By Eben van Tonder, 29 July 2025
An EarthwormExpress Special
Part of the series: A Shared Spirit: Austria, Russia, and Germany
Executive Summary of 6-Part Exploration
This work explores the cultural, spiritual, scientific, and historical connections that unite Austria, Russia, and Germany through shared archetypes of order, suffering, and transcendence. While shaped by distinct histories and faiths, these nations have influenced one another through architecture, music, philosophy, and science, leaving an enduring legacy that still resonates today. Beyond cultural memory, their combined scientific and technological strengths hint at a future of economic and industrial cooperation rather than rivalry. If Austria and Germany’s engineering precision and innovation were to merge with Russia’s vast resources and scientific tradition, they could form a powerful economic partnership capable of redefining Europe’s role in the world. Though such collaboration may seem unlikely in the current political climate, history suggests that a shared spirit of endurance, creativity, and higher purpose could one day turn this vision into reality.
Part 1: The Imperial Soul of Austria and Russia
Part 1 explores the historical, spiritual, and philosophical foundations of Austria and Russia’s imperial identities, with Germany as an intellectual mediator, focusing on the shared archetypes of order and redemptive suffering.
Part 2: Architecture and Music as Mirrors of Spirit
Part 2 examines how architecture and music in Vienna and St. Petersburg embody spiritual and imperial ideals, revealing how these arts became vessels for transcendent values and political identity.
Part 3: Genetic and Epigenetic Memory – A Shared Temperament of Resilience and Faith
Part 3 delves into the biological and epigenetic dimensions of cultural temperament, exploring how collective trauma, Indo-European roots, and historical memory have shaped the shared resilience and spiritual depth of these nations.
Part 4: Modern Echoes of a Shared Spirit – Politics, Memory, and Identity in the 21st Century
Part 4 traces how the shared cultural spirit of Austria, Russia, and Germany survives in modern identity, diplomacy, and historical memory, despite the dissolution of their traditional empires.
Part 5: Timeless Archetypes and the Future of the Shared Spirit
Part 5 synthesises the entire work, showing how timeless archetypes of order, suffering, and beauty still influence Austria, Russia, and Germany and could shape Europe’s spiritual and cultural future. Could Russia, Austria and Germany cooperate beyond the current political challenges to create a better future apart from one dominated by either America or China?
Part 6: Indo-European Kinship – Genetic Memory and the Russian link with Austria
Part 6 explores how Austria’s genetic heritage—particularly in regions like Styria and Carinthia—fosters a deep, often unconscious affinity with Russia, rooted in shared ancestry, evolutionary psychology, and historical convergence.
Introduction
Austria is not merely a nation defined by borders, language, or cultural icons. It is a convergence—a deeply interwoven web of migrations, genetic memory, and historical accommodation. In this instalment, we explore a thesis seldom addressed: that Austria’s role as a neutral nation in the modern geopolitical landscape is not just a political arrangement, but a reflection of its genetic and ancestral identity. Nowhere is this more clearly revealed than in the shared kinship between the peoples of Styria, Bavaria, Slovenia, and Russia.
Shared Genetic Roots and Indo-European Kinship
Long before borders or dialects solidified, the ancestors of these populations were already flowing into and across what is now Austria. Around 3000 BCE, vast migrations from the Pontic-Caspian Steppe brought with them not only the Indo-European languages but also the Yamnaya genetic signature. This ancestry now forms one of the foundational layers of Central and Eastern Europe. It stretches seamlessly from the Pannonian Basin and Alpine slopes through the Balkans and into the heartlands of Russia. Thus, even before the Celts and Romans arrived in the Alpine regions, a deep biological kinship already connected Austrians to Slavic and Eastern populations.
The Slavic Thread and Enduring Connections
This shared genetic inheritance can be traced with increasing clarity thanks to ancient DNA studies. The people of Styria and Carinthia, for instance, carry strong signals from both the early Anatolian farmers and the steppe herders, an echo also found among Slovenians and Russians. The Slavic migration between the 6th and 8th centuries CE strengthened this bond. Slavs from what is now Ukraine and Belarus settled in Eastern Austria and Slovenia, bringing linguistic influence, material culture, and genes. Far from being a footnote in history, this Slavic contribution laid down roots that would persist even through centuries of Germanisation.
A Genetic Mosaic: The Palimpsest of Austria
Modern genetic surveys of Austria reveal a complex but coherent picture. The eastern and southern provinces of Styria, Carinthia, and Burgenland exhibit high degrees of Slavic and Balkan ancestry, while central and western Austria retains a more Germanic and Alpine signature. Importantly, these are not sharply divided populations. Rather, Austria is a palimpsest of overlapping lineages, a fact that makes it resistant to binaries and open to coexistence. Its identity was never forged in purity but in the blending of diversity.
