Are the Indo-Europeans just a meme or are they actually important

Meme. There is no such thing as "the indo-europeans." Proto-indo-european was a hypothetical language spoken long before civilization.

>>1934841

What about some genetic markers existing predominantly in IE cultures and those same cultures speaking languages with similar, words and sentence structures? What about similar physical traits existing among these peoples somewhat now and more obiouvlsy in past populations?

>>1934849

Also, addressing OP, civilization existed before IEs rocked up. IEs are more important for contemporary civilization though.

>>1934841
This.

It's not like they were ever a united entity, indoeuropean speaking peoples have always been fighting eachother

>What about similar physical traits existing among these peoples somewhat now and more obiouvlsy in past populations?

Such as?

>What about some genetic markers existing predominantly in IE cultures and those same cultures speaking languages with similar, words and sentence structures

Some genetic markers are shared between Fins and Native Americans too, doesn't mean they're the same ethnicity

>>1934853

>It's not like they were ever a united entity, indoeuropean speaking peoples have always been fighting eachother

This is true, I haven't heard the claim IEs were every a united people however.

>Some genetic markers are shared between Fins and Native Americans too, doesn't mean they're the same ethnicity

Of course, but those genetic markers I would imagine to be traced back to a common ancestor 30,000 + years ago I'd imagine. With IEs it's much more recent. I'm no geneticist, but IEs the connection is far, far more recent (past 2-3 thousand years).

>Such as?

Light hair, light eyes. As seen in ancient Iranian burials.

>>1934860
>but IEs the connection is far, far more recent (past 2-3 thousand years).

You can see autosomically that IE speaking people do not form a distinct genetic cluster but are very heterogenous, sharing a few genetic markers doesn't unite them, it's a very shallow link over all, for instance Iranians are much closer to other Mesopotamian people than to Scandinavians or English people

>Light hair, light eyes

The first PIE speakers from the Yamnaya culture were darker than modern Southern Europeans, according to all the studies performed on their bodies, while light hair and eyes already existed among Scandinavian hunter gatherers and Neolithic Hungarians, Yamna have mixed with those populations and migrated back east, even reaching the borders of what is now China, but those features mainly developed in Central-Northen Europe and were selected there.


Furthermore it seems useless to point out, but there are many other populations with light hair and eyes, the Fins are not Indoeuropean speakers but show the highest frequency of both light hair and eyes and the Hungarians show a high frequency too despite not being Indoeuropeans.

I'd say it's more of a Northen European feature by now, before that some Nomadic populations had it too in Asia but those groups have almost all been absorbed by native Asian and West Asian populations by now

>>1934841
Fuck you kike


There is no such thing as jews therefore the shoah never happened.

>>1934872

You seem to be using modern populations as your reference point. For instance, Hungarians speak a Urallic language, but the Magyards didn't leave a big genetic mark upon the indigenous Indo-European speaking population.

>the Fins are not Indoeuropean speakers but show the highest frequency of both light hair and eyes

True, although I didn't claim light features to be unique to IEs. Berbers also have light features despite not being IEs. It just happens to be a recurring physical feature correlated to areas of Indo-European conquest and culture in the Bronze Age.

>some Nomadic populations had it too in Asia but those groups have almost all been absorbed by native Asian and West Asian populations by now

As far as I know, Ancient native Iranian steppe peoples were predominantly light featured. Mongoloid features became more predominant following Turkic expansion in the what? 4th century?

>The first PIE speakers from the Yamnaya culture were darker than modern Southern Europeans

I doubt your use of Southern Europeans as a reference point here. Do you have a source?

>>1934892

What the fuck?

>>1934894
>areas of Indo-European conquest and culture

There isn't even a consensus that an "indo-european people" existed, let alone were a political entity that conquered anything.

>>1935005
>There isn't even a consensus that an "indo-european people" existed,

According to who? You?

>>1935024

Historians?

>>1935005
>There isn't even a consensus that an "indo-european people" existed
Explain

>>1935030

Historians are literally the most irrelevant people considering Indo-European people history, it's all just speculations from them.

