When Indo-Europeans first came to Europe?

[molbol2000]

And why? It is generally accepted, that they was conqueriors, but that's not clear, why they come from steepe to the territory that was not good for horse breeding.
They did not need this territory for their usual economic structure.
What if we assume otherwise. They suffered from the expansion of European farmers, and therefore decided to establish control there.
After all, it is the expansion of agricultural cultures that is typical in history (for the purpose of colonization, and so on)
The ancient Indo-European attribute of snake fighting(Hero kills serpent) did not imply aggression, on the contrary, it meant victory over aggression and evil

[mathematic]

I know very little about this subject.  However movement like this usually means they need more room.

[joigus]

5 hours ago, molbol2000 said:

And why? It is generally accepted, that they was conqueriors, but that's not clear, why they come from steepe to the territory that was not good for horse breeding.
They did not need this territory for their usual economic structure.
What if we assume otherwise. They suffered from the expansion of European farmers, and therefore decided to establish control there.
After all, it is the expansion of agricultural cultures that is typical in history (for the purpose of colonization, and so on)
The ancient Indo-European attribute of snake fighting(Hero kills serpent) did not imply aggression, on the contrary, it meant victory over aggression and evil

There were many migrations. Some more peaceful, traders, like the Beaker people; others, not so much.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indo-European_migrations

The ones that really spread and seem to have been quite violent are the Yamnaya. They flooded Europe with their genes. They also brought the plague and big axes:

https://www.newscientist.com/article/mg24132230-200-story-of-most-murderous-people-of-all-time-revealed-in-ancient-dna/

[molbol2000]

11 hours ago, joigus said:

The ones that really spread and seem to have been quite violent are the Yamnaya. They flooded Europe with their genes. They also brought the plague and big axes:

According the map, all of them from Yamnaya

11 hours ago, joigus said:

Some more peaceful, traders

There was no "peaceful traders" in the aryan cultures at all. All of them were extrimelly warior cultures with cult of Hero.
But the question is was it cultures agressive or it was just defence from paleoeuropeans

There are no "traders" in IE-mythology at all.

The base of indoeuropean myth is the hero that kills evil in the face of serpent

Edited December 19, 2020 by molbol2000

[joigus]

1 hour ago, molbol2000 said:

There was no "peaceful traders" in the aryan cultures at all.

Yes, there were. The Beaker people were traders. They brought beer and artifacts. They travelled alone or in small groups across Europe and were buried with their artifacts. A famous example is the Amesbury Archer. Of course he had weapons, because many people had weapons in the Bronce Age. And travelling traders were not an exception, for very good reasons.

There is no culture without traders. Trade has been a part of human culture for millenia. Prehistoric trading routes of obsidian have been found in Africa.

[molbol2000]

1 minute ago, joigus said:

Yes, there were. The Beaker people were traders. They brought beer and artifacts. They travelled alone or in small groups across Europe and were buried with their artifacts. A famous example is the Amesbury Archer. Of course he had weapons, because many people had weapons in the Bronce Age. And travelling traders were not an exception, for very good reasons.

There is no culture without traders. Trade has been a part of human culture for millenia. Prehistoric trading routes of obsidian have been found in Africa.

A simple exchange of goods is not yet trade. Trading starts there, there is profit for trader.

if the Indo-Europeans were traders, this would be reflected in their ethic and myths

[joigus]

You just saying barter is not trade does not imply you're right, of course. And actually you're wrong. You don't have to have money to have trade. Plus the concept of money is very old nonetheless: Seashells, salt, and other goods too were accepted currency in the past. Fixing the exchange rate, if you will, for any good that's scarce enough does the trick. If you are sitting next door to an extremely valuable resource that's in high demand, there's your profit. It is trade, subject to all the constrictions of supply and demand, upturns and downturns in value, availability, etc. That may be why anthropologists call it trade.

Trade in some societies is present in more recent myths, as e.g., the Nabateans. But not necessarily, and not tipically, even though it's been there for millenia. You should support what you say with some facts. I've given you the example of the Beaker people. They are known to have been traders, of Indo-European origin, and trading is not exactly unequivocally present in their myths. We do not know what those myths were about, assuming they existed.

 

Quote

Proto-Finno-Ugric and PIE have a lexicon in common, generally related to trade, such as words for "price" and "draw, lead". Similarly, "sell" and "wash" were borrowed in Proto-Ugric. Although some have proposed a common ancestor (the hypothetical Nostratic macrofamily), this is generally regarded as the result of intensive borrowing, which suggests that their homelands were located near each other. Proto-Indo-European also exhibits lexical loans to or from Caucasian languages, particularly Proto-Northwest Caucasian and Proto-Kartvelian, which suggests a location close to the Caucasus.^[19][22]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indo-European_migrations#Uralic,_Caucasian_and_Semitic_borrowings

For obvious reasons, trade is not an element that easily plays a central role in myths. It's too domestic, familiar, too routine, and not an element of the transcendental side of existence.

Can you support anything you say with arguments, data, quotations, instead of just a tacky image and repeating "I'm right; you're wrong"?