How Can We know Indo-European Institution of Monarchy Began in River Valleys of Ukraine?

Brief Outline.

A century of work on ancient Indian concept of monarchy (Dumezeil, Puhvel, and heaps of others) and ancient Ireland concept of monarch (by Fergus Kelly, Myles Dillon, Binchy) has shown Indian and Irish concept of monarchy came from same Common Source.

By the time of the Roman conquest of Gaul, the specific Indo-European had become so muddled with evolutionary innovations in Germanic, Roman, and Gaulish governance structures / cultures, only parts of that Common Source inheritance were left. And because of the muddle and no base-line, it was impossible to parse from the evidence what was new and what was ancient.

BUT what arrived in Ireland with the first Indo-European infiltrations stayed steady for a comparatively long time into historical era.

So the basis of the English monarchy model of governance comes via the first Britons - Preteni (who became the Welsh) and the Scottish. Both Scotland and Welsh monarchal (and mythological and linguistic) cultures were, mainly, formed of the impact of Irish infiltrations / colonisation of the geographical and cultural space of what became Scotland and Wales. Those Preteni conquered almost the entire island of Britain before the Saxons and Romans arrived, and pushed them back.

So English Monarchal model comes from Preteni (Welsh), Scottish, Germanic (Saxon & Viking) influences, as well as French (but by this time ~1000 CE that Indo-European Common Source was only vaguely discernible in its institutions on the island of Britain, as in the rest of Europe).

However, since we can get close to the essence of the Indo-European model of monarchy through the Irish and Indian evidence, we can then use it as a baseline of what’s essentially Indo-European. Then we can carefully parse the literary, archaeological, and linguistic evidence in other Indo-European cultures (e.g., Germanic, Roman, Iranian, etc) into the part of their Indo-European essences that survived, and the innovation aspect.

We know from archaeological evidence (e.g., male chiefly burials, grave goods, mounds, ancient DNA, etc) and linguistic evidence (e.g., ri, raj, and a whole host of different words associated with governance) that these words existed before 2,500 BCE while the Common Source Indo-European culture was still intact.

We also have a consensus about several ways in which the language spread from Ukraine to India and Ireland: a communal model of sacrifice associated with feasts at times of burials (we have heaps of archaeological evidence for this - Ireland to India).

Sacrifice was a contractual practice with Sky Father dyḗus pḥatḕr (ancient Ukraine pre-2,500 BCE) whose Magical/Priestly/Poetic aspect became: Odin (Wednesday), Yama (India), Varuna (India), Yima (Iran), Ymir (Scandinavia), Tuisto (Germanic), Mercury (Rome), Jupiter (Rome), Zeus Pater (Greece), Lugh / Donn (Celtic), Ahura Mazda (Iran).... first function (Sovereignty - Magical, as distinct from juridical function) first Kings who died so their culture could live).

In return for a ritually proper sacrifice, community's welfare was guaranteed. This is the Indo-European model, with the tripartite expression of social hierarchy (Sovereign (Juridical and Magical), Warriors, and Cultivators) often reflected in the castes, religion, and even in the order of our days of the week: Tiwaz (Juridical Germanic God), Whodanaz / Odin / Oden / Woden (Germanic Magical/Priestly/Chaotic/Lord of Death), Thor (Germanic God, who like Indra controls the thunderbolt), and Freya / Frigg (Cultivator/Farmer/Economy).

Today the specific and particular Indo-European rite of sacrifice manifests in the communion (theology and ritual) in Christian churches and in the offering / reward system (theology and ritual) in other Indo-European religions like Buddhism, Zoroastrianism, etc.

We assume other community celebrations (inaugurations were held on the mounds) for which we have no archaeological evidence also took place. All of these ceremonies where sacrifices according to the Indo-European model were held are associated with language spread, use of wheeled carts, technologies associated with horse domestication, community governance (Indo-European monarchical model), and other aspects of the Common Source Indo-European culture which gave it an evolutionary edge.

Remember: our starting point is the scientifically established fact (known since 1782 that ALL Indo-European languages, Ireland to India, stem from a Common Source. Then we work backwards to determine: “How could this have happened? What other forms of evidence elucidate this amazing phenomenon?”).

So the male patriarchal "Chiefly Complex" in ancient Ukraine before 2,500 BCE was the archetype of the first function monarch (who combines juridical and magical aspects of power) across the Indo-European zone Ireland to India. It spread with and as a function of the Indo-European language outwards from ancient Ukraine. (see Disinfolklore (1) and "Indo-European Immanence in Early Christianity" on my Substack for more references / details).

P.S. This is an extremely brief overview of some evidence trajectories that demonstrate the extent and depth of the immanence, even today, of Indo-European cultures’ Common Source inheritance. Stay tuned and look at DecodingTrolls, Power of Mana, and Disinfolklore Substack and Twitter for ever more information about these matters.