Eupedia Forums
Site NavigationEupedia Top > Eupedia Forum & Japan Forum
Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast
Results 26 to 50 of 67

Thread: Were the Aryan who ruled the Mitanni the same as those of India ?

  1. #26
    Banned Achievements:
    OverdriveThree FriendsVeteran10000 Experience PointsRecommendation Second Class

    Join Date
    06-06-11
    Posts
    2,651
    Points
    15,622
    Level
    37
    Points: 15,622, Level: 37
    Level completed: 97%, Points required for next Level: 28
    Overall activity: 0%

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    R1a*
    MtDNA haplogroup
    HV1b2

    Country: Netherlands



    Quote Originally Posted by Taranis View Post
    Haplogroup I is very likely indigenous to Europe. It's been there since at least the Neolithic, and is possibly Mesolithic or even Paleolithic in age. In the same manner, N1c1 is also in Europe since at least the Neolithic (though it originally migrated from Siberia). In any case, either Haplogroups certainly predate the arrival of the Indo-European languages.
    Yes, that's why I'm ruling out that the proto-Indo-Europeans are from North-Europe like many people wanted us to believe.

    When I was a child (before the haplogroups) I heard many times that Aryan people are from North Europe, because folks in Europe are very pure and unmixed, and the proof that they're pure is in their looks. According to them their white skin and their light hair etc. was the proof that Aryans were from North Europe.

    But haplogroups tell the different story. Xenophon (430 – 354 BCE) describes the Persian troops as white compared to the sun-tanned skin of Greek troops. And at that time Persians called themselves 'Aryans'.

    Darius (550 – 486 BCE) : "An Achaemenian, A Persian son of a Persian and an Aryan, of Aryan stock".

  2. #27
    Banned Achievements:
    5000 Experience PointsVeteran

    Join Date
    07-09-11
    Posts
    891
    Points
    6,887
    Level
    24
    Points: 6,887, Level: 24
    Level completed: 68%, Points required for next Level: 163
    Overall activity: 0%


    Ethnic group
    Georgian
    Country: Georgia



    Quote Originally Posted by Goga View Post
    Lithuanian is not an 'archaic' language. It is a Baltic language, which in turn is a Balto-Slavic language. And Balto-Slavic is part (offspring) of the 'archaic' Indo European language family.

    Sanskrit is one of the oldest Indo-Aryan (more archaic Indo-Iranian) languages. So Lithuanian and Sanskrit are not even from the same family, but both are part of the satem group though.

    Baltic language was introduced in the Baltics during the Northern extensions of the Corded Ware culture horizon / Battle-Axen folks: 3300 - 1800 BCE.

    I do also believe that R1a was important part of the Aryan people in EUROPE (Battle-Axe folks). But I don't think that the first 'proto'-Aryans were R1a folks, more likely G & J2
    That's exactly interesting that Lithuanian which is officially in a different branch of Indo-European language family has so many similarities with Sanskrit. There are many parallels between Lithuanian paganism and Vedic lore. So how did they get the archaic form of language and culture? from who and when?

  3. #28
    Banned Achievements:
    OverdriveThree FriendsVeteran10000 Experience PointsRecommendation Second Class

    Join Date
    06-06-11
    Posts
    2,651
    Points
    15,622
    Level
    37
    Points: 15,622, Level: 37
    Level completed: 97%, Points required for next Level: 28
    Overall activity: 0%

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    R1a*
    MtDNA haplogroup
    HV1b2

    Country: Netherlands



    Quote Originally Posted by Kardu View Post
    That's exactly interesting that Lithuanian which is officially in a different branch of Indo-European language family has so many similarities with Sanskrit. There are many parallels between Lithuanian paganism and Vedic lore. So how did they get the archaic form of language and culture? from who and when?
    There's a possibility of the existence of ergative in Lithuanian.
    http://www.lituanus.org/1973/73_1_04.htm

    I think that Lithuanian was an ergative language in the past but that some time ago it lost this construction, like Persian and many other IE languages.

