The Indo-Europeans

[galvez]

www.skadi.net/forum/showthread.php?t=6590&page=1&pp=15


Originally Posted by Prodigal Son:

[There is a] mesocephalic type, with a cephalic index of 79-80, inhabiting 16 regions within the area of the former Ryazan, Tambov and Penza departments [i.e. the "Eastern Great Russian type"]. This zone is located between tributaries of the Oka river, tributaries of the Tsna and Moksha rivers, as well as the upper tributaries of the Don. Nowhere else in the area inhabited by ethnic Russians is such a high concentration of mesocephalic indices found. This type is also found among Erzya Mordvins ... The Tambov-Penza type is more ancient [than the Valdaic type] and has to a great measure preserved the specialties of the ancient Kurgan [i.e. Aryan] population. ...


Source: Origins and Ethnic History of the Russian People According to Anthropological Data p. 9, par. 4 - p. 10, par. 2. Published by the Academy of Sciences of the USSR, senior editor V.V. Bunak.


=-=-=-=-=-=-=


www.skadi.net/forum/showthread.php?t=6590&page=5&pp=15


Originally Posted by Prodigal Son:

The fact of the matter is that professional Indo-European scholars have abandoned Coon's notion that the Scandinavians were descendants of the Indo-Europeans over 50 years ago. The dominant theory right now is the Kurgan Theory which postulates exactly what I've been saying; Southeastern Russians are the closest living relatives of the modern-day Aryans. The problem with this board [Skadi] is that people are using information that is 65 years out of date (i.e. The Races of Europe). I wouldn't be surprised if people here started quoting Ripley and Sergi one of these days.

[HINDI]

These nordicists are kind of silly....Kurgan people are probably most related to ancient Aryans but their people never called themselve Aryan..the children of the Aryans are in North India and Iran..mixed or not..these are the offspring of the Aryans...Aryan has got nothing to do with barbarian blonde Swedes..

[galvez]

HINDI said:

These nordicists are kind of silly....Kurgan people are probably most related to ancient Aryans but their people never called themselve Aryan..the children of the Aryans are in North India and Iran..mixed or not..these are the offspring of the Aryans...Aryan has got nothing to do with barbarian blonde Swedes..

If what Dienekes and ProdigalSon are saying is true -- that the Proto-Indo-Europeans had nothing to do with modern Scandinavians -- then White Nationalists are among the most politically deluded people on earth.

[darwinslawyer]

By that logic if Swedes had nothing to do with the proto-Europeans then the White people of the world must give up their homelands to non whites and let their populations become mongrelised while all the non white nations of the world are allowed their racial purity and cultural integrity.

Anyway there is a lot of evidence that the proto indo Europeans looked like Swedes. Regardless of whether the Russians or the Swedes are the proto-Indoeuropeans they are both very similar.

It is likely the Proto-Indoeuropeans spread through out all of Europe and all populations in Europe have some level of their ancestry. Sweden probably had a high level of this ancestry given that it was relatively unpopulated when invaded by these proto-IndoEuropeans although some parts of Russia would probably have a higher levels of this ancestry.

BTW Aryan is taken was a suggested by linguists as the prototypical world which the proto-IndoEuropeans described themselves as. Swedes are more similar to these Aryans or what ever you want to call them than any current peoples living in India.

[Agrippa]

darwinslawyer said:

By that logic if Swedes had nothing to do with the proto-Europeans then the White people of the world must give up their homelands to non whites and let their populations become mongrelised while all the non white nations of the world are allowed their racial purity and cultural integrity.

Anyway there is a lot of evidence that the proto indo Europeans looked like Swedes. Regardless of whether the Russians or the Swedes are the proto-Indoeuropeans they are both very similar.

It is likely the Proto-Indoeuropeans spread through out all of Europe and all populations in Europe have some level of their ancestry. Sweden probably had a high level of this ancestry given that it was relatively unpopulated when invaded by these proto-IndoEuropeans although some parts of Russia would probably have a higher levels of this ancestry.

BTW Aryan is taken was a suggested by linguists as the prototypical world which the proto-IndoEuropeans described themselves as. Swedes are more similar to these Aryans or what ever you want to call them than any current peoples living in India.

Quite a good post!

Aryan is the only proper name of a major Indoeuropean group. So its not that wrong to call all Indoeuropeans "Aryans" at least not more wrong than to call them Indoeuropeans.

In fact we dont know how they called themselves at the beginning and that such a major groups like the Indoiranians/Indoaryans called themselves Aryans is reason enough to call all Indoeuropeans (in its narrower sence the descendents of the early Indoeuropeans) Aryans.

BTW whoever were the first Indoeuropeans, the final Indoeuropean culture was spreaded and lead by the battle-axe/Kurgan people and this people had at least a "Protonordid" character.

The nearest relatives today are the Nordids, even those of Sweden. Maybe this Nordids had other ancestors than those of Eastern Europe (I dont think so but to be honest I saw so far no sufficient proof for both) but they are in many features so similar that they are more their relatives than some upmixed people of Central Asia. (from their character, appearance, morphology)

And I would be curious to know which Russians (morphological type) show the greatest affinity to the Nordindid/Indoaryan populations.


The only group which share almost the same similarities are the Nordindids of Northern India and Afghanistan.
I call this people (the typical ones) Aryans too, or even Aryans in the narrower sence of the word.

