Who are the Indo-Europeans? Historical roots, settlement. Ancient Indo-Europeans - who are they?

07.04.2019

Where did the Slavs and “Indo-Europeans” come from? DNA genealogy provides the answer. Part 1

Make yourself comfortable dear reader. Some shocks await you. It’s not very easy to start a story with what the author expects from his research into the effect of a bomb exploding, but what to do if this happens?

But, in fact, why such confidence? Nowadays, nothing can surprise you anymore, right?

Yes, that's how it is. But when the issue is at least three hundred years old, and the conviction has gradually formed that the issue has no solution, at least by “available means,” and suddenly a solution is found, then this, you see, is not such a common occurrence. And this question is "The Origin of the Slavs". Or - “The origin of the original Slavic community.” Or, if you prefer, “The search for the Indo-European ancestral home.”

In fact, over these three hundred years, all sorts of assumptions have been made on this matter. Probably everything that is possible. The problem is that no one knew which ones were correct. The question was extremely confusing.

Therefore, the author will not be surprised if, in response to his findings and conclusions, a chorus of voices is heard - “that’s how it was known,” “they wrote about this before.” This is human nature. And ask this choir now - well, where is the ancestral home of the Slavs? Where is the ancestral home of the “Indo-Europeans”? Where did they come from? So there will no longer be a chorus, but a discord - “the question is complex and confusing, there is no answer.”

But first, a few definitions to make it clear what we are talking about.

Definitions and explanations. Background

Under Slavs in the context of their origin I will mean pre-Slavs. And, as will be clear from the subsequent presentation, this context is inextricably linked with the “Indo-Europeans”. The latter is a terribly awkward term. The word “Indo-Europeans” is just a mockery over common sense.

In fact, there is an “Indo-European group of languages”, and the history of this issue is such that two centuries ago certain similarities were discovered between Sanskrit and many European languages. This group of languages was called “Indo-European”; it includes almost all European languages, except Basque, Finno-Ugric and Turkic languages. Then they didn’t know the reasons why India and Europe suddenly found themselves in the same language bundle, and even now they don’t really know. This will also be discussed below, and it would not have happened without the Proto-Slavs.

But the absurdities began to develop when the speakers of “Indo-European languages” themselves began to be called “Indo-Europeans”. That is, a Latvian and a Lithuanian are Indo-Europeans, but an Estonian is not. And the Hungarian is not Indo-European. A Russian living in Finland and speaking Finnish is not an Indo-European, but when he switches to Russian, he immediately becomes an Indo-European.

In other words, linguistic, the linguistic category was moved to ethnic, even essentially genealogical. Apparently they thought that best choice No. It might not have been then. Now there is. Although, strictly speaking, these are linguistic terms, and when linguists say one thing, they mean another, and others get confused.

There is no less confusion when we return to ancient times. Who are they "Indo-Europeans"? These are those who in ancient times spoke “Indo-European” languages. And even earlier, who were they? And they were - "proto-Indo-Europeans". This term is even more unfortunate, and is akin to calling the ancient Anglo-Saxons “proto-Americans.” They have never even seen India, and that language has not yet been formed; only after thousands of years will it be transformed and join the Indo-European group, and they are already “Proto-Indo-Europeans”.

It’s like calling Prince Vladimir “proto-Soviet.” Although "indo-"- this too linguistic term, and philologists have no direct connection with India.

On the other hand, you can understand and sympathize. Well, there was no other term for “Indo-Europeans”. There was no name for the people who in those distant times formed cultural connection with India, and expanded this cultural, and in any case linguistic connection throughout Europe.

Wait a minute, how did this not happen? A arias?

But more on this a little later.

More about terms. For some reason, it is acceptable to talk about the ancient Germans or Scandinavians, but not about the ancient Slavs. It immediately rings out - no, no, there were no ancient Slavs. Although it should be clear to everyone that we are talking about Proto-Slavs. What kind of double standard is this? Let's agree - when speaking about the Slavs, I do not mean the modern “ethno-cultural community”, but our ancestors who lived millennia ago.

Should they have some kind of name? Not awkward “proto-Indo-Europeans”? And not “Indo-Iranians”, right? Let there be Slavs pre-Slavs. AND arias, but more on that later.

Now – which Slavs are we talking about? Traditionally, the Slavs are divided into three groups - Eastern, Western and Southern Slavs. Eastern Slavs e – these are Russians, Ukrainians, Belarusians. Western Slavs - Poles, Czechs, Slovaks. Southern Slavs- these are Serbs, Croats, Bosnians, Macedonians, Bulgarians, Slovenians. This is not an exhaustive list, you can remember the Sorbs (Lusatian Slavs), and others, but the idea is clear. Actually, this division is largely based on linguistic criteria according to which the Slavic group of Indo-European languages consists of eastern, western and southern subgroups, with approximately the same division by country.

In this context, the Slavs are “ethno-cultural communities,” which includes languages. In this form, they are believed to have formed by the 6-7 centuries AD. AND Slavic languages, according to linguists, diverged about 1,300 years ago, again around the 7th century. But genealogically The listed Slavs belong to completely different clans, and the history of these clans is completely different.

Therefore, Western and Eastern Slavs as “ethno-cultural communities” are somewhat different concepts. Some are mostly Catholics, others are Orthodox. The language is noticeably different, and there are other “ethno-cultural” differences. A within the framework of DNA genealogy - this is the same thing, one genus, the same mark on the Y chromosome, the same migration history, the same common ancestor. The same ancestral haplogroup, finally.

Here we come to the concept "ancestral haplogroup", or "genus haplogroup". It is determined by marks, or the pattern of mutations, on the male sex chromosome. Women also have them, but in a different coordinate system. So, Eastern Slavs- this is a genus R1a1. They are among the residents of Russia, Ukraine, Belarus - from 45 to 70%. And in ancient Russian and Ukrainian cities, towns, villages - up to 80%.

Conclusion - the term "Slavs" depends on the context. In linguistics, “Slavs” are one thing, in ethnography – another, in DNA genealogy – a third. A haplogroup, a genus, was formed when there were no nations, no churches, no modern languages. In this regard, belonging to a genus, to a haplogroup - primary.

Since belonging to a haplogroup is determined by very specific mutations in certain nucleotides of the Y chromosome, we can say that each of us carries a certain label in DNA. And this mark in male offspring is indestructible; it can only be exterminated along with the offspring itself. Unfortunately, there have been plenty of such cases in the past. But this does not mean at all that this mark is an indicator of a certain “breed” of a person.

This the tag is not associated with genes and has nothing to do with them, namely genes and only genes can, if desired, be associated with the “breed”. Haplogroups and haplotypes do not in any way determine the shape of the skull or nose, hair color, or physical or mental characteristics of a person. But they forever tie the carrier of the haplotype to a certain human race, at the beginning of which there was a patriarch of the family, whose offspring survived and live today, unlike millions of other broken genealogical lines.

This mark in our DNA turns out to be invaluable for historians, linguists, anthropologists, because this the label is not “assimilated” how native speakers of languages, genes, and speakers assimilate different cultures, which “dissolve” in the population. Haplotypes and haplogroups do not “dissolve”, do not assimilate. Whatever religion the descendants change over the course of thousands of years, whatever language they acquire, whatever cultural and ethnic characteristics they change, exactly the same haplogroup, same haplotype(except perhaps with a few mutations) stubbornly appear with appropriate testing of certain fragments of the Y chromosome. It doesn't matter if he is a Muslim, a Christian, a Jew, a Buddhist, an atheist or a pagan.

