How Far Back in History Does the European Race Go?

Etype shares a great many myths about “Aryans,” by which means I am not sure what.

The greatest number of linguistic precursor markers for the Aryan language that is shared throughout the globe and the greatest concentrated number of speakers of that language is German.

However this is not to be discussed, as Nazi anthropology and Germans are to be repudiated as thoroughly as possible…even if this means twisting common sense…which is easy enough these days…witness the small-pox blanket myth, something so simple anyone should have been able to refute it…yet for some reason it ran around loose like a dog no one dared collar…even if the entire idea was completely, spuriously insane.

Anthropology like most science, is filled with many of these myths that are demonstrably insane.

The idea that science is a warehouse of verities and not something the state would notice might be good to bolster various spurious arguments for collective mind control is itself deluded.

If there is any truth to the original findings, and need I remind you it was in Germany where the science of modern anthropology and anthropological linguistics originated and developed… later post-war jury rigged for British propaganda purposes. Then possibly the Aryans originated around the Baltic during a thermocline some 10.000 to 30.000 years ago.

Recently excavations found Lithuanian settlements that contained bronze tools and evidence of textile clothing that were carbon dated to 40,000 years old. However this totally uproots many favorite common theories, so you don’t hear much of it.

But it is more certain than any opposing theory, despite the latter’s currency, that Europeans are older than 10,000 years old, has more consistent evidence than any prevailing idea, whatever sanction our betters lay on it.

On that topic, the evidence for the out-of-Africa theory is actually paper thin, the fossil record to support it could fit on a garden table…and does not account for the fact glaciers swept Europe and N Asia in this time period, and this may be why the oldest fossils are found in Africa to date….

The African genesis theory is mostly supported mostly by group think and the fact that opposing theories sound a lot like Europeans who prefer logic to what the established state says is good for them to think.

There is absolutely no reason for anyone to think that the Aryans were not much the same as today’s European, other than what seems the knee jerk need to conform to common fallacy – such as Europeans evolved in isolation the last 10000 years.

The “Aryan” language is most closely related to Persian or Sanskrit and the other Indian languages, not German.

As far as “Aryans’ originating 10-30,000 YBP in the Baltic region, I do not know what he means by Aryans. He means White people? White people originated around Finland 9-11,000 YBP.

I know nothing of 40,000 YBP Lithuanians, but 35,000 year old Europeans look nothing like Europeans. There’s nothing remotely European about them. They may look a bit like African Hottentots.

The traditional European phenotype only dates back 10,000 years. Before that, Europeans looked very different.

In fact, the African genesis theory is pretty uncontroversial in anthropology today. It is only rejected by nonscientists, mostly White nationalists and White racists with an axe to grind against Black people.

The “Aryans” only date back to 5,000 YBP. That’s it. If you are talking White people, well, White skin and blue eyes go back 9-11,000 YBP. Before that, European skulls and genes look more Arab than anything else. Going back ~20,000 YBP, European skulls look most like the skulls of the Indian tribes of NW America such as the Makah of Washington state. Going back 35,000 YBP, the oldest Europeans do not look like any known race. They may look more like a Bushman than anything else.

45 Comments

Filed under Anthropology, Balto-Slavic-Germanic, Europe, Europeans, German, Germanic, History, Indic, Indo-European, Indo-Iranian, Indo-Irano-Armenian, Indo-Irano-Armeno-Hellenic, Language Families, Linguistics, Physical, Race/Ethnicity, Regional, Sanskrit, Science, Whites

45 responses to “How Far Back in History Does the European Race Go?

  1. Hank the plant

    Lithuanian is remarkably similar to Sanskrit. This doesn’t mean Indo-European began in Lithuania, but it is interesting on its own.

    • Pepperoncini

      Of currently spoken IE languages, Lithuanian retains the most archaic form of IE.
      As for where IE originated, probalby somewhere around South West Russia-Ukraine-Eurasian Steppes up to around Kazahstan.

  2. Indeed, where do whites come from? Seeded from Sirius? What makes you think we have anything to do with the rest of homo sapiens?

    • etype

      Robert, I don’t know if you wrote this but anyway, you write:

      ‘The “Aryan” language is most closely related to Persian or Sanskrit and the other Indian languages, not German.’

