Post 1/2
This post is related to posts 585, 586, 588-590 above - in particular any that mentioned PCT.
(This one is unlikely to make sense without reading those.)
An almost live-development that is really interesting to see. But that comes in point 2 below.
1. First the digression.
When I looked up the source for the statements in the post directly above (Kowshika's post), some western people seemed rather desperate to latch onto the new excuse that these dark Europeans were not really native Europeans/must have been visitors to Europe, by deciding that burial practices - i.e. disposing the body by means of only one of the 4 reasonably-tangible primary elements - was specifically not as per the "oldest oral European literature" and that burial practices must have been imported, and that disposing the body by means of the 3 remaining primary elements (fire, water, wind) were now suddenly the only true representative native primordial Euro practices. Apparently only/all because the 2 preserved buried European natives of this time-depth that were studied both turned out to be dark or have their genes indicate they were dark. (Seems that only for 5300 years before present have they found have an actual light-skinned European - but I only skimmed, so may have misread that.)
But uh, mounds are *very* European. The Celts etc had it, which is why Tolkien used burial mounds ("Haudh-en-eleth", "Haudh-en-arwen" etc) profusely in his literature.
Anyway, tracked down the comment:
That is just so funny. So anyone who is buried is not native European? Then why is the Kurgan Kultur - which almost every alien swore was (Proto) "Indo-European" - typified by Kurgans which are mounds, and IIRC not usually the kind to contain cremated remains (but of the Tolkien variety: i.e. of burial of unburnt whole-body remains, apparently not dispersed bones possible with cremation but whole skeletons)?
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kurgan
Two examples of Kurgan excavations on the wacky page mention skeletons. And when a "kurgan cremation" case is finally mentioned, it is not very ancient plus the line itself specifically contrasts "kurgan cremation" with the more usual case of "kurgan burial", leaving little doubt as to what the reference to "burial mounds" in the general case of Kurgans is to have meant:
Back to Annie Mouse denying burials as suddenly un-European (un-IE?)
Why do western people always want to have things both ways, and so keep changing the story whenever archaeo-genetic finds don't go the way they want it to?
Annie Mouse has clearly not read - or decided to ignore and hide - that La Brana's genome is significantly European and particularly Scandinavian.
Admittedly, if really desperate, one could stretch the interpretation on the info thus-far revealed in mainstream news about the dark European Stone Ager - "La Brana" - from 7000 yrs ago (the one with the African genes for skin colour). The only way such commenters as Annie Mouse - desperate to have all-"white" Europeans 7000 yrs ago - can then still make it all fit is if they hid behind the "But what if La Brana was actually an ancient Finn/Saami type?" If one were to suppose it, then it would mean that the statement in the news articles somewhere above that declared the Euro Stone Ager's genome being more "Scandinavian" than any other type of European could technically still hold true, while no other European (i.e. the IE types) would yet have to be lumped with "dark" ancestors as recently as 7000 years ago (unless more finds appear) - since recent dark ancestors is clearly a notion too disturbing for some in the west. (Though Finns and Saami are no less native to Europe. And La Brana's genes were specifically described as European, especially Northern European/Scandinavian.) And Finns/Saami being non-IE, IE-Europeans can still hold on to the Anatolian PIE theory and also the Kurgan hypothesis and especially an all-white PIE population (and I'm sure that at that point, "Annie Mouse" would return to Kurgan mounds/burials being very "IE/traditionally European after all").
Of course, there is the slight problem to this convenient retelling - though only implicit: that had La Brana been more Finnish/Saami in terms of his genome than "other" (=IE) Scandinavian, the researchers would *very* likely have specifically stated so: after all, such info is very much what the west is interested in. The west only cares about "Is it IE or Not?" It's the first and last question on their minds. Since in their minds IE=white civilisation. So anything that shakes the foundations of either side of that equals sign is bound to be considered explosive news and would not result in ancient Finns/Saami being packaged under generic Scandinavian. Hence it's likely that when they said the Stone Age European from 7000 years BP had a "Scandinavian genome", they would really have meant the majority "IE" Scandinavians' genome (too) and not (just) the minority (non-IE) Scandinavians' genome.
2. Anyway, that was not the point of this post.
The main point of this post was that when I visited the wackypedia page on "Kurgan" (mounds) I discovered something really hysterical. And predictable.
It becomes apparent from the wackypedia Edit History Differences.
You need to bear in mind that until recently Kurgan was firmly associated in the minds of all mainstream PIE-ists with IE and especially with the Kurgan - and Anatolian - PIE theories. Remember, Elst himself declared that the Kurgan kultur was "definitely" IE.