There wasn't a written language by the time Indo-Europeans formed. First and foremost you should look at archeologists and geneticists, but genetics aren't always a 100% hit to the right spot, because as you might known haplogroups don't tell you what language that person spoke, only gives clues to some degree.

Also how do you define a person? Lets takes for a example a Slav? First and foremost when defining people first criteria is what language they speak, then culture and yada yada. So yes people who spoke some sort of ancestral Indo-European dialects which later evolved into various Indo-European languages and shared related cultures existed.


You're an idiot.

>>1935040
>Explain

We are pretty confident that PIE was a language that existed, but there are various competing hypotheses for who actually would have spoken it. In any case, there isn't a one to one correspondence of languages to cultures. e.g. it could be a pidgin used to trade between otherwise unrelated peoples.

>>1935043
>Historians are literally the most irrelevant people considering Indo-European people history, it's all just speculations from them.

As opposed to from you, I guess, you fucking moron.

>>1934813
Yes. Their language, religion, culture, and technology changed Europe and much of Asia forever.

>>1935053
>We are pretty confident that PIE was a language that existed, but there are various competing hypotheses for who actually would have spoken it.
In any case, there still would have been a Proto-Indo-European people, no?

> In any case, there isn't a one to one correspondence of languages to cultures. e.g. it could be a pidgin used to trade between otherwise unrelated peoples.
I'm pretty sure PIE doesn't show any evidence at all of pidginization.

File: steppeFB.jpg (95KB, 500x281px) Image search: [Google]

95KB, 500x281px

>>1935055
>As opposed to from you

Oh yes all speculation. Lets ignore Yamnaya Culture, Afansevo culture, Corded Ware culture that show they share genetic continuity.

>But a genetic study conducted by Haak et al. (2015) found that a large proportion (about 75%) of the Corded Ware culture's ancestry came from the Yamnaya culture, tracing the Corded Ware culture's origins to migrations from the Yamnaya population of the steppes.

Who were those people then? Not Indo-Europeans? Related archaeological cultures and genetic continuity isn't a thing, okay then.

>>1934841
Languages don't spread to new regions easily, there certainly was a indo European ethnic group which certainly did express dominance in each of those geographic regions.

Just a coincidence the Vedas and indian civilization thrived right around their passage, just a coincidence so did the Persia emperor and birth of zorostarianism, them Hellenic Greece then roman empire, all coinciding with their passage.

>>1935063
Vedas was written*

>>1935060
>I'm pretty sure PIE doesn't show any evidence at all of pidginization.
Indeed. PIE is too complex to be a pidgin/creole.

File: Goldberg_Fig_3.png (38KB, 1200x319px) Image search: [Google]

38KB, 1200x319px

>>1935062
http://biorxiv.org/content/early/2016/09/30/078360

And a study which shows that Indo-European migration was mostly male driven as opposed to earlier farmer migrations where ratio was almost equal.

>For later migrations from the Pontic steppe during the LNBA, however, we estimate a dramatic male bias, with ~5-14 migrating males for every migrating female. We find evidence of ongoing, primarily male, migration from the steppe to central Europe over a period of multiple generations, with a level of sex bias that excludes a pulse migration during a single generation.

>>1934894

>I doubt your use of Southern Europeans as a reference point here. Do you have a source?

Yes, here's a few:

http://www.pnas.org/content/111/13/4832.full.pdf

"Another article released a year later basically revealed the same thing, although this study focused the pigmentation of many ancient European populations in comparison to modern ones including pre Neolithic Western Hunter Gatherers and early Neolithic Farmers in Europe. But the study did also include a sample set from the Yamnaya culture which is identified by most linguists as the speakers of the Proto Indo-European language on the eve of their great expansion. Only 11% of the Yamnaya in this sample from the Samar Oblast region carry alleles for light eyes, as they are noticeably darker pigmented in skin and eyes than contemporary Southern Europeans. See data below."

