Out-of-India - From Theory to Truth: Part 2

The Strategic Issues & International Relations Forum is a venue to discuss issues pertaining to India's security environment, her strategic outlook on global affairs and as well as the effect of international relations in the Indian Subcontinent. We request members to kindly stay within the mandate of this forum and keep their exchanges of views, on a civilised level, however vehemently any disagreement may be felt. All feedback regarding forum usage may be sent to the moderators using the Feedback Form or by clicking the Report Post Icon in any objectionable post for proper action. Please note that the views expressed by the Members and Moderators on these discussion boards are that of the individuals only and do not reflect the official policy or view of the Bharat-Rakshak.com Website. Copyright Violation is strictly prohibited and may result in revocation of your posting rights - please read the FAQ for full details. Users must also abide by the Forum Guidelines at all times.
shiv
BRF Oldie
Posts: 35041
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Pindliyon ka Gooda

Re: Out-of-India - From Theory to Truth: Part 2

Postby shiv » 10 Jan 2018 17:43

syam wrote:@shiv sir, can you tell me how any one can read Cuneiform script. I am going through some material. They have so many pictures of these scripts.

Wonder how it is possible to read without knowing the language of the speaker. Can we learn arabic or chinese just by looking at script?


The history is interesting - but the actual method used in deciphering is unclear. According to Wiki the method of deciphering has never been published.

However the most important clue in deciphering cuneiform is the Behistun inscription in Iran. This is a tri-lingual inscription with one of the languages being "Old Persian". It was translated by a Rawlinson who had been in India and knew some Sanskrit (I think). Anyhow old Persian sounds a bit like Sanskrit if the deciphering is to be believed. From that deciphering of old Persian - the other two languages in the tri lingual Behistun inscription were deciphered.

I think someone needs to re-do this - starting with digging up old records and looking at cuneiform. If you do it - more power to you.

shiv
BRF Oldie
Posts: 35041
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Pindliyon ka Gooda

Re: Out-of-India - From Theory to Truth: Part 2

Postby shiv » 10 Jan 2018 18:23

The following Wiki page has some fascinating information but I belong to a school of thought that says that any old work like this needs to be redone - esp redone by someone adept at Indian languages. I am not sure that I am the right person - although I would like to dabble with it..
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Old_Persian_cuneiform

There are assertions in that page that I would dispute. For example what they claim as "da" (as in "ada" ) could possibly actually be "dda" as in "adda" - so I am convinced the work needs to be redone...Even my examples may be erroneous - so don't go by them.

Many such works were done by Germans, Czech and others so even if you can find the originals - translations are not available or not easily available. I have done such searching in the past and that is what made me realize that 200 years of European "scholarship" - when it turns out to be absolute bullshit - will be very ve-ry difficult to overturn.

syam
BRFite
Posts: 284
Joined: 31 Jan 2017 00:13

Re: Out-of-India - From Theory to Truth: Part 2

Postby syam » 10 Jan 2018 22:12

shiv wrote:The following Wiki page has some fascinating information but I belong to a school of thought that says that any old work like this needs to be redone - esp redone by someone adept at Indian languages. I am not sure that I am the right person - although I would like to dabble with it..
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Old_Persian_cuneiform

Old Persian has separate lines/strokes. Akkadian script has overlapping lines/strokes. What if both are same, written in different styles?

They even constructed old persian and it's sister/child languages based on small variation in script. It is not very convincing. Cuneiform has many vertical strokes. Sankrit has max. one or two vertical strokes. Please don't tell me this loss of strokes is the sign of migration.
Last edited by syam on 11 Jan 2018 17:12, edited 1 time in total.

syam
BRFite
Posts: 284
Joined: 31 Jan 2017 00:13

Re: Out-of-India - From Theory to Truth: Part 2

Postby syam » 10 Jan 2018 23:32

Learnt something today. Nothing to do with OIT. sorry for off-topic.

When library of Alexandria was constructed, the city had larger percentage of Jewish population. Research continued there. Then Julius Caesar men and later people set fire to the building and destroyed it over time. Scholars used Serapeum for study purposes from then on. Down the line, Christianity came into picture. People say Alexandria is birthplace of Christianity. Christians were initially persecuted by Romans. Later same guys made it state religion.

Immediately after that, Christians started completely destroying other religious people in the city.

quoting wiki,
In 391, Theophilus (according to Rufinus and Sozomen) discovered a hidden pagan temple. He and his followers mockingly displayed the pagan artifacts to the public which offended the pagans enough to provoke an attack on the Christians. The Christian faction counter-attacked, forcing the pagans to retreat to the Serapeum. A letter was sent by the emperor that Theophilus should grant the offending pagans pardon, but destroy the temple; according to Socrates Scholasticus, a contemporary of his, the latter aspect (the destruction of the temple) was added as a result of heavy solicitation for it by Theophilus.

