<!--QuoteBegin-Mudy+Jul 8 2006, 10:46 PM-->QUOTE(Mudy @ Jul 8 2006, 10:46 PM)<!--QuoteEBegin-->It was traders from India who took language and culture to Europe. Even now Roma have kept some ritual and Vedic practice. That is why there is small pocket of Indic culture one can find in Europe. It is not other way round. [right][snapback]53295[/snapback][/right]
<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Mudy,
The Roma form 10% of the population of our dear Romanian heartland, having arrived only 1K years back. What is becoming clear is that the side effect of India's tryst with the Mideast was the indicization of Europe. I don't think anyone can doubt that the Parsi Achaemenids expanded into the mideast from the East, and they were even able to hold the fertile crescent temporarily. But even though they were not able to effect any permanent change in the developed semitic/sumerian heartland of mesopotamia, syria, eygpt, they could still easily inundate the upper courses of the mideast - present kurdistan, armenia, ajerbaijan, and into balkan greece- where the cultural strands were far more fettered and thus receptive to formative influences.
The other thing we have to remember is that if the mideast could only barely be affected, then what to say about the indus valley, which dwarfed the mideast in terms of extent and size, down to this present day .
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
http://koenraadelst.bharatvani.org/article.../keaitlin1.html
According to Oleg Trubachov (1999), elaborating on a thesis by Kretschmer (1944), Indo-Aryan was spoken in Ukraine as late as the HellenisÂtic period, by two tribes knows as the <b>Maiotes and the Sindoi,</b> the latter also known by its Scythian/IranÂian-derived name Indoi and <b>explicitly described by Hesychius as "an Indian people". </b>They seem to have used a word sinu, from sindhu, for "river", a general meaning which it also has in some Vedic verses.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
<span style='font-family:Courier'>Joker babayev finds this all to be very "interesting"- of course no hard conclusions can be formed since it completely destroys the received albino wisdom: http://indoeuro.bizland.com/archive/article17.html
Another interesting gloss is the Hesychius's dictionary which gives the following: <b>Sindoi ethnos Indikon. </b>There were many versions of interpreting this: "Sindes - a Sindic tribe", which is a nonsense, or "Sindes - a Scythian tribe" which is too far from the text and therefore doubtful. The most natural will be the translation "Sindes - an Indic tribe" which can be true.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------</span>
<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Mudy,
The Roma form 10% of the population of our dear Romanian heartland, having arrived only 1K years back. What is becoming clear is that the side effect of India's tryst with the Mideast was the indicization of Europe. I don't think anyone can doubt that the Parsi Achaemenids expanded into the mideast from the East, and they were even able to hold the fertile crescent temporarily. But even though they were not able to effect any permanent change in the developed semitic/sumerian heartland of mesopotamia, syria, eygpt, they could still easily inundate the upper courses of the mideast - present kurdistan, armenia, ajerbaijan, and into balkan greece- where the cultural strands were far more fettered and thus receptive to formative influences.
The other thing we have to remember is that if the mideast could only barely be affected, then what to say about the indus valley, which dwarfed the mideast in terms of extent and size, down to this present day .
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
http://koenraadelst.bharatvani.org/article.../keaitlin1.html
According to Oleg Trubachov (1999), elaborating on a thesis by Kretschmer (1944), Indo-Aryan was spoken in Ukraine as late as the HellenisÂtic period, by two tribes knows as the <b>Maiotes and the Sindoi,</b> the latter also known by its Scythian/IranÂian-derived name Indoi and <b>explicitly described by Hesychius as "an Indian people". </b>They seem to have used a word sinu, from sindhu, for "river", a general meaning which it also has in some Vedic verses.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
<span style='font-family:Courier'>Joker babayev finds this all to be very "interesting"- of course no hard conclusions can be formed since it completely destroys the received albino wisdom: http://indoeuro.bizland.com/archive/article17.html
Another interesting gloss is the Hesychius's dictionary which gives the following: <b>Sindoi ethnos Indikon. </b>There were many versions of interpreting this: "Sindes - a Sindic tribe", which is a nonsense, or "Sindes - a Scythian tribe" which is too far from the text and therefore doubtful. The most natural will be the translation "Sindes - an Indic tribe" which can be true.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------</span>