Aryanam Vaijah the ancient home land of Aryans

a reply to: peter vlar

if i am not mistaken the rigveda text is about 7000+ yrs old. google may provide some insight but i hv not chkd it.

originally posted by: DJW001

originally posted by: zinc12
a reply to: DJW001

No academic would say the Torah predates Zoroastrian text, likewise no academic would say the Hebrew or even proto Hebrew language predates Sanskrit....so what exactly are you talking about ?

Given that the earliest Zoroastrian manuscript dates from the 14th Century, I'm pretty sure that you are mistaken about that:

en.wikipedia.org...

On a side note, the Indus Valley civilization was almost certainly not "Aryan." Attempts to decipher what is believed to be their writing using Sanskrit as a guide have always failed. There is reason to believe they had trade ties with Sumer, however, another non-Aryan civilization.

14th century...nah!

" Plutarch estimated that Zoroaster lived 5,000 years before the Trojan War; the ancients believed that the date of the Trojan War was 1184 BCE (according to Eratosthenes’ estimations), which would make 6184 BCE a date consistent with Plutarch’s opinion. In the 3rd century CE, Diogenes Laertius, based on a claim of Xanthos of Lydia (a contemporary of Herodotus), places Zoroaster’s life 6,000 years before Xerxes’ military campaign against the Greeks, which took place in 480 BCE. Thus, according to Diogenes, 6480 BCE was the time when Zoroaster lived."
www.ancient.eu...

originally posted by: zinc12

originally posted by: DJW001

originally posted by: zinc12
a reply to: DJW001

No academic would say the Torah predates Zoroastrian text, likewise no academic would say the Hebrew or even proto Hebrew language predates Sanskrit....so what exactly are you talking about ?

Given that the earliest Zoroastrian manuscript dates from the 14th Century, I'm pretty sure that you are mistaken about that:

en.wikipedia.org...

On a side note, the Indus Valley civilization was almost certainly not "Aryan." Attempts to decipher what is believed to be their writing using Sanskrit as a guide have always failed. There is reason to believe they had trade ties with Sumer, however, another non-Aryan civilization.

14th century...nah!

" Plutarch estimated that Zoroaster lived 5,000 years before the Trojan War; the ancients believed that the date of the Trojan War was 1184 BCE (according to Eratosthenes’ estimations), which would make 6184 BCE a date consistent with Plutarch’s opinion. In the 3rd century CE, Diogenes Laertius, based on a claim of Xanthos of Lydia (a contemporary of Herodotus), places Zoroaster’s life 6,000 years before Xerxes’ military campaign against the Greeks, which took place in 480 BCE. Thus, according to Diogenes, 6480 BCE was the time when Zoroaster lived."
www.ancient.eu...

Cherry picking the information that you like and ignoring the rest is a pretty disingenuous approach to scholarship.
Based on the linguistics of the language spoken by Zarathustra,Avest, and cited in your own source article, puts the lifetime of Zarathustra in the mid second millennium BCE. A far cry from 5 or 6 KA BPE.

Since you don't want to be honest in your citations, the following is from the paragraphs immediately following your excerpted quote-

Modern scholars believe that Zoroaster must have lived at some point between c. 1500 and c. 600 BCE. The 600 BCE limit is based on the fact that the Avesta does not contain a single reference to a ruler of the Achaemenid Empire, which was the dominant power in Persia beginning in 550 BCE. The Avesta is believed to have been composed in eastern Persia, which is why one would expect these texts to mention an Achaemenid ruler if its composition was later than 550 BCE. The earlier date in the range, 1500 BCE, is based on linguistic evidence found in the Avesta. This work is composed of several different texts and one of these texts, the Yasna, is considered to be the oldest of the Avestan texts. Its language is Old Avestan (sometimes called Gathic Avestan), which is grammatically comparable to the language of the Indian text known as Rig Veda, since the languages of Persia and India belong to the same language family (the Indo-European Languages family). It is therefore believed that the Rig Veda and the Avesta are about the same age, dating to c. 1500 BCE. The range of speculation for Zoroaster’s life is wide. Saying that he lived in around 1000 BCE, give or take a century or so, is an estimation that would be acceptable to most scholars.