Scholasticus goes on to state that:

“Seizing this opportunity, Theophilus exerted himself to the utmost ... he caused the Mithraeum to be cleaned out... Then he destroyed the Serapeum... and he had the phalli of Priapus carried through the midst of the forum. ... the heathen temples... were therefore razed to the ground, and the images of their gods molten into pots and other convenient utensils for the use of the Alexandrian church[2]”

The destruction of the Serapeum was seen by many ancient and modern authors as representative of the triumph of Christianity over other religions. According to John of Nikiu in the 7th century, when the philosopher Hypatia was lynched and flayed by a mob of Alexandrian Coptic monks, they acclaimed Theophilus's nephew and successor Cyril as "the new Theophilus, for he had destroyed the last remains of idolatry in the city".


Islam came 200 years later.

A_Gupta
BRF Oldie
Posts: 10536
Joined: 23 Oct 2001 11:31
Contact:

Re: Out-of-India - From Theory to Truth: Part 2

Postby A_Gupta » 11 Jan 2018 02:34

syam wrote:@shiv sir, can you tell me how any one can read Cuneiform script. I am going through some material. They have so many pictures of these scripts.

Wonder how it is possible to read without knowing the language of the speaker. Can we learn arabic or chinese just by looking at script?


Basic outline of the decipherment story:
http://www.britishmuseum.org/explore/th ... rment.aspx

Some details:
https://cdli.ucla.edu/files/publication ... 11_001.pdf

There is a striking passage about the inscriptions in Hincks’ letter of the 23 August 1847, which reads as follows (Cathcart 2007: 206)

The characters in the Van inscriptions are clearly derived from the Babylonian ones; but I have ascertained that in the mode of using them there is a very material difference. While the generality of the Babylonian characters are used, like the Hebrew and other Semitic ones, to express consonants in which no particular vowels inhere, the Van characters present a complete syllabary, its vowels being all expressed either by separate characters or by syllabic signs, in which they inhere. The mode of reading the language of these inscriptions is consequently much more definite than in the case of any other species of cuneatic writing, with the exception of the first Persepolitan; and, what surprised me not a little, the language of the inscriptions agrees with that of the last-named inscriptions in being Indo-Persianic. Its resemblance to the Sanskrit is, indeed, in some respects, closer than that of the ancient Persian; though it is curious that some of its grammatical forms are more akin to the Greek. To all who are engaged in philological and ethnological pursuits it must be of the highest interest, as the oldest member – of the eastern branch at least – of this widely-diffused family of languages.

.....
.....
Hincks’ conviction that he was dealing with an Indo-European language was wrong, but he correctly recognized that the language was not Semitic.

syam
BRFite
Posts: 284
Joined: 31 Jan 2017 00:13

Re: Out-of-India - From Theory to Truth: Part 2

Postby syam » 11 Jan 2018 11:19


Sir, my complaint is with the credibility of these translations. They say they deciphered those texts. How can any body decipher something from one language to another?
When king makes inscription, he keeps different language people in mind and tries to convey the message. Generally there is no link between those languages. These are separate languages with separate scripts. They might convey same meaning. But that doesn't make those two same. Only meaning is similar. Not the script or language.

Lets take example of some thing from our times. We see sign boards and warning boards in railway stations. Those are written in multiple languages.
Only names are same in both messages. These names may be understood with the number of repetitions in both messages. Even that also difficult. What about other words? These have nothing common with each other.

Rosetta Stone is same as our message boards in railway station. Greek rulers issued these messages to two different language groups who have two different family of sounds and words. Its not like they are writing same thing in two different scripts quite literally. It defeats the purpose of two different languages in first place.

syam
BRFite
Posts: 284
Joined: 31 Jan 2017 00:13

Re: Out-of-India - From Theory to Truth: Part 2

Postby syam » 11 Jan 2018 12:46

Farsi is written from right to left. Older Persian is from left to right. How come one single language can have two different styles of writing? Does that make both languages same?

On side note,
This language family look like this,
Arabic -> Farsi -> Urdu/Hindi.

No wonder Tamils distance themselves from Hindi speaking people. Hindi people definitely Invaded Tamil people.

syam
BRFite
Posts: 284
Joined: 31 Jan 2017 00:13

Re: Out-of-India - From Theory to Truth: Part 2

Postby syam » 11 Jan 2018 13:34

This one takes the cake,

They deciphered oldest Indo-European language. Watch from 8:32.

A_Gupta
BRF Oldie
Posts: 10536
Joined: 23 Oct 2001 11:31
Contact:

Re: Out-of-India - From Theory to Truth: Part 2

Postby A_Gupta » 11 Jan 2018 17:13

syam wrote:Lets take example of some thing from our times. We see sign boards and warning boards in railway stations. Those are written in multiple languages.
Only names are same in both messages. These names may be understood with the number of repetitions in both messages. Even that also difficult. What about other words? These have nothing common with each other.


