"Only this is denied to the gods: the power to recreate the past."
(Aristoteles)
The old theory about the origins of the Germanic culture claims that it came into existence between 3000BC and 2000BC and that it was the result of a mixture of the native northern European megalithic cultures and later Indo-European invaders, this theory was very controversial due to its theoretical nature and the lack of proof for it, therefor it is nowadays not longer supported by historians and they have come up with a much better researched and more reliable theory that is also backed up with proof.
Because some of my research material was quite old I have initially supported the old theory on this site but I have now decided to update this site to the new theory, I hereby offer my apologies for using the old obsolete theory and I hope that you will enjoy the newer and more correct information, here it is:
The first Germanic culture: Not much is known about the exact historical origins of the Germanic peoples but most historians agree that the first culture that can officially be called "Germanic" was the Jastorf culture in northern Germany, this culture came into existence around 600BC and was the first northern European culture that used iron, which they probably adopted from the nearby Celtic Hallstatt culture in the Alps.
According to the German linguistician (and fairy tale writer!) Grimm the formation period of the Germanic language ended around 500BC with the completion of the Germanic sound shift, most modern linguisticians agree with Grimms theory so the official "start date" of the Germanic identity is 500BC and is based on the period around which the formation of the Proto-Germanic language was completed.
Does that mean that there was no Germanic identity before 500BC? officially not, though the Germanic identity (culture, religion, language, etc.) was the result of a long formation period that may have taken hundreds or even thousands of years, on this site I will use the word "Pre-Germanic" to define all northern European cultures that preceeded the Germanic culture, most of which are probably its direct or indirect ancestors.
Due to its use of iron the Jastorf culture became very powerful and quickly spread its influence through northern Europe, not with force (no evidence of struggle has been found) but probably with trade, diplomacy, and by forming alliances; around 100BC the Harpstedt culture joined the new Germanic culture which caused it to spread to the northern part of the Netherlands and Germany west of the river Elbe, many other cultures followed and soon the Germanic culture had spread to Scandinavia and most lands between the rivers Rhine (Rhein), Danube (Donau), and Vistula (Weichsel), and in many places even beyond those rivers, most northern European cultures were closely related and shared a common ancestry which made it easier for them to unite themselves into the new Germanic culture.
What happened after the birth of the Germanic culture is described on the rest of this site so I will now go back in time to shed some light on the possible ancestors of the Germanic culture.
The Pre-Germanic Bronze Age cultures: The ancestors of the first Germanic cultural group (Jastorf) were the Bronze Age cultures of northern Germany, the most important ones were:
Lausitz culture (1300BC-500BC)
Unstrut group (1200BC-700BC)
Lüneburger group (1200BC-1100BC)
Aller Mündungs group (1200BC-1000BC)
Stader group (1100BC-800BC)
Ems-Hunte group (1100BC-800BC)
Of all this cultures the Lüneburger group is probably the most direct ancestor of the Jastorf culture, some researchers believe that the Unstrut group was the first Germanic culture but that is still controversial so I will not go much further into that.
So the new Germanic culture was the result of a cultural union of the northern European Bronze Age cultures, which was probably established by the spread of iron usage, the Jastorf culture (and later also other Germanic cultural groups) did not only bring iron usage to the other northern European cultures, but also new ideas, new inventions, and a new language; Proto-Germanic.
A more complete list of Bronze Age cultures in Germany (and earlier ones) can be found at: http://www.obib.de/zeitliste2c.html (in German).
The origins of the Pre-Germanic Bronze Age cultures: Although the new Germanic culture unified the cultures of northern Europe they already had many similarities before that, many of those cultures were highly influenced by the Urnfield culture, an Indo-European culture in central Europe from which the Celtic Hallstatt culture and many other Indo-European cultures descended.
If we go even further back in time we find a common ancestor of the northern European Bronze Age cultures; the Funnelbeaker culture (around 3500BC), of course there were many other cultures between the Funnelbeaker culture and the Pre-Germanic Bronze Age cultures but most of the cultural similarities can probably be traced back to this common ancestor.
