Unmasking AIT

[Husky]

Post 2/2



[3] According to the following page, it seems the extict Hindoo horse -Equus Sivalensis- is considered the oldest "True Horse" after all, besides being thought to have extincted more recently than thus far assumed:



aryaninvasionmyth.wordpress.com/2012/10/18/origin-of-the-light-sivalensis-type-horse-from-india/

Linguistic, archaeological and DNA Evidence favouring origin of some breeds of the Domestic Horse "Equus caballus" from India



"Equus sivalensis is the oldest true horse known, it has more highly specialised teeth than the Oreston and Newstead ponies. After Lydekker. Palaeontologia Indica, Ser. x. vol. ii." (Ewart 1911: 366)



Abstract:

Cognate words of the Sanskrit asva (PIE *akwa) are found in nine out of the ten branches the Indo-European family of languages, indicating that the original Indo-European homeland had horse. Although horse bones have been found from the archaeological remains of the Indus Valley Civilization, the oldest domesticated "true horse" bones too have been recovered from India from 8000 BP layer, and wild from 20,000 years back.



The DNA studies of horse shows that the Aryan-horse association is a myth, and that the horse was domesticated at many places. Archaeology shows that the Central Asians were late to use horse, say about 50 AD, and the Central Asian Bactria-Margiana-Archaeological Complex had no horse at all. Thus there was an archaeological disconnect between the Ukrainian and the South Asian horse domestications, meaning that horse was domesticated independently at the two places. This is consistent with the DNA findings.



The Indian sivalensis horse has survived as many modern breeds of horse, and the Arabic, the Thoroughbred of Europe and the Blood races have evolved from the sivalensis. There is a geographical population structuring of Indian horses, indicating that the Indian horses are indigenous and have not been imported.



[...]



The Light Race Horse of Indian Origin



Azzaroli (1985:94) noted that the Indian domestic caballus horse recovered from 1200 BCE horse burials at Katelai (Swat, India) belonged to the "eastern" breed which was different "from the Bronze and Iron Age horses of Eastern and Central Europe and recalls some horses from Etruscan tombs: presumably it belongs to some oriental strain."



The "eastern breed" certainly refers to the sivalensis horse (discussed elsewhere in this article). The Etruscan horses from Populonia and Castro from the first millennium BCE resemble the Swat horse and do not resemble the Bronze or Iron Age horse from north Italy and the rest of Europe as well as the Pleistocene horse of the same area (Azzaroli 1985:146).



Etruscan Horse teracotta Fig. 1 Etruscan teraco

[...]

It's a great page to peruse, and not just for the pictures. (There's a picture labelled "A Marwari Indian Horse". Looks magnificent...)



On this statement by Paul Manansala from Philippines that Danino had quoted:

"So the horse of India, including that of the asvamedha sacrifice in what is regarded as the oldest part of the Rgveda, is a distinct variety native to southeastern Asia."

aryaninvasionmyth.wordpress.com/2012/10/18/origin-of-the-light-sivalensis-type-horse-from-india/

There is evidence that the sivalensis horses were taken along with the Neolithic migrations from India to the Southeast Asia and the Philippines. Paterno (1981:396) noted, "This contention is based on some isolated preservation of E. sivalensis traits. However, rather fully-sivalensis types have been described from Neolithic strata (8000-4000 BCE) at Lemery, Batangas in the Philippines together with dog remains." Alba (1994) too notes that the E. sivalensis features are still found in the horses of the so-called "Sulu Horse" and its relatives in Borneo, Sumatra and Malacca. This description implies domestication of sivalensis horse in India before 8000 BCE (10,000 BP).



Ewart (1911) presented a good discussion on the Indian Equus sivalensis and found that this particular wild horse has made a large contribution to modern "true horse" or caballus population of the world. The Thoroughbred breed which is used worldwide today for racing, hunting, polo etc is descended from Equus sivalensis (Ewart:369).



Certain breeds of modern British racehorses have descended from Newstead horse which was a connecting link between the modern British horse breeds and the Indian sivalensis (ibid:370). The Barb breed of North African coast and also the so called Arab breed of horse in fact are descendants of the Equus sivalensis (ibid:369). Lydekker, another specialist of equine breeds too opined that the horses of Arabia, North African coast and the Thoroughbred breed have descended from the Indian Equus sivalensis. (quoted in ibid:369; also Lydekker:19-21). Lydekker, and also Ray Lankester, found that the "blood-horse" too was of Indian origin. (quoted in The Origin and Influence of Thoroughbred Horse, CUP Archives.). This is logical. The term blood-horse is a short form for "warm-blooded horse".



Manansala (p. 396) notes, "In other words, Lydekker now realizes that all the modern breeds are not characterized by long-pillared molars, and says that there is a probability that Barbs, Arabs and Thoroughbreds are descended from Equus sivalensis". He further adds, "However, rather fully sivalensis types have been described from Neolithic strata (8000-4000 BCE) at Lemery, Batangas in the Philippines together with dog remains." (ibid).



