Genetic evidence ends Aryan origin theory

The BMAC origin of Indo-Iranian is only a hypothesis, there is nothing conclusive about it.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BMAC

Others maintain there is insufficient evidence for any ethnic or linguistic identification of the BMAC solely based on material remains, in the absence of written records. The archaeological record is inconclusive with regard to a migration of Indo-Aryans or Indo-Iranians to the BMAC[3], or with a migration of Indo-Aryans from the BMAC to the Indus Valley.[4] There is no archaeological evidence for an invasion into Bactria and Margiana.[5] Furthermore, there is no evidence that the complex even represented an ethnic/linguistic unity. Moreover, cultural links between the BMAC and the Indus Valley can also be explained by reciprocal cultural influences uniting the two cultures, or by the transfer of luxury or commercial goods.[6] The BMAC complex is also very poor in horse remains or representations, which are often seen as a sign for Indo-Aryan presence.[7]

Other arguments can be based on the current data. Even Iranists claims there is a non-IE substratum that is native to the region.

The BMAC origin of Indo-Iranian is only a hypothesis, there is nothing conclusive about it.

banned from the forum.

CiegaSordomud wrote: How are they going to dominate militarily or economically by not moving? All language transfer was based on those two principles.

Economic domination is fairly easy to achieve without any major population movement; it's not like there's been any major population transfer from the US to hardly any other country, and yet the US economy globally dominates practically all other economies. Similarly, English has become a global lingua franca even in areas where the British never colonized.

So you can  throw this idea out the window - plainly it does not work. It is not necessary for there to be any signifigant movement of population for language (or economic dominance) to spread. This is hardly a modern phenomena either. 

In fact, you don't even need dominance. Sometimes the dominant even take on the language and culture of the dominated! I can think of quite a few examples of this - the Anglo-Normans in Ireland, for instance.

Finally, both economic and military dominance can be achieved without any major population transfer at all. This happened all the time in the ancient world - the conquerors just formed a tiny elite. There was some movement of population, obviously, but not necessarily anything signifigant. Romans never settled in major numbers in places like Judea or Britain, for instance, and any genetic contribution they brought was so minimal as to be insignifigant. In the wake of Alexander, Hellenic culture and the Greek language dominated the Near East, but apart from Anatolia, there was never any signifigant population of Greeks settling in those areas.

Edited by edgewaters - 15-Dec-2008 at 17:19

The invention of the war chariots and the domestication of the horse 's nothing to do with the so called indo-europeans or indo-iranians.

The first people who did these things are the HURRIANS who speek an ugrian langauge which shows many similarity with the ancient caucasian langauge family(for example the hatti which became in the scythian 'confederacy' the name of the whole folk because the term askata-sakata-saketa-scytha-schütha is came from the term hatti-khatti-kheta with an S-SS phoneme).

The hurrian langauge shows many similarity(and also the mitannian) with the vedic and sanskrit langauge but the logic which etimologies the words is very different.

For example the aryan sun-god SURYA has very good analogies in the hurrian related kassite langauge. The kassite sun-god's name is SURIASH. The word sur mean in the urartian-hurrian-subarean langauge: lance, a weapon. In hungarian which has a very big substrate of the avar, avarhun, hunavar, onugor langauge this term mean 'to  pick'.
In hungarian the term sunstroke= NAP-SZÚR-Ã�S  nap-suriash  sun-sun god suriash who picks our head....

If there was any invasion against norhern india and the indus valley civilization(after the 'deluge' because there were many before...) it is a cleare evidence that the hurrians and kassites are part of  the army. But this not means that they speak sanskrit or there are any aryan aristocracy who mastered the subarean-hurrian folk...

I show one example which shows that the logical conclusion is that the sanskrit has an hurrian superstrate
some hurrian name:

s'uvardata  in sanskrit this means: *svarda_ta 'given by heaven'
in hungarian it has the same meaning: sovar_gas adta(da-ad methatesis) sovar_adta given by wishfull
The term SUVAR is the self name of the hurrians and also indicate the name of their ancestrical war-god ZABA(hungarian Csaba a mythical hero who mastered the armies of the milky way)

biryawa_za (sanskrit: vi_ryava_ja 'having the prize of valour'),   hungarian: bir-ja a java_kat having the goods, the good things(jó-jav=good).