As will be shown in this study, members of the genus R1a1 in the Balkans, who lived there 12 thousand years ago, after more than two hundred generations came to the East European plain, where 4500 years ago the ancestor of modern Russians and Ukrainians of the clan appeared R1a1, including the author of this article. Another five hundred years, 4,000 years ago, they, the Proto-Slavs, reached the southern Urals, and four hundred years later they went to India, where they now live approximately 100 million their descendants, members of the same clan R1a1. Aryan family. Aryans, because they called themselves that, and this is recorded in the ancient Indian Vedas and Iranian legends. They are the descendants of the Proto-Slavs or their closest relatives. There was and is no “assimilation” of the R1a1 haplogroup, and the haplotypes are almost the same and are easily identified. Identical to Slavic. Another wave of Aryans, with the same haplotypes, went from Central Asia to Eastern Iran, also in the 3rd millennium BC, and became Iranian Aryans.

Finally, another wave of representatives of the genus R1a1 went south and reached the Arabian Peninsula, the Gulf of Oman, where Qatar, Kuwait, the United Arab Emirates are now located, and the Arabs there, having received the results of DNA testing, look with amazement at the testing certificate with the haplotype and haplogroup R1a1. Aryan, Proto-Slavic, “Indo-European” - call it what you want, but the essence is the same. And these certificates determine the boundaries of the area of the campaigns of the ancient Aryans. The calculations below show that the times of these campaigns in Arabia are 4 thousand years ago.

So, when we say “Slavs”, in this study we will mean Eastern Slavs , people from the family R1a1, in terms of DNA genealogy. Until very recently, science did not know how to define them in “scientific terms.” What objective, measurable parameter unites them? Actually, the question was not posed that way.

According to the huge amount of data accumulated by linguistics, comparative analysis languages - these are some “Indo-Europeans”, “Aryans”, newcomers from the north (to India and Iran), they know snow, cold, they are familiar with birch, ash, beech, they are familiar with wolves, bears, they are familiar with the horse. It has now become known that these are people of the kind R1a1, to which they belong 70% population modern Russia. And further to the west, to the Atlantic, the share of the Aryan, Slavic race R1a1 is steadily falling, and among the inhabitants of the British Isles it is only 2-4% .

This issue has been resolved. A "Indo-Europeans"- that's it then Who?

From the above it inevitably follows that “Indo-Europeans” is the ancient genus R1a1. Arias. Then everything, or at least a lot, falls into place - with the arrival of people of this kind in India and Iran, and the spread of people of the same kind throughout Europe, and hence the emergence of the Indo-European group of languages, since this is actually theirs, Aryan language or its dialects, and the emergence of “Iranian languages” of the Indo-European group, since this is what Aryan languages. Moreover, as we will see below, “Iranian languages” appeared after the arrival of the Aryans in Iran, or more precisely, not “after”, but became the result of the arrival of the Aryans there, in the 2nd millennium BC.

How do modern sciences now look at the “Indo-Europeans”?

“Indo-Europeans” for them are like a heffalump. "Indo-Europeans", in modern linguistics and a little in archeology - these are ancient (as a rule) people who then (!), after thousands of years (!), came to India, and somehow made it so that Sanskrit, the literary Indian language, ended up in the same linguistic connection with the main European languages, except Basque and Finno-Ugric languages. And besides Turkic and Semitic, which do not belong to the Indo-European languages.

How they, the Europeans, did this, how and where they came from in India and Iran - linguists and archaeologists do not explain. Moreover, those who did not come to India and did not seem to have anything to do with Sanskrit, but apparently spread the language, are also included in the “Indo-Europeans”. Celts, for example. But at the same time they argue about who was Indo-European and who was not. The criteria used are very different, up to the shape of the dishes and the nature of the patterns on it.

Another complication– since many Iranian languages are also Indo-European, and many also do not understand, for some reason they often say “Indo-Iranian” instead of “Indo-European”. To make matters worse, “Indo-Europeans” are often called “Indo-Iranians.” And monstrous constructions appear that, for example, “Indo-Iranians lived on the Dnieper in ancient times.”

This must mean that those who lived on the Dnieper produced descendants over thousands of years who came to India and Iran, and somehow made the languages of India and Iran become to a certain extent close to many European languages - English, French, Spanish , Russian, Greek, and many others. Therefore, those ancients who lived on the Dnieper thousands of years before were “Indo-Iranians”. You can go crazy! Moreover, they spoke “Iranian languages”! This is despite the fact that the “Indo-European” ancient Iranian languages appeared in the 2nd millennium BC, and those on the Dnieper lived 4000-5000 years ago. And they spoke a language that would appear only after hundreds, or even thousands of years.

They spoke Aryan, dear reader. But it’s simply scary to mention this among linguists. They don't even mention it. They don't do that. Apparently, no command or order was received. And we ourselves are afraid.

Who are they "proto-Indo-Europeans"? And it's like proto-heffalump. These, therefore, are those who were the ancestors of those who were the ancestors of those who, after thousands of years, came to India and Iran, and did so... well, and so on.

This is how linguists imagine it. There was a certain “Nostratic language”, a very long time ago. It is placed from 23 thousand to 8 thousand years ago, some in India, some in Central Europe, some in the Balkans. Not long ago, it was estimated in the English-language literature that scientific sources suggested 14 different "ancestral homelands""Indo-Europeans" and "Proto-Indo-Europeans". V.A. Safronov in the fundamental book “Indo-European Ancestral Homelands” counted them 25 – seven in Asia and 18 in Europe. This “Nostratic” language (or languages), which was spoken by the “Proto-Indo-Europeans”, about 8-10 thousand years ago split into “Indo-European” languages, and other non-Indo-European ones (Semitic, Finno-Ugric, Turkic). And the “Indo-Europeans”, therefore, developed their own languages. True, they came to India after many millennia, but they are still “Indo-Europeans”.

We sorted this out too. Linguists, however, have not figured it out yet. They note - “although the origin of Indo-European languages has been studied more intensively than others, it continues to be the most difficult and persistent problem of historical linguistics... Despite more than 200 years of history of the issue, experts have not been able to determine the time and place of Indo-European origin."

Here again the question of the ancestral home arises. Namely, three ancestral homelands - the ancestral home of the “Proto-Indo-Europeans”, the ancestral home of the “Indo-Europeans”, and the ancestral home of the Slavs. It’s bad with the ancestral home of the “proto”, because it’s bad with the ancestral home of the “Indo-Europeans”. Currently, three are more or less seriously considered as candidates for the ancestral homeland of the “Indo-Europeans” or “Proto-Indo-Europeans”.

One option– Western Asia, or, more specifically, Turkish Anatolia, or, even more specifically, the area between lakes Van and Urmia, just south of the borders of the former USSR, in western Iran, also known as western Azerbaijan.

Second option– the southern steppes of modern Ukraine-Russia, in the places of the so-called “Kurgan culture”.

Third option– Eastern or Central Europe, or more specifically the Danube Valley, or the Balkans, or the northern Alps.

