The Indo Europeans in Space and Time

[Guest guest]

p 5 onwards

 

http://tinyurl.com/6l5k3o

 

Rehashing of the same old stuff. The fiction of the " Aryan warriors "

and the Mittani aristocracy is just that (Dassow 2008, Meiroop 2007).

Interestingly if the Mittani Indo Aryans were warriors then their

cousins who supposedly came to India were also warriros and hence this

is turn back to AIT. The linking of steppe archaeological cultures to

any known " Indo-European " language is the work of nationalistic Russian

archaeology and has been severally challenged by Lamberg-Karlosky

(2002) and Kohl (2007).

 

M. Kelkar

[Guest guest]

IndiaArchaeology , " Francesco Brighenti "

<frabrig wrote:

-

 

> ...if the Mittani Indo Aryans were warriors then their cousins who

> supposedly came to India were also warriors and hence this is turn

> back to AIT.

 

This is curious. Doesn't the oldest Indo-Aryan text, the Rgveda,

reflect a society in which warrior groups had a relevant role, for

which they were exalted in the Rgveda (especially indirectly, i.e.

through hymns addressed to warrior gods)? Of course, this doesn't

mean the Rgvedic Aryans *as a whole* were a military society.

Likewise, this doesn't mean they *invaded* northwestern South Asia

from Afghanistan through some organized military operations.

Therefore, no AIT is implied by saying that the Rgvedic Aryans (and,

possibly, the so-called Mittani Aryans too) *included* a military

aristocracy within their respective social fabrics.

 

> The linking of steppe archaeological cultures to any known " Indo-

> European " language is the work of nationalistic Russian

> archaeology...

 

This statement is patently false. Many non-Russian scholars support

this view, and they have no links with Russian nationalism.

 

Regards,

Francesco

 

--- End forwarded message ---

[Guest guest]

IndiaArchaeology , " mkelkar2003 "

<swatimkelkar wrote:

 

 

>

> > ...if the Mittani Indo Aryans were warriors then their cousins

who

> > supposedly came to India were also warriors and hence this is turn

> > back to AIT.

>

> This is curious. Doesn't the oldest Indo-Aryan text, the Rgveda,

> reflect a society in which warrior groups had a relevant role, for

> which they were exalted in the Rgveda (especially indirectly, i.e.

> through hymns addressed to warrior gods)?

 

 

Rig Veda describes the War of the Ten kings among various groups of

Vaidic people. None of them were invading warriors.

 

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

 

The so called " Mittani Indo-Aryans " for which no evidence can be

found (Dassow 2008, Meiroop 2007) supposedly invaded and defeated

the " non-Indo-European " local people through their superior horse

driven chariotry for which again no evidence can be found. This would

be the Aryan Invasion of the Near East (AINE) of which AIT is a

corrolary.

 

M. Kelkar

 

Of course, this doesn't

> mean the Rgvedic Aryans *as a whole* were a military society.

> Likewise, this doesn't mean they *invaded* northwestern South Asia

> from Afghanistan through some organized military operations.

> Therefore, no AIT is implied by saying that the Rgvedic Aryans

(and,

> possibly, the so-called Mittani Aryans too) *included* a military

> aristocracy within their respective social fabrics.

>

> > The linking of steppe archaeological cultures to any known " Indo-

> > European " language is the work of nationalistic Russian

> > archaeology...

>

> This statement is patently false. Many non-Russian scholars support

> this view, and they have no links with Russian nationalism.

>

> Regards,

> Francesco

>

 

--- End forwarded message ---

[Guest guest]

IndiaArchaeology , " Francesco Brighenti "

<frabrig wrote:

 

> >

> > > ...if the Mittani Indo Aryans were warriors then their cousins

> > > who supposedly came to India were also warriors and hence this

> > > is turn back to AIT.

> >

> > This is curious. Doesn't the oldest Indo-Aryan text, the Rgveda,

> > reflect a society in which warrior groups had a relevant role,

> > for which they were exalted in the Rgveda (especially

> > indirectly, i.e. through hymns addressed to warrior gods)?

>

> Rig Veda describes the War of the Ten kings...

 

That is, the ***BATTLE*** (not a " war " ) of the Ten Kings

(Da:s'ara:jn~a, RV 7.18). Your use of an improper term to define

this episode from the RV has already been noticed during a previous

discussion on this List.

 

> ...among various groups of Vaidic people. None of them were

> invading warriors.

