[a / b / c / d / e / f / g / gif / h / hr / k / m / o / p / s / t / u / v / vg / vm / vmg / vr / vrpg / vst / w / wg] [i / ic] [r9k / s4s / vip] [cm / hm / lgbt / y] [3 / aco / adv / an / bant / biz / cgl / ck / co / diy / fa / fit / gd / hc / his / int / jp / lit / mlp / mu / n / news / out / po / pol / pw / qst / sci / soc / sp / tg / toy / trv / tv / vp / vt / wsg / wsr / x / xs] [Settings] [Search] [Mobile] [Home]
Board
▼ Settings Mobile Home
/his/ - History & Humanities

Name
Options
Comment
Verification
4chan Pass users can bypass this verification. [Learn More] [Login]
File
  • Please read the Rules and FAQ before posting.

08/21/20New boards added: /vrpg/, /vmg/, /vst/ and /vm/
05/04/17New trial board added: /bant/ - International/Random
10/04/16New board for 4chan Pass users: /vip/ - Very Important Posts
[Hide] [Show All]


[Advertise on 4chan]


For some reason, this is always mentioned when we read anything about Indo-Aryans and their belief system. I never understood why this exactly would be the case. What do we know today?
>>
>>18771847
>Why do people say that Indra and Soma are loans from BMAC
Because of figures like Witzel and his followers, and more recently Alexander Lubotsky. Similar to what Beekes did with ancient Greek, working with a "substratum" of a language whose existence is purely hypothetical and of which we have not a single written record or attestation inevitably leads to an argument based on ignorance and pure guesswork.

there are no descendant languages, and bmac is used as a smokescreen to say that Indo-Aryan languages are the result of the so called "syncretism." terms of the supposed substratum can reasonably be explained by perfectly Indo-European phonetic rules. I always like to cite the word for "brick" that the substratum theory attributes to the architecture of the BMAC. But Buyaner demonstrated that it fulfills formal criteria to derive directly from an Indo-European prototype (*h2h̥1s-tó- / *h2h̥1s-ti-), linked to the idea of "drying" or "heating," in addition to archaeological support.

Indra could be explained as deriving from the PII *índras, a concept derived from the PIE *h3eyd-, meaning "to swell" or "to become strong". As for Soma, it's derived from the root 'su' - to press. It also has PIA *sáwHmas - to press out, extract.
>>
File: Behold, bmcsaar.jpg (23 KB, 735x246)
23 KB JPG
>>18771847
>bmac
Dwarfs, grain eaters, and probably matriarchs who were obliterated by the Aryans and depended on the Aryans for tin smelting—virtually zero relevance in history. Pure rubbish.
>>
>>18771891
why would a farmer be that robust
>>
>>18771891
>I hate civilization
What's wrong with you performative fags
>>
>>18772157
neolithic farmer "civilization" involved ritual cannibalism and torture of captured enemies by means of breaking their shinbones and letting them roll around in agony before caving their skull in.
They also lived in communal latrines, their sleeping quarters were often in the same house as the sheep and goats and the latrines where they'd piss and shit for fertilizer.

The Aryans did none of that stuff, they brought some deceny to these places.
>>
>>18771847
>Indra
Only the name itself is theorized to be borrowed from BMAC.
>soma
I think there's a PIE root for it. But even if it's a loanword, again, only the name was borrowed. And maybe the specific recipe based on the local plants. Soma has parallels in other IE myths. The most striking one is the mead of Mebd in Celtic mythology. Even the queen's name "Mebd" literally means "intoxicating one".
>>
>bmac
taught aryans how to smoke weed
>>
>>18772157
It's not the NTA, but the Andronovo were at a fairly significant stage of urbanization.
>>
>>18772157
A bunch of favelas made of mud bricks? No. Keep that trash to yourself retard
>>
>>18772248
>Only the name itself is theorized to be borrowed from BMAC.
No, that's not what the proponents of this hypothesis say. They say Indra was a bmac deity, but the hypothesis is unfounded. Both Indra and Soma are Indo-European. We don't know what religions or languages were spoken in these complexes.>>18771881
>>
>>18772277
This doesn't even make sense, where are you getting this information from? The use of cannabis has been documented since the Yamnaya.
>>
File: 1785088856154.jpg (253 KB, 720x726)
253 KB JPG
>>18771881
I just noticed that I didn't post the image. The list of loanwords "bmac" is nebulous and unreliable. this also applies to other concepts like fire worship or agriculture, which are both archaeologically attested in ancient Indo-Iranian populations like Andronovo and Sintashta. A critical analysis of these lists should be done urgently.
>>
>>18772811
Yeah fuck Witzel and his followers
>>18772232
Not all farmoids were the same the European farmoids were more noble and humane. These creatures from Central Asia were simply used as punching bags for the Aryans
>>
>>18772150
1/3rd excess ANE ancestry in this site
>>
>>18771847
I doubt Indra is BMAC related as corollaries are found in Europe, Haoma is probably oxus derived.
>>
>>18772842
>Haoma is probably oxus derived
No, it's not
>>
>>18771847
Indra is Jupiter and Soma is Bacchus
>>
>>18772978
Ephedra plant geographic location the Aryans used in rituals is Hindu kush/Afghanistan region
>>
File: 1788409946422.png (535 KB, 1178x1682)
535 KB PNG
>>18773240
No. First, you must prove that ephedra was used to make soma. Do you know something we don't? Or are you just repeating what you've heard somewhere? And in any case, the word for soma is not a loanword from a non-Indo-Iranian language. It's derived from the root 'su' - to press. It also has PIA *sáwHmas - to press out, extract, which again is semantically correct, considering that in the RV soma is made by pressing to prepare it. There are parallels to the practice of drinking soma elsewhere in Indo-European. There are no reasons to say it's "oxus" or bmac.



[Advertise on 4chan]

Delete Post: [File Only] Style:
[Disable Mobile View / Use Desktop Site]

[Enable Mobile View / Use Mobile Site]

All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective parties. Images uploaded are the responsibility of the Poster. Comments are owned by the Poster.