>They wuz Hittites
>They wuz Persians
>They wuz Greeks
>They wuz Indians
>They wuz Romans
>They wuz Germanic tribes
>They wuz Vikings
>They wuz every major European civilization
How the hell did they become so successful? Also could the Indo-Europeans be classified as real life Kangz?
>Hi, I'm going to post one of the less regular Veeky Forums topics
>just let me shit it up with memes first...
NOONE WILL EVER TAKE ANYTHING THAT YOU POST SERIOUSLY AS LONG AS YOU EXPRESS YOURSELF LIKE THAT.
Look who's talking
Clearly it is because the Indo-Europeans of old had the blessings of the Gods and even when they fore went their Gods, the God of the Hebrews still smiled upon them and gave them the blessings to conquer the world.
It's the only logical explanation.
>all-caps tripfagging
>THEY WUZ ERRYTHANG
They wuzn't Egyptians, Israelites, Phoenecians, Babylonians, Assyrians, Akkadians, Sumerians, Harappans or Chinese though.
Get rekt Indo-shits.
only way to get people to respond
No-one will ever take anything that you post seriously as long as you express yourself like that.
>the Amazon is completely depopulated from Portuguese speaking people meme
>Paraguay speaks mystical native languages
>Siberia has no one living outside of the Trans-Siberian Railroad
>people in Central-America and Yucatan don't speak Mexican as first language
Japheth means 'expand'
Knowing how to use horses pretty much made you a god in the bronze age.
>They wuzn't Egyptians
That's wrong, though
Mexico actually does have significant native populations that cant speak spanish
WE
WUZ
KANGZ
Before the Indo-European migrations, Europe already had advanced civilizations such as the Minoans, Nuragics and Etruscans. The Greeks learned everything from the Minoans and later on, Egyptians and Phoenicians. Coincidentally, the Latins had to be civilized by the Etruscans to move past their mudhut level of architecture and tribal system of government.
Language and tribal identity or race (related to genetics) are different things.
I love the Etruscan example. It completely destroys any argument for Indo European claim of first origin. Also Indus Valley civilization was not Indo-European unlike civilizations after them . In fact, contradictory to some Hindu nationalists claims, Aryan invasion of the Indian subcontinent could be what ended Indus valley civilization.
So many beautiful ancient civilizations destroyed by the Indo Europeans.
>Nuragics
Egyptians were never ever Indo Europeans, you maniacal filth.
?
Wrong green text. But my post was referring to the claim that Egyptians were (Indo European). A claim made in a post in reply to this one which in turn is a reply to the OP.
bait
Why waste time disproving it? It's a WEWUZ fringe theory nobody takes seriously outside of the internet.
You just have to look at the fact that Egyptians native tongue belonged to the Afroasiatic family, thus more related to Berber and Semitic languages than anything else.
There wasn't any time wasted disproving it, the posts just said "they were never ever indo europeans".
Also, you'd be surprised how much bullshit people believe outside of the internet. False appropriations didn't start in the internet. Afrocentrism for example was spread before the internet was a thing.
Egyptian ruling class was euro, but the 90% slave class wereafrican and they traded with the Levant and further eurasia
>WIR
While Indo-Europeans didn't create civilizations, it's pretty epic how they destroyed them.
Take Skara Brae for example.
Peaceful folks who just want to build stuff.
One day an enraged band of Indo-Europeans finds them and kills every single one simply out of hatred and topples many of their structures.
Why were they so angry? Did they think the sky god commanded them to destroy?
Cheese.
No, really. Proto Indo-Europeans became successful because of their ability to domesticate grazing animals and store and consume dairy products.
The Indo-European identity with the exception of language means very little.
Indo-European admixture into all of these native populations was very small.
>Indo-European admixture into all of these native populations was very small.
Modern Europeans outside Sardinia have between 25% and 50% Indo-European admixture.
The Yamnaya were lactose intolerant.
>ended
yes, Aryans destroyed entire rivers armed with chariots like ancient beavers.
I'm pretty sure Sicilians, S.Italians, Albanians and Iberians have much less than 25%
And you think we will take you seriously allah capbhar
Pic related, CHG admixture whcih came with Yamnaya is very little in Iberians, also for some reason Sardinians have more WHG than Sicilian (WHG is blue)
If they did, it wouldn't be much less but slightly less.
But, there's complexities involved like Arabic admixture and such which makes it impossible to model them just as a simple mixture of Indo-European on Neolithic European so the actual percentage will vary depending on the methods used.