The Funnelbeaker culture inhabited roughly the same area as the later Germanic culture, this culture also built the so called "Hunebeds", which were megalithic tombs of large stones covered with earth, the "Funnelbeaker culture" has been named after the funnel-shaped beakers they created.
Some historians believe that the Funnelbeaker culture was an Indo-European culture that was the result of a fusion of the native northern European culture and later Indo-European influences though most historians agree that the Funnelbeaker culture was the native (Pre-Indo-European) culture of northern Europe and that the Indo-European influences started much later.
Ethnically seen the Funnelbeaker people were the direct ancestors of the later Germanic people but culturally seen the Germanic culture also had many influences from later cultures as well as a great deal of Indo-European additions, though the Germanic culture probably inherited much of the native northern European culture, after all the Germanic language still contains over 40% of non-Indo-European words, which is quite a lot and indicates that many aspects of the native northern European culture may have been preserved in the Germanic culture.
I shall now go a little deeper into the earliest history of northern Europe, because very little is known about this subject the following texts can be a bit speculative, so if you are only interested in proven facts I advice you to go and read something else ;) Origin of the Germanic peoples according to Tacitus: Some of the texts Tacitus wrote in his "Germania" may give us some clues about the origins of the Germanic peoples since he based some of his work on older texts that were written by Roman historians who actually met with the Germans and asked them questions that they have later written down:
Tacitus' Germania: The Germans, I am apt to believe, derive their original from no other people; and are nowise mixed with different nations arriving amongst them: since anciently those who went in search of new buildings, travelled not by land, but were carried in fleets; and into that mighty ocean so boundless, and, as I may call it, so repugnant and forbidding, ships from our world rarely enter. Moreover, besides the dangers from a sea tempestuous, horrid and unknown, who would relinquish Asia, or Africa, or Italy, to repair to Germany, a region hideous and rude, under a rigorous climate, dismal to behold or to manure unless the same were his native country? In their old ballads (which amongst them are the only sort of registers and history) they celebrate Tuisto, a God sprung from the earth, and Mannus his son, as the fathers and founders of the nation.
To Mannus they assign three sons, after whose names so many people are called; the Ingaevones, dwelling next the ocean; the Herminones, in the middle country; and all the rest, Instaevones. Some, borrowing a warrant from the darkness of antiquity, maintain that the God had more sons, that thence came more denominations of people, the Marsians, Gambrians, Suevians, and Vandalians, and that these are the names truly genuine and original.
For the rest, they affirm Germany to be a recent word, lately bestowed: for that those who first passed the Rhine and expulsed the Gauls, and are now named Tungrians, were then called Germans: and thus by degrees the name of a tribe prevailed, not that of the nation; so that by an appellation at first occasioned by terror and conquest, they afterwards chose to be distinguished, and assuming a name lately invented were universally called Germans.
The Germanic creation myth Tacitus mentions has much resemblances with the later text from the Edda in which Bor sprung from the Earth at the beginning of time; his son Buri also got three sons; Odin, Vili, and Vé, who were believed to have been the ancestors of the Germanic peoples, furthermore the text implicates that Germania was a new land and that it's inhabitants must originate from a land that was similar in climate and terrain; the most obvious regions for this are southern Scandinavia and the Northsea coast since the western Germans (who were described in Tacitus work) all came from that area and had colonized the rest of Germania in the centuries before.
Ethnic origin of the Germanic peoples: Many ancient sources tell us that the Germanic peoples were tall, white, and had blond hair and blue eyes, this physical features are rather rare among humans and are only seen amongst Europeans and their descendants in other places of the world, considering this it may be possible that those peoples share a common ancestry somewhere way back in human history.
I am now "moving onto slippery ice" as we say it in the Netherlands, ethnicity is a very sensitive subject here in Europe and most people are rather paranoid about it since WW2. Before I continue I would therefore like to restate that this is a historically orientated site that has nothing to do with politics or extremist ideas; the only reason why I would mention the subject "ethnicity" on this site is when it can help us in our search for historical answers.
