Baby, wake up. New civilization dropped in Central Asia.https://arkeonews.net/archaeologists-unearth-8th-century-bc-settlement-in-uzbekistan/
>>16805653Too old to be Scythian, too young to be Andronovo. That if it was made by Indo-Iranians. It could be made by any other people in the region. Can someone who knows central asian history here shed a light on which people lived there around 800 BC?
We'll have to see some artifacts
More evidence of the ancient PIE civilization flowing up
>>16805744>Too old to be ScythianYou got limited understanding of Scythian culture/history. Scythians are thousands of years old in their culture and history prior to Greeks. They roamed the entire Eurasian land seeding various civilizations everywhere.
>>16805784More than 2000 years too young to be PIE
>>16805792> steppe Aryans were uncivilized barbsFalse
>>16805805I never said that you illiterate retard. I just said that this settlement is more than 2000 years younger than PIE steppe people, and it is.90% of poor historical understanding in this board would be solved if dumbfucks like you could grasp chronological scale.
>>16805786>Scythians are thousands of years old in their culture and history prior to GreeksHerodotus put their civilizational beginning between 1600 BC, they clearly came out of a wider pre-Scythian culture. I think the dating is based on the age of their language (it's post middle Avestan).
>>16805805>>16805872
>>16805914>Proto-Indo-IraniansWhat's your point?
>>16805744Uzbekistan was rather underdeveloped. Most of the BMAC sites were located in Turkmenistan, but similar people probably lived in Uzbekistan.
>>16805989BMAC lived until around 1600 BC.By 800 BC they were already raped into extinction/full miscigenation by Iranians.
>>16805999I mean, they did not disappear. The people who lived in that settlements were probably descendants of BMAC people and Andronovo.
Any bomes?
>>16805786no
>>16805914>>16805983Retard really mistook Proto-Indo-European with Proto-Indo-Iranian and thought he was doing a huge "gotcha".Never change /his/.
>>16805653It's a remnant of old Tartaria obviously.
>>16806014thisI do not believe this until they show the bones
>>16806998I mean, if you think they are faking the site, why wouldn't them fake the bones too?
>>16805653Ancient Turk civilization. Turks, the civilization creators and civilization bringers
>>16805653Bump
>>16806982>mistook Proto-Indo-European with Proto-Indo-IranianThey're the same thing. Scythians and central Asians did not speak Slavic or Turkic. They universally spoke Iranic. Zoroaster was probably from Russia and the Zoroastrian texts are explicitly referential of the region.
>>16805653Where they black? If not then not interested.
>>16805653Likely a BMAC adjacent site, although the 8th century BCE is a very late date for that. But maybe when it's actually digged we'll find it was founded earlier.
>>16807880>They're the same thingNo they aren't, you absolute mong.It's the same thing in saying Latin is the same as French. One derives from the other, but they are not the same.The people who spoke each of those languages lived more than 1200 years apart.The absolute state of /his/ holy fuck
>>16807880idiot
>>16807883Only sane answer in the whole thread, thanks anon
>>16807933Both regions spoke a mutually intelligible Avestan then uniformly switched to the later Iranic families of languages. The Celts in the west split off slightly becoming Latin and later Celtic languages, then Germanic shortly after. Greek remained an ancient anomaly in between the two. Hope this helps.>>16807941Arguments?
>>16807953>Hope this helpsNo it doesn't, because you are just sprouting bullshit and you don't know how IE languages actually developed from each other.You are just a Zoroastrian LARPer, begging for something that proves your pathetic sense of self-importance. Just here to remember that our religion is dead, there's nothing you can do about it, and Iranian is just a random branch of IE that isn't any more important than Albanian or Nuristani or whatever steppe people devolved into.
>>16807968This post is pure schizo nonsense. The Scythians spoke Iranic and were an Iranic people and the entire steppe was the same. Persianic Iran to the south is just a holdout from the days they had crossed the Khyber.
>>16807974>the entire steppe was the same.Yep, 2000 years after PIE was spoken. Whatever the Scythians spoke wasn't PIE, but a language evolved from it, 2 millennia later. Like I said, it's the same thing as comparing Latin and French.I will repeat myself once again: if you retards could grasp chronological scale, most /his/ discussions would disappear.
>>16807991>Whatever the Scythians spoke wasn't PIEYou're still fucking up. I will repeat myself again: Proto Indo Iranian is literally the same thing as PIE. PIE develops into Avestan, which becomes Iranic later. The Scythians speak a late Avestan, early Iranic, which is not PIE. Do you still require help? Y/N.
