Historum - History Forums  

Go Back   Historum - History Forums > World History Forum > Asian History
Register Forums Blogs Social Groups Mark Forums Read

Asian History Asian History Forum - China, Japan, Korea, India, Australia, New Zealand, and the Asia-Pacific Region


Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
Old December 26th, 2017, 08:15 PM   #51

Dreamhunter's Avatar
Historian
 
Joined: Jun 2012
From: Malaysia
Posts: 5,140
Blog Entries: 1

Quote:
Originally Posted by specul8 View Post
HEY ! Are those Vedic Vikings she is fighting ?
In the first vid, our Kerala heroine Mira is sparring with Aurelius, a Roman commander whom she is helping to get a young Romulus (not the one of first legend, but another one - son of the last Roman emperor - who is later going to adopt the name Pendragon, and guess what, eventually become Arthur's father) out of the anarchy of a collapsing Rome into the safety of Britannia.

In the second, she is fighting a bunch of traitorous Goths, henchmen of Odoacer the Goth, who has wrested Western Rome & is now trying to assassinate Romulus.

Quote:
Originally Posted by specul8 View Post
And also, dont go weaponless fighting before you build up your competency in internet forum debate... in terms of balance, proof, evidence, answering the questions put to you ......
We hv a saying in Malay, which goes, 'He who eats the chilli, he will feel the burn'.

Last edited by Dreamhunter; December 26th, 2017 at 08:19 PM.
Dreamhunter is online now  
Remove Ads
Old December 26th, 2017, 08:44 PM   #52
Historian
 
Joined: Dec 2014
From: USA
Posts: 2,553

Quote:
Originally Posted by Vaderfan View Post
The problem is that you start from the assumption that Sanskrit is the true oldest ancestor of IE languages. That's why you find reconstructoion faulty.


Every single IE language has linguistic laws defined which describe its evolution since PIE. It's not that people made up PIE and made up laws to make it fit the modern language. It's the other way around, with modern languages first being reconstructed to their ancient versions through historical evidence, internal and external reconstruction, only then, on the basis of recovered proto languages, was PIE reconstructed. About which one is the oldest, probably the Anatolian branch with Hittite, followedby Sanskrit, which cannot ve reliably dated because Vedas were written down centuries or millennia after events they describe, and jntil then they could have underwent multiple changes and revisions.
I did not start with the assumption that Sanskrit was the oldest. I started looking at the existing PIE reconstruction, and then the ancient Sanskrit works. It did not need a lot of time for me to realize how they came up with this reconstructed PIE, and how faulty it was. I thought I gave you a very good example of how faulty the PIE root is in the case of Ashwa. There are hordes of other examples.

Oh yes. I understand they did not make PIE first and made laws around it. For example, they took equivalent words - Vrddha or Vedic, and Varezda of Avestan. Then since they knew that they had the same meanings, "started with the assumption" that there "should have been" a proto parent language of both these languages First this assumption helped establish a basic hypothesis (that had literally no proof or sense whatsoever) - the AIT/AMT. How? because it was easy to say that the proto parent language called Proto-Indo-Iranian language was the language of people who were splitting into Avestan and Vedic. No need to guess - they had to say that Avestan was older because it fit the narrative of the movement into India.

Now comes the fun part. Now how do you come up with the parent language of these two languages? Its quite easy! You pick up one of the oldest grammars, i.e. the Vedic grammar, also known as PAnini's Sutras (the whole of classification of sounds is picked up from there), see the way the word Vrddha is constructed. Now it clearly says it is the root "Vrdh" + the participle "ta" leading it to form Vrddha (there are a set of rules when you finally arrive at the final word). Now you see that the ending of the word Varezda has an ending of 'zda' Now how do we fit in this sound 'z' in the whole affair? Simple - say that Vedic lost 'z' from its parent language when it arrived in the subcontinent. Now where should have been that 'z', was it in the root or in the participle?

