10-01-2006, 03:47 PM
Dear Viren, I do know the article by Izady. I do not share the migration theory (AIT/AMT) from the Pontic vicinities to India he refers to. There is absolutely no archaeological trail from the Pontic into the subcontinent.
The Mitanni Saindhva had an r-isogloss, like the main dialect in Rgveda (pinkara reddish, parita = greyish. Praacya RV has pinjala and palita). But the Pontic Saindhva (Sindoi-Maeotoi) had an l-isogloss (Hesychius "mesple" for moon must be maas =moon and ple= pra(a), filling, fulfilling => full moon; see for -pra as last member: kaama-pra), which means that they are either from a different Saindhva group, or a little unlikely that the Pontic changed their r for l under influence of northern non-Saindhva speakers.
The main Rgvaidika Vaac, which has a Pratiicya feature (sharing that with Iranic) is more related to the Mitanni Saindhva than to the Pontic one. While the l-isogloss is the special Praacya feature in India (Mishla instead of Mishra). Indian Praacya is in every sense unrelated to the Pontic, while the Pratiicya share similarities. But there is neither a trail from Khabur-Zagros to the subcontinent.
One particular RShi family is common to all three (Mitannic, Iranic, Indic), that is KaNva, and especially the Medha KaNvas: Medha is central to Avesta religion as Mazda, Biriamasda (Priyamedha) is the name of one of the Mitanni kings, while Priyamedha is an important Aangirasa, who must be a KaNva. Sindhu-kShit (!) Praiyamedha is the RShi of Rgveda X.75 the Nadii Stuti.
If Mitannians travelled to india, the Rgveda should have known the form *Priyamazdha, which it doesn't.
The KaNvas (Paippalaada Shaakhaa has the older form KrNva) are a relative late Vaidika Gotra, offbranched from the Shaaktya/Aindra VasiShThas.
A reference to 4 Vaidika Devas of the latest Xth MaNDala of the Rgveda can be found in a Mitanni-Egyptian treaty of ca. 1398 BCE. (with one slight important difference: RV mentions Ashvinaa, while the Mitannias have Naasatyaa).
Note
The later r-isogloss Iranian clans do appear from the (north)east to the Zagros. They must have come from the Yaz I and Archaic Dahistan cultures of which similarities can be found in the Hasanlu layers (Kurdistan area) from the 1st millennium on as intrusive, merging with the older Saindhva clans.
That must have been one of the trails too of the Saindhva groups, while the southern and sea routes (sea-faring Meluhhans) were the other ones.
The Mitanni Saindhva had an r-isogloss, like the main dialect in Rgveda (pinkara reddish, parita = greyish. Praacya RV has pinjala and palita). But the Pontic Saindhva (Sindoi-Maeotoi) had an l-isogloss (Hesychius "mesple" for moon must be maas =moon and ple= pra(a), filling, fulfilling => full moon; see for -pra as last member: kaama-pra), which means that they are either from a different Saindhva group, or a little unlikely that the Pontic changed their r for l under influence of northern non-Saindhva speakers.
The main Rgvaidika Vaac, which has a Pratiicya feature (sharing that with Iranic) is more related to the Mitanni Saindhva than to the Pontic one. While the l-isogloss is the special Praacya feature in India (Mishla instead of Mishra). Indian Praacya is in every sense unrelated to the Pontic, while the Pratiicya share similarities. But there is neither a trail from Khabur-Zagros to the subcontinent.
One particular RShi family is common to all three (Mitannic, Iranic, Indic), that is KaNva, and especially the Medha KaNvas: Medha is central to Avesta religion as Mazda, Biriamasda (Priyamedha) is the name of one of the Mitanni kings, while Priyamedha is an important Aangirasa, who must be a KaNva. Sindhu-kShit (!) Praiyamedha is the RShi of Rgveda X.75 the Nadii Stuti.
If Mitannians travelled to india, the Rgveda should have known the form *Priyamazdha, which it doesn't.
The KaNvas (Paippalaada Shaakhaa has the older form KrNva) are a relative late Vaidika Gotra, offbranched from the Shaaktya/Aindra VasiShThas.
A reference to 4 Vaidika Devas of the latest Xth MaNDala of the Rgveda can be found in a Mitanni-Egyptian treaty of ca. 1398 BCE. (with one slight important difference: RV mentions Ashvinaa, while the Mitannias have Naasatyaa).
Note
The later r-isogloss Iranian clans do appear from the (north)east to the Zagros. They must have come from the Yaz I and Archaic Dahistan cultures of which similarities can be found in the Hasanlu layers (Kurdistan area) from the 1st millennium on as intrusive, merging with the older Saindhva clans.
That must have been one of the trails too of the Saindhva groups, while the southern and sea routes (sea-faring Meluhhans) were the other ones.