Kuyavia [Kujawy] the homeland of the Proto-Indo-Europeans? I think so!

[Atimeres]

The origin of the proto-Indo-European community
(family, homeland and PIE language).
(Kuyavian Theory, extract)
http://www.tropie.tarnow.opoka.org.p...Indo-Europeans

1. The Proto-Indo-European family R1a-M417. That's what clearly brings basic group of people of Indo-European language in Europe and Asia, is a genetic family with the paternal mutation M417, currently on the tree of modern man designated as a branch (haplogroup) R1a1a1-M417, in short R1a-M417 or R-M417. He distinguishes especially the Slavic peoples in Europe (up to approx. 50% of the population; in Poland 57%), in Asia especially Indo-Iranian Aryans (to approx. 25% of the population). It is now dated at about 5700 years before Christ. In the straight line the family is a descendant from mutation M420, created somewhere in south-east Asia (Sundaland?), which on the phylogenetic tree of modern man, marks the beginning of the great paternal branch R1a-M420, dated back to about 9000 years BC.

2. In the archeological circle Janisławice-RudojOstrow on Kuyavia. In about half of the sixth millennium BC, a small group of the Proto-Indo-European population of this particular genetic paternal lineage R1a-M420, migrating through the Middle East, where in Anatolia leaves some its part and traces its proto-IE language, passes through the Caucasus, lands on the Black Sea, Rudoj Ostrow on the Dnieper and Polish Janisławice and arrives at Kuyavia (Polish: Kujawy).In the archaeological circle Janisławice-RudojOstrow, represented especially by the settlement Dęby 29 on the river Bachorza, this population, as the only, fully implements their own model of the Caucasian-Black Sean proto-neolitic culture (L. Domańska 1990). In the craft of manufacturing tools, using flint and proto-agrocultural trend this culture is characterized by unique and distinct features, unseen in other local Mesolithic cultures (L.Czerniak 1988), thus giving a proof to their separate origins and distinct language, probably already Indo-European.

3. In the Globular Amphora culture. After the development phase, this culture disappears, probably because of the demographic crisis of the population of the genetic haplogroup R1a. About 4000 years before Christ, as if a completely new culture, Globular Amphora, arises gradually here, again with distinct features (M Szmyt 1996 and 2010), which later geneticists recognize the haplogroup R1a, derived from a single common ancestor, the mutation M417 that distinguishes Proto-Indo-Europeans.

4. Indo-Europeanization of the family I1 and I2. The territory of the Janisławice-Rudoj Ostrow culture and Globular Amphora almost literally applies to the territory of the Mesolithic cultures: Komornicka and Chojnice-Pieńkowska and Neolithic Funnel Beaker Culture (J.K. Kozlowski 1998), probably created by the old-European families I1 and I2, which is in the genetical and archaeological community with the then population of northern Germany, Jutland and south Scandinavia, linguistically probably pre-proto-Germanic. This meeting must result in their early Indo-Europeanization.

5. Indo-Europeanization of the family R1b. At meetings of the population R1a in the Globular Amphora culture and the Corded Ware horizon with the kindred groups of the populations of the Italo-Celtic R1b in the Bell Beaker and Unietice archaeological cultures (Wielkopolska, Silesia, Czech Republic) also occurred their linguistic full Indo-Europeanization and the emergence of centum dialects, mainly in Western Europe.

6. The migrations of the population and IE dialects. Around 3250 years BC the Globular Amphora culture and its population already reaches the middle Elbe and Saale rivers, where it is a subject to the Corded Ware horizon cultures and where geneticists have identified the haplogroup R1a-M417 (W. Haak 2008), probably in the sub-branches with mutations CTS4385 or Z284, migrating to the west and north of Europe. Moreover, from about 2950 years BC the Globular Amphora culture appears in Volhynia, Podolia and Moldavia, and on the north-eastern from Poland on the Narew and Niemen rivers basin (though some elements of the culture reaches up into the valley of the Volga and the foothills of the Caucasus). Is a migration of family R1a-M417 and its subbranches, especially with the mutations "Balto-Slavic" Z280 and "Aryan" Z93, and with the population - migration of subsequent dialects of the proto-IE language.