To see that you have to see a derived word of Varezda for further analysis. The word is Varedata (Vedic equivalent Vardhata). If 'z' was in root, then the derived word 'Varedata' should have had 'z' in it. But as we see, there is none. So that leaves the only possibility that the participle should have 'z' in it. So the conclusion is that the root of Varezda is not Varezd, but should have been 'Vared'. This root of Avestan is equivalent to 'Vrdh' of Vedic. We clearly see that the form Vr is the original form of 'Var' (This is a very usual phenomenon in Sanskrit to Prakrit or Sanskrit to Sanskrit transformations. Ex.: Krsh (to plow) to karsh).

So we see that the root form of Vedic is older than Avestan. Now let's turn our attention to the participle. When Vrdh joins with ta in Vedic, it finally produces Vrddha. See the cluster ddh here. See that the sound d is emphasized twice. Now as much as I see in Avestan, there is scarcity of consonant clusters with repetition. So it is very likely that in Avestan, Vrdh became Vared, and when combined with participle 'ta' yields Varezda, where 'zda' is a replacement of ddha.

But the geniuses of "AMT" and "PIE" scholarship tried to give this a different spin. They said that the root Vrdh itself had 'z' in it! So here we go, the root was 'Vrzdh' in Vedic, and 'Varezd' in Avestan. And then, Vedic loses the 'z' sound, and becomes 'Vrdh'. Now, it is easy to write a law or a rule - the one of loss of z sound, and the one of how a cluster formation happens when the root combines with the participle. In fact this is no mathematical or scientific law but an empirical observation, a faulty one at that. More disturbing is the fact that it is a lifted concept from the Vedic grammar and phonetics, and is claimed to be an original science.

This is an example of how your PIE rules are written. This is how the reconstruction happens in finding a proto language. I might now very well know all the PIE rules to the tee, but I think I have a clue of the mechanics behind it.

To explain the relation between Vedic and Avestan words Vrddha and Varezda, we did not have to come up with phony proto language, the associated rules and laws like this. The transformation of Sanskrit to Prakrit has a lot of set patterns, and it does not need these phony laws. This transformation of Vrddha to Varezda is only operating in different condition and possibly location, where there would have been a local language that had preponderance of 'z' sound. In order to express Vrddha, they came up with the nearest form of expressing it. That's all!

It makes me wonder what are all the scholars in India doing? Why are they mute on the fact that their own knowledge has been lifted lock, stock and barrel, and has been fed back into their academics as "linguistics", with a spin to suit some agenda?

It is just about time that people stand up against this monumental lie called PIE.
Aatreya is offline  
Old December 26th, 2017, 08:46 PM   #53
Historian
 
Joined: Dec 2014
From: USA
Posts: 2,553

Quote:
Originally Posted by Disciple of Sophia View Post
Haplogroups R1a and R1b originated in Siberia near lake Baikal 18,000-24,000 years ago so did not originate in India or Spain as the Basque Mr. Chekovs claim.

The Sintashta Culture: first domesticated the horse; invented the chariot; used copper or bronze hatchets as weapons; lived in circular cities.
They are the original Aryans most likely. Chariot Racers of the Steppes | DiscoverMagazine.com

Their culture was 1,000 years older than the Rig Veda.

Arkaim
Click the image to open in full size.
How did you date the Rig Veda though? There is no mention of circular cities in Rig Veda. And the terms Aryan, Ratha and Chakra are very definitively Vedic in their root.
Aatreya is offline  
Old December 26th, 2017, 09:10 PM   #54

Aupmanyav's Avatar
Atheist, Advaitist, Hindu
 
Joined: Jun 2014
From: New Delhi, India
Posts: 2,923

Quote:
Originally Posted by Aatreya View Post
You realize the stupidity of the Arctic theory that claims Rig Vedic hymns were composed in Arctic, when the branching had not even happened according to the PIE model, don't you?
We may have only a few complete hymns and portions of other hymns surviving after the long journey in time and distance. Some were wholly lost. The RigVedic hymns were re-written time and again to make them understandable to people after each change of language. The new writers did not understand what the older people had said, some inserted their own meanings (Dirghatamas) and built myths over them. That is why the necessity of Niruktikaras like Aupamanyava, Yaska and Sayana - they did the best they could do, explaining the words and meanings that were not clearly understood. That is how scriptures are compromised over long periods of time and change of locale. By branding them 'divine', we do injustice to the original hymns.

