• •English ……Hattic …..Egyptian…….. Malinke (Mande language)
  
  powerful ……ur………. wr'great,big' ………fara
  
  protect…….. $uh……… swh …………………solo-
  
  head …………tup ………tp ……………tu 'strike the head'
  
  up,upper….. tufa ………..tp……………… dya, tu 'raising ground'
  
  to stretch put… pd ………pe,……………….. bamba
  
  o prosper …….falfat …..-- …………………..find'ya
  
  pour ……………duq …….---………………….. du 'to dispense'
  
  child …………..pin………,pinu………………… den
  
  
  Mother ………..na-a ………--…………………….. na
  
  lord …………….sa ………..--………………………. sa
  
  place ………….-ka………… -ka

• Dravidian Hurrian
  
  a a
  
  -kku -ikka
  
  imbu impu
  
  
  
  There are analogous Dravidian and Hurrian terms:
  
  
  
  English Hurrian Dravidian
  
  mountain paba parampu
  
  lady,woman aallay ali
  
  King Sarr,zarr Ca, cira
  
  god en en
  
  give tan tara
  
  to rule irn ire
  
  father attai attan
  
  wife,woman asti atti

• Hurrian Sanskrit
  
  Mi-it-va Mitra
  
  Aru-na Varuna
  
  In-da-ra Indra
  
  Na-sa-at-tiya Nasatya

• English Hurrian Sanskrit Tamil
  
  One aika eka okka ‘together’
  
  Three tera tri
  
  Five panza panca añcu
  
  Seven satta sapta
  
  Nine na nava onpatu
  
  
  
  Other Hurrian terms relate to Indo-Aryan:
  
  
  
  English Hurrian I-A Tamil
  
  Brown babru babhru pukar
  
  Grey parita palita paraitu ‘old’
  
  Reddish pinkara pingala puuval
  
  
  
  English Mitanni Vedic Tamil
  
  Warrior marya marya makan, maravan

References:

Itamar Singer, Hittites and Hattians in Anatolia at the beginning of the Second Millennium B.C., Journal of Indo-European Studies, 9 (1-2) (1981), pp.119-149.
 

---

Posted by Clyde Winters (Member # 10129) on :
 
I believe that Dravidian languages were spoken in India when the Indo-Aryans invaded the region. The Proto-Indo-Aryan(Kaska/Mitanni/ Hatti) speakers were probably descendents of the Kushites who formerly lived in Anatolia. Since Dravidians speakers also belonged to the Kushite Dwipa, like the Proto-Indo-Aryans it is only natural that the languages are related.



The relationship between the Dravidian languages and Prakritic languages is much more complicated than the ideas presented by Bh Krishnamurti. Krishnamurti argues that there were many Dravidians in India when the Indo-Aryans arrived; and that as a result Dravidian influenced the Indo-Aryan languages through the introduction of lexical items and (grammatical) structural features.



Due to early Dravidian settlement in Northern India there is a Dravidian substratum in Indo‑Aryan. There are Dravidian loans in the Rg Veda, even though Aryan recorders of this work were situated in the Punjab which occupied around this time by the BRW Dravidians.

There are islands of Dravidian speakers in Afghanistan, Iran and Pakistan. There are over 300,000 Brahui speakers in Qualat, Hairpur and Hyderabad districts of Pakistan. There are an additional 40,000 Brahui in Emeneau and Burrow (1962) found 500 Dravidian loan words in Sanskrit. In addition, Indo-Aryan illustrates a widespread structural borrowing from Dravidian in addition to 700 lexical loans (Kuiper 1967; Southward 1977; Winters 1989).

Iran and several thousand along the southern border of Russia and Yugoslavia. (ISDL 1983:227)

Emeneau and Burrow (1962) have found 500 Dravidian loan words in Sanskrit. the number of Dravidian loans in Indo‑Aryan is expected to reach 750.

There are numerous examples of Indo‑Aryan structural borrowings from Dravidian. For example, the Bengali and Oriya plural suffix ‑ra is analogous to the Tamil plural suffix ‑ar. Both of these suffixes are restricted to names of intelligent beings. (Chatterji 1970:173) Oriya borrowed the ‑gura plural suffix from the Dravidians. (Mahapatra 1983:67) Some researchers believe that the syntax of the Indo‑Aryan languages is ambivalent because of the Dravidian influence on these languages. As a result, they represent both SOV and SVO traits. If my theory is correct the relationship between Indo-Aryan and Dravidian languages is not the result of borrowing, it is due to the fact that the ancestors of the Vangi, Odri and Maharastri were descendents of the Kushite Anatolians.



In conclusion,the relationship between indo-Aryan and Dravidian languages are not the result, purely of contact with Dravidian speakers in India. These languages are related because the speakers of these languages formerly belonged to the C-Group or Kushite people of the region called Kusha Dwipa in the Sankritic text.

I believe that after the Hittites defeated the Hatti and Kaska and other peoples belonging to the Hurrian and Mitanni kingdoms, these people were uprooted and forced into Iran. The lost of Anatolia to the Hittites, probably forced these people to become nomads.


