U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > History
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 01-16-2018, 05:03 PM
 
1,350 posts, read 1,002,285 times
Reputation: 2856

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dad01 View Post
excuse me !
I'm not sure of the rest of what they wrote but this is absolutely true. Prior to the 1900s it was Bavarian or Prussian history...
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 01-16-2018, 07:51 PM
 
Location: Independent Republic of Ballard
7,995 posts, read 8,036,439 times
Reputation: 6119
The Holy Roman Emperors weren't Germans?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-17-2018, 12:14 AM
 
5,462 posts, read 2,925,545 times
Reputation: 3271
Quote:
Originally Posted by CrazyDonkey View Post
https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/...w/55532665.cms



The term "Indo-European" came about due to linguistic similarities between Indian/Sanskrit-based and many European languages. It designates a family of languages, descending from a commonly shared language-heritage (PIE), and not a specific racial/genetic group. It can in no way be inferred to signify racial or ethnic superiority/purity.

Genes for skin-color, light or dark, are selected for based on latitude and sun exposure. That invaders from the north (not just Indo-Europeans, but also Scythians, Macedonians, Kushans, White Huns, etc.) were lighter-skinned is simply a matter of their geographic origination (the northern Eurasian steppes). Tamils/Dravidians, however, originated from Southeast Asia...


British English existed several centuries ago. American English came 250 years ago. So going forward would you say both of them evolved together?? "European" gradually got added to Indian and if few centuries, Indian would even go away.

Tell me which European languages were as old as Sanskrit, except probably Greek.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-17-2018, 04:05 PM
 
Location: Independent Republic of Ballard
7,995 posts, read 8,036,439 times
Reputation: 6119
Quote:
Originally Posted by shanv3 View Post
Tell me which European languages were as old as Sanskrit, except probably Greek.
It is not a question of which is older. Both descended from a much earlier language, Proto-Indo-European (PIE) that was spoken on the Eurasian Steppes in the 3rd Millennium BC. Indo-Aryan split off from Indo-Iranian about 1500 BC. Mycenaean Greek arrived in the Aegean about the same time. Hittite was a little earlier.

Most European languages descend from Indo-European, although, besides Greek, they don't show up in the historical record until later. Proto-Celtic, for instance, is estimated to have been spoken around 1200 BC - the early Celtic language, which is related to Latin and the Italic languages, is associated with the Hallstadtt Culture in central Europe (c.800 BC). Other European languages with IE roots: Germanic, Baltic, Slavic, Illyric, etc. Non-European: Hittite/Luwian, Armenian, Tocharian, Iranian, Sanskrit/Prakrit.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-18-2018, 08:48 AM
 
5,462 posts, read 2,925,545 times
Reputation: 3271
Quote:
Originally Posted by CrazyDonkey View Post
It is not a question of which is older. Both descended from a much earlier language, Proto-Indo-European (PIE) that was spoken on the Eurasian Steppes in the 3rd Millennium BC. Indo-Aryan split off from Indo-Iranian about 1500 BC. Mycenaean Greek arrived in the Aegean about the same time. Hittite was a little earlier.

Most European languages descend from Indo-European, although, besides Greek, they don't show up in the historical record until later. Proto-Celtic, for instance, is estimated to have been spoken around 1200 BC - the early Celtic language, which is related to Latin and the Italic languages, is associated with the Hallstadtt Culture in central Europe (c.800 BC). Other European languages with IE roots: Germanic, Baltic, Slavic, Illyric, etc. Non-European: Hittite/Luwian, Armenian, Tocharian, Iranian, Sanskrit/Prakrit.
Please give a literary evidence or some famous kings who lived in 3rd millenium BC. And if you need evidence of what India looked like that time, please google Mahabharat. But of course that estimate is also from the European "Scholars" , reality is it might have taken place much earlier than that.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-18-2018, 10:32 AM
 
15,478 posts, read 6,392,018 times
Reputation: 8195
What? India had missiles and anti- missiles and other magical stuff like the never ending sari depicted in Mahabharata? That is your evidence?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-19-2018, 11:47 AM
 
Location: Independent Republic of Ballard
7,995 posts, read 8,036,439 times
Reputation: 6119
Quote:
Originally Posted by shanv3 View Post
Please give a literary evidence or some famous kings who lived in 3rd millenium BC. And if you need evidence of what India looked like that time, please google Mahabharat. But of course that estimate is also from the European "Scholars" , reality is it might have taken place much earlier than that.
The evidence is linguistic, cultural, and genetic. See:

In Search of the Indo-Europeans: Language, Archaeology and Myth by J.P. Mallory.

The Horse, the Wheel, and Language by David W. Anthony.

The "Out of India" theory was devised to explain the incontrovertible linguistic evidence that Sanskrit and European languages such as Greek and Latin are part of the same language family. I've already linked to the latest genetic (Y-DNA) evidence of a male-biased influx of R1a haplogroup individuals that renders the "Out of India" theory no longer tenable.

That the Mahabharat dates back to the 3rd Millennium is utter speculation. That doesn't mean it doesn't contain archaic elements, from the Indo-Iranians, for instance.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-19-2018, 05:37 PM
 
5,462 posts, read 2,925,545 times
Reputation: 3271
Quote:
Originally Posted by CrazyDonkey View Post
The evidence is linguistic, cultural, and genetic. See:

In Search of the Indo-Europeans: Language, Archaeology and Myth by J.P. Mallory.

The Horse, the Wheel, and Language by David W. Anthony.

