Why Arabs Believe In Force Fields (Interesting!)

Strategy Page ^ | December 26, 2008

[muawiyah]

Ukraine and Turkey just before the big movement on horseback ~ Bulgaria is where all of 'em lived before that.

Populations have moved on only to be replaced by others.

Non Indo-European speaking, non Semitic speaking, non Turkic speaking people inhabited a great deal of Mesopotamia (which includes the entire watershed of the Tigris and Euphrates rivers) before those people had ot put on trousers and crawl out of their caves.

Something about Bronze Age people rousting more primitive tribes from lethargy, and then all those folks on horseback hasseling others, followed by Iron Age people whuthing everybody!

[Cronos]

Ukraine and Turkey just before the big movement on horseback ~ Bulgaria is where all of 'em lived before that.

There;s no archaeological or historical proof for Aryans being in Anatolia/Turkey before 2000 BC odd when the Hittites conquered the Hatti (a non-Indo-European people), so that is out.

There is also no archaeological proof for Aryans in Bulgaria earlier than them in Central Asia -Iran-Indic.

Eastern Ukraine -- maybe as that would stretch close to the core Aryanic lands in Central Asia.

The Aryans being nomadic people from teh steppes and grasslands of Central Asia - Iran - north-west-India were the ones who developed chariots and advanced horse-riding and so had the advantage of mobility to take over the lands to the south and west and east of them.

The same reason why the Iranic people were chased out of what is now Turkmenistan, Bulgaria, Uzbekistan and Kirghizia -- the Tungushic peoples (Turkics and Mongols) developed stirrups and were better horsemen when the Iranic peoples (include the Sarmatians and Alans) had become more sedentary.

[muawiyah]

There was a time before the Semitic language group emerged out of the body of languages that became known as Indo-European.

This is long after the Ice Age, and before the Iron Age, but definitely around the Black Sea (which may have been the Black Lake).

This is the same crowd. The horse merely gave them the opportunity to MOVE East, among other things.

Concerning the Hittites and Hatti, that's a vowel change in cognate words. Kind of an early differentiation of Q-Celtic and P-Celtic too. Both sets of dialects traveled alongside each other, and at least one of each still exiss to this day.

As far as suffixes go, there were differnces "then" and "now", but with a little work a speaker of one can communicate with folks who speak the other.

The question is did these guys actually write in Gaelic, or did they write, perhaps, in Greek ~ a detailed computer analysis of Classical Greek and the oldest known Gaelic reveals that these two were the first Indo-European languages to break off from the Eastern languages and can be thought of as cognates.

Greeks got their tans in a much later time. The Gaelic speakers went West by 700 BC and conquered a bunch of Basques. They imposed their language on them but pretty much disappeared genetically leaving no particular imprint. Today the Irish and the Basques are essentially the same ethnicity but differ in history and culture.

Now, back to 4,000 BC, the Indo-European languages had not yet emerged in any respect from the milieu of the Semitic languages. There's not enough information available to develop a full proto-Semitic language unfortunately.

But, back to were the Aryans came from ~ the Nazis thought they came from the Baltic because they envisioned them as being platinum blonds. After meeting one of the Vahdat girls, way back when, I'd have to suggest that the Aryans weren't quite platinum (Fur Shur).

[Cronos]

There was a time before the Semitic language group emerged out of the body of languages that became known as Indo-European.

back up -- no one's ever proved any linkages between indo-european and semitic languages. Semitic languages belong to the afro=asiatic group of languages.

[Cronos]

Concerning the Hittites and Hatti, that's a vowel change in cognate words.

That's silly, those are two completely separate languages and people. Just because the words sound similar in English doesn't make them sister languages -- duuuuh.

[muawiyah]

English is mostly foreign words.

[Cronos]

Yes, and that has no relevance to your incorrect and wildly out-there supposition that the Hittites and Hatti are the same people “because the words sound alike”.