    Most 'modern' IE languages don't have this contsruction. But Kurdish IS still an ergative language, Persian (Old Farsi) was an ergative language in the past but it 'lost' this construction.
    This feature is most likely due to a Caucasian origin of Kurdish language. I want to note that Caucasian languages are ergative too!

  4. #29
    Banned Achievements:
    5000 Experience PointsVeteran

    Join Date
    07-09-11
    Posts
    891
    Points
    6,887
    Level
    24
    Points: 6,887, Level: 24
    Level completed: 68%, Points required for next Level: 163
    Overall activity: 0%


    Ethnic group
    Georgian
    Country: Georgia



    Quote Originally Posted by Goga View Post
    There's a possibility of the existence of ergative in Lithuanian.
    http://www.lituanus.org/1973/73_1_04.htm

    I think that Lithuanian was an ergative language in the past but that some time ago it lost this construction, like Persian and many other IE languages.

    Most 'modern' IE languages don't have this contsruction. But Kurdish IS still an ergative language, Persian (Old Farsi) was an ergative language in the past but it 'lost' this construction.
    This feature is most likely due to a Caucasian origin of Kurdish language. I want to note that Caucasian languages are ergative too!
    Old Church Slavonic had Ergativity too and so does modern Bulgarian.
    Anyway, now I am lost, if Kurdish has Caucasian origin as you propose, how is it Indo-European then?

  5. #30
    Banned Achievements:
    OverdriveThree FriendsVeteran10000 Experience PointsRecommendation Second Class

    Join Date
    06-06-11
    Posts
    2,651
    Points
    15,622
    Level
    37
    Points: 15,622, Level: 37
    Level completed: 97%, Points required for next Level: 28
    Overall activity: 0%

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    R1a*
    MtDNA haplogroup
    HV1b2

    Country: Netherlands



    Quote Originally Posted by Kardu View Post
    if Kurdish has Caucasian origin as you propose, how is it Indo-European then?
    Because according to me proto-IE and Caucasian language family are from the same source.
    Like I said, proto Indo-Europeans (or at least the proto-Iranic folks) were from somewhere between Southwest Caucasus - NorthWest Iran. I believe that these people used an ergative language. Many of them lost this construction when they migrated into North Europe and Central Asia, when they mixed with R1a folks.

    Persian is a good example of how a language can lose ergativity! Because it's proven that the old-Iranic languages had the ergative construction.

    Sanskrit (old-Indic language) doesn't have an ergative constriction and is not an ergative language! The ergative construction in the modern Indic (Hindi) languages came much later.

  6. #31
    Advisor Achievements:
    Three FriendsTagger Second ClassOverdriveVeteran25000 Experience Points

    Join Date
    07-11-12
    Location
    Germany
    Posts
    2,383
    Points
    27,727
    Level
    51
    Points: 27,727, Level: 51
    Level completed: 17%, Points required for next Level: 923
    Overall activity: 3.0%

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    R1b1b2a* (inferred)

    Country: Germany



    Goga, there is no (undisputed) evidence that the Caucasian languages are related with Indo-European. I should also elaborate that there is not one Caucasian language family but three:

    - Kartvelian (which includes Georgian 'Kartli' in their own language)
    - Northwest Caucasian languages (which includes Abkhazi and the extinct Ubykh language)
    - Northeast Caucasian languages (which most prominently include the Chechen language)

    The exact relationship between these three language families is disputed in itself. Also, I find it questionable if PIE originally had Ergativity even if some branches of it have, this is by no means a consensual opinion.

  7. #32
    Regular Member Achievements:
    500 Experience Points3 months registered

    Join Date
    11-09-11
    Posts
    165


    Country: Canada



    Quote Originally Posted by Maciamo View Post
    There is nothing exceptional about the high frequency of G and J2 in Assyria/Northern Mesopotamia (where the Mitanni ruled). The intrusive outside element would be R1a. There is also a lot of R1b in Assyria and Kurdistan, but without knowing exactly what subclades we are dealing with, we cannot know if all of it is pre-IE or some of it is Indo-European.