The "Out of India" theory was devised to explain the incontrovertible linguistic evidence that Sanskrit and European languages such as Greek and Latin are part of the same language family. I've already linked to the latest genetic (Y-DNA) evidence of a male-biased influx of R1a haplogroup individuals that renders the "Out of India" theory no longer tenable.

That the Mahabharat dates back to the 3rd Millennium is utter speculation. That doesn't mean it doesn't contain archaic elements, from the Indo-Iranians, for instance.
So a book published in 2007 becomes the evidence. Why isnt anything coming up the Eurasian guys themselves???

Ok I agree that it was the Eurasian technology that was used in South Indian temples. And to commemorate they carved Ox, Bull and Chariots in every ancient temple built centuries ago.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-20-2018, 03:53 PM
 
Location: Independent Republic of Ballard
7,995 posts, read 8,036,439 times
Reputation: 6119
Quote:
Originally Posted by shanv3 View Post
So a book published in 2007 becomes the evidence. Why isnt anything coming up the Eurasian guys themselves???

Ok I agree that it was the Eurasian technology that was used in South Indian temples. And to commemorate they carved Ox, Bull and Chariots in every ancient temple built centuries ago.
The Mallory book was published in 1989. It is the foundation book on the topic. The Anthony book is an exhaustive survey of current knowledge as of 2007 - ten years is not a long period in cultural archaeology and linguistics. It has been known since the 19th Century that Sanskrit and western languages such as Greek and Latin belonged to the same language family - that has been accepted everywhere, even in India.

The only dispute was whether the carriers of those languages (and cultural traditions) emanated outward 1) from a central region (such as the Eurasian steppes) to Europe and India or 2) from India through Eurasia to Europe (the minority dissenting opinion, primarily in India). The latest Y-DNA evidence has settled this dispute - the "Out of India" theory is sunk. See:

https://bmcevolbiol.biomedcentral.co...862-017-0936-9

Quote:
Maternal lineages primarily reflect earlier, pre-Holocene processes, and paternal lineages predominantly episodes within the last 10 ka. In particular, genetic influx from Central Asia in the Bronze Age was strongly male-driven, consistent with the patriarchal, patrilocal and patrilineal social structure attributed to the inferred pastoralist early Indo-European society. This was part of a much wider process of Indo-European expansion, with an ultimate source in the Pontic-Caspian region, which carried closely related Y-chromosome lineages, a smaller fraction of autosomal genome-wide variation and an even smaller fraction of mitogenomes across a vast swathe of Eurasia between 5 and 3.5 ka.
Quote:
Contrary to earlier studies [99, 100], recent analyses of Y-chromosome sequence data [55, 58, 94] suggest that haplogroup R1a expanded both west and east across Eurasia during the Late Neolithic/Bronze Age. R1a-M17 (R1a-M198 or R1a1a) accounts for 17.5% of male lineages in Indian data overall, and it displays significantly higher frequencies in Indo-European than in Dravidian speakers [55].
Quote:
Indeed, Y-chromosome haplogroup R1a, which spread with pastoralism and the Indo-European languages into South Asia, also seems to have been carried into Europe a millennium earlier, alongside a similar pastoral economy and language package and its sibling lineage, R1b [53, 58, 76, 94]. Notably, however, the extent to which the R1 lineages replaced earlier Y chromosomes was much greater across Europe than we see in South Asia. This corresponds to the greater impact of Indo-European languages in Europe, which ultimately left few relicts of earlier language families surviving—the only cases still extant being Basque and Finno-Ugric, with Etruscan and Iberian as well-attested but extinct examples. By comparison, almost a quarter of modern Indians speak the Dravidian languages that seem most likely to have been spread by the first farmers [12].
I'm not claiming that Hinduism and Indian Culture is derivative of the Indo-European influx, but a synthesis of Indo-European and earlier ("autochthonous") influences. Whether or not they created the caste system, Indo-European/Sankrit-based language-speakers are still sitting on top of the heap, with Dravidian-language speakers largely at the bottom.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-20-2018, 06:52 PM
 
5,462 posts, read 2,925,545 times
Reputation: 3271
Quote:
Originally Posted by CrazyDonkey View Post
The Mallory book was published in 1989. It is the foundation book on the topic. The Anthony book is an exhaustive survey of current knowledge as of 2007 - ten years is not a long period in cultural archaeology and linguistics. It has been known since the 19th Century that Sanskrit and western languages such as Greek and Latin belonged to the same language family - that has been accepted everywhere, even in India.

The only dispute was whether the carriers of those languages (and cultural traditions) emanated outward 1) from a central region (such as the Eurasian steppes) to Europe and India or 2) from India through Eurasia to Europe (the minority dissenting opinion, primarily in India). The latest Y-DNA evidence has settled this dispute - the "Out of India" theory is sunk. See:

https://bmcevolbiol.biomedcentral.co...862-017-0936-9







I'm not claiming that Hinduism and Indian Culture is derivative of the Indo-European influx, but a synthesis of Indo-European and earlier ("autochthonous") influences. Whether or not they created the caste system, Indo-European/Sankrit-based language-speakers are still sitting on top of the heap, with Dravidian-language speakers largely at the bottom.
Thank you. Makes sense.

It may look like that but it isnt. There are 4 major languages spoken - Tamil , Telugu, Malayalam, Kannada which are classfied as Dravidian. And apart from the capital and Mumbai, those regions fare better than any other Hindi speaking state.

The lower caste people still get discriminated and face oppression irrespective of their linguistic origin.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > History
Similar Threads

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2023, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top