§ 8. Resettlement of the Indo-Europeans
From the southeast of Europe, the triumphant spread of the Indo-Europeans across Eurasia began. Some moved west and took possession of the expanses of Europe to the Atlantic. Another part of them spread to the north, east and southeast. They occupied the north of Europe and the Scandinavian Peninsula. The wedge of Indo-European migrations cut into the habitat of the Finno-Ugric peoples and ran into the Ural Mountains, beyond which the Indo-Europeans did not go. In the south, in the forest-steppe and steppe zone, they advanced into Asia Minor, the North Caucasus, reached the Iranian Highlands and settled in India.
Already during the migrations in the IV-111 millennia BC. e. the former community began to disintegrate. Large language blocks were formed. So, one of them included Germans, Slavs, Balts. Once they were all one people and spoke the same language. Only later did the Germans stand out. Abalts and Slavs formed a single whole. But life went on, the Indo-Europeans continued to settle in the territory of Eurasia, and their number increased. In conditions of constant movement, the development of new territories, their settlement, the Indo-Europeans continued to isolate themselves. In the end, from the Indo-Europeans, the eastern group of languages \u200b\u200band peoples (Indians, Iranians, Armenians, Tajiks, the inhabitants of present-day Afghanistan - Pashto and Dari, etc.), the Western European group (English, Germans, French, Italians, Greeks, etc.) , Slavic group (Eastern, Western and Southern Slavs: Russians, Ukrainians, Belarusians, Poles, Bulgarians, Czechs, Serbs, Slovaks, Croats, Slovenes, etc.), Baptist group (Baltic peoples - Lithuanians, Latvians, etc.).
However, despite this isolation, traces of the former community, the depths of the historical memory of these peoples are visible everywhere. First, in language. So, the Slavic and Iranian peoples have a lot of common words and concepts: “god” (lord, lord), “hut” (house), “boyar” (near master), “axe”, “dog”, “hero” and many others - they all came to us from the ancient Iranians. Previously, the word "birch" was already mentioned as the name of a tree that was used from India to the Carpathians and the Balkans.
This commonality is also seen in applied arts, for example, in embroidery patterns, in decorations on clay vessels - a combination of rhombuses and dots was used everywhere. In the areas of settlement of the Indo-Europeans, the domestic cult of elk and deer has been preserved for centuries, although, as is known, these animals are not found in Iran, India, and Greece. The same applies to a number of folk holidays, for example, to the "bear holidays" held by many peoples in spring days awakening from the winter hibernation of a bear. All these are traces of the northern ancestral home of the Indo-Europeans.
These peoples also have much in common in religious cults. So, the famous Slavic pagan god Perun is a thunderer akin to the Lithuanian G1erkunas, the ancient Indian Pardzhanya, the Celtic Perkunia, and he himself is very reminiscent of the main Greek god Zeus. The Slavic pagan goddess Lada - the patroness of marriage and family - is comparable to the Greek goddess Lata. Many other deities of different Indo-European peoples have common ancient roots.
Warlike, energetic Indo-Europeans came to where the local Neolithic population already lived. These incursions were far from peaceful. Long before the first states, armies appeared on the territory of Eurasia, wars began, our ancient ancestors fought for convenient lands, generous fishing grounds, forests rich in animals. On the site of many ancient sites, traces of a fire, hot fights are distinguishable, skulls, bones pierced by arrows and broken by battle axes were found there.
Already at that time, the Indo-Europeans began to mix with the tribes that lived here earlier, as well as with another human branch - the Finno-Ugric peoples, who previously occupied large areas of the north of our country, the Cis-Urals and Trans-Urals. There were also immigrants from the lands where the ancient ancestors of the Turks and Mongols lived. In particular, the Kalmyks and Buryats became the descendants of the ancient Mongols. And the Finno-Ugric peoples themselves, like the Indo-Europeans, began to disintegrate into new branches - into Ugric peoples and Finns. In the future, many Russian peoples of the Volga region and the North of the country - Mordovians, Udmurts, Mari, Komi, etc. - became the descendants of the Finno-Ugric population. All of them later also were full-fledged ancient inhabitants of the East European Plain, like the Slavs.
In the region of the Northern Urals, between the mouth of the Pechora and the Ob, the Neolithic ancestors of the Ural peoples, who spoke the so-called Uralic languages, settled down. In Southern Siberia, in Altai, in the Sayans, a population of ancient Altaians developed, who spoke in special, Altaic, languages, different from all the others. The Altaians became the main owners of these lands in ancient times.
Turbulent processes took place in the Caucasus, where a population was formed that spoke Caucasian languages (the ancient inhabitants of Dagestan, Adygea, Abkhazia). south of Caucasian ridge the ancestors of the Georgians stood out.
Each of these ancient peoples, like the Indo-Europeans, contributed to the development of the ancient economy of our country. The North Caucasians, earlier than anyone, mastered the smelting of metal (fortunately, it was in abundance in the Caucasus) and the manufacture of metal tools and weapons, tamed horses, cattle, pigs and switched to cattle breeding. They were the first to master wheeled carts.
The Ural peoples were the first to launch boats, invented skis and sledges. The Indo-Europeans who settled in the forest zone, together with other local inhabitants, switched to cattle breeding and forest-type agriculture, still developed hunting and fishing, but the population in the harsh conditions of the forest and forest-steppe lagged behind the rapidly developing peoples of the Mediterranean, southern Europe, Western Asia, Mesopotamia , Egypt. Nature at that time was the main regulator of human development, and it was not in favor of the north.
The formation of nations. The end of the former equality of people. As a result, the former, mostly uniform, development of human society in the vast expanses of Europe, Asia, and Africa is disrupted. The new opportunities that appeared then for people allow them to better, more efficiently use the natural advantages of the area in which they lived. Conversely, where nature and climate were harsh, it was more difficult for people to use new remarkable achievements.
From now on, the rates of development of individual regions of the world become different. The areas with a mild climate and fertile soils developed most rapidly, where farmers could get huge harvests. This happened in Western Asia, North Africa (the Nile Valley), the Mediterranean, India, and China. Almost simultaneously in the steppe regions of Eastern Europe, Siberia, and the Far East, nomadic pastoral societies were being formed.
Both farmers and nomads rapidly grew in population and accumulated wealth. It became possible to single out individual families from the tribal communities, which could independently provide for their existence. The former equality of people from the time of the tribal system was leaving in the past.
Tribal leaders, elders, warriors had the opportunity to get into their hands the best lands for plowing and pastures, to collect great wealth in their hands, to hire people to protect and increase this wealth, to organize their capture in foreign territories. It was about creating states.
Even in the Neolithic period, they originated in the fertile river valleys of Western Asia (Euphrates and Tigris), Egypt (Nile), India (Indus). Later, already in the Bronze Age, states arose in China, the Mediterranean, some nomadic peoples Europe and Asia.
Development was slower in the south of Europe and very slowly in the north and east of this continent, in the vast expanses of Asia. A few thousand years later, there was a transition from hunting, fishing, gathering to agriculture and cattle breeding. The inhabitants of these places lagged behind the inhabitants of the south in everything: in the type of tools and weapons, utensils, dwellings, religious rites and even decorations.
Folding nations . Differences in the development of mankind also influenced the formation of separate large groups of people who spoke their own special languages, had their own special customs and even external differences.
So, in the north-east of Europe, in the Trans-Urals, Western Siberia, a type of people began to take shape, who began to ancestors of the Finno-Ugric peoples.
IN Eastern Siberia in the undivided steppe spaces of Asia, in the zone of the appearance of pastoral tribes, began to form ancestors of the future Mongolian and Turkic peoples.