(7 Reflection. Archaeologists note a surprising "the phenomenon of the place" in the proglacial river Bachorza on the Kuyavia, especially with the towns: Dęby, Dobre and Smarglin. In this small area "extraordinary wealth of diverse cultural traditions" has been recorded, from the Proto-Neolithic age, through Neolithic, late Neolithic, Neolithic-Bronze interstadium to bronze in the Lusatian culture inclusive. A dozen well-known in Poland archaeological cultures or groups from these ages have been identified here, many of them betrays the other regions on the its earliness, suggesting, supposedly the local population on the Bachorza was the initiator or at least very active in taking from closer or further other people's cultural initiatives - and to the extent that sometimes it is difficult to indicate their proper initiator and creator (see: Czebreszuk, Makarowicz 1990; Czebreszuk, Ignaszak, Łoś 1997)

[Atimeres]

Oh, these are two specific starting points for discussions on Pra-Indo-Europeans and their homeland.
There are specific people and territory.
From them you need to start a discussion rather than "impurities"


The PIE family


The unambiguous route to migrate to the particular archaeological Janisławice culture


And the territory where identified the specific group of the Proto-Indo-Europeans.
The previous discussions about the IE proto-homeland focuses around the theme of admixtures and population distances....
Not true?

[Atimeres]

W.A.Safronov: ”Indo-European Proto-Homelands”

Северный Кавказ, исследованный нами от моря и до моря, в степях и предгорьях, в 1972, 1976-1981 гг., стал кладезем для индоевропейского культурознания. В Прикубанье была открыта новая культура с повозками, сходная и отличная от древнеямной, послужившая для обоснования новых гипотез о происхождении и направлениях распространения колесного транспорта и представляющая археологический эквивалент индоариев в Восточной Европе. Новосвободненская керамика в кубано-днепровских погребениях с повозками и повозки в древнеямных погребениях позволили говорить об ареальных контактах хеттов и индоариев на Кавказе и о чресполосном существовании древних иранцев и индоариев на Кавказе. ... Исследование куро-аракской культуры в Осетии (картвельская атрибуция которой поддерживается нами), выделение кубано-терской культуры Центрального Предкавказья, происходящей из культуры шаровидных амфор, первой производной от праиндоевропейской культуры воронковидных кубков (Николаева, 1980, 1987), а также обнаружение синкретичных комплексов с традициями двух культур позволили сделать вывод о длительных контактах картвелов с одной из групп древнеевропейцев. Эти открытия, без которых было бы невозможно наше обращение к индоевропейской проблеме...”

W.A. Safronov: Indoeuropejskie praojczyzny.

Północny Kaukaz, w latach 1972 i 1976-1981 przebadany przez nas od morza do morza w części stepowej i przedgórskiej, okazał się skarbnicą dla indoeuropejskiego kulturoznawstwa. W pobliżu Kubania została odkryta nowa kultura z powozami, podobna, a zarazem różna od starojamowej, która posłużyła dla precyzowania nowych hipotez co do pochodzenia i kierunków rozprzestrzenienia transportu kołowego i przedstawiająca archeologiczny ekwiwalent Indoariów we wschodniej Europie. Nowoswobodniańska ceramika w kubano-dnieprowskich grobach z powozkami w starojamowych grobach pozwoliła mówić o rejonowych kontaktach Hetytów i Indoariów na Kaukazie oraz o strefowym współistnieniu starożytnych Irańczyków i Indoariów na Kaukazie....[b]Przebadanie kuro-arakskiej kultury w Osetii (której kartwelską atrybucję potwierdzamy), wydzielenie kubano-terskiej kultury Środkowego Przedkaukazia, pochodzącej z kultury amfor kulistych, pierwszej emanacji praindoeuropejskiej kultury pucharów lejkowatych (Nikołajeva, 1980, 1987), a także odkrycie synkretycznych kompleksów z tradycjami tych dwóch kultur pozwoliły dokonać wywodu o długich kontaktach Kartwelów z jedną z grup staroeuropejskich.
Bez tych odkryć nie byłoby możliwe nasze skierowanie się ku indoeuropejskiej problematyce...[b]

