History Community ~ All Empires Homepage


This is the Archive on WORLD Historia, the old original forum.

 You cannot post here - you can only read.

 

Here is the link to the new forum:

  FAQ FAQ  Forum Search   Calendar   Register Register  Login Login


Forum LockedGenetic evidence ends Aryan origin theory

 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <123
Author
Sharrukin View Drop Down
Chieftain
Chieftain


Joined: 04-Aug-2004
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1134
Post Options Post Options   Quote Sharrukin Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Topic: Genetic evidence ends Aryan origin theory
    Posted: 02-Nov-2008 at 17:56
Here is an article relating Indo-Iranian influence on Uralic, Yeniseian, and BMAC, based upon archaeology and linguistics.  Witzel may be reviled by some (especially Indians), but his scholarship is quite sound.
 
 
 


Edited by Sharrukin - 14-Dec-2008 at 17:54
Back to Top
CiegaSordomud View Drop Down
Housecarl
Housecarl


Joined: 07-Aug-2008
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 40
Post Options Post Options   Quote CiegaSordomud Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 02-Nov-2008 at 19:25
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.
Back to Top
Chilbudios View Drop Down
Arch Duke
Arch Duke
Avatar

Joined: 11-May-2006
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1900
Post Options Post Options   Quote Chilbudios Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 02-Nov-2008 at 19:36
Originally posted by Sharrukin

Here is an article relating Indo-Iranian influence on Uralic, Yeniseian, and BMAC, based upon archaeology and linguistics.  Witzel may be reviled by some (especially Indians), but his scholarship is quite sound.
I guess the reason is that he spent considerable time and effort in refuting the out-of-India theories:
 
 
This article actually holds a wealth of information and arguments and also open issues on the IE and Indo-Iranian expansions.
Back to Top
Sharrukin View Drop Down
Chieftain
Chieftain


Joined: 04-Aug-2004
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1134
Post Options Post Options   Quote Sharrukin Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 04-Nov-2008 at 05:21
The BMAC origin of Indo-Iranian is only a hypothesis, there is nothing conclusive about it.
 
I never said that Indo-Iranian originated in the BMAC, just as I've never said that BMAC originated from the Indo-Iranians.  However, what we seem to be seeing is that BMAC was influenced by, and then superceded by cultures from the northern steppe.  Given that there is an influence by Indo-Iranian specifically on the Uralic and Yeniseian languages, the implication is certainly there of contact with, and later supersession of BMAC, by Indo-Iranians. 
 
As I've mentioned before there is already steppe penetration into BMAC regions.   At first steppe pottery was certainly introduced into BMAC sites most likely from the Zeravshan Valley where there was a Sintashta-Petrovka presence, and then later from the Andronovian variant known as Alakul.  Hence, there was certainly a trade going on.   Later Andronovians migrated into the region just south of the Aral Sea establishing the Tazabagyab Culture.  By 1800 BC Tazabagyab pottery was appearing in "post-BMAC" cities which have either declined in size or were neglected.  By 1600 BC, BMAC was finally superceded by the Andronovian-derived steppe cultures, now including the Bishkent and Vaksh Cultures.  So, you see, I really didn't need BMAC to prove an Indo-Iranian presence.  Andronovo superceded BMAC.  The cultures that descended from the southern Andronovo cultures directly led to historic presence of the Iranian tribes of the region.
 
Now considering the Indo-Iranian "loans" in Uralic and Yeniseian, the location was still most likely the steppe.   In the absence of valid "other hypothesises" this one stands out at the very best quite conveniently.
 
Conversely we can also see loans of words from a culture familiar with irrigation and brick building into Common Indo-Iranian as well.  The paramount deity Indra, for instance, bares a name which is not Indo-Iranian along with another 54 words identified by Alexander Lubotsky which were shared by both Iranic and Indo-Aryan, apparently before they splitted up.  Since the Harappa cities were already abandoned, this leaves the cities of the BMAC culture, as the most likely candidates. 
Back to Top
Suren View Drop Down
Arch Duke
Arch Duke
Avatar
Chieftain

Joined: 10-Feb-2006
Location: United States
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1673
Post Options Post Options   Quote Suren Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 21-Nov-2008 at 18:10
Originally posted by balabanpasa3

Aryan invaders ;
Peoples who use iron weapons and use chariots at 5000 B:C

LOL

And yuo want to me believe it LOL

LOL
agian you show your lack of Information about the subject. 5000bc??Wink
Anfører
Back to Top
Seko View Drop Down
Administrator
Administrator
Avatar
Superfluous Enabler of Sekostan

Joined: 01-Sep-2004
Location: United States
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 8682
Post Options Post Options   Quote Seko Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 21-Nov-2008 at 18:26
banned from the forum.
Copyright © 2004 Seko
Back to Top
Boreasi View Drop Down
Consul
Consul
Avatar

Joined: 15-Sep-2006
Location: Norway
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 300
Post Options Post Options   Quote Boreasi Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 15-Dec-2008 at 12:50
Major population movements, social structure, and caste endogamy have influenced the genetic structure of Indian populations. An understanding of these influences is increasingly important as gene mapping and case-control studies are initiated in South Indian populations.

http://www.biomedcentral.com/1471-2156/9/86/abstract
Be good or be gone.
Back to Top
edgewaters View Drop Down
Immortal Guard
Immortal Guard
Avatar

Joined: 13-Mar-2006
Location: Canada
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 2396
Post Options Post Options   Quote edgewaters Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 15-Dec-2008 at 17:06

Originally posted by CiegaSordomud

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
Back to Top
Boreasi View Drop Down
Consul
Consul
Avatar

Joined: 15-Sep-2006
Location: Norway
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 300
Post Options Post Options   Quote Boreasi Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 16-Dec-2008 at 21:25
Like the Spanish took over Florida and Mexico with less than a legion of soldiers...
Be good or be gone.
Back to Top
dan_smith View Drop Down
Immortal Guard
Immortal Guard


Joined: 02-Apr-2009
Location: Hungary
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 0
Post Options Post Options   Quote dan_smith Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 02-Apr-2009 at 10:26
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-ÁS  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
Back to Top
dan_smith View Drop Down
Immortal Guard
Immortal Guard


Joined: 02-Apr-2009
Location: Hungary
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 0
Post Options Post Options   Quote dan_smith Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 02-Apr-2009 at 10:33
The old-bulgar langauge are also an uar-avar-ugor with a very big ammount of persian-iranian words(but i don't know which word is iranian and which is hurrian. One example: var. The hungarian so called 'academist scientists' say that this name came from a persian word. But this word has very much different meaning and very much different form:
par, parancsolni-to command
var-to stand
var-fortress
avar-ethnic name
ur-lord
ar-shining, flood, wealth
arany-gold
bar-át-friend
uartian: e-ur-e=lord
god, creator=UR)




Edited by dan_smith - 02-Apr-2009 at 11:03
Back to Top
dan_smith View Drop Down
Immortal Guard
Immortal Guard


Joined: 02-Apr-2009
Location: Hungary
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 0
Post Options Post Options   Quote dan_smith Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 02-Apr-2009 at 11:08
"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....
Back to Top
Indian Pathan View Drop Down
Janissary
Janissary
Avatar

Joined: 07-Apr-2009
Location: New Delhi, Indi
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 16
Post Options Post Options   Quote Indian Pathan Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 24-May-2009 at 07:18
Originally posted by Slayertplsko

Originally posted by Asawar Hazaraspa

Originally posted by Suren

  we are still superior to you, Germanic sub-Iranic language tribal federation, yeath that's how we rule!?Big%20smileWackoNuke 

You simply believed all these?! Such studies has nothing to do with superiority. But Do not forget William Durant words: "Indo-Europeans have lost many lands throughout history and proably will do the same in future".



I think he was just joking around.

Back to Top
Indian Pathan View Drop Down
Janissary
Janissary
Avatar

Joined: 07-Apr-2009
Location: New Delhi, Indi
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 16
Post Options Post Options   Quote Indian Pathan Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 24-May-2009 at 07:26
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.
Back to Top
fantasus View Drop Down
Samurai
Samurai
Avatar

Joined: 07-May-2009
Location: denmark
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 111
Post Options Post Options   Quote fantasus Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 24-May-2009 at 08:50
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. The same may be true about the englissh, not to say those who have english as first language - how related to the "invaders" of late roman times do You expect them to be? Powerfull and prestigious invaders or "immigrants" can change language and culturural traiths even if they are not a majority (the same about arabs).
Back to Top
pinguin View Drop Down
Editorial Staff
Editorial Staff
Avatar

Joined: 29-Sep-2006
Location: Chile
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 7508
Post Options Post Options   Quote pinguin Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 24-May-2009 at 14:59
Originally posted by fantasus

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.
 
Why shouldn't we be related to the ancient Romans of the antiquity?
 
Indeed, if you say "Latin" the matter is tricky, because how many Italians are Latin? Nobody knows from sure. But if you say Roman, as a citizen of the Roman Empire, then chances are very high that most people of Latin Europe, and also Latin America have at least an obscure ancestor in the Roman Empire.
 
By the way, you could never understand the Spanish Reconquista and even the Spanish Inquisition, whitout knowing the fact that Spaniards of the time believed they were descendents of Romans, and were fighting to restablish a "Rome" (Known as Christianity at that time). Hispania, after all, was the name of a main Roman Province, a place were three important Roman Emperors were born, besides Seneca, Wink
 
"He who attempts to count the stars, not even knowing how to count the knots of the 'quipus'(counting string), ought to be held in derision."

Inca Pachacutec (1438-1471)
Back to Top
fantasus View Drop Down
Samurai
Samurai
Avatar

Joined: 07-May-2009
Location: denmark
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 111
Post Options Post Options   Quote fantasus Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 24-May-2009 at 17:31
Originally posted by pinguin

Originally posted by fantasus

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.
 
Why shouldn't we be related to the ancient Romans of the antiquity?
 
Indeed, if you say "Latin" the matter is tricky, because how many Italians are Latin? Nobody knows from sure. But if you say Roman, as a citizen of the Roman Empire, then chances are very high that most people of Latin Europe, and also Latin America have at least an obscure ancestor in the Roman Empire.
 
By the way, you could never understand the Spanish Reconquista and even the Spanish Inquisition, whitout knowing the fact that Spaniards of the time believed they were descendents of Romans, and were fighting to restablish a "Rome" (Known as Christianity at that time). Hispania, after all, was the name of a main Roman Province, a place were three important Roman Emperors were born, besides Seneca, Wink
 
The Romans descends as far as I know from wolflings(adopted). They preferred Eagles, perhaps because they did not know about Southamerican or Antarctic Pinguins(Sorry if I have missed any late detection of central italian ones)?
Is not russians (or albanians) "romans" too? Even with double headed (janus?)eagles.
And what about the "romans" of Asia minor? Very prolific people those romans!
Back to Top
 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <123

Forum Jump Forum Permissions View Drop Down



This page was generated in 0.063 seconds.