In Iran the Hatti, Kaska and Mitanni probably formed a significant portion of the Proto-Indo-Aryan population. Here they may have met Iranian speaking people,who may have practiced a hunter-gatherer existence, that adopted aspects of their Kushite culture , especially the religion and use of Mitanni religious terms and chariot culture. Joining forces with the Indo-Aryan (Mitannian-Hurrian-Kaska-Hatti) exiles they probably attacked Dravidian and Austronesian speaking people in India who lived in walled cities. The Austronesian and Dravidian people probably came in intimate contact during the Xia and Shang periods of China.


I have to reject the Afghanistan origin for the Indo-Aryan speaking people because the cultures there in ancient times show no affinity to Indo-European civilization. Given the Austronesian and Dravidian elements in Sanskrit and etc., I would have to date the expansion of the Indo-Aryan people sometime after 800 BC, across Iran, down into India.

This would explain why "the Vedic and Avestan mantras are not carbon copies of each other", they may have had a similar genesis, but they were nativised by different groups of Indic and Iranian speakers after the settlement of nomadic Hurrian, Kaska, Hatti and Mitanni people in Iran.



If this theory is correct the Kaska, Mittani and etc., were probably the ancestors of Prakrit speaking tribes of the Vangi, Odri and Maharastri.This view is supported by the relationship between Indo-Aryan and Mittani. H.H. Hock in Language History, Language Change, and Language Relationship , noted that Mittani “words contained in these passages are phonetically closer to the earliest attested Indo-Aryan than to Old Iranian” (p. 62).


 

---

Posted by Clyde Winters (Member # 10129) on :
 
Hatti
In the ancient literature the Proto Dravidians are called Kushites. Using boats the Kushites moved down ancient waterways many now dried up, to establish new towns in Asia and Europe after 3500 BC. The Kushites remained supreme around the world until 1400 1200 BC. During this period the Hua (Chinese) and Indo European (I E) speakers began to conquer the Kushites whose cities and economies were destroyed as a result of natural catastrophes which took place on the planet between 1400 1200 BC. Later, after 500 AD, Turkish speaking people began to settle parts of Central Asia. This is the reason behind the presence of the K s h element in many place names in Asia e.g., Kashgar, HinduKush, and Kosh. The HinduKush in Harappan times had lapis lazuli deposits.




Proto Saharans/Kushites expanded into Inner Asia from two primary points of dispersal : Iran and Anatolia. In Anatolia the Kushites were called Hattians and Kaska. In the 2nd millennium BC, the north and east of Anatolia was inhabited by non I E speakers.

Anatolia was divided into two lands “the land of Kanis” and the “land of Hatti”. The Hatti were related to the Kaska people who lived in the Pontic mountains.

Hattians lived in Anatolia. They worshipped Kasku and Kusuh. They were especially prominent in the Pontic mountains. Their sister nation in the Halys Basin were the Kaska tribes. The Kaska and Hattians share the same names for gods, along with personal and place names (1). The Kaska had a strong empire which was never defeated by the Hittites.

Singer (1981) has suggested that the Kaska, are remnants of the indigenous Hattian population which was forced northward by the Hittites. But at least as late as 1800 BC, Anatolia was basically settled by Hattians (2)

Anatolia was occupied by many Kushite groups,including the Kashkas and or Hatti. The Hatti , like the Dravidian speaking people were probably related . The Hatti were probably members of the Tehenu tribes.

The Tehenu was composed of various ethnic groups. One of the Tehenu tribes was identified by the Egyptians as the Hatiu or Haltiu.

During the Fifth Dynasty of Egypt (2563-2423), namely during the reign of Sahure there is mention of the Tehenu people. Sahure referred to the Tehenu leader “Hati Tehenu” .(3) These Hatiu, may correspond to the Hatti speaking people of Anatolia. The Hatti people often referred to themselves as Kashkas or Kaskas.

The Hatti controlled the city state of Kussara. Kussara was situated in southern Anatolia.

The earliest known ruler of Kussara was Pitkhanas. It was his son Anitta (c. 1790-1750 BC) who expanded the Kussara empire through much of Anatolia.

Many researchers get the Hittites (Nesa) mixed up with the original settlers of Anatolia called Hatti according to Steiner “.[T]his discrepancy is either totally neglected and more or less skillfully veiled, or it is explained by the assumption that the Hittites when conquering the country of Hatti adjusted themselves to the Hattians adopting their personal names and worshipping their gods, out of reverence for a higher culture” .(4)

Neshili, was probably spoken by the Hatti, not the IE Hittite. Yet, this language is classified as an IE langauge. Researchers maintain that the Hatti spoke 'Hattili' or Khattili “language of the Hatti”, and the IE Hittites spoke "Neshumnili"/ Neshili .(5) Researchers maintain that only 10% of the terms in Neshumnili is IE. This supports the view that Nesumnili may have been a lingua franca.

