1/3I believe that many enthusiasts of Indo-European migrations to South and Central Asia have already encountered arguments, usually presented by biased people (generally Indian), about a supposed influence through a "fusion" with or a "BMAC" substrate on Bronze Age Iranians. Examples include the use of fire altars, the practice of cremation, and the claim that Indra and Soma originated from a "BMAC" substrate. I will not address these issues in this post, because from an archaeological point of view they are not valid. I will focus on linguistic issues instead, where several words are postulated to have originated from this substrate, although I am not an expert in this area.
>>185990262/3Author David B. Buyaner from the Freie Universität Berlin is challenging a famous hypothesis called the Indo-Iranian Substrate Theory, and from what I understand, more articles by him are forthcoming. He is one of the few authors who has decided to use critical thinking to address these issues.Buyaner says that the basis of this theory is "methodologically unstable," which I fully agree with, and we don't even know what these agricultural complexes spoke. Witzel used a small list of words that appear in both Indo-Aryan and Iranian, but which do not have a clear Indo-European etymology and therefore must necessarily be non-Indo-European. the same with that bizarre list of supposedly non-Aryan Vedic tribal names, and therefore must be from allied Dasas tribes or something like that.Several of these "borrowed" words can be better explained as words inherited from Proto-Indo-Iranian itself.
>>185990453/3One of the most prominent examples that uses this hypothesis is the word for brick.the Indo-Iranian word for 'brick' is _Hišti- / _Hišta-_. the author proposes an Indo-European origin: _h2eh1s-tó- / _h2eh1s-ti-_ coming from _h2eh1s- 'to dry'_. That is, "dry thing" > "adobe brick". It says that this fulfills the semantic and formal criteria.
>>18599072Unfortunately, this is in Russian, and I don't know why they wrote the article only in Russian when it would be much more accessible in English. I couldn't find an English version. But here is the source;https://indo-iranian.org/iil/article/view/23I look forward to more articles and, to be honest, I don't know why it was assumed that the Indo-Iranians couldn't have had knowledge of sun-drying bricks, given that we have interesting archaeological evidence that Sintashta temples or structures (Sintha B Bolshoi, from the Altar of Tholus) were made of bricks
>>18599026From what I understand, bmac in the era wasn't really a single people.
>>18599117Well, in a certain way, yes."bmac" is best described as a complex of several city-states in Margiana. But the biggest problem is that we don't know what kind of language they spoke, so the argument of Witzel and his followers is forced in my view. Linguists like Alexander Lubotsky have identified "dozens" of supposedly foreign terms that were absorbed into ancient Indo-Aryan and Iranian languages, but the author in question here intends to launch other articles in a series, which is interesting to have a counterpoint.Words related to bricks, irrigation, agriculture, and rituals supposedly do not have Indo-European roots, and i.e., are necessarily "bmac." But it turns out that in some districts of Andronovo, there is evidence of irrigation (simple and limited, of course) agriculture, and fire rituals, the latter dating back to Sintashta. For more information on this, I would advise everyone to read the book *The Origin of the Indo-Iranians* by the Russian archaeologist Elena Kuz'mina.But the point is that these arguments fail archaeologically speaking, and apparently linguistically as well.
>>18599026Bmac is a smokescreen used by nationalist poopers and modern neo-Iranians to mask the fact that they were conquered by peoples entirely different from themselves. bmac was garbage.
>>18599159>the latter dating back to SintashtaCorrection: perhaps as old as the Middle Dnieper Culture (one of the earliest subgroups of the Corded Ware Culture). They lived in houses with pillars and hearts, and possessed kurgans, shallow graves, and even cremations, in addition to fire cults
>>18599045>Witzel LOL who would take this guy seriously?
>>18599195Everyone
>>18599114It's no big deal. If the article is machine readable (you can test this by copying and pasting text to see if you get gibberish or well-formed Unicode) then most LLMs can translate the PDF without issue. I've successfully translated a number of different linguistic papers from German, French, or Spanish using Gemini and ChatGPT. It's only when the article has text that isn't machine readable that the translation has major problems.Just attach the PDF in a prompt and tell the LLM to translate it. It's that easy.