[Cronos]

Furthermore, just like you supposition that the Semitic languages are part of or related to the Indo-European language family, that's completely wrong. Semitic langauges are part of the Afro-Asiatic language family.

Hittites were Indo-European, Hatti were pre=Indo-European

The Hittites invaded from the north, into Anatolia. Most likely from the north-east as they formed a linguistic continuum with the Mitanni who preceeded them.

This is like your strange tales about the Rig Veda being composed somewhere in Europe, when the entire topography described is from north-west India, the Punjab continuum into Iran-Central Asia.

[muawiyah]

Did I say Europe?

The earliest ones were composed further West than the Indus valley ~ before the Aryans arrived.

Everything West of India is hardly Europe ~ in fact, Europe ends at the Bosphorus ~ Anatolia IS Asia. The Arabian peninsula, once it was recognized as being mostly a large island-like landmass between Africa and Asia began to be called Arabia ~ with the Levant separately identified.

Take a good look at a map someday.

[ROCKLOBSTER]

Wait till they hear the myth about the destructive force of a nuclear detonation. Wow, what a whopper, these morons would believe anything.

[ROCKLOBSTER]

There is a creature called the camel spider, a giant, spider-like thing that leaves nasty bites, found in Iraq and around the Middle East. It was an annoyance to troops in Iraq, and some Saudis believed it was a blessing from Allah to hinder the American invaders.

Just wondering...there must be recipies by now.

[G8 Diplomat]

Maybe. I don’t know for sure.

[Cronos]

Your exact words were "Ukraine and Turkey just before the big movement on horseback ~ Bulgaria is where all of 'em lived before that." i.e. that Aryans were from Bulgaria and the Ukraine. Now, since you say that you prefer using the names of current countries rather than earlier entities, you don't mean Volga Bulgaria but mean the Bulgaria and the Ukraine in EUROPE.

here's the map of Europe:


Take a good look at this map -- it's of Europe btw.

Now, the Aryans didn't come from here. They didn't come from Anatolia either as evidenced by the records of the Hitties and the Hatti themselves which talk about Hittite warriors invading Hatti lands (Hatti lands, btw are smack dab in the centre of Anatolia)

At the same time, Elamites talk about people moving in from the north (and Elam, fyi, was in the Western corner of what is now Iran) giving rise to the later kingdom of the Medes.

all this evidence proves that Aryans only appeared in Anatolia around 2000 BC when the Hittites moved in. The Hittites worshipped the same Indic gods like Indra and Varuna and Mithra but moved on to Hatti gods (like the Akkadians ended up worshipping Sumerian gods)

And, your strange comment about Semitic languages are part of or related to the Indo-European language family, that's completely wrong. Semitic langauges are part of the Afro-Asiatic language family.

Just like your comment suggesting Hittites and Hatti are one and the same because the terms sound alike, quoting you: "Concerning the Hittites and Hatti, that's a vowel change in cognate words" ha!

Now, back to 4,000 BC, the Indo-European languages had not yet emerged in any respect from the milieu of the Semitic languages. There's not enough information available to develop a full proto-Semitic language unfortunately

Now that is funny...

Your renewed assertion that the earliest Vedas were not written in the Punjab disregards two facts:
1. The Rig Veda is the oldest Veda
2. पंजाब means the land of the five rivers --> that's why it's called Panjab.Have you ever read the Rig Veda and it's definition of the 5 rivers? The Rig Veda's description of the 5 rivers and the "disappearance" of the Saraswati are all linked to the land of the Punjab. Sie begreifen?

The Aryans never originated from the Gangetic basin of what is now india, but their homeland seems to be in the stretch from the Punjab, across the Iranian Plateau, into southern Central Asia. Not even originally as far west as the Caspian as you have non-Aryanic groups there and not as south-west as the Elamites or in Mesopotamia

The Medes came into picture a bit earlier than the Hittites, indicating a movement out of the central grounds. Ditto for the Tocharians who moved EAST and for the Gangetic valley: a movement from central lands in the India(Punjab)-East.Iran-Central Asia triangle of Aryans. You would realise that there were no Indo-Europeans in Mesopotamia until the Persians in 500 BC. Mesopotamia is the land now defined by Shatt-al-Arab.

