The hushed up southward mass migration of North Europeans

originally posted by: zinc12

Mysterious Indo-European homeland may have been in the steppes of Ukraine and Russia

Looking at the map above is Russia above or below Ukraine?

*sigh* you are still playing games, and not very successfully. We are not referring to all of Russia, but the Pontic Steppe area.

Funny how you didn't link to the article where you copy-pastad that headline from. Here's some body of it:

The comparison of the two cultures’ DNA showed that the four Corded Ware people could trace an astonishing three-quarters of their ancestry to the Yamnaya. That suggests a massive migration of Yamnaya people from their steppe homeland into central Europe about 4500 years ago, one that could have spread an early form of the Indo-European language, the team concludes. Thus the paper for the first time links two far-flung material cultures to specific genetic signatures and to each other—and suggests, the team says, that they spoke a form of Indo-European.

The Corded Ware culture soon spread across north and central Europe, extending as far as today’s Scandinavia. So the “steppe ancestry,” as the authors of the preprint call it, is found in most present-day Europeans, who can trace their ancestry back to both the Corded Ware people and the earlier Yamnaya. The work thus adds to genetic findings from last fall showing that the genetic makeup of today’s Europeans is more complicated than anyone expected.

It's an interesting article:

www.sciencemag.org...

However, as the jury is still out on where the proto Indo-Europeans came from - some still favour Anatolia:

The studies’ conclusions emerge from state-of-the-art ancient DNA and linguistic analyses, but the debate over PIE’s origins is likely to continue. A rival hypothesis—that early farmers living in Anatolia (modern Turkey) about 8000 years ago were the original PIE speakers—is not ruled out by the new analyses, most agree.

Though presumably you will now claim Anatolia is in Northern Europe....

a reply to: FatherLukeDuke
I think everyone can see that I did link and quote two studies and if you read them you would see that it confirmed what I said about these Aryans originating in north Europe and moving southwards.

The anthropological type of the earliest Indo-Europeans suggests that they come from the temperate zone of Europe. They were tall Northern Europeoids with strong bodies and fair hair, skin and eyes. These facts are proven by anthropological examinations of bones from the kurgans dating back to the 5th-3rd millennia B.C., as well as folklore and written sources. Rigveda referred to the Aryans as Svitnya, meaning light or white-skinned. The heroes of The Mahabharata, a well-known Aryan epic, often had eyes like “blue lotuses”. In the Vedic tradition, a real Brahmin had to have brown hair and grey eyes.

So if they state "They were tall Northern Europeoids " and I say they are "north Europeans and they came from North Europe originally what's the difference?

originally posted by: zinc12
a reply to: FatherLukeDuke
So if they state "They were tall Northern Europeoids " and I say they are "north Europeans and they came from North Europe originally what's the difference?

Who is "they"? It seems you just cherry picked a quote from some random Ukrainian magazine - not a respected scientific source. The article in question actually says they are from the Ukrainian Steppe, not Northern Europe. Again, you also didn't provide a reference for the quote, which seems like more game playing on your part.

So, lets get this straight: you think the proto Indo-Europeans originated from the Pontic Steppe, which is in modern day Southern Ukraine around the Black Sea. They then migrated south until the reached Norway? You need to take a serious look at a map.

I've had some weird debates on the internet, but never one where someone tried to redefine north and south to suit their argument.

Well done?

Who is "they"? It seems you just cherry picked a quote from some random Ukrainian magazine - not a respected scientific source. The article in question actually says they are from the Ukrainian Steppe, not Northern Europe.

So if it says what you wanted it to say what's your problem with it being from a magazine?
But in any case it says the earliest are from North Europe and presumable then moved further south into Ukraine along with East and West

Again, you also didn't provide a reference for the quote, which seems like more game playing on your part.

I think you will find I did a few posts back, you will find it next to the other one you said I didn't provide a link to.

So, lets get this straight: you think the proto Indo-Europeans originated from the Pontic Steppe, which is in modern day Southern Ukraine around the Black Sea. They then migrated south until the reached Norway? You need to take a serious look at a map. I've had some weird debates on the internet, but never one where someone tried to redefine north and south to suit their argument.