And an another:
subandhu    in slavic langauges the term zsupan is an office. They took it from the avars. In hungarian the word means: yammering but the ancient meaning is i think is very different.

http://www.virtus.hu/user_gfx/20071112/tn_aid3486_20071112071313_176.jpeg

This image shows the similaritiy between the hurrian-urartian and the sekler-hungarian runic script or hieroglyphal script.

After the collapse of the hittite and hurrian-mitanni states they migrated to the tarim basin and to northern india(the kassites became kazars, in india: gujjar khazars)

The ancient names of the tarim basin shows that the territory was inhabited during the centuries by the hurrites(Tolstov the great russian archeologist  confirmed this theory).

Orkhon runic scripture of  the old-turkish langauge named the place APAR
This name is the derivation of the word AVAR.
Avar is the cognate of the hurri word ur-eur-iuri which means in hungarian lord. The word var=castle an fortress. Also the name chorezm is the form of the ethnic name hurri because it is the cognate of the subarean-suvarean ethnic name.
Khorezm=khurrite. In sumerian kur=mountain, land. Also a similar word is the hurssag=mountain, land. Hungarian: orszag(land) and kormány(government).

The ethnic name mitannian has also a very unknown but easily understoodable origin. They call themselves MADA, MATA. In hungarian this means also MEGYE(pronounced: med-ye)=shire and the ethnic name MAGYAR=MAD-JAR or madar(bird).

The medieval hungarian chronicles say that the father of the hungarian nations(huns and maygars) NIMRUD the great king ruled over sinear, akkad and subartu. After a catastroph they went to persia, havilah(khorezm, uvar-azmiy and northern india, the  real-ethiophia and KUS the hindukush).
Nimrud is a hurrian related assyrian city(the assyrian folk is an subarean-semitic mixture i think).
Also the hungarian grand-prince ARPAD has a very good analogi with the hurrian city-state ARPAD in syria.

http://www.imninalu.net/maps_file/Hurrians.jpg


I do not want tho speech against the persian superiority and the theory of the non-turkish non-ugric iranian horse-riding tribes who wandering between the great chinese wall and the great hungarian plain....but i think the relation of the ancient iranians, medes, mitannians, madas, hurrians, avars, chorezmians, parthians ugrians and so on....is a very difficult question and this question is the greatest problem troubled by the so called indogerman school(before this school was born the hungarians were scythian-related, after the school agressive campaign against the habsburg ruled hungarians the scythians became related to the great great aryan-german nation....)





Edited by dan_smith - 02-Apr-2009 at 10:52

"Imagine if all the non-Indo-Europeans, non-Afro-Asiatics would stand up and unite?

The non-Islamic Turks, Hungarians, Chechens, Caucasians, and others who are genetic descendants of the Sumerians, Hurrians, Etruscans, Minoans, Elamites, Kassites, etc who are R1a and G carriers. They will start to demand a lot of recognition."


Unfortunatley I found nothing about the genetic links between these people and the ural-altayic people. I found something about the sekler-kabars. An article said that they have iranian genes(I think this means: chorezmian which is the crossroad between the turko-ugro-scythian world and the iranian) If you know something about this please send me some link....

No body is superior to other, the wealth sometime is here then there. No body is permanent here in this world. In India, I normally heard that Aryans to to this land but not found perfect reasons to believe except one, there is a big difference in color between North Indians and South Indians. And lower cast, even in north India have a different color. So, I think, South Indians and the lower cast (Dalit) should be the original Indians before arrivals of "Aryasns", can anyone please reveal in details this case, thanks.

fantasus wrote: There is not the slightest doubt that the origin of the "latin" languages is the ancient latin of the romans. Still we may dioubt whether the majority of "latin" Europeans and south americans are very much genetically related to central italians of antiquity.