That is essentially how decipherment starts. One tries to identify the proper names in the unknown script. If you guess correctly you now know the sounds corresponding to a few letters of the unknown script. And thus one proceeds. The decipherment tries to find the sound values for all the symbols in the unknown script. This is complicated by the fact that most scripts are not simple (some of the complications you will see if you read through the links I provided).

The other part is that one uses the facts that languages are related, so it is possible to guess the meaning of the words that emerge from the phonetic values you have assigned to the letters in the script.

syam
BRFite
Posts: 284
Joined: 31 Jan 2017 00:13

Re: Out-of-India - From Theory to Truth: Part 2

Postby syam » 11 Jan 2018 18:31

A_Gupta wrote:That is essentially how decipherment starts. One tries to identify the proper names in the unknown script. If you guess correctly you now know the sounds corresponding to a few letters of the unknown script. And thus one proceeds. The decipherment tries to find the sound values for all the symbols in the unknown script. This is complicated by the fact that most scripts are not simple (some of the complications you will see if you read through the links I provided).

The other part is that one uses the facts that languages are related, so it is possible to guess the meaning of the words that emerge from the phonetic values you have assigned to the letters in the script.

It's not about deciphering those scripts. Deciphering is done when someone encrypts the message from original text. Here we have no such case. Those texts are addressed to different language people. What's there to decipher? They created these new languages like James Cameron created language for his movie.

This writing style ended with Old Persians. Greeks didn't made any new notice boards in this script. People say it was replaced by Phoenician alphabet. There is no connection between this script and later Greek scripts. Now tell me how they are able to decipher it. . .

Another question, Zoroastrian religion is supposed to be old Cyrus's religion. Don't you think these inscriptions at least have some Zend Avesta sloka? I see so many holes in these language theories.

Cyrus is Latin name. Darius is greek name. Hittite is lifted from Hebrew bible. These are nothing to do with original names. So called scholars just scavenged everything from Greece to India and cooked up nice story. Now we have to deal with this legendary fiction tale called history.

A_Gupta
BRF Oldie
Posts: 10536
Joined: 23 Oct 2001 11:31
Contact:

Re: Out-of-India - From Theory to Truth: Part 2

Postby A_Gupta » 11 Jan 2018 19:05

Let me try again, suppose you have Devanagari (known to you) and Malayalam script (unknown script and language to you).
Suppose you figure out "Tirumala" which is in Devanagar & Malayalam on your railway station sign in Malayalam. Now perhaps you know what "ma" and "la" look like in Malayalam. Then somewhere else in some Malayalam inscription, you find a word that looks like "mala". You guess the meaning based on the hypothesized relatedness of Malayalam and the languages that you know. And so on. And if your guesses all cohere together and make lots of (Malayalam) text become meaningful, then you have managed to decipher Malayalam.

In the case of hieroglyphics of Egypt, some descendants of the ancient Egyptian language survived, and those were pulled into the decipherment in that case.

One of the points to make is that there is a hell of a lot of long cuneiform text, so the guesses one makes can be tested. The problem with the Indus Valley writings are that what we have are short and few, and so it is difficult to test one's guesses. That is why it hasn't been deciphered so far.

Lastly, yes, "Darius" is an anglicization of what was actually something like "Dâryavuš" in the Behistun inscription, and so on, and so its affinity with Sanskrit that should be manifest is not directly apparent. Which is one reason why Shiv and I both think Indian linguists need to revisit the whole cuneiform corpus, and it needs to be written out in an Indian phonetic script. And on the way, they can examine each part of the decipherment, and come to their own conclusions about how good the decipherment is.

syam
BRFite
Posts: 284
Joined: 31 Jan 2017 00:13

Re: Out-of-India - From Theory to Truth: Part 2

Postby syam » 11 Jan 2018 19:42

A_Gupta wrote:Let me try again, suppose you have Devanagari (known to you) and Malayalam script (unknown script and language to you).
Suppose you figure out "Tirumala" which is in Devanagar & Malayalam on your railway station sign in Malayalam. Now perhaps you know what "ma" and "la" look like in Malayalam. Then somewhere else in some Malayalam inscription, you find a word that looks like "mala". You guess the meaning based on the hypothesized relatedness of Malayalam and the languages that you know. And so on. And if your guesses all cohere together and make lots of (Malayalam) text become meaningful, then you have managed to decipher Malayalam.

Please go through it again. I don't know what 'ma' 'la' are in Malayalam. I only know Sanskrit words. Please tell me how it is possible to create Malayalam out of this script.

In this case, they don't know even single stroke in Cuneiform. There is no bilingual script with it. In fact, it looks like Cuneiform people gone extinct. And later Greeks ransacked old Persian cities.