a reply to: Nochzwei

You are mistaken. It was written circa 1700 BCE

a reply to: peter vlar
It is opinion, you either go with the ancient historians dates or the modern ones, the modern dates is based "the Avesta does not contain a single reference to a ruler of the Achaemenid Empire" Why should a religious text talk about the rulers when Zarathustra was alive. Secondly it was originally an oral religious teaching and those reciting it would have been more interested in its religious content then political content, in fact they could easily have omitted it or not mentioned it at all.

Regardless which dates you use the Zoroastrian is still older then the Hebrew Torah

originally posted by: peter vlar
a reply to: Nochzwei

You are mistaken. It was written circa 1700 BCE

No not mistaken at all, it was originally illegal to write it down. It was an oral tradition (and still is) for thousands of years before it was committed to writing.

originally posted by: LABTECH767
a reply to: cenpuppie
Gaelic languages are derived from the Semitic/North african language family's.

Absolutely not, Gaelic (Irish) is an Indo-European language and so are all Celtic languages along with their customs,mythology,religion etc

a reply to: zinc12

I take it you got that from wicki, I and many other's believe they are wrong as to the origin of the Gaelic language's, here is a point based on the welsh language.
forum.wordreference.com...

Of course it IS possible that the Gaelic language of Wales, Scotland, Cornwall and Ireland (And were it survived among the french) which are definitely related to one another may have been influenced either way, by long exposure to the Indo european language's which came to dominate the world around them or also by trade with the North African's so in my personal belief there is not truly enough evidence to catagorically declare it either way but I believe it is of the Semitic or north african language tree.

And tribal genetic traces show that the Gaelic speaking people's may have a lot of non eurasian ancestry, of note it may actually be there original seed culture as well with later arrivals blending and eventually saturating with the newer DNA over generation's.
www.irishtimes.com...

of course one study arrives at one conclusion and another at another as we see here.
www.sott.net...

Now weather either is correct is another matter and weather they actually complement one another or a more thorough genetic analysis should be performed is yet another.
www.africaresource.com...

Then again all language's share common word's.
Some more for your perusal,
www.ensignmessage.com...
s1.zetaboards.com...

The other arguement of course is that the language Gaelic may have like all modern language's more than one ancestral language tree, it may be both Semitic (or rather north african and ancient messopotamian) and Indo European.
www.theguardian.com...

As well as this is worth bearing in mind that the Ancient greek's certainly knew of ireland as did the north african's and trade would certainly have linked it to the rest of the world so as with genetic legacy the language itself was never a sterile example and like all language's it would have adopted and adapted new word's as they came into it.

Today if you listen to a welsh program on S4C or another welsh language service or listen to an irish Gaelic program you will hear what to an English speaker sound like English word's intersparsed into the language but of course are they English word's or where they simply Adopted and Adapted as the English language formed.

Basic word's like for example Bread are perhaps the oldest in any language and English shares that word and meaning with the same word and meaning in Denmark and in the ancient language of the Hittite's whom DID speak and indo european language closely related to modern English and the other Germanic language's.


archive.org...

originally posted by: zinc12
a reply to: peter vlar
It is opinion, you either go with the ancient historians dates or the modern ones,

To you, then, it is a matter of opinion whether to try and determine the age of the text by the use of logic or by the use of supernatural faith.

originally posted by: zinc12or the modern dates is based "the Avesta does not contain a single reference to a ruler of the Achaemenid Empire" Why should a religious text talk about the rulers when Zarathustra was alive.

That was well explained in the quote provided.

originally posted by: zinc12 Secondly it was originally an oral religious teaching and those reciting it would have been more interested in its religious content then political content, in fact they could easily have omitted it or not mentioned it at all.

That can always be said of any ancient texts involving religion and such.
Since it applies to all of them, the fact is in itself useless.