>>16808004>Proto Indo Iranian is literally the same thing as PIENo it's not. Be better.>PIE develops into Avestan, which becomes Iranic later.Avestan is not even Proto-Iranic, let alone a direct descendant of PIE. There are at the very least 3 languages between PIE and Avestan: PIE -> (some intermediate language) -> PII -> Proto-Iranic -> Avestan.>Do you still require help? Y/N.Why would I want help from someone who doesn't know the very basics of IE linguistic history?
>>16808029>No it's not. Be better.Yes it is. They were speaking PIE.>Avestan is not even Proto-IranicWhen I see a post as stupid as this I have to question myself. You see, when I repeat myself over and over again it's exhausting but my kneejerk reaction is "I can teach this person. It just takes patience", but then they run right into the same wall head first as before. No helmet.No, Avestan is not proto-Iranic. Good job! It's an earlier form of Iranic so in one sense it is, but when people say proto-Iranic usually they are pointing to PIE. The timeline goes PIE -> early/middle/late Avestan -> Iranic -> Persian/Farsi. There is no PII or PI, the schema jumps straight from PIE to Avestan.>Why would I want helpThat's hilarious.
>>16808047>You see, when I repeat myself over and over again it's exhausting but my kneejerk reaction is "I can teach this person. It just takes patience"Don't pretend you are some cool and collected intellectual. You are just sprouting zoroastrian supremacist bullcrap that's not confirmed by any linguist or self-respecting historian.I've studied IE languages for years and I never seen anyone even propose that Avestan is directly descendant from PIE, it doesn't make sense grammatically, lexically or chronologically.I dare you to provide a single legitimate source of your bullshit, and perhaps we can talk like adults. Until then, I'll treat you like the retarded adolescent you are.
>>16808080>You are just sprouting zoroastrian supremacist bullcrap that's not confirmed by any linguist or self-respecting historian.Any self respecting historian would be a Zoroastrian supremacist. That much is obvious. >I've studied IE languagesOh wow we have a badass over here! Let's see it then.>I never seen anyoneOh, I get it. You're the kind of scholar that doesn't make arguments AND doesn't interact with a broad majority of people with whom to debate ideas with. Interesting method. Not sure it's the most effective but if you're short on time, resources, know how, and painful anxiety attacks whenever the thought of speaking to someone arrives then I could see how it would be your best bet.>it doesn't make sense grammatically, lexically or chronologicallyWell go on then. You've studied it, as you have said. Prove the point then. You have such a keen idea of it. Show me the missing links, these PII/PI phases you were just mentioning. Well go on then.
>>16808091>Any self respecting historian would be a Zoroastrian supremacist. That much is obvious.I rest my case. Just a pathetic little LARPer.>Well go on then. You've studied it, as you have said. Prove the point thenThe burden of proof is on you. You are the one saying fringe stuff, and I asked for sources before. If you don't provide it, I can tell you are bullshitting.I'm done with you.
I am going to tell you a little secret: archeologists can't explain where all the earth they dig out come from. Why do archeologists need to dig in the first place? why are ancient artifacts in the ground? where does the earth come from?It's like having your current house above ground, completely normal, and 1000 years later you have an enormous pile of earth, rocks and dust above it.Archeologists don't have any explanation for this.It's like having an ancient city buried with millions of tons of earth above it. And no archeologists find this suspicious.That's right, it's millions of tons of earth. because It's not just one tiny house which is underground, it's an area long of hundreds of miles which is underground and somehow that's perfectly normal in the mind of scientists.
>>16808104>I rest my case. Just a pathetic little LARPer.You just claimed to be a distinguished expert. What proof did you have for PII or PI? I never claimed that they existed, so if they did then you could supply me with sufficient evidence?>The burden of proof is on youIt seems quite clear that it is not. We have PIE and we have Avestan. We have no evidence for these missing links. But you, as the local expert, are prepared to offer up your help surely. What other reason could you have had for saying you had studied for years?>You are the one saying fringe stuff, and I asked for sources before.Sources on what exactly? We agree there is PIE and we agree there is Avestan. You have suggested two missing links I am unfamiliar with. It should not be so hard to acquaint a student with them. I'm an open mind. Go ahead.>I'm doneSurely you did not just demand someone prove your case for you to then whine and run off when they refused.
>>16808111Checked! I think the only hope of anything lasting is if it's conditionally optimal. We just can't hope for things to last or at least not be looted if they stay superterranean.