    As for the J2 and G found among higher caste Indians, there is an easy explanation, which I already suggested a few years ago. During the Neolithic G and J2 expanded eastward to what is now Iran, Turkmenistan, Uzbekistan and Afghanistan. When the Proto-Aryan R1a people descended from Russia to southern Central Asia, more precisely in the region corresponding to the Bactria–Margiana Archaeological Complex , they mixed with the local J2 and G people for a while, before carrying their expansion to Persia and the Indian subcontinent. Some G2a3b1a was already among the R1a people in Russia, but any other subclade (especially G1) would be of Central Asia origin.
    I agree mostly with what you said (How haplogroups J2 and G being Neolithic markers that traveled east from West Asia), I also agree that the Indo-Iranians were likely a product of Indo-European folks from the Andronovo culture (Who carried a heavy amount of R1a1a) who mixed with the BMAC folks (Who likely carried a good chunk of J2, G, L3, and possibly some R2).

    The important development that is happening right now with haplogroup R1a1a is very interesting, there seems to be a clear division between European and non-European R1a1a's, the non-European folks seem to be Z93+ dominant while the Europeans are Z93-, that's not to say that Z93+ does not exist in Europe nor is it correct to assume that all Asian R1a1a's are Z93+, but these occurrences are among the minority, so the question here is were the Andronovo folks Z93+ or not? If not, then the genetic impact of Indo-Europeans in Asia is rather weak compared to the language significance.

  8. #33
    Banned Achievements:
    5000 Experience PointsVeteran

    Join Date
    07-09-11
    Posts
    891
    Points
    6,887
    Level
    24
    Points: 6,887, Level: 24
    Level completed: 68%, Points required for next Level: 163
    Overall activity: 0%


    Ethnic group
    Georgian
    Country: Georgia



    Quote Originally Posted by Goga View Post
    Because according to me proto-IE and Caucasian language family are from the same source.
    Like I said, proto Indo-Europeans (or at least the proto-Iranic folks) were from somewhere between Southwest Caucasus - NorthWest Iran. I believe that these people used an ergative language. Many of them lost this construction when they migrated into North Europe and Central Asia, when they mixed with R1a folks.

    Persian is a good example of how a language can lose ergativity! Because it's proven that the old-Iranic languages had the ergative construction.

    Sanskrit (old-Indic language) doesn't have an ergative constriction and is not an ergative language! The ergative construction in the modern Indic (Hindi) languages came much later.
    You can not prove relatedness of language families based only on Ergative structure. Mayan in Mexico is ergative too and so are(or were) many other languages around the globe.
    Taranis is right, it's not even proven that Caucasian languages are related to each other, not to mention Indo-European.
    As for the topic of the thread I find it plausible that Mitanni Aryas and Aryas of Rigveda were different branches of the same folk, comprised mainly by R1a1 and to lesser degree G and J2.

  9. #34
    Banned Achievements:
    OverdriveThree FriendsVeteran10000 Experience PointsRecommendation Second Class

    Join Date
    06-06-11
    Posts
    2,651
    Points
    15,622
    Level
    37
    Points: 15,622, Level: 37
    Level completed: 97%, Points required for next Level: 28
    Overall activity: 0%

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    R1a*
    MtDNA haplogroup
    HV1b2

    Country: Netherlands



    Quote Originally Posted by Cobol19 View Post
    I agree mostly with what you said (How haplogroups J2 and G being Neolithic markers that traveled east from West Asia), I also agree that the Indo-Iranians were likely a product of Indo-European folks from the Andronovo culture (Who carried a heavy amount of R1a1a) who mixed with the BMAC folks (Who likely carried a good chunk of J2, G, L3, and possibly some R2).
    Dude, no way it's possible that there's so much of G2 and R2 from the Neolithic farmers and only in the upper classes in India!