It is clear that the Anatolians spoke many languages including:Palaic, Hatti, Luwian and Hurrian, but the people as you know mainly wrote their writings in Neshumnili. The first people to use this system as the language of the royal chancery were Hatti Itamar Singer makes it clear that the Hittites adopted the language of the Hatti .(6) Steiner wrote that, " In the complex linguistic situation of Central Anatolia, in the 2nd Millennium B.C. with at least three, but probably more different languages being spoken within the same area there must have been the need for a language of communication or lingua franca [i.e., Neshumnili), whenever commercial transactions or political enterprises were undertaken on a larger scale" .(7)

•The Hatti language which provided the Hittites with many of the terms Indo-Aryan nationalists use to claim and Aryan origin for the Indus civilization is closely related to African languages including Egyptians. For example:
Big, mighty, powerful protect, help upper

• Hattic ur $uh tufa
  Egyptian wr swh tp
  Malinke fara solo dya, tu ‘raising’
  Head stretch (out) prosper to pour
  Hattic tu put falfalat duq
  
  Egyptian tup pd
  Malinke tu ‘strike head’ pe, bemba fin’ya du
  Eye hand Place King, term of respect

• Mother father lord,ruler build, to set up
  Hattic na-a ša tex
  Malinke na baba sa te
  Sumerian na ‘she’ aba tu ‘to create’
  To pour child,son up, to raise strength,powerful land
  Hatti dug pin,pinu tufa ur -ka
  Malinke du den dya, tu fara -ka
  Sumerian dub peš dul usu ki
  

Conclusion

In summary, the Hattic speaking people were members of the Kushite tribe called Tehenu. They were probably called Hati ( pl. Hatiu), by the Egyptians.

The language of the Hittites was more than likely a lingua franca, with Hattic, at its base. In Western Anatolia many languages were spoken including Hattic, Palaic, Luwian and Hurrian used Nesa as a lingua franca. For example, the king of Arzawa, asked the Egyptian in the Amarna Letters, to write them back in Nesumnili rather than Egyptian .(8)

Steiner notes that “In the complex linguistic situation of Central Anatolia in the 2nd Millennium B.C., with at least three, but probably more different languages being spoken within the same area there must have been the need for a language of communication or lingua franca whenever commercial transaction or political enterprises were undertaken on a larger scale” .(9)

This led Steiner to conclude that “moreover the structure of Hittite easily allowed one to integrate not only proper names, but also nouns of other languages into the morphological system. Indeed, it is a well known fact the vocabulary of Hittite is strongly interspersed with lexemes from other languages, which is a phenomenon typical of a “lingua franca” .(10)

Footnotes


1. Itamar Singer, Hittites and Hattians in Anatolia at the beginning of the Second Millennium B.C., Journal of Indo-European Studies, 9 (1-2) (1981), pp.119-149.

2 Gerd Steiner, The role of the Hittites in ancient Anatolia, Journal of Indo-European Studies, 9 (1-2) (1981), 119-149.

3 El Mosallamy,A.H.S. Libyco-Berber relations with ancient Egypt:The Tehenu in Egyptian records. In (pp.51-68) 1986, p.55; and L. Borchardt, Das Grabdenkmal des Konigs Sahure. Vol. II, Table 1.

4 Steiner, p.160.

5 I.M. Diakonoff and P.L. Kohl, Early Antiquity. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1990.

6. Itamar Singer, Hittites and Hattians in Anatolia at the Beginning of the Second Millennium BC,Journal of Indo-European Studies, 9 (1-2) (pp.119-149).

7 Ibid., p.162.

8 Ibid., p.161.

9 Ibid., p.162

10 Ibid., p.165.
 

---

Posted by Clyde Winters (Member # 10129) on :
 

Move it up.
 

---

Posted by Clyde Winters (Member # 10129) on :
 
Since modern European languages, the so-called Indo-European, are derived from the Indian languages of the Dravidians, plus the East Asian languages of people like the Persians, plus whatever the Aryans and other White Central Asians spoke, plus the languages of the native Black Europeans that they melded with.

Point being, that modern languages are modern combinations of ancient languages - the English language is a perfect example. Therefore a case can be made for just about any connection. [/qb][/QUOTE]The relationship between English and ancient language is mainly due to literacy, not the combination of ancient and modern languages. Speakers of the Germanic languages (which) include English) lexicalized many Greek and Roman terms as they became literate in these languages.

Blacks spread civilization around the world. As other people came in contact with these bLacks they adopted cultural traditions and the terms that came along with the new way of life introduced to Europeans by the Blacks. This is evident in the relationship between Greek, and the two major lingua francas of Central asia and South Asia: Tocharian and Sanskrit.


It is important to remember that the relationship between Indo-European and Indo-Aryan language, especially Sanskrit is via the Greek language. Greek influenced other European languages because it was recognized as a language of culture and civilization by the Romans.

It was in Pakistan that the Greek language was probably incorporated into Sanskrit. Many of the rules for Sanskrit were codified by Panini, who was born in Salatura, in Northwest Pakistan. Panini’s grammar contains 4000 rules.

When Panini wrote his grammar of Sanskrit, it was spoken by the elites in the area. Greek was also popular when Panini wrote the Sanskrit grammar. The Greeks were called Yunani or Yavana. Thus we learn from Agrawala (1953) that the Yavanani lipi (edict) was well known in Gandahara, and even Panini mentions the Yavana in his grammar . The term Yauna meant Ionian (Woodcock, 1966).

The history of Greeks in the area is quite interesting. When Alexander entered the HinduKush region in 327 B.C., Greek settlements were already in the area. By 180 BC, as the Mauryas fell into decline, the Greek Kings of Bactria took control of Western Punjab and Gandhara up to the Indus River. Under King Menander (d.130 B.C.) the Greeks had their capital at Taxila. The center of Greek culture in the area was Charsadda near Peshawar (Woodcock,1966).