 

Are you here replying to ***ME*** or to some other unknown poster?

Since it is apparent that you are actually replying to me, why do

you try to put words in my mouth? I never referred to your " invading

warriors " before.

 

> The so called " Mittani Indo-Aryans " for which no evidence can be

> found (Dassow 2008, Meiroop 2007) supposedly invaded and defeated

> the " non-Indo-European " local people through their superior horse

> driven chariotry for which again no evidence can be found.

 

Which up-to-date scholar would still lend his/her support to such a

fanciful scenario nowadays, really?

 

Regards,

Francesco

 

--- End forwarded message ---

[Guest guest]

IndiaArchaeology , " mkelkar2003 "

<swatimkelkar wrote:

 

 

> > > Doesn't the oldest Indo-Aryan text, the Rgveda,

> > > reflect a society in which warrior groups had a relevant role,

 

> > > > That is, the ***BATTLE*** (not a " war " ) of the Ten Kings

> (Da:s'ara:jn~a, RV 7.18). Your use of an improper term to define

> this episode from the RV has already been noticed during a previous

> discussion on this List.

 

You have used the word " warrior " in your post above that I was

replying to

 

> Are you here replying to ***ME*** or to some other unknown poster?

 

Using all caps is equivalent to screaming. Calm down.

 

>

> > The so called " Mittani Indo-Aryans " for which no evidence can be

> > found (Dassow 2008, Meiroop 2007) supposedly invaded and defeated

> > the " non-Indo-European " local people through their superior horse

> > driven chariotry for which again no evidence can be found.

>

> Which up-to-date scholar would still lend his/her support to such a

> fanciful scenario nowadays, really?

>

> Regards,

> Francesco

>

 

There is more. Dassow's and Meiroop's work demolishes the steppe

origin theory of the hypothetical " Indo-Iranians " that hinges on

horse riding and chariotry. Recently there has been a trend among

Russian archaeologist away from finding everything in the steppes

as " Indo-Iranian. " See Mordvintseva 2007 re Koryakova.pdf in the

files section.

 

" The authors (Koryakova and Epimakhov, 2007) do not directly identify

archaeological cultures with known ethnic entities of the ancient

world. However, they explain historical processes in Eurasia by way

of steady waves of migrations moving through the vast Eurasian steppe

in a westward direction. Each wave bears the name of people who are

presumed to have headed the movement (Aorsi, Alans and others). This

westward movement is illustrated by the appearance of " eastern "

imports or objects of " eastern " appearance in graves of western

Eurasia. This gives the impression that the authors are suggesting

that all these objects have been physically travelling to the west

together with their owners (pp. 231, 238, 249). Finds of western

origin in the eastern part of Eurasia, however, are not usually

explained in the same way (Mordvintseva 2007, p.246, first

parenthesis added). "

 

Mordvintseva, Valentina (2007). " Book review: ludmila koryakova and

Andrej epimakhov, the urals and western Siberia in the bronze and

iron ages. (cambridge: cambridge university press [cambridge world

archaeology], 2007, 408pp., illustrated, hbk, 978 0 521 82928 1). "

European Journal of Archaeology, 10 (pp. 245-247). "

 

M. Kelkar

 

--- End forwarded message ---

[Guest guest]

IndiaArchaeology , " mkelkar2003 "

<swatimkelkar wrote:

 

 

> > The linking of steppe archaeological cultures to any known " Indo-

> > European " language is the work of nationalistic Russian

> > archaeology...

>

> This statement is patently false. Many non-Russian scholars support

> this view, and they have no links with Russian nationalism.

>

> Regards,

> Francesco

>

 

It is not. Gimbutas was an ardent Lithuanian nationalist and a

feminist.

 

" As she (Gimbutas) fleshed out her ideas in later decades, however,

it became clear she had a more complicated story to tell. Her

invasionary narrative drew a sharp contrast between aggressive,

patriarchal, nomadic and artistically incompetent Indo-Europeans from

the " Kurgan culture " of the steppes and the pacific, matrifocal,

agricultural aesthetically sophisticated, much more ancient and

admirable Old Europeans of Mitteleuropa. The Soviet takeover of her

native Lithuania was a transparent subtext (Lincoln 1999, p. 215). "

Rhetorically speaking�apart from the any archaeological data

confirming or disconfirming this theory�this is a terrific place to

locate the patriarchal homeland. What is required is a territory big

enough to be home to a largish population of marauding warriors; a

place from which one can, without crossing enormous geographical

barriers (such as oceans) reach Europe and the Near East; a region

whose prehistory is neither noble nor well documented; and finally,

since no one wants to come from the place where patriarchy began, a

land this is sparsely populated today. On all counts, the Russian

steppes� " no man's land " �fit the profile (Eller 2000, p. 49).