A good example is a recent research that was conducted in Britain for the purpose of finding out where the current English population originates from, DNA research has indicated that the English have much genetical similarities with the population of northern Netherlands and Germany, which completed a big piece of the puzzle and allowed historians to learn a lot more about British history and the origins of the Anglo-Saxon settlers.
Our search to explain the differences in human appearance takes us back to long forgotten times; in early prehistory the size of the world population was still very small and areas the size of Great Britain were inhabited by no more than a few thousand people, this people were mainly hunter-gatherers who lived in rather isolated communities; this lifestyle continued for thousands of years which caused the different groups of humans to slowly adapt to the climate and the surrounding terrain; a good example are the Eskimo's who developed smaller bodies to retain their body heat and wider noses to warm up the cold air before breathing it in, another possible reason for the difference in human appearances is that newcomers interbred with other types of humans who were living in the area they settled in, in those days Homo Sapiens Sapiens shared the world with at least three other types of humans; Homo Erectus (mainly in Asia but also in most other parts of the world), Homo Sapiens Neanderthalensis (Europe, the Middle East, and parts of western Asia) and Homo Sapiens Cro-Magnon (North Africa, Europe), this three groups were not stupid cavemen but intelligent human species who were almost similar to the modern humans.
For a long time we have seen those other types of humans as "inferiour" and portrayed them as stupid apemen hitting eachother on the head with clubs shouting "UGH!", but today this kind of views are not longer supported.
Homo Erectus: The Homo Erectus was almost as intelligent as the modern humans and was the first type of human that left Africa and colonized other parts of the world, during that process it had to adapt to the changes of the earth's climate and the different terrains it encountered, slowly evolving it and increasing its ability to think and adapt to the ever changing environment.
Homo Sapiens Neanderthalensis: It is often believed that the modern humans exterminated the Neanderthals but this is very unlikely, 10.000 years ago they lived side by side in Europe; if two groups of peoples live in the same area they will sooner or later meet eachother and they will trade, fight, exchange knowledge, and fall in love with eachother.
A good example is this Dutch newsarticle that was published in the "Metro" on April 17, 2001:
"Red-haired may possess a Neanderthal-gene Nature according to British researchers humans with red hair may have possibly inherited a gene from the Neanderthals. Because of that the gene that is responsible for their red hairs and freckles can be 100.000 years old and would in that case be older than the Homo Sapiens who migrated from Africa to Europe 40.000 years ago. The Neanderthals have lived in Europe for 200.000 years before Homo Sapiens came there. Assumingly both species did have mated with eachother. (DPA)"
Cro-Magnon man: Another type of human living alongside modern humans was the Homo Sapiens Cro-Magnon, who was anatomically identical to the Homo Sapiens Sapiens and is often considered to have been a subgroup of it, whatever its exact place in the human genealogy tree was, the Cro-Magnon was just as intelligent and developed as we are now.
The Cro-Magnon wore cloathing of woven fabrics instead of animal hides and made jewellry like for instance necklaces of ivory marbles, they are also known for their cave paintings, especially the ones at Lascaux in France; the paintings are characterized by the use of new techniques, perspective, and even the introduction of astrology; paintings have been found that contained starmaps of the Summer Triangle, the Pleiades, and the Northern Crown like they looked 16.500 years ago.
Just like the Homo Sapiens Sapiens today there were many differences in the appearance of the Homo Sapiens Cro-Magnon; some Cro-Magnon types looked much like the modern Asian peoples while others looked more like the modern Europeans, some had a light skincolour, others had a dark one, some had light hair, some dark, etc. despite it's differences the Cro-Magnons all had one common feature; they were tall and long-skulled (dolichocephalic), a feature that also characterizes the modern northern Europeans as well as some isolated peoples in Asia (Ainu) and northern Africa (Masaď, Berbers).
