Were the original Indo-Europeans white?

>>3370940
No, they were pure African nig-nogs.

>>3370940
No, they wouldn't meet our current standards for being "white", in fact they would've looked quite different to modern Europeans and not just in terms of skin, hair and eye colour but appearance in general.

>>3370940
only the romans were white

>>3370978
Proofs?

File: proofpls.png (8KB, 277x271px) Image search: [Google]

8KB, 277x271px

>>3370989

>>3370940
>>3370978
Yes.

http://journals.plos.org/plosgenetics/article?id=10.1371/journal.pgen.1003912
http://www.popsci.com/article/science/how-gene-fair-skin-spread-across-india
http://www.eupedia.com/forum/threads/29435-Light-skin-allele-of-SLC24A5-gene-was-spread-by-the-Indo-Europeans-(R1a-R1b)

>>3371000
The Indo-Europeans that migrated to India weren't the original Indo-Europeans, they were descended from the Corded Ware people, who were mixed with North-Europeans.

>>3370989
They were overwhelmingly brown haired, brown eyed and their skin was darker than modern southern Europeans (this was normal for the time, though). Cbf to provide sources because it's easy to find.

As for their appearance in general, just look up skulls from the early PIE period. They look quite dissimilar to modern western/northern Europeans who are the standard for "whiteness". Still Caucasoid, but not Nordic or typically European/White.

>>3371000
He said "original" Indo-Europeans i.e. Proto-Indo-Europeans, not the later Indo-Europeans who spread to India (which I'm guessing the third article you posted talks about). The later Indo-Europeans were light skinned and quite fair but this was thousands of years after the emergence of PIE.

Also having genes for light skin =/= white skin tone. The Proto-Indo-Europeans had "light skin" but they were still darker than any modern Europeans.

No, they were redhead asians

>>3371049
The problem is that the swarthy yamnaya were pretty much exterminated by their corded ware offspring (who were still heavily Yamnaya admixtured)

>>3371059
What is this a problem for?

>>3371049
>The Proto-Indo-Europeans had "light skin" but they were still darker than any modern Europeans.
t. shitalian

File: EE.png (287KB, 800x1737px) Image search: [Google]

287KB, 800x1737px

>>3371059
Redpill me on Corded Ware, who were they?

File: Steppe R1a & R1b.png (455KB, 1134x506px) Image search: [Google]

455KB, 1134x506px

>>3370978
>>3371049
The Yamna horizon hasn't been excavated in full yet and all the samples from it so far have turned out R1b, R1a were probably more light.

>>3371102
Forest steppe peoples closely related to PIE Yamnaya peoples who adopted the PIE language and culture and spread throughout northern, central and eastern Europe and ultimately into Asia.

No, because "white" was invented in the modern era.

>>3371112
That image is kind of pointless though because the R1b Yamnaya samples precede the R1a Central Asian samples by literally thousands of years. By this point the R1a Indo-Europeans had mixed with Pre-Indo-European Europeans and spread back eastward.

I agree that R1a Proto-Indo-Europeans contemporary with Yamnaya were "probably" lighter and fairer to a degree, but there is literally no proof at this stage. Keep in mind that R1b Bell Beakers were also light skinned and somewhat fair, so it's not impossible that R1a Indo-Europeans were once darker.

They probably looked like (P)ersians.

>>3371272
Why would they look like Persians?

>>3370978
>>3371112
>>3371130
>idiots who think Yamna culture was Indo-European

WHAT PART OF PROTO DO YOU NOT UNDERSTAND?

>>3371051
>Eurasians
fixd

>>3370940
>original Indo-Europeans
Idiot, Indo-European is a language family.

The proto-indo-iranic speaking peoples who used the word Arya as a self designation had fully expressed skin depigmentation and lactase persistence.

>>3371290
he's an idiot and says they looked like Persians, when what he should have meant to say was Persians used to look more like them.