 

Eller, Cynthia. (2000). The myth of matriarchal prehistory: why an

invented past won't give women a future. Boston: Boston Press. ISBN

0-8070-6793-8

 

Lincoln, Bruce (1999), Theorizing Myth: Narrative, Ideology, and

Scholarship, Chicago and London: The University of Chicago Press.

The Arkaim discoveries have been used profitably by the Russian

government

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

" In pseudoarchaeology and national mysticism

Since its discovery, Arkaim has attracted public and media attention

in Russia, from a broad range of the population, including esoteric,

New Age and pseudoscientific organizations. It is said to be the most

enigmatic archaeological site within the territory of Russia, and as

with many archaeological discoveries, many conflicting

interpretations have been put forward. "

Nationalism, Politics, and the Practice of Archaeology

By Philip L. Kohl, Clare P. Fawcett

Contributor Philip L. Kohl, Clare P. Fawcett

Published by Cambridge University Press, 1995

ISBN 0521480655, 9780521480659

329 pages

http://tinyurl.com/6jm4zq

 

A History of Archaeological Thought: Second edition

By Bruce G. Trigger

Published by Cambridge University Press, 2006

ISBN 0521840767, 9780521840767

710 pages

 

http://tinyurl.com/6pnvy9

 

M. Kelkar

 

--- End forwarded message ---

[Guest guest]

IndiaArchaeology , " mkelkar2003 "

<swatimkelkar wrote:

 

-

 

> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arkaim

 

 

Quotated from the above link:

 

" The 17th century date suggests that the settlement was about co-eval

to, or just post-dating, the Indo-Aryan migration into South Asia and

Mesopotamia (the Gandhara grave culture appearing in the Northern

Pakistan from ca. 1600 BC, the Indo-European Mitanni rulers reached

Anatolia before 1500 BC, both roughly 3,000 km removed from the

Sintashta-Petrovka area), and that it was either an early Iranian

culture, or an unknown branch of Indo-Iranian that did not survive

into historical times. "

 

So because the Arkaim settlement is dated to 17th century BCE it

supposedly shows evidence of IA and IE migrations, which have been

already placed at the same date based on? A clear case of a dog

wagging its own tail.

 

M. Kelkar

 

--- End forwarded message ---

[Guest guest]

IndiaArchaeology , " mkelkar2003 "

<swatimkelkar wrote:

 

 

> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arkaim

 

The identification of Andronovo (of which Arkaim is a part) with the

linguistically reconstructed " Indo-Iranians " is not tenable.

 

" The identification of Andronovo as Indo-Iranian has been challenged

by scholars who point to the absence of the characteristic timber

graves of the steppe south of the Oxus River.[6] Sarianidi (as cited

in Bryant 2001:207) states that " direct archaeological data from

Bactria and Margiana show without any shade of doubt that Andronovo

tribes penetrated to a minimum extent into Bactria and Margianian

oases " .

 

Based on its use by Indo-Aryans in Mitanni and Vedic India, its prior

absence in the Near East and Harappan India, and its 16th�17th

century BCE attestation at the Andronovo site of Sintashta, Kuzmina

(1994) argues that the chariot corroborates the identification of

Andronovo as Indo-Iranian. Klejn (1974) and Brentjes (1981) find the

Andronovo culture much too late for an Indo-Iranian identification

since chariot-wielding Aryans appear in Mitanni by the 15th to 16th

century BCE. However, Anthony & Vinogradov (1995) dated a chariot

burial at Krivoye Lake to around 2000 BCE.[7]

 

Mallory (as cited in Bryant 2001:216) admits the extraordinary

difficulty of making a case for expansions from Andronovo to northern

India, and that attempts to link the Indo-Aryans to such sites as the

Beshkent and Vakhsh cultures " only gets the Indo-Iranian to Central

Asia, but not as far as the seats of the Medes, Persians or Indo-

Aryans " .

