Credit of me finding this out goes to a banging instagram account archaelogyart. I couldn’t believe it. Even the pippeli’s are scanning the horizon.

https://www.reddit.com/gallery/1q2x3xh

Posted by sukkapleikka24h7

16 Comments

  1. Most probably not Finns. There was an indoeuropean population in Finland before us fenno-ugrians arrived.

  2. SlummiPorvari on

    Based on the genitalia I think they’re not hunting. They’re going to assault the reindeer sexually.

  3. Such a note that there were no Finns yet in 4000-3000 BCE, not even speakers of Proto-Finnish and Proto-Sámi, but the carvings are made by a bit-comb ware people who spoke some died paleolanguage that preceded the Uralic languages here and left behind only some substrate words as well as some toponyms and hydronyms such as Saimaa and Imatra. According to researchers, especially archaeologists and linguists, the ancestors of the Proto-Sámi didn’t arrive until around 2000 BCE in the Onega and Ladoga regions while the proto-Finnic ancestors first arrived in the Baltics around 1200-800 BCE and only to the northern side of the Gulf of Finland at the beginning of the Common Era (based on recent views). And the Finnish identity emerged and morphed gradually between 14th and 20th centuries and is still changing and seeking new shapes.

  4. Unlikely_Biscotti_62 on

    must’ve been hairy Finns 4000 bc, if they were able to hunt elk butt naked, in heavy snow.

  5. Usual_Wolverine3269 on

    “You can tell a lot about a man by looking at his nose”
    -Finns in 4000BC, probably