Here's how Russian archaeologist W.A. Safronov justify their interest in the pre-Indo-European issues to his books,
“Proto-Indo-European homelands”.
http://www.istorya.ru/book/safronov/index.php
[My attempt to English translation]
“North Caucasus, between 1972 and 1976 to 1981 examined by us from the Sea to Sea in a part of the steppe and pre-mountain, turned out to be a treasure trove for the Indo-European cultural studies. Near the Kuban was discovered a new culture with carriages, similar, yet different from the old-Yamna, which was used for refinement of new hypotheses regarding the origin and direction of spread of road transport and presenting archaeological equivalent Indo-Arians in eastern Europe. The Novosvobodnaya ceramics in Kubano-Dnieper graves with wagons in the Old-Yamna graves allowed to talk about the district contact of Hittite and Indo-Arians on the Caucasus and obout the zonal co-existence of the ancient Iranians and Indo-Arians on the Caucasus. Examination of Kura-Arakse culture in South Ossetia (which Kartwelian attribution we confirm), separation of the Kubano-Tersk culture of the Middle Pre-Kaucasus, derived from the Globular Amphora culture, the first emanation of the Indo-European Funnel Beaker culture (Nikolajev, 1980, 1987), as well as the discovery of syncretic traditions of these complexes two cultures - allowed to make a long argument Kartwelians dealing with one of the Old-Europeans groups.
Without these discoveries would not be possible, our directing towards the Indo-European issues...”
http://www.istorya.ru/book/safronov/safron_12.php
The Polish studies, for example Marzena Szmyt 1996 ... and 2010, confirm the origin of the Novosvobodnaja Globular Amphora culture from Kuyavia.
Could Novosvobodnaja was recognized as the first migration of the south-eastern R1a-Z93 family from the areal Globular Amphora culture in Central Europe?

[Atimeres]

Please, translation, who knows better Russian and English.
http://ria.ru/science/20140915/1024223871.html

Российские генетики уточнили историю археологических культур в Адыгее
20:0415.09.2014119071
В работе, которую выполнили ученые, изучалась ДНК из митохондрий ("энергетических фабрик" клеток), выделенная из остатков древних людей, живших свыше 5,5 тысяч лет назад в районе Новосвободной.
МОСКВА, 15 сен — РИА Новости. Российские генетики, изучавшие ДНК из остатков древних людей, найденных в предгорьях Северного Кавказа, подтвердили гипотезу о самостоятельном возникновении распространенной свыше пяти тысяч лет назад в тех местах новосвободненской археологической культуры, и предположили, что носители этой культуры занимались разведением домашнего скота, сообщил директор Центра "Биоинженерия" Российской академии наук Константин Скрябин.
Новосвободненская культура названа по адыгейской станице Новосвободная. В свое время большинство археологов выделяло другую, переднеазиатскую майкопскую археологическую культуру, как единственную в тех местах, бывшую примерно 5600-5700 лет назад. Но результаты последовавших в 1980-х-1990-х годах раскопок позволили археологам не только усомниться в связи новосвободненской и майкопской культур, но и предложить гипотезу о решающем вкладе в формирование новосвободненской культуры одного из вариантов так называемой индоевропейской культуры воронковидных кубков.
Скрябин выступил в понедельник на международной конференции, посвященной 80-летию со дня рождения выдающегося советского ученого в области наук о жизни, вице-президента Академии наук СССР Юрия Овчинникова и 55-летию Института биоорганической химии имени академиков Шемякина и Овчинникова.
Ученый отметил, что генетический анализ – это инструмент, который помогает археологам вынести окончательный вердикт в пользу той или иной гипотезы.
По его словам, в работе, которую выполнили специалисты Национального исследовательского центра "Курчатовский институт", Центра "Биоинженерия" при участии сотрудников петербургского Института истории материальной культуры РАН и Новороссийского исторического музея-заповедника, изучалась ДНК из митохондрий ("энергетических фабрик" клеток), выделенная из остатков древних людей, живших свыше 5,5 тысяч лет назад в районе Новосвободной.
Результаты генетического анализа позволяют предположить общность новосвободненской культуры с культурой воронковидных кубков. "Вывод такой – новосвободненская культура – это культура, которая пришла из Европы", — сказал Скрябин.
Кроме того, методы генетических исследований "подсказали" ученым возможный род занятий носителей новосвободненской культуры.
"Мы задали себе вопрос: а как была устроена жизнь этих людей бронзового века? Как это определить? В основном, археологи определяют это по тому или иному захоронению, стиль которого связан со стилем жизни этих людей. У нас была такая идея – если это были собиратели или охотники, или люди, занимавшиеся сельским хозяйством, то, может быть, у них были болезни, которые встречаются и у животных и у человека", — сказал Скрябин.
По его словам, в одном из образцов новосвободненской культуры удалось найти следы ДНК бактерии — возбудителя бруцеллеза, который встречается у крупного рогатого скота и передается человеку. "Поэтому мы делаем вывод, что, может быть, новосвободненская культура была связана с сельскохозяйственными вещами", — заключил ученый.