Many Greek terms were probably already incorporated in the Prakrits of Northern India-Pakistan and Central Asia. Here the Greeks minted their coins with Kharoshthi, Brahmi and Greek inscriptions.

Greek was used for commercial purposes and served as a patrician lingua franca of the Kabul valley and of Gandhara. During the rule of Pushyamitra many Greeks settled in India. Due to the long history of Greeks in India, Ashoka had some of his edicts written in Greek and Aramaic bilinguals. In 44 A.D., Appolonius of Tyana when he visited Taxila found that merchants and kings learned Greek “as a matter of course” (Rahman, 2004; Woodcock,1966).

Given the popularity of Greek in the region it is not surprising that Sanskrit would show such a strong relationship to the Indic languages, since it was spoken throughout the area of a couple of hundred years. Commenting on the Greek rulers of India, Kulke and Rothermund (1998), said that “They are referred to as ‘Indo-Greeks’, and there were about forty such kings and rulers who controlled large areas of northwestern India and Afghanistan….They appear as Yavanas in stray references in Indian literature, and there are few but important references in European sources. In these distant outposts, the representatives of the Hellenic policy survived the defeat of their Western compatriots at the hands of the Parthians for more than a century” (p.70). The greatest of the Indo-Greek rulers was Menander, who is mentioned in the famous Milindapanho text. The Shakas adopted many elements of Indo-Greek culture which they perpetuated in India for over 100 years (Rahman, 2004).

It is impossible to argue for a genetic relationship between Vedic and Greek languages based on the fact that speakers of these languages formerly lived in intimate contact in historical times. Secondly, we know the Dravidians were in Greece before the Indo-Europeans enter the country. These non-I-E speakers were called Pelasgians. As a result, Anna Morpurgo Davies, The linguistic evidence:Is there any?, in Gerald Cadogan, The End of the early Bronze Age in the Agean (pp.93-123), says that only 40% of Greek is of Indo-European etymology (p.105). Since only 40% of the Greek terms are of I-E origin, many of the Greek terms that agree with the Indic languages may be from the 60% of the Greek lexical items that came from non-I-E speakers which as noted by Lahovary in Dravidian origins and the West, were people who spoke either Dravidian languages, or other languages from Africa, genetically related to the Dravidian group.

In conclusion, as a result of the Greek influence in Bactria and India-Pakistan , Indians and Bactrians had to acquire "Greek Culture" to enhance their position and opportunity in North India and Bactria during Greek rule. Greek rule placed prestige on status elements introduced into the region by the Greeks, especially the Greek language. Status acquired by Bactrians and Indian-Pakistanis was thus centered around acquisition of Greek language and Greek culture. This supported by the evidence that Indian elites used Greek in business and government (Rahman, 2004). This would have inturn added pressure on the Bactrians to incorporate Greek terms into a Bactrian lingua franca (i.e., Tocharian).

Given the fact that Greek administrators in Bactria and Northern India-Pakistan ,refused to fully integrate Bactrians and Indians into the ruling elite, unless they were “well versed in Greek culture and language) led to subsequent generations of native Bactrians and Indian-Pakistanis to progressively incorporate more Greek terms into their native language. This would explain why Tocharian has many features that relate to certain IE etymologies and Panini’s Sanskrit grammar, present many terms that are associated with the Greeks, but illustrates little affinity to Indo-Iranian languages which are geographically and temporally closer to Tocharian.

Some researchers might dispute the influence of the Greek language on Sanskrit because Panini’s grammar was suppose to have been written around 400 B.C. This date for the grammar might be too early, because Rahman (2004) and Agrawala (1953) maintains that Greek was spoken in Gandahara in Panini’s time.

The influence of colonial Greeks in Central Asia would explain why the most important evidence of an I-E relationship with Sanskrit. The historical connections between the so-called Indo-European languages probably respect an areal linguistic relationship—not genetic relationship.


Here I discuss in detail the relationship between Greek and Sanskrit

http://www.federatio.org/joes/EurasianStudies_0310.pdf

see pages 70-77.


.
 

---

Posted by Clyde Winters (Member # 10129) on :
 

Move it up.
 

---

Posted by the lioness, (Member # 17353) on :
 
.

The word Iran is the Persian word for land/place of the Aryans




 

---

Posted by Clyde Winters (Member # 10129) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by the lioness,:
Do you think possible an African Origin of Proto-Indo-European (PIE) even though its actual birth place would be elsewhere ?
The French linguist Andre Martinet had attempted to reconstruct a very early state of the PIE and found typically African consonants such as labiovelar kp and prenasalised mp. On the other hand, applying vert rigorously the comparative method to some African languages, I'm surprised to find in the reconstructed vocabulary some words very similar to PIE ones.
So are you aware of other works in that direction worldwide ?
Here below are a few PIE roots of negro-egyptian origin:

1) PIE *h2ent- "front", "before", "against" (hittite hanti, latin ante, greek anti). This root has no etymology in PIE itself, but taking into account the negro-egyptian root *xun-t(w)i "nose" fully explains its origin: middle egyptian xnt "nose" "front"; sango hon "nose", "front", "end"; zande hun-se "nose", hausa hanci "nose", etc.

