Unmasking AIT

[Husky]

This post is actually important. Contains yet more proof that AIT-ists (especially steppists) are into serial forgery and serial lying. All in order to claim Vedic religio-civilisation incl. Skt for Europeans.





This post is directly related to post 468 (and 467) further above.



Proof - "from the horse's mouth", so to speak - that David Anthony is a serial liar and forger like Mair (but isn't absolutely every IE-ist, especially every steppist the same? ALL Indian AITists inclusive).



David Anthony - parroted by that other compulsive liar Witzel - claimed that a certain burial in Potapovka was the "antecedent" for the Rig Veda's mention of Vedic Rishi Dadhyanch. In fact, the steppist compulsive liar Anthony claimed that the steppe burial site was probably of the original Dadhyanch himself (thus pretending that a Vedic Rishi was some European. HAHAHA, "sorry", no EHG in Indians. No steppe in Indians. As admitted even by Harvard steppists geneticists now.)



Anyway, after both Anthony and Witzel and all their associates screeched loudly that here was proof of "Indo-Aryan" (read Vedic) religion and language originating in the steppes

(and repeated by Hindu-baiting internet trolls like one "Neville Ramdeholl" who spammed the story everywhere on the internet, demanding OIT-ists try and answer it),

David Anthony has to finally retract it after 2 more honest researchers caught him and his Indo-Europeanist ilk in the lie.



And how does Anthony retract it? He tries to pretend he only ever claimed it looked like some unnamed "centaur" and that he had made no more out of the burial than that.





From the 2010 reprint of the originally 2007 book

"THE HORSE THE WHEEL AND LANGUAGE HOW BRONZE-AGE RIDERS FROM THE EURASIAN STEPPES SHAPED THE MODERN WORLD"

by DAVID W. ANTHONY



p. 501 "Notes to chapter 15". Footnote 17. (Of course it would be nestled in a footnote tucked away at the end and presented in tiny print of course.



Googlebook link

17. In Table 1, sample AA 47803, dated ca. 2900-2600 BCE, was from a human skeleton of the Poltavka period that was later cut through and decapitated by a much deeper Potapovka grave pit. A horse sacrifice above the Potapovka grave is dated by sample AA 47802 to about 1900-1800 BCE. Although they were almost a thousand years apart, they looked, on excavation, like they were deposited together, with the Potapovka horse skull lying above the shoulders of the decapitated Poltavka human. Before dates were obtained on both the horse and the skeleton this deposit was interpreted as a "centaur"—a decapitated human with his head replaced by the head of a horse, an important combination in Indo-Iranian mythology. But Nerissa Russell and Eileen Murphy found that both the horse and the human were female, and the dates show that they were buried a thousand years apart. Similarly sample AA-12569 was from an older Poltavka period dog sacrifice found on the ancient ground surface at the edge of Potapovka grave 6 under kurgan 5 at the same cemetery. Older Poltavka sacrifices and graves were discovered under both kurgans 3 and 5 at Potapovka cemetery I. The Poltavka funeral deposits were so disturbed by the Potapovka grave diggers that they remained unrecognized until the radiocarbon dates made us take a second look. The "centaur" possibility was mentioned in Anthony and Vinogradov 1995, five or six years before the two pieces were dated. Of course, it now must be abandoned.

That final line becomes more telling in the context of steppist Asko Parpola's unreferenced allusion to it, where the latter merely projects it as a possible mixing of archaeological layers instead of the definite mixing that Anthony was forced to admit to (all because Asko Parpola wants to retain the myth of "[Proto]Indo-Aryan" origins in steppes when even genetics teams have ruled the steppes out as origins not only of PIE but of IA languages.

This is what was stated by Parpola, the other steppist fraud (still seen in mid 2015 developing on the now-abandoned steppe origins of "IA") after he had likewise waxed eloquent about Dadhyanch Rishi and the connection to Finno-Ugric etc:

It must be noted, however, that the evidence of the Potapovka grave has been questioned, because of a suspected mixing of the archaeological layers.

Anyway, as for Anthony's own statements, note how the retraction comes in a tiny footnote, where he tries to obfuscate that it is about the earlier-claimed supposedly "Dadhyanch" burial site.

He is careful to only speaking about having misinterpreted a certain grave as a "centaur" instead. But the reference he provides reveals everything: Turns out it was the very grave Anthony had loudly proclaimed as that of Dadhyanch and as fitting so Perfectly with Vedic religion. (<- Supposedly "Vedic" funerary rites is ALL the "evidence" these steppist frauds ever had. Not counting uni-directional loans into Finno-Ugric/Uralic, which are clearly from Vedic migrants in the steppe zone.)



And here's the main body of the text that the footnote was for, p. 386 (Chapter 15):

... Potapovka graves were occasionally situated directly on top of older Poltavka monuments. Some Potapovka graves were dug right through preexisting Poltavka graves, destroying them, as some Sintashta strongholds were built on top of and incorporated older Poltavka settlements. 17

Reading that, would you know that there would be a massive retraction hidden away in footnote 17?