Neutrality Rooted in Biology
This helps explain the extraordinary cultural and diplomatic instinct that Austrians exhibit, particularly their deep-rooted neutrality. Since 1955, Austria has been officially neutral, a position often understood as geopolitical convenience. But there is another dimension: neutrality as a biological recognition. In a land where no single ancestry dominates, to take sides too quickly would be to war against oneself. The genetic continuity that Austrians carry is a lived memory of convergence, not conquest. Neutrality, then, becomes not weakness, but ancestral realism.
Kin Recognition and the Russian Connection
This ancestral realism finds further expression in Austria’s relationship with Russia. Despite Cold War pressures, Austria maintained diplomatic, cultural and intellectual ties with Russia. This connection is not merely pragmatic; it is, in part, kin recognition, a phenomenon increasingly supported by research in behavioural genetics and evolutionary theory.
Genetic Similarity Theory, as developed by J. Philippe Rushton and colleagues, proposes that humans possess an unconscious preference for those who are genetically similar to themselves. While the most intense expressions of this are found in kin-based relationships, the effect can extend to ethnic and even regional affiliations. Such preferences may manifest in trust, sympathy and readiness to cooperate, even in the absence of cultural or linguistic commonality.
This tendency is an outgrowth of the principles of inclusive fitness and kin selection. According to W. D. Hamilton’s theory, individuals are biologically predisposed to behave more altruistically toward others who carry a higher proportion of their own genes. In ancestral environments, cues like physical appearance, scent and dialect helped identify likely kin. In large populations today, such preferences operate more abstractly, expressed through culturally transmitted behaviours that correlate with shared ancestry.
Eastern Austria, particularly regions such as Styria and Carinthia, experienced centuries of sustained Slavic presence, beginning with the eastward migration of Slavic tribes in the 6th and 7th centuries CE. These settlers intermarried with local populations, and their genetic legacy persists in the mitochondrial and autosomal DNA of modern Austrians from these regions. Comparative genetic analyses have revealed measurable overlaps between these southeastern Austrian populations and contemporary East Slavic groups, including Russians.
The shared Indo-European linguistic and genetic substrate, inherited from the Yamnaya migrations of the early Bronze Age, adds a deeper layer of kinship. These migrations not only seeded language families but also spread gene complexes related to immunity, metabolic efficiency and temperament, traits that subtly shape cultural expression. It is perhaps no coincidence that both Austrian and Russian societies share a historical emphasis on endurance, spiritual interiority and reverence for suffering as a transformative force.
Austria’s persistent cultural engagement with Russia, even during periods of political tension, may therefore reflect more than historical habit or realpolitik. It may be a form of ancestral recognition, an intuitive sense of familiarity rooted not in ideology, but in the deeper, embodied memory of common origin.
Styria, Slovenia and Bavaria: A Cultural Convergence Zone
The same can be said of Bavaria and Slovenia. Bavaria shares with Austria a genetic heritage composed of intertwined Germanic, Celtic and pre-Indo-European layers, further enriched by the steppe ancestry that swept across Central Europe during the Bronze Age. Slovenia, by contrast, retains one of the strongest Slavic genetic signatures in the West while also reflecting substantial Central European admixture. These three regions, Styria, Slovenia and Carinthia, form a zone not of division but of historic convergence.
Population geneticists refer to areas like this as clinal regions, where gene frequencies shift gradually over space rather than changing abruptly at borders. Mitochondrial DNA studies and Y-chromosome haplogroup analyses show a consistent admixture of Western and Eastern European lineages throughout southeastern Austria and northern Slovenia. These lineages bear the mark of Neolithic farmers, steppe herders, Roman soldiers, Slavic migrants and later Bavarian settlers. The result is a population that is genetically blended yet regionally coherent.
Historically, this convergence expressed itself through bilingualism, intermarriage and cultural hybridity. In many Styrian and Slovenian communities, identity was fluid, shaped more by valley and village than by empire or ethnicity. It is in this context that modern interactions between Austrians, Slovenians and Russians acquire their remarkable texture. They are not encounters between strangers but exchanges among distant cousins, cousins whose shared bloodlines stretch back to the same river valleys of the Pontic Steppe.
The cultural and political rapport observed between these regions and Russia may derive not only from linguistic or religious commonalities, but from an inherited sense of kinship. It is a kinship that has survived centuries of shifting allegiances, formal borders and ideological division. Beneath these surface distinctions lies a matrix of shared genetic inheritance that continues to bind.