 

An alternative possibility for the language of Andronovo may be

Buru�aski (now spoken in Ka�m�r) or & #292;apirti ( & #661;elamitic),

anciently

spoken in & #292;uzistan.

 

Since older words of Indo Iranian have been taken over in Uralian and

Proto-Yeneseian, occupation by some other languages (also lost ones)

cannot be ruled out altogether, at least for part of the Andronovo

area: i.e., Uralic and Yeneseian.[8]

"

 

Declaration of Andronovo and BMAC as " Indo-Iranian " is clearly in

Russian national interest as they speak an Indo-European language as

well.

 

M. Kelkar

 

--- End forwarded message ---

[Guest guest]

IndiaArchaeology , " mkelkar2003 "

<swatimkelkar wrote:

 

Archaeology and ethnic politics:

the discovery of Arkaim

 

starting p.33 below:

 

 

http://unesdoc.unesco.org/images/0011/001123/112397e.pdf

 

" Under these conditions Russian ethnic nationalists

began a feverish search for historical

justification for Russian domination

over the entire territory of the former Empire. The history of the

recent and medieval periods, replete with campaigns

of conquest, was not well suited to that

purpose. The prehistoric past offered more

tempting prospects for the propounding of

arbitrary constructs as promising theories.

Russian ethnic nationalists reopened on

their own account the long-forgotten and

rejected reasoning of the `Slavic school of

history' that had vainly sought to identify

the Slavs with the ancient nomadic inhabitants

of the steppe who spoke Persian

languages (Scythians, Sakians and Sarmatians).

Moreover, having armed themselves

with modern archaeological data,

they began to insist that the `ancestors of

the Slavs' had already conquered the European

steppe zone back in the Bronze Age.

They increasingly identified these ancestors

with the `Aryans', arbitrarily including

in that category those groups of Indo-

Europeans whom they found most acceptable

as forebears. In this way the

aggressive policy of the Russian Empire

was represented by them in a different

light as the return of the Russians to their

hereditary lands.

In that context the discovery of Arkaim was

most opportune (p.37). "

 

M. Kelkar

 

--- End forwarded message ---

[Guest guest]

IndiaArchaeology , " mkelkar2003 "

<swatimkelkar wrote:

 

IndiaArchaeology , " mkelkar2003 "

<swatimkelkar@> wrote:

> A History of Archaeological Thought: Second edition

> By Bruce G. Trigger

> Published by Cambridge University Press, 2006

> ISBN 0521840767, 9780521840767

> 710 pages

>

> http://tinyurl.com/6pnvy9

>

> M. Kelkar

>

Ch 7 p. 326 on Soviet archaeology

 

M. Kelkar

 

--- End forwarded message ---

[Guest guest]

IndiaArchaeology , " Paul Kekai Manansala "

<p.manansala wrote:

 

IndiaArchaeology , " Francesco Brighenti "

<frabrig@> wrote:

IndiaArchaeology , " mkelkar2003 "

> <swatimkelkar@> wrote:

>

> > ...if the Mittani Indo Aryans were warriors then their cousins who

> > supposedly came to India were also warriors and hence this is turn

> > back to AIT.

>

> This is curious. Doesn't the oldest Indo-Aryan text, the Rgveda,

> reflect a society in which warrior groups had a relevant role, for

> which they were exalted in the Rgveda (especially indirectly, i.e.

> through hymns addressed to warrior gods)? Of course, this doesn't

> mean the Rgvedic Aryans *as a whole* were a military society.

 

 

The Rgveda is not particularly any more militaristic than say the

Bible or Quran. There is as much written about soma drinking as fighting.

 

One of the great Chinese classics is Sun Tzu's " The Art of War, " and

there are similar works, but the Chinese were not really a warrior

society as we imagine such.

 

 

 

> Likewise, this doesn't mean they *invaded* northwestern South Asia

> from Afghanistan through some organized military operations.

> Therefore, no AIT is implied by saying that the Rgvedic Aryans (and,

> possibly, the so-called Mittani Aryans too) *included* a military

> aristocracy within their respective social fabrics.

>

 

Some elements of the " military, " i.e. at least the military

leadership, are almost always part of the aristocracy in any society.

In very many traditional societies, anyone who acquires arms (swords,

guns,etc.) or kills someone in battle becomes the equivalent of a

" life peer. "

 

 

Regards,

Paul Kekai Manansala

Quests of the Dragon and Bird Clan

http://sambali.blogspot.com/

 

--- End forwarded message ---