The time of spread of the “Indo-European” or “Proto-Indo-European” language also remains uncertain, and varies from 4500-6000 years ago, if we take representatives of the Kurgan culture as its speakers, to 8000-10000 years ago, if its speakers are the then inhabitants of Anatolia. Or even earlier. Supporters of the “Anatolian theory” believe that the main argument in its favor is that the spread of agriculture throughout Europe, North Africa and Asia began from Anatolia between 8000 and 9500 years ago, and reached the British Isles approximately 5500 years ago. Proponents of the “Balkan theory” use the same arguments about the spread of agriculture, albeit from the Balkans towards Anatolia.

This issue has not been resolved to this day. There are many arguments for and against each of the three options.

The same goes for ancestral home of the Slavs. Since no one has yet connected the Slavs (Proto-Slavs), Aryans, and Indo-Europeans, much less put a sign of identity between all three, the ancestral homeland of the Slavs is a separate and also unresolved question. This issue has been discussed in science for more than three hundred years, but there is no agreement, even minimal. It is generally accepted that the Slavs entered the historical arena only in the 6th century AD. But these are new times. And we are interested in the ancient Slavs, or Proto-Slavs, say, three thousand years ago and earlier. And this is generally bad.

Some believe that "ancestral home of the Slavs" was located in the region of Pripyat and the Middle Dnieper. Others believe that the “ancestral home of the Slavs” was the territory from the Dnieper to the Western Bug, which the Slavs occupied two to three thousand years ago. And where the Slavs were before, and whether they were there at all, is considered a question “unsolvable at this stage.” Still others suggest that the ancestral home of the Slavs, as well as the “Indo-Europeans” in general, was the steppes of the south of what is now Russia and Ukraine, but still others indignantly reject this. Still others believe that the ancestral homeland of the “Indo-Europeans” and the ancestral homeland of the Slavs must still coincide, because the Slavic languages are very archaic and ancient. Others correct that it is not “Indo-Europeans”, but one of their large groups, thereby hinting that “Indo-Europeans” must be different. Which ones are usually not explained.

From time to time a certain "Indo-Iranian community", which for some reason spoke a “Balto-Slavic proto-language.” This is already starting to make my head spin. Sometimes there are some "Black Sea Indo-Aryans". Why they are suddenly “Indo” in the Black Sea region is not explained. Linguists say that this is customary.

They attract anthropology, and they say that the Slavs in this respect are close to the Alpine zone - modern Hungary, Austria, Switzerland, Northern Italy, Southern Germany, the northern Balkans, and therefore the Proto-Slavs moved from west to east, and not vice versa. But anthropologists and archaeologists cannot indicate the time of this movement, since the Slavs usually burned corpses rather than burying them, which deprived scientists of material for two and a half millennia.

Some believe that the settlement of the Proto-Slavs across the territory of Eastern Ukraine is associated with the spread of the Kurgan archaeological culture, and therefore from east to west. It is almost unanimously believed that the population of the Andronovo culture was “Indo-Iranian” in its linguistic affiliation, that “Indo-Aryans” lived in the Southern Urals, in Arkaim, and it was again created by “Indo-Iranians”. There are expressions “Indo-Iranian tribes on the way to resettlement to India.” That is, they were already “Indo-Iranian,” although they had not yet moved there. That is, anything, even to the point of absurdity, only so as not to use the word "arias".

Finally, “pseudo-scientific” literature hits other extreme, and claims that “the Russian Slavs were the ancestors of almost all European and part of the Asian peoples,” and “from 60% to 80% of the British, northern and eastern Germans, Swedes, Danes, Norwegians, Icelanders, 80% of Austrians, Lithuanians are assimilated Slavs, Slavic Russes."

The situation is approximately clear. You can move on to the essence of my presentation. Moreover, the most “advanced” historical and linguistic scientific articles, recognizing that the question of the place and time of the emergence of the “Indo-European” language remains unresolved, they call for going beyond archeology and linguistics and using “independent data” to resolve the issue, which will allow us to look at the problem from the other side and make a choice between the main theories.

Which is what I do in the research presented here.

DNA genealogy in general, and Slavs in particular

I have repeatedly described the essence of DNA genealogy and its main provisions before (http://www.lebed.com/2006/art4606.htm, http://www.lebed.com/2007/art4914.htm, http://www .lebed.com/2007/art5034.htm). This time I will get straight to the point, recalling only that in the DNA of every man, namely in his Y chromosome, there are certain areas, in which mutations gradually, once every few generations, accumulate in nucleotides over and over again. This has nothing to do with genes. And in general, only 2% of DNA consists of genes, and the male sex Y chromosome is even less, there are only a tiny fraction of a percent of genes there.

Y chromosome- the only one of all 46 chromosomes (more precisely, of the 23 that the sperm carries), which is transmitted from father to son, and then to each successive son along a chain of times tens of thousands of years long. The son receives the Y chromosome from his father exactly the same as he received from his father, plus new mutations, if any occurred during transmission from father to son. And this happens rarely.

How rare?

Here's an example. This is my 25-marker Slavic haplotype, genus R1a1:

13 24 16 11 11 15 12 12 10 13 11 30 16 9 10 11 11 24 14 20 34 15 15 16 16

Each number is a specific sequence of nucleotide blocks in the Y chromosome of DNA. It's called allele, and shows how many times this block is repeated in DNA. Mutations in such a haplotype (that is, a random change in the number of nucleotide blocks) occur at a rate of one mutation approximately every 22 generations, that is, on average once every 550 years. No one knows which allele will change next, and it is impossible to predict. Statistics. In other words, here we can only talk about the probabilities of these changes.

In my earlier stories about DNA genealogy, I gave examples on the so-called 6 -marker haplotypes, small, for simplicity. Or else they call it "bikini haplotypes". But to search for the ancestral home of the Slavs, a much more accurate tool is needed. Therefore, in this study we will use 25 -marker haplotypes. Since any man has 50 million nucleotides on his Y-chromosome, the haplotype with its numbers can, in principle, be made as long as desired, it’s just a matter of the technique for determining the nucleotide sequences. Haplotypes are determined to a maximum length of 67 markers, although technically there is no limit. But also 25 -marker haplotypes are a very fine resolution; such haplotypes are not even considered in scientific articles. This is probably the first one.

Haplotypes are extremely sensitive to origin when talking about genealogical lineages. Let’s take not the Slavic R1a1, but, say, the Finno-Ugric clan, N3 in the DNA genealogy system. A typical 25-marker haplotype of this genus looks like this:

14 24 14 11 11 13 11 12 10 14 14 30 17 10 10 11 12 25 14 19 30 12 12 14 14

It has 29 mutations compared to the Slavic one above! This corresponds to a difference of more than two thousand generations, that is, Slavic with Finno-Ugric common ancestor lived more than 30 thousand years ago.

The same picture emerges if we compare, for example, with Jews. Typical Middle Eastern haplotype of Jews (genus J1) such:

12 23 14 10 13 15 11 16 12 13 11 30 17 8 9 11 11 26 14 21 27 12 14 16 17

It has 32 mutations in relation to Slavic. Even further than the Finno-Ugric. And they differ from each other by 35 mutations.

In general, the idea is clear. Haplotypes are very sensitive when compared across genera. They reflect completely different histories of the clan, origin, and migration of clans. Why are there Finno-Ugric people or Jews? Let's take the Bulgarians, brothers. Up to half of them have variations of this haplotype (genus I2):

13 24 16 11 14 15 11 13 13 13 11 31 17 8 10 11 11 25 15 20 32 12 14 15 15

It has 21 mutations in relation to the above East Slavic haplotype. That is, they are both Slavic, but the gender is different. Genus I2 descended from a different ancestor, the migration routes of the genus I2 were completely different from those of R1a1. It was later, already in our era or at the end of the last, that they met and formed a Slavic cultural-ethnic community, and then they combined writing and religion. And the gender is basically different, although 12% Bulgarians– East Slavic, R1a1 genus.