A_Gupta
BRF Oldie
Posts: 10536
Joined: 23 Oct 2001 11:31
Contact:

Re: Out-of-India - From Theory to Truth: Part 2

Postby A_Gupta » 11 Jan 2018 20:28

syam wrote:
A_Gupta wrote:Let me try again, suppose you have Devanagari (known to you) and Malayalam script (unknown script and language to you).
Suppose you figure out "Tirumala" which is in Devanagar & Malayalam on your railway station sign in Malayalam. Now perhaps you know what "ma" and "la" look like in Malayalam. Then somewhere else in some Malayalam inscription, you find a word that looks like "mala". You guess the meaning based on the hypothesized relatedness of Malayalam and the languages that you know. And so on. And if your guesses all cohere together and make lots of (Malayalam) text become meaningful, then you have managed to decipher Malayalam.

Please go through it again. I don't know what 'ma' 'la' are in Malayalam. I only know Sanskrit words. Please tell me how it is possible to create Malayalam out of this script.

In this case, they don't know even single stroke in Cuneiform. There is no bilingual script with it. In fact, it looks like Cuneiform people gone extinct. And later Greeks ransacked old Persian cities.


a. I can only give you pointers (already provided) and an outline of the method, I can't educate you. That is entirely up to you.
b. The Behistun inscription is trilingual cuneiform inscription. There are inscriptions with Akkadian and Aramaic (Aramaic is the language Jesus spoke) and so on.

PS: If you know only one language, you are very unlikely to be able to decipher an unknown language. In this particular example, if Malayalam was the unknown language, if you knew Sanskrit and Tamil you'd have a better chance of deciphering Malayalam than just Sanskrit alone.

syam
BRFite
Posts: 284
Joined: 31 Jan 2017 00:13

Re: Out-of-India - From Theory to Truth: Part 2

Postby syam » 11 Jan 2018 20:54

Aramaic is not from PIE. Cuneiform supposed to be PIE language related. Even if inscription is found with both languages, translation is not possible.
It's like deciphering Arabic from Sanskrit.

You are getting snappy for unknown reason. I am not asking you to teach me these dead languages. Only asking about credibility of so called translations.

A_Gupta
BRF Oldie
Posts: 10536
Joined: 23 Oct 2001 11:31
Contact:

Re: Out-of-India - From Theory to Truth: Part 2

Postby A_Gupta » 11 Jan 2018 21:32

It doesn't matter that Aramaic is not from PIE. If the writing represents sounds, not logograms, then one can write any language in it, provided the writing system represents sufficient sounds. Of course that doesn't happen. If you bothered to even scan through the links I provided, you will get some sense about the various complications because of the limitations of writing systems.

Is the epic of Gilgamesh a made-up decipherment?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Epic_of_Gilgamesh

Regarding credibility, you will have to decide for yourself.
Irritated because you seem to require spoon-feeding; no more from me.

syam
BRFite
Posts: 284
Joined: 31 Jan 2017 00:13

Re: Out-of-India - From Theory to Truth: Part 2

Postby syam » 11 Jan 2018 22:19

Ok. . . .If you believe that story, good for you. Remember they messed up translations of our own texts.

It's just story. No one is there to verify whether it is correct or not. It's not like the original script writers come and correct these translations. Those Middle east people are dead long time back.

syam
BRFite
Posts: 284
Joined: 31 Jan 2017 00:13

Re: Out-of-India - From Theory to Truth: Part 2

Postby syam » 11 Jan 2018 23:17


It's how they pronounce and write Cyrus in old that script.

Pronunciation is totally semetic. Nothing like Avestan language. If Cyrus followed Sanskrit related religion, atleast his texts should sound like sanskrit.

Now I sound like some nazi.

shiv
BRF Oldie
Posts: 35041
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Pindliyon ka Gooda

Re: Out-of-India - From Theory to Truth: Part 2

Postby shiv » 12 Jan 2018 08:17

syam wrote:Sir, my complaint is with the credibility of these translations. They say they deciphered those texts. How can any body decipher something from one language to another?
When king makes inscription, he keeps different language people in mind and tries to convey the message. Generally there is no link between those languages. These are separate languages with separate scripts. They might convey same meaning. But that doesn't make those two same. Only meaning is similar. Not the script or language.

2-3 points to make

First of all whenever there is an unknown language script people will try and count the number of different symbols which represent alphabets. This does not work for some languages but it does for most. This can be done for any script. Once all the "alphabets" or the much nicer word "shabdamala" is written down you have the beads (letters) of the mala but not the shabd. The shabd could be guesswork and I suspect that it is pure guesswork in lingusitics.

Secondly - as regards the Behistun/Bistoun/Bagastana inscription of Iran - it was obvious that it was in 3 separate parts which looked like 3 languages. But most important there was this fellow called Herodotus who wrote about a king called Darius and mentioned that Darius had a 3 language inscription made. He also recorded that the inscription had some kind of lion logo. he also recorded in his Greek writings a word for word translation of at least parts of the inscription.

So people knew that there was a 3 language inscription by Darius along with a lion logo and they also had some inkling of its content, but could not decipher the 3 languages. They could also say that one of the languages was an old form of Persian because untranslated texts of that old type of Persian had been found elsewhere.

