Proto-Indo-Europeans were the Highlanders, who lived near the sea.

Taranis said:
Exactly this. The plethora of non-IE languages (be they Elamite, Hurro-Urartian or Sumerian, they were generally all agglutinative, where PIE was fusional) found in the supposed PIE homeland is one of the main obstacles of that scenario. There's an additional problem with this in the Anatolian languages, the one branch of Indo-European that was present in Anatolia relatively early on: according to one of the current foremost Anatolianists, Craig Melchert, there's not a single example of a loanword from any one of the Near Eastern languages or language families actually reconstructable for Proto-Anatolian, and this would suggest that Proto-Anatolian was actually not originally spoken in Anatolia.
Click to expand...
Once again I'm talking about Leyla-Tepe and NOT Anatolia. Leyla-Tepe is located in the Iranian Plateau, South of the Caspian Sea. Iranian Plateau is not the same as Anatolia, lol. There is no proof that the languages of the Hurrians, Sumerians and Elamites were spoken in Leyla-Tepe, north of the Iranian Plateau. I'm NOT discussing Anatolia, but LEYLA-TEPE and MAYKOP!!! PIE is not from Anatolia, but from Leyla-Tepe! Although, it's possible that proto-Anatolian came down from the Maykop! But Maykop folks were from Leyla-Tepe, they were West Asian!
 
Robert6 said:
Why not?
If proto-Kurgan Leyla-Tepe culture is PIE, then PIE were in the Steppes.
Click to expand...
Interesting, but I believe that the Maykop PIE were mountain folks. The first thing what Indo-Europeans did when they arrived in Europe was to settle down in the mountains, in their eyes familiar environment. Like you said they were Highlanders...
 
Goga said:
Interesting, but I believe that the Maykop PIE were mountain folks. The first thing what Indo-Europeans did when they arrived in Europe was to settle down in the mountains, in their eyes familiar environment. Like you said they were Highlanders...
Click to expand...
I just said "Steppe Highlanders who lived near the Sea". :))
Steppe environment is not equal to Plain territories,
Steppe people also need Mountains for their animals in the Summer.
 
Goga said:
West Asia has always been multi cultural and multi linguistic, because of the mountainous region there. The mountains literally divided and are divinding the people, they are the geographic boundaries. Actually the place where there are so many different languages is actually the place where a new language can be born. The pluralism and the variance of different languageis a good indication that the environment is sustainable enough to create a new language. There is no proof that around the Leyla-Tepe folks were not proto-Indo-European. Also, Indo European is not that old as other ancient native West Asian languages. It's a recent language that doesn't rule out the co-existence of other languages.

You have no proves at all. You have no strong proves that do support in your fairytales. So you only bark so to speak, without the real counter arguments.

Actually the Steppes model is full of nonsense, contradicting facts and lots of wishful thinking. The Steppes model doesn't have any strong arguments at all, not even 1 argument.

But haters will continue to hate and denials are going to deny, there is a great proverb in the Middle East, the dogs bark, but the caravan goes on!
Click to expand...

Jesus.

Currently their really are no proves.
 
Goga said:
Interesting, but I believe that the Maykop PIE were mountain folks. The first thing what Indo-Europeans did when they arrived in Europe was to settle down in the mountains, in their eyes familiar environment. Like you said they were Highlanders...
Click to expand...

This is absurd
 
Robert6 said:
Why not?
If proto-Kurgan Leyla-Tepe culture is PIE, then PIE were in the Steppes.
Leyla-Tepe and Maikop cultures are in Steppe environment.
Click to expand...

If proto-Kurgan Leyla-Tepe culture is PIE,
then PIE split in Anatolian language and Maykop?
 
holderlin said:
Jesus.

Currently their really are no proves.
Click to expand...
Jesus Christ, Hail Mary, Mohammed, Allah and Holy Trinity is this everything you can say? They won't help, since nobody can change the reality.
 
holderlin said:
This is absurd
Click to expand...
Can you collaborate, why absurd? I'm just repeating what other academics and scholars are saying. From most prestigious universities in the world, like Harvard etc. I'm not inventing anything and don't dare to take credits from what other are championing.
 