      There is no known ‘Aryan’ language. What we have is the hypothesis of a proto-Aryan root language based on common noun forms and syntax structure across various cultures associated with Aryan migrations. Collecting and cross – indexing all the shared forms from Indo-Aryan, Iranian and European we find the highest concentration of lingual markers consistent across all forms in N Europe, and the root language in N.Europe is Germanic.
      This method of statistical and lexical indexing was abandoned by the Anglo American Academics after WWI and replaced by the assertion that the proto-Aryan language itself followed migratory patterns analogous to theories of ‘Caucasian’ migrations, which themselves proved logically unsustainable and are rarely mention except for those sorely in need of a ‘uncontroversial’ standpoint. However, the linguistic theory itself remains….. Post hoc ergo propter hoc

      like the rest of the remarks you make on the African genesis theory and the European genotype – remains only because it is uncontroversial… there are many anthropologists who disagree with the theory who are neither ‘non-scientists’, nor nationalists or racists…. nor does political invective exclude impartial science… you yourself are politically partial, yet assume yourself impartial, or at least conventional…..if the shoe fits – wear it.

      Qui tacet consentire videtur
      ————–>

      Your suppositions regarding the timeline of European ‘evolution’ from the African bushman to George Bush are simply that – suppositions you assume scientific gospel.

      I have no time to find an internet link to the archeological finds in Lithuania, of which there are similiar in roughly analogous time frames in other parts of Europe (Romania, Wales, Russia, Germany)…….but later perhaps I will search for them.

      • You are asking which modern language has preserved the most ancient IE forms? I am not sure if anyone knows this. You are using Aryan for IE. The earily German anthropologists were extremely bad, and were basically proto-Nazis. They saw mysterious “Aryans” all over Eurasia, always leading the societies. Mysterious “Aryans” or Nordics (Germanics) were heading societies in Armenia, Egypt, Persia, everywhere. It’s whack.

        The Romanian skull from 35,000 YBP is based on a reconstruction. Genes for White skin, blue and green eyes and red hair only go back 10,0000 years. 13,000 YBP, Euro skulls and genes look like Arabs.

        • etype

          No, I wasn’t asking what modern language has preserved the highest number of lexical markers of ‘IE’, along a wide strata of adjutant and similar cultures, such as Europe. I wasn’t sure if you wrote the above .

          Sure, the early German anthropologists who were mostly characterized by the Nazis as ‘liberal humanists’ were definitely ‘proto-Nazis’. That explains why the Nazis went with the Anglo/French anthropology and the caucasus origin theory…at least for the proletariat. I recall Blumenbach chose the skull from the Caucasus to represent the European because ‘it was the most beautiful’. Nice.
          I do agree they saw ‘Aryans’ everywhere, but I think you exaggerate and conflate the work of propagandists such as Rosenberg with the actual scientific work done. That and later distortions. It is no secret that any anthropologist who differs from the ‘conventional orthodoxy’ will be sacked from any western academic institution and in some cases their doctorate revoked… just like the Nazis! Strange! However I do agree the differences often come down to politics.
          So anyway, you propose the conventional comparison of skulls to be far superior to statistical reference of lexical and syntax markers in linguistic / cultural groups and biological typology in determining migration patterns via language based on a reconstructed model of ‘IE’….or consider that not up to the level of comparison of skulls? This and notepad recursive formulas for genetic variation to state as a matter of faith….”Genes for White skin, blue and green eyes and red hair only go back 10,0000 years. 13,000 YBP, Euro skulls and genes look like Arabs.”
          Well we disagree. My understanding is that the rectangular orbis, nose brow and extremely large tooth size was unique in early modern European humans…but then who knows what arabs looked like back then? (btw. arabs are a particular genus within the ME, unless you mean culturally arab)

        • Pepperoncini

          And the contemporary equivalent to Nazi’s historical Aryan myth making is Hindutva.

        • Matt

          They even saw Aryans in the New World, wherever there were signs of somebody having built something more permanent than a lean-to.

  3. Xera

    So why would an Indo-Aryan language travel all the way from Lithuania to modern day BengaL then? Assuming of course these are people that are from the same racial base stock or are descended from it.

    • etype

      One theory is the period of a warm thermocline ended, possibly in a quick manner…this supposition is supported by mammoth carcasses (found with green grass in their mouths) in thawing glaciers all over the sub polar region. Glaciers swept all of the N. Eurasian continent digging down in some cases miles down from the projected surface soil, leveling and creating mountains where there was once plain, and leaving plains where there was once valleys. This is why the African genesis theory is a hypothesis. The fact of fossil records found in Africa does not necessarily mean these are the only possible origins of hominids anywhere.

