I2+R1a+R1b Contact Area = PIE Urheimat

[AlexImreh]

Thank you Angela I am trying to learn, and in the meantime I play with ideas .. Nobody said here that the "Indo-Europeans" are equivalent to the people of Cucuteni Tripolite. It is however, logically hard for me to understand, why should G matter more than I2 in the making of the indo-europeans, when present day G is so low compared to present day I2, in all indo-european populations. My logic is bound with the following connections:
1] I like to believe, accordingly to the Alinei continuity theory, that there was a strong continuity over the last 8000 years, that populations changed slowly in all this time, that populations did not disapeared over and over again.
2] Each migration meant a relatively small number of people coming to an area where they found much larger populations, the newcomers maybe had more influence at certain times because they were more advanced technologically or more potent military, but than in most cases the migrants were largely absorbed by the main substratum; we can see that situation in Pannonia, present day Hungary - where after many big empires built by very different populations, we still have a present day haplo-mixture very similar with Latin Romania, with 'Slav' Serbia, and 'German' Austria, with practically little Y-DNA left after the military dominance of Huns, Mongols, Avars, Sarmatians, Goths, asian Magyars and so on
3] maybe samples taken from a few elites can not reflect the overall ''textures'', certain fertile river basins were occupied by strong migrants, pushed away by other stronger migrants, they all left settlements from where we take now samples, but around them there was all this time a numerous populations not so developed maybe, with traces less visible in today archeology
4] I think that the lower Danube area had the biggest population density for a long time, a large population which the migrants were not able to displace, R1a and R1b were more succesful in ares less populated.
5] Again present day Vinca, and Cucuteni areas have a lot of I2, Cucuteni was largely started by Vinca people, am I wrong if I pressume that present day I2 is linked with I2 haplo from Cucuteni and Vinca period? I make most of my deductions based on the Eupedia site which states the link between I2 and Cucuteni. For more than 1000 years, maybe for 2000 years the Cucuteni culture extended to east, traded with people from east, they mixed a lot for sure in all this time, the Cucuteni area covered all the kurgan Uhrheimat from Dniester to Don even beyond, to Volga. In all this time R1b coming from south mixed with R1a coming from north and I2 coming from west in the area between Dnienster, Don and the forest steppes.
6] Also there is a lot of 'historical gossip' about the link between the Getes (living in Dacia and Thracia) and the MassaGetes from the Oxus/Caspian area, leaving room to a possible relation with present day Jats from India who could be followers of the first Indo-Europeans in India. The link between ThracoGetes and MassaGetes is through Scytian area, it was a large indo-euroepan continuum until the arrival of the Turcic populations. Also there are quite a few historians saying that Getes and Goths are almost same thing.
7] The Celts and the Goths, conquered Western Europe having as turntable, departure area, present day Romania which I presume to be an I2 area in the past, even more than today.
8]Finally there is the issue of the Romanian language, I strongly believe that Romanization after the Roman conquest is bullshit, that Dacians already spoke a latin language before the roman conquest. That is a subject more difficult to discuss here with people who do not know the language, and here is after all a forum for genetics not for lingvistic studies.
Yes we will have more and more samples to tell us the truth, in the meantime I am just noticing all these connections.
I am apologize if I was too long, if I said anything stupid, brain storming can be useful sometimes, I am trying to learn ..

 

[Taranis]

About the Vinca simbols:

The Vinca symbols orginate from the gravettian symbols.

Upper Paleolithic writing recovered from Magdalenian cave sites (top) compared to characters in three early written languages: (b) Indus valley signs, (c) Greek and (d) Runic. Settegast (p. 28) after Forbes and Crowder, 1979. - See more at:

This is also a proof that the mesolithic culture of the balkane influenced the neoilthic ones.

You're aware that there's both thousands of years and thousands of kilometers between the scripts?

Also "early"? The Runic alphabet, and Greek? Mind you, neither the Greek nor the Runic scripts are "ancient". By the time that the Germanic peoples became literate, people in Mesopotamia were already literate for some 2500 years. Likewise, the Greek alphabet is an adaptation from the earlier, Phoenician alphabet. I might add that you are, however, correct on one thing: the Greek and the Runic alphabet actually are related, just not in the way depicted in that picture.

With regard for the Greek alphabet, that image is clearly deceptive because it shows (apparently cherry-picked) different variants of the same letter, for example third and four letter from the left are both variants of the letter Eta (Η or η).

Also, some of the shapes are so simple (an "X" for example) that they are invariably likely to come up in different, unrelated scripts.

 

[srbo]

You're aware that there's both thousands of years and thousands of kilometers between the scripts?