link: http://biorxiv.org/content/early/2015/03/13/016477

pdf:

http://biorxiv.org/content/biorxiv/early/2015/03/13/016477.full.pdf

"Also of note, another 2015 major aDNA study was released just several months later. Interestingly enough, it found the same extremely high prevalence for brown eyes in the people of the Yamnaya culture. These aDNA samples were taken from the Kalmykia & Rostov Oblast regions, which are roughly 1,000 kilometers Southwest of the other Yamnaya group sampled in the earlier Maithieson et al study above, which were taken from the Samara Oblast region. However, the study and new sample locations yielded the same results."

http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v522/n7555/full/nature14507.html

>>1935060
>In any case, there still would have been a Proto-Indo-European people, no?

I mean, I guess if you use "people" VERY loosely then sure, a language can't exist without someone speaking it. But that doesn't mean those speakers would have a unified culture or see themselves that way.

>I'm pretty sure PIE doesn't show any evidence at all of pidginization

That was just an example. The point is we don't know.

>>1935075
Mental gymnastics of this guy.

>>1935078
>Mental gymnastics

How so? And why would I even care?

>>1935075
>But that doesn't mean those speakers would have a unified culture or see themselves that way.

So you can say that about every language group retard. If some onga bonga molds his pots in a slightly different way and lives 500km from his his fifth generation cousin ungu bungu who he has never seen and they mold pots in a slightly different way and over a few generations slight dialectal differences appeared are they unrelated people now? Do you understand how far back into time you're looking and looking for political entity which you mentioned few posts above? Concepts like these weren't a thing back then. But YES, I'm repeating to you again those people were closely related by their language and culture, it doesn't necessarily mean that in 1000km radius everyone spoke literally the same without any dialectal differences and made everything literally the same you dense fuck.

>>1935086

Why are you so upset?

>>1935094
Not an argument.

>>1935094
I'm not him but I share his rage. Due to the never ending shilling that continues to divide the white race and its rich I.E roots.

>>1935099

So it's a /pol/ thing for some ridiculous reason? Jesus Christ, you people.

>>1935103
You seem to be lost, reddit is that way.

>>1935099
Yes goy you are not exceptional hehe everything is relative especially culture hehe you are just as goy as the lower brown races hehe.

How dare you suggest you're anything greater with your indo European theories goy, only the chosen are the master race.

>>1935119

You realize the Indo-Europeans were brown themselvse, right?

>>1934977
Would you feel more comfortable on reddit

>>1935149

Sick burn!

File: Map_of_Indigenous_Skin_Colors (1).png (56KB, 1288x660px) Image search: [Google]

56KB, 1288x660px

>>1935138
Honestly that's pretty unlikely considering the latitude of their origin. Keeping in line with the Black sea area hypothesis, they would likely be about the shade of frenchmen, lighter than Southern Europeans.

Though, considering their likely pastoral lifestyle, Milk might provide the necessary vitamin D to avoid selection for light skin. Still, it conflicts with historical and genetic accounts of likely IE descendants. (Hammurabi referring to himself as "the white king...ruling over the black-headed people"; Ramses light complexion and red hair; Fagg El Gamous phenotype data).

File: indoeuropean.jpg (893KB, 1479x1361px) Image search: [Google]

893KB, 1479x1361px

>>1934813
Turkish people being Turkic is a meme. They are a mix of Indo-European and Caucasiann nations.

>>1935157
Thanks I thought about it for a long time

>>1935160
>white people are indigenous to south africa

>>1935160
It's nto unlikely, at least read the posts in thsi thread:

>>1935070

>>1935160
>Hammurabi

Hammurabi was of Amorite origins, Amorites are semitic speakers, not Indoeuropeans, you don't know what you're talking about

>>1935160
>likely IE descendants

Likeliness determined by what?

>>1935160
And Ramses was an Egyptian with North African ancestry, again Afro asiatic, not Indoeuropean, sigh

File: north african ancestry.png (151KB, 1042x306px) Image search: [Google]

151KB, 1042x306px

>>1935219
Yeah man, clearly north African. All those north African fair-skinned gingers. Clearly native to the Saharan desert.