Goga said:
Yamna culture = 3600 BC - 2300 BC
Maykop culture = 3700 BC - 3000 BC
Uruk period = 4000 BC - 3100 BC
Leyla-Tepe culture = 4350 BC - 4000 BC
Ubaid period = 6500 BC to 3800 BC

What does this tell us? That Leyla-Tepe is the oldest of those 'Bronze Age' civilizations and I believe that the founders of the Uruk civilization were the same as the founders of Maykop culture. I think that one part of the Leyla-Tepe folks migrated into Mesopotamia and found the Uruk civilization by replacing the Ubaid Culture, while other group went to the Northern Caucasus and found the Maykop culture which resulted into the Yamanaya culture. Since Maykop and Uruk are closely related to each other. Actually the Leyla-Tepe is the starting point of the Proto-Indo-Europeans in the Bronze Age. Leyla-Tepe/Maykop warriors most likely Indo-Europized the uncivilized Steppes folks in the Yamnaya Horizon throug the elite dominance. Something happened around this time, around 4000 BC - 3500 BC and it has something to do with J2a, R1a* and R1b...
Click to expand...

there is a 300 year gap : Leyla Tepe ends 4000 BC, Maykop starts 3700 BC
please explain
 
bicicleur said:
you're right, we know very little about light pigmentation
but I don't agree with your asumption it originated in northern Europe
Tochars and the Tarim mummies where light pigmented too, this can't have originated in northern Europe
there are hints of light-pigmented Gutians who invaded Mesopotamia after the fall of the empire of Sargon the Great
where these Gutians came from is not exactly known, but it might be the Armenian highlands or south of the Caspian Sea
on the other hand, light pigmentation in Europe seems to be linked with haplo I1 and R, which is in favour of your asumption
but since I1 has been discovered in neolithic Hungary, I1 pigmentation could have been affected by EEF admixture[/QUOT

perhaps I was not clear enough: I thinK lightER pigmentation occurred in a region BETWEEN NORTH-EAST EUROPE AND THE eastern STEPPES, NOT IN NORTH-EAST EUROPE, not by force...
By the way, the fairest pigmented population are clearly NOT the Slavic nor Baltic ones! (and Estonians aren't baltic) - I cannot link this depigmantation with an unique culture as, say, the Indo-Europeans - and it 's not more linked to Finns or Ugrians - I think in a population speaking a language unkown to me, maybe a mix of western mesolithical H-G-ers (great weight to 'cromagnoids') with more "refined" but yet robust types, around central-northern Russia, having already developped one or more mutated gene IGNORED by today geneticians studies, OR having acquired it there, in East, from ??? I think Indo-Europeans (not all of their tribes but a great number) had a some (LATE?)stage a big proportion of this mix, more on the second element, so they carried this light pigmentation with them but I don't make a principe of a primary all depigmented I-Ean people... No "religion war" with me -
the principal skin depigmentation mutation common among ALL CAUCASIANS (Arabs comprised and N-Indians) cannot explain the today repartition of pigmentation in Europe, and the asiatic one is absent apparentlyin Europe - for i red, the genes of depigmentation beared by neanderthal have not been passed to us - on this last point somebody can correct me if I'm wrong -
&: Tocharians are supposed to be come from a more western place than their remnants say to us.
&: Gutians were said to be "light" that don't tell us HOW MUCH LIGHT they were in fact - Corsicans are not too light but in a very southern country of Arabia they would qualifed by "light" at some degree...
just my point
Click to expand...
 
bicicleur said:
there is a 300 year gap : Leyla Tepe ends 4000 BC, Maykop starts 3700 BC
please explain
Click to expand...
There are no fixed 'exact' dates, only estimates. But Leyla-Tepe and Maykop belong in the same real of transition.


" It has been suggested that the Leyla-Tepe were thefounders of the Maykop culture. An expedition to Syria by the Russian Academy of Sciences revealed thesimilarity of the Maykop and Leyla-Tepe artifacts with those found recentlywhile excavating the ancient city of Tel Khazneh I, from the 4th millennium BC. "

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Leyla-Tepe_culture
 
HARVARD

" On Tuesday, geneticists from Harvard Medical School (HMS) and the Broad Institute of Harvard and MIT highlighted those evolving techniques and talked about recent findings that revealed that a previously unknown group made a major contribution to the gene pool of modern Europeans and Native Americans. They also discussed the result of preliminary investigations that suggest that an ancient civilization located between the Black and Caspian seas may have created a major group of modern languages, spanning English, German, Russian, Urdu, Punjabi, and Hindi. "


http://news.harvard.edu/gazette/story/2014/12/the-surprising-origins-of-europeans/
 
" Genetic evidence ruled out one likely related group inthe region, the Yamnaya, because their DNA showed the group had hunter-gathererancestry, which is inconsistent with the fact that two Indo-European groups,Armenians and Indians, don’t share it, Patterson said. That made Patterson looksouth, to the Maikop civilization, which likely had significant contact withthe Yamnaya, as a plausible culture where Indo-European languages originated.Samples have been obtained from Maikop burial sites, but the DNA work to testthat proposal is pending, Patterson said."
http://news.harvard.edu/gazette/story/2014/12/the-surprising-origins-of-europeans/


Thisis what the senior professors of Harvard are saying! Professors David Reich, Michael McCormick, Francis Goelet, Nick Patterson etc. I'm just a parrot, I'm just repeating and reproducing the knowledge I'm acquiring.
 