In the southeast of Europe and adjacent territories, agricultural and pastoral tribes developed, which became ancestors of future Indo-Europeans.
In the Caucasus region began to form Caucasian peoples.
In all these groups of tribes of Eurasia there was a rapid population growth. They became crowded in the former territories, and the land was great, plentiful and beautiful. People have understood this for a very long time. They continued to move from place to place in search of a better life. And this means that already in those days not only the isolation of large groups of the Earth's population began, but also their mixing.
This process was facilitated by the exchange of food products, tools, weapons, familiarization with each other's production experience. War and peace continued to go side by side on our planet.
Scientists call Indo-Europeans ancient population vast territories of Europe and Asia, which gave rise to many modern peoples of the world, including Russians and others.
Where was the ancient ancestral home of the Indo-Europeans? And why are the ancient ancestors of most of the peoples of Europe, including the Slavs, called Indo-Europeans? Most scientists believe that a large region of South-Eastern and Central Europe, in particular the Balkan Peninsula and the foothills of the Carpathians, and probably the south of Russia and Ukraine, became such an ancestral home. Here, in parts of Europe washed by warm seas, on fertile soils, in sun-warmed forests, on mountain slopes and valleys covered with soft emerald grass, where shallow transparent rivers flowed, the most ancient Indo-European community of people was formed. There are other points of view on the place of the ancestral home of the Indo-Europeans.
Once upon a time, people belonging to this community spoke the same language. Traces of it common origin are still preserved in many languages of the peoples of Europe and Asia. So, in all these languages \u200b\u200bthere is the word "birch", denoting either a tree in general, or the name of the birch itself. There are many other common names and terms in these languages.
The Indo-Europeans were engaged in cattle breeding and agriculture, later they began to smelt bronze.
An example of Indo-European settlements are the remains of an ancient settlement in the region of the middle reaches of the Dnieper near the village of Trypillya, dating back to the 4th-3rd millennium BC. e.
"Trypillians" no longer lived in dugouts, but in large wooden houses, the walls of which were covered with clay for warmth. The floor was clay. The area of such houses reached 100-150 m2. Large groups lived in them, possibly tribal communities, divided into families. Each family lived in a separate, fenced-off compartment with a fired clay oven for heating and cooking.
In the center of the house there was a small elevation - an altar, where the "Trypillians" performed their religious rites and sacrifices to the gods. One of the main ones was considered the mother goddess - the patroness of fertility. Houses in the village were often located in a circle. The settlement consisted of dozens of dwellings. In the center of it there was a corral for cattle, and it itself was fenced off from attacks by people and predatory animals with a rampart and a palisade. But it is surprising that in the settlements of the "Trypillians" no remains of weapons were found - battle axes, daggers and other means of defense and attack. And this means that mostly peaceful tribes lived here, for whom war had not yet become a part of life.
The main occupation of the "Trypillians" were agriculture and breeding of domestic animals. They sowed large areas of land with wheat, barley, millet, peas; they cultivated the field with hoes, harvested with wooden sickles with silicon inserts inserted into them. "Trypillians" bred cattle, pigs, goats, sheep.
The transition to agriculture and cattle breeding significantly advanced the economic power of the Indo-European tribes and contributed to the growth of their population. And the domestication of the horse, the development of bronze tools and weapons made the Indo-Europeans in the 4th - 3rd millennium BC. e. more easy-going in search of new lands, more daring in the development of new territories.
Settlement of the Indo-Europeans. From the southeast of Europe, the spread of the Indo-Europeans across the expanses of Eurasia began. They moved west and southwest and occupied all of Europe to the Atlantic. Another part of the Indo-European tribes spread to the north and east. They populated the north of Europe. The wedge of Indo-European settlements ran into the environment of the Finno-Ugric peoples and ran into the Ural Mountains, beyond which the Indo-Europeans did not go. In the south and southeast, they moved into Asia Minor, the North Caucasus, Iran and Central Asia, and settled in India.
In the myths and fairy tales of the peoples of India, memories of their ancient northern ancestral home have been preserved, while in the north of Russia there are still names of rivers and lakes, dating back to Sanskrit, the ancient language of India.
During the migrations of the 4th-3rd millennium BC. e. Indo-European community, which occupied vast lands from Western Europe to India (hence the name), began to disintegrate. In conditions of constant movement, the development of new territories, the Indo-European tribes were increasingly moving away from each other.
belligerent, energetic Indo-Europeans came to places where other peoples already lived. These incursions were far from peaceful. Long before the first states, armies appeared on the territory of Eurasia, wars began, our ancient ancestors fought for convenient lands, generous fishing grounds, and forests rich in animals. On the site of many ancient sites, traces of a fire, hot fights are distinguishable: skulls, bones pierced by arrows and broken by battle axes were found there.
Indo-Europeans and ancestors of other peoples. Already during the period of settlement of the Indo-Europeans, their interaction and mixing with other tribes began. So, in the north-east of Europe, they coexisted with the ancestors of the Finno-Ugric peoples (now they include many Russian peoples - Mordovians, Udmurts, Mari, Komi, as well as Hungarians, Estonians and Finns).
In Asia and Europe, the Indo-Europeans encountered the ancestors of the Turks and Mongols (their descendants from Russian peoples are Tatars, Bashkirs, Chuvashs, Kalmyks, Buryats, etc.).
The ancestors of the Ural peoples were located in the region of the Northern Urals. The ancient Altaians developed in Southern Siberia.
Turbulent processes took place in the Caucasus, where a population was formed that spoke Caucasian languages (the ancient inhabitants of Dagestan, Adygea, Abkhazia).
Settled in the forest zone Indo-Europeans Together with other local inhabitants, they mastered cattle breeding and forest-type agriculture, and continued to develop hunting and fishing. The local population, living in the harsh conditions of the forest and forest-steppe, lagged behind the rapidly developing peoples of the Mediterranean, southern Europe, Asia Minor, and Egypt. Nature at that time was the main regulator of human development, and it was not in favor of the north.
To imagine where the Indo-Europeans could come from and how to spread across Eurasia, it is necessary to use the knowledge of archeology, history, linguistics, genetics and religious studies.
The most common territory among researchers, which is taken as the ancestral home of the Indo-Europeans, is the region of the Middle Volga and the Dnieper. The authoritative archaeologist and culturologist Maria Gimbutas places the starting point of the spread of the Indo-Europeans in the area of Samarskaya Luka at the beginning of the 5th millennium BC. Let's take this place as a conditional starting point of the Indo-European settlement in Eurasia.
South!
Let's turn to linguistics. It is believed that the first of the historically known Indo-European languages \u200b\u200bis Hittite. The Hittites can be clearly traced in Anatolia from 1650 BC. Before them, the Hatti people existed in this territory (in Anatolia since 2300 BC), which some researchers also classify as Indo-Europeans. Thus, it can be assumed that the Indo-Europeans first appear on the historical arena in Anatolia. Why exactly here? After all, the Black Sea, the Caucasus Mountains and the Caspian Sea stand in the way of migration here from the Middle Volga. We will offer an answer to this question below.
The next language that evolved from Proto-Indo-European is Greek. From Anatolia, we are transported to the west and see that around 1850, the Achaians invade the territory of modern Greece from the north. They push the local Pelasgians, who, under the onslaught of the Achaians, move south and east (to Western Anatolia). Note interesting detail. The name of the Achaians (Ἀχαιοί) is consonant with the name of the Aryans (ahaya - araya). Having settled in Greece, the Achaians established close ties with the Hittites. This is not surprising, since they were related by language, genetics and religion. We will talk about genes and beliefs below.