It is very important that by the number of mutations in haplotypes we can calculate when the common ancestor of the group of people whose haplotypes we are considering lived. I will not dwell here on exactly how the calculations are carried out, since all this was recently published in the scientific press (link is at the end of the article). The bottom line is that the more mutations there are in the haplotypes of a group of people, the more ancient their common ancestor. And since mutations occur completely statistically, randomly, with a certain average speed, the life time of the common ancestor of a group of people belonging to the same genus is calculated quite reliably. Examples will be given below.

To make it clearer, I will give a simple analogy. The haplotype tree is a pyramid standing at the top. The top at the bottom is the haplotype of the common ancestor of the genus. The base of the pyramid, at the very top, is us, our contemporaries, these are our haplotypes. The number of mutations in each haplotype is a measure of the distance from the common ancestor, from the top of the pyramid, to us, our contemporaries. If the pyramid were perfect - three points, that is, three haplotypes at the base would be enough to calculate the distance to the top. But in reality, three points are not enough. As experience shows, a dozen 25-marker haplotypes (which means 250 points) may be sufficient for a good estimate of the time to a common ancestor.

25-marker haplotypes of Russians and Ukrainians of the genus R1a1 were obtained from the international database YSearch . The carriers of these haplotypes are our contemporaries, living from the Far East to western Ukraine, and from the northern to southern outskirts. And in this way it was calculated that the common ancestor of the Russian and Ukrainian Eastern Slavs, clan R1a1, lived 4500 years ago. This figure is reliable, it was verified by cross-calculation using haplotypes of different lengths. And, as we will now see, this figure is not accidental. Let me remind you again that the details of calculations, verification and double-checking are given in the article given at the end. And these calculations were carried out using 25 marker haplotypes. This is already the highest level of DNA genealogy, if you call a spade a spade.

It turned out that the common Proto-Slavic ancestor, who lived 4500 years ago, had the following haplotype in his DNA:

13 25 16 10 11 14 12 12 10 13 11 30 15 9 10 11 11 24 14 20 32 12 15 15 16

For comparison - here my haplotype:

13 24 16 11 11 15 12 12 10 13 11 30 16 9 10 11 11 24 14 20 34 15 15 16 16

Compared to my Proto-Slavic ancestor, I have 10 mutations (highlighted in bold). If we remember that mutations occur once every 550 years, then I am separated from my ancestor 5500 years. But we are talking about statistics, and for everyone it turns out 4500 years. I got more mutations, someone else got fewer. In other words, each of us has our own individual mutations, but we all have the same ancestor haplotype. And, as we will see, it remains this way throughout almost all of Europe.

So let's take a breath. Our common Proto-Slavic ancestor lived on the territory of modern Russia-Ukraine 4500 years ago. Early bronze age, or even Chalcolithic, the transition from the Stone Age to the Bronze Age. To imagine the time scale, this is much earlier than the exodus of the Jews from Egypt, according to biblical legends. And they came out, if you follow the interpretations of the Torah, 3500-3600 years ago. If we ignore the interpretation of the Torah, which, of course, is not a strict scientific source, then we can note that the common ancestor of the Eastern Slavs, in this case Russian and Ukrainian, lived a thousand years before the eruption of the Santorini (Thera) volcano, which destroyed the Minoan civilization on the island Crete.

Now we can begin to build a sequence of events in our ancient history. 4500 years ago pre-Slavs appeared on the Central Russian Upland, and not just some Proto-Slavs, but precisely those whose descendants live in our time, numbering tens of millions of people. 3800 years ago, the Aryans, descendants of those Proto-Slavs (and having an identical ancestral haplotype, as will be shown below), built the settlement of Arkaim (its current name), Sintashta and the “country of cities” in the Southern Urals. 3600 years ago the Arkaim left the Arkaim and moved to India. Indeed, according to archaeologists, the settlement, which is now called Arkaim, lasted only 200 years.

Stop! Where did we get the idea that these were the descendants of our ancestors, the Proto-Slavs?

How from? A R1a1, kind mark? This mark accompanies all the haplotypes given above. This means that it can be used to determine to what clan those who went to India belonged.

By the way, here's some more data. In recent work, German scientists identified nine fossil haplotypes from southern Siberia, and it turned out that eight of them belong to the genus R1a1, and one is a Mongoloid, kind WITH. Dating is between 5500 and 1800 years ago. Haplotypes of the genus R1a1, for example, are like this:

13 25 16 11 11 14 X Y Z 14 11 32

Here the undeciphered markers are replaced with letters. They are very similar to the Slavic haplotypes given above, especially when you consider that these ancient ones also carry individual, random mutations.

Currently, the proportion of Slavic-Aryan haplogroup R1a1 in Lithuania 38%, in Latvia 41%, and Belarus 40%, in Ukraine from 45% to 54%. In Russia, Slavic-Aryans on average 48% , due to the high share of Finno-Ugric people in the north of Russia, but in the south and center of Russia the share of Eastern Slavic-Aryans reaches 60-75% and above.

Haplotypes of Indians and the lifespan of their common ancestor

Let me make a reservation right away - I deliberately write “Indians” and not “Indians”, because the majority of Indians are aborigines, Dravidians, especially Indians in the south of India. And the Hindus, for the most part, are carriers of the R1a1 haplogroup. To write “haplotypes of Indians” would be incorrect, since Indians as a whole belong to a wide variety of DNA genealogies.

In this sense, the expression “haplotypes of the Indians” is similar to the expression “haplotypes of the Slavs”. It reflects the “ethno-cultural” component, but this is one of the characteristics of the genus.

Unique possibilities of DNA genealogy. Anatoly Klyosov

Entertaining DNA- genealogistsI

More details and a variety of information about events taking place in Russia, Ukraine and other countries of our beautiful planet can be obtained at Internet Conferences, constantly held on the website “Keys of Knowledge”. All Conferences are open and completely free. We invite everyone who wakes up and is interested...

Where is the homeland of all Indo-Europeans?
Studying the ancient history of the peoples of the world, I constantly encounter different points of view and different theories.

There is especially a lot of controversy among historians, archaeologists, ethnographers, linguists and doctors (who study peoples based on comparison of their genes) on the topic “The homeland of all ancient Indo-Europeans.”

To begin considering this issue, let's write down the following basic facts on this issue:
a) in 3 thousand years ago, on the territory of the steppes from the Southern Urals to the lower reaches of the Dniester, there existed the Yamnaya archaeological culture, which included tribes of nomads who are recognized by all archaeologists as Indo-Europeans.
b) the first Indo-Europeans appear in Europe - pastoral tribes of Indo-Europeans penetrated into (corded ceramics, battle ax cultures) the territory of Ukraine (Middle Dnieper culture), the Baltic states and the south of Scandinavia (nautical ax culture) around 2300 BC, pastoral tribes entered Poland tribes (Zlota culture) penetrated around 2100 BC, shepherd tribes (Saxo-Thuringian culture) penetrated into Germany around 1900 BC.
c) the first Indo-Europeans - Luwians, Hittites, Palais - appeared in Asia Minor at the turn of the 3rd and 2nd millennia BC. This is recognized by all historians. By the way, from this time there are the first written sources about the Indo-European peoples.
G). In the 17th-16th century BC, the first Indo-European tribes of the Achaeans penetrated into Ancient Greece. This is also a fact recognized by all historians. There are written sources about this from the Hittite kingdom.
e) in the 15th century BC, Indo-Europeans (Indian tribes) began to populate Northern India.
This fact is also recognized by all historians.
f) around the 15th-13th centuries BC, the Indo-European Tocharian tribes settled in Northwestern China (modern Uyghuria). There are reports about this from ancient Chinese sources. This fact is also recognized by historians.
g) around the 11th-10th centuries BC, Indo-European tribes of the Medes and Persians appeared on the territory of Iran. This fact is also recognized by historians.