The conception of most researchers is that the northern Europeans are descendants of a small isolated group of hunter/gatherers (probably of the Cro-Magnon type) who have slowly adapted their physical appearance to the European climate and conditions and started colonizing northern Europe after the melting glaciers retreated northwards.
The following newsarticle was published in the "Spits" on May 18, 2001:
"'European descends from small group of hunters' London The northern Europeans may possibly descend from fifty to no more than thousand hunter-gatherers from the Stone Age, who survived the last Ice Age. New DNA-researches prove this, as reported by the BBC yesterday based on an article in the trade journal Nature. (ANP)"
The descendants of the people that are mentioned in this newsarticle have settled in northern Europe and the areas around the Baltic sea, possibly also near the Black Sea and the Caucasus, there are even people who claim that they also travelled to other parts of the world, to support their theory they use the following arguments;
In Japan lives the Ainu people who have much similarities with the modern Europeans and are believed to be an early mixture of Asians and Europeans.
In ancient times the Canary Islands were inhabited by tall blonde people who were called "Guanches" by their neighbours, they built step-pyramids similar to those in South- and Central America and some researchers believe that they may have used the Canary Island sea-current to reach America in the period from 2000BC to 500BC, though this theory remains controversial, unfortunately the Guanches have long since disappeared but archeologists have found mummies on the island that looked much like northern Europeans.
There are also rumours of tall white people inhabiting America before the Native Americans (Kennewick man) and old Spanish chronicles even mention white Indians.
I shall not go any deeper into this because a lot of research is still needed to say anything definitive, and it is irrelevant to the subject anyway.
The native northern Europeans: the common origin of the northern Europeans explains most of their later cultural similarities, the first organized civilizations in northern Europe were probably the megalithic cultures that created many of the mysterious stone structures that we can still see in the landscape nowadays (like the Hunebeds and the Externsteine), some people believe that this cultures may have even been united into a developed civilization because a lot of organization and planning was needed to build this stone structures, which is impossible for a small group of local farmers, in my opinion it goes too far to say that this civilization was "Atlantis" or "Ultima Thule" but if such a civilization really existed it must have been organized and advanced enough to realize this kind of massive projects.
According to modern historians most megalithic monuments were built between 3500 and 3000 BC; a period that coincides with the Funnelbeaker culture, this culture was indeed organized and developed enough to realize projects of such a scale, I have seen the hunebeds this culture has built in the Dutch province of Drenthe and the stones are so big that even their modern descendants with the help of machines have difficulties reconstructing their work, the Funnelbeaker culture was probably the native (pre-Indo-European) culture of northern Europe or at least a direct descendant of it because the Indo-European influences on northern Europe started much later around 2500BC.
The origin of the Indo-European culture: there is still much debate about the origin of the Indo-European culture and whether they were originally an ethnic group or a cultural/linguistical group, the original (incorrect and highly outdated) theory states that the northern Europeans were the creators of the Indo-European culture and that this "master race" founded the first civilizations, for this reason the Indo-European culture is also referred to as "Indo-Germanic" (which is still an accepted word in academical circles) or even with the incorrect word "Aryans", which was introduced by the nazi's who (mistakenly) believed that the Aryans (an Indo-Europan tribe that invaded India) were a Germanic people, nowadays this ridiculous theory is not longer supported and new views are being introduced, the most commonly accepted one states that the Indo-European culture and language has its roots somewhere around the Black Sea and that it was only a cultural and linguistical identity that was adopted by many different peoples, on this site I also support this theory because I believe it is the most plausible explanation.
Although it is commonly accepted that the Indo-European culture had its roots around the Black Sea there is still much debate about the exact location, this debate is called "die Urheimatsfrage", one of the theories about the Indo-European homeland is that it was located in modern Turkey or on the Balkans, from where farming was introduced to the rest of Europe.