    You (as an Assyrian or maybe Armenian/Turkish?) just can't live with the fact that Kurds are Iranic and are native to Kurdistan. Somehow you printed in your mind that Kurds are 'immigrants' from Central Asia who killed the natives. That they are the same as Turks, who are also from Central Asia. And that the Turks can have Kurdish land and have the right to take it because Kurds are the same 'immigrants' from Central Asia as Turks. Or that Kurds live on the Assyrian and Armenian lands, lol. Keep dreaming!

    I'm sorry to take you out your dream, but you are WRONG! Kurds are Iranic, and Kurds are native to their homeland Kurdistan!

    And as far as I know the Andronovo culture was in Central Asia, on the eastern side of the Caspian Sea and that the BMAC folks were just an extension of these people in Northeast Iran!
    Some cultures in the Zagros Mountains and Caucasus are much older! Halaf culture between 6100 - 5400 BCE and even the Ubaid culture between 5000 - 4000 BCE. Even Kurgans in South Russia are older than the Andronovo Culture!

    People in the Androno Culture were already R2a, J2a , R1a, G etc!



  10. #35
    Banned Achievements:
    OverdriveThree FriendsVeteran10000 Experience PointsRecommendation Second Class

    Join Date
    06-06-11
    Posts
    2,651
    Points
    15,622
    Level
    37
    Points: 15,622, Level: 37
    Level completed: 97%, Points required for next Level: 28
    Overall activity: 0%

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    R1a*
    MtDNA haplogroup
    HV1b2

    Country: Netherlands



    Quote Originally Posted by Taranis View Post
    Goga, there is no (undisputed) evidence that the Caucasian languages are related with Indo-European. I should also elaborate that there is not one Caucasian language family but three:

    - Kartvelian (which includes Georgian 'Kartli' in their own language)
    - Northwest Caucasian languages (which includes Abkhazi and the extinct Ubykh language)
    - Northeast Caucasian languages (which most prominently include the Chechen language)

    The exact relationship between these three language families is disputed in itself. Also, I find it questionable if PIE originally had Ergativity even if some branches of it have, this is by no means a consensual opinion.
    Sure everything is possible. I'm just giving other possibilities and these are not only 'my' views, but also views of some other modern 'western' scientists.

    Did you know that the Nazi Deutschland considered only the Battle-Axe folks in Europe the chosen one? They even considered the Battle-Axe folks even much superior to the Beaker people (R1b folks)? Accroding to them Battle-Axe folks were the true and purest Aryans.

    What would they say if they knew that R1a is very high where Battle-Axe used to live, lol!
    Last edited by Goga; 01-10-11 at 01:58.

  11. #36
    Banned Achievements:
    OverdriveThree FriendsVeteran10000 Experience PointsRecommendation Second Class

    Join Date
    06-06-11
    Posts
    2,651
    Points
    15,622
    Level
    37
    Points: 15,622, Level: 37
    Level completed: 97%, Points required for next Level: 28
    Overall activity: 0%

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    R1a*
    MtDNA haplogroup
    HV1b2

    Country: Netherlands



    And here is the Halaf culture! The same shape as Kurdistan, lol. And also in the Zagros Mountains and Northern Kurdistan!


  12. #37
    Advisor Achievements:
    Three FriendsTagger Second ClassOverdriveVeteran25000 Experience Points

    Join Date
    07-11-12
    Location
    Germany
    Posts
    2,383
    Points
    27,727
    Level
    51
    Points: 27,727, Level: 51
    Level completed: 17%, Points required for next Level: 923
    Overall activity: 3.0%

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    R1b1b2a* (inferred)

    Country: Germany



    Quote Originally Posted by Goga View Post
    Sure everything is possible. I'm just giving other possibilities and these are not only 'my' views, but also views of other modern 'western' scientists.
    Not "everything is possible". Any claim of a relationship between two languages or two language families must be testable and absolutely rigorous before it is accepted by the mainstream community.