>>3371369
shut the fuck up you french worm

>>3371049
>their skin was darker than modern southern Europeans
you mean somewhat darker than all modern Europeans, idiot.
>just look up skulls from the early PIE period
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

>>3371397
idiot

File: frenchie.jpg (845KB, 2300x1300px) Image search: [Google]

845KB, 2300x1300px

>>3371398
>>3371404
autist

Is R1b an indo european haplogroup ? or only R1a ? In my opinion only R1a.

>>3371409
>indo
>european
>haplogroup

>>3371420
>ndo
>>european
>>haplogroup

I meant the original founding population of the indo ayrans. Is only R1a acceptable ? since this is what archaeology reveals.

>>3371435
>original founding population of the indo ayrans
oh yeah dude, R1a out the ass more than likely

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Andronovo_culture

>>3371445

So in the study they found R1a and C. I think R1b is not indoeuropean. only R1a and C should be indo european.

>>3371102
The forefathers of: Balto-Slavs, Early Germanics and Indo-Iranian folk.

>>3370940
is that a fluffy pony?

>>3371420

The wiki page says that androno culture was an east ward migration after corded ware hence they found mongoloid C. The rest was R1a, that is why i say that the r1a is the original indo european haplo group.

>>3370940
No. They hadn't evolved yet.

>>3371505
it's best girl from boku no hero

>>3371369
Angry little faggot who doesn't realise that Proto-Indo-European = common ancestor of all Indo-European languages = "original" Indo-Europeans

>>3371398
>you mean somewhat darker than all modern Europeans, idiot.
These mean the same thing

>HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
What's so hilarious?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indo-Iranians
>the study determined that at least 60% of the individuals overall (out of the 26 Bronze and Iron Age human remains' samples of the study that could be tested) had light hair and blue or green eyes

>>3371540
Indo-Iranians weren't the original Indo-Europeans, though.

>>3371531
>Proto-Indo-European = "original" Indo-Europeans
idiot who doesn't understand what words mean, the average modern European has lighter skin than the average modern Southern European. The Proto-Indo-Europeans had lighter skin than the average of those European groups they encountered.

>>3371545
you fail to grasp the point

>>3371559
I thought the proto indo Europeans were darker and got the light skin from the hunter gatherers they encountered.

>>3371559
>idiot who doesn't understand what words mean
Except I do. Let me say it again:
Proto-Indo-European = common ancestor of all Indo-European languages = "original" Indo-Europeans

>the average modern European has lighter skin than the average modern Southern European
Stop getting so caught up over one minor fucking point, jeez. Just pretend I left out the "southern" because it makes no difference anyway. The point is that PIE peoples had darker skin than ANY modern European population and that is a proven FACT. Because of this, calling them "white" in today's sense would be dumb.

>The Proto-Indo-Europeans had lighter skin than the average of those European groups they encountered.

>The Proto-Indo-Europeans had lighter skin than the average of those European groups they encountered.
Let's assume you're right for a minute. HOW IS THIS RELEVANT? OP was asking of the original Europeans were "white". PIE were not white by today's standards. It doesn't matter if the people they replaced were even less white. They were not white by today's standards, end of story.

>you fail to grasp the point
Except I do. Indo-Iranians are not the original Indo-Europeans. OP asked if the original Indo-Europeans were white. Therefore, how white Indo-Iranians were is not relevant to OP's question.

>>3371580
nope, WHG had blue eyes and darker skin.

EHG were a massive part of the PIE ethnic breakdown, that being tripartite, including ANE and Neolithic farming peoples. And that is to say nothing of their close relationship with the peoples of the Burned House horizon and Cucuteni–Trypillia.

>>3370940
Define "white." It's impossible to make a genetic definition of race. If you try, then all PIE peoples are too genetically similar to one another to separated into races, even if you say there are up to 12 races.

http://science.sciencemag.org/content/298/5602/2381.full

>>3371596
>white

>PIE peoples had darker skin than ANY modern European population
idk, Sardinians and North Africans can get really dark. Probably darker than the PIE given their geographic location.

>>3371597
>WHG had blue eyes and darker skin.
True, but northern and eastern European hunter gatherers had lighter skin, blue eyes and fair hair. >>3371580 is right. Corded Ware acquired its lighter skin and hair from pre-existing populations in northern, central and eastern Europe.