>>1935160
All Caucasians originally had dark skin compared to modern ones today (at least in Europe). In fact, light skin evolved later than light eyes and hair.

>you will never fuck a brown girl with blue eyes

>>1935174
It days indigenous. Those are the Khoisan race that they're referring to, they're lighter skinned than other Africans.

>>1935500
*says

>>1934813
Trypillian civilization dating to 6000 B.C.
Oxus civilization circa 2500 BC
Hittite civilization circa 1800 BC


http://web.archive.org/web/20131029190343/http://www.ukom.gov.si/en/media_relations/background_information/culture/worlds_oldest_wheel_found_in_slovenia/

http://discovermagazine.com/2006/nov/ancient-towns-excavated-turkmenistan

http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/world/europe/4000-year-old-Aryan-city-discovered-in-Russia/articleshow/6683681.cms

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Seima-Turbino_phenomenon

>>1935536
But Hittites were Indo-Europeans anon.

>>1935536
>Trypillian civilization dating to 6000 B.C.

Non Indoeuropean, but neolithic Europeans

>>1935668
the Yamna originated from Trypillian/Samara culture
Yamna later merged with Trypillian

>>1935638
and so were Oxus/Trypillian

also Vedas, Avestans, Khwarezms etc..

>>1935731
>the Yamna originated from Trypillian/Samara culture

Not really, the Cucuteni were farmers who originated south from the Aegean/Western Anatolia, while the Yamna people were semi nomadic from the steppes

>>1935740
Yamanya was roughly a 50/50 mix of EHG (Eastern Hunter Gatherers) who showed affinity to Mal'ta boy and Siberian populations and CHG Caucasus Hunter-Gatherers population that was isolated in that region for a long time during the ice age.

File: comitatuscavalry15.jpg (116KB, 706x292px) Image search: [Google]

116KB, 706x292px

the Indo-Europeans were not a single entity, there was never an IE Empire.

This does not mean they weren't important.
Something about that ethnicity in particular was really, really, successful. This means they were successful, but not in a Roman sort of way. They were successful by having a society that was very efficient. My bet is horse domestication and Comitatus.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comitatus_(classical_meaning)
>Comitatus is an Indo-European concept that predates Roman times and was practiced from Western Europe to China, especially among Eur-Asian Steppe tribes. [1]
this is not to say that other ethnic groups couldnt have Comitatus-like societies (like Japan for instance), but still that it meant that were Indo-Europeans went, Comitatus followed, and this meant that these disunited ethnic groups would be successful where they went, creating Celts, Italics, Germanics, Iranics, Indics, and giving them a societal edge over the peoples that would have previous inhabited now IE lands.

>>1935162
kill yourself, Turkic is an ethnolinguistic group.

>>1935793
when i say "single entity" i mean there wasn't a kingdom or empire that they held, but rather just tribal group(s) somewhere around the black sea.

at some point there was a PIE-speaking group of people, meaning the Proto-Indo-Europeans as a distinguished group.

>>1935793
>comitatus

Hmmmm...

>>1935805
>at some point there was a PIE-speaking group of people
Of course there were. How could it be any other way?

>>1935174
It's funny because they're legally not considered indigenous to Europe either...

>>1935854
>legally not considered indigenous to Europe
What does law have to do with any of this?

>>1935862
Nothing, I just think indigenous is a funny word that doesn't mean what people think it means.

>>1935854

Which law says that?

>>1935055
As opposed to linguits maybe. Im not him btw

>>1935842
?

>>1935903
groid law #348332 states crackas lived in caves befor they was civilized and brought to eurup

>>1935980

Sorry, but Europeans are not Americans.