    Did you know that the Nazi Deutsland considered only the Battle-Axe folks in Europe the chosen one? They even considered the Battle-Axe folks even much superior to the Beaker people (R1b folks)? Accroding to them Battle-Axe folks were the true and purests Aryans.

    What would they say if they knew that R1a is very high where Battle-Axe used to live, lol!
    Sorry, but the Nazi comparison is totally out of place here. They are not, and have never been, any authority on genetics or archaeology. Why you bring this up here eludes me.

  13. #38
    Banned Achievements:
    OverdriveThree FriendsVeteran10000 Experience PointsRecommendation Second Class

    Join Date
    06-06-11
    Posts
    2,651
    Points
    15,622
    Level
    37
    Points: 15,622, Level: 37
    Level completed: 97%, Points required for next Level: 28
    Overall activity: 0%

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    R1a*
    MtDNA haplogroup
    HV1b2

    Country: Netherlands



    Quote Originally Posted by Taranis View Post
    Not "everything is possible". Any claim of a relationship between two languages or two language families must be testable and absolutely rigorous before it is accepted by the mainstream community.



    Sorry, but the Nazi comparison is totally out of place here. They are not, and have never been, any authority on genetics or archaeology. Why you bring this up here eludes me.
    As far as I know are Caucasian languages very very old. SO it is possible.
    Just look that according to this scheme Caucasian languages are older than IE languages!


    And about the Nazi's. I think it's funny to know that the culture/people they considered 'superior' had much of R1a in them.

  14. #39
    Banned Achievements:
    OverdriveThree FriendsVeteran10000 Experience PointsRecommendation Second Class

    Join Date
    06-06-11
    Posts
    2,651
    Points
    15,622
    Level
    37
    Points: 15,622, Level: 37
    Level completed: 97%, Points required for next Level: 28
    Overall activity: 0%

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    R1a*
    MtDNA haplogroup
    HV1b2

    Country: Netherlands



    Quote Originally Posted by Taranis View Post
    Not "everything is possible". Any claim of a relationship between two languages or two language families must be testable and absolutely rigorous before it is accepted by the mainstream community.



    Sorry, but the Nazi comparison is totally out of place here. They are not, and have never been, any authority on genetics or archaeology. Why you bring this up here eludes me.
    ?
    But there IS a relationship between Caucasian languages and Indo-European languages. But nobody knows to which degree. And Caucasian languages are very very old.
    According to this scheme Caucasian languages are not so far placed from the more archaic the Nostratic language. And according to this scheme Caucasian languages (KartveloEusian) are ANCESTORS of IE languages!


    http://grzegorj.w.interia.pl/lingwen/afil.html


    And about the Nazi's, for me it's very funny to know after 50 years that people who they considered the chosen one and superior to all other Europeans - Battle-Axe warriors - had very much R1a in them. And that Slavic folks have much more R1a than the Germanic folks.

    This is what I call the irony of history!

  15. #40
    Banned Achievements:
    OverdriveThree FriendsVeteran10000 Experience PointsRecommendation Second Class

    Join Date
    06-06-11
    Posts
    2,651
    Points
    15,622
    Level
    37
    Points: 15,622, Level: 37
    Level completed: 97%, Points required for next Level: 28
    Overall activity: 0%

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    R1a*
    MtDNA haplogroup
    HV1b2

    Country: Netherlands


  16. #41
    Advisor Achievements:
    Three FriendsTagger Second ClassOverdriveVeteran25000 Experience Points

    Join Date
    07-11-12
    Location
    Germany
    Posts
    2,383
    Points
    27,727
    Level
    51
    Points: 27,727, Level: 51
    Level completed: 17%, Points required for next Level: 923
    Overall activity: 3.0%

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    R1b1b2a* (inferred)