In spite of the widely held belief that Equus sivalensis went extinct about 10,000 years back, we have evidence of their existence in the true horse population of India. US Bureau on Animal Industry Fifth Report noted that [...]





[...]

In all event, there is no archaeological evidence of movement of humans or horse from the Central Asia to Iran or India. The BMAC (Bactria-Margiana-Archaeological Complex, 4300-3700 BP) is the southern Central Asian cultural complex. It has been found that there was no horse in the BMAC (Witzel 2003:7 of 12, pdf). No horse related furniture has been found. This clearly rules out any migration of horse or horse riding Aryans from this route to Iran or India. Clearly Indian antiquity of horse is older than that of the Central Asia. That means horse was domesticated in India and Ukrainian steppe independently of each other.



Moreover, Hiebert (1998:153) noted, "no steppe nomadic complex has been found on the Iranian plateau, not even evidence of indirect contact or interaction… The only evidence for interaction … comes from the Central Asia desert oasis cultures." Thus any migration of man or horse from steppe to Indo-Iran is ruled out by archaeology.



The Linguistics of Horse

[...]

Etc.

Again, great page.





[4] The AIT myth site seems to have other interesting pages, presumably by the same author.

aryaninvasionmyth.wordpress.com/2012/10/01/3/



Some Domestic Animals of the Indo-European Homeland and their dispersal

P. Priyadarshi

Bouckaert's study is bad in design because the meanings (words) which were listed for the various languages for the comparative study did not include any farming related "meaning" like horse, cow, bull, goat, lamb, sheep, pig, chariot, wheel, mouse, cook, grind, mill and similar Neolithic associated meanings, which are most relevant to the study of the farming related Indo-European migrations (which the article claims to have achieved). The study was biased too, because it considered only two options or possibilities for the homeland—Anatolia and the steppe (p.959). The result is marred by the use of the wrong data for the Indian languages.



The Vedic word (paśu, from PIE pek, cattle; Pokorny:797) for the meaning "animal" has been given a low rating (single star), while more obscure words from the many European languages have been given high ratings (up to three stars). Often, words have been chosen from the Vedic in such a way that these would be scored "not cognate" in the computerized analysis. One simple example of such manipulation is the meaning "warm": for Vedic Sanskrit they have listed uṣṇa, instead of the Vedic word gharma- (cognate to PIE *ghwer-) reducing one mark to the Vedic. Such manipulation of data completely erodes the credibility of this study. Even after doing them, the Vedic stands older (2,900 BCE) than the European languages in the study.

Appalling though, how deliberately unscientific indologicals are - i.e. how motivated they all are.



There's also a section showing that sheep and pig domestication happened in India. And goat too apparently. So that's horse, goat, sheep and pig domesticated since ur-times in India (the arguments are detailed at the links).



More shocking stuff:

Sir William Ridgeway was wise enough to assert in the year 1905 that the Przewalski was not the ancestor of the caballus horses (Ridgeway:425). However, as the Aryan theory gained influence, more and more authors started saying that the steppe horse Przewalski was the ancestor of the caballus horses. To their frustration, the DNA studies have concluded that not a single horse lineage has descended from the Przewalski (Achilli; Weinstock). The Przewalski and the caballus have different chromosome numbers, and actually they belong to different species. On this basis we can say that the domestic horse found in the steppe and Central Asia was surely imported from outside.



The much widely publicized story of the horse domestication at Dereivka (horse-and-dog burial, Ukraine) at 4200-3700 BCE, which is generally believed even today, proved wrong in 2000. The dates claimed were of the soil layer, not of the skull. The Dereivka horse was never accepted as domestic horse by a large number of scholars (like Levine, Hausler etc). To silence the opposition, the skull bone was directly radiocarbon dated and found to be from 3000 BCE (Anthony 1997). However it became soon obvious that this report was wrong as a bone not actually belonging to the horse had been tested by mistake. Still later, by actual radiocarbon dating of the horse skull, it came out that the horse-burial had been made by a much later settlement, settled over the same place (Scythian era 800-200 BCE), digging deep into the lower layers. David Anthony, author of the Dereivka story was left with no choice. He quickly retracted his earlier claim (Anthony:2000, 2009:215).

(Awww, another crash-and-burn.)



Thus the 4200 BCE domestic horse no more exists, although many authors still beat its drum. The DNA studies have proved that the horse had been domesticated at more than seventy places throughout Eurasia (Vila; Tatjan; Kavar). However, horse was possibly not domesticated in the Central Asia and the steppe, while it was domesticated in India and Spain. The progenitor of the Indian domestic horse was the wild sivalensis horse, and that of the Spanish was the Tarpan horse. This is the only parsimonious solution. Many horse breeds of the Iberian Peninsula (like the Pottoka) were locally evolved much before the Aryans arrived into the penninsula (Solis 2005:677; Achilli 2011:4 pdf).