РИА Новости http://ria.ru/science/20140915/10242...#ixzz3EPd0e6jN

[Agamemnon]

Yeah... Well no, not really.
Poland as the PIE urheimat doesn't work for various reasons, it simply doesn't tie in with what we know about PIE.

[rms2]

Yeah... Well no, not really.
Poland as the PIE urheimat doesn't work for various reasons, it simply doesn't tie in with what we know about PIE.

The idea that PIE=R1a doesn't work either, in my opinion. That might hold some water in the eastern, satem-speaking range, but it belly flops in the West, and that is where the older, more archaic, centum branch of IE wound up.

[Atimeres]

Yeah... Well no, not really.
Poland as the PIE urheimat doesn't work for various reasons, it simply doesn't tie in with what we know about PIE.

I believe that the original Proto-Indo-Europeans, until the passage of the Aryans to India and Iran, it was the haplogroup R1a-M417.
The European R1b today is Indo-European, but in the beginning it was not "Proto-IE". Coming from a common ancestor (R1), R1b was from the beginning only close linguistically, and later in Europe (about 2500 BC) has become culturally Indo-European

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4115223/
The Co-author is A.D. Rezepkin.
It is the concept of an excess of dating (no radiocarbon) - 5500 BP.
His concept of the "German" TRB.
In the end, will once again be the Indo-Germanic start IE-Europe

[ADW_1981]

I believe that the original Proto-Indo-Europeans, until the passage of the Aryans to India and Iran, it was the haplogroup R1a-M417.
The European R1b today is Indo-European, but in the beginning it was not "Proto-IE". Coming from a common ancestor (R1), R1b was from the beginning only close linguistically, and later in Europe (about 2500 BC) has become culturally Indo-European

To the best of my knowledge, groups like Celts, Italics, Greeks, Germanics..etc had little in common with Aryans other than distant linguistic connections. I would imagine these steppe specific rituals evolved locally in their geography.

[rms2]

I believe that the original Proto-Indo-Europeans, until the passage of the Aryans to India and Iran, it was the haplogroup R1a-M417.
The European R1b today is Indo-European, but in the beginning it was not "Proto-IE". Coming from a common ancestor (R1), R1b was from the beginning only close linguistically, and later in Europe (about 2500 BC) has become culturally Indo-European. . .

Well, we definitely disagree. It seems to me just as likely that the bulk of R1a was Indo-Europeanized by R1b as the other way around.

You have a real dilemma when you make R1a the original PIE y haplogroup, because then you have to come up with a process by which western Europe came to speak languages that stem from the older, centum branch of IE without much R1a to account for it.

[parasar]

Well, we definitely disagree. It seems to me just as likely that the bulk of R1a was Indo-Europeanized by R1b as the other way around.

You have a real dilemma when you make R1a the original PIE y haplogroup, because then you have to come up with a process by which western Europe came to speak languages that stem from the older, centum branch of IE without much R1a to account for it.

First kentum is not known to be older. Second the region where Tocharian of the kentum type was spoken has turned up no R1b in ancient DNA.
Please note that I do not necessarily subscribe to the theory that R1b was present in early PIE, just that one can envision a scenario that it was not.