>>18599026I will just say that the heart of historical linguistics is the comparative method. When someone says a list of words are of "BMAC origin" yet there is no attested BMAC lexicon or language to compare with, that claim is methodologically unsound and unverifiable.
>>18599296You lost
>>18599311Exactly. The methodology is flawed and nebulous, to be fair. I'm glad that linguists are questioning this dogma.>>18599296Yes, thanks. despite it being a very short article, I had help from a Russian friend, but it bothers me to have poorly done translations, especially from Google Translate.
>>18599311>>18599159>>18599072>My supremacist fantasies don't fit with linguistic consensus, so it's false. That's not how things work The substrate and massive influence on these illiterate pastors is immense and cannot be denied Indra is definitely Bmac and has parallels in Mesopotamia. Many Aryan deities are Bmac, and the word Aryan itself gained its meaning after contact with Bmac.
>>18599341You've been using Google translate? If you decide to start using LLMs, the only other things you need to remember is to select "extended thinking" or the more advanced models for the task of translating and if the PDF is especially long, tell it to to translate piecemeal or only the section you want since sometimes LLMs will paraphrase a paragraph when the article is really long.
>>18599350>The substrate and massive influence on these illiterate pastors is immense and cannot be deniedWhat massive substrate are we specifically talking about? The lists of Alexander Lubotsky or Witzel? Witzel and Lubotsky postulate a non-Indo-European substrate in Indo-Iranian based on a small list of words found in both Indo-Aryan and Iranian, which supposedly have no reliable Indo-European etymology available. But this may be due to a lack of proper careful analysis, and many of these substrate words are being questioned, as is the case with the word "brick". And why can't they be denied? It's not a religious dogma.>Indra is definitely Bmac"definitely" is a very strong word for a language or languages for which we have no evidence whatsoever of any surviving lexicon beyond these infamous "substrates." And I'm sure authors have already proposed an Indo-European etymology for this god.>and the word Aryan itself gained its meaning after contact with BmacI do not understand. What's your point? >parallels in Mesopotamia.For example?>>18599352Thank you very much for the advice. I have several articles in Russian, and pure Italian or English translations are rare or impossible to find. I will try to do that.
>>18599350Take your meds schizo
>>18599377This article is a joke. The author said nothing substantial. Bricks can't be Indo-European, and don't you realize that this is a problem for your steppe hypothesis? The ethnogenesis of the early Indo-Iranians seems much more nuanced and complex and was an amalgam of many different priestly traditions. You see this somehow in the Bhirgu Atharvans a term from the BMAC closer to Varuna and fire ritualism, in contrast to the Angirasas, closer to Indra and war-centered themes, also present in the Rig Veda). All its nuances and details, and comparing it with the ancient version (~2200-2000 BC) of the Near Eastern NIN.URTA against 'Az'ag , we will see similarities that are hard to ignore.
>>18599480>I do believe that *arya- just like *ārya- was originally nothing more than a designation for the Aryans... We don't know what the word actually meant and we can't determine it through etymological analysis either. After all, it is not even certain that the word is actually Indo-European. As a folk name, it could easily be of foreign origin". And it seems to me that that is indeed the case." Szemerényi (1977)It can be also bmac
>>18599480>Bricks can't be Indo-Europeanlmao, what a ridiculous statement. Do you not understand that the author claims THE WORD for brick is Indo-European? He's not even claiming it's a PIE word. The Indo-Iranians used a PIE root and suffix to make a word for bricks. No BMAC language involved. They probably knew what bricks were for a long time even if it wasn't common to make houses with them. Making ovens or a furnace may have frequently involved bricks.>>18599489>It can be also bmacIt cannot. The comparative evidence contradicts that belief.>Szemerényi (1977)Outdated nonsense.Are you autistic or something? Do not turn this into yet another thread about "Aryan". This is not the thread. Take your medications and take a nap.