Besides, oral traditions cannot and never have maintained a pure story line over millennia. If you want to go there (i.e. "it was an oral tradition...") then you have to admit the story we have right now is the one that was crystallized into text at a certain point in time and almost certainly differs, and probably wildly, from earlier traditional versions.

originally posted by: zinc12Regardless which dates you use the Zoroastrian is still older then the Hebrew Torah

Many things, including texts, are MUCH older than the Torah.

Harte

a reply to: LABTECH767

All the reading I have ever done in respect of Celtic culture has always stated it as Indo-European which is why when I read your comment stating it was Semitic/North African I had a huh moment

No even the encyclopedia britannica says the 7 surviving Celtic languages as being Indo-European
www.britannica.com...

And I had mentioned that I had noticed similarity's in religion, mythology etc

One similarity that I noticed is that in Vedic mythology the Ganges has its origin in a higher realm and flows from that realm into ours which is why it is sacred. Amongst the Irish the river boyne has the same mythology having its origin in the other world and flowing into our world.

The Tuatha Dé Danann of Irish mythology being identical with the Danava of Vedic mythology is another among many.

You can find whole lists of words from Irish language compared with Indian showing the similarity's also

"In the area of vocal ornamentation East and West come close. I once played a Claddagh recording of Maire Aine (Ni Dhonnacha) singing `Barr an tSleibhe’ for an Indian Professor of Music who refused to believe, until I showed her the sleeve of the record, that it was an Irish song. She claimed, and demonstrated by singing to me, that the song bore a strange resemblence to an Indian (North) raga about a young girl being lured toward a mountain. The Professor was interested in the mode, the pitching of the voice, and certain notes which were characteristic of both the raga and `Barr na tSleibhe’…"

originally posted by: Harte

originally posted by: zinc12
a reply to: peter vlar
It is opinion, you either go with the ancient historians dates or the modern ones,

To you, then, it is a matter of opinion whether to try and determine the age of the text by the use of logic or by the use of supernatural faith.

How did you come to the conclusion that Plutarch and Diogenes dating of when Zoroaster lived was based on Supernatural faith ?

The similarity's between Vedic and Celtic cultures has been noted by the well known Vedic scholar David Frawley. Frawley believes this similarity is the results of Vedic culture spreading North into Europe from India and is probably not aware that DNA testing of high caste Indians (descendants of Aryans) demonstrates that they are closer to Europeans then Asians, furthermore that this European factor has been traced to bones found in the Caucasus hence it was the other way around, the Aryans went from north (the lands around meru) to south.

This article shows how the Proto-European Aryans, like the Celts, were originally a Vedic people called the Danavas or Sudanavas (good Danavas) connected to Vedic kings, sages and yogis. It is adapated from Frawley’s Rig Veda and the History of India. Many ancient European peoples, particularly the Celts and Germans, regarded themselves as children of Danu, with Danu meaning the Mother Goddess, who was also, like Sarasvati in the Rig Veda, a river Goddess. The Celts called themselves “Tuatha De Danaan”, while the Germans had a similar name. Ancient European river names like the Danube and various rivers called Don in Russia, Scotland, England and France reflect this. The Danube which flows to the Black Sea is their most important river and could reflect their eastern origins. In fact, the term Danu or Danava (the plural of Danu) appears to form the substratum of Indo-European identity at the base of the Hellenic, Illyro-Venetic, Italo-Celtic, Germanic and Balto-Slavic elements. The northern Greeks were also called Danuni. Therefore, the European Aryans could probably all be called Danavas.

vedanet.com...

originally posted by: zinc12

originally posted by: Harte

originally posted by: zinc12
a reply to: peter vlar
It is opinion, you either go with the ancient historians dates or the modern ones,

To you, then, it is a matter of opinion whether to try and determine the age of the text by the use of logic or by the use of supernatural faith.

How did you come to the conclusion that Plutarch and Diogenes dating of when Zoroaster lived was based on Supernatural faith ?

Faith in the "history" of Diogenes or Plutarch is certainly supernatural.

I don't mean religious faith.