The next branch was the Indo-Iranian languages. In the territory of modern Iran and Pakistan, Indo-Europeans invade in separate streams around 1700 BC. If practically nothing is known about Iranian expansion, then in Hindustan the Indo-Europeans became the cause of the decline of the Harappan civilization. Such large and surprisingly highly developed cities as Harappa and Mozhenjo-Daro died out sharply at this time. Then there was a gradual penetration into the territory modern India. In Hindustan, the Indo-Europeans still formed an oral corpus of religious hymns "Vedas", the ordering of which dates back to around 1700 BC. Indo-Europeans on the territory of modern Iran, Pakistan and India called themselves Aryans.
Here it is necessary to chronologically return to the Greek linguistic community, since about 1200 BC, the Indo-European Dorians invaded Greece from the north. Now the Achaians had to make room. All these movements seem to have caused quite a few problems. Among them and Trojan War, and the movement of the Sea Peoples south into Palestine. Note that the Dorians are also consonant with the Aryans and not only in Russian.
Here the Greek-Anatolian expansion stopped and closed in on itself, and then on the Iranian expansion. The Dorians jostled with the Achaians, and the Achaians with the Anatolian Hittites. Why didn't the Indo-Europeans go further south? The fact is that there were powerful Egypt and Mesopotamia, in which culturally (and genetically) more ancient and more developed peoples lived. Therefore, here the Indo-European expansion ran into an insurmountable obstacle.
So the Indo-Aryan branch ran into a more cultured and ancient people in Hindustan - the Dravidians. Further advance into the depths of Hindustan was extremely slow and painful. The local population was forced out to the south and east extremely reluctantly.
The next branch is Italian. Mythology says that when the warrior of Troy devastated by the Achaians - Aeneas arrived on the territory of modern Italy, he found a tribe of Latins here. The Etruscans and Sabines also lived here. All these tribes are attributed to the Indo-Europeans, who came here somewhere between the invasions of the Achaians and Dorians in Greece. The descendants of Aeneas and the Latin woman he took as his wife founded Rome and the dynasty of its rulers. Therefore, the Latin language since the time of the military expansion of Rome on the Apennine Peninsula began to dominate. The tribes of the Indo-Europeans who settled in Italy had to go further from their ancestral home than the Hittites, Achaians, Dorians and Aryans. Therefore, their sedentary culture was formed later and they entered the historical arena belatedly, but no less triumphantly. In Italy, the Indo-Europeans ran into a natural obstacle - the sea. The water element stopped them. They were forced to master the sea much later, when they fought with the Semites by the Phoenicians of Carthage.
Drankh nah westen
The Celtic branch may have formed around the same time as the Italic branch. Speakers of the Celtic languages did not meet in Europe either natural obstacles or strong opposing peoples. Therefore, they walked for a long time until they reached the Atlantic coast of Europe and to modern Britain. There they stopped, but failed to develop in the same way as their Indo-European relatives, who followed a shorter path to areas where they could develop and enrich themselves culturally from more ancient neighboring peoples.
The speakers of the Balto-Slavic branch also moved west, but the bulk of the speakers of these languages did not go further than Central Europe. Researchers tend to place the approximate time of the formation of the Balto-Slavic languages around the 3rd or 2nd millennium BC. This branch is older than the Celtic. That is, we have a picture when the "younger" and more active cultures are moving west further than the "older" cultures.
The Germanic languages can be attributed to the young Indo-European language cultures. Their beginning is usually attributed to the middle of the 1st millennium BC. Representatives of these languages went from the north of Central Europe to the south between the representatives of the Celtic languages in the west and the representatives of the Balto-Slavic languages in the east. But this is about our time.
The main migration flows of the Indo-Europeans went west, south and southeast. If in the south and southeast they met powerful cultures that left a memory of themselves, then in the west, in Europe, apparently, the cultures were weak, or their representatives were small. Therefore, pre-Indo-European Europeans were culturally assimilated.
Since culture is closely related to language, it is the remains of pre-Indo-European languages in pre-literate Europe that are of greatest interest. And those leftovers are scarce.
In the west it is Basque. The Basques live in the mountainous regions of the Western Pyrenees. That is, the speakers of the non-Indo-European Basque language were actually pressed against the ocean and driven into the mountains. So intense was the conquest of Europe by the Indo-Europeans. The Basques, by the way, gave the name to the Gascons. d'Artagnan was a descendant of the Basques.
In the north, these are the non-Indo-European Finno-Ugric languages of the Uralic language family. But, as we can see, migration to the north was not a priority for the Indo-Europeans. The speakers of the languages of the Uralic language group are now the northern neighbors of foreign Europeans throughout Eurasia from Finland to Siberia.
In the south, these are the Kartvelian languages, localized in the mountainous regions of the Caucasus, mainly in Georgia. All other languages of Europe are Indo-European languages.
Thus, we see that all non-Indo-Europeans in Europe were culturally assimilated by the Indo-Europeans, either pressed to the sea, driven into the mountains or left in the cold. This is how they carried out the aggressive “dranh nah westen”.
Tokhary
We see another picture in the east of the alleged ancestral home. If in Europe the Indo-Europeans still rule the ball, then in the Far East they left several bright traces of their stay and literally disappeared into the local peoples. Around 3000 BC in Altai, on the border with the Far East, carriers of Afanasyevka are announced archaeological culture, which is identified with the Indo-Europeans. On the territory of modern China, the Tarim mummies of red-haired and fair-haired people of European appearance are dated to the middle of the 2nd millennium. In the 1st millennium, this territory was inhabited by the Rong tribe, whose ancestors, according to ancient Chinese historians, were blue-eyed and fair-haired. It is noteworthy that around this time, the Chinese rulers in the army appear war chariots, which did not exist before. The appearance of chariots in China is associated with the Indo-Europeans. It is known that in the territory of the Tarim Basin people spoke Indo-European Tocharian languages somewhere from the 1st millennium BC until almost the time of Genghis Khan - until the 1st millennium AD.
Thus we see what different fate befell the Indo-Europeans who settled in Eurasia.
Genetics
Now let's see if the genetic data confirm this picture. We will be interested in the haplogroups of the Y-chromosome of the modern population of Eurasia. Haplogroups show the relationship of people to each other in the male line by identifying gene mutations. Haplogroups are related to each other by kinship. We roughly know which haplogroups (mutations) appeared when, but we don’t know where. Therefore, if we combine the data of linguistics, history and genetics, we must
get a more or less objective picture. These data will complement each other. So, closely related haplogroups R1b and R1a are usually associated with the original speakers of Indo-European languages. The distribution of these haplogroups among people on the territory of Eurasia coincides with the distribution of Indo-European languages.
R1a
The oldest haplogroup R1a, which originated around 16500 BC, is distributed from Central Europe to China and India. R1a has the highest concentration among the population in Eastern Europe and in the Pamir and Tien Shan mountains. Among modern peoples, R1a has the highest concentration among the Slavs, especially among the Lusatian Slavs in Germany, as well as among upper castes Northern Hindustan and some Iranian peoples.
That is, the distribution of R1a today just covers the area dominated by the oldest Indo-European languages, with the center at our conditional point of migration reference. But why is the highest concentration of these haplogroups today observed in the population at the edges of this region. Why is there no concentration in the center? This question can be answered by history and geography. Steppes, deserts and semi-deserts lie between Eastern Europe and the mountains of the west of South Asia, along which there was a brisk trade (Silk Road) and conquering trans-Eurasian raids (Huns, Genghis Khan, Turks, Chinese, etc.). All this activity "trampled" and diluted the concentration of R1a in the center of the area of its current distribution. That is, later historical activity, as it were, drove the Eastern Indo-Europeans R1a in the south into the mountains, cutting them off from the Western Indo-Europeans, who settled in the dense and impenetrable forests Of Eastern Europe.
