herself a "real Prussian" and for what reason? The answers will vary as it is an individual perception.
Samogitians, Letish , Lithuanians and Estonians are Slavic? wow this is news to me. It looks like the subjugated kicked some serious rear in Grunwald . Yep the Hapsburgs were funded through conquest, Ottoman conquest .
I'm confused that's all. The Habsburg family being founded through conquest confuses me. To me "conquest" means offensive war. Ottokar II. lost Austria because he opposed the election of Rudolf I. in 1273. The next regions were gained through marring and inheriting. Remember the Ottomans did the invading and conquering. They were very successful at it. So I'm still confused how the Habsburgs who peaked with Karl V. (born 1500) "conquered".
i talk about Baltic Prussians victims of the first modern genocide in Europe . and who else could do it? of cos - Germans
The Teutonic Order in a bloody conquest according with medieval practices subjugated the Prussians in the 13th century. The order comprised a ruling class while the Prussians, a Baltic tribe remained as serfs. Later in 1525 the order was dissolved, the cast structure somewhat relaxed, and the Prussians assimilated over the ensuing centuries into the German customs and culture. The Teutonic Order was dissolved in 1525 as a result to a conclusion of a 30 year old conflict waged between Poland and Lithuania on one side and Russia and the Teutonic Order on the other. In its aftermath, Lithuania lost a third of its territory including the frontier fortress city of Smolensk, but eventually the Russian advance was checked and peace with Russia concluded. Poland and Lithuania immediately turned their attention to Prussia, its former vassal since 1466, with intent to punish it for its treaterous alliance with Russia. The Teutonic monarch to avoid such uneven war then pledged to dissolve the Order, rekindle full allegiance and further requested to be allowed to change the official religion if his possessions from Catholic to aProtestant. A century later, Brandenburg was allowed to seat a prince in Prussia in exchange for Prussia bailing out a bancrupt Polish-Lithuanian state following a botched invasion of Russia. In 1653 Prussia fully broke away to join up with Brandenburg.
There is a nice contemporary painting commemorating those events. http://commons.m.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Battle_of_Orsha_(1514-09-08).jpg
you ´d know it, the first anti- language anti culture laws in Europe have been introduced by German colonists in Baltic Prussia , Germans have always been so much into this http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Germanisation
As I mentioned before: There were no Prussians before 1525. And since you referred to the "first modern genocide in Europe" of "Baltic Prussians" I had to assume you meant something after 1848. This view of a genocide in the 12th century by Germans is very political and incorrect. You're implying that Germans have these tendencies which is just incorrect. These types of things were going on all across Europe. The Baltic region and Palestine were hit in the 12th century. The same thing happened to the Saxon-Germans beginning with Karl the Great in the 8th century. It was a catholic based conquering moving towards the east. But this isn't a modern genocide. Nationalism and identity (to repeat myself) are creations starting in the second half of the 18th century at the earliest. You can't apply todays perceptions of identities into the middle ages. It just doesn't work that way.
you are wrong, you did to Prussians ((there are (were) only one Prussians, Baltic Prussians))exactly the same things what you tried to do with Jews only 70 years ago: "the deliberate and systematic destruction, in whole or in part, of an ethnic, racial, religious, or national group" this exactly what satanic German illegal settlers did to harmless native Prussian nation . i hate my Kings and nobility for not using Grunewald victory and did not finish off the illegal terrorist G. settlers , women , olders, and busters , much like you did to harmless Prussians...
It is remarkable that you are annoyed at events 600 years ago and you think that today's Germans are responsible. Do some digging in your families history and I'm convinced that if you go back 600 years you will find a lot of ethnic groups. You might run into more Germans in your lineage than you think. Ethnics differences were limited to religion 600 years ago, not to language or heritage. If you don't believe me read up on it a little more. There must be a local historian you can consult on these matters.
German dogs has committed the first genocide in Europe, Prussians were the biggest Baltic nation.... Germans (criminals, busters, white thresh) took everything from them . we´d always remember it
correction: I meant Vienna, not Prague. The capital of Austria is Vienna. I do not know how I could have made such a silly mistake. One of the moderators please go back and correct the original post.