This is where a fellow called Rawlinson who had been in India did some guesswork. the guesswork is clever but I still have my doubts about sounds - although I cannot take away his cleverness. Rawlinson went to Behistun, climbed up the high cliff where the text was there and made copies. He did this several times. Then he, using the fact that Herodotus had said that the text started with words like "I Darius, king of kings, son of Cyrus" started looking for a pattern where word number 2 and 3 or 3 and 4 (king of kings) were very similar. He found the pattern and then guess that the word that came before "king of kings" must be Darius and the words later had the name "Cyrus". A few others joined the game in Europe and came up with the words:

Adam Daravayus Xayatiya Xayati - or some such thing which sounds suspiciously like Sanskrit "Aham Daravayus Kshatriya (of) Kshatriyas" or "I, Darius king of kings"

Working in this way they decoded the Persian part and that led to the decoding of other languages.

I have many doubts. Have the sounds been attributed correctly? Very often you can have a script whose sounds cannot be written exactly in another language. Sanskrit and Indian languages are an exception. The script and sounds correspond exactly. But English is terrible and English spellings do not match sounds. So what is the proof that old Persian cuneiform script sounds corresponded exactly to the spoken sounds? There is no proof. Only guesswork. This guesswork was undoubtedly brilliant and hard work, and was done over 100 years ago - and I think Indian scholars need to redo this because we understand pronunciation better than native angrezi speakers

A_Gupta
BRF Oldie
Posts: 10536
Joined: 23 Oct 2001 11:31
Contact:

Re: Out-of-India - From Theory to Truth: Part 2

Postby A_Gupta » 12 Jan 2018 08:33

Indian scholars need to redo this because we understand pronunciation better than native angrezi speakers


Exactly. Especially since linguists make big deal of trying to distinguish whether the cuneiform says "eka" or "aika" (for "one") and spin theories around such things. That one difference, e.g., is enough, per Herr Witzel, to make the language found in the Mitanni texts an independent branch of Indo-Aryan - not Sanskrit or a descendant of Sanskrit, but a sister of Sanskrit.

shiv
BRF Oldie
Posts: 35041
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Pindliyon ka Gooda

Re: Out-of-India - From Theory to Truth: Part 2

Postby shiv » 12 Jan 2018 08:49

syam wrote:Pronunciation is totally semetic. Nothing like Avestan language. If Cyrus followed Sanskrit related religion, atleast his texts should sound like sanskrit.

Syam it is my belief that this "Avestan" language is completely fake. It has been totally cooked up by linguists using hints from a Sanskrit translation of a "Middle Persian" text by one Neryosang Dhaval, and from guesswork comparing gathas with Atharva Veda. I am totally, 100% suspicious that Avestan never existed as a separate language and has simply been created by linguists to fill a gap they wanted to fill.

May do an article on this..

Pulikeshi
BRFite
Posts: 1411
Joined: 31 Oct 2002 12:31
Location: Badami

Re: Out-of-India - From Theory to Truth: Part 2

Postby Pulikeshi » 20 Jan 2018 11:41

Another aspect of the OIT story is the migration of people, language, culture, etc. from South India to the rest of South-East Asia all the way to Australia, New Zealand and beyond into Polynesia. This aspect does not get much discussion around here as the tribe is focused on North-West politics, etc. Want to start looking at some work that has been controversial nevertheless very useful in understanding the indigenous populations of South-East Asia. For example the groups native to South India, Andaman Islands, Indonesia, Vietnam, Cambodia, Taiwan, Japan, Papua New Guinea, etc.

His argument goes further than language.

“The changes brought about by the introduction of rice-paddy cultivation, the use of iron and the loom occurred in the Yayoi Period,” Ohno writes in “Seeking the Origins of the Japanese Language.” By analyzing words associated with these practices, he claims that they were introduced by Tamils who traveled the 7,000-odd kilometers from their home to Japan during the Yayoi Period two millenniums ago.


Was the Japanese language influenced by Tamil

(Ok no jokes on why Rajni is popular in Japan! :mrgreen:)

For most purposes, Japanese uses Chinese numbers, rather than native numbers. However, native numbers are often used for counting numbers of items up to 10 – as in hitotsu, futatsu, mittsu (one item, two items, three items), notably days on the calendar, and with other Japanese counter words – and for various exceptions (fossils)


Knowing multiple Indian languages - but especially fluent in all South Indian - I have always wondered why the Japanese also end their words with a "u" sound for example - which to Kannada speakers is very amusing. (OT) For example a common joke was around the word "Nai" (Dog in Tamil, etc.) the popular PJ went to make it work in Kannada add a "du" at the end of it... which turns out to be quite politically incorrect to a certain trading community in South India. But this silliness has many ancient Japanese words that sound like someone did something similar... but to my knowledge no Indian scholarship has explored.