There are many points of view about where the ancestral homeland of all Indo-European peoples was located, but I will tell you about the most famous ones.
1. The homeland of the Indo-Europeans is the north - the mysterious country of Hyperborea, located in ancient times on the continent of Arctida (on this continent there was the legendary Mount Meru), which in ancient times existed in the Arctic Ocean. By the 13th millennium BC, the continent sank to the bottom of the ocean, and the north of Eurasia was covered with glaciers. Under the influence of such a climate, the Hyperboreans (descendants of the Hyperboreans) began to move south and reached the Middle Urals and the territories adjacent to it.
Until the 8th millennium we had no information about this people, and only in the 8th millennium
archaeological evidence of the residence of tribes of the Shigir archaeological culture there appears. In 7-6 thousand days BC tribes the most ancient Indo-Europeans began to separate from the Shigirs (the remaining Shigirs formed Ural peoples).
No later than 4 thousand BC / in 5 or 4 thousand BC / the ancient Indo-European languages were already different, which means a single Indo-European proto-language existed earlier than in 4 thousand BC - 5 thousand BC. Already at the beginning of the 5th millennium, the united one began to split into groups:
- the main group was in the Southern Urals and adjacent steppe territories,
- Upper Volga (Upper Volga archaeological culture) group lived in the area
Upper Volga,
- the western group (Narva archaeological culture) lived between the upper reaches
Volga and Baltic.
Supporters of this theory are the Indian scientist B. Tilak, researcher V. Demin, A. Barchenko, S. V. Zharnikova, N. Roerich, D. O. Svyatsky, M. V. Lomonosov, Karamzin, Strabo, Pausanias, Nostradamus, Diodorus Sicilian. I am 90% sure of the correctness of this theory, so this theory formed the basis of the historical atlas of the peoples of the world.
2.The homeland of the Indo-Europeans is Asia Minor. Tribes of the archaeological culture Chatal-Guyuk lived there in 7 thousand days. According to this theory, from Asia Minor the tribes of this culture (alleged Indo-Europeans) penetrated into the Balkans at the beginning of the 6th millennium BC, settled there (Keresh culture) on long time, and then settled in the center of Europe (Germany, Poland) at the beginning of the 3rd millennium BC (Lendyel culture). From the center of Europe they begin to spread across the steppes of Eurasia.
Proponents of this theory include Colin Renfrew of Cambridge and other historians.
I am 90% sure that this theory is absurd. Why did the Indo-Europeans need to leave Asia Minor to return there again at the beginning of the 2nd millennium BC? At the same time, the archaeological cultures (Chatal Guyuk, Keresh, Lengyel) have nothing in common with the Yamnaya culture.
3.The homeland of the Indo-Europeans is Balkan Peninsula. Supporters of this theory believe that the place where a single Indo-European community was formed is the Balkans. Such a community is called the Keresh, Turdash, Vinca cultures. It was from there, in their opinion, that the Indo-Europeans began to settle throughout the 4th millennium. different directions.
I am 90% sure that this theory is wrong. The Keresh, Turdash, and Vinca cultures have nothing in common with the Yamnaya culture.
4.The homeland of the Indo-Europeans is the Northern Black Sea region and Kuban. According to this theory, the homeland of all Indo-Europeans is this territory and from this territory the settlement of Indo-Europeans begins in the 3rd millennium. Already in the 19th century O. Schrader believed that they originally lived in the Northern Black Sea region, today this point has many supporters, including including E. Vale, A. E. Bryusov.
I am sure that this theory fits well with the theory of the origin of the Indo-Europeans from Hyperborea and is part of this theory.
6.The homeland of the Indo-Europeans is the South Caucasus. In 1972, Ivanov and Gomkrelidze suggested placing the ancestral home in the north of Western Asia / south of Transcaucasia, north of Central Mesopotamia /. It was from there that the Indo-Europeans began to settle in the 3rd millennium BC. At that time, the ancient city of Arkaim in the Southern Urals (Chelyabinsk region) had not yet been excavated. Arkim was the center of the Aryan tribes (ancient Indians and Iranians), this city already existed before 1900 BC.
Previously, I myself was a supporter of this theory (in the 70s), but now I am 100% sure that it is wrong. Why would Indo-Europeans from the South Caucasus go (via Iran) to the steppes of Eurasia (to the territory of the Yamnaya culture), only to soon go south again (in the opposite direction) in two waves - to India and Iran.
7.Altai is the homeland of the Indo-Europeans. According to this theory, the Indo-Europeans formed in Southern Siberia and from there began to move west.
I am sure that this theory requires clarification, since it may be a continuation of the first peoria (Hyperborean); perhaps the distribution area of the Yamnaya culture across the steppes of Eurasia reached Altai.
8.The homeland of the Indo-Europeans is Scandinavia. This theory was popular especially during fascism in Germany. According to it, the Aryans (Indo-Europeans) came to Germany from Scandinavia, and then began to settle throughout Eurasia.
I am sure that this theory was created for the sake of politics and has nothing to do with archaeology.
9.The homeland of the Indo-Europeans is Ukraine. This theory appeared quite recently and is actively supported by nationalist circles in Ukraine. According to this theory, the ancestral home of all Indo-Europeans was on the territory of Ukraine. These were tribes of the Trypillian culture. It was from Ukraine that the resettlement of all Indo-Europeans across the territory of Eurasia began. Ukrainians remained in the place of this ancestral home, and it was from Ukrainians that all other peoples (Indians, Germans, French, Persians and others) descended. I think that these Ukrainian “researchers” will soon declare Ukrainians to be true Aryans, as was already the case in fascist Germany.
I am sure that this theory was created to please some Ukrainian politicians.
10.The homeland of the Indo-Europeans is Germany. In the last quarter of the 19th century and the beginning of the 20th century, many scientists believed that the ancestral home of the Indo-Europeans was in Germany / the coast of the North and Baltic Seas /. Proponents of this theory were Latham, G. Krahe, P. Thieme.
I am sure that this theory was created to please some German politicians.
11.The homeland of the Indo-Europeans is Central Asia. According to this theory, the homeland was in Central Asia (Turkmenistan, Uzbekistan). From there, in the 3rd millennium, the settlement of all Indo-Europeans throughout Eurasia began. A supporter of this theory is academician S.A. Radzhabov and his followers.
I am sure that this theory is part of the first theory (Hyperborean).
12.The homeland of the Indo-Europeans is the Iranian plateau. According to this theory, the settlement of all peoples began from the northeastern part of Iran at the end of the 3rd millennium BC. A supporter of this theory is the French scientist R. Girshman.
I am 99% sure that this theory is wrong, why will the Indo-Europeans from Iran go north and soon again from the south of the Urals (from Arkaim) they will go in two waves to India and Iran.
13.The homeland of the Indo-Europeans is North America. According to this theory, the Indo-Europeans are called Arcto-Russians, who spoke Old Russian language and lived on the continent of Arctida, after the disappearance of the continent, the Arcto-Russians moved to North America and soon arrived at Far East, where they lived 100 thousand years ago, there they left their runic records on stones, and the inscriptions were made in Old Russian. It was from the Arcto-Russians that all the Indo-European peoples descended, who settled from the Far East throughout Eurasia. A proponent of this theory is Academician V. Chudinov.
I have not yet studied this theory in detail, but it is possible that if the word “Arcto-Russians” is replaced with the word “Hyperboreans,” then perhaps some of the Hyperboreans went to North America and then to the Far East. And perhaps some of them remained there (Tochars of Northwestern China). After all, Tocharian words are found even in the Korean language.
14.The homeland of the Indo-Europeans is the steppes of Eurasia. Therefore, it was in the steppes of Eurasia that the Indo-Europeans were born and their settlement began from there. This homeland was formed in 6-5 thousand years ago. A proponent of this theory is the American anthropologist Maria Gimbutas.
I consider this theory a continuation of the first (Hyperborean) theory; it does not contradict it in any way.
Please express your opinion on this issue (14 theories are proposed) in order to identify the prevailing opinion.