2) PIE *demh2- "home" (latin domus "home", greek demos "department". This root is related to négro-egyptian *dIm-xI "house" (middle egyptian dmi "house", zandé dimo idem).

3) PIE *h2er "to plough" (latin arare, greek aroun idem). This root derives from negro-egyptian *xir "to work" (middle egyptian iri "to work", sango le idem).

As the PIE forms are close to middle egyptian ones, it is clear that the negro-egyptian dialects entered Europe through south-west Asia, that is why Hittite forms (including personal pronouns) are so close to middle egyptian's (I shown this extensively in my book) and this is why there is some common forms with proto-semitic.

--Jean-Claude Mboli

---

• Hurrian Sanscrit
  Mi-it-ra Mitra
  Aru-na Varuna
  In-da-ra Indra

quote:

---

Originally posted by the lioness,:
.

The word Iran is the Persian word for land/place of the Aryans

---

• --- In Ta_Seti@yahoogroups.com, "ulagankmy" <ulagankmy@y...> wrote:
  Dear Dr Winters
  
  As you are aware, the word 'aariyan' is a Tamil word, an ancient one at
  that and which has been borrowed by many tribes in deep past. Probably the root is Su. a and Ta. aal, to spread out, powerful, strong etc.
  
  
  Sumerian a-ri-a and Tamil aariyan
  
  The noun aal-al ( >aaRRal) which means strength, capacity and so forth is still in use in Tamil . The following note may help out to destroy the myth that Europeans were the Aryans.
  
  Related to this is that the whole of Rig Veda and related literature in
  Rigkrit is another variant of SumeroTamil. As such it has nothing to
  do with any "Aryan' family of languages - it is a pure fiction
  
  
  
  
  
  The word "aryan " that has acquired a racial connation has become one of
  the most important words to divide of Indian into Aryan and Dravidian with vrious antagonisms along racial lines. The growth of 19th century
  Dravidian movements in Tamil Nadu which has become political in the 20th
  cent. and the cultural movements to purify Tamil by cleaning it of the so-called Sanskrit terms are related to this. The replacemnt of Tamil as the language of Temple Worship among the tamils however has a different
  historical basis. It was something introduced by Ramanuja and on
  philosophical grounds. The Sanskrit literature , under the impact of
  Sankara became predominantly Advaitic Vedantic and hence was seen as
  detrimental to the growth of Bakthi and for which reason Ramaunuja
  installed the recitation of Thruvaymozi in the temples in place of Vedic
  mantras. One can see the present movement of the Saivites to give the
  place of honour to Tamil particularly the Thevaram corpus as something like that of Ramanuja, who incidently was a Brahamin and who wrote only in Sanskrit despite being a brilliant Tamil scholar.
  
  At the moment and perhaps mainly due to IndoEuropean scholarship the
  excitment and arrogance with which the Brahmins in Tamil Nadu received
  this, which is mainly a hypothesis , and who started to call themseves the scions of these Aryans is that which unnderlies the Brahmin-bashing that continues to this day. I have a colletion of litwrature in Tamil towards the end of 19th ,where the Smartha brahmins called themselves Aryans and went on to criticise severely Saiva Sidddhanta and many other philosophies of the Tamils. The Dravidian identity was fostered by Bihop Caldwell with his epoch making "Comparative study of Dravidian Languages" which was well received by the Tamil scholars but vehemently challenged by the Smartha Brahmins.
  
  This association of Tamil Brahmins with Aryanism and also Sanskrit along
  with it, still continues and will continue perhaps for a long time. It is certainly unfortunate for such a hatred for the TERM aryan is NOT to be met with in traditional India where the primary meaning of Aryan as used in Thevaram corpus Kamba Ramayan and so forth and perhaps also as Dhammapada did not have the racial sense at all rather that of "exceptional or brilliant individual" as in Tamil " ariyan'
  
  In Sangam classics there are several uses of it .
  
  1. aariyar tuvanRiya peerisai imayam: the famed Himalayas where dwell the Aryas. Here it certainly means a group of people bordering the Himalayas and in sense a generic term for all those who dwelt in the North of India
  
  2. aariyak kuuttu: here it means a noisy kind of dance especially those
  like walking on ropes to the accopaniment of loud and boisterous music.
  
  3. ariyamum tamizum: This phrase used by Appar and so forth applies to the Languages and here aariyam means certainly Sanskrit. Here we see the
  beginnings of the use of Aryan and Dravidian (=Tamil) in linguistic terms but without any anatogonistic emotional undertones. For both are recognised as languages founded by Siva.
  
  Ariyan as the Brilliant , Resplendent Principle and hence another variant for Siva
  
  We see the use of Aryan in this sense in the following verse of Tirumular
  
  Tirumantiram 134.
  
  puraiyaRRa paalinuL ney kalataaR pool
  tirai aRra cintaiyil aariyan ceppum
  uraiyaR RuNarvoor udambing kozitaaR
  karaiyaRRa cooti kalawthasat taame
  Meaning
  
  BEING emerges but stands as the Unconscious in the mind that
  becomes unruffled by any earthly desires just like ghee
  being present invisibly in the pure milk. Those who transcend
  speech ( by transcending temporality) and LISTEN in
  DEEP SILENCE to the instructions on Absolute Illumination that
  BEING-the -Radiant instructs on (through the language of Cin
  Muttirai) will untie themselves from all attachments to the
  physical body and becoming FREE from it, plunge into
  Boundless Radiance and through that also become a Sat, an
  absolute (just like BEING)
  
  Here Ariyan is used as anohter name for Civa, the Immensely Radiant BEING who illuminates all and helps the attainment of genuine freedom through the severances to all the bondages.
  The use of Aryan in the sense 'divine" that the above suggests is also
  available in Kampan's description of Rama as "aariya maintan". Here it may also mean the "royal, the kingly" etc.
  