R1b
The distribution of the haplogroup R1b related to R1a also coincides with the distribution of Indo-European languages. Therefore, R1b is also considered among the ancient Indo-Europeans. R1b appeared around 14500 BC. She is younger than R1a by two millennia. But the representatives of this haplogroup went much further west than the representatives of R1a. The highest concentration of R1b is observed among the peoples of the Ural Mountains and the population of Western Europe. That is, the carriers of this younger mutation turned out to be the most active in matters of territorial expansion in the western direction. Someone stayed in the area of the beginning of resettlement, and someone went on a long journey.
This can be explained by the fact that the younger clans wanted more free space for life, so they went further than the older clans, which quickly occupied good spaces near the conditional settlement point. For some reason, R1b did not go to the East. The haplogroup of Tarim mummies is R1a. Maybe the young generations of R1b received information from the elders of R1a that it is not worth going to the east (snow will fall into the head), but it is worth going to the west. There they went, eventually resting in the Atlantic.
Who did they meet in Western Europe not known. R1b, apparently, took girls from local tribes as wives, but did not give their girls to the locals. That is, they treated the local population rudely. Therefore, the haplogroups of the original ancient Western Europeans have not been preserved. Even the Basques, the only people in Western Europe who speak a non-Indo-European language, also have a predominant R1b haplogroup. That is, the Indo-Europeans in Western Europe pressed to the sea and drove into the mountains their own descendants, who assimilated into culture local residents, but passed on their dominant genetics to them.
The Indo-Europeans reached modern Spain, France and Britain in the form of the Celts in the first millennium BC.
Ungrateful euro-natives at the dawn of history
The R1a Indo-Europeans in Europe seem to have treated the local population more respectfully. Representatives of the ancient haplogroup I remained in Northern and Southern Europe, which is older than haplogroups R1a and R1b by 5-10 thousand years. A high concentration of the population with this haplogroup is now observed in Scandinavia and in the western part of the Balkan Peninsula. These people speak Indo-European languages, but their genes tell that they are descendants of the pre-Indo-European population of Europe.
The Indo-Europeans R1a took pity on I, but the representatives of this haplogroup turned out to be ungrateful. In Scandinavia and Northern Germany in the 1st millennium BC, there was a merger of three groups of genera with haplogroups R1b, I and R1a. The product of the merger was a new genus, which is called the ancient Germans. At the turn of the eras, they began their movement to the west, south and east. In the west they pushed back the Celts, in the south they entered into military interaction with the Italics, and in the east they pushed back the R1a Slavs, who from then until the present day have constantly experienced military pressure from aggressive Germans.
Nevertheless, all of Europe became the property of the Indo-Europeans. What cannot be said about all other regions of Eurasia, where the settlers were opposed by ancient, highly developed civilizations with strong culture and economy.
Opponents of the Indo-Europeans
Earlier we considered the Hittites (descendants of the Hatti) in Anatolia, the Achaians and Dorians in Greece, and the ancient Iranians, the ancestors of the Persians in Iran. These peoples were forced to close in on themselves, as they were opposed by powerful civilizations in the south - Egypt and Mesopotamia. There already existed writing and a developed economy by the time of contact with the Indo-Europeans who came from the north. brisk trade, advanced culture with writing - perhaps this attracted the Indo-Europeans to the south. From our conditional point of migration reference to Anatolia, the ancestors of the Hittites could go down the Volga and further through the Caucasus.
In North Africa (including Egypt), the most ancient haplogroup E dominates, which arose 55-50 thousand years ago in Africa. The Egyptians already had pyramids, writing, developed relationships with Crete, Santorini, Palestine and Mesopotamia. It was the territory of Palestine that became the battlefield of the Indo-Europeans and the Egyptians. It was from the Indo-Europeans, directly or through intermediaries, that the ancient Egyptians, like the Chinese, adopted chariots.
Mesopotamia also had writing, culture and economy. Haplogroup J dominated there (Assyrians, Phoenicians, Semites). The age of this haplogroup is about 30 thousand years. She is approximately the same age as haplogroup I, much younger than E, but older than R1a and R1b. Therefore, the Indo-Europeans also ran into Mesopotamia as an insurmountable obstacle. Even the Ahmenid Persians in the 1st century BC were forced to have four imperial languages, two of which were Semitic, one Afroasian. And only one of the imperial languages was Old Persian. There was also no cultural and religious uniformity in the Persian Empire.
In Hindustan, the Indo-Europeans R1a met with representatives of the L and H haplogroups. They were also much older than R1a. Haplogroup L today has a maximum concentration in the northern mountainous regions of Hindustan and near the mouth of the Indus. Between these areas, the Indo-Europeans R1a passed. Some L were driven into the mountains, while others L were pressed to the sea. Haplogroup H (gypsies, Bangladeshis) was forced out to South India. Mobile islets H still roam the world in the form of gypsies.
Representatives of haplogroup L were Dravidians who created the Harappan civilization, swept away by the Indo-European Aryans in the territory of modern Pakistan. True, many elements of the culture of this civilization were borrowed by the Aryans and became part of Hinduism, which was already formed on the territory of Hindustan.
In the Far East, the Indo-Europeans were the least fortunate. They gave away their cultural achievements, but, apparently, they did not receive local women. But the Indo-European women, apparently, went to the Far Eastern men. Therefore, the Indo-European genetics of patrilineal haplogroups did not take root here.
Common features of the Indo-Europeans
Of course, the linguistic community makes all the considered Indo-Europeans related. Language is an element of culture, which cannot be reduced to language. There must be some common features even in sociology and religion.
Three strata
It is known that when the Aryans came to Hindustan, they separated themselves from the local population and formed their own three castes: Brahmins, Kshatriyas, Vaishyas. Brahmins were a few representatives of spiritual and intellectual pursuits. Kshatriyas were engaged in public administration and war. They were also few. The Vaishyas were the remaining members of the community, who were supposed to thrive under the spiritual protection of the Brahmins and the physical protection of the Kshatriyas. The Vaishyas were supposed to create wealth and enjoy happy family life. In the fourth caste, the Shudras, were the infidels, that is, the local population of Hindustan. The rest are more lower castes appeared even later.
Thus, it can be assumed that the three-membered own structure of the Aryans was transferred from the ancestral home. Was there a similar structure among the Indo-Europeans, who diverged from their ancestral home in other directions?
The social division of the Indo-Europeans who came to the territory of modern Iran can be judged by the class structure of the state under the Persian ruler Ardashir I at the beginning of the first millennium AD. The society was divided into four estates: priests (priests, magicians, judges), warriors, scribes, people (peasants, artisans). If we take into account that the Indo-Europeans who came to the modern territory of Iran did not have a written language, then scribes can be removed from the estates. There are three estates: priests, warriors, people.
IN Ancient Greece tribal community called Phil. It was a community that had its own priests and its own warriors, headed by a philarch. Separately, a group of fila warriors in the general army was also called fila. Therefore, the phylum can be represented as a society, which is divided into three parts: priests, warriors and everyone else. Subsequently, the phylum became a unit of the territorial division of Greece.
There were tribes in Rome. It must be remembered that in all Indo-European languages the number "three" sounds the same. From the word "tribe" came latin word tribuo (to divide). Perhaps the tribe originally meant a community divided into three parts: priests, warriors, people. Therefore, the name of this division was given to the word, which began to denote the very action of division.