      Lithuania is just one site of a anomalous excavation in Europe which contradicts orthodox explanations such as the ‘caucasian’ theory. There is evidence to support migration and settlement straight across to the pacific, possibly even the American continent.

      If we look at pre-historic mongoliod people, we see they traveled across the sub polar region from the pacific to the atlantic leaving behind settled peoples, over to America via the assumed land bridge, and from the south across the pacific as what we now classify as Austronesian, Oceanics, Polynesians, etc…. it is a logical assumption they reached S.America. A result of vast migrations stretching over millennia, leaving traces of language and culture across the pacific.
      Similar to the proto – Aryans.

  4. Xera

    A quick question, what if we were to deport a bunch of modern day Horn Africans, Dravidians, Arabs etc to live in a place like Green-land or a place with mountains, snow, blizzards, harsh terrain like the alps,Ural or Altaic mountains, just approximately how long would it take for there to be a major physiological change in skin color, eyes and hair features?

    • etype

      The mongoloid people have been living in sub polar regions for untold millennia and have yet to exhibit physiological changes such as skin, eye and hair color shifts or paling

      • Xera

        But that’s primarily because of the fish/seal diet correct?

        • etype

          I’ve heard that theory but it doesn’t seem consistent to me, do you have a source? I say inconsistent because it assumes pre-iron age Europeans did not also live primarily on marine food source + mammalian source diet. Nor does it explain southern peoples who live primarily on grains showing diminished levels of melanin over time.

        • tulio

          I guess for whatever reason, the genetic marker that turns off melanin in the eyes of humans only occured in the Caucausus region and nowhere else. My question is why is there such diversity of eye colors amongst wildlife,but not humans(beyond whites). Take canines for instance, they have black eyes, brown eyes, hazel eyes, orange eyes, yellowish eyes, blue eyes, grey eyes. Variety of eye colors is hardly anything special in the animal kingdom, it just seems to be limited to Caucasions when it comes to humans.

      • Xera

        Yeah I have noticed this as well, why is there so much variation in eye color among canines? What if countries with dark skinned Caucasoid populations were to dump them in an environment such as the Russian steppes, forced them to take on a nomadic pastoral lifetyle, and have a diet based on their surroundings? How long would it take to turn the melanin genetic marker off, only after a few generations Tulio?

        • Xera

          I guess the big question is, if white women go to beaches to tan to look hot, then should dark skinned women who want to bleach their skin go to a pontic steppe environment with all the bleaching material, ride/feed on horses/milk, and live a semi-pastoral life for a period of time so their skin lightens?

    • Pepperoncini

      Well it depends on whether or not these populations have access to contemporary technological and agricultural products or by what food , clothing and shelter was available 7000+ years ago.

  5. Realist

    When do we lose our Interweb here in the US?

  6. AlanJ

    “Arya” in Sanskrit means “Noble”; Not the western idea of Noble Class; But a humble pious persons mostly elite Brahmins.
    My theory is that Earth has supported very diverse species of Human like beings, Almost all have gone extinct.

    I read somewhere, that “Black Forest” in Germany is named after Aryans who migrated to Germany from India.

    • Pepperoncini

      Sounds like BS. And Brahmins were anything but humble or pious, since they created and mainted a culture of rape, slavery and wickedness.

      • AlanJ

        Visit India; you will till find Brahmins whom you can call Arya true to its meaning. Dont be fooled by all these propaganda

        • Dota

          Including the RSS Brahmins who sanction mass murder against Muslims and Christians? Spare us your Brahminical crap Alan. The caste system should be cast into the dustbin of history where it belongs. Nobody cares what a ‘true’ Brahmin is or should be like as it is irrelevant. If not for the Brits, India would still be a backward, segregated and rural hellhole.

        • Pepperoncini

          I am from South Asia, ethnic origin (Dravidian). I have met , knew and have had Brahmin friends. While I am Agnostic ,some of my family and relatives are very devout Hindus. Family and relatives visit temples regularly both in the West and South Asia. I also have been reading about Indian premodern history for the last 16 odd years, so I know all to well just what Brahmin culture has been doing to us Native/Ancient peoples of India. While I don’t automatically assume or view individual Brahmins as bad , the culture as a whole has always practiced (or just gone along with it) genocide against us Dravidians and ripped off Dravidian and non Aryan Indian culture and claimed it as Aryan.

