Talk:Baiuvarii

Untitled

Just curious, what is the singular of Bavarii? — CharlotteWebb 18:29, 3 October 2008 (UTC)

Bavarius, maybe? Absurdistani (talk) 10:23, 28 October 2008 (UTC)

Bohemia was part of Bavaria?

"Bohemia, an area that has at times been part of Bavaria proper" when was this? i don't think this is true64.129.127.5 (talk) 23:31, 22 January 2009 (UTC)

This subject is a lot bigger than the article and we don't need to rely on the Internet site given for it. So far, no one has undertaken to do a proper article; this is an obvious place-holder. That's one of the challenges of Wikipedia: all place-holders, no places. A couple of million fragmentary statements and random personal conjectures under the guise of "an encyclopedia" is dangerously misleading to the public, so it is a challenge, but there is hope; there are some really good articles in here. This could be one of them when someone steps up to do it. Meanwhile you can find more under Boii. Most generally, Bavaria is "the Germanic people who live where the Celtic Boii used to live" and modern borders and issues have nothing to do with it. How would you correct this article? You can't; it isn't really an article. Once a real article has been done here this and other "issues" will go away.Dave (talk) 08:18, 10 May 2009 (UTC)

Bavaria related to Avars?

The Bavarians ruled the Hungarian plain, the same region ruled by Avars, a conquering people from the Caucasus. Note the term Czech in German is Tchechen, close to the term Chechens from Chechnya, also in the Caucasus. Are there Caucasian origins of both Bavarians, the Czechs and Slovaks, and even Austrians who are Germanics like Bavarians who replaced earlier Slavic tribes? 2605:E000:100D:C571:A8BB:CE5:5FFF:7B6A (talk) 07:59, 12 July 2020 (UTC)

Double standards in genetics.

All male from the fake continent of “Europe” are descendants of East Asians, the ANEs and other more recent conquests. So why is this not mentioned in this article and others on genetics? Sanesafer (talk) 17:40, 13 October 2025 (UTC)

Get yourself published in a good journal, and then afterwards it might be reported on Wikipedia. This is not the place to debate your opinions.--Andrew Lancaster (talk) 17:47, 13 October 2025 (UTC)

Your own article says that only one of the 41 individuals appears to have only 20% East Asian DNA. Sanesafer (talk) 18:01, 13 October 2025 (UTC)

Also, the only ones with darker skin and hair were individuals with elongated skulls (a practice associated with the elites). Sanesafer (talk) 18:21, 13 October 2025 (UTC)

It is not my article. You are now editing Wikipedia just like the rest of us. I did not add the genetics section and I haven't had time to look at it closely. What is your point actually? To make sure you realize it, genetics sections on articles like this tend to be controversial because the science is so new and there is no real secondary literature, only research reports which each push their own point. Whatever you do to that section, I strongly advise that you move it in a careful and cautious direction, rather than a speculative one.--Andrew Lancaster (talk) 18:55, 13 October 2025 (UTC)