I2a-Din distribution among East Slavs

[Tomenable]

No, there was NEVER a Semitic civilization in Kurdistan/Zagros Mountains and the Iranian Plateau in the ancient times. Akkadians/Assyrians NEVER ruled Kurdish mountains, NorthWest Iran(ian Planteau) and Southern parts of the Caspian Sea. What are you talking about? Sumerians, proto-Iranians have alwasy been living in those parts of the world without new migrations in that area.

^ This is all wrong and not true. You are blinded by some sort of chauvinistic nationalism.

In some way I understand this because Kurds have hard time now, under pressure of ISIS and without their own state.

But history is history. If you want independence then better use AK-47, not history books.

 

[Goga]

And who is claiming otherwise? It is mostly you who is claiming some sort of superiority and also unbroken continuity since Sumeri. There were also high advanced cultures in Europe - such as the Cucuteni-Trypillian or the the Vinca culture - which were Non-Indo-European. If you read Marija Gimbutas then she actually claimed that Neolithic cultures in Europe were in many ways more advanced than Indo-Europeans. But they were less patriarchal and less militaristic, which is why Indo-European cultures managed to conquer them.

All what I'm trying to say is that Sumerians who stayed in the Zagros Mountains and northern Mesopotamia evolved into proto-Iranic people (Mitanni/Kassites) and that proto Iranic people are from nowhere and are just natives of West Asia.

And here you see the differences. Indo-Europized Indo-Europeans are descedants of the Cucuteni-Trypillian, Vinca culture etc. folks.


While proto-Iranic peoples (Kassites/Mitanni) are (maybe partly?) descedants of the Sumerians, look at the linguistic (ergativity), theological (SKY gods) and cultural (human value and laws) connections. Sumerians were the cradle of human civilization and were the VERY first Aryans!

 

[Goga]

^ This is all wrong and not true. You are blinded by some sort of chauvinistic nationalism.

In some way I understand this because Kurds have hard time now, under pressure of ISIS and without their own state.

But history is history. If you want independence then better use AK-47, not history books.

Lol, it has nothing to do with the situation of my people. Facts are facts! Ancient Afro-Asiatic Semites from Levant, Africa and Arab Desert (Akkadians/Assyrians) NEVER invaded and ruled the Zagros Mountains and NorthWestern Parts (Southwest of the Caspian Sea) of the Iranian Plateau. Semites are desert people, not the mountain people. The original and native land of the Sumerians, Mitanni, Kassites, Medes was NEVER invaded by the Semitic tribes. Once again, what the f*** are you talking about?

Proto-Iranic race was born in the same mountains where the Sumerians came from and have been living until they disappeared, and right after the Sumerians were gone in their mountains proto-iranic people like the Kassites and Mitanni were born.

 

[Fire Haired14]

The Medes were Indo-European, more precisely Indo-Iranian (a non-scientific name for them is Aryans indeed).

But the Sumerians - as I wrote before - were not, and all those Semitic civilizations like Assyria and Babilon were not.

Indo-Europeans came to the Middle East later, often conquering and dominating previous Semitic civilizations.

The Indus Valley civilization was also not Indo-European. It was most likely Dravidian. Indo-Aryans (the branch of Indo-Iranians that migrated to India) conquered remnants of that civilization (it had declined already before the Aryan invasion).

As for Dravidians - there is a theory that Dravidian language was brought to India by the Elamites (the Elamo-Dravidian hypothesis).

Elamo-Dravidian is a proposed language family. But this Elamite-Dravidian connection is often disputed.

Anyway, the "most indigenous" people of India were Negrito foragers. All other groups probably came later as invaders.

Negritos were the first group of modern humans in India: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peopling_of_India#The_Negrito_migrations

After Negritos probably came Australoids. Only later various Caucasoid and other (mixed, Mongoloid, etc.) groups.

The classifications "Negritos" and "Australoids" are based on physical appearance, not DNA. The "Negriots" and "Australoids" of Eurasia are from the same stock as all Eurasians not Africans, and share some-type of extra ancestry with East Asians which they don't share with West Eurasians. They're not even very close to each other. For example Papuans and Onge, who both have the "Negriod" look, are only a little more related to each other than to East Asians. So, when talking about India we need to be more specific than "Negrit", because they're not all the same.

Modern South Asians who look very Middle-Eastern, actually have a lot of Onge-like ancestry. If Onge-type people were there first, they didn't die out. I've heard South Asians are a mix of West Eurasian-type ancestors called ANI(Ancestral North Indian) and Onge-type ancestors(Ancestral South Indian).