        • Xera

          The Dravidians were never natives in the Indian sub-continent, the Dravidians originated within the Levant possibly in some previous Ice age and were forced to migrate to the Indian sub-continent. So the Dravidians are also invaders in a sense.

  7. “I know nothing of 40,000 YBP Lithuanians, but 35,000 year old Europeans look nothing like Europeans.”
    That. A lot of the commenters here seem to be rather short sighted on that – the racial classifications we have today didn’t exist prior to 10000 BC (or perhaps even earlier). One doesn’t have to be an anthropological genius for that, just a visit to some cultural/anthropoligcal museums would clear that up. Even within the current classifications, the physical characteristics of the races juts a few hundreds of years back were different.

  8. Jaakko Raipala

    AlanJ, the only Aryans who migrated from India to Germany are the gypsies. I suppose it would be possible for the place to have been named after gypsies, considering that gypsies are often called “blacks” in European languages, but that’s pretty far fetched.

    Hank, Xera, others: Lithuanian is a very conservative language which means its grammar has evolved less from the older forms than the grammar of most Indo-European languages. That mean Lithuania is a likely candidate for the IE mother tongue, actually perhaps the opposite: when a language colonizes a new area, the *new* area tends to end up with the more conservative grammar while the language keeps changing faster in the old center. For the first, crudest possible guess for the original source of an expanding language family, you’d look at where you find the maximal *diversity* of related languages in a small area, not the most conservative languages. For Indo-European languages that place would be what’s now Turkey (even though the Indo-European languages there have mostly been wiped out by Turkish).

    In any case, the whole effort is futile if you’re actually interested in race, since we now know that the biological differences between races have developed over a much longer time and it’s pointless to try to trace the origins of races to languages. Back when the original Indo-European mother tongue was spoken, there must have already been white people all over Europe and the original Indo-Europeans were not the only white group – if they even were “pure” whites. A common theory is that the original Indo-Europeans were a steppe nomad warrior culture and most of those have been Mongoloid in appearance; we even have examples of an small Mongoloid-looking steppe warrior culture conquering enough Caucasians to end up looking mostly Caucasian, like the Turks and the Magyars.

    For all we know, those original Aryans that all race loonies love chasing could have been Mongoloids. Though the best guess probably is that they looked much like people of their most likely origin areas look today – and that is “swarthy Caucasians with a bit of Mongoloid in them”.

    • Pepperoncini

      Europe would definitely have had more widespread non Indo-European cultures . One only needs to look at Basque, Sami and Finns to see this. Hisotrically we can include the language isolate Minoan.

    • Pepperoncini

      I disagree with locating Proto-IE in Turkey / Anatolia. While the oldest written IE language is Hittite, there is a non IE substratum within Hittite . IE tribes would have taken over the non IE speakers and eventually succeeded in imposing their IE language.
      http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/22939/Anatolian-languages

      Hurrian and Uratian were in the region and neither is IE. The Indo-Aryan Mitanni made up some of the elite of the Mitanni empire, which can be evidenced in the gods and names of ruling elite. But the Mitanni empire did not speak Indo-Aryan or for that matter any IE language, rather they spoke Hurrian. So we see an elite (partially atleast) composed of Indo-Aryans (Warrior Nobility) ruling over the non Indo-European locals.

      Colin Renfrew is the one most well known for pushin an Anatolian hypothesis but it hasn’t been widely accepted. The Russian-Ukranian-Eurasian Steppe (Pontic Steppes) location is the dominant accepted theory.

  9. NonKoolAidDrinker

    “white” people originated in Finland? I guess you’re defining “white” as Northern Euro. looking? What garbage. The shift from a generalised Eurasian look to a specifically European look among European/West Asian people probably happened at least 20,000 ybp. Europeans had split from a common ancestor from Mongoloid people about 20,000 years before that. Is 20,000 years enough time to change? I think so.

    Etype, I’m assuming you’re some kind of Asian. I’ve noticed Asians are very narrow minded when it comes to defining “white people”. They like the idea of whites as a race of blonde, blue eyed Nordic types.You’re definition of “white” excludes about 80% of Europeans. Do you see a problem?

