So your position is that the Medes are an unaltered version of the Mesolithic inhabitants of the same territory, largely CHG, Iran_N and Levant_N, who already spoke a Proto-Indo-European language?Quote:
Originally Posted by Guti
Printable View
So your position is that the Medes are an unaltered version of the Mesolithic inhabitants of the same territory, largely CHG, Iran_N and Levant_N, who already spoke a Proto-Indo-European language?Quote:
Originally Posted by Guti
And yet the most CHG populations today speak Kartvelian and Caucasian languages. This doesn't seem to fit with your theory.Quote:
Originally Posted by Guti
My position is that IF once again IF the Medes were from SouthCentral Asia than they were mostly BMAC derived people.Quote:
Originally Posted by Nmiito
BMAC has CHG/Iran_ChL origin. If you don’t believe me, I can give you link to the academic papers.
BMAC mixed a little bit the native people of Central Asia, but they kept more CHG/Iran_ChL intact than let say Armenians
You didn’t read the Southern Arc paper? If you have issues with the paper and the academic world, it is not really my problem.Quote:
Originally Posted by Nmiito
It has been said that the proto-Hurrians and proto-Indo-Europeans share the same origin and the same ancient pre-Sumerian ancestors.
The Medes are a population contemporary to ancient Rome. Pretending that they have any importance in the ethnogenesis of any other population is stupid.Quote:
Originally Posted by Guti
You have no idea if the Medes are of local origin and descended from a population who had been living in the same land for 10k years, or if the original Medes came from somewhere else and if they made a small or big impact in the local population (like the Huns in Hungary vs the Hazaras in Afghanistan). You don't even know if the CHG/Iran_N-like of the Medes has its origin in BMAC or from from locals CHGs. All you have is your wishful thinking.
No, you're just making things up because you're clueless but desire very strongly that your theory becomes true.Quote:
Originally Posted by Guti
You can't pretend to link an ancient population (CHG) to a macrogroup of languages (Indo-European) and then forget that the populations who today harbour the highest amount of this ancient ancestry do not speak the languages which supposedly originated in them. Not to mention the insane ties you make between ancient and modern populations and between populations with mixed origins who share the same ancient ancestry. Seriously nothing you say makes sense.
Except Iranics dont have the most CHG in west asia. Those would be north caucasus folks.Quote:
Originally Posted by Guti
Bro, you're all over the place. Its clear that the original west Iranics originated from the Sintashta/Andronovo cultures.
LOL.Quote:
Originally Posted by Nmiito
The biblical MedES, the Aryans, and not the Meds, I don't refer to the Medeterranean people, hehe.
The Medes were direct ARYAN ancestors of the Kurds
The MedEs were the founders of the 1st Aryan Empire ever. If they were not significant than nobody is on this planet. Even more significant than the Sumerians.
https://i.postimg.cc/L6G3Qj9C/Median-empire-map.png
You are wrong. Iranics have, together with the modern Hurrians, the most CHG/Irn_ChL ancesty.Quote:
Originally Posted by Babak
In the Southern Arc paper they use Irn_ChL for their CHG models.
No way in 1000 years people in Sintashta/Andronovo cultures spoke a Western Iranic dialect aka proto-Kurdic hehe. Western Iranic is either native to Kurdistan or was native to Yaz (BMAC). With other words a CHG/Iran_ChL language, period!
If the Medes came from SouthCentral Asia than this was most likely the case.
https://i.postimg.cc/Df6C6xM7/R1a-migration-map.jpg