I have also developed a theory about the ancestors of the Indo-European culture, this theory is just an idea of course and is only here for your amusement:
My theory states that the land around the big rivers north of the Black sea (nowadays the Ukraine) may have been the cradle of the Indo-European culture and language because this position is at the center of the Indo-European "migration" waves, it may even be possible that the Indo-European culture was the descendant of an older culture that was situated at the coasts of the Black Sea, this position would also allow sea trade, colonization of other coastal areas around the Black Sea, and early influences from more developed cultures in the Middle East, from where many new ideas and inventions (farming?) may have been introduced to the areas around the Black Sea.
The Black Sea also used to be much smaller and consisted of fresh water, something that may have supported agricultural developements in the coastal areas, so to say it short; it may be possible that the Indo-European culture originated from an older culture that lived around the Black Sea and took over many cultural and scientifical influences from the Middle East.
The Black Sea flood: you are now probably wondering why we don't find any traces of that old Black Sea culture who I believe was the ancestor of the Indo-European culture, well, recent discoveries have indicated that the Black Sea was flooded long before the Indo-European migrations started, researchers do not agree about the exact date but it must have happened between 7500 and 5500 BC.
The rising sea level caused the Mediterranian sea to swell up and flood the coastal areas around it, the Black Sea was a small lake in that time that was separated from the Mediterranian Sea by a small land bridge in what is now the Bosporus between Europe and Asia, the pressure of the billions of tons of water from the Mediterranian sea caused the natural dike to break which flooded a large area of land around the Black Sea.
It may be possible that the Black Sea flood triggered a mass exodus of people who left their flooded lands in search for new farmlands, they brought their culture, language, and religion with them and may have influenced surrounding cultures with it, many peoples around the world have legends about a great flood; in Celtic mythology, the Babylonian Gilgamesj epic, the Bible, etc.
It would go too far to connect the Black Sea flood to the Great Flood of the Bible or even the Atlantis myth but it may have caused certain migrations of peoples, cultures, and technologies, the Indo-European culture may have been a descendant of this people who built up a new life north of the new Black Sea and from there eventually spread their culture and language to large parts of Europe and Asia, the earlier "migrations" also mean that not every similarity in different cultures is caused by the Indo-European migrations but may have also happened during an earlier migration, and of course one must not rule out a common origin but let's not go off-topic.
Whatever we believe and whatever theories we come up with, the Black Sea flooding did really happen and has also been proven; traces of an ancient coast line has been found on the bottom of the Black Sea, fossilized flora and fauna indicate that the Black Sea changed from a freshwater lake into a saltwater sea, and the most important finding of all; traces of human settlements have been found under water: remains of houses, carved wooden beams, a stone tablet, and human stone tools were found.
Most of the research has been conducted on the seabottom north of modern Turkey but in my opinion they should look south of the Ukraine, this area may have been inhabited by many people, perhaps even a developed civilization from which the Indo-European culture descended (no Atlantis, extra-terrestrial colonies, or superadvanced civilizations of course, just a developed and organized society of people) since the lands north of the Black Sea must have been good farmland because of all the rivers flowing through it; the Don, Dnjepr, Donets, Dnjestr, Danube, etc. (which I shall refer to as the "D-rivers" from now on), this D-rivers transported much sediments, clay, and organic material to the area which is very fertile and good for farming as every farmer knows.
This fertile farmlands were perfectly able to support an advanced society and the loss of this lands (during the flood) may have caused a huge migration of people who all left their flooded home in search for new lands, which may explain the myths about great floods many cultures have.
The Black Sea before and after the flood.
The Indo-Europeans: the Indo-European migrations began somewhere around 4000BC, this means that the Black Sea flood can not have triggered the Indo-European migrations because it happened to soon for that; between 7500 and 5500 BC, but it may have caused an earlier migration that actually resulted in the new Indo-European culture.