So keeping that in mind then, now compare:
a ) [color="#0000FF"]en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Kurgan&oldid=593454147[/color]
The thing to note is that the above text was the last Wacky edit NOT to mention the additions that follow in (b ) below.
Note also that the above was the edit from Feb 1.
b ) Now things get really interesting. Several consecutive edits, all on March 1st, - by one "Hirabutor" - follow the above edit. The first couple or so edits are not relevant to my point.
Two consecutive by this "Hirabutor" show the following appear and then evolve:
en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Kurgan&oldid=597693785
And this is the final current text of [color="#0000FF"]the intro to the Kurgan page at wackypedia as it exists at present.[/color]
Note the above was added by Hirabutor just 20 mins after previous (minor-looking) edits. Notice particularly the message Hirabutor records for the edit - so innocuous - between the previous edit at 17:23 and this significant one at 17:43:
[color="#0000FF"]en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Kurgan&diff=597693785&oldid=597691175[/color]
Where the text went from (at 17:23):
The above was changed to (17:43):
And just a carefree edit message by Hirabutor about how his colossal change was merely for "improving style of writing (feel free to move this part to other sections)". Meanwhile, [color="#0000FF"]his edit was to insert the PCT - Pal(a)eolithic Continuity Theory - take on Kurgan burial mounds into the very introduction of the Kurgan page.[/color]
I mean, previously the whole topic of Kurgan mounds was practically dominated by the prevailing version of PIE-ism - the Kurgan hypothesis (and IIRC the Anatolian PIE theory didn't disagree about the Kurgans being IE). Until the above wackypedia edit, the only place in the main body of the wacky Kurgan page's text where the Paleolithic Continuity Theory was described was in the Kurgan (PIE) Hypothesis subsection of the page - far from the intro - where the Anatolian Hypothesis and PCT were merely mentioned as opposing PIE theories to Kurgan culture being PIE. (Note that IIRC the Anatolian hypothesis still had Kurgan as IE, but not as PIE. That is, Kurgan was to have descended from an earlier PIE culture, whereas the Kurgan Hypothesis had Kurgan culture being PIE culture. PCT doesn't have Kurgan as PIE or even IE at all, but - as seen above - PCT has Kurgan being mixed Uralic-Altaic, i.e. non-IE.)
Again, the significance is that the wackypedia Kurgan page's Intro is headlining with PCT (again, it's the page's intro section), attempting to pass this off as the New Old "Received Wisdom". And someone just snuck that massive change in, as if was just a minor text edit and as if it was the original Euro position on PIE all along. Like I said, hysterical. And so predictable. Personally, I think we'll see more of this changeover in future. IMO, it is an inevitable fallout from discovering that dark stone age European (and the other apparently dark European from about the same period). Europeans having been a not all-white population just 7000 years ago is too close for some people.
Who knows, if this wacky edit wasn't just an individual's attempt to sneak past the radar but suddenly actually has higher-level support in the west (implying that it is the west making a move to prop PCT up as the New Eternal Original PIE Theory), maybe tomorrow they will sneakily rewrite the rules for IE-language-change-over-time to suddenly support PCT too (whereas IE linguists until now adamantly argued that PCT was in contradiction to the current IE linguistic rules), so that, from that angle too, they can pretend that PCT was the only argument they ever made.
Time to parrot my statement from 2 posts up:
This post is related to posts 585, 586, 588-590 above - in particular any that mentioned PCT.
(This one is unlikely to make sense without reading those.)
An almost live-development that is really interesting to see. But that comes in point 2 below.
1. First the digression.
When I looked up the source for the statements in the post directly above (Kowshika's post), some western people seemed rather desperate to latch onto the new excuse that these dark Europeans were not really native Europeans/must have been visitors to Europe, by deciding that burial practices - i.e. disposing the body by means of only one of the 4 reasonably-tangible primary elements - was specifically not as per the "oldest oral European literature" and that burial practices must have been imported, and that disposing the body by means of the 3 remaining primary elements (fire, water, wind) were now suddenly the only true representative native primordial Euro practices. Apparently only/all because the 2 preserved buried European natives of this time-depth that were studied both turned out to be dark or have their genes indicate they were dark. (Seems that only for 5300 years before present have they found have an actual light-skinned European - but I only skimmed, so may have misread that.)
But uh, mounds are *very* European. The Celts etc had it, which is why Tolkien used burial mounds ("Haudh-en-eleth", "Haudh-en-arwen" etc) profusely in his literature.
Anyway, tracked down the comment:
Quote:Annie Mouse said...
