Are the Indo-Europeans just a meme or are they actually important to the creation of civilization?

>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.

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

According to who? You?

Historians?

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

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.

>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.

>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.

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

>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.

>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.

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.

Vedas was written*

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

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.

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

Yes, here's a few:

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

pdf:

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."

nature.com/nature/journal/v522/n7555/full/nature14507.html

>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.

Mental gymnastics of this guy.

>Mental gymnastics

How so? And why would I even care?

>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.

Why are you so upset?

Not an argument.

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.

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

You seem to be lost, reddit is that way.

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.

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

Would you feel more comfortable on reddit

Sick burn!

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).

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

Thanks I thought about it for a long time

>white people are indigenous to south africa

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

>Hammurabi

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

>likely IE descendants

Likeliness determined by what?

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

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

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

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

*says

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

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

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

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

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Seima-Turbino_phenomenon

But Hittites were Indo-Europeans user.

>Trypillian civilization dating to 6000 B.C.

Non Indoeuropean, but neolithic Europeans

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

and so were Oxus/Trypillian

also Vedas, Avestans, Khwarezms etc..

>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

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.

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.
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.

kill yourself, Turkic is an ethnolinguistic group.

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.

>comitatus

Hmmmm...

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

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

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

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

Which law says that?

As opposed to linguits maybe. Im not him btw

?

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

Sorry, but Europeans are not Americans.

>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

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

So you're agreeing with me?

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

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

Dnieper–Donets culture
Samara culture
Cucuteni culture

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.

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

None of that is correct.

Yeah, we wuz kangz, right?

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.

?

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

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.

academia.edu/5965973/Origins_and_history_of_Haplogroup_R1b_Y-DNA_

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Decline_and_end_of_the_Cucuteni–Trypillian_culture

t. Mehmetcan Öztürk

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

>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.

you should, tocharianbro

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.

>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.

>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?

>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.

sciencedaily.com/releases/2016/02/160204150602.htm

>Ghengis Khan
>thriving civilization

hey john green

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

>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.

>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:

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

No it doesn't.

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

>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

>proto-indo-europeans

>He's pretty fucking correct.

No he really isn't.

PIE'D

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