>>18599480>The ethnogenesis of the early Indo-Iranians seems much more nuanced and complex and was an amalgam of many different priestly traditionsAnd this amalgam of traditions and cultures must necessarily be "Bmac," right? simply based on substrate words and the supposed absence of fire worship within an Indo-European and Indo-Iranian context, but these arguments are fallacious and I've already answered them here.>>18599159I'm on my new phone and I don't have many sources here, but there is much literature on ritualistic practices within the Indo-Iranian imaginary, and Kuz'mina and others have shown that Fire worship was well known among the Andronovo and Sintashta peoples, and apparently earlier, in the Middle Dnieper Culture.https://archive.org/details/originoftheindoiranianselenakuzminae.brill_614_Yfire worship has been present in the Indo-Iranian (and even before) imaginary since Sintashta, evidenced by findings in their settlements, There is also recent literature on this you can watch this lecture about a Sintashta temple that necessarily operated for fire worship.https://arizona.hosted.panopto.com/Panopto/Pages/Embed.aspx?id=eb50e2b2-9283-4e99-ab13-af2501494438They also used bricks to build this temple..Therefore, these arguments are based on a false premise.>Bricks can't be Indo-European, and don't you realize that this is a problem for your steppe hypothesisI'm curious to know exactly how this would refute the "steppe hypothesis," tell us. And why is the article a joke? It seems like an ad hominem attack..please, show us why the reconstruction presented is flawed or any bmac lexicon
>>18599580>>18599550You're not a Nazi, at least.>I'm curious to know exactly how this would refute the "steppe hypothesis If you said Sinthastha had Unbaked bricks it does kills the theory because Iṣṭakā has etymological root related to bake. Word for wheat derives from PIE root kewdh(to cover, hide"). Gives Sanskrit gudh+uma suffix. It literally means that which is covered. Botanical type wheat. Sutra. Occam razor's law says that simplest explainafion with less assumption is the best. Before rigveda the arya identity itself wasn't formed. Indians and iranians themselves weren't split during that timeAlso see>FromProto-Indo-Aryan*íṣṭakaH, fromProto-Indo-Iranian*ištaH(“brick”), possibly fromtheBMAC substrate.[1][2]
>>18599645What a weird incoherent response. Why are you even here?>possibly fromtheBMAC substrateWishful thinking which was debunked by the article in the OP.
>>18599676Iṣṭakā has etymological root related to bake
>>18599676>>18599708Because iranian doesn't preserve dh, it turned into dental d/t giving us Iranic gandum/gantum.
>>18599708That is the same stem talked about in OP's article, just with an additional suffix. If you are trying to relate it to something else, you have to show the words you want to connect it to.
>>18599715>Because iranian doesn't preserve dhWhere is *dʰ under discussion?
>>18599480The religion of the Rig Veda could*** be influenced by the JEETMAC people that Aryans interacted with during their expansion into Asia, but given its similarity to other Indo-European faiths I think it’s fair to say it survived this influence relatively intact.
>>18599717Its not only brick, A lot of Indo-aryan words like átharvan(priest), bhiṣáj(physician),íṣṭakā(brick),úṣṭra(camel),sūćī(needle),gandhá(smell),gandharva(celestial beings),ṛ́ṣi(Rishi/seer),kutta(dog) and others are said to have come from BMAC substrate language.-Source: INDO-IRANIAN SUBSTRATUM by Alexander Lubotskyhttps://www.academia.edu/428961/The_Indo_Iranian_SubstratumIf Nor Indic or Iranic have dozens of loanwords, then why propose big migration event?>Etymology of the Word iṣṭi-We have reached a point where the etymological analysis of the word is necessary. I would like to emphasize that there is no known Ṛgvedic word that fits in well with our previous analysis. There exists a possibly related word in Vedic, but it occurs only in the early Yajurveda: íṣṭakā- ‘brick’. It denotes almost exclusively the sacred bricks of the agnicayana ritual. Converse (1974: 83–85) suggested two possible Tamil candidates as its etymology: cengal (cennu + kal/gal) and cuṭakal/suṭakal (cuṭa/suṭa + kal). On account of Emeneau’s critique of Converse’s proposal, Staal (1983: I, 131– 132) turned to other possibilities and offered the Avestan ištiia- and Old Persian ištiš as a starting point. Witzel (1995: 103) not only accepted this, but also enlarged the horizon significantly by arguing – on the basis of the slightly different Vedic and Iranian (Avestan and Old Persian) forms – that ‘the origin as a loan word from some unknown pre-Aryan culture should be considered’. He also made a proposal for this pre-Aryan language: that of the Bactria-Margiana Archaeological Complex (BMAC) alias the ‘Oxus culture’ of Bronze Age (ca. 2500–1500 BCE)."