I think we should be cautious with these La Brana folk. They may not be typical of the area. I have long felt that our view of mesolithic Europeans is possibly being distorted by imported burial practices (as opposed to air, fire and water rituals as mentioned in our oldest oral European literature). Burials and entombment (as in La Brana) create more durable remains.
La Brana could represent nomadic folk following game back and forth across Europe and Asia.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fileistribution_of_Haplogroup_C-M217_Y-DNA_-_worldwide.png
In my opinion that still makes them mesolithic Europeans or accurately Eurasians, but they may not have been typical, or even resident. Just part of the rich milieu.
Sunday, January 26, 2014 11:49:00 pm
That is just so funny. So anyone who is buried is not native European? Then why is the Kurgan Kultur - which almost every alien swore was (Proto) "Indo-European" - typified by Kurgans which are mounds, and IIRC not usually the kind to contain cremated remains (but of the Tolkien variety: i.e. of burial of unburnt whole-body remains, apparently not dispersed bones possible with cremation but whole skeletons)?
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kurgan
Quote:Kurgan barrows were characteristic of Bronze Age peoples, from the Altay Mountains to the Caucasus, Ukraine, Romania, and Bulgaria. Burial mounds are complex structures with internal chambers. Within the burial chamber at the heart of the kurgan, elite individuals were buried with grave goods and sacrificial offerings, sometimes including horses and chariots. Kurgans were used in the Ukrainian and Russian Steppes but spread into eastern, central, and northern Europe in the 3rd millennium BC.
Two examples of Kurgan excavations on the wacky page mention skeletons. And when a "kurgan cremation" case is finally mentioned, it is not very ancient plus the line itself specifically contrasts "kurgan cremation" with the more usual case of "kurgan burial", leaving little doubt as to what the reference to "burial mounds" in the general case of Kurgans is to have meant:
Quote:A kurgan burial site at à Âubna-Jakusy and a kurgan cremation near Guciów are examples of Trzciniec culture of c. 1500 BC.
Back to Annie Mouse denying burials as suddenly un-European (un-IE?)
Why do western people always want to have things both ways, and so keep changing the story whenever archaeo-genetic finds don't go the way they want it to?
Annie Mouse has clearly not read - or decided to ignore and hide - that La Brana's genome is significantly European and particularly Scandinavian.
Admittedly, if really desperate, one could stretch the interpretation on the info thus-far revealed in mainstream news about the dark European Stone Ager - "La Brana" - from 7000 yrs ago (the one with the African genes for skin colour). The only way such commenters as Annie Mouse - desperate to have all-"white" Europeans 7000 yrs ago - can then still make it all fit is if they hid behind the "But what if La Brana was actually an ancient Finn/Saami type?" If one were to suppose it, then it would mean that the statement in the news articles somewhere above that declared the Euro Stone Ager's genome being more "Scandinavian" than any other type of European could technically still hold true, while no other European (i.e. the IE types) would yet have to be lumped with "dark" ancestors as recently as 7000 years ago (unless more finds appear) - since recent dark ancestors is clearly a notion too disturbing for some in the west. (Though Finns and Saami are no less native to Europe. And La Brana's genes were specifically described as European, especially Northern European/Scandinavian.) And Finns/Saami being non-IE, IE-Europeans can still hold on to the Anatolian PIE theory and also the Kurgan hypothesis and especially an all-white PIE population (and I'm sure that at that point, "Annie Mouse" would return to Kurgan mounds/burials being very "IE/traditionally European after all").
Of course, there is the slight problem to this convenient retelling - though only implicit: that had La Brana been more Finnish/Saami in terms of his genome than "other" (=IE) Scandinavian, the researchers would *very* likely have specifically stated so: after all, such info is very much what the west is interested in. The west only cares about "Is it IE or Not?" It's the first and last question on their minds. Since in their minds IE=white civilisation. So anything that shakes the foundations of either side of that equals sign is bound to be considered explosive news and would not result in ancient Finns/Saami being packaged under generic Scandinavian. Hence it's likely that when they said the Stone Age European from 7000 years BP had a "Scandinavian genome", they would really have meant the majority "IE" Scandinavians' genome (too) and not (just) the minority (non-IE) Scandinavians' genome.
2. Anyway, that was not the point of this post.
The main point of this post was that when I visited the wackypedia page on "Kurgan" (mounds) I discovered something really hysterical. And predictable.
It becomes apparent from the wackypedia Edit History Differences.
You need to bear in mind that until recently Kurgan was firmly associated in the minds of all mainstream PIE-ists with IE and especially with the Kurgan - and Anatolian - PIE theories. Remember, Elst himself declared that the Kurgan kultur was "definitely" IE.