    Country: Germany



    Quote Originally Posted by Goga View Post
    ?
    But there IS a relationship between Caucasian languages and Indo-European languages. But nobody knows to which degree. And Caucasian languages are very very old.
    According to this scheme Caucasian languages are not so far placed from the more archaic the Nostratic language. And according to this scheme Caucasian languages (KartveloEusian) are ANCESTORS of IE languages!
    Sorry, no. The Nostratic hypothesis is by no means accepted by all (or even the plurality of all) linguists. The way the Nostratic languages are usually set up you get the impression of a grab-all-bag for the languages of much of the Old World, which I find in itself quite a challenge. Especially I find that tree you present there completely untenable.

    There are many problems associated with the Nostratic hypothesis, some which I will elaborate: one problem is that their internal reconstruction of proto-languages and the assumption about the exact nature of the proto-languages are often far from certain (even with the Indo-European languages, which are probably the most intensely researched and well-established language family, there is controversy about the exact nature of PIE). The other, equally problematic issue is that so-called 'Wanderwörter' are completely ignored by the Nostraticists. These 'wandering words' are words that appear in different languages but where their exact origin is undiscernable. A typical example would be the word 'wine'. Nostraticists tend to take 'wanderwörter' as exact cognates, which can cause a completely false image.

    This, and a number of other problems, are the reason why the Nostratic hypothesis is rejected by mainstream linguistics.

  17. #42
    Regular Member Achievements:
    500 Experience Points3 months registered

    Join Date
    11-09-11
    Posts
    165


    Country: Canada



    Quote Originally Posted by Goga View Post
    Dude, no way it's possible that there's so much of G2 and R2 from the Neolithic farmers and only in the upper classes in India!

    You (as an Assyrian or maybe Armenian/Turkish?) just can't live with the fact that Kurds are Iranic and are native to Kurdistan. Somehow you printed in your mind that Kurds are 'immigrants' from Central Asia who killed the natives. That they are the same as Turks, who are also from Central Asia. And that the Turks can have Kurdish land and have the right to take it because Kurds are the same 'immigrants' from Central Asia as Turks. Or that Kurds live on the Assyrian and Armenian lands, lol. Keep dreaming!

    I'm sorry to take you out your dream, but you are WRONG! Kurds are Iranic, and Kurds are native to their homeland Kurdistan!

    And as far as I know the Andronovo culture was in Central Asia, on the eastern side of the Caspian Sea and that the BMAC folks were just an extension of these people in Northeast Iran!
    Some cultures in the Zagros Mountains and Caucasus are much older! Halaf culture between 6100 - 5400 BCE and even the Ubaid culture between 5000 - 4000 BCE. Even Kurgans in South Russia are older than the Andronovo Culture!

    People in the Androno Culture were already R2a, J2a , R1a, G etc!


    I would answer you back but it's not worth my time since:

    a) You don't listen and have a hard head, discussing such topics is not about who has the hardest head.

    b) You always throw stupid accusations that make no sense and start fights.

    c) You don't even know much about genetics to begin with, anyone who does not know the difference between deep ancestry and autosomal DNA should NOT be discussing this stuff until they learn.

    On top of all of this you're a paranoid wreck, anyone who has an opinion seems to have an agenda to you, I already said that the Kurds for most part ARE natives to West Asia, it's not my problem that you don't know how to read, even your own Kurdish brethren kind of agrees with me on this, so until you do something about these points, there's nothing to discuss with you.

  18. #43
    Banned Achievements:
    OverdriveThree FriendsVeteran10000 Experience PointsRecommendation Second Class

    Join Date
    06-06-11
    Posts
    2,651
    Points
    15,622
    Level
    37
    Points: 15,622, Level: 37
    Level completed: 97%, Points required for next Level: 28
    Overall activity: 0%

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    R1a*
    MtDNA haplogroup
    HV1b2

    Country: Netherlands



    Quote Originally Posted by Taranis View Post
    Sorry, no. The Nostratic hypothesis is by no means accepted by all (or even the plurality of all) linguists. The way the Nostratic languages are usually set up you get the impression of a grab-all-bag for the languages of much of the Old World, which I find in itself quite a challenge. Especially I find that tree you present there completely untenable.