>>1935793
>there was never an IE Empire

neither were Turkics/Semites/Bantus/Sino-Tibetans

there were dominant IE cultures/civz/empires:

Phrygoid, Thracian, Dacian, Illyroid, Greco-Armo-Romo-Ibero-Celtoid, Germanoid, Irano-Scythoid, Yamnoid-Poltavoid-Afanesevoid

Trypillian civilization dating to 6000 B.C.
Oxus civilization circa 2500 BC
Hittite civilization circa 1800 BC

>>1935768
the Yamna came eons after the appearance of Cucuteni

Samara culture/Dnieper–Donets culture (5500BC) birthed the Yamna culture

they were Cro-Magnons with more massive and robust features and not the gracile Mediterranean peoples of the Balkan Neolithic

the Cucuteni were Anatolians who moved to Ukraine (Dnieper–Donets) and they mixed with Dnieper–Donets culture to create Yamna

>>1936081
So you're agreeing with me?

>>1936081
>the Cucuteni were Anatolians who moved to Ukraine (Dnieper–Donets) and they mixed with Dnieper–Donets culture to create Yamna
Proofs?

>>1936091
the Yamna are not the 1st PIE, the PIE b4 Yamna:

Dnieper–Donets culture
Samara culture
Cucuteni culture

>>1934813
They created
>Vedic India
>Persia
>Ancient Greece
>Rome
So yeah I'd say they were pretty fucking important.

They also probably gave a big boost to Chinese civilization by introducing to them metalworking.

>>1936110
Cucuteni culture was made of Neolithic farmers from the South/Anatolia so they're not Proto Indoeuropeans

>>1936112

None of that is correct.

>>1936128
Yeah, we wuz kangz, right?

>>1936101
Cucuteni is older than Yamna
Cucuteni is contemporaneous w/ Dnieper–Donets and Samara
Dnieper–Donets/Cucuteni overlapped territories
Yamna derive from Dnieper–Donets culture
Yamna rejoin Cucuteni


In his 1989 book In Search of the Indo-Europeans, Irish-American archaeologist J. P. Mallory, summarizing the three existing theories concerning the end of the Cucuteni-Trypillian culture, mentions that archaeological findings in the region indicate Kurgan (i.e. Yamna culture) settlements in the eastern part of the Cucuteni-Trypillian area, co-existing for some time with those of the Cucuteni-Trypillian

Cucuteni-Trypillian culture ended not violently, but as a matter of survival, converting their economy from agriculture to pastoralism, and becoming integrated into the Yamna culture

read about Cucuteni, they merged back with Yamna. Most later Yamna are actually Cucuteni and they spread to India.

>>1936133

?

>>1936140
Whitey never did anything they wuz living in caves, the Greeks were Afrikan.

>>1936134

It is therefore more likely that Dnieper-Donets marked the transition of indigenous R1a and/or I2a1b people to early agriculture, perhaps with an influx of Near Eastern farmers from 'Old Europe'. Mitochondrial DNA sequences from Dnieper-Donets culture showed clear similarities with those of the Cucuteni-Trypillian culture in the Carpathians (haplogroups H, T and U3). The first clearly Proto-Indo-European culture was Sredny Stog (4600-3900 BCE), when small kurgan burials begin to appear, with the distinctive posturing of the dead on the back with knees raised and oriented toward the northeast, which would be found in later steppe cultures as well. There is evidence of population blending from the variety of skull shapes. Towards the end of the 5th millennium, an elite starts to develop with cattle, horses and copper used as status symbols.

http://www.academia.edu/5965973/Origins_and_history_of_Haplogroup_R1b_Y-DNA_

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Decline_and_end_of_the_Cucuteni%E2%80%93Trypillian_culture

>>1935797
t. Mehmetcan Öztürk

>>1936153

Whiteness has absolutely nothing to do with any of this you absolute retard.

>>1936128
>They created
>>Vedic India
>>Persia
>>Ancient Greece
>>Rome

>None of that is correct.
He's pretty fucking correct.
i personally don't know about the Tocharians giving ironworking to the Han though.