We shouldn't call migrations in Pre-History "Invasions" but instead "immigration". We don't know exactly how new-blood came into regions with native pops, because we don't have time-machines. The whole narrative some people play with the history African-looking people in Eurasia is raciest. They're not anymore original to Eurasia as anyone else, and they weren't "invaded" in a European-colonization-style like some people imagine by West Eurasians.

 

[Goga]

Lol, it has nothing to do with the situation of my people. Facts are facts! Ancient Afro-Asiatic Semites from Levant, Africa and Arab Desert (Akkadians/Assyrians) NEVER invaded and ruled the Zagros Mountains and NorthWestern Parts (Southwest of the Caspian Sea) of the Iranian Plateau. Semites are desert people, not the mountain people. The original and native land of the Sumerians, Mitanni, Kassites, Medes was NEVER invaded by the Semitic tribes. Once again, what the f*** are you talking about?

Proto-Iranic race was born in the same mountains where the Sumerians came from and have been living until they disappeared, and right after the Sumerians were gone in their mountains proto-iranic people like the Kassites and Mitanni were born.

+ It's very retard to believe that some very few proto-Balto-Slavonic primitive cannibals (Androphagi, according to Herodotus) who 'just existed' from NorthEastern Europe came to West Asia and BMAC and were responsible for the high advanced Sumerian, Mitanni, Medo-Persian, BMAC (Aryans of CentralSouth Asia who invaded India) and Indus Valley Civilizations.

Well, I'm going to tell you a secret. All those so called Aryan (Mitanni/Kassites, Medo-Persian & BMAC) civilizations were built on and were a continuation of the Sumerian civilization. We have got mythology (Iranic vs. Sumerian), culture (archeology, pottery, laws & values) and language (ergativity in proto-Iranic, Avestan and Sumerian) and even genetics (J2a, G2a etc. haplogroups and auDNA) as evidence..

 

[Fire Haired14]

+ It's very retard to believe that some very few proto-Balto-Slavonic primitive cannibals (Androphagi, according to Herodotus) who 'just existed' from NorthEastern Europe came to West Asia and BMAC and were responsible for the high advanced Sumerian, Mitanni, Medo-Persian, BMAC (Aryans of CentralSouth Asia who invaded India) and Indus Valley Civilizations.

We don't know what language those people spoke. They could have been Finno-Urgic. And no one said they went to West Asia. People say a common ancestor, went to Europe and West Asia, and is a source of IE languages in both regions.

A nation of stone-age people can turn into an advanced civilization in a few generations, if they were influenced enough by advanced foreigners. Culture can radically change in one generation. Indo-Iranian speakers having advanced civilizations in 1000BC or whatever doesn't mean, the first Indo Iranians were that advanced.

 

[gyms]

This thread is about I2a-Din distribution among East Slavs!

 

[Милан М.]

And who is claiming otherwise? It is mostly you who is claiming some sort of superiority and also unbroken continuity since Sumeri. There were also high advanced cultures in Europe - such as the Cucuteni-Trypillian or the the Vinca culture - which were Non-Indo-European. If you read Marija Gimbutas then she actually claimed that Neolithic cultures in Europe were in many ways more advanced than Indo-Europeans. But they were less patriarchal and less militaristic, which is why Indo-European cultures managed to conquer them.

Actualy in Vinca culture(Old Europe) has been found the oldest script in the world that predate even the Egyptian hieroglyphs,Marija Gimbutas point out some military conquest which is rejected today,people of those cultures were exchanging things,at the end how Cucuteni Tripolye emerge,early speakers of Balto-Slavic (Thracians,Dacians) which later developed in this modern languages,otherwise where the second most numerous people in the world after the Indians according to Herodotus have vanished,it was hybrid from old Europe and the Kurgans,however i don't support the Kurgan hypothesis of Indo-European languages,if they have come with R1a people they come trough Anatolia like Klyosov explain trough in the second Urheimat(Old Europe) then settled in the Kurgans,Balkans are the most diverse in R1a and with the Danube basin is a key for Slavic origin,however Kurgans had no agriculture yet they are part of Indo-European vocabulary.

 

[Maleth]

Actualy in Vinca culture(Old Europe) has been found the oldest script in the world that predate even the Egyptian hieroglyphs,

If not mistaken Vinca symbols cannot be classified as script as they do not form sentences to explain a particular event or name. I believe even the symbols themselves are not very clear to what they represent. They would be some form of proto writing symbols. (some symbols were also found in China in the same millenium), but never developed into full script or writing.

However the Vinca culture is very fascinating in itself and probably there will be much more we would learn about it.

 

[Милан М.]

If not mistaken Vinca symbols cannot be classified as script as they do not form sentences to explain a particular event or name. I believe even the symbols themselves are not very clear to what they represent. They would be some form of proto writing symbols. (some symbols were also found in China in the same millenium), but never developed into full script or writing.