Harte

a reply to: zinc12

It is a long time ago now but when I first read of the similarity's between the religion's I was a little surprised, to be fair I may have changed my opinion about the language and it's origin back then, roughly twenty or so years ago when I read that there were certain shared syntax and word's between Arabic and Gaelic such as the name of the most famous Irish symbol the Shamrock which St Patrick (Patris) used to illustrate the meaning of the holy trinity and a similar three leaved plant called a Shamrack with an A instead of an O in the pronunciation in Arabic among other thing's but argumentatively all languages have shared ancestry.
Accent's or rather regional dialect's are probably how languages begin to move apart if they become isolated.
So really what we are debating is who's accent they have.
You know there is also a racial element with many in Ireland fiercely not wanting one link OR the other though for the most part as you know the Irish are open minded so long as it does not in there eye's denigrate there history.

But I must say that I have had a good think about it and realize that I am simply being stubborn in my view point and so my opinion is swayed even though I linked those pages', I am actually now willing to accept it as an Indo European family language but I still think putting it into a such a neat category may be too simple and tidy, for those languages exposed only to other Indo European yes a perfect analogy but for those that have been exposed over many century's and even millennia to other language group's then there has to be crossover and adoption between them which of course goes both way's.

So you are probably MORE correct than I on that point and I shall concede that point but hope I have opened the door to the possibility of other linguistic influence and the possibility that it is only influenced by the Indo European, indeed it is probably the oldest language in western Europe.

The Pict's are an interesting group, though of course the Scot's invaded from Ireland (Scot's though from Ireland were also of Viking or nordic settler descent and it is were the Mac or like my name the Mc. clans' originated from both in Caledonia and Eira of course Brian Baru defeated them but how many Nordic descendant's fought on his side against the later settlers though the Irish had held there own far more than the Romanized and no longer warrior culture Britain's had) and drove the indigenous Pict's back, it was as you know a marriage between a poweful Scot's clan prince and the Pict princess that ended the war between them.
The Pict's no one really know's what they looked like before mixing with other people's but some account's claimed that they were swarthy (Sallow) of skin with often dark eye's while other's say they were flaxen with blue or green eye's and of course they may have been the last vestige of the ice age European's.
We do however have a famous account of Pre nordic invastion British children from the slave market of Rome, Golden haired can mean reddish blond or it could mean simply blond and of course the Irish though just as likely to have black hair or brown are still famous for Red lock's just as the British Icenea Queen Boadicca is thought to have had.
www.telegraph.co.uk...
Of course as for the Pict's we do not really know much, there are the enigmatic ruin's on the hill's of Scotland such as Tap'O'Noth or the Petrified hill fort's which were beloved of Ancient alien's because they were literally burned to the temperature that there stones melted, some Victorian scholars thought that they were extinct volcano's even but now it is suspected they were once well build hill top castle's or fort's that were burned probably by piling heather and peat against the wall's but the truth is we simply do not know and it just as likely there was war or an invasion back then, or even a revolt by a slave class against priest king's whom lived in palaces.

I do however get the feeling we are only scratching the surface of the Pict's history and what they or there ancestor's may have achieved that was then subsequently lost, just like anywhere else any of these fort's that had not been burned probably had there useful stone's carted off to make Brock's or partition walls' in the medieval period and we think of the highland's as windswept and barren but they were not always so, indeed it as the land clearance's, both the Jacobite and the Victorian period clearances which literally destroyed hundreds if not thousand's of small villages and even small town's depopulating Scotland by more than two third's of it's people, a lot of those people were probably of Pictish descent as well.

Of course this has bearing on the movement of languages and the loss of perhaps earlier dialect's and is only one micro scale case study on the fringe of western europe but given your interest in Gaelic culture it is worthy of inclusion, personally though the written language may not have been there's I do believe the pict's had a much more advanced culture in the past that would have rivaled anything on mainland Europe during the early to mid bronze age and perhaps even those of north africa though admittedly Egypt is the high bar for that period though Babylon may have been even more sophisticated.