Of course the theory that states that the Indo-European culture descended from an older culture based around the Black Sea coasts is purely hypothetical, but I think the idea isn't that ridiculous because the Black Sea flood probably made a lot of people homeless who all started looking for a new place to live, which has undoubtly influenced many cultures or even started new ones, the Indo-European culture may have been "founded" by the people who stayed behind in the higher areas around the Black Sea after the flood, they probably lived there long enough to develop their own language and cultural identity (the Indo-European one) and they may have migrated in a later period when the land became too arid; in that time the Earth's climate was warming up which caused certain areas to become more barren, nowadays big parts of the Ukraine are even transforming into a desert, which also supports this theory.
This is a satisfying explanation for many of our questions but I still think more research is needed before we can draw any conclusions, this is just how I think it may have been.
As a side note; Snorri Sturluson wrote an interesting text that can be found in his "Heimskringla", it is called the "Ynglinga saga" and tells of a land north of the Black Sea area that was called Swithiod, this area is believed to be Sweden but the text also mentions the river Tanais or Vanaquisl, which is known to be an older name for the river Don, the Edda also mentions a river named Danpar, which is believed to have been the Dnjepr, and the Ynglinga saga says that the god Odin lead his people from the land of Swithiod westwards into Gardariki (which was the Old Norse name for western Russia) and then southwards into Saxony; this stories are written too late to be reliable but since most stories are derived from older stories and folklore it may be possible that there once was an ancient Germanic myth linking to the Black Sea area that is now lost.
The Norwegian explorer Thor Heyerdahl was even planning to research the authenticity of this stories, unfortunately this great man died before he could finish his research, this newsarticle was published in the "Gelders Dagblad" on April 24, 2001:
"Heyerdahl searches roots of Vikings in Russia Moscow (AP) a scientific team lead by the well known Norwegian explorer Thor Heyerdahl has started on a research of the possibility that the Vikings originally came from the south of Russia. The archeologists are going to dig near the southern Russian city of Azov, where the river Don flows into the Sea of Azov. The Don was called the Tanais in earlier times and because Icelandic sagas speak about a river named Tana Heyerdahl thinks that the name has Germanic roots. The work in Azov is conducted in cooperation with the Russian Academy of Science. Last year Heyerdahl has said that he also wants to conduct research to the origin of the Vikings in Georgia and Azerbeidjan. Heyerdahl became famous around the world with the journey he undertook in 1947 with the Kon-Tiki. To prove that in the ancient times contacts were already being laid over seas he sailed in 101 days with this wooden raft from Peru to Polynesia."
If you look at the Indo-European migrations on a map you can see that the Black Sea area is at the center of those migrations; most Indo-European tribes began their migration from this area.
Not all Indo-Europeans migrated to Europe; the Hittites invaded Egypt, the Aryans invaded India, and other Indo-European tribes have even invaded western China.
The proof for the Indo-European invasions into China is formed by the discovery of mummies in the Takla Makan desert who are some of the best preserved mummies in the world, their facial features are still visible and it can clearly be seen that this humans were not of Asian origin; they were tall, white, and had blond or reddish hair.
The decendants of this mummy-people are believed to have been the Tocharians, an interesting people who still puzzle historians today.
Two of the mummies found in the Takla Makan desert in China
The Tocharians were cattle-breeders and inhabited the same area as where the mysterious mummies were found and they also appear on Asian rock paintings and writings where they are depicted as white people with blonde or reddish hair who had long noses and much body hair, they also wore Persian clothes and seemed to have taken over many local customs.
They used sea shells as money and made rock paintings that depicted ritual fertility dances, similar paintings have been found in the Ukraine(!) and Bulgaria.
They had much similarities with the peoples of northern Europe; their rituals had much in common with those of the Celts, Germans, and Slavs, and their language was an Indo-European one that was related to Italo-Celtic and Germanic, human sacrifices were a part of their religion just like in northern Europe and their art had much swirling and curling patterns which also had much in common with that of the Celts and the Germans.
After the 10th century AD the Tocharians disappeared and have probably assimilated with Turkish peoples who migrated into the same area, the modern Uygurs and Kazachs are believed to be partial descendants of them.