However the Vinca culture is very fascinating in itself and probably there will be much more we would learn about it.

Is the Danube Valley Civilization script the oldest writing in the world?

The Danube Valley civilization is one of the oldest civilizations known in Europe. It existed from between 5,500 and 3,500 BC in the Balkans and covered a vast area, in what is now Northern Greece to Slovakia (South to North), and Croatia,Serbia to Romania (West to East).
During the height of the Danube Valley civilization, it played an important role in south-eastern Europe through the development of copper tools, a writing system, advanced architecture, including two storey houses, and the construction of furniture, such as chairs and tables, all of which occurred while most of Europe was in the middle of the Stone Age. They developed skills such as spinning, weaving, leather processing, clothes manufacturing, and manipulated wood, clay and stone and they invented the wheel. They had an economic, religious and social structure.
One of the more intriguing and hotly debated aspects of the Danube Valley civilization is their supposed written language. While some archaeologists have maintained that the ‘writing’ is actually just a series of geometric figures and symbols, others have maintained that it has the features of a true writing system. If this theory is correct, it would make the script the oldest written language ever found, predating the Sumerian writings in Mesopotamia, and possibly even the Dispilio Tablet, which has been dated 5260 BC.

Danube Valley Civilization Artifacts (image source)​

Harald Haarmann, a German linguistic and cultural scientist, currently vice-president of the Institute of Archaeomythology, and leading specialist in ancient scripts and ancient languages, firmly supports the view that the Danube script is the oldest writing in the world. The tablets that were found are dated to 5,500 BC, and the glyphs on the tablets, according to Haarmann, are a form of language yet to be deciphered. The symbols, which are also called Vinca symbols, have been found in multiple archaeological sites throughout the Danube Valley areas, inscribed on pottery, figurines, spindles and other clay artifacts.

The Vinca Symbols (Source: Wikipedia)​

The implications are huge. It could mean that the Danube Valley Civilization predates all other known civilizations today. Evidence also comes from thousands of artifacts that have been found, such as the odd-looking figure displayed on the left. However, the majority of Mesopotamian scholars reject Haarmann’s proposal, suggesting that the symbols on the tablets are just decoration. This is despite the fact that there are approximately 700 different characters, around the same number of symbols used in Egyptian hieroglyphs. Other scholars even suggested that the Danube Civilization must have copied signs and symbols from the Mesopotamian civilizations, despite the fact that some of the Danube tablets have been found to be older that the Mesopotamian ones.
It appears that this is another case of a theory based on solid research being outright rejected without appropriate consideration. Could this be because it conflicts with the accepted view of which nation holds claim to the ‘first civilization’? At the very least, Haarmann’s proposal deserves further research and serious analysis in order to confirm whether this is indeed the oldest known written language in the world.






Read more: http://www.ancient-origins.net/anci...ipt-oldest-writing-world-001343#ixzz3btStuumG
Follow us: @ancientorigins on Twitter | ancientoriginsweb on Facebook

 

[Maleth]

They should decode them probably and maybe should change the mainstream in Europe that's a problem,history is a bit connected to Nationalism sad but true.

I agree that, that is how things start off especially with new findings and discoveries with an inclination for nationalistic agendas to be put forward with amount of zest and energy. However luckily a group genuine historians, linguists and archaeologists will put the puzzle together and prevail with solid proof and logic arguments. It always need to take its course.

 

[Sile]

No, there was NEVER a Semitic civilization in Kurdistan/Zagros Mountains and the Iranian Plateau in the ancient times. Akkadians/Assyrians NEVER ruled Kurdish mountains, NorthWest Iran(ian Planteau) and Southern parts of the Caspian Sea. What are you talking about? Sumerians, proto-Iranians have alwasy been living in those parts of the world without new migrations in that area. Semites hate mountains and love desert...

agree, no semetic in kurdish areas

 

[Tomenable]

Goga,

Asia Minor - including Kurdistan/Zagros Mountains - was then inhabited by speakers of Non-Indo-European languages.

Those Non-Indo-European peoples were the same group of peoples who also expanded into Europe as Neolithic farmers.

They spoke languages related to languages of the Caucasus. Such as for example the Hurro-Urartian language family:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hurro-Urartian_languages

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alarodian_languages

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hattians

This extended family also includes the Ibero-Caucasian languages:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ibero-Caucasian_languages

==========================================

The Iranian Plateau was also inhabited by Non-Indo-Europeans before the Aryans came.

Those people were the Elamites, who spoke a Non-IE Elamite language:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elam

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elamite_language

Elamite language was related to Dravidian language, spoken in India (including the Indus Valley Civilization):

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elamo-Dravidian_languages

Sumerian language could be related to Elamo-Dravidian or/and to Alarodian.