So keeping that in mind then, now compare:
a ) [color="#0000FF"]en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Kurgan&oldid=593454147[/color]
Quote:Kurgan
This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Fraggle81 (talk | contribs) at 17:27, 1 February 2014. It may differ significantly from the current revision.
Revision as of 17:27, 1 February 2014 by Fraggle81 (talk | contribs)
(diff) ââ  Previous revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision ââ â (diff)
Jump to: navigation, search For other uses, see Kurgan (disambiguation).
Sarmatian Kurgan 4th century BC, Fillipovka, South Urals, Russia. This kurgan was excavated in a dig led by Russian Academy of Sciences Archeology Institute Prof. L. Yablonsky in the summer of 2006. It is the first kurgan known to be completely destroyed and then rebuilt to its original appearance.Kurgan is the Turkic term for a tumulus. These are mounds of earth and stones raised over a grave or graves. Originating with its use in Soviet archaeology, the word is now widely used for tumuli in the context of Eastern European and Central Asian archaeology.
The word kurgan ââ¬Ëfunerary moundââ¬â¢, is, as well as Central Asia and Anatolia used in Russia and Ukraine, but throughout South-Eastern Europe (Ru. kurgán, ORu. kurganu, Ukr. kurhán, BRu. kurhan, Pol. kurhan, kurchan, kuran ââ¬Ëmoundââ¬â¢; Rumanian gurgan, dial. Hung. korhány), from Tatar, Tat., Osm., Kum. kurgan, Old Turkic kurgan "fortification", Kirg. and Jagat. korgan, Karakirg. korgon, all from Turkotat. kurgamak "fortify", kurmak "erect".[citation needed][1]
The distribution of such tumuli in Eastern Europe corresponds closely to the area of the Pit Grave or Kurgan culture in South-Eastern Europe.[2]
[...]
[color="#800080"](At the bottom of the page, the footnote to that last finally mentions Alinei, the promulgator of the PCT/Palaeolithic Continuity Theory of P/IE in Europe - that was brought up in some posts above[/color]
2.Jump up ^ Mario Alinei 'Interdisciplinary and linguistic evidence for Paleolithic continuity of Indo-European, Uralic and Altaic populations in Eurasia', 2003
The thing to note is that the above text was the last Wacky edit NOT to mention the additions that follow in (b ) below.
Note also that the above was the edit from Feb 1.
b ) Now things get really interesting. Several consecutive edits, all on March 1st, - by one "Hirabutor" - follow the above edit. The first couple or so edits are not relevant to my point.
Two consecutive by this "Hirabutor" show the following appear and then evolve:
en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Kurgan&oldid=597693785
Quote:Kurgan
This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Hirabutor (talk | contribs) at 17:43, 1 March 2014. It may differ significantly from the current revision.
Revision as of 17:43, 1 March 2014 by Hirabutor (talk | contribs)
(diff) ââ  Previous revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision ââ â (diff)
Jump to: navigation, search For other uses, see Kurgan (disambiguation).
Sarmatian Kurgan 4th century BC, Fillipovka, South Urals, Russia. This kurgan was excavated in a dig led by Russian Academy of Sciences Archeology Institute Prof. L. Yablonsky in the summer of 2006. It is the first kurgan known to be completely destroyed and then rebuilt to its original appearance.Kurgan is the Turkic term for a tumulus. These are mounds of earth and stones raised over a grave or graves. Originating with its use in Soviet archaeology, the word is now widely used for tumuli in the context of Eastern European and Central Asian archaeology.
According to Mario Alinei's [color="#FF0000"]Paleolithic Continuity Theory[/color] the distribution of such tumuli in Eastern Europe corresponds closely to the area of the Pit Grave or Kurgan culture in South-Eastern Europe. [color="#FF0000"]PTC reassigns the Kurgan culture (traditionally considered early Indo-European) to a people of predominantly mixed Uralic and Turkic stock.[1][/color]
Kurgans were built in the Eneolithic, Bronze, Iron, Antiquity and Middle Ages, with old traditions still active in Southern Siberia and Central Asia. Kurgan cultures are divided archeologically into different sub-cultures, such as Timber Grave, Pit Grave, Scythian, Sarmatian, Hunnish and Kuman-Kipchak.
A plethora of placenames that include the word "kurgan" appear from Lake Baikal to the Black Sea.