Yamato Kotoba

The dark skinned Dravidians also foolishly known as the ASI were probably going down SE Asia - Taiwan, etc. into what is today Japan.
See the Jomon People for example

Zynda
BRFite
Posts: 1458
Joined: 07 Jan 2006 00:37
Location: J4

Re: Out-of-India - From Theory to Truth: Part 2

Postby Zynda » 20 Jan 2018 19:35

Shiv,
Any chance of uploading the videos from the recent Chennai Indology Summit? Rajiv Malhotra has uploaded a critique of Harvard Tamil chair which has excerpts.

shiv
BRF Oldie
Posts: 35041
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Pindliyon ka Gooda

Re: Out-of-India - From Theory to Truth: Part 2

Postby shiv » 20 Jan 2018 20:10

^^I am told that they will be uploaded. I have no idea when. The videos belong to the foundation and I have none with me.

Pulikeshi
BRFite
Posts: 1411
Joined: 31 Oct 2002 12:31
Location: Badami

Re: Out-of-India - From Theory to Truth: Part 2

Postby Pulikeshi » 24 Jan 2018 12:19



Slightly OT - but for those of you who enjoy listening to Sanskrit spoken esp. by people from outside India - this one is a treat.

Pulikeshi
BRFite
Posts: 1411
Joined: 31 Oct 2002 12:31
Location: Badami

Re: Out-of-India - From Theory to Truth: Part 2

Postby Pulikeshi » 24 Jan 2018 12:34

Interesting to find several scholars in the beginning so Sanskrit discovery were very much ameanable to India being the origin of the European civilization - but over time as the politics of the day took over it seems very much an engineered onslaught took place to reverse the direction from OIT to AIT:

Schlegel’s Über die Sprache und Weisheit der Indier (On the Language and Wisdom of India, 1808) was a pioneering work in comparative Indo-European linguistics and comparative philology. Inspired by the thoughts of Sir William Jones (1746-1794), who had found similarities between Sanskrit and three other languages, Latin, Greek, and Persian, Schlegel claimed that India was the cradle of Western culture. He discovered parallels between language and race, and started to speak of "Aryans" (the honorable people), who had moved from northern India to Europe. His work influenced Goethe's Westöstlicher Divan. (According to Arvidsson, writers like Bernal have unjustly claimed that Schlegel was a racist.[1])


Friedrich Von Schlegel

Pulikeshi
BRFite
Posts: 1411
Joined: 31 Oct 2002 12:31
Location: Badami

Re: Out-of-India - From Theory to Truth: Part 2

Postby Pulikeshi » 24 Jan 2018 13:01

^^^ I think there is enough evidence if one digs for it that the British - cultivated "useful idiots" in Germany to do this Aryan Invasion Theory/PIE idiocy research. Kind of like an outreach to help the Anglo/Protestant cause if you will... some really good smells cometh along these lines for hound willing.
:mrgreen:

wig
BRFite
Posts: 1531
Joined: 09 Feb 2009 16:58

Re: Out-of-India - From Theory to Truth: Part 2

Postby wig » 24 Jan 2018 15:23

shiv wrote:^^I am told that they will be uploaded. I have no idea when. The videos belong to the foundation and I have none with me.


perhaps the papers read in the conference could be shared

shiv
BRF Oldie
Posts: 35041
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Pindliyon ka Gooda

Re: Out-of-India - From Theory to Truth: Part 2

Postby shiv » 25 Jan 2018 19:21

One more AIT squashing gene paper - this time studying wimmens Mitochondrial DNA - showing that to be older than 8000-16000 yrs in Kashmir - older than PIE/Aryan dungpile and also pooping on the "Men only invasion" baloney fostered by testosterone fuelled cunning linguists reading about R1A1 male DNA
https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-017-18893-8

Prem Kumar
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2063
Joined: 31 Mar 2009 00:10

Re: Out-of-India - From Theory to Truth: Part 2

Postby Prem Kumar » 26 Jan 2018 00:13

One more thing the paper says (in more than one place): that the genetic variations could very well have been an in-situ development!

Also, as we have seen in many ill-informed genetic papers, this one too says that a 8000 - 10000 ybp migration could've brought language, completely demonstrating their lack of understanding of AIT dates of 1200 - 1500 BCE! There is no reason to make any claims regarding language in a genetics paper. Tomorrow, a linguist will claim that "genetics showed that women came to India from the steppes". This is a Salma-quotes-Sabrina circular disease.

shiv
BRF Oldie
Posts: 35041
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Pindliyon ka Gooda

Re: Out-of-India - From Theory to Truth: Part 2

Postby shiv » 26 Jan 2018 07:35

Prem Kumar wrote:One more thing the paper says (in more than one place): that the genetic variations could very well have been an in-situ development!