All of those were Non-Aryan languages.

 

[Tomenable]

and even genetics (J2a, G2a etc. haplogroups and auDNA) as evidence..

G (including G2a), E1b, T1, H2, J (including J2) were haplogroups which came to Europe from the Near East with first Neolithic farmers. And those Neolithic farmers did not speak Indo-European languages. They spoke Non-IE languages related to those mentioned above.

So your hypothesis is incorrect.

 

[Tomenable]

We don't know what language those people spoke. They could have been Finno-Urgic.

If we believe Herodotus then the Androphagi and the Budini were some remnant groups of hunter-gatherers.

I'm not sure about the Androphagi (what did Herodotus write about them?), but I remember that he described the Budini as foragers.

So they probably spoke some sort of Old European. Or they could be those Finno-Ugrians who still had not switched to farming.

Similar remnant groups of hunter-gatherers still exist in Asia and South-East Asia today:

http://s14.postimg.org/flkh0bstt/Modern_HGs.png

For example the Paliyans in India, as well a some other Adivasi:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adivasi

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paliyan

They are traditional nomadic hunter-gatherers, honey hunters and foragers. Yams are their major food source. In the early part of the 20th century the Paliyans dressed scantily and lived in rock crevices and caves. Most have now have transformed to traders of forest products, food cultivators and beekeepers. Some work intermittently as wage laborers, mostly on plantations. They are included in the List of Scheduled Tribes in India.

The Paliyans today speak Dravidian - but this wasn't their original language, they probably adopted this language from Dravidians.

Just like Mbuti Pygmies adopted Bantu and Sudanid languages. By contrast Biaka Pygmies still speak the original Pygmy language:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aka_people

Unlike the Mbuti pygmies of the eastern Congo (who speak only the language of the tribes with whom they are affiliated), the Aka speak their own language along with whichever of the approximately 15 Bantu peoples they are affiliated.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mbuti_people

Their languages are Central Sudanic languages (a family of the Nilo-Saharan phylum) and Bantu languages.

 

[Милан М.]

Goga,

Asia Minor - including Kurdistan/Zagros Mountains - was then inhabited by speakers of Non-Indo-European languages.

Those Non-Indo-European peoples were the same group of peoples who also expanded into Europe as Neolithic farmers.

They spoke languages related to languages of the Caucasus. Such as for example the Hurro-Urartian language family:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hurro-Urartian_languages

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alarodian_languages

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hattians

This extended family also includes the Ibero-Caucasian languages:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ibero-Caucasian_languages

==========================================

The Iranian Plateau was also inhabited by Non-Indo-Europeans before the Aryans came.

Those people were the Elamites, who spoke a Non-IE Elamite language:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elam

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elamite_language

Elamite language was related to Dravidian language, spoken in India (including the Indus Valley Civilization):

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elamo-Dravidian_languages

Sumerian language could be related to Elamo-Dravidian or/and to Alarodian.

All of those were Non-Aryan languages.

What about the Hittite,first attested Indo-European language in Anatolia,who were they?

 

[Tomenable]

The Hittites were speakers of the so-called Anatolian branch of Indo-European languages, which is today extinct:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anatolian_languages

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Proto-Anatolian_language

The Hittites conquered the local Hurrians (part of Hurro-Urartic speakers), and formed the Hittite Empire in Anatolia:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hurrians

The Mitanni were most probably also Indo-European speakers, who had conquered the Hurrians before.

But Non-Indo-European Hurrian language continued to be spoken by the majority of population in the Mitanni Kingdom.

 

[Tomenable]

Proto-Anatolian and Proto-Tocharian were probably the oldest identifiable branches which split from the Proto-Indo-European continuum:

Indo-Iranian was rather more closely related to Tocharian than to Anatolian. So Indo-Iranians (such as Kurds) came to Asia Minor later:

http://www.eupedia.com/forum/thread...Y-DNA-landscape-of-Europe?p=458429#post458429

Anyway, the Indo-Iranian branch is younger than the Anatolian branch.

And Anatolian-speakers came to Asia Minor first, Indo-Iranian speakers much later. Today Anatolian branch of IE languages is extinct.

 

[Tomenable]

^ That the language is extinct doesn't mean that all those people were exterminated, or something.

But denying new migration waves to the region, of people who brought in new languages, is simply chauvinism.

It was simply a melting pot of many ethnic groups and new immigrants were bringing in new elements.

 

[Милан М.]

^ That the language is extinct doesn't mean that all those people were exterminated, or something.

But denying new migration waves to the region, of people who brought in new languages, is simply chauvinism.

It was simply a melting pot of many ethnic groups and new immigrants were bringing in new elements.

I guess most probably was replaced by some other IE,which migrations i am denying,from what time?