All of the above Indo-Europeans met with societies that were economically superior to them and had a written language. It may have allowed him to keep his ancient culture more or less intact.
But the early Slavs and Celts in Europe did not meet anything like that, they stayed outside of history for too long and “forgotten” themselves. But the Celts were "helped" by distant relatives.
At the turn of the era, the still young Roman adventurer-commander Julius Caesar, who attacked the Gauls (Celts), described their three estates: druides, equites and plebs. Priests, warriors and people. The warriors of the Gauls could still be called "fillets". From this word came the English field (battlefield). Compare with the military phylum of the Greeks. Julius Caesar did not know that he was destroying his distant relatives.
It is difficult to say anything about the Slavs and Germans in relation to the social structure dating back to the times of the Indo-European ancestral home. The Slavs have long and comfortably settled in impenetrable forests without writing and did not much come into contact with literate and active sea peoples. Lazy and "wild". The Germans themselves formed very late from the Slavs, the Celts and the local pre-Indo-European Scandinavian population. Therefore, their sociological memory was even worse than that of the Slavs.
With regard to the Slavs and Germans, one can only make rough guesses. For example, it can be assumed that for some reason the originally tripartite (three-stratum) society was divided. Warriors with a minimum number of priests and representatives of the people went north and joined with the local Scandinavians, giving the Germans. And the people who are accustomed to live safely and engage in a peaceful life, remained in comfortable forests on the banks of convenient rivers and lakes. If everything happened just like that, the episode with the calling of the Varangians by the Slavs is understandable. Our land is plentiful, we are fattening here, but everyone quarreled, because we do not have rulers-administrators (warriors) who would manage society. Therefore, the Slavs turned to the Varangians. The Vaishya caste turned to the kshatriyas who had long gone to the west, so that they would come and streamline their life together, as in the old days.
This can also explain the extreme militancy of the Germans and the calm, peaceful disposition of the Slavs.
A similar situation can be observed in ancient Sparta. Where only warriors were citizens. The military estate existed separately from the people, which, moreover, was not related to it. That is, speaking in Hindu terms, there were no Vaishyas and Brahmins, but only Kshatriyas and Shudras (representatives of the conquered people). The Spartans called priests from neighboring Greek cities. In times of acute need, the role of the priest was performed by the main warrior - the king. At the same time, the Spartans were excellent warriors (they staged the famous massacre of their distant relatives, the Persians, at the Battle of Thermopylae), but lawless people. They staged deadly raids on their Shudras and engaged in the most disgusting eugenics - killing babies with bodily defects. That is, these valiant warriors clearly lacked spiritual and intellectual mentors who would teach them mercy and explain that their true purpose is not to kill, but, on the contrary, to protect (save lives).
Both the Spartans and the Germans may have "forgotten" their role in the three-stratum society and engaged in robbery and violence.
Religion
It is generally accepted that the Indo-Europeans were pagans. The pantheon of Indo-European gods is known, which have many parallels and similarities in different Indo-European cultures very far from each other in time and territory. But we are interested in the ancestral home and metamorphoses in the process of settling in Eurasia.
The most remarkable thing is that in different Indo-European cultures there are signs of the presence of the category of the Creator. One God who created everything, including many lower gods.
In the early Vedas, there are hymns that tell about the Heavenly Father (Dyaus Pita), who was the original creator of the world. God of light and day. He figured together with the female principle (Mother). The Slavic word "day" is related to the word "dyaus", since the day is characterized by a bright sky. The cult of the Heavenly Father was already fading away at the time of the Rig Veda ordering in 1700 BC, when the Aryans came to modern Pakistan. So he was of greater importance where the Aryans came from to Hindustan.
In the Avesta in the 1st millennium BC, the reformer of the Iranian religion Zarathustra speaks of Ahura Mazda (Initially Thinking) - the One God.
In Greece, at the time of Homer, when there was already confusion and vacillation in the religion of the people, and there was no written language yet, Zeus was the main god. The relationship of the Greek "Zeus" and the Aryan "Dyaus" has been firmly proven by linguists, historians and religious scholars.
In Rome, the main god, the sky god Jupiter, is none other than "Dyaus Pita". This has also been proven and beyond doubt.
But the most interesting thing is that the Tocharians, who have sunk into obscurity, left us a beacon here too. In the 1st century BC, on the territory of modern China, in the area near the area of distribution of the Zhong tribes (descendants of the Tokhars), the category Tian-di (Sky First Ancestor) appears. Compare the words of Dyaus Pita and Tian-di. And the words "day" and "tian". The meaning of this category absolutely coincides with the Indo-European Heavenly Father. The category of Tian-di in the steppe expanses of Eurasia later turned into the category of Tengri, that Heavenly Father, whom Genghis Khan worshiped.
It is extremely interesting that the haplogroup R1b was recorded by Pharaoh Akhenaten, who in the middle of the 2nd millennium, when Egypt was already in full contact with the Indo-Europeans in the north, tried (unsuccessfully) to establish monotheism. That is, the pope of the pharaoh was either himself an Indo-European, or was their descendant. The presence of Indo-Europeans in Egypt may explain the high concentration of R1b among Cameroonians. The descendants of the Indo-Europeans, once in Egypt, could climb the Nile and for some reason move to the territory of modern Cameroon.
It is difficult to consider Slavic and Celtic deities in relation to the most ancient categories. Since there was too much non-written period and a huge number of foreign cultural contacts and influences.
It can be assumed that at the time of the beginning of the movement of the Indo-Europeans from their ancestral homeland, they had, if not monotheism, then stereotheism, when the One Primal Creator as a male principle was revered with a feminine principle, through which the world was created (born). The rest of the gods were revered as hypostases of these two principles, applicable to certain life situations. Many religious historians defend this position. In their opinion, the wild polytheism of paganism is the decomposition of the initially spiritually and intellectually harmonious ancient high religious concept.
For example, the Israeli archaeologist Zeev Herzog in 1999, in his article “The Deconstruction of the Walls of Jericho” in the weekly Haaretz, writes that, according to his data, strict monotheism was finally formed among the Jews already in the period of the kingdoms. Up to this point, “…the God of Israel, Jehovah, had a female spouse…” It is possible that Herzog's archaeological data record the remnants of an ancient stereotheistic cult among the Jews. And only a strong centralized royal power was able to finally stop the ancient cult inertia.
It is also noteworthy that there is only one step from such stereotheism to monotheism. Need to be removed from religious system feminine beginning. Which was done by Abraham at the turn of the 3rd and 2nd millennium BC in Northern Mesopotamia. Where there was an area of contact between the ancient Semites and the Indo-Europeans who came from the north.
Why was this step taken? Because the ancient stereotheism by that time everywhere had degenerated into the most terrible bloody paganism. The main source of the destruction of religion was the sexual sphere, since the main religious symbols of that time were the male and female genital organs. Rituals and ceremonies had corresponding symbols and actions. Blood sacrifices of children flourished. In the most terrible forms, this paganism manifested itself precisely among the representatives of highly developed peoples with more ancient haplogroups, in which the younger and still more pious ancient Indo-Europeans "rested". There are hymns in the Rigveda that openly condemn "member-worshippers". Among the ancient Indo-Europeans, the sexual sphere was in a chaste state. Among the ancient Aryans, for example, murder and adultery were considered equivalent crimes and were punishable by death.