Also, as we have seen in many ill-informed genetic papers, this one too says that a 8000 - 10000 ybp migration could've brought language, completely demonstrating their lack of understanding of AIT dates of 1200 - 1500 BCE! There is no reason to make any claims regarding language in a genetics paper. Tomorrow, a linguist will claim that "genetics showed that women came to India from the steppes". This is a Salma-quotes-Sabrina circular disease.

True - I noticed that and I have an idea. I want to collect up 6-8 genetics papers that mention "Indo-Aryan migration" and then dig down into the actual references they use and try and narrow down the source of the biggest hoax played on India in 10000 years.

Rudradev
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3138
Joined: 06 Apr 2003 12:31

Re: Out-of-India - From Theory to Truth: Part 2

Postby Rudradev » 27 Jan 2018 05:21

R1a1 is the "horse burial" equivalent of phyllogeography/genetics. One data point that may mean nothing at all, blown up out of all proportion to try and support patent nonsense.

R1a1 branches are found at high frequencies among Punjabis (highest) but also amongst tribes like the Chenchu (26%, in a "Dravidian" language-speaking "indigenous" tribe!) It is also only found in 10% of the Indian population overall.

It's like looking at one speck of dirt on your windscreen and asking: "did this come from the petrol pump attendant last night? Or the urchin who was wiping my windscreen at a crossroads one week ago? Or is it $hit from a bird living in a tree outside my very own home where I park it?"

What does any of this tell you about the car?

Rudradev
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3138
Joined: 06 Apr 2003 12:31

Re: Out-of-India - From Theory to Truth: Part 2

Postby Rudradev » 27 Jan 2018 05:41

For a somewhat useful big-picture of what ancient DNA analysis of Y haplogroups tells us, look at this image:
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articl ... gure/Fig3/

The image shows distribution of Y haplogroups inferred to be more than 30,000 years old.

The dark green blocks are nine Y haplogroups from the Indian Subcontinent.

Of these NINE Y haplogroups, SEVEN are UNIQUE to the Indian Subcontinent. Not found anywhere else in the WORLD.

Only TWO of the Indian Subcontinent Y haplogroups are found in common with other areas of the world. R, in common with West Eurasia, and O2, in common with Southeast Asia/Oceania.

This image narrows down into the R haplogroup clades:
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articl ... gure/Fig7/

Of the R1a1 clades, M780, estimated to arise 5000 ybp, is PURELY Indian (consistent with the assertion by Dr. Chaubey that I had asked about).

Three other R1a1 clades descended from another branch (Z2125) arose between 2500-5000 ybp, and are present in India as well as in Central Asia/Iran (immediately neighbouring regions, NOT the Caucasus or "steppe").

The ONLY clade that is shared between Caucasus/"steppe" Russia/E.Europe and India is the R1b clade M478. And that has an age of 7500 ybp.

Is all of this in ANY way consistent with the idea that a population of Aryans from Europe/Central Asia displaced or replaced a great segment of autochthonous Indians, Dravidians/Lemurians/whatever? Let alone that they did so 3500 or fewer years ago?

And this is on the male side. On the female side, we know from the Indu Sharma paper linked by Shiv that the last known migrations of females into J&K occurred 8000 to 16000 ybp.

Source: Kivisild, T. The study of human Y chromosome variation through ancient DNA. Hum Genet. 2017; 136(5): 529–546.
Last edited by Rudradev on 27 Jan 2018 06:39, edited 1 time in total.

RoyG
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5181
Joined: 10 Aug 2009 05:10

Re: Out-of-India - From Theory to Truth: Part 2

Postby RoyG » 27 Jan 2018 06:16

Rudradev wrote:For a somewhat useful big-picture of what ancient DNA analysis of Y haplogroups tells us, look at this image:
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articl ... gure/Fig3/

The image shows distribution of Y haplogroups inferred to be more than 30,000 years old.

The dark green blocks are nine Y haplogroups from the Indian Subcontinent.

Of these NINE Y haplogroups, SEVEN are UNIQUE to the Indian Subcontinent. Not found anywhere else in the WORLD.

Only TWO of the Indian Subcontinent Y haplogroups are found in common with other areas of the world. R, in common with West Eurasia, and O2, in common with Southeast Asia/Oceania.

This image narrows down into the R haplogroup clades:
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articl ... gure/Fig7/

Of the R1a1 clades, M780, estimated to arise 5000 ybp, is PURELY Indian (consistent with the assertion by Dr. Chaubey that I had asked about).

Three other R1a1 clades descended from another branch (Z2125) arose between 2500-5000 ybp, and show some presence in India though mainly present in Central Asia/Iran (immediately neighbouring regions, NOT the "steppe").

The ONLY clade that is shared between "steppe" Russia/E.Europe and India is the R1b clade M478. And that has an age of 7500 ybp.

Is all of this in ANY way consistent with the idea that a population of Aryans from Europe/Central Asia displaced or replaced a great segment of autochthonous Indians, Dravidians/Lemurians/whatever? Let alone that they did so 3500 or fewer years ago?