Ancient Rus' through the eyes of contemporaries and descendants (IX-XII centuries); Course of lectures Danilevsky Igor Nikolaevich

Lecture 1 INDO-EUROPEANS AND THEIR ORIGIN: CURRENT STATE OF THE PROBLEM

Lecture 1

INDO-EUROPEANS AND THEIR ORIGIN: CURRENT STATE OF THE PROBLEM

WHO ARE THE INDO-EUROPEANS

The history of the peoples of our country goes back to ancient times. Apparently, the homeland of their distant ancestors was Eurasia. During the last great glaciation (the so-called Valdai) a single natural zone was formed here. It extended from Atlantic Ocean to the Ural ridge. On the endless plains of Europe, huge herds of mammoths and reindeer grazed - the main sources of food for humans of the Upper Paleolithic era. Throughout its territory, the vegetation was approximately the same, so there were no regular seasonal migrations of animals then. They roamed freely in search of food. Primitive hunters moved behind them just as haphazardly, coming into constant contact with each other. Thus, the peculiar ethnic homogeneity of the society of the Late Paleolithic people was maintained.

However, 12–10 thousand years ago the situation changed. The last significant cold snap has arrived, resulting in the “sliding” of the Scandinavian ice sheet. He divided Europe, previously unified in natural terms, into two parts. At the same time, the directions of the prevailing winds changed and the amount of precipitation increased. The nature of the vegetation has also changed. Now, in search of pastures, animals were forced to make regular seasonal migrations from the periglacial tundra (where they went in the summer to escape blood-sucking insects) to the southern forests (in winter), and back. Following the animals within the emerging boundaries of new natural areas The tribes that hunted them also began to wander. At the same time, the formerly single ethnic community turned out to be divided into western and eastern parts by the Baltic glacial “wedge”.

As a result of some climate cooling that occurred in the middle of the 5th millennium BC. e., broadleaf forests retreated to the south and coniferous trees spread in the northern regions. In turn, this entailed, on the one hand, a reduction in the number and diversity of herbivores, and on the other, their movement to the southern regions. The ecological crisis forced people to move from consuming forms of farming (hunting, fishing, gathering) to producing ones (farming and cattle breeding). In archeology, such a transition is usually called the Neolithic revolution.

In search of favorable conditions for the emerging cattle breeding and agriculture, the tribes developed more and more new territories, but at the same time gradually moved away from each other. Changed environmental conditions - impenetrable forests and swamps, now dividing separate groups people - made communication between them difficult. Constant, although unsystematic, inter-tribal communication (exchange of economic skills, cultural values, armed clashes, lexical borrowings) turned out to be violated. The single way of life of wandering or semi-vagrant hunting tribes was replaced by isolation and increasing differentiation of new ethnic communities.

Most full information about our ancient ancestors preserved in the most ephemeral creation of man - language. A. A. Reformatsky wrote:

“You can own a language and you can think about a language, but you cannot see or touch a language. It cannot be heard in the literal sense of the word.”

Even in the last century, linguistic scientists drew attention to the fact that the vocabulary, phonetics and grammar of the languages of a significant number of peoples inhabiting Eurasia have many common features. Here are just two examples of this kind.

The Russian word "mother" has parallels not only in Slavic, but also in Lithuanian ( motina), Latvian ( mate), Old Prussian ( muti), ancient Indian ( mata), Avestan ( matar), New Persian ( madar), Armenian ( mair), Greek ( ????? ), Albanian ( motre) - sister), Latin ( mater), Irish ( mathir), Old High German ( router) and other modern and dead languages.

The word “to seek” has no less cognate “brothers” - from the Serbo-Croatian isti and the Lithuanian ieskoti (to seek) to the ancient Indian icchati (to seek, ask) and the English to ask (to ask).

Based on similar coincidences, it was established that all these languages had a common basis. They went back to a language that was conventionally (based on the habitat of the ethnic groups who spoke the “descendant” languages) called Proto-Indo-European, and the speakers of this proto-language - Indo-Europeans.

Indo-European languages include Indian, Iranian, Italic, Celtic, Germanic, Baltic, Slavic, as well as Armenian, Greek, Albanian and some dead (Hittite-Luvian, Tocharian, Phrygian, Thracian, Illyrian and Venetian) languages.

The time of existence of the Indo-European community and the territory on which the Indo-Europeans lived are reconstructed mainly on the basis of an analysis of the Indo-European language and a comparison of the results of such research with archaeological finds. IN lately To solve these questions, paleogeographical, paleoclimatological, paleobotanical and paleozoological data are increasingly being used.

The so-called time arguments(i.e., indicators of the time of existence of certain phenomena) are words - “cultural indicators”, denoting such changes in technology or economics that can be correlated with already known, dated archaeological materials. Such arguments include the terms coinciding among most peoples who spoke Indo-European languages for plowing, plough, war chariots, utensils, and most importantly, two terms of a pan-European nature, undoubtedly dating back to the final phase of the Neolithic era: the name copper ( from Indo-European root *ai- to kindle a fire) and anvil, stone (from Indo-European *ak- spicy). This made it possible to attribute the existence of the Proto-Indo-European community to the 5th–4th millennium BC. e. Around 3000 BC e. The process of disintegration of the Proto-Indo-European language into “descendant” languages begins.

THE HOMELANDS OF THE INDO-EUROPEANS

The solution to the question of the ancestral homeland of the Indo-Europeans turned out to be more difficult. place arguments(i.e. pointers to any geographical realities) words were used that denoted plants, animals, minerals, parts of the landscape, forms economic activity And social organization. The most indicative in spatial terms should be recognized as the most stable toponyms - hydronyms (names of water bodies: rivers, lakes, etc.), as well as the names of such tree species as beech(so-called beech argument), and such fish as salmon(so-called salmon argument). To establish the location where all such objects, the names of which had the same origin in Indo-European languages, could be located, it was necessary to involve data from paleobotany and paleozoology, as well as paleoclimatology and paleogeography. Comparing all the spatial arguments turned out to be an extremely complex procedure. It is not surprising that there is no single, generally accepted point of view regarding where the speakers of the Proto-Indo-European language originally lived.