>>1937016
you should, tocharianbro

>>1936112

Afanasevo (3700BC) early Indo-Europeans, metal-use, horses and wheeled vehicles, and cultural relations with Kurgan steppe cultures, the Afanasevans were Indo-European-speaking.[7] Afanasevo were genetically indistinguishable from Yamnaya people. Afanasevo were responsible for the introduction of metallurgy to China.

>>1934860
>Light hair, light eyes.

The oldest remains of an individual with blue eyes was found in Spain. He had dark skin and hair and carried Y-DNA haplogroup C. C, as in the one found in Mongols, Chinese, and Eskimos.

>>1935063
>Just a coincidence the Vedas and indian civilization thrived right around their passage, just a coincidence so did the Persia emperor and birth of zorostarianism, them Hellenic Greece then roman empire, all coinciding with their passage.

It coincided with advances in cavalry you delusional stormcuck, as evidenced by the high number of names in Greece beginning with Hippo-, particularly among rulers and nobility. Was Genghis Khan Aryan too?

>>1937642
>>1934872
>haplogroup c + m
europeans were poos and slants

Our model suggests that during this period of climatic upheaval, the descendants of the hunter-gatherers who survived through the Last Glacial Maximum were largely replaced by a population from another source

The new data show that the mitochondrial DNA of three individuals who lived in present-day Belgium and France before the coldest period in the last Ice Age -- the Last Glacial Maximum -- belonged to haplogroup M. This is remarkable because the M haplogroup is effectively absent in modern Europeans but is extremely common in modern Asian, Australasian, and Native American populations.

https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2016/02/160204150602.htm

>>1937649
>Ghengis Khan
>thriving civilization

hey john green

>>1935793

This, just because they weren't united in an advanced 'state' doesn't mean they were a meme.

>>1934872
>Furthermore it seems useless to point out, but there are many other populations with light hair and eyes

But the Proto-Indo-Europeans were the ones who've introduced pale skin and light-haired features on a mass scale, not vice versa.It is concluded that R1a cultures correlate the strongest with the gene that produces blondness.

>>1937972
>But the Proto-Indo-Europeans were the ones who've introduced pale skin and light-haired features on a mass scale

Again no, I've just clarified it wasn't the case, the PIE aka Yamnaya were mostly dark haired and eyed, as proven by several scientific studies:

>>1935070

>It is concluded that R1a cultures correlate the strongest with the gene that produces blondness.


No it doesn't.

>>1938099
It certainly does, hence people with an abundant amount of it being largely "fairer" than those who don't.

>>1938145
>It certainly does, hence people with an abundant amount of it being largely "fairer" than those who don't.

Hum no, the fairest people on earth have very little of it ( Fins) , Scots and Irish also have low r1a but are very fair, while Greeks who have more r1a than Fins are overwhelmingly dark haired

File: 1465417246402.gif (277KB, 200x200px) Image search: [Google]

277KB, 200x200px

>proto-indo-europeans

>>1937016
>He's pretty fucking correct.

No he really isn't.

>>1935067
PIE'D

>>1938204
So what the fuck are Greece, Rome, Persia, and India then

>>1938232

What do you mean, what are they?

>>1938234
Greeks were IE, Hellenic branch
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hellenic_languages

Rome was IE, Italic branch
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Italic_languages

Persia was IE, Iranian branch
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iranian_languages

India was IE, Indo-Aryan branch
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indo-Aryan_languages

>>1937972
>But the Proto-Indo-Europeans were the ones who've introduced pale skin and light-haired features on a mass scale, not vice versa.

Oh here comes the Svetovid, the faggot who shoves his faggot opinion everywhere as facts even though he has no idea what he's talking about.

>The genetic basis of a number of physical features of the Yamnaya people were ascertained by the ancient DNA study conducted by Haak et al. (2015), Wilde et al.(2014), Mathieson et al. (2015) : they were genetically tall (phenotypic height is determined by both genetics and environmental factors), overwhelmingly dark-eyed (brown), dark-haired and had a skin colour that was moderately light, though somewhat darker than that of the average modern European.