To stop the pagan madness of the 2nd millennium BC, it is not enough to return to the ancient pious stereotheism, it was necessary to remove the feminine principle from rituals and religious images, along with sexual iconography and reference to the sexual act as an act of creation of the world. This was done by the pious ancient Jews. The sexual sphere from the public ritual has been moved to the hidden area of the family sacrament. That is why the One Creator God in Judaism and Islam cannot be portrayed in any way at all. Because earlier it was universally depicted as a phallus.
It is possible that one of the destinations of the ancient Indo-Europeans was to bring their relatively young pious religion to the realm of older, already degenerate cults, in order to communicate a new bright impulse for the purification of the spiritual sphere of mankind.
After all, if this had not happened, the era of atheism would have begun much earlier. This can be seen in Ancient Greece and the philosophy that “originated” there, as a movement of light religion, through the decay of paganism into atheism of the denial of the spiritual sphere and the transformation of a person into a lustful biorobot, that is, into an animal. It is no coincidence that the first sparks of atheism in Europe were the Renaissance, which is characterized by a return to the ideals of antiquity, which is in a state of transition from the horrors of occult paganism to atheism.
fate
The spiritual destinies of the Indo-Europeans in the places where they came and settled are interesting. The Aryans of India absorbed elements of the degenerate paganism of the Dravidians, through the Shramans they came, on the one hand, to extreme occultism (Shiva, Kali, Khajuraho), and on the other, to Buddhism. The latter became the prototype of modern atheism, since it does not imply the category of God the Creator at all.
The Iranian branch attempted to fix the primordial God in Ahura Mazda, but in that territory was absorbed into the more concrete young monotheism of Islam.
Greeks and many Palestinians and Syrians became Christians. The Copts, the original Egyptians, also became Christians. All Europe became Christian. Even some descendants of alien Indo-Europeans on the territory of modern China and Mongolia became Christians. During the military strengthening of the young Genghis Khan, the Christian tribes in Mongolia came to an end. But Genghis Khan himself, like Moses, went to communicate with the Heavenly Father (Tengri) on the Sacred Mountain (Burkhan Khaldun).
Apparently Christianity as a development of Judaism was especially close to the descendants of the ancient Indo-Europeans. It is tempting to assume that the reason for this is the influence of the alien ancient Indo-Europeans on the teachings of Abraham.
Today we see that monotheism is gradually losing ground.
The Jews became mothballed and ceased to militantly prove the correctness of their monotheism. Some Jews turned to the occult pagan corruption of Judaism - the Kabbalah. Some Jews became atheists. Even representatives of the elected ancient Jewish priesthood of the Levites become militant atheists (K. Marx). Other Semites tend to practice Islam. But the latter are stubbornly pulled into the marginal realm of fanatical terrorism, which in its essence is also paganism and occultism.
The carriers of the Indo-European haplogroup R1b and non-Indo-European I are trying to free themselves from the remnants of Christianity in Western Europe and have fallen into fanatical atheism. As if occult paganism was ripening in this territory in parallel with the flowering of Christianity, in order to one day break out and plunge everyone into extreme godlessness. Economically subjugating the whole world, they are also trying to aggressively impose their unbelief on all the peoples of the world.
Only lazy R1a in comfortable forests are still trying to resist the onslaught of atheism from the West and preserve the spiritual tradition of Orthodoxy. How long will the strength last?
Traditionally, ancient history begins to be studied from the civilizations of Ancient Egypt, the Sumerians, and Babylon. No doubt, these civilizations have made a significant contribution to the development of mankind. But in parallel with the emergence and development of these civilizations in the north, on the territory modern Russia there were events 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 a clear similarity between Sanskrit and European languages. Sanskrit was an ancient language whose position in India resembled that of Latin in Europe, with some Sanskrit texts over 3,000 years old. Similarities were found not only in language, but also in traditions and beliefs, so it became clear that ancient Indians and ancient Europeans had common ancestors.
More than a hundred years of disputes and searches followed, spent on reliably establishing where the ancient Indo-Europeans lived, where their ancestral home was. There has been a lot of speculation on this subject. The German Nazis, for example, at one time announced that the ancient Indo-Europeans, or the ancient Aryans, lived on the territory of modern Germany and represented a special superior race. However, studies have shown a very different picture.
In ancient times, the Indo-Europeans really were one people. They lived relatively compactly in the basin of the Don and Volga, on the territory of modern Russia. The most ancient archaeological culture, for which its Indo-European origin has been proven, is Samara. It belongs to the 5th millennium BC. e., and the area of its distribution affects the territory of modern Samara, Saratov and Orenburg regions. In the next millennium, Indo-European cultures expanded their range, capturing the Urals and the Kazakh steppes in the east, and reaching the Dnieper in the west. Up to 3-4 millennium BC. e. Indo-Europeans were a single community.
Who were the ancient Indo-Europeans? They were a warlike people, but at the same time they 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 various gods, the main of which was the god of thunder and lightning (the same one that was known in Ancient Rus' as Perun, and in Ancient Greece as Zeus). The ancient Indo-Europeans believed in an afterlife and the existence of hell and heaven. They also had a cult of heroes, about whose exploits legends were composed.
About 5-6 thousand years ago, the Indo-Europeans made one of the most important discoveries in the history of mankind - they invented the wheel and learned how 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.
The resettlement of the Indo-Europeans (red color shows the distribution by the middle of the III millennium BC and orange - by the I millennium BC)
The Indo-Europeans were divided. Part 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" living to the north - Slavic, Germanic and Celtic tribes were also Indo-Europeans. Part came to Asia Minor (the territory of modern Turkey). The Indo-European people of the Hittites created a powerful kingdom and were the first in history to master the smelting of iron. Part of the Indo-European tribes, having lingered for a while on 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 oldest 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.
Where did the Slavs and "Indo-Europeans" come from? The answer is DNA genealogy. Part 1
Get comfortable, dear reader. Some shock awaits you. It's not very convenient to start the story with what the author expects from his research on the effect of an exploding bomb, but what if this is the case?
And, in fact, why such confidence? Nothing surprises us these days, 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 frequent occurrence. And this question is "The Origin of the Slavs". Or - "The origin of the original Slavic community." Or, if you like, "The search for the Indo-European ancestral home."
In fact, over these three hundred years, no matter how many assumptions have been made on this subject. Probably everything that is possible. The problem is, no one knew which ones were true. The question was utterly confusing.
Therefore, the author will not be surprised if, in response to his conclusions and conclusions, a chorus of voices will be heard - “this is how it was known”, “this has been written about before”. Such 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 the choir will no longer be, but there will be 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 Proto-Slavs. And, as will be seen from the following presentation, this context is inextricably linked with the "Indo-Europeans". The latter is a monstrously clumsy 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, a certain similarity was found between Sanskrit and many European languages. This group of languages \u200b\u200band called "Indo-European", it includes almost all European languages, except for Basque, Finno-Ugric and Turkic languages. Then they did not know the reasons why India and Europe suddenly found themselves in the same language bundle, and even now they do not really know. This will also be discussed below, and it could not have done without the Proto-Slavs.
But the absurdities were set in motion when the carriers of the "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 an Indo-European. A Russian who lives in Finland and speaks Finnish is not an Indo-European, and 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 there was no better choice. Then it might not have been. Now there is. Although, strictly speaking, these are linguistic terms, and saying one thing, linguists mean something else, 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 antiquity spoke the "Indo-European" languages. And before that, who were they? And they were - "Proto-Indo-Europeans". This term is even more unfortunate, and is akin to what the ancient Anglo-Saxons are called "proto-Americans." They have not even seen India in their eyes, and that language has not yet been formed, it will only be transformed in millennia and join the Indo-European group, and they are already “Proto-Indo-Europeans”.