Taranis said:
Exactly this. The plethora of non-IE languages (be they Elamite, Hurro-Urartian or Sumerian, they were generally all agglutinative, where PIE was fusional) found in the supposed PIE homeland is one of the main obstacles of that scenario. There's an additional problem with this in the Anatolian languages, the one branch of Indo-European that was present in Anatolia relatively early on: according to one of the current foremost Anatolianists, Craig Melchert, there's not a single example of a loanword from any one of the Near Eastern languages or language families actually reconstructable for Proto-Anatolian, and this would suggest that Proto-Anatolian was actually not originally spoken in Anatolia.

The language families that can reasonably be assumed to have had early contact with Indo-European are Uralic and Kartvelic, and for that, the Pontic-Caspian steppe is the best-working scenario. That model also has the advantage that there's a common Indo-European word for 'wheel' (or 'wheeled vehicle'), reconstructable for PIE, and the wheel was a 'new' technology that is actually tracable via archaeology. The oldest vehicle sites come from more or less simulatenously from Mesopotamia (Uruk, certainly from the clearly non-Indo-European Sumerians), from Central Europe and from the Pontic-Caspian steppe, and certainly not from Anatolia, and certainly not from the Iranian plateau.
Click to expand...

Yes and yes. How can you reconcile all of these things with a Near Eastern homeland?

The sound correspondences of PIE and Uralic are so uniform that Uralic can be used as a proxy for PIE when comparing IE forms. PIE speaking peoples were almost certainly in contact with Uralic speaking peoples by 3000BC, and likely before 5000BC, if not having been unified in PIU, which would of course simplify this whole discussion.

Actually, to me the strongest evidence against a Near Eastern homeland is simple. One of the consequences of accepting any such model requires that the Corded Ware Horizon be dissociated from the indoeuropeanization of Europe. I will go so far as to say that this is impossible.

Also, there is the minor issue of PIE Baltic river names.
 
holderlin said:
Yes and yes. How can you reconcile all of these things with a Near Eastern homeland?

The sound correspondences of PIE and Uralic are so uniform that Uralic can be used as a proxy for PIE when comparing IE forms. PIE speaking peoples were almost certainly in contact with Uralic speaking peoples by 3000BC, and likely before 5000BC, if not having been unified in PIU, which would of course simplify this whole discussion.

Actually, to me the strongest evidence against a Near Eastern homeland is simple. One of the consequences of accepting any such model requires that the Corded Ware Horizon be dissociated from the indoeuropeanization of Europe. I will go so far as to say that this is impossible.

Also, there is the minor issue of PIE Baltic river names.
Click to expand...
LMAO, Uralic? What kind of bullsh*t invention lie is this? There're actually links between Semitic, Caucasian (Kartvelian) and Indo-European languages. Uralic language acquired some loanwords much later from the anciet East Iranian tribes in the Steppes and proto-Balto-Slavic language. With other words, Uralic vocabulary is heavily influenced by early East Iranic tribes and other already formed POST Indo European languages in the Steppes.

Also, Corded Ware Horizon was R1a-Z280 or something like that. NOT R1a folks but the R1b folks caused and were responsible for the Indo Europezation of Europe!
 
Goga said:
Can you collaborate, why absurd? I'm just repeating what other academics and scholars are saying. From most prestigious universities in the world, like Harvard etc. I'm not inventing anything and don't dare to take credits from what other are championing.
Click to expand...

I wouldn't know where to begin.
 
Goga said:
LMAO, Uralic? What kind of bullsh*t invention lie is this? There're actually links between Semitic, Caucasian (Kartvelian) and Indo-European languages. Uralic language acquired some loanwords much later from the anciet East Iranian tribes in the Steppes and proto-Balto-Slavic language. With other words, Uralic vocabulary is heavily influenced by early East Iranic tribes and other already formed POST Indo European languages in the Steppes.

Also, Corded Ware Horizon was R1a-Z280 or something like that. NOT R1a folks but the R1b folks caused and were responsible for the Indo Europezation of Europe!
Click to expand...

I am sorry, but no.
 
Silesian said:
@Goga

Don't waste your time debating with fringe Steppe theories/ and or Eurocentrists. Nick Patterson, the senior computational biologist has already set the stage; further south.
http://news.harvard.edu/gazette/story/2014/12/the-surprising-origins-of-europeans/
Click to expand...
I know. There're 4 categories of people who are denying these facts. First: ethnocentric racist insecure folks in denial full of hatred, be it originally from India or Europe that don't want accept the reality and want to live in their dreamworld. Second: really retard, uneducated ignorant people. Third: people who are losing their reputation or business writers who like to write PIE fairytales for stupid ignorant people, who want to be misled. And those business writers make lots of money by misleding people. Fourth: good, integer, honest people, but who are very confused and who don't know any more what & who to believe!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

This thread has been viewed 157789 times.

Back
Top