The invasions of the Indo-Europeans were mostly met with little resistance, even powerful civilizations like India and Egypt were quickly conquered by them, possibly because of temporary weaknesses that may have been caused by civil wars and internal unrest, in Egypt the drying up of the Sahara desert in 3500 BC may have also been a destabilizing factor; in the Ice Age the Sahara desert was a fertile green area that must have been inhabited by lots of people but due to over-grazing and the warming of the Earth's climate the Sahara slowly changed into a desert, this may have caused the people there to migrate to other areas which probably caused unrest and wars that weakened the otherwise so powerful nation of Egypt and offered the Indo-Europeans the chance to invade, besides this internal unrest the Indo-Europeans were militarily superiour to most other peoples which is another reason for their quick victories.
We should not overestimate the Indo-European migrations though, I have heard theories of thousands or even millions of people invading countries but that is almost impossible and not backed up with proof, actually the Indo-Europeans were a cultural/linguistical group and not an ethnic group; many different peoples and cultures adopted the Indo-European language and culture but most of them were of a different origin, many people who hear the term "Indo-European migrations" immediately think about hordes of people invading Europe and replacing the original inhabitants, but recent genetical research has indicated that over 80% of the Europeans are direct descendants of the original population in their areas while only 20% of them are descendants of people who migrated there in later periods, so although migrations of people also took place most "Indo-European migrations" should be regarded as migrations of language and culture rather than people.
The Indo-European influences on the ancient world can be compared to the influence of the United States on the modern western world; although the western cultures have kept most of their own identity they have all adopted something from the current dominant culture (the USA); English loanwords, American products and inventions, American ideas, etc. but the fact that they have been influenced by American culture does not mean that they have been invaded by hordes of American immigrants, it's just an adoption of cultural aspects.
Conclusion: The northern Europeans are probably descendants of a small isolated group of hunter-gatherers that survived the Ice Age, this group of people have probably once formed a single unknown culture that later fell apart into several smaller cultural groups, this groups still had many cultural similarities that have supported some temporary unifications into bigger cultures (like the Funnelbeaker culture) that were perhaps advanced enough to undertake massive building projects like the megalithic structures that still enrich the northern European landscape today.
The introduction of the Indo-European culture in northern Europe influenced the native cultures there which resulted in new cultures that consisted of Indo-European and native cultural elements, after some time one of those groups (the Jastorf culture in northern Germany) adopted iron from the nearby Hallstatt civilization which gave them an advantage over the other northern European cultures, the Jastorf culture became a dominant force and their culture, language, and technology was quickly spread to the surrounding cultures which created the new Germanic identity that unified the already related cultures of northern Europe.
"Red-haired may possess a Neanderthal-gene
The Cro-Magnon wore cloathing of woven fabrics instead of animal hides and made jewellry like for instance necklaces of ivory marbles, they are also known for their cave paintings, especially the ones at Lascaux in France; the paintings are characterized by the use of new techniques, perspective, and even the introduction of astrology; paintings have been found that contained starmaps of the Summer Triangle, the Pleiades, and the Northern Crown like they looked 16.500 years ago.
"'European descends from small group of hunters'
The native northern Europeans: the common origin of the northern Europeans explains most of their later cultural similarities, the first organized civilizations in northern Europe were probably the megalithic cultures that created many of the mysterious stone structures that we can still see in the landscape nowadays (like the Hunebeds and the Externsteine), some people believe that this cultures may have even been united into a developed civilization because a lot of organization and planning was needed to build this stone structures, which is impossible for a small group of local farmers, in my opinion it goes too far to say that this civilization was "Atlantis" or "Ultima Thule" but if such a civilization really existed it must have been organized and advanced enough to realize this kind of massive projects.
The Black Sea flood: you are now probably wondering why we don't find any traces of that old Black Sea culture who I believe was the ancestor of the Indo-European culture, well, recent discoveries have indicated that the Black Sea was flooded long before the Indo-European migrations started, researchers do not agree about the exact date but it must have happened between 7500 and 5500 BC.
"Heyerdahl searches roots of Vikings in Russia