It's like calling Prince Vladimir "proto-Soviet". Although "indo-"- it is too linguistic term, and philologists have no direct relation to 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 a cultural connection with India, and expanded this cultural, and in any case linguistic connection to the whole of Europe.
Wait a minute, how could it not? A arias?
But about this a little later.
More about terms. For some reason, it is permissible to talk about the ancient Germans or Scandinavians, but not about the ancient Slavs. Distributed immediately - no, no, there were no ancient Slavs. Although it should be clear to everyone that we are talking about Proto-Slavs. What's the double standard? Let's agree - speaking of the Slavs, I do not mean the modern "ethno-cultural community", but our ancestors who lived millennia ago.
Should they have a name? Not clumsy "Proto-Indo-Europeans" right? And not "Indo-Iranians", right? Let there be Slavs Proto-Slavs. AND arias, but more on that later.
Now - what kind of Slavs are we talking about? Traditionally, the Slavs are divided into three groups - Eastern Slavs, Western and Southern. Eastern Slavs e are Russians, Ukrainians, Belarusians. Western Slavs Poles, Czechs, Slovaks. South Slavs- these are Serbs, Croats, Bosnians, Macedonians, Bulgarians, Slovenes. This list is not exhaustive, one can recall the Sorbs (Lusatian Slavs), and others, but the idea is clear. In fact, 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, as it is believed, they were formed by the 6th-7th centuries of our era. AND Slavic languages, according to linguists, diverged about 1300 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 markedly different, and there are other "ethno-cultural" differences. A within the framework of DNA genealogy, they are one and the same, one genus, the same label 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 a pattern of mutations in the male sex chromosome. Women also have them, but in a different coordinate system. So here it is East Slavs- this is the genus R1a1. They are among the inhabitants 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” is one thing, in ethnography it’s another, in DNA genealogy it’s a third. Haplogroup, the 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 wears a certain label in DNA. And this mark in the male offspring is indestructible, it can only be destroyed together with the offspring itself. Unfortunately, there have been many such cases in the past. But this does not mean at all that this label is an indicator of a certain “breed” of a person.
This the label is not associated with genes and has nothing to do with them, namely genes and only genes can be associated with a "breed" if desired. Haplogroups and haplotypes do not in any way determine the shape of the skull or nose, hair color, 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 was the patriarch of the clan, whose offspring survived and lives today, unlike millions of other broken genealogical lines.
This mark in our DNA is invaluable to historians, linguists, anthropologists, because this label is not "assimilated" how speakers of languages, genes, speakers assimilate different cultures, which "dissolve" in the population. Haplotypes and haplogroups do not "dissolve" are not assimilated. No matter what religion the descendants change over the course of millennia, no matter what language they acquire, no matter what cultural and ethnic characteristics they change, exactly the same haplogroup, same haplotype(perhaps with a few mutations) stubbornly appear with appropriate testing of certain fragments of the Y chromosome. It doesn't matter if it's a Muslim, Christian, Jew, Buddhist, atheist or 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 they entered the East European plain, where 4500 years ago the ancestor of modern Russians and Ukrainians appeared R1a1 including the author of this article. Five hundred years later, 4000 years ago, they, the Proto-Slavs, went to the southern Urals, after another four hundred years they went to India, where they now live about 100 million their descendants, members of the same genus R1a1. Aryan clans. 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, they are easily detected. 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 began 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, United United Arab Emirates, and the local Arabs, 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 define the boundaries of the range of the campaigns of the ancient Aryans. The calculations below show that the times of these trips to Arabia - 4 thousand years ago.
So, speaking "Slavs", we in this study will mean Eastern Slavs, people of the genus R1a1, in terms of DNA genealogy. Until very recently, science did not know how to designate them in "scientific terms". What objective, measurable parameter unites them? Actually, the question was not put like that.
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 know birch, ash, beech, they know wolves, bears, they know a horse. It has now become known that these are people of precisely the kind R1a1 to which they belong 70% population of modern Russia. And further to the west, to the Atlantic, the share of the Aryan, Slavic genus R1a1 is steadily falling, and among the inhabitants of the British Isles it is only 2-4% .
This issue has been dealt with. A "Indo-Europeans"- this is then Who?
From the above, it inevitably follows that "Indo-Europeans" - this is the ancient genus R1a1. Arias. Then everything, or at least a lot, falls into place - and 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 appearance of the Indo-European group of languages, since it is actually theirs, Aryan language or its dialects, and the appearance of the "Iranian languages" of the Indo-European group, since this is Aryan languages. Moreover, as we will see below, the “Iranian languages” appeared after the arrival of the Aryans in Iran, or, more precisely, not “after”, but were the result of the arrival of the Aryans there, in the 2nd millennium BC.
And how do modern sciences look at the "Indo-Europeans" now?
“Indo-Europeans” among them are like a heffalump. “Indo-Europeans”, in modern linguistics and a little in archeology, are ancient (as a rule) people who then (!), after millennia (!), came to India, and somehow made Sanskrit, the literary Indian language, turned out to be in the same linguistic bundle with the main European languages, except for the Basque and Finno-Ugric languages. And besides the Turkic and Semitic, which do not belong to the Indo-European languages.
How they, the Europeans, did it, how and where they ended up in India and Iran - linguists and archaeologists do not explain. Moreover, they also include those who did not come to India and did not seem to have anything to do with Sanskrit, but, apparently, they spread the language. Celts, for example. But at the same time, they argue who was an 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 also belong to Indo-European, and also incomprehensible to many, for some reason they often say “Indo-Iranian” instead of “Indo-European”. To make matters worse, "Indo-Europeans" are often referred to as "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, through the millennia, produced descendants 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 millennia before were "Indo-Iranians." You can go crazy! Moreover, they spoke "in 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 this is simply scary to mention among linguists. They don't even mention. They don't take it that way. Apparently, the command, the order was not received. And we are afraid.
And who are "Proto-Indo-Europeans"? And it's like proto-elephant. These, therefore, are those who were the ancestors of those who were the ancestors of those who, after millennia, came to India and Iran, and did so ... well, and so on.
Here is how linguists present 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 so long ago in English Literature it has been estimated that the scientific sources suggested 14 different "ancestral homes""Indo-Europeans" and "Proto-Indo-Europeans". V.A. Safronov in the fundamental book "Indo-European Ancestral Homes" 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 broke up into "Indo-European" languages, and other non-Indo-European (Semitic, Finno-Ugric, Turkic). And the "Indo-Europeans", therefore, led their languages. True, they came to India after many millennia, but they are still “Indo-Europeans”.
This is also dealt with. Linguists, however, have not figured it out yet. They note that “although the origin of the Indo-European languages is studied most intensively, compared to others, this continues to be the most difficult and enduring 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 the 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 is bad with the ancestral home of the “proto”, because it is bad with the ancestral home of the “Indo-Europeans”. Currently, three are more or less seriously considered as candidates for the ancestral home of "Indo-Europeans" or "Proto-Indo-Europeans".
One option- Western Asia, or, more specifically, Turkish Anatolia, or, more specifically, the area between the lakes Van and Urmia, just south of the borders former USSR, in western Iran, aka western Azerbaijan.