The fact of the matter is that professional Indo-European scholars have abandoned Coon's notion that the Scandinavians were descendants of the Indo-Europeans over 50 years ago.

Well, thats just not true.
First of all, why is this theory abandoned exactly 50 years ago? Maybe some political reasons too?

Of course I read many things about this topic and I say too that the Indoeuropeans didnt come originally from Scandinavia, but thats not the whole problem.

Coon didnt say that too, he said the Scandinavians were PARTLY descendents of Indoeuropeans which came from the South-East to Scandinavia!

And thats true!

The question is just were this invaders the first Indoeuropean wave or maybe a 2nd or 3rd etc of already mixed indoeuropeanized people?

That there is a relation between the battle-axe/corded and some parts of the North-Central-Eastern European populations is obvious and no one who is honest can deny that.

Its a fact that many people just denied that after the 2nd WW for political reasons and that people which still believed and promoted the old theory (even with good material) got and still get much trouble in the "politically correct" scientific community.

Scandinavia is most likely not the original homeland of the IE, Scandinavians are probably not the descendents of the pimary wave of IE, they are maybe not in their majority descendents of the Battle-Axe people BUT there was significant migration of Battle-Axe people which were the ancestors of many Scandinavians and there were later waves of IE of the Nordid type.

[Ioulianos]

Can we be sure that "Indoeuropeans" really existed? Is there real evidence for it?

[Dienekes]

Agrippa said:

BTW whoever were the first Indoeuropeans, the final Indoeuropean culture was spreaded and lead by the battle-axe/Kurgan people and this people had at least a "Protonordid" character.

The nearest relatives today are the Nordids, even those of Sweden.

Nonsense. There is no relationship between the Kurgan people and the Battle-Axe group. And, the Battle-Axe group is a limited European phenomenon and is unrelated to the majority of Indo-Europeans. As to today's Nordids they are basically aboriginal NW Europeans, genetically unrelated to the Indo-Europeans.

[Agrippa]

Dienekes said:

Nonsense. There is no relationship between the Kurgan people and the Battle-Axe group. And, the Battle-Axe group is a limited European phenomenon and is unrelated to the majority of Indo-Europeans. As to today's Nordids they are basically aboriginal NW Europeans, genetically unrelated to the Indo-Europeans.

I should have made the point clear:

The Battle-Axe/Corded people were the FINAL distributors of the Indoeuropean languages and culture no matter who the first wer in most parts of Europe!
They were the main group spreading the Kentum languages finally.

The Kurgan people were probably the ancestors of the distributors of the Indoiranian/Indoaryans and predecessors of f.e. the Scyths, Sarmats, Persians, etc...you know what I mean.

[dandan]

Again, it seems that people are confusing LINGUITIC and RACIAL classifications. The earliest evidence of the Indo-European language is the Rig Veda, a very old INDIAN text, dated, conservatively, to ca. 2000-2500 BC.
It was written by people who called themselves Aryans, i.e. "Nobles". It is notable that the skeletal record of the sub-continent has not changed since this time. Also notable is that in the first Shloka (couplet) of the first hymn of the first recorded Indo-European language text, the Rig Veda, there are Dravidian phonemes (retroflex consonants). What does this mean? It means the first recorded Indo-europeans were already mixed, and it also means that "aryan" should refer only to people who subscribed to the sacrificial Vedic religion, before its collapse in ca. 500-100 BC with the rise of Buddhism in India. There is no racial meaning in the word "Aryan" except for 19th century German fantasists who needed a non Judeo-Christian outlet for their deluded Neitschean Folkische yearnings. Period.

[Dienekes]

The Rig Veda was written down in the latter half of the 1st millennium BC and it dates back to 1500-1200BC according to some scholars. The earliest written records in an Indo-European language are in Hittite, the language of the Mitanni and then Mycenaean Greek c. 1500BC.

[caucasoid]

Dienekes said:

The Rig Veda was written down in the latter half of the 1st millennium BC and it dates back to 1500-1200BC according to some scholars. The earliest written records in an Indo-European language are in Hittite, the language of the Mitanni and then Mycenaean Greek c. 1500BC.

I was under the impression that Mittanian language had some Indo-European names, but was Hurrian.

[HINDI]

Northern Europeans (Swedes e.g) thats call themselves Aryan are like a joke to me....these barbarians make me laugh...

Actually all Nordic WN's make me laugh while white civilizations were nearly all Mediterannean...

[ProdigalSon]

Dienekes said:

Nonsense. There is no relationship between the Kurgan people and the Battle-Axe group.

Are you saying that the Kurgan folk had nothing to do with the Fatjanovo people, Dienekes??

[Artemisia]

caucasoid said:

I was under the impression that Mittanian language had some Indo-European names, but was Hurrian.

Most Linguists agree that the Mittanian and Hurrian languages (if indeed they represent two different languages) were not Indo-European.
So far, either Hittite or Mycenaean Greek hold the record of the oldest epigraphically attested IE language. Until a few years ago, Hittite was supposed to be the oldest by a century or so but the Mycenaean tablets are being re-evaluated and new discoveries keep pushing the language back further in time.

[Artemisia]

Ioulianos said:

Can we be sure that "Indoeuropeans" really existed? Is there real evidence for it?

I must admit that I, too, am one of the sceptical ones. Indo-Europeans only exist in the minds of scholars. So far, no one has been able to prove that there actually was a single Indo-European people from which all other subgroups emerged.