This is worth reading, one final caveat could the Pict's have invaded Caledonia and done away with the builders of those hill fort's?.
The pict's may have spoken a NON Gaelic language?.
halfmoon.tripod.com...

a reply to: zinc12

So if this is some metaphysical mountain, why bother bringing up Mercator's physical mountain and claim he knew of it too? Rhetorical question, as I have already shown that you link sources dissuading the very arguments you make...

...speaking of which, you claimed this Chinese depiction matched your claims of matching latitude zones. Why don't we reverse image search and read what your source says directly above it:

No claim for particular beauty and certainly no claim for any antiquity is made for the Chinese hemisphere shown in Fig. 57, drawn, says Dr. Du Bose, by a monk in Soochow, who perceived that times were changing, that the new geography was of a spherical Earth and not of a "World Mountain," but who realised that the North Pole is permanent--if anything is. He therefore drew a conventional

p. 133

modern hemisphere with its lines of latitude and longitude, over which he traced Europe-Asia-Africa; and then, upon the top of the world, raised his World Mountain

And so you speak of Meru Mountain being the navel of the Earth et al, and that it could only have been at the north pole... Even though Meru Mountain is in The Himalayas! Wow, it's even relatively close to the Pontic Steppes. What a coincidence, it fits in with actual evidence of an Indo-European homeland.

You make an absurd claim that the Pole Star can only be witnessed from the North Pole, even deliberately contradicting what you said in your earlier thread, where you claimed the Egyptians could see the sky revolving around the pole star. But I'm guessing you think the Egyptians lived in the Arctic as well.

Speaking of insanity, you also claimed that the Jews are evil Luminari and the Illuminati are good Aryans, with zero evidence or sources, and laughably grouped the Pope in with the good guys... All based solely on colors. Do you even realize the original Israeli flag design was of a red Menorah?

ATS, promote ignorance. I mean using sources that disagree with your premise must be a new low.

a reply to: zinc12

No even the encyclopedia britannica says the 7 surviving Celtic languages as being Indo-European

Yes, the Celtic languages are a branch of the Indo-European languages. Like the Nazis, you cannot grasp the difference between language and people. There is no such thing as the Aryan people, just people who speak languages descended (theoretically) from a common ancestral language. In mountainous areas, like the Balkans, genetically identical groups of people in a small geographical area can speak several different languages and practice several different religions. Culture is independent of biology.

a reply to: SargonThrall

Himalayas haha, wishful thinking from an Indian perspective, does the cosmos rotate around the Himalayas? is the pole star at its summit?

Just because you did a reverse image search don't mean squat, how many results came back and in any case even in the link you selected it confirmed that meru is a polar mountain.

It's called esoteric tradition and most esoteric schools dont bother revealing the details to the uninitiated, they consider you unworthy to know this information however that meru is not a physical mountain should be obvious to anyone reading Vedic text.

Meru is 84,000 yojanas high
It has four rivers of different juices going out of it eg Jambu juice
It is at the centre of the Earth, but is not seen there
Its summit reaches above the sky
And most obviously it is narrow at its base and wide at its summit like the cone in the centre of a lotus flower. What mountain do you know that is narrow at its base and wide at its top???

This image illustrating meru according to Thai mythology makes it obvious it is no physical mountain.

a reply to: DJW001

"Aryanam Vaijah" literally homeland of THE Aryans...yes Aryans are a race otherwise they would not have a homeland they would have said they can be found wherever noble people can be found. You see unlike today the Aryans didn't give a fig about political correctness.

Oh and btw are you forgetting the dna results of high caste Indians proving the Aryans were European?

And even more unsatisfying to some, most probably white people like the peoples who can be found in Russia and much of north Europe today.

a reply to: zinc12

russians by and large are slavic folks, but the sanskrit speaking minority are not slavic but aryan.

a reply to: Nochzwei
The Aryans in India today(there are others elsewhere) or rather the descendants of them are among the higher caste Indians. Today anyone can learn Sanskrit it don't mean that you can trace your genealogy back to these Aryans.