Biological Bias and Cultural Affinity
What of cultural loyalty itself? Evolutionary biology increasingly supports the idea that humans are inclined to favour those who share greater degrees of genetic similarity. Though this is most evident within families, it scales outward to include clan, tribe and ethno-regional groups. Hamilton’s rule, predicting that altruistic behaviours are more likely between individuals who share genes, applies at the population level as well, particularly in small or medium-scale societies.
Behavioural genetics research suggests that humans are more likely to form bonds, friendships and coalitions with individuals who are genetically more similar to themselves than to random others. These preferences are not necessarily conscious. They manifest through perceived familiarity, comfort in interpersonal dynamics, or resonance in shared values and dispositions. Studies of social networks, political alignment and even facial preference have shown that people unconsciously gravitate toward genetically proximate individuals.
In a culturally plural and genetically interwoven society like Austria, especially in its southeastern regions, this biological bias does not lead to exclusion. Rather, it fosters a resilient structure of accommodation. The presence of multiple overlapping ancestries means that most Austrians share some genetic affinity with both Western and Eastern populations, creating a biological bridge between otherwise polarised identities.
When an Austrian from Carinthia or Styria engages with a Russian diplomat, scholar or artist, the interaction may be coloured not only by political context or shared history, but by a more intrinsic familiarity, a genetic empathy. In such moments, loyalty to kin is not a function of blood and soil nationalism, but an echo of the human body’s long memory, a memory of fields crossed, winters survived and language sung before it was written.
This does not replace culture. It enriches it. It suggests that Austria’s capacity for dialogue, balance and neutrality is not merely institutional, but evolutionary, a quiet outcome of its unique position in the genetic landscape of Europe.
Conclusion
To be Austrian is to be the inheritor of many bloodlines. The fusion of Indo-European, Slavic, Roman, Celtic, Jewish, and Balkan threads does not lend itself to rigid nationalism. It lends itself to listening, synthesis, and an uncanny ability to see both sides. Austria is thus not only geographically but genetically a bridge between East and West. Its neutrality is not imposed; it is remembered. It is the outcome of millennia of living among, marrying into, and surviving with the “other.”
In this light, Austria’s role as a mediator, its ties to Russia, and its cultural sympathy with neighbouring Slavic peoples are not accidents of geography—they are expressions of a shared spirit rooted in shared genes. From the salt routes of the Celts to the Orthodox chants that once echoed in Slovenian valleys, from the Roman roads through Noricum to the diplomatic salons of post-war Vienna, Austria has always been a place where differences converge into coherence. And that coherence, inherited and lived, is the true foundation of its neutrality.
References
Alford, J. R., Funk, C. L. and Hibbing, J. R. (2005). Are political orientations genetically transmitted? American Political Science Review, 99(2), pp. 153–167.
Allentoft, M. E., Sikora, M., Sjögren, K.-G., Rasmussen, S., Rasmussen, M., Stenderup, J., Damgaard, P. B., Schroeder, H., Ahlström, T., Vinner, L., Malaspinas, A.-S., Margaryan, A., Higham, T. F. G., Chivall, D., Lynnerup, N., Harvig, L., Baron, J., Della Casa, P., Dąbrowski, P., Duffy, P. R., … Willerslev, E. (2015). Population genomics of Bronze Age Eurasia. Nature, 522, pp. 167–172.
Fieder, M. and Huber, S. (2005). The effects of migration on genetic diversity in Austria. Genetica, 123, pp. 241–256.
Haak, W., Lazaridis, I., Patterson, N., Rohland, N., Mallick, S., Llamas, B., Brandt, G., Nordenfelt, S., Harney, E., Stewardson, K., Fu, Q., Mittnik, A., Bánffy, E., Economou, C., Francken, M., Friederich, S., Pena, R. G., Hallgren, F., Khartanovich, V., … Reich, D. (2015). Massive migration from the steppe was a source for Indo-European languages in Europe. Nature, 522, pp. 207–211.
Lazaridis, I., Patterson, N., Mittnik, A., Renaud, G., Mallick, S., Kirsanow, K., Sudmant, P. H., Schraiber, J. G., Castellano, S., Lipson, M., et al. (2014). Ancient human genomes suggest three ancestral populations for present-day Europeans. Nature, 513, pp. 409–413.
Reich, D. (2018). Who We Are and How We Got Here: Ancient DNA and the New Science of the Human Past. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Rushton, J. P. and Bons, T. A. (2005). Mate choice and friendship in twins: Evidence for genetic similarity. Psychological Science, 16(7), pp. 555–559.