World Families Forums - R1 and Proto-Indo-European

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
December 25, 2014, 05:37:35 AM
Home Help Search Login Register

+  World Families Forums
|-+  General Forums - Note: You must Be Logged In to post. Anyone can browse.
| |-+  R1b General (Moderator: rms2)
| | |-+  R1 and Proto-Indo-European
« previous next »
Pages: 1 2 3 [4] Go Down Print
Author Topic: R1 and Proto-Indo-European  (Read 7240 times)
rms2
Board Moderator
Guru
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 5023


« Reply #75 on: May 25, 2012, 09:28:12 PM »


. . .
There is more R1a in Western Europe than R1b in Central Asia . . .

I'm not sure that is true, really.

There isn't that much R1a in western Europe, even after historic influxes of likely R1a-carrying populations, like Huns, Magyars, Vikings and Slavs.

But, you know, your arguments are like a leaky faucet: the same constant dripping noise.

Time to ignore you, at least for me.
« Last Edit: May 25, 2012, 09:28:33 PM by rms2 » Logged

Maliclavelli
Guru
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2158


« Reply #76 on: May 26, 2012, 12:14:56 AM »

Time to ignore you, at least for me.


- MESSAGE DELETED - Terry
« Last Edit: May 28, 2012, 10:52:25 PM by Terry Barton » Logged

Maliclavelli


YDNA: R-S12460


MtDNA: K1a1b1e

Jean M
Guru
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1253


« Reply #77 on: May 26, 2012, 06:12:38 AM »

Not even sure what the Indian subcontinent was brought into this for.

Because there are IE languages there - the Indic branch. The Iranian branch is not the only daughter of Andronovo.

Quote
Not to mention language families like Italo-Celtic and Germanic aren't Eastern European but they aren't Western European either. They are Central and Northern European anyways. Where R1a does exist.

Two misconceptions here.

1. Celtic was once spoken over a very wide area of Europe from Iberia and the British Isles to Central Europe. The old-fashioned idea that they spread from Central Europe in the Iron Age is no longer accepted by experts in the field. They appear to have first spread in the Copper/Bronze Age.   

2. There is R1a1a now in Austria and Germanic-speaking areas of Switzerland. No surprise. But these regions were not Germanic-speaking until after the fall of the Western Roman Empire. There is no indication whatsoever that R1a1a travelled with Proto-Italic-Celtic.

« Last Edit: May 26, 2012, 06:34:55 AM by Jean M » Logged
intrestedinhistory
Old Hand
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 186


« Reply #78 on: May 26, 2012, 08:25:59 AM »


. . .
There is more R1a in Western Europe than R1b in Central Asia . . .

I'm not sure that is true, really.

There isn't that much R1a in western Europe, even after historic influxes of likely R1a-carrying populations, like Huns, Magyars, Vikings and Slavs.

But, you know, your arguments are like a leaky faucet: the same constant dripping noise.

Time to ignore you, at least for me.

There is zero M269 in most parts of Central Asia so yes that is true.  Its your arguments which are based on R1b supremacy and frindge theories which contradict what most people accept  the Kurgan theory and PIE coming from R1a.
Logged
Jean M
Guru
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1253


« Reply #79 on: May 26, 2012, 08:37:06 AM »

Its your arguments which are based on R1b supremacy and fringe theories which contradict what most people accept the Kurgan theory and PIE coming from R1a.

These attacks really are counter-productive. The moderator of this forum is not an R1b supremacist. He simply proposed years ago that R1b was the other half of the Indo-European story. That makes perfect sense. There is a correlation between the distribution of IE languages and these two haplogroups jointly. Neither of these brother haplogroups has "supremacy" whatever that might mean in this context. Neither can explain the full distribution of IE languages by itself.

Claims of R1a "supremacy" (particularly on an R1b forum) are liable to irritate and annoy and produce strong reactions. The temptation to counter-claims must be almost irresistible. If you stop cheer-leading for R1a, I think you will find people perfectly willing to accept R1a and R1b as part of the same story.

It is very sad that there are people who seem to think that there is some sort of competition here to be king of the castle. There is no castle. Indo-European is a language family that has been pretty successful in the long run, but there was nothing special about PIE. Nor were the people who spoke it gods on earth. They were people like other people, but it chanced that they lived in an environment that favoured nomadic pastoralism. They took it up and found eventually that mobility gave them an advantage in difficult times. Lady luck was on their side it seems.
« Last Edit: May 26, 2012, 08:46:07 AM by Jean M » Logged
rms2
Board Moderator
Guru
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 5023


« Reply #80 on: May 26, 2012, 09:08:17 AM »

That is exactly right, Jean.

All the R1b guys I know are perfectly willing to give R1a credit for spreading IE to the east; some even concede that PIE may have originated with R1a (not my position, but I will admit it as a possibility).

Then you have a guy show up here accusing us of being "racist" and "nationalist" simply because we make R1b half of the IE story. Now that is educational for me, since I did not know the two major divisions of R1 actually formed distinct "races" or comprised nations.

For me, there are a lot of problems with all the PIE scenarios. It should be fun to toss them back and forth, but, unfortunately, it's usually not: too much pride involved (and I am not immune from that myself).

Let's face it: the image of hyper-macho "Aryans" galloping across the Russian/Ukrainian steppe, with golden hair streaming in the wind and flashing blue eyes, dominating all the lowly pedestrians in their path, is still with us.

Its "wannabe" allure is nearly equal to that of the Vikings.

Women may have a certain amount of immunity to it, but for us guys, it's powerfully attractive.
Logged

Maliclavelli
Guru
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2158


« Reply #81 on: May 26, 2012, 09:21:09 AM »

These attacks really are counter-productive. The moderator of this forum is not an R1b supremacist. He simply proposed years ago that R1b was the other half of the Indo-European story. That makes perfect sense. There is a correlation between the distribution of IE languages and these two haplogroups jointly. Neither of these brother haplogroups has "supremacy" whatever that might mean in this context. Neither can explain the full distribution of IE languages by itself.

Claims of R1a "supremacy" (particularly on an R1b forum) are liable to irritate and annoy and produce strong reactions. The temptation to counter-claims must be almost irresistible. If you stop cheer-leading for R1a, I think you will find people perfectly willing to accept R1a and R1b as part of the same story.

It is very sad that there are people who seem to think that there is some sort of competition here to be king of the castle. There is no castle. Indo-European is a language family that has been pretty successful in the long run, but there was nothing special about PIE. Nor were the people who spoke it gods on earth. They were people like other people, but it chanced that they lived in an environment that favoured nomadic pastoralism. They took it up and found eventually that mobility gave them an advantage in difficult times. Lady luck was on their side it seems.

 -- MESSAGE DELETED --  Terry
« Last Edit: May 28, 2012, 10:53:03 PM by Terry Barton » Logged

Maliclavelli


YDNA: R-S12460


MtDNA: K1a1b1e

Pages: 1 2 3 [4] Go Up Print 
« previous next »
Jump to:  


SEO light theme by © Mustang forums. Powered by SMF 1.1.13 | SMF © 2006-2011, Simple Machines LLC

Page created in 0.098 seconds with 19 queries.