>good temperatures
>abundance of resources
>abundance of solid ground
WHG isn't blue stupid.
Blue represents both EHG and WHG here which it makes it completely fucking useless at telling apart Indo-European and Paleo-European admixture.
CHG can have other sources like haplogroup J carriers.
You are stupid you dumb fucker, whg and ehg are the same race
Not really. They have fairly large genetic distances because EHG have paternal descent(R1a, R1b, Q?) from Paleolithic Siberia(Mal'ta Buret culture) whereas some WHG groups had minor Aurignacian admixture from the Magdalenian people.
But yes, their genetics overlap just enough that in a K=low analysis they are forced to be represented by the same component.
Hittites copied non-Indo-European Hattians and Hurrians
Persians copied non-Indo-European Mesopotamians
Egyptian is an Afroasiatic, not Indo-European, language.
lol best bait I've seen in a while
Not to emntioned Assyrians already had massive colonies in the territory where the Hittities later settled, in one of them they found over 40,000 written tablets, some of them contained laws and apparently women had a lot of power in that society
They certainly picked up Indo-European tech quickly enough after they got btfo by it. They even formed the warrior castes needed to build the expertise necessary to effectively use CHARIOTS.
Of course not all Egyptians are Indo-Europeans, but some Indo-Europeans were certainly Egyptians.
ITT we pretend haplotypes don't exist
>Hyksos
They were mixed. Not enough information to substantiate them being Indo-European.
>[who?]
all the evidence points in that direction. chariots, advanced bronzeworking techniques, horse burials, the composite bow. Not to mention the time-frame of their settlement in the Nile Delta, which matches that of the Indo-European migrations.
en.wikipedia.org
>you may recognize the term Sintashta
random "Semites" don't just pick that shit up overnight you know. They probably moved along with them.
>Not to mention the time-frame of their settlement in the Nile Delta, which matches that of the Indo-European migrations.
A coincidence. They spoke a Semitic language and were influenced by Indo-Europeans. That's why they still worshipped Semitic gods.
>pure coincidence
Literal horse burials and unique military practices unknown in the region until the arrival of Indo-Europeans too? Indo-Europeans were famous for assimilating different cultures, it doesn't surprise me in the least that they would take up different gods.
en.wikipedia.org
>They spoke a Semitic language
I'll bet you don't have a source on that.
>I'll bet you don't have a source on that.
britannica.com
>Hyksos, dynasty of Palestinian origin that ruled northern Egypt as the 15th dynasty (c. 1630–1523 bce; see ancient Egypt: The Second Intermediate period). The name Hyksos was used by the Egyptian historian Manetho (fl. 300 bce), who, according to the Jewish historian Flavius Josephus (fl. 1st century ce), translated the word as “king-shepherds” or “captive shepherds.” Josephus himself wished to demonstrate the great antiquity of the Jews and thus identified the Hyksos with the Hebrews of the Bible. Hyksos was in fact probably an Egyptian term for “rulers of foreign lands” (heqa-khase), and it almost certainly designated the foreign dynasts rather than an ethnic group. Modern scholarship has identified most of the Hyksos kings’ names as Semitic.
>The rise of the Hyksos kings in Egypt was made possible by an influx of immigrants from Palestine into Egypt beginning about the 18th century bce. The immigrants brought with them new technologies, including the horse and chariot, the compound bow, and improved metal weapons. Most of them settled in the eastern portion of the Nile Delta, where they achieved a dominant role in trade with western Asia. Archaeological excavations in that area have revealed a Canaanite-style temple, Palestinian-type burials (including horse burials), Palestinian types of pottery, quantities of their superior weapons, and a series of Minoan frescoes that demonstrate stylistic parallels to those of Knossos and Thera. The most-prominent settlement was Avaris (modern Tall al-Dabʿa), a fortified camp over the remains of a Middle Kingdom town in the northeastern delta. Their chief deity was the Egyptian storm and desert god, Seth, whom they identified with a Syrian storm god, Hadad.
t. Tyrone Goldberg
>britannica
>Palestinian-type burials (including horse burials)
KEK
>dynasty of Palestinian origin
Ironically, the word Palestine comes from Philistine. Who probably spoke an Indo-European language. Not sure why they mentioned this though, Philistines wouldn't come on the scene for another couple centuries, during the Bronze Age collapse.
>Their chief deity was the Egyptian storm and desert god, Seth, whom they identified with a Syrian storm god, Hadad.
Actually, they originally followed Baal.