This second page seems a great read too, but reposting just the conclusion section now:

Conclusion: The domestic animals pig, goat, sheep, cow and horse were late to arrive in the steppe. This we can say on the basis of the archaeology, DNA studies and the linguistics. The Indo-European languages had spread widely before these animals arrived in the steppe. We find that the Slavic languages, the language of the steppe region is poor in vocabulary for the domestic animals. On the other hand, India shows a long history of domestication of these animals on the basis of archaeology, DNA studies and linguistics.



We find in our study that the steppe region fails to meet the requirements for being the homeland when the archaeological, genetic and philological facts are examined. On the other hand the South Asia, particularly India, passes all of the genetic, the archaeological and the philological tests. The evidence suggests at least two large migrations out of India having impact on other cultures. One at the dawn of the Neolithic marked by the R1a1a and the J2b migrations, and the other at the Chalcolithic period about 3,000-2,500 BCE.

The entire article is at the link.

And there are many more at the site



aryaninvasionmyth.wordpress.com/



But don't get why Indians like Priyadarshi still continue to call them *Indo-European* (IE) languages, though. As such an equally-weighted name still gives undeserved importance to the aliens (the 'European' part of the term), by pretending they have anything to do with all this, other than that the so-called "IE-ness" they exhibit - language and religio-culture - is no more than an accidental by-product of a few outward trajectories and their being a receptacle for knowledge.



And wow again:



aryaninvasionmyth.wordpress.com/2014/01/14/the-vedic-history-revealed-from-the-fossil-pollens/

[...]

Fig. The beech line passing through Poland and Romania, East of which beech tree is not found



Witzel claimed that the beech was found in the steppe, much to the east of the modern beech-line, at the Atlantic period about 5,500 to 3,000 BC (Witzel 2001:51 n120; 61 n146). This is a clear case of concoction. The archaeological evidence from palynology has proved that the beech was found only in South France, South Italy and the south Balkans (Greece, Macedonia etc) before 3000 BC (Tonkov; Feurdean). The much later expansion of the beech tree was from south (Balkan Peninsula) to north and from west (France) to east, not from east to west. It has also been proved archaeologically that the steppe never had beech over the last 12,000 years and the nearest beech forests in the mountains of Ukraine and Romania had beech only over the last 4000 years (since about 2000 BC). Thus the claim can be proved bogus on the basis of sound material evidence.



It is an example how the Eurocentric authors have thus taken recourse to deception and concoction to write whatever they wanted to prove, and the thing was accepted as fact by others. The great difficulty for history was that the hard evidence was circumvented by lies.



Witzel tells another untruth in the same article that the beech tree is not found in Greece, and adds that the word for beech tree fagus (Latin) was adopted in the Greek language to mean 'oak' because Greece is a beech-less country (2001:51, 61; 2005:394). This is again a huge concoction and deception. Forest survey reports from Greece mention that beech is found there in plenty (Bergmeier 2001). Archaeology too proves that the Balkan Peninsula, in which Greece is located, is the oldest home of beech in Europe (vide supra).



Thus the beech tree has been found in Greece since at least 12,000 years back, and has expanded only recently to other places. Unfortunately, Elst contradicted Witzel's logic well, yet did not notice the concoction in his story.[6] Clearly the Greeks never had the identification problem for 'beech' because had been there always. We can say that the Greek word phagos (oak) has not changed its meaning on arrival of IE in Greek, rather the Latin fagus is a borrowing into Latin (Gk phagos, oak > L. fagus) with associated change of meaning, and it was applied to name a different tree 'beech' in the Latin language, because of disappearance of the oak from the Latin speaking regions about 5,000 BC. Hence we can date the arrival of Indo-European into the South-West Europe to a date between 5000 and 2,500 BC.



[...]

Geez. I knew WitSSel was a liar, didn't know he was quite so compulsive at it...

As for why the subject of beech trees is relevant at all becomes apparent from perusing the material at that link.

Citation:



Priyadarshi, P., 2013, Evidence of Indo-European origins from the Early Holocene pollen studies, linguistics and climatology, Dialogue, July-Sept 2013, Vol 15, No. 1.





Evidence of Indo-European origins from the Early Holocene pollen studies, linguistics and climatology



by P. Priyadarshi

Apparently Priyadarshi (who refers to Stephen Oppenheimer as a friend) has written a book. Amazon entry:

In Quest of the Dates of the Vedas: Comprehensive Study of the Vedic and the Indo-European Flora, Fauna and Climate in Light of the Information Emerging from the Disciplines of Archaeology, Archaeo-<botany?>, Geology, Genetics and Linguistics for the Last 10,000 Years

Paperback September 2, 2014

by Premendra Priyadarshi (Author)



About the Author

Dr. Premendra Priyadarshi, MBBS, MD, MRCP (UK), is Fellow of the Royal College of Physicians of Edinburgh. He views science as a source for writing history. In the past, he wrote about the origins of human civilization basing on the published articles about human as well as the domestic plant and animal lineages.

Most interestingly, going by the chapter headings of his book visible from Amazon's "Look Inside" feature, he does exactly what one wishes people had done (in proper depth) earlier: look into the relevant flora and fauna that the matter concerns.



The entire book or a good chunk appears to be available at the author's site itself.