The following localizations were proposed:

Baikal-Danube;

South Russian (between the Dnieper and Don rivers, including the Crimean peninsula);

Volga-Yenisei (including the northern Caspian Sea, Aral and northern Balkhash);

Eastern Anatolian;

Central European (Rhine, Vistula and Dnieper river basins, including the Baltic states)

and some others.

Of these, the Eastern Anatolian one is considered the most substantiated. A fundamental monograph by T. V. Gamkrelidze and V. Vs was devoted to its development. Ivanova. A thorough analysis of linguistic materials, the mythology of the Proto-Indo-Europeans (more precisely, traces of myths preserved by their descendants) and a comparison of these data with the results of research by paleobiologists allowed them to identify the region of modern Eastern Anatolia around lakes Van and Urmia as the most likely ancestral homeland of the Indo-Europeans.

There are also hypotheses that unite several ancestral homelands of the Indo-Europeans, each of them being considered as a region with which a certain stage in the development of the Indo-European community is associated. An example is the hypothesis of V. A. Safronov. In accordance with linguistic data on three long stages of the evolution of the Indo-European proto-language, the author indicates three large habitats of the Proto-Indo-Europeans, which successively replaced each other in connection with migration processes. They correspond to archaeological cultures - equivalents of the stages of evolution of the Indo-European proto-culture, genetically related to each other. The first, early Indo-European, ancestral home was located in Asia Minor with the archaeological culture equivalent of Çatalhöyük (VII–VI millennium BC); the second, Central Indo-European, ancestral home - in the Northern Balkans with a culture equivalent to Vinca (V-IV millennium BC); and, finally, the third, late Indo-European, ancestral home - in Central Europe with an equivalent culture in the form of a block of two cultures - Lengyel (4000–2800 BC) and the Funnel Beaker culture (3500–2200 BC).

Each of these hypotheses is another step in studying the ancient history of our ancestors. At the same time, let me remind you that for now they are all just hypothetical constructions that need further proof or refutation.

SETTLEMENT OF INDO-EUROPEANS

The main occupation of the Indo-Europeans was arable farming. The land was cultivated using harnessed arable tools (ralas, plows). At the same time, they apparently knew gardening. Cattle breeding occupied a significant place in the economy of the Indo-European tribes. Cattle were used as the main draft force. Animal husbandry provided the Indo-Europeans with products - milk, meat, as well as raw materials - leather, hides, wool, etc.

At the turn of the 4th–3rd millennium BC. e. the life of the Indo-European tribes began to transform, global climate changes began: the temperature dropped, continentality increased - hotter than before summer months alternated with increasingly harsh winters. As a result, grain yields decreased, agriculture ceased to provide guaranteed means to ensure people's lives during the winter months, as well as additional feed for animals. The role of cattle breeding gradually increased. The increase in herds associated with these processes required the expansion of pastures and the search for new territories where both people and animals could feed. The gaze of the Indo-Europeans turned to the endless steppes of Eurasia. The period of development of neighboring lands has begun.

WITH beginning of III thousand BC e. the discovery and colonization of new territories (which was often accompanied by clashes with the indigenous population) became the norm of life of the Indo-European tribes. This, in particular, was reflected in the myths, fairy tales and legends of the Indo-European peoples - Iranians, ancient Indians, ancient Greeks. The migration of the tribes that previously formed the Proto-Indo-European community acquired a special scale with the invention of wheeled transport, as well as the domestication and use of horses for riding. This allowed pastoralists to move from a sedentary lifestyle to a nomadic or semi-nomadic one. The consequence of the change in the economic and cultural structure was the disintegration of the Indo-European community into independent ethnic groups.

So, adaptation to changed natural and climatic conditions forced the proto-Greeks, Luwians, Hittites, Indo-Iranians, Indo-Aryans and other tribal associations formed within the framework of the Proto-Indo-European tribes to go in search of new, more economically suitable territories. And the continued fragmentation of ethnic groups led to the colonization of new lands. These processes occupied the entire 3rd millennium BC. e.

From the book Empire - II [with illustrations] author

The current state of the Dendera and Esna zodiacs in Egypt. In July 2002, one of the authors (G.V. Nosovsky), together with the famous traveler V.V. Sundakov, artist-photographer Yu.L. Maslyaev and cinematographer V.V. Sundakov (junior) took part in the expedition

From the book Aryan Rus' [The Heritage of Ancestors. Forgotten gods of the Slavs] author Belov Alexander Ivanovich

“The current state of the issue...” Not so long ago, just 50 years ago, Boris Porshnev’s book “The current state of the issue of relict hominoids” was published. The book was published in a ridiculously small edition - only 180 copies. In 2012, this book was finally republished for the second time.

From the book History of Russia in the 18th-19th centuries author Milov Leonid Vasilievich

Chapter 8. The state of the rural economy. Financial problems and public administration in the 20-40s. XVIII

From the book New Chronology of Egypt - I [with illustrations] author Nosovsky Gleb Vladimirovich

6.8. 2002 addition. The current state of the Dendera and Esna zodiacs in Egypt In July 2002, one of the authors (G.V. Nosovsky) together with the famous traveler V.V. Sundakov, artist-photographer Yu.L. Maslyaev and cinematographer V.V. Sundakov ( younger) accepted

From the book HISTORY OF RUSSIA from ancient times to 1618. Textbook for universities. In two books. Book one. author Kuzmin Apollon Grigorievich

The current state of the problem of the Aryan ancestral home (Note on the concept of V.A. Safronov. - A.K.). It would be necessary to more thoroughly draw on written sources indicating the name of the “Country of Farmers” of Aratta, its social structure, rituals and deities, as well as events.

From the book Japan in the War of 1941-1945. [with illustrations] author Hattori Takushiro

From the book Ancient Rus' through the eyes of contemporaries and descendants (IX-XII centuries); Course of lectures author Danilevsky Igor Nikolaevich

Lecture 1 INDO-EUROPEANS AND THEIR ORIGIN: THE CURRENT STATE OF THE PROBLEM WHO ARE THE INDO-EUROPEANSThe history of the peoples of our country goes back to ancient times. Apparently, the homeland of their distant ancestors was Eurasia. During the last great glaciation (so

From the book Secrets of Ancient Civilizations. Volume 2 [Collection of articles] author Team of authors

Historical role Rome and the problems of modernity X. A. Livraga, founder of the “New Acropolis” Lecture When they talk about Rome as an empire, as a rule, they claim that its mission was reconstruction, restoration of elements Hellenistic culture in art,

From the book Historical Ethnology author Lurie Svetlana Vladimirovna

The current state of psychological anthropology In the seventies and eighties, new university centers dealing with problems of ethnopsychology emerged - at the University of California, at Emory University. In addition, they continue to exist

From the book General history state and law. Volume 1 author Omelchenko Oleg Anatolievich

The current state of historiography In modern, primarily Western, historiography of state and law, it is difficult to identify any internal trends; impossible due to the vastness of historical material accumulated over two centuries, steel and works in the full sense

From the book Japan in the War of 1941-1945. author Hattori Takushiro

1. The current state of military power The assessment of the current state of military power, which was given on June 6 at a meeting of the Supreme Council for War Direction, was as follows. As the military situation for Japan worsens, more and more difficulties arise for

From the book Generalissimo Prince Suvorov [volume I, volume II, volume III, modern spelling] author Petrushevsky Alexander Fomich