    • etype

      koolaiddrinker:
      No, I didn’t say white people originated in Finland. Perhaps a mention of an anomalous archeological site in a particular geography now known as ‘Finland’ implies this. There are many such sites which contradict official theory found in Europe other than Finland.
      I agree 20000 years is more than enough time to change…but that doesn’t necessarily contradict the hypothesis which I was going to present in detail, but do not think it worth the effort now.
      No, I’m not Asian. Incorrect assumption.
      Nor does my definition exclude 80% of Europeans. Incorrect assumption.
      No, I do not see a problem at all with this hypothesis. I see a problem with assumptions based on any type of current orthodoxy when the chief asset is the claim to infallibility due to the number of followers of a received dogma … which is often misunderstood, misinterpreted, and usually wrong,

  10. Anonymous Coward

    What does a highly mixed white person look like? Based on Darwin’s observation of crossing lines producing ancestral types, that ought to give some indication as to their origin.

  11. Pingback: “incurable illness” is a linguistic fallacy « JRFibonacci's blog: partnering with reality

  12. Pingback: new myth, old god (and the origin of heaven and hell on earth) « JRFibonacci's blog: partnering with reality

  13. ACSrivastava

    I believe that europeans would have possibly breaded with neanderthals(hence they inherited there features like blue eyes,green eyes)and other pre-homo sapien races.
    Also i have few questions regarding mongoloid race
    1.Is there any connection between mongloid and Caucasoid race.Various archaeological evidences found in Xinjiang province of china suggests that aryans would have also migrated to that province also you can see lot of blue eyed,green eyed and blonde haired people with mongoloid features.
    2.What are the possibilities that dravidians are the descendants of Mongoloids or vice-a-versa.According to the DNA tests conducted by University of Delhi with Harvard-dravidians have genes similar to both Mongoloids as well as Caucasoids(Do not get confused with genetics of caucasoids found in tibetian people because they trace their origin to buddhist monks who travelled to china from india and they belonged to the brahmin group so the equation is pretty obvious).

    • Xera

      The dravidians originated within the North African Levant I believe this pointed out a while ago on here.

      • ACSrivastava

        I saw ur point there but still even if i believe it how are u going to explain the asian angle in it,as of african genes in them it is only found amongst an isolated part of India(ie.andaman and nicobar).

        • Hi, Andamanese have no African genes whatsoever.

          Indians are almost between Caucasians and Asians, but more on the Caucasian side. Obviously there has been a lot of Asian gene flow going in over there due to their location in Asia.

  14. Mandana

    Hello Sir. Interesting blog you have here. I am an Iranian woman (not a muslim) living in Norway. Its funny that Americans consider Chinese people as the most highly intelligent on earth…In Norway most people laugh at them. Recent studies in Norway shows that many foreigners (Muslims…since that suddenly has become its own race) are highly educated, knows several languages, but they do not get a job and all of them work as taxi-drivers. If you change your name here it is supposedly easier to get a job. I am excited to know what you have to say about that. I do not believe that intelligence is everything in life. Somebody has to throw you the ball. Race in my view- is a cultural matter, Iranians were declared to be included in the Aryan race by Adolph Hitler. But today, all of them are spread throughout the world, poor, in exile and unhappy due to the consequences after World War I and II. Thank you on advance for your answer.

  15. Mandana

    Well, first of all Sir. I am not a Muslim. Second of all i didn’t talk about my own experience, but what has been shown in the recent studies. http://nrk.no/nyheter/norge/1.7947724
    Certain names are worse than others of course. I think its great that you have a country that see the best in ethnicities, but 70 years ago Chinese people were not considered the most intelligent……

  16. Uxshyat

    In Zoroastrian Avestas and Hindu Vedas, there is no distinction between the languages spoken by the two groups when they communicated. The Aryans in India described the Iranian people as non-Vedic Aryans. In Zoroastrian literature, the distinction is not made either, and say to follow only one God instead of the devas. meaning they shared similar religions. The earliest mention of these interactions in the Rig Vedas suggest that at that point Gathic Avestan and Vedic Sanskrit were only different dialects of the same language. So the retroflex and other Dravidian influences came later. When the languages were one and the same, that would be the true Aryan language. In essence, Sanskrit and Avestan would be the closest to the Aryan language followed by modern Iranian languages, then Dardic, then Indic.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s