  Su. a -ri-a
  
  The Tamil 'aariyan' that has has so many different meanings and hence
  possibly with different etymological roots also occurs in Sumerian in the sense "divine, royal " etc as the following line from Sulgis MutarIbuyam (Hymn B) would indicate.
  
  11. lugal-e lugal-a-ri-a nin-e -tu-da -me-en
  I, the king of Royal descent, who a princess bore.
  Ta. uLukaLee uLugak aariya(ariya) ninnee todda maan
  
  lu> uLu> aaLu, aaL: person. gal> kaL: great -e: -ee: the suffix that
  isolates that which is named ; the teeRRa eekaaram. a-ri-a> ariya (the
  rare) ; aariya: the royal , divine etc. nin> Nin, nan: the lofty: tu-da>
  todda; to bear , to give birth; me-en> maan: the person as in ceeramaan,
  atikaimaan etc The term" lugal-aria" is almost identical with the Tamil usage of Arya maintain such as that of Kamban. And this may be the sense in the use of Arya by Buddha in Dhammapada.
  
  It is also interesting that in the long history of Tamil literature nowhere we come across the Brahmins being called or call themselves as Aryas. Even in Sangam epoch we have kapilar, known as a Brahamana calling himself AntaN and NOT Aryan. This term has been more in use with the royalties and as an alternative term for Siva , the Brilliant Principle, the supremely radiant BEING that illuminates all minds arising as the inner sun.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Clyde Winters:


[list]
[*]--- In Ta_Seti@yahoogroups.com, "ulagankmy" <ulagankmy@y...> wrote:
Dear Dr Winters

As you are aware, the word 'aariyan' is a Tamil word, an ancient one at
that and which has been borrowed by many tribes in deep past. Probably the root is Su. a and Ta. aal, to spread out, powerful, strong etc.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Clyde Winters:
The Proto-Indo-Aryan(Kaska/Mitanni/ Hatti) speakers were probably descendents of the Kushites who formerly lived in Anatolia.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Clyde Winters:

The earliest Aryan tribe called Ionians spoke a dialect of East Greek called Aeolic.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Clyde Winters:

The Aryan Invasion theory (AIT) is supported by archaeological, genetic, textual and linguistic data. Reich et al found that the Indians could be divided into two groups the ANIs, who speak Indo-Aryan languages; and ASI, Dravidian speakers. This is why the authors acknowledge that that ANIs are related to western Eurasians, while the ASIs do not share any similarity with the Eurasians.


AIT states that the Indo-Aryans invaded India. The genetic evidence separating the Indo-Aryan speakers into an ANI group and the Dravidians into a ASI group is congruent to the AIT.


This genetic data clearly divides the North and South Indians, and supports AIT; and the replacement of an original Dravidian speaking people in the north by the invading Indo-European speaking Vedic people.

---

quote:

---

Above you quote the word Aryan being Tamil.

---

quote:

---

Then you have another thing saying proto-Aryans were probably descendents of the Kushites who formerly lived in Anatolia.

---

quote:

---

Then you have something about Ionina Greeks being Aryans.

---

quote:

---

And you say Indo-Aryan language speaking ANIs are related to western Eurasians, while the ASIs do not share any similarity with the Eurasians.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Clyde Winters:

Yes the first Indo-Aryan speakers were Kushites forced into Iran by the Hittites. They invaded India to find a home since Indo-Aryan speakers already dominated most of Iran except for former Elamite-Persian regions in southern Iran.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Clyde Winters:

The earliest Aryan tribe called Ionians spoke a dialect of East Greek called Aeolic.

The Persians deposited Ionian nationalists in Pakistan. Here the Ionians became the elites and spread the Greek language. The Greek language gained even more prominence when Alexander the Great took control of the entire region.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Clyde Winters:

Finally, genetic research indicates that the North Indians are more related to Europeans and Central Asians than the Drabidian and Munda speakers of the rest of India.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by the lioness,:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Clyde Winters:

Yes the first Indo-Aryan speakers were Kushites forced into Iran by the Hittites. They invaded India to find a home since Indo-Aryan speakers already dominated most of Iran except for former Elamite-Persian regions in southern Iran.

---

Clyde I don't get it. You say that Indo-Aryan speakers were Kushites.
Then you say that the had to find a home because Indo-Aryan speakers were already dominating

but you just said the Kushites were Indo-Aryan speakers

quote:

---

Originally posted by Clyde Winters:

The earliest Aryan tribe called Ionians spoke a dialect of East Greek called Aeolic.

The Persians deposited Ionian nationalists in Pakistan. Here the Ionians became the elites and spread the Greek language. The Greek language gained even more prominence when Alexander the Great took control of the entire region.