    There are many problems associated with the Nostratic hypothesis, some which I will elaborate: one problem is that their internal reconstruction of proto-languages and the assumption about the exact nature of the proto-languages are often far from certain (even with the Indo-European languages, which are probably the most intensely researched and well-established language family, there is controversy about the exact nature of PIE). The other, equally problematic issue is that so-called 'Wanderwörter' are completely ignored by the Nostraticists. These 'wandering words' are words that appear in different languages but where their exact origin is undiscernable. A typical example would be the word 'wine'. Nostraticists tend to take 'wanderwörter' as exact cognates, which can cause a completely false image.

    This, and a number of other problems, are the reason why the Nostratic hypothesis is rejected by mainstream linguistics.
    Ok, what do you think about the proto-Pontic theory? There're just a lot folks who see the connection between IE and Caucasian languages! I'm not the only one with these concepts.

    "Pontic is the proposed language family or macrofamily, comprising the Indo-European and Northwest Caucasian language families, with Proto-Pontic being the reconstructed proto-language.

    In 1960, Aert Kuipers noticed the parallels between a Northwest Caucasian language, Kabardian, and PIE. It was Paul Friedrich in 1964, however, who first suggested that PIE might be phylogenetically related to Proto-Caucasian. In 1981, Colarusso examined typological parallels involving consonantism..."

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Proto-Pontic_language

    "The linguist John Colarusso wrote an excellent article describing some of these morphological and lexical similarities in the Journal of Indo-European Studies (Library of Congress CB201.J68), 1997, volume 25, p.119"

    http://neohumanism.org/p/pr/proto_pontic.html

  19. #44
    Elite member Achievements:
    VeteranThree FriendsRecommendation Second Class25000 Experience Points

    Join Date
    14-11-10
    Posts
    2,504
    Points
    28,134
    Level
    51
    Points: 28,134, Level: 51
    Level completed: 54%, Points required for next Level: 516
    Overall activity: 0%

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    R1a1a1
    MtDNA haplogroup
    HV2a1 +G13708A

    Ethnic group
    Kurdish
    Country: Germany



    Quote Originally Posted by Goga View Post
    Because according to me proto-IE and Caucasian language family are from the same source.
    Like I said, proto Indo-Europeans (or at least the proto-Iranic folks) were from somewhere between Southwest Caucasus - NorthWest Iran. I believe that these people used an ergative language. Many of them lost this construction when they migrated into North Europe and Central Asia, when they mixed with R1a folks.

    Persian is a good example of how a language can lose ergativity! Because it's proven that the old-Iranic languages had the ergative construction.

    Sanskrit (old-Indic language) doesn't have an ergative constriction and is not an ergative language! The ergative construction in the modern Indic (Hindi) languages came much later.
    Thats an interesting point you have taken up here. Yes Persian did definitely loose ergative. We know from Parthian sources found in Central Asia that ergative was very much present there too. The Reason why Persian has no ergative anymore is simple. Persian has lost it casus rectus entirely what makes it impossible to build full ergative.

  20. #45
    Banned Achievements:
    5000 Experience PointsVeteran

    Join Date
    07-09-11
    Posts
    891
    Points
    6,887
    Level
    24
    Points: 6,887, Level: 24
    Level completed: 68%, Points required for next Level: 163
    Overall activity: 0%


    Ethnic group
    Georgian
    Country: Georgia



    My point is that in determining the identity of ancient populations and their possible modern descendants we should take a combined approach and take in account genetics (deep ancestry and autosomal data), linguistics, anthropology (phenotypes and skeletal measurements), culture (archeological discoveries), historiography and literature (same Rigveda and Avesta etc.), Focusing just on one or few of those can easily lead us astray.

