linguistics are hearsay. what does archeology suggest?

They didn't teleport from Scandinavia to Italy, they went from Scandinavia to the Vistula region first. There is no disagreement here and no one denies the Scandinavian origin of Goths.

>>18326256
>There is no disagreement here and no one denies the Scandinavian origin of Goths.
So why is the Getica accused of being mythical in this regard? Jordanes doesn't make any outlandish claims in his statement that they came from further north than the Vistula

>>18326274
Nobody states that the Scandinavian origin is mythical, the story is just mythologised to some degree.

>>18326232
>>18326236
Latin/mainstream academics are without a fault pope-suckers.

>>18326232
Physical evidence for Wielbark (Goth) culture being Scandinavian in origin are:
>Significant influx of Scandinavian paternal (Y-DNA) lines
>Stone circle monuments
>boat graves
>"weaponless" burial rituals

File: the-migration-of-the-goths-v0-jewefdm5jfef1.jpg (687.5 KB)

687.5 KB JPG

>>18326236
Basically south east sweden ----> Wielbark -----> Chernyakhov -----> Visigoth/Ostrogoth split -----> on towards the balkans and italy. This is considered mainstream now so idk what OP is talking about

are there any studies on the DNA of the late goths in Spain and Italy?

File: Suebi elite.png (194.3 KB)

194.3 KB PNG

>>18327413
Some samples from the visigoth period are locals with local haplogroups and ancestry. Most are mixed, some even have real Goth haplogroups and ancestry. There's a Suebi sample from a high status burial that looks pure Germanic, maybe there were "pure" Goths in Iberia too but I doubt it

>>18327413
Epitome of mutts, they were only like 15% germanic by the time they reached iberia, picking up celtic, dacian, illyrian and thracian ancestry along their adventures

>>18327463
unlike you they were all white

>>18327467
Not that anon but I don't think anyone denies that they were "white", they were still heavily mixed. They had some Sarmatian too aside from the stuff he mentioned

>>18327467
You're a brazilian monkey, go back to your sweatshop and make me a pair of shoes, will ya?

>>18326256
Why do we even differentiate a "viking period" at this point? Scandis had been migrating south for hundreds of years by the 8th century. There was no change. The viking period is a myth. It was meerly a continuation of the migration period

>>18328462
I agree, this is purely a phenomenon of northern Europe becoming literate and later generations assuming that the things they began documenting then were somehow new

>>18328462
Because earlier migrations included entire peoples/tribes. Even an exodus of entire language family branches like East Germanic who left their homeland permanently. The Viking Age was a bunch of men going on raids and small scale in comparison.

>>18328485
A shit ton of scandi famlies migrated to western europe as vikings though. We can still see their genetics in modern populations. Hell I'm Irish and I've got some scandi in me.

The migration period ended in 1066

>>18328462
>>18328494
There was no major Germanic migration between ca 600-800, there weren't really any major non-Germanic migrations either if you exclude steppe niggers.

File: 1579215683478.jpg (67.1 KB)

67.1 KB JPG

>>18328500
Slavs didn't come from the steppe, they came from the forests

>>18328494
>A shit ton of scandi famlies migrated to western europe as vikings though
Not really. It was mostly warbands and heavily male biased, and even those warbands and raiding parties weren't enough to fundamentally change the genetic landscape of the massive settled agricultural populations they raided and whose lands they sometimes (temporarily) conquered. It's not comparable to the migration period in the slightest, we know this because scandinavia did not experience anywhere near the same depopulation as it did in the MP.