>>3371606
Well in that case it would come down to where you put the threshold of whiteness. Some people would call Sardinians white, others would call them non-white. So it's really an unanswerable question to begin with.

>>3371607
>eastern European hunter gatherers
you mean those people who formed a massive part of the PIE?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Proto-Indo-Europeans#Eastern_European_hunter-gatherers

>>3371624
Yes but PIE were also mixed with swarthy CHG.

>>3371653
>CHG
Yeah PIE has a huge Near East component but mate, almost all the Y-dna is EHG. And even CHG was mixed with the Neolithic farmers.

>>3371685
They were still swarthier than northern/eastern hunter gatherers, though.

>>3371717
Not all of them I'd wager. PIE was almost universally taller though.

>northern hunter gatherers
I actually can't find anything on these people.

>>3371745
They're usually referred to as Scandinavian Hunter Gatherers, I just prefer to say "northern" to keep it consistent with WHG and EHG.

>>3371807
I'm not finding much on their skin tone at least, but the area wasn't exclusively hunter gatherer. There were also lots of farming peoples that predate Battle Axe culture, like the Funnelbeaker culture.

Did WHG subsist in the north?

>>3371859
Here's some skin pigmentation and eye colour information if you're interested. SHG is included as one of the populations tested.
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1xe9sgt0PSt6cUQ3cYp14foBoaVGsOKZBmmHJoKz0HB0/edit#gid=1800275085
>There were also lots of farming peoples that predate Battle Axe culture, like the Funnelbeaker culture.
True. Interestingly though farmer populations in Europe and Anatolia weren't as dark as what people assume, even in terms of eye colour.

>>3371859
Also I guess you could say that WHG subsisted in the north given that the Indo-Europeans were largely WHG themselves. But it's likely that much of the WHG in Europeans today was brought back to Europe by the Indo-Europeans, rather than continuously surviving through from the Mesolithic.

>>3371920
>re16891982 - did not match any documents
so what gives?

>this SNP is a relatively new one in human evolution; one estimate [PMID 17182896] is that the rs1426654(A) allele, in other words, light skin pigmentation, spread through the European population around 6,000 - 12,000 years ago

>AA, AG, GG, A%
>GG, CG, CC C%
what?

So it sounds like people are claiming that the original people of Europe disappeared

Yes.

>>3371926
>much of the WHG in Europeans today was brought back to Europe by the Indo-Europeans
n-no

>>3371920
>SHG is included
paleolithic Sweden is, but it was Neolithic peoples who were displaced by the Battle Axe culture.

File: 1505054377980.png (169KB, 792x653px) Image search: [Google]

169KB, 792x653px

>>3372014

>>3371981
>n-no
?
It's been pretty well established at this point.

Isnt it commonly known that the indo-europeans were the so called "aryans"

File: Ala111Thr_allele_frequency_distribution0.png (889KB, 1466x664px) Image search: [Google]

889KB, 1466x664px

>The earliest known sample of the threonine allele is 13,000 years old from Satsurblia Cave in Georgia.
>It is theorised that selection for the derived allele is based on the need for sunlight to produce the essential nutrient vitamin D.
>white

>>3372027
What's this?

>>3372016
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atlantic_(period)
*yawns*

>>3372054
your breath smells like shit

File: 150524034415588.jpg (25KB, 374x299px) Image search: [Google]

25KB, 374x299px

>>3372074

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neolithic_Subpluvial
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Holocene_climatic_optimum
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Younger_Dryas

>>3372043
Orcadians are niggers

>>3370940
Not by modern standards.

First of all, there was no one tribe of "Indo-Europeans". They were a bunch of inter-connected tribes who spread out at various times and speeds. Generally though they were lightly-swarthy Steppe dwellers, primarily horse and cow herders, had a patriarchal society and believed in Sky Daddy.

The Scythians were probably their most "direct" local ancestors, and these are considered an Iranic group. It's likely they slowly inter-married with (proto-) Central Asians, (proto-) Middle Easterners, Anatolians and the forest barbarians of eastern Europe.