  21. #46
    Banned Achievements:
    OverdriveThree FriendsVeteran10000 Experience PointsRecommendation Second Class

    Join Date
    06-06-11
    Posts
    2,651
    Points
    15,622
    Level
    37
    Points: 15,622, Level: 37
    Level completed: 97%, Points required for next Level: 28
    Overall activity: 0%

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    R1a*
    MtDNA haplogroup
    HV1b2

    Country: Netherlands



    Quote Originally Posted by Kardu View Post
    My point is that in determining the identity of ancient populations and their possible modern descendants we should take a combined approach and take in account genetics (deep ancestry and autosomal data), linguistics, anthropology (phenotypes and skeletal measurements), culture (archeological discoveries), historiography and literature (same Rigveda and Avesta etc.), Focusing just on one or few of those can easily lead us astray.
    Huge Kurgans (4500 years old!) found in the Trialeti Culture site in Georgia (South Caucasus)! Many connections and very close relations with the Mesopotamian folks!



    Last edited by Goga; 02-10-11 at 03:42.

  22. #47
    Banned Achievements:
    5000 Experience PointsVeteran

    Join Date
    07-09-11
    Posts
    891
    Points
    6,887
    Level
    24
    Points: 6,887, Level: 24
    Level completed: 68%, Points required for next Level: 163
    Overall activity: 0%


    Ethnic group
    Georgian
    Country: Georgia



    Thanks for sharing, Goga. I've visited once the site.
    Interestingly the word Trialeti in Georgian means 'belonging to Trials' and is common model for place names derived from tribal/ethnic names like Kakheti, Meskheti etc. Some Georgian scholars assumed that those Trials might have been connected to Thracian Treri tribe.

  23. #48
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    15-05-12
    Posts
    8


    Country: Angola



    The Mitannis were probably mostly Hurrian populated and ruled over by an Indo-Aryan class. Most of West Kurdistan is probably Hurrian descended. J2 is not "Aryan", but native caucasian aswell, native to West Asia.

  24. #49
    Regular Member Achievements:
    1000 Experience PointsVeteran
    khufu's Avatar
    Join Date
    19-02-14
    Posts
    39
    Points
    3,937
    Level
    18
    Points: 3,937, Level: 18
    Level completed: 22%, Points required for next Level: 313
    Overall activity: 3.0%

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    z830
    MtDNA haplogroup
    R0a

    Country: Egypt



    Has anyone know what aryan mean? and why in Germany not Italy for example

  25. #50
    Regular Member Achievements:
    1 year registered50000 Experience Points
    Aberdeen's Avatar
    Join Date
    12-11-13
    Posts
    1,838
    Points
    52,092
    Level
    70
    Points: 52,092, Level: 70
    Level completed: 68%, Points required for next Level: 458
    Overall activity: 0%

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    I1
    MtDNA haplogroup
    H4

    Ethnic group
    Scottish, English and German
    Country: Canada-Ontario



    1 members found this post helpful.
    Quote Originally Posted by khufu View Post
    Has anyone know what aryan mean? and why in Germany not Italy for example
    According to the Babblefish Translator, "aryan" means "brown skinned person who speaks an Indo-European language". If you want to find aryans, look for them in Pakistan and India - they're the descendants of the Indo-European tribes who invaded the Indian subcontinent about 3500 years ago, and so are of proto-Iranian (aryan) descent.

Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. Modern Assyrians (split from "Were the Aryan who ruled the Mitanni"...)
    By Alan in forum DNA Testing & General Genetics
    Replies: 62
    Last Post: 15-05-12, 19:24
  2. The Cross, an Aryan and not a Christian Symbol
    By Arahari in forum European Culture & History
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 13-09-09, 20:54
  3. Replies: 6
    Last Post: 14-07-07, 21:54
  4. Gay and Transgender in india
    By Rachel in forum Opinions
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: 21-12-05, 08:33

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •