My only criticism is the term 'Indo-European', when the theory has been disproven, it is Ancient European that would be more accurate to the ancient world. This is because the Indians of the ancient period have been found to have no cultural or genetic connections to those of us in the Occidental world, and even in the Bronze Age there is no connection, first one archeologically that I could find would be Alexander the Great's war in that region.
Ummm, I think I take your point. Aryan, and proto Aryan would be more correct Ancient Sanskrit and the Rig Veda are evidence. However a certain nasty little Austrian painter and his minions have caused the term Aryan to be frowned upon.
The oldest examples of Sanskrit are found among the Hurrians of ancient South eastern Anatolia, for example inscriptions from the The Mitanni empire. The Hittite language and myths reflect a common origin as well.
The Greek Theogeny reflects these migrations as does the Prose Edda, and the Lebhor Gebhala Erenn.
The Indo Aryan languages are related as are the myths.
While modern South Asians are not the Indo Aryans any longer. There's still the Iranians, the Georgians, Armenians, Kurds, all of which are related.
The Ancient world ( Neolithic, Chalcolithic, and early Bronze Age, was very different.) Archeology, and Genetics clearly demonstrate Two migrations into Europe , first Anatolian farmers, in the late neolithic era, then a migration in the late Chalcolithic from the Russian steppes (Yamnaya) which resulted in Bell Beaker culture, that evolved into the Celts.
Yes, the Turkic invasions of the late Migration era and Middle Ages did change the population and languages creating the situation today.
It should be noted that cultural impacts in South Asia do not necessarily mean a genetic displacement.
Much as in the modern era of American language, culture, music, movies.
Blue jeans and Rock and Roll are found throughout the world not just America.
I’m not sure Aryan is the right term either, my only point is that the Hittites used cuneiform, not Sanskrit. There are similarities yet they are different still. The term Sanskrit doesn’t fit with the Hittites (I did some research on them in college), the cuneiform is not Sanskrit.
After some research looks like the Mitanni have no relation to India. But to Central Asia as you mentioned.
I’ve just grown suspicious of the term ‘indo-european’, as to Aryan-Europeans I think might be an apt term though in my view I’m not fond of it due to funny moustache man as you pointed out.
In Irish traditions, the people who migrated to the British Archipelago, are called the Tuatha de Danu, the people of Danu. Welsh traditions call them the children of Don.
Oh no... now you’ve done it.. got me immersed in reading about this, need to go through my own collection of books to see what I’ve got... but time 🙈
Thank you for the Compliment!!!
My only criticism is the term 'Indo-European', when the theory has been disproven, it is Ancient European that would be more accurate to the ancient world. This is because the Indians of the ancient period have been found to have no cultural or genetic connections to those of us in the Occidental world, and even in the Bronze Age there is no connection, first one archeologically that I could find would be Alexander the Great's war in that region.
But other than that good essay.
Ummm, I think I take your point. Aryan, and proto Aryan would be more correct Ancient Sanskrit and the Rig Veda are evidence. However a certain nasty little Austrian painter and his minions have caused the term Aryan to be frowned upon.
The oldest examples of Sanskrit are found among the Hurrians of ancient South eastern Anatolia, for example inscriptions from the The Mitanni empire. The Hittite language and myths reflect a common origin as well.
The Greek Theogeny reflects these migrations as does the Prose Edda, and the Lebhor Gebhala Erenn.
The Indo Aryan languages are related as are the myths.
While modern South Asians are not the Indo Aryans any longer. There's still the Iranians, the Georgians, Armenians, Kurds, all of which are related.
The Ancient world ( Neolithic, Chalcolithic, and early Bronze Age, was very different.) Archeology, and Genetics clearly demonstrate Two migrations into Europe , first Anatolian farmers, in the late neolithic era, then a migration in the late Chalcolithic from the Russian steppes (Yamnaya) which resulted in Bell Beaker culture, that evolved into the Celts.
Yes, the Turkic invasions of the late Migration era and Middle Ages did change the population and languages creating the situation today.
It should be noted that cultural impacts in South Asia do not necessarily mean a genetic displacement.
Much as in the modern era of American language, culture, music, movies.
Blue jeans and Rock and Roll are found throughout the world not just America.
I’m not sure Aryan is the right term either, my only point is that the Hittites used cuneiform, not Sanskrit. There are similarities yet they are different still. The term Sanskrit doesn’t fit with the Hittites (I did some research on them in college), the cuneiform is not Sanskrit.
After some research looks like the Mitanni have no relation to India. But to Central Asia as you mentioned.
I’ve just grown suspicious of the term ‘indo-european’, as to Aryan-Europeans I think might be an apt term though in my view I’m not fond of it due to funny moustache man as you pointed out.
Yes we do need a better term! Absolutely!
The old models are inaccurate. ( Being kind!)
The fertile crescent was not the cradle of Occidental civilization.
The Varna discoveries, the Vinca, and Old-Europe/Danube cultures predate the fertile crescent.
Hmm,
Maybe Dannans? Homer, the Danube, Dneiper, Donnets, Don rivers, may have a base for use.
I wish we had a clue of what they called themselves.
Agreed, hmmmmmmm maybe Dannans is fitting?
In Irish traditions, the people who migrated to the British Archipelago, are called the Tuatha de Danu, the people of Danu. Welsh traditions call them the children of Don.
Hmmm.
I know the tradition, awesome tradition, so Danaan or Danuans would be a fitting name.
I still regard old school as I am, the French, Scots & Irish as one peoples, and the Anglos, Germans, Scandinavians as another.