Nah I think you will find several posts back I said the Scythians themselves came from the North originally and then moved South into the stepps

Well done?

you too

Its quite amusing that the map used to try and assert I am being untruthful comes from a theory (Kurgan theory) which states that the people of the pontic-caspian steppe migrated there from Russia.

Marija Gimbutas defined the "Kurgan culture" as composed of four successive periods, with the earliest (Kurgan I) including the Samara and Seroglazovo cultures of the Dnieper/Volga region in the Copper Age (early 4th millennium BC). The people of these cultures were nomadic pastoralists, who, according to the model, by the early 3rd millennium BC had expanded throughout the Pontic-Caspian steppe and into Eastern Europe.[3]

en.wikipedia.org...

a reply to: SargonThrall

Agreed on that point, the Indo-Europeans were not like modern Russians. The language(s) they spoke were probably most similar to Sanskrit (though it's been said that Lithuanian is actually the closest living language to the original IE). They definitely weren't speaking modern Slavic.

Now I'm not a geneticist, so take this with a hefty-sized grain of salt. But as far as physical appearance, I would guess it varied a lot by region. There's little reason to believe the Indo-Aryans looked exactly like the PIE nomads on the Pontic steppe, or other IE-speaking regions further north. I would bet the Indo-Aryans looked closer to modern Afghans, Tajiks, Punjabis, and Sikhs than any IEs out on the steppe further north and west. IMO, the modern Pashtun (despite not being in India) are probably the closest of anyone to the physical appearance of the original Indo-Aryan invaders. They often have a very distinct look, and can have a somewhat lighter complexion than folks in surrounding regions. You'll often find that really mountainous, rural, impoverished, or isolated places tend to preserve human physical types that are diluted elsewhere.

a reply to: FatherLukeDuke
Thank you!! for understanding what I was trying to get at and wording it eloquently. And it is definitely worthy of note that origins are ever a speculative notion. Only extensive archaeological discovery can elaborate on information.


a reply to: Talorc
Indeed! My dearest friend related a story to me espousing the same thing. He met an elderly North Indian man through work, who was rather light skinned with light brown eyes, black (but greying) hair. He said that the man reminded him of an Afghani, and that he could have been the prototypical Vedic Aryan. I imagine they would have looked somewhat similar to their later cousins the Persians; black hair, fair skin, perhaps blue eyes. Pashto and Urdu (as I'm certain you know) are Indo-European languages.

This nonsense idea that the Aryans were all... Northern European-looking with blonde hair and blue eyes, invading the Harrappans, is a purely 19th/20th century invention.

a reply to: zinc12

Sometime in the last couple of months I said in a post about the Muslim invasion of Europe that perhaps the purpose was to destroy Europe by swapping the white populations out for the muslin population as this would be quickest and most efficient non military way of destroying Europe.

Europe would be too hard to destroy and take too long to achieve short of military destruction. Even then they rebuilt after WW2 so a peaceful swap out of the European population is by far the best option.

a reply to: Talorc

Considering the Chinese mummies are close to the border of north India at the time the Aryans are supposed to have arrived in India.

The Chinese mummies fit the description of the Aryans ie Tall, Svitnya (light skinned), red/blond hair, green/blue eyes ,nomadic horse riders who used wagons (ratha) and along with that they belong to the same haplogroup r1a.

Why would they be brown skinned if they originate in a cold country, Russia is far from warm, actually much colder then the UK or Ireland.

a reply to: Azureblue

Well you dont seriously think the European union is there for the good of Europe do you, their sole purpose is to manage the destruction of Europe by controlling politics, immigration and the economy.

a reply to: zinc12
Where on earth did you get the false idea that the Aryans had blonde hair? Blavatsky again?

a reply to: SargonThrall

I never said they had blond hair exclusively, they had brown, red and blond hair but they were not black haired like native Indians....I know you don't like it but tough !