And this is the final current text of [color="#0000FF"]the intro to the Kurgan page at wackypedia as it exists at present.[/color]
Note the above was added by Hirabutor just 20 mins after previous (minor-looking) edits. Notice particularly the message Hirabutor records for the edit - so innocuous - between the previous edit at 17:23 and this significant one at 17:43:
[color="#0000FF"]en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Kurgan&diff=597693785&oldid=597691175[/color]
Where the text went from (at 17:23):
Quote:The distribution of such tumuli in [[Eastern Europe]] corresponds closely to the area of the [[Pit Grave]] or [[Kurgan culture]] in [[South-Eastern Europe]].<ref>[[Mario Alinei]] 'Interdisciplinary and linguistic evidence for Paleolithic continuity of Indo-European, Uralic and Altaic populations in Eurasia', 2003</ref>(The stuff between <ref></ref> tags would generate a link to a footnote: the footnote would contain the text between the ref tags, not the intro section itself. This is confirmed by how at 17:23, the intro section did not contain the text in the <ref>, which only contained a link to where it was displayed in the page's footnotes.)
The above was changed to (17:43):
Quote:Revision as of 17:43, 1 March 2014 (edit) (undo)
Hirabutor (talk | contribs)
[color="#FF0000"](improving style of writing (feel free to move this part to other sections))[/color]
Next edit ââ â
According to [[Mario Alinei]]'s [[Paleolithic Continuity Theory#Historical_reconstruction|Paleolithic Continuity Theory]] the distribution of such tumuli in [[Eastern Europe]] corresponds closely to the area of the [[Pit Grave]] or [[Kurgan culture]] in [[South-Eastern Europe]]. PTC reassigns the Kurgan culture (traditionally considered early [[Indo-European]]) to a people of predominantly mixed [[Uralic]] and [[Turkic languages|Turkic]] stock.<ref>[[Mario Alinei]] '[http://www.continuitas.org/texts/alinei_...linary.pdf Interdisciplinary and linguistic evidence for Paleolithic continuity of Indo-European, Uralic and Altaic populations in Eurasia, with an excursus on Slavic ethnogenesis]', 2003</ref>
And just a carefree edit message by Hirabutor about how his colossal change was merely for "improving style of writing (feel free to move this part to other sections)". Meanwhile, [color="#0000FF"]his edit was to insert the PCT - Pal(a)eolithic Continuity Theory - take on Kurgan burial mounds into the very introduction of the Kurgan page.[/color]
I mean, previously the whole topic of Kurgan mounds was practically dominated by the prevailing version of PIE-ism - the Kurgan hypothesis (and IIRC the Anatolian PIE theory didn't disagree about the Kurgans being IE). Until the above wackypedia edit, the only place in the main body of the wacky Kurgan page's text where the Paleolithic Continuity Theory was described was in the Kurgan (PIE) Hypothesis subsection of the page - far from the intro - where the Anatolian Hypothesis and PCT were merely mentioned as opposing PIE theories to Kurgan culture being PIE. (Note that IIRC the Anatolian hypothesis still had Kurgan as IE, but not as PIE. That is, Kurgan was to have descended from an earlier PIE culture, whereas the Kurgan Hypothesis had Kurgan culture being PIE culture. PCT doesn't have Kurgan as PIE or even IE at all, but - as seen above - PCT has Kurgan being mixed Uralic-Altaic, i.e. non-IE.)
Again, the significance is that the wackypedia Kurgan page's Intro is headlining with PCT (again, it's the page's intro section), attempting to pass this off as the New Old "Received Wisdom". And someone just snuck that massive change in, as if was just a minor text edit and as if it was the original Euro position on PIE all along. Like I said, hysterical. And so predictable. Personally, I think we'll see more of this changeover in future. IMO, it is an inevitable fallout from discovering that dark stone age European (and the other apparently dark European from about the same period). Europeans having been a not all-white population just 7000 years ago is too close for some people.
Who knows, if this wacky edit wasn't just an individual's attempt to sneak past the radar but suddenly actually has higher-level support in the west (implying that it is the west making a move to prop PCT up as the New Eternal Original PIE Theory), maybe tomorrow they will sneakily rewrite the rules for IE-language-change-over-time to suddenly support PCT too (whereas IE linguists until now adamantly argued that PCT was in contradiction to the current IE linguistic rules), so that, from that angle too, they can pretend that PCT was the only argument they ever made.
Time to parrot my statement from 2 posts up:
Quote:Personally, I think the time is now ripe for Hindoos to use the current genetic and archaeological etc data to work on re-defining a logically-consistent (internally logically consistent) Palaeolithic Continuity Theory for Skt in India. Don't leave it too late and end up letting aliens inundate the field and fill in the gap on the Indian side with their storytelling. [color="#0000FF"]If you see any tendency toward general acceptance of PCT among the larger set of PIE-ists - either covertly or overtly starting to propound it - you need to be ready with a case for the Indian situation.[/color]