Chapter IV. Polish Confederate War: Lanckorona; 1768-1771. Poland; its gradual decline and current state. - Bar Confederation. - Suvorov’s forced march to Smolensk; march from there to Warsaw; search; battle near Orekhovo. - Appointment of Suvorov as chief

From the book History of the People of Ros [From Aryans to Varangians] author Akashev Yuri

§ 1. State of knowledge of the problem The problem of the origin of Rus' and its original history has attracted attention for many centuries. Russian chroniclers, following the author of The Tale of Bygone Years, associate the beginning of the Russian people with the descendants of the biblical

From the book History of Economics: lecture notes author Shcherbina Lidiya Vladimirovna

LECTURE No. 14. Modern entrepreneur: Western experience and ours

From the book History of Orthodoxy author Kukushkin Leonid

From the book Complete collection essays. Volume 7. September 1902 - September 1903 author Lenin Vladimir Ilyich

I. labor movement, its history and current state 1. Brief description conditions and state of industry. The number, composition, distribution and other features of the local proletariat (industrial, commercial, handicraft, etc., perhaps also

Traditionally ancient history begin to study with civilizations Ancient Egypt, Sumerians, Babylon. There is no doubt that these civilizations have made a significant contribution to the development of humanity. But in parallel with the emergence and development of these civilizations in the north, on the territory of modern Russia, events took place that were no less, and probably even more important for world history. These events were connected with the ancient Indo-Europeans, which we will talk about in this post.

Why Indo-Europeans? Back in the 18th century, Europeans who visited India noticed the clear similarity of Sanskrit with European languages. Sanskrit was an ancient language whose position in India resembled that of Latin in Europe, some texts in Sanskrit are more than 3 thousand years old. Similarities were found not only in language, but also in traditions and beliefs, so it became clear that the ancient Indians and ancient Europeans had common ancestors.

More than a hundred years of disputes and searches followed, spent reliably establishing where the ancient Indo-Europeans lived and where their ancestral home was. There has been a lot of speculation on this topic. The German Nazis, for example, at one time announced that the ancient Indo-Europeans, or ancient Aryans, lived on the territory of modern Germany and represented a special superior race. However, research has shown a completely different picture.

In ancient times, the Indo-Europeans truly represented one people. They lived relatively compactly in the Don and Volga basin, on the territory of modern Russia. The most ancient archaeological culture for which its Indo-European origin has been proven is Samara. It dates back to the 5th millennium BC. e., and its distribution area covers the territory of modern Samara, Saratov and Orenburg regions. In the next millennium, Indo-European cultures expanded their range, capturing the Urals and Kazakh steppes in the east, and reaching the Dnieper in the west. Up to 3-4 millennium BC. e. The Indo-Europeans were a single community.

Who were the ancient Indo-Europeans? They were warlike people, but at the same time had a developed mythology and valued knowledge. According to the ideas of modern scientists, the society of the ancient Indo-Europeans was divided into three main groups - priests, warriors and those who were engaged in agriculture and cattle breeding. They worshiped different gods, the main one of which was the god of thunder and lightning (the same one who Ancient Rus' was known as Perun, and in Ancient Greece as Zeus). The ancient Indo-Europeans believed in afterlife and the existence of hell and heaven. They also had a cult of heroes, about whose exploits legends were written.

About 5-6 thousand years ago, the Indo-Europeans made one of the most important discoveries in human history - they invented the wheel and learned to harness horses to carts. This event turned the history of Eurasia upside down. Soon the warlike Indo-Europeans, who by that time already knew how to smelt copper and bronze, moved in all directions from their ancestral home.

Settlement of the Indo-Europeans (red color shows distribution to the middle of the 3rd millennium BC and orange - to the 1st millennium BC)

The Indo-Europeans were divided. Some of the Indo-Europeans moved to Europe, the entire local population living there was conquered and assimilated (it is believed that the only fragment of pre-Indo-European culture is the small Basque people in Spain). Indo-European peoples in Europe created outstanding ancient civilizations of Ancient Greece and Rome, while the “barbarians” who lived to the north - Slavic, Germanic and Celtic tribes were also Indo-Europeans. Part came to Asia Minor(territory of modern Turkey). The Indo-European people of the Hittites created a powerful kingdom and were the first in history to master iron smelting. Some of the Indo-European tribes, having stayed for some time in the Southern Urals, moved south, coming first to Central Asia, and then to India and Iran. It was these peoples who called themselves Aryans and were the very first to write down their myths in Sanskrit. The most ancient Vedas are believed to have been written down in the 16th century. BC e. Finally, part of the Indo-European tribes moved east, reaching the Yenisei and settling in northwestern China. In a relatively short period of time, the Indo-Europeans occupied most of Eurasia.

INDO-EUROPEANS, Indo-Europeans, units. Indo-European, Indo-European, husband. Nationalities, nations speaking Indo-European languages. Ushakov's explanatory dictionary. D.N. Ushakov. 1935 1940 ... Ushakov's Explanatory Dictionary

INDO-EUROPEANS- INDO-EUROPEANS, ev, units. eets, eitsa, husband. Common name of ancestral tribes modern peoples speaking languages of the Indo-European family. | adj. Indo-European, oh, oh. Ozhegov's explanatory dictionary. S.I. Ozhegov, N.Yu. Shvedova. 1949 1992 … Ozhegov's Explanatory Dictionary

Indo-Europeans- INDO-EUROPEANS, ev, pl (ed Indo-European, eytsa, m). The general name of the tribes of the ancestors of peoples speaking languages of the Indo-European family of languages; people belonging to this group of tribes. The Indo-Europeans spoke the ancient languages of Asia and Europe, to which... Explanatory dictionary of Russian nouns

Indo-Europeans- pl. The peoples of Europe, Western Asia, and Hindustan, speaking related languages. Ephraim's explanatory dictionary. T. F. Efremova. 2000... Modern explanatory dictionary Russian language Efremova

Indo-Europeans- Indo-Europeans, ev, units. h. eets, eitsa, creation. p. eyets... Russian spelling dictionary

Indo-Europeans- (English: Indo Europeans), a language family whose origins appear to be related to the steppes. Indo-European languages spread widely during the migration of peoples of the 2nd millennium BC. in Europe, as well as in Iran, India, temporarily also... Archaeological Dictionary

Proto-Indo-European language

Exodus theory- Indo-Europeans Indo-European languages Anatolian · Albanian Armenian · Baltic · Venetian Germanic · Illyrian Aryan: Nuristanian, Iranian, Indo-Aryan... Wikipedia

PIE- Indo-Europeans Indo-European languages Albanian · Armenian Baltic · Celtic Germanic · Greek Indo-Iranian · Romance Italic · Slavic Dead: Anatolian · Paleo-Balkan ... Wikipedia

Paleolithic continuity theory- Indo-Europeans Indo-European languages Anatolian · Albanian Armenian · Baltic · Venetian Germanic · Illyrian Aryan: Nuristanian, Iranian, Indo-Aryan... Wikipedia

Books

Indo-Europeans, O. Schrader. We present to the attention of readers a book by the famous German linguist and historian Otto Schrader, the purpose of which the author saw as bringing together all the scientific information in the field... Buy for 474 UAH (Ukraine only)
Indo-Europeans, Schrader O.. Readers are invited to a book by the famous German linguist and historian Otto Schrader (1855-1919), the purpose of which the author saw was to bring together all the scientific information in the field...