---

You said the first Indo-Aryan speakers were Kushites.
So why do you call Ionians who spoke a dialect of East Greek -Aryans?

quote:

---

Originally posted by Clyde Winters:

Finally, genetic research indicates that the North Indians are more related to Europeans and Central Asians than the Drabidian and Munda speakers of the rest of India.

---

If North Indians are more related to Europeans and Central Asians how could that be if you said the
" first Indo-Aryan speakers were Kushites... They invaded India "

That would mean the Kushites are more related to Europeans and Central Asians you said they were the ones that invaded India

---

LOL. That means that Indo-Europeans are carrying Black genes.

I have tried to explain to you the formation of the Indo-Aryan people. I think if you take the time to think about what I wrote you will get it.

Check Out these videos:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DesPF-6-WCE


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3F38UBu50i4

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C3GnfxfTJOg

Enjoy

.


.
 

---

Posted by Clyde Winters (Member # 10129) on :
 

Move it up.

.
 

---

Posted by CelticWarrioress (Member # 19701) on :
 
Clyde, no such thing as a Black European, Blacks are NOT native to Europe no matter how much you want it to be so, NO such thing as a White Central Asian either. Sorry Whites are NOT some kind of inferior, non human serpent people like you want to believe Clyde. White people hating, White child hating, White child wanna be killing, Black racist, Black supremacist POS demon spawn of satan. White people do not carry Black genes & there is NO similarity between European & East Indian languages. Tell me Clyde what have White children ever done to you to make you hate them so & to make you want to harm them???
 

---

Posted by Clyde Winters (Member # 10129) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by CelticWarrioress:
Clyde, no such thing as a Black European, Blacks are NOT native to Europe no matter how much you want it to be so, NO such thing as a White Central Asian either. Sorry Whites are NOT some kind of inferior, non human serpent people like you want to believe Clyde. White people hating, White child hating, White child wanna be killing, Black racist, Black supremacist POS demon spawn of satan. White people do not carry Black genes & there is NO similarity between European & East Indian languages. Tell me Clyde what have White children ever done to you to make you hate them so & to make you want to harm them???

---

Blah,blah, blah....
 

---

Posted by CelticWarrioress (Member # 19701) on :
 
Clyde come on White child hating, White child wanna be harming, Black racist, Black supremacist answer the question. What's the matter aint got the testicular fortitude Clyde? Not man enough you cowardly little boy. BTW I'm interested to see the similarity between East Indian languages & European languages lets see that as well Clyde you little wienie.
 

---

Posted by xyyman (Member # 13597) on :
 
"little wienie"?

What is it with you white women/men(Ralph) and your obsession with the black men's dick?
 

---

Posted by CelticWarrioress (Member # 19701) on :
 
Xy-YT-hater,

Dude come off that crap. First I have already proven more than once or twice I am a female & at least once my name is not Ralph. Second wienie has NOTHING to do with dicks moron, its another way of say COWARD, pansy, pussy, wuss, weakling, etc etc.
 

---

Posted by Clyde Winters (Member # 10129) on :
 
The connection of Greek and the Indian language is the result of Greeks living in Indian when Panini wrote his grammar of Sanskrit, See: https://www.academia.edu/1898458/Greek_influence_on_Sanskrit

.
 

---

Posted by Snakepit1 (Member # 21736) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by CelticWarrioress:
Xy-YT-hater,

Dude come off that crap. First I have already proven more than once or twice I am a female & at least once my name is not Ralph. Second wienie has NOTHING to do with dicks moron, its another way of say COWARD, pansy, pussy, wuss, weakling, etc etc.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by the lioness,:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Clyde Winters:


[list]
[*]--- In Ta_Seti@yahoogroups.com, "ulagankmy" <ulagankmy@y...> wrote:
Dear Dr Winters

As you are aware, the word 'aariyan' is a Tamil word, an ancient one at
that and which has been borrowed by many tribes in deep past. Probably the root is Su. a and Ta. aal, to spread out, powerful, strong etc.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Clyde Winters:
The Proto-Indo-Aryan(Kaska/Mitanni/ Hatti) speakers were probably descendents of the Kushites who formerly lived in Anatolia.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Clyde Winters:

The earliest Aryan tribe called Ionians spoke a dialect of East Greek called Aeolic.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Clyde Winters:

The Aryan Invasion theory (AIT) is supported by archaeological, genetic, textual and linguistic data. Reich et al found that the Indians could be divided into two groups the ANIs, who speak Indo-Aryan languages; and ASI, Dravidian speakers. This is why the authors acknowledge that that ANIs are related to western Eurasians, while the ASIs do not share any similarity with the Eurasians.


AIT states that the Indo-Aryans invaded India. The genetic evidence separating the Indo-Aryan speakers into an ANI group and the Dravidians into a ASI group is congruent to the AIT.


This genetic data clearly divides the North and South Indians, and supports AIT; and the replacement of an original Dravidian speaking people in the north by the invading Indo-European speaking Vedic people.

---

Clyde I'm getting confused here who were the people that some theorized to have invaded India?

Were these white people?

Above you quote the word Aryan being Tamil.
Then you have another thing saying proto-Aryans were probably descendents of the Kushites who formerly lived in Anatolia.
Then you have something about Ionina Greeks being Aryans.
And you say Indo-Aryan language speaking ANIs are related to western Eurasians, while the ASIs do not share any similarity with the Eurasians.