Second option- the southern steppes of modern Ukraine-Russia, in 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 distribution time 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 carriers, to 8000-10000 years ago, if its carriers 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 Agriculture across Europe, North Africa and Asia began from Anatolia between 8000 and 9500 years ago, and reached the British Isles about 5500 years ago. Supporters of the "Balkan theory" use the same arguments about the spread of agriculture, however, 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 for ancestral home of the Slavs. Since no one has yet connected the Slavs (Proto-Slavs), Aryans, and Indo-Europeans, and even more so did not put an identity sign between all three, the ancestral home of the Slavs is a separate, and also unresolved issue. 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 enter 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 people think 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 at all - they consider the question "insoluble at this stage." Still others suggest that the ancestral home of the Slavs, as well as the "Indo-Europeans" in general, were the steppes of the south of present-day Russia and Ukraine, but the fourth reject this with indignation. Fifths believe that the ancestral home of the "Indo-Europeans" and the ancestral home of the Slavs must still coincide, because the Slavic languages \u200b\u200bare very archaic and ancient. Others correct that they are 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, some "Indo-Iranian community", which for some reason spoke the "Balto-Slavic proto-language". This is already making 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's the way it is.
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, which means 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, and did not bury them, which deprived scientists of material for two and a half millennia.
Some believe that the settlement of the Proto-Slavs on the territory of Eastern Ukraine is associated with the spread of the Kurgan archaeological culture, which means 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 again "Indo-Iranians" created it. There are expressions "Indo-Iranian tribes on the way of resettlement to India." That is, they were already "Indo-Iranian", although they had not yet moved there. That is, anything, up to the point of absurdity, only not to use the word "Aryans".
Finally, "near-scientific" literature strikes at the other extreme, and claims that "Slavic-Russians were the progenitors of almost all European and part of 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, Slavs-Rus".
The situation is pretty clear. You can go to the essence of my presentation. Moreover, the most "advanced" historical and linguistic science articles, recognizing that the question of the place and time of the emergence of the "Indo-European" language remains unresolved, they call to go beyond archeology and linguistics and to involve "independent data" in order to resolve the issue, which will allow us to look at the problem from a different angle and make a choice between the main theories.
Which is what I do in the study presented here.
DNA genealogy in general, and the Slavs in particular
I have repeatedly described the essence of DNA genealogy and its main provisions (http://www.lebed.com/2006/art4606.htm , http://www.lebed.com/2007/art4914.htm , http://www .lebed.com/2007/art5034.htm). This time I'll get straight to the point, only reminding you that in the DNA of every man, namely in his Y chromosome, there are certain areas, in which gradually, every few generations, over and over again, mutations accumulate in nucleotides. It 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 an insignificant fraction of a percent of genes.
Y chromosome- the only one of all 46 chromosomes (more precisely, of the 23 that the spermatozoon carries), which is transmitted from father to son, and then to each next son along a chain of times tens of thousands of years long. The son receives a Y-chromosome from the father exactly the same that he received from his father, plus new mutations, if any, occurred during the transfer from father to son. And it rarely happens.
And how rare?
Here is 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 is 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 in about 22 generations, that is, on average, once every 550 years. Which allele will change next - no one knows, and it is impossible to predict. Statistics. In other words, here we can only talk about the probabilities of these changes.
In their more early stories about DNA genealogy, I gave examples on the so-called 6 -marker haplotypes, small for simplicity. Or also called "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 in the Y-chromosome, the haplotype with its numbers can, in principle, be extended as long as you like, it's just a matter of determining the nucleotide sequences. Haplotypes are determined by the maximum length in 67 markers, although technically there is no limit. But also 25 -marker haplotypes - very fine resolution, such haplotypes are not even considered by scientific articles. This is probably the first one.
Haplotypes are extremely sensitive to ancestry when talking about genealogical genera. 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 above! This corresponds to a difference of more than two thousand generations, that is, Slavic with Finno-Ugric common ancestor lived more than 30,000 years ago.
The same picture is obtained if we compare, for example, with the Jews. A 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 Finno-Ugric. And among themselves they differ on 35 mutations.
In general, the idea is clear. Haplotypes are very sensitive when compared with representatives of different genera. They reflect completely different histories of the genus, origin, migration of the genus. Why are there Finno-Finns or Jews! Let's take the Bulgarians, brothers. Up to half of them have variations of such a 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, both of them are Slavic, but the genus is different. Genus I2 descended from a different ancestor, the migration routes of the genus I2 were completely different than R1a1. It was later, already in our era or at the end of the past, that they met and formed a Slavic cultural and ethnic community, and then they joined the writing and religion. And the genus is mostly different, although 12% Bulgarians- East Slavic, R1a1 genus.
It is very important that the number of mutations in haplotypes can be calculated 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 I recently published all this in the scientific press (link is at the end of the article). The bottom line is that the more mutations in the haplotypes of a group of people, the older their common ancestor. And since mutations occur completely statistically, randomly, with a certain average speed, then the lifetime of a 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 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 a 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 (meaning 250 points) is enough for a good estimate of the time to a common ancestor.
25-marker haplotypes of Russians and Ukrainians of the R1a1 genus 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, the clan R1a1, lived 4500 years ago. This figure is reliable, it is verified by cross-calculation for 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, checks and rechecks are given in the article at the end. And these calculations were carried out using 25-marker haplotypes. This is already the pinnacle 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 in about 550 years, then I am separated from the ancestor 5500 years. But we are talking about statistics, and for everyone it turns out 4500 years. I have more mutations, someone else has less. In other words, each of us has our own individual mutations, but the ancestor haplotype is the same for all. And, as we shall see, it remains so 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 the Eneolithic, 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 stories. And they came out, if you follow the interpretation of the Torah, 3500-3600 years ago. If we ignore the interpretation of the Torah, which, of course, is not a strict scientific source, it can be noted that the common ancestor of the Eastern Slavs, in this case Russian and Ukrainian, lived a thousand years before the eruption of the volcano Santorin (Thera), which destroyed the Minoan civilization on the island of Crete.
We can now begin to sequence the events of our ancient history. 4500 years ago Proto-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, the 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 Arkaim left the Aryans and moved to India. Indeed, according to archaeologists, the settlement, which is now called Arkaim, existed for only 200 years.
Stop! And where did we get that they were the descendants of our ancestors, the Proto-Slavs?
How from where? A R1a1, gender label? She, this label, accompanies all the haplotypes listed above. This means that it can be used to determine to what genus those who went to India belonged.
By the way, here's some more info. In a recent work by German scientists, nine fossil haplotypes from southern Siberia were identified, 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 as follows:
13 25 16 11 11 14 X Y Z 14 11 32
Here the undeciphered markers are replaced by letters. They are very similar to the Slavic haplotypes given above, especially when you consider that these ancient ones also carry individual, random mutations.
At present, the proportion of Slavs-Aryans of the haplogroup R1a1 in Lithuania 38%, in Latvia 41%, and Belarus 40%, in Ukraine from 45% to 54%. In Russia, the Slavs-Aryans on average 48% , due to the high proportion of Finno-Ugric peoples in the north of Russia, but in the south and in the center of Russia, the share of the Eastern Slavs-Aryans reaches 60-75% and higher.
Hindu haplotypes and the lifetime of their common ancestor
I’ll make a reservation right away - I deliberately write “Indians”, and not “Indians”, because the Indians for the most part belong to the natives, Dravidians, especially the Indians of the south of India. And the Indians are, for the most part, just the carriers of the haplogroup R1a1. It would be wrong to write “haplotypes of Indians”, since Indians as a whole belong to very different genera of DNA genealogy.
In this sense, the expression "haplotypes of the Hindus" is symbatic with the expression "haplotypes of the Slavs." There is a reflection of the "ethno-cultural" component in it, but this is one of the signs of the genus.
The unique possibilities of DNA genealogy. Anatoly Klyosov
Entertaining DNA- genealogistsI
More detailed and a variety of information about the 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 all waking up and interested ...