Also "early"? The Runic alphabet, and Greek? Mind you, neither the Greek nor the Runic scripts are "ancient". By the time that the Germanic peoples became literate, people in Mesopotamia were already literate for some 2500 years. Likewise, the Greek alphabet is an adaptation from the earlier, Phoenician alphabet. I might add that you are, however, correct on one thing: the Greek and the Runic alphabet actually are related, just not in the way depicted in that picture.

With regard for the Greek alphabet, that image is clearly deceptive because it shows (apparently cherry-picked) different variants of the same letter, for example third and four letter from the left are both variants of the letter Eta (Η or η).

Also, some of the shapes are so simple (an "X" for example) that they are invariably likely to come up in different, unrelated scripts.

Sure iam aware of this. The point is that i wanted to show that many of the vinca symbols orginated directly from gravettian symbols. these symbols were spreaded around euroasia. the most famous of these symbols is the swastika which was a part of the "gravettian horizon".

Iam not saying that the old european symbols were a real script, but its a fact that after the collapse of these cultures the spread of their technological achievements begun.
You are talking about the Greek alphabet which was indeed a adaption of the eraly Phonecian alphabet. The funny thing ist that archeologist found a tablet in greece with vinca symbols which was written written in some kind of linear style.

Back in 1993, in a Neolithic lakeshore settlement that occupied an artificial island near the modern village of Dispilio on Lake Kastoria in the Kastoria Prefecture, professor George Hourmouziadis and his team unearthed the Dispilio Tablet (also known as the Dispilio Scripture or the Dispilio Disk), a wooden tablet bearing inscribed markings (charagmata) that has been carbon 14-dated to about 7300 BP (5260 BC).

Another interesting thing is the earliest evidence of writting in aegypt and mesopotamia. Researcher are still arguing in which of these cultures the script evolved.
The older evidence of this kind of pictogram writing can be found in the area of the cucuteni trypillian culture. this findings are 2000 years older that the one in aegypt or mesopotamia.
But thats not all.
Researcher found an Temple in the area of the cucuteni trypillian which is older then 6000 year. If it should turn out that this temple is older that the temples in mesopotamia and aegypt we should to reappraise the prehistorical history. Iam also very interested if there is any Old Europoean influence in the Uruk Time of Mesopotamia.

 

[srbo]

You're aware that there's both thousands of years and thousands of kilometers between the scripts?


Also "early"? The Runic alphabet, and Greek? Mind you, neither the Greek nor the Runic scripts are "ancient". By the time that the Germanic peoples became literate, people in Mesopotamia were already literate for some 2500 years. Likewise, the Greek alphabet is an adaptation from the earlier, Phoenician alphabet. I might add that you are, however, correct on one thing: the Greek and the Runic alphabet actually are related, just not in the way depicted in that picture.


With regard for the Greek alphabet, that image is clearly deceptive because it shows (apparently cherry-picked) different variants of the same letter, for example third and four letter from the left are both variants of the letter Eta (Η or η).


Also, some of the shapes are so simple (an "X" for example) that they are invariably likely to come up in different, unrelated scripts.

Sure iam aware of this. The point is that i wanted to show that many of the vinca symbols orginated directly from gravettian symbols. these symbols were spreaded around euroasia. the most famous of these symbols is the swastika which was a part of the "gravettian horizon".


Iam not saying that the old european symbols were a real script, but its a fact that after the collapse of these cultures the spread of their technological achievements begun.
You are talking about the Greek alphabet which was indeed a adaption of the eraly Phonecian alphabet. The funny thing ist that archeologist found a tablet in greece with vinca symbols which was written written in some kind of linear style.


Back in 1993, in a Neolithic lakeshore settlement that occupied an artificial island near the modern village of Dispilio on Lake Kastoria in the Kastoria Prefecture, professor George Hourmouziadis and his team unearthed the Dispilio Tablet (also known as the Dispilio Scripture or the Dispilio Disk), a wooden tablet bearing inscribed markings (charagmata) that has been carbon 14-dated to about 7300 BP (5260 BC).

Another interesting thing is the earliest evidence of writting in aegypt and mesopotamia. Researcher are still arguing in which of these cultures the first script evolved.
The older evidence of this kind of pictogram writing can be found in the area of the cucuteni trypillian culture. this findings are 2000 years older that the one in aegypt or mesopotamia.
But thats not all.
Researcher found an Temple in the area of the cucuteni trypillian which is older then 6000 year.
http://www.ukraine-kiev-tour.com/nebelivka-tripolian-settlement-temple-age-6000-years.html

If it should turn out that this temple is older that the temples in mesopotamia and aegypt we should to reappraise the prehistorical history. Iam also very interested if there is any Old Europoean influence in the Uruk Time of Mesopotamia. It seems there is:

From Wiki:

Nebelivka, or Nebelovka, in Ukraine, is the site of an ancient mega-settlement dating to 4000 B.C. belonging to theCucuteni-Trypillian culture. The settlement was for the time huge, covering an area of 260-300 hectares and home to perhaps 17,000 people.^[1] The settlement within the boundary ditch includes over 1200 structures. Research from 2012 to 2014 imply "the possibility of state-level societies", contemporary with similar developments in Uruk. Mega-structures "suggest the presence of public buildings for meetings or ceremonies".^[2][3]

 

[AlexImreh]

Using data from over 150 languages, linguists at the University of California, Berkeley provide evidence that this ancestor language originated 5,500 – 6,500 years ago, on the Pontic-Caspian steppe stretching from Moldova and Ukraine to Russia and western Kazakhstan.
“Ancestry-constrained phylogenetic analysis supports the Indo-European steppe hypothesis“, by Will Chang, Chundra Cathcart, David Hall and Andrew Garrett, will appear in the March issue of the academic journal Language. A pre-print version of the article is freely available from the Linguistic Society of America, the publishers of Language:http://www.linguisticsociety.org/files/news/ChangEtAlPreprint.pdf
This article provides new support for the “steppe hypothesis” or “Kurgan hypothesis”, which proposes that Indo-European languages first spread with cultural developments in animal husbandry around 4500 – 3500 BCE. (An alternate theory proposes that they diffused much earlier, around 7500 – 6000 BCE, in Anatolia in modern-day Turkey.)
Chang et al. examined over 200 sets of words from living and dead Indo-European languages; after determining how quickly these words changed over time through statistical modelling, they concluded that the rate of change indicated that the languages which first used these words began to diverge approximately 6,500 years ago, in accordance with the steppe hypothesis.
This is one of the first quantitatively-based academic papers in support of the steppe hypothesis, and the first to use a model with “ancestry constraints” which more directly incorporate previously discovered relationships between languages. In future research, methods from this study could be used to study the origins of other language families, such as Afro-Asiatic and Sino-Tibetan.
http://www.pasthorizonspr.com/index...st-emerged-circa-6500-years-ago-on-the-steppe

 

[gyms]

About the Vinca simbols:

The Vinca symbols orginate from the gravettian symbols.

Upper Paleolithic writing recovered from Magdalenian cave sites (top) compared to characters in three early written languages: (b) Indus valley signs, (c) Greek and (d) Runic. Settegast (p. 28) after Forbes and Crowder, 1979. - See more at: http://dnaconsultants.com/_blog/DNA...istorian_and_Geneticist/#sthash.9228REdY.dpuf

This is also a proof that the mesolithic culture of the balkane influenced the neoilthic ones.

[h=2]Székely-Hungarian Rovás[/h]

[h=3]Numerals[/h]

[h=2]Sample texts[/h]

​

 

[AlexImreh]

The introduction of farming has often been described as the pivotal event in European prehistory. The new study, published Monday in the journal Nature, suggests that instead of one mass migration of farmers, as long thought, there were two: first an influx from Anatolia, a region of today's Turkey, and then a second wave of people moving into central Europe from the steppes of modern-day Russia, four millennia later, who would have brought with them the Indo-European languages that became English and many other modern European languages. http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2015/03/150303-human-dna-europe-language-archaeology/?utm_source=Facebook&utm_medium=Social&utm_content=link_fb20150303news-humanseurope&utm_campaign=Content&sf7780538=1

Massive migration from the steppe is a source for Indo-European languages in Europe. We generated genome-wide data from 69 Europeans who lived between 8,000-3,000 years ago by enriching ancient DNA libraries for a target set of almost four hundred thousand polymorphisms. Enrichment of these positions decreases the sequencing required for genome-wide ancient DNA analysis by a median of around 250-fold, allowing us to study an order of magnitude more individuals than previous studies and to obtain new insights about the past. We show that the populations of western and far eastern Europe followed opposite trajectories between 8,000-5,000 years ago. At the beginning of the Neolithic period in Europe, ~8,000-7,000 years ago, closely related groups of early farmers appeared in Germany, Hungary, and Spain, different from indigenous hunter-gatherers, whereas Russia was inhabited by a distinctive population of hunter-gatherers with high affinity to a ~24,000 year old Siberian6. By ~6,000-5,000 years ago, a resurgence of hunter-gatherer ancestry had occurred throughout much of Europe, but in Russia, the Yamnaya steppe herders of this time were descended not only from the preceding eastern European hunter-gatherers, but from a population of Near Eastern ancestry. Western and Eastern Europe came into contact ~4,500 years ago, as the Late Neolithic Corded Ware people from Germany traced ~3/4 of their ancestry to the Yamnaya, documenting a massive migration into the heartland of Europe from its eastern periphery. This steppe ancestry persisted in all sampled central Europeans until at least ~3,000 years ago, and is ubiquitous in present-day Europeans. These results provide support for the theory of a steppe origin of at least some of the Indo-European languages of Europe.http://biorxiv.org/content/early/2015/02/10/013433