Samhita is a collection of verses/hymns. Various people at various times made these collections. Taittiriya Samhita is the collection by the four disciples of Sage Vaishampayana (Krishna YajurVeda), but another was done by Yajnavalkya (Shukla YajurVeda).

Samhita: any methodically arranged collection of texts or verses, junction or combination of letters according to euphonic rules, force which holds together and supports the universe, conjunction, text treated according to euphonic rules, connection, science, union, next.
Sanskrit Dictionary for Spoken Sanskrit

1 saMhita mfn. (1. %{dhA}) put together , joined , attached RV. &c. &c. ; fixed , settled AitBr. ; composed of (comp.) ib. ; placed together (%{pArzva-s-} , `" placed side by side "') La1t2y. ; uninterrupted (as a series of words) RPra1t. ; joined or connected or endowed or furnished with , abounding in , possessed of , accompanied by (comp.) Mn. MBh. &c. ; agreeing with , conformable to (%{dharma-s-} , `" in accordance with justice "') R. ; relating to , concerning (comp.) ib. ; connected with , proceeding from (comp.) MBh. ; being on friendly terms with (instr.) ib. ; (%{-ta4}) mfn. mixed in colour , variegated VS. TS. ; (%{A}) f. see next ; n. N. of a Sa1man A1rshBr.
2 saMhitA f. conjunction , connection , union TUp. ; (in gram.) the junction or combination of letters according to euphonic rules (= %{saMdhi} , but sometimes considered rather as the state preparatory to the actual junction than the junction itself Pra1t. ; a text treated according to euphonic rules (esp. the real continuous text of the Vedas as formed out of the Padas or separate words by proper phonetic changes [according to various schools ; cf. IW. 152]: beside the Sam2hita1s of the R2ig- , Sa1ma- , and Atharvaveda there is the Va1jasaneyi-S˝Sam2hita1s belonging to the White Yajur-veda , and five other Sam2hita1s belonging to the black Yajur-veda , viz. the Taittiri1ya-S˝Sam2hita1 , the Sam2hita of the A1treyas [known only by its Anukraman2i1] , the S˝Sam2hita1 of the Kat2has , the Kapisht2hala-Kat2ha-S˝Sam2hita1 , and the S˝Sam2hita1 of the Maitra1yan2iyas or Maitra1yan2i1-S˝Sam2hita1) Nir. Pra1t. &c. ; any methodically arranged collection of texts or verses (e.g. the Ra1ma7yan2a , the various law-books , the medical works of Caraka and S3a1rn3gadhara , the complete system of natural astrology &c. [cf. %{bRhat-s-}] ; there is also a Sam2hita1 of the Pura1n2as said to have been compiled by Vya1sa , the substance of which is supposed to be represented by the Vishn2u-pura1n2a) MBh. VarBr2S. Pur. &c. ; science L. ; the force which holds together and supports the universe (a term applied to the Supreme Being accord. to some) MW. ; N. of various wks.
3 saMhita see p. 1123 , col. 1.
4 sAMhita mf(%{I})n. relating to the Sam2hita1 , found in the S˝Sam2hita1 text or based upon it &c. Pra1t. Pa1n2. Sch.
http://www.sanskrit-lexicon.uni-koel...amil/recherche

संहिता saṃhitā [f. saṃhita] f. conjonction, union; proximitÚ | [saṃhitāpāṭha] Únonciation continue; texte sous forme continue o¨ s'applique la liaison [sandhi] | phil. recueil de textes (not. du Veda), collection d'ouvrages, compilation.
saṃhitāyām gram. en phrase continue (o¨ le sandhi est effectuÚ).
saṃhitaikapade nityā nityā dhātūpasargayoḥ nityāsamāse vākye tu sā vivakṣāmapekṣate L'Únonciation continue est obligatoire Ó l'intÚrieur d'un mot, obligatoire entre un prÚverbe et une forme verbale, obligatoire Ó l'intÚrieur d'un composÚ, mais dans la phrase elle doit respecter l'intention d'expression du locuteur.
Sanskrit Heritage Dictionary

Last edited by Aupmanyav; December 26th, 2017 at 09:22 PM.
Aupmanyav is offline  
Old December 26th, 2017, 09:16 PM   #55
Scholar
 
Joined: Oct 2016
From: Australia
Posts: 856

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dreamhunter View Post
^
With all due respect, I wud say, the PC thing to say, as well as the pro-nation building thing to say, is, yep, they are 'one people'. But the honest, historical thing? Likely not. We in fact hv many 'Indian' ethnicities in Malaysia, ranging from Punjabi, Gujarati, Bengali, eastern North Indian, to Malayalee, Kerala & Tamil. And they certainly do not seem to think & behave as they are really 'one people', considering that they are all of 'Indian' descent. Indeed, a Punjabi in Malaysia wud quite often be saying, 'I'm not an 'Indian', I'm a Punjabi', when what he actually means is, 'I'm not a Dravidian/Tamil, I'm a Punjabi'.

Even for a small nation like ours, the Malay people, we know that our ancient ancestors were originally not so called 'one people', but rather several tribes, of quite different stock, who only after a rather long time eventually became 'one people'.

Let alone a nation as vast as the 'Indian' nation, or the equally vast 'Chinese' nation. It wud be almost like saying that the entire Asia is 'one people'.

It's not that simplistic. With all due respect again, saying something like, 'If North Indians were Arya, then Dravidics were also Arya' wud to me be not that much different from saying, 'If Anatolian Turks are now more or less Anatolian, then CA Turks are now also more or less Anatolian'. I'm not into being divisive or anything like that, but just preferring to more closely ally with what I happen to believe is the historical truth.
These guys are hilarious !

I been watching them conflute nation, ethnicity, culture, 'race', etc. etc .

"All Indians are ..... " - a nation .

All Australians are the same too, we got white Euros , recent and generational, Chinese, Africans ( black and white ) , Indigenous of many types, Pacific Islanders ..... all Australians ( unless they visiting or illegal ) .

I'm not sure how you prove being Indian, but here we have Australian citizenship papers or passport.


Click the image to open in full size.

Last edited by specul8; December 26th, 2017 at 09:28 PM.
specul8 is offline  
Old December 26th, 2017, 09:21 PM   #56
Scholar
 
Joined: Oct 2016
From: Australia
Posts: 856

Quote:
Originally Posted by Disciple of Sophia View Post
LOL,




Read them here The Poetic Edda: Contents


Your theory of what "eddas" meant was outdated in 1936!
I knew it ! I said he was outdated - oldschool ...

Click the image to open in full size.

Even got the timing right ^ ... around 1930

Last edited by specul8; December 26th, 2017 at 09:30 PM.
specul8 is offline  
Old December 26th, 2017, 09:35 PM   #57

Aupmanyav's Avatar
Atheist, Advaitist, Hindu
 
Joined: Jun 2014
From: New Delhi, India
Posts: 2,923

Quote:
Originally Posted by specul8 View Post
Your grandfather's sword ? Is it a traditional Viking Vedic sword ?
No. It was a regular Rajput sword, but it was heavy, like the ones that the bridegroom carries with him from a week or so before and during his marriage. He also carries a pouch of cardamom with him to offer to people who congratulate him on his coming marriage. That also worked as an invitation to his marriage seeking your blessings. It was always so funny to see a young boy with his turban and sword wandering in the street offering cardamoms to people, blushing all over. But what to do? Traditions are traditions. Not just the Rajputs but the brahmins and traders were also supposed to do that (The more sophisticated migrant Kashmiri brahmins like us did not do that).

Click the image to open in full size. Click the image to open in full size.

Last edited by Aupmanyav; December 26th, 2017 at 10:13 PM.
Aupmanyav is offline  
Old December 26th, 2017, 09:56 PM   #58

Dreamhunter's Avatar
Historian
 
Joined: Jun 2012
From: Malaysia
Posts: 5,140
Blog Entries: 1

^
This cardamom, it's called laichi in Indian, right?
Dreamhunter is online now  
Old December 26th, 2017, 10:03 PM   #59

Aupmanyav's Avatar
Atheist, Advaitist, Hindu
 
Joined: Jun 2014
From: New Delhi, India
Posts: 2,923

Quote:
Originally Posted by Disciple of Sophia View Post
The Sintashta Culture: first domesticated the horse; invented the chariot; used copper or bronze hatchets as weapons; lived in circular cities. They are the original Aryans most likely.

Their culture was 1,000 years older than the Rig Veda.

Arkaim
Click the image to open in full size.
If they were the original Aryans then RigVeda belongs to them and is just as old. Do you know what chants they sang during their rituals? (Hint: They were hymns of RigVeda in the old language). A beautiful settlement, no doubt.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Aatreya View Post
It is just about time that people stand up against this monumental lie called PIE.
The only problem that we encounter other than the genetic one, which we do not discuss in this forum, is archeology. How come the time-line of cultures leads from Sintashta to Andronovo to BMAC to Yaz to Iran and India; and not the other way around. But we can always disregard archaeology.

Last edited by Aupmanyav; December 26th, 2017 at 10:21 PM.
Aupmanyav is offline  
Old December 26th, 2017, 10:05 PM   #60

Aupmanyav's Avatar
Atheist, Advaitist, Hindu
 
Joined: Jun 2014
From: New Delhi, India
Posts: 2,923

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dreamhunter View Post
^
This cardamom, it's called laichi in Indian, right?
Right, Ilaichi in Hindi.

"The modern genus name Elettaria is derived from the local name. The root ēlam is attested in all Dravidian languages, viz. Kannada elakki (ಏಲಕ್ಕಿ), Telugu yelakulu (యేలకులు), Tamil elakkai (ஏலக்காய்) and Malayalam elakkay (ഏലക്കായ്). The second element kai means "seed" or "fruit". The Malabar region had historical trade connections and was a prominent area of cardamom cultivation. A related root is also present in Hindi ilaychi (इलायची), Bengali Šlachi (এলাচি) and Punjabi ilaichi (ਇਲੈਚ) "green cardamom". In Sindhi it is called Photta (ڦوٽا). In pashto it is called Lachi. In Sanskrit it was known as ela (एला) or ellka (एल्ल्का). In Marathi it is commonly known as velchi (वेलची) or veldoda (वेलदोडा). In Sri Lanka, the plant is known as Enasal by Sinhala language."
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cardamom#Etymology

Last edited by Aupmanyav; December 26th, 2017 at 10:35 PM.
Aupmanyav is offline  
Reply

  Historum > World History Forum > Asian History

Tags
aryas, pie, vikings



Thread Tools
Display Modes


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Vikings okamido History in Films and on Television 226 January 18th, 2018 07:03 AM
Vikings Zitadelle Medieval and Byzantine History 2 October 26th, 2015 03:44 AM
Vikings Zitadelle History Help 1 October 15th, 2015 04:37 PM
Why do some Indians hate Aryas? dara Asian History 21 October 22nd, 2014 12:10 PM
New Vikings Helfaeng European History 97 September 25th, 2010 03:16 AM

Copyright © 2006-2013 Historum. All rights reserved.