And this is on the male side. On the female side, we know from the Indu Sharma paper linked by Shiv that the last known migrations of females into J&K occurred 8000 to 16000 ybp.

Source: Kivisild, T. The study of human Y chromosome variation through ancient DNA. Hum Genet. 2017; 136(5): 529–546.


No. Genetics imo, has been completely settled in 2017-2018. All we have to do now is keep up the pressure on Wiki and conferences. The last thing we have to do now is crack the Indus code and that's it. Sullivan in my view has already cracked part of it.

ashbhee
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 44
Joined: 15 Aug 2016 07:05

Re: Out-of-India - From Theory to Truth: Part 2

Postby ashbhee » 29 Jan 2018 10:23

Saw RD parade on TV, It had lots of horse mounted soldiers. This conclusively proves AIT.

shiv
BRF Oldie
Posts: 35041
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Pindliyon ka Gooda

Re: Out-of-India - From Theory to Truth: Part 2

Postby shiv » 29 Jan 2018 19:15

:D

Gus
BRF Oldie
Posts: 8073
Joined: 07 May 2005 02:30

Re: Out-of-India - From Theory to Truth: Part 2

Postby Gus » 29 Jan 2018 19:46

shiv - the political discourse in TN is now more and more dominated by aryan-dravidian politics as dmk sees that as a potent weapon against bjp (and admk by alleged association) and use that to build a grand narrative of (tn/tamil/dravidian/state) Vs (outsider/northie/hindi/aryan/center)

unfortunately there's no scholarly person on this side of the debate to take on the rhetoric and back it up with their own understanding of the details, and do it in tamil.

on the other side, there's an entire ecosystem of ideology based groups like dravidar kazhagam, and academia, and writers, actors and what not, who will jump upon anybody with a contrary opinion like a wolf pack and silence/intimidate/discredit them.

You mentioned that this was talked about in your conference. Anything coming out of it?

shiv
BRF Oldie
Posts: 35041
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Pindliyon ka Gooda

Re: Out-of-India - From Theory to Truth: Part 2

Postby shiv » 29 Jan 2018 22:52

Gus wrote:shiv - the political discourse in TN is now more and more dominated by aryan-dravidian politics as dmk sees that as a potent weapon against bjp (and admk by alleged association) and use that to build a grand narrative of (tn/tamil/dravidian/state) Vs (outsider/northie/hindi/aryan/center)

unfortunately there's no scholarly person on this side of the debate to take on the rhetoric and back it up with their own understanding of the details, and do it in tamil.

on the other side, there's an entire ecosystem of ideology based groups like dravidar kazhagam, and academia, and writers, actors and what not, who will jump upon anybody with a contrary opinion like a wolf pack and silence/intimidate/discredit them.

You mentioned that this was talked about in your conference. Anything coming out of it?


There is actually a large body of scholars on the "our side" of the debate - which is what became apparent in the conference. But unfortunately this is a battle that has to be fought in Tamil Nadu with support from others where possible. The media are bought over and the politics is as you say - but there are inherent contradictions in what the politics is doing -because the culture of Tamil Nadu is deeply steeped in the old Vedic traditions - the language and the arts are also intertwined as is the system of folk medicine.

And there are good great people like our own Raja Ram ji who are doing great work. So all is not lost. the fight must go on. I keep hearing some of the names on Twitter - I saw one today - Nagaswamy. But with Tweets in Tamil - which I cannot read - I am unable to comment or retweet when necessary.

Gus
BRF Oldie
Posts: 8073
Joined: 07 May 2005 02:30

Re: Out-of-India - From Theory to Truth: Part 2

Postby Gus » 29 Jan 2018 23:53

what is the tweeter id? I can try and translate when possible.

shiv
BRF Oldie
Posts: 35041
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Pindliyon ka Gooda

Re: Out-of-India - From Theory to Truth: Part 2

Postby shiv » 30 Jan 2018 07:54

Will call attention when I see one next..

I follow ersakthivel of DFI and he often retweets stuff that looks interesting butin Tamil

chandrasekaran
BRFite
Posts: 349
Joined: 27 Nov 2008 15:07

Re: Out-of-India - From Theory to Truth: Part 2

Postby chandrasekaran » 30 Jan 2018 12:41

Gus wrote:unfortunately there's no scholarly person on this side of the debate to take on the rhetoric and back it up with their own understanding of the details, and do it in tamil.


There are many many researchers/people who do this. Read some of these links..

http://jayasreesaranathan.blogspot.in/
http://tamilartsacademy.com/home.html
http://www.tamilhindu.com/
https://tamilandvedas.com/

Will post more. However it is my contention that there IS zero respect for scholarship in TN thanks to decades of the *D*K goons occupying the political scene, very well explained in this 5-part series...

http://prekshaa.in/series/facets-of-dravidianism/


Return to “Strategic Issues & International Relations Forum”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Ashokk, kancha and 13 guests