Andronovo and Bactrian Margiana archaeological complexes

[Guest guest]

I do not know how many people on this group will be interested in this-

certainly, Dr Witzel and K Elst must be interested I hope- but I have

come across an interesting essay on the above complexes which were

identified as IIr.

 

The author C. C. Lamberg-Karlovsky says the above complexes have been

identified as IIr. for nationalist purposes and there was no

archaeological signature what so ever to confirm this kind of

derivation. The abstrct concludes: " The identity of the Indo-Iranians

remains elusive " .

 

Enjoy the article:

 

http://tinyurl.com/5vyguj

 

best regards,

 

Kishore patnaik

[Guest guest]

, " Kishore patnaik "

<kishorepatnaik09 wrote:

>

> The author C. C. Lamberg-Karlovsky says the above complexes have

been

> identified as IIr. for nationalist purposes and there was no

> archaeological signature what so ever to confirm this kind of

> derivation. The abstrct concludes: " The identity of the Indo-Iranians

> remains elusive " .

>

 

So what? This is the umpteenth time that Indian AIT skeptics pick a

hole in an AIT assertion (not by finding original evidence against it

but by quoting some Westerner who has argued against it) and then look

around smugly: " Ahaaa, what do you say noooowwww? "

 

The AIT isn't disproven just because some particular claim that *some*

(but by no means all) AIT votaries have woven into it, gets denied or

even disproven. In this case, a non-Indo-Iranian identity for the BMAC

poses a problem not just to the AIT but also to the OIT. By 2000 BC, we

should expect some IE tribes to be on their way westward, either Slavs

or Greeks or already Iranians, who are part of the Indo-Iranian group.

While not strictly indispensible, it would be plausible if some of

these IE and possibly Iranian tribes has populated the BMAC.

 

What you do is not to seek to prove the OIT, but merely to harass the

AIT people.

 

Yes, my tone is not so friendly, as I take offence at your hilarious

claim that obvious jokes by Torsten and Francesco are actually death

threats. If you really mean that, then something is wrong with you. Why

is the OIT being given such a bad name by the mad conduct of its Indian

defenders?

 

Kind regards,

 

KE

[Guest guest]

So what? This is the umpteenth time that Indian AIT skeptics pick a hole in an AIT assertion (not by finding original evidence against it

but by quoting some Westerner who has argued against it) and then look around smugly: " Ahaaa, what do you say noooowwww

 

My thrust here is not on the disproval or finding holes in AIT, but to remind AITians that the identity of IIr is elusive on one hand and to specifically point out that the so called Nationalistic claims are not confined to OIT endorsers alone. I have never said that this has proved OIT.

 

 

 

Yes, my tone is not so friendly, as I take offence at your hilarious claim that obvious jokes by Torsten and Francesco are actually death threats. If you really mean that, then something is wrong with you. Why

is the OIT being given such a bad name by the mad conduct of its Indian defenders?

 

 

I don;t know whether your misunderstanding is deliberate or inadvertent, but certainly what you state is not on the side of facts. It is in fact certainly objectionable to value judge my conduct. What is happening at another group has got nothing to do with ideologies but with racism - a french person has called me a Hindu basXXXX. the thread was later taken up by Fr Br who seems to be losing his cool nowadays and wished that my skull be examined after my death. I am appalled that you find it hilarious. If this is not death wish, I don;t know what it is. Any way, I don;t want drag those things here,since neither of the above people is a member here. I hope you desist too.

 

 

Kishore patnaik

[Guest guest]

, " kishore patnaik "

<kishorepatnaik09 wrote:

>

> > So what? This is the umpteenth time that Indian AIT skeptics pick

a

> > hole in an AIT assertion (not by finding original evidence

against it

> > but by quoting some Westerner who has argued against it) and then

look

> > around smugly: " Ahaaa, what do you say noooowwww

>

>

> My thrust here is not on the disproval or finding holes in AIT, but

to

> remind AITians that the identity of IIr is elusive on one hand and

to

> specifically point out that the so called Nationalistic claims are

not

> confined to OIT endorsers alone. I have never said that this has

proved

> OIT.

>

>

 

 

That's bad too, for another reason. All the talk of the political

motives allegedly involved in the AIT, though sometimes (not here)

unavoidable, only diverts from the real and truly fascinating debate,

viz. on what happened ca. 6000 years ago, where PIE was spoken etc.

All this talk about alleged ulterior motives is pedestrian, boring

and parasitic upon the real debate, which is about ancient history.

No one will give you a Nobel prize for finding political fault with

Witzel or Brighenti or whomever. By contrast, whoever can solve and

terminate the question of IE origins is assured of a golden mention

in the history books.

 

Kind regards,

 

 

KE

[Guest guest]

Here, it is not bad because the traditionalists are accused of

Nationalism. In the name of this, the actual facts are given a go by.

In fact, I was at one point of time or other branded as a Hindutvan,

which I am not , as if only those who have political ideology only

should and would canvass for OIT and long chronology. Is no one else

capable or what?

 

The above article would prove it is not just OITians (or actually a

part of them) who are Nationalistic. In other words, the

nationalistic tendencies cut across several schools, polaristically

differnt from one another. This in turn points to the fact that we

should differentiate between politics (or political ideology) and

Social Sciences.

 

Finally, I guess what we both are talking is the same - the politics

and science should not mix. I hope to draw your attention to my group

motif wherein I have categorically declared that there should not be

any polemics in searching for the truth.

 

Kishore patnaik