Who the hell are these people ???

___________________________________

Also who do ASIs have the most similarity to DNA-wise ?

---

I've seen quite a few debates on this Aryan invasion, on the net, and the people from India, or Indian heritage apposed this strongly.


This from an old thread.

http://www.egyptsearch.com/forums/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=15;t=006798;p=1#000020
 

---

Posted by Clyde Winters (Member # 10129) on :
 



http://www.dnatribes.com/dnatribes-digest-2014-07-02.pdf

Five Continent Core Components in 44 World Regions
 

---

Posted by Clyde Winters (Member # 10129) on :
 


Move it up.
 

---

Posted by Clyde Winters (Member # 10129) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by Troll Patrol # Ish Gebor:

quote:

---

Originally posted by the lioness,:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Clyde Winters:


[list]
[*]--- In Ta_Seti@yahoogroups.com, "ulagankmy" <ulagankmy@y...> wrote:
Dear Dr Winters

As you are aware, the word 'aariyan' is a Tamil word, an ancient one at
that and which has been borrowed by many tribes in deep past. Probably the root is Su. a and Ta. aal, to spread out, powerful, strong etc.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Clyde Winters:
The Proto-Indo-Aryan(Kaska/Mitanni/ Hatti) speakers were probably descendents of the Kushites who formerly lived in Anatolia.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Clyde Winters:

The earliest Aryan tribe called Ionians spoke a dialect of East Greek called Aeolic.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Clyde Winters:

The Aryan Invasion theory (AIT) is supported by archaeological, genetic, textual and linguistic data. Reich et al found that the Indians could be divided into two groups the ANIs, who speak Indo-Aryan languages; and ASI, Dravidian speakers. This is why the authors acknowledge that that ANIs are related to western Eurasians, while the ASIs do not share any similarity with the Eurasians.


AIT states that the Indo-Aryans invaded India. The genetic evidence separating the Indo-Aryan speakers into an ANI group and the Dravidians into a ASI group is congruent to the AIT.


This genetic data clearly divides the North and South Indians, and supports AIT; and the replacement of an original Dravidian speaking people in the north by the invading Indo-European speaking Vedic people.

---

Clyde I'm getting confused here who were the people that some theorized to have invaded India?

Were these white people?

Above you quote the word Aryan being Tamil.
Then you have another thing saying proto-Aryans were probably descendents of the Kushites who formerly lived in Anatolia.
Then you have something about Ionina Greeks being Aryans.
And you say Indo-Aryan language speaking ANIs are related to western Eurasians, while the ASIs do not share any similarity with the Eurasians.

Who the hell are these people ???

___________________________________

Also who do ASIs have the most similarity to DNA-wise ?

---

I've seen quite a few debates on this Aryan invasion, on the net, and the people from India, or Indian heritage apposed this strongly.


This from an old thread.

http://www.egyptsearch.com/forums/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=15;t=006798;p=1#000020

---

There were two Indo-Aryan migrations into India. The first waves of Indo-Aryans arrived the Indo-Iranian borderlands when ecological conditions had improved. These Indo-Aryans began to settle areas formerly occupied by Dravidian-speaking Harappans.The dravidian speakers used black-and-red ware (BRW).

As the Aryans moved southward other Dravidian-speaking groups living in isolated villages in the Punjab and Haryana, probably allowed. The Indo-Aryans used Painted Grey Ware.



Indo-Aryan tribal groups to settle in their respected urban centers.

This would explain the association of BRW with PGW in the Punjab dating between 1000-1300 B.C.( Singh 1982, p.xli). It would also explain the mention of the highly developed civilization of the non-Indo-Aryan speakers in the Rg Veda.

The second and major wave of Indo-Aryans probably entered northern India around 1000-800 B.C. This would explain why almost all the dependable PGW dates cluster around 800-350 B.C.(Agrawal & Kusumgar 1974, p.132).

By the advent of the second Indo-Aryan migration the Dravidians were weakened by drought and famine and they were easily defeated and pushed out of the Gajarat. The PGW folk appears to have pushed the Dravidians into the Dekkan.

Due to the early Dravidian presence in Northern India there is a Dravidian substratum in Indo-Aryan. There are Dravidian loan words in the Rg Veda, even though Aryan recorders of this work were situated in the Punjab, which was occupied around this time by the BRW using Dravidians.

Emeneau and Burrow (1962) have found 500 Dravidian loan words in Sanskrit. The Dravidian loans in Indo-Aryan are expected to reach 750. Indo-Aryan illustrates widespread structural borrowing from Dravidian in addition to the lexical loans. For example, Kuiper (1967) has noted the increasing frequency of Dravidian type retroflex consonants in Indo-Aryan. Southward (1977) has also recorded the Dravidian structural features borrowed by the Indo-Aryans.

A new hypothesis about Indo-Aryan has been advanced by Dr. K.Loganathan (Loga). Dr. Loganathan has presented convincing evidence that Sanskrit is really a form of Tamil, which is the base of this writing system. He has also shown a close relationship between Vedic and Sumerian, by way of Tamil.
 

---

Posted by Clyde Winters (Member # 10129) on :
 
...
 

---