Someone translate the article that the OP miserably failed to translate to shut up all of this nonsense.
>>18599754>are said to have come from BMAC substrate language.Based on what? Simply due to an unknown etymology? Witzel creates an entire personal theory of an alliance between Rigvedic and Dasa tribes based simply on Vedic tribal names that don't have a clear Indo-Aryan etymology, therefore, they must be Dasa tribes... this is the level of these arguments. And the article in the statement demonstrates how the word for brick has an Indo-European etymology, and the author is working on a series of articles on this subject. Just wait and see.
>>18599754>ra(camel)Also, the ancient Indo-Iranian peoples (in particular, the Andronovians) had already come into contact with the camel and probably domesticated it in some way. It was an important animal for daily life.We have evidence of camel bones in Andronovos tombs throughout their territory, that is, before the separation between the Indo and Iranian peoples.Even including in Sintashta, where they appear only occasionally as rare sacrificial animals in graves alongside horses and cattle.I wouldn't be surprised if the Indo-Iranians used an Indo-European root and suffix to create a word for camel, and this animal is so important to the Indo-Iranian question that it could certainly be an ethnic identifier almost like the horse, and recent, considering evidence of the presence of horses and camels was also found (cf. Young and Coningham 2018). Kuz'mina also mentions camels in areas adjacent to Balochistan (Pirak).It would be useful to extract DNA from these camels to see if they all derive from a single lineage, like the Sintashta DOM2 horses.
>>18599916That's really interesting! Kino I had absolutely no idea about that, or about the camel in IE>>18599754Stop trolling Jamboy
>>18599916>was also found*on the Kachi Plain, in Balochistan, near the entrance to the Bolan Pass**a possible root for the entry of Indo-European peoples>>18599926Yes, there is information that few people know. It's a shame I lost everything I had on the subject when my cell phone was brutally hacked and its privacy violated. But Kuz'mina's book is very good and contains a lot of information; I recommend everyone read it as a basis for studying Indo-Iranian, especially. There are some more recent books and articles, but none with the same level of detail. And the interesting thing is how archaeology got many things right even before the advent of genetics. Kuz'mina and others believed that Sintashta and Andronovo were responsible for breeding a species of horses that would dominate Eurasia, and that many later horse breeds would be descendants of these old proto-indo-Iranian breeds. And what was the conclusion of modern genetics for Dom2 horses? Exactly.
>>18599916>>18599947>>18599926I'm busy, I'll refute you in a moment, and why are you changing the subject? Couldn't you answer my question about bricks? Wait.
>>18599952so?
>>18599550>Outdated nonsense.>said the larp who uses 1800s sources for his charts kek
>>18599645>>18599754>>18599715Why are you copying and pasting posts from Xiiter? its always you.
>>18599952I can't refute you. Sorry!
>>18600186That’s not me lol
>>18599550I was wrong sorry
>>18599550see kuiper.
>>18601571see my anus
>>18601632Kek kek
>>18599350>Indra is definitely Bmac and has parallels in Mesopotamia.>parallelsReally convincing arguments. wow. >>18599072it's kind of funny how we still can demonstrate previously thought-of substrate/hard to explain words to have simple etymologies, like how king is related to kin. i might be mistaken but I think it was only shown relatively recently by Kroonen.>>18599645>xitter postFULL. SAPPORT. SAAR.