[muawiyah]

Mesopotamia necessarily includes the headwaters of all the tributaries of the Euphrates and Tigris rivers, and that young fella’ is a whale of a lot of territory!

[Cronos]

Mesopotamia means the land BETWEEN the two rivers -- the two rivers in question being the Tigris and the Euphrates. Sumeria itself was in the southern-most part of that area, south of what is now Baghdad.

At no point historically, socially or etymologically did / does Mesopotamia (land between the two rivers) include the headwaters of all the tributaries of the Euphrates and the Tigris rivers

Didn't you say "Ukraine and Turkey just before the big movement on horseback ~ Bulgaria is where all of 'em lived before that." i.e. that Aryans were from Bulgaria and the Ukraine. Now, since you say that you prefer using the names of current countries rather than earlier entities, you don't mean Volga Bulgaria but mean the Bulgaria and the Ukraine in EUROPE.

So, your point about "Did I say Europe" is -- yes, you did mention Europe as the homeland of the Aryans and that's wrong.

Also, you would realise that there were no Indo-Europeans in Mesopotamia until the Persians in 500 BC. Mesopotamia is the land now defined by Shatt-al-Arab. There were invasions of the Hittites and Mitanni into Anatolia in 2000 BC odd, yes, but that's not Mesopotamia

[muawiyah]

You are confounding the geographic region with the descriptor of the original settlement area. Mesopotamia, as a region, did not END on the West bank of the Tigris and the East bank of the Euphrates.

The original settlers in the area followed wild game (mostly reindeer). They also built cities, invented writing, invented money, and a bunch of other stuff ~ think of them as clever nomads who liked to eat reindeer.

[Cronos]

The original urban settlement area (if we're talking Chronologically) in the region that is now Iraq, Armenia and Turkey is in the southern-most region.

Sumeria was huddled at the Shatt-al-Arab

Akkadia was settled later and the Euphrates in Turkey was settled much later. Çatalhöyük was settled earlier but isn't near the Tigris or Euphrates.

[muawiyah]

The Sumerians (non-IndoEuropean/non-Semitic) from the earliest days pursued game in the most Northern reaches of Asia North of Kazan ~ one of the more amazing things to come out of the ancient cuneiform libraries was the fact that they wrote about "glaciers" ~ and it's a long way to "glaciers" from those libraries although it's quite possible they meant glaciers in Turkey.

Being the first in the area to achieve working with bronze they were hardly "huddled" anywhere although their cities were located in what is now SW Iraq for the most part. The culture itself was more widespread than among those towns.

[Cronos]

The Sumerians (non-IndoEuropean/non-Semitic) from the earliest days pursued game in the most Northern reaches of Asia North of Kazan ~ one of the more amazing things to come out of the ancient cuneiform libraries was the fact that they wrote about "glaciers" ~ and it's a long way to "glaciers" from those libraries although it's quite possible they meant glaciers in Turkey.

Interesting -- you have any links that describe that? i've not heard any bits about claciers in the Sumerian texts

[Cronos]

Being the first in the area to achieve working with bronze they were hardly "huddled" anywhere although their cities were located in what is now SW Iraq for the most part. The culture itself was more widespread than among those towns.

Though, bronze-working in Sumeria only started in c. 2900 BC -- abotu 1100 years AFTER the building of the first cities of Uruk, etc. Also, if you see the earliest cities on a map, you will see that their cities were located in what is now S-E iraq for the most part.

There's no evidence for the culture being more wide-spread than the Shatt-al-Arab, unless you consider Elam, Dilmun, Oman and Harappa to be related to the Sumerian culture (valid hypothesis, but still not proven, or disproven)