And to make sure that no one tries to pretend that the suddenly devolved into anonymous "centaur" concerns anything other than the very burial that Anthony and Witzel and co. had loudly and triumphantly proclaimed was supposedly oh-so-Vedic and straight from the Rig and an antecedent of "derived miscegenated" India, and the very burial of Rishi Dadhya~nch, what's more:





here's the direct connection to the alleged "Dadhyanch" burial to the now-turned "centaur", via the very Anthony and Vinogradov 1995 paper which was all that David Anthony would refer to (perhaps he hoped no one would look it up?) -



Googlebook

The Indo-Aryan Controversy: Evidence and Inference in Indian History

By Edwin Francis Bryant, Laurie L. Patton, p.115

...

[Skipping Edwin Bryant retreading the Dadhyan~ch narrative in the Veda. Immediately thereupon, he refers to Anthony and Vinogradov 1995's claims concerning the Potapovka burial site as being related to the Rig Vedic Dadhyanch:]



The Vedic tradition seems to have a predecessor in the mid-Volga region in the beginning of the second millennium BC: a grave belonging to the Potapovka culture (Figure 4.10), which succeeded the Abashevo culture (Figure 4.9) and possessed the horse-drawn chariot, was found to contain a skeleton, which was otherwise human except for the skull which belonged to a horse (cf. Vasil'ev et al. 1994: 115, Fig. 11; cf. Anthony and Vinogradov 1995).

Note how Anthony's careful understated retraction proves his bent for lying and forgery: he got caught in his deliberate lie by honest researchers Nerissa Russell and Eileen Murphy. But having been caught, he doesn't want to undo the powerful push he gave to the Steppe PIE theory and the powerful meme of "Dadhyanch/Vedic was from the steppes" story.

His sneaking around in the retraction is deliberate: in order to leave alive the huge AIT-ist lie concerning an alleged Rig Vedic burial (even declared a burial of ethnically-Hindoo Rishi Dadhyanch himself, turned European of course) in "the steppes".



And so wikipedia continues to repeat THE LIE (deliberately too of course, whereas the Russian language page knows better than to repeat this known lie):

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Potapovka_culture

One burial has the corpse's head replaced with that of a horse,

reminiscent of the Vedic account of how the Asvíns replace the head of the priest Dadhyañc Artharvana with that of a horse so that he could reveal the secret of the sacred drink. —EIEC "Potapovka Culture"

More proof that all AIT-ist are liars. All of them. Without exception. Be they alien or Indian.







And, as seen in the previous post, this next is known to be a controversial claim. What I didn't know is that Anthony is the "archaeologist" behind the claim. In other words, the date for "the world's first preserved chariot" in Sintashta given below is probably a fraud, and that's why only the horse bones were dated (see previous post). It is all done in order to claim that the steppes originated the chariots (and then claiming this for Europeans; when the chariot-building, metallurgical part of the Sintashtans were very likely migrants to the region from "South Asia") -



en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Andronovo_culture

Based on its use by Indo-Aryans in Mitanni and Vedic India, its prior absence in the Near East and Harappan India, and its 16th–17th century BCE attestation at the Andronovo site of Sintashta, Kuzmina (1994) argues that the chariot corroborates the identification of Andronovo as Indo-Iranian. Klejn (1974) and Brentjes (1981) find the Andronovo culture much too late for an Indo-Iranian identification since chariot-using Aryans appear in Mitanni by the 15th to 16th century BCE. However, Anthony & Vinogradov (1995) dated a chariot burial at Krivoye Lake to around 2000 BCE.[17]

Reading ^that^ para, it becomes immediately clear why Anthony had to manufactured that date: had to claim chariots for Europoids via the Sintashtan (migrants) at the steppes before anyone else could claim the spoked wheel chariot.



Again: the 2000 BCE (2026 BCE) date for a chariot in steppes is considered controversial:

As already explained in the previous post, it is very likely that the Sintashta chariot is from 16th century BCE (or 1626 BCE). David Anthony probably manufactured the evidence of the chariot dating, by dating the horse bones instead, since the bones turned out to be 400 years older than the artifacts also found buried at the "chariot burial" site. Remember: the chariot itself remains undated. And the fact that there are 400 years between the different items at the burial site will probably turn out just like Anthony's allegedly "Dadhyanch" forgery and Anthony's alleged "4200-3700 BCE Dereivka horse domestication in the steppes" forgery. He like Mair - and let's throw in Witzel who's also not recanted on the fraud concerning Dadhyanch/Rig Veda he pulled - are all serial forgers, serial liars. Like all AIT-ists especially steppists.





This post is actually important.

This post contains proof from a primary source that the supposed "Dadhyanch/Rig Vedic" burial in Potapovka was but massive hoax number #3 perpetrated by David Anthony (and Witzel etc).

The other two hoaxes being

- the supposedly 4200-3700 BCE steppe domestication of the horse - this and other horse-related steppe lies, stories and forgeries long exposed here

- the supposedly 2100-2000 BCE (2026 BCE) date of a chariot at Sintashta, which is considered VERY controversial, when only horse bones found 'buried' at the location were dated, while other artifacts also buried at the location were dated to 400 years later. And people are still waiting for/demanding the chariot itself be dated. Of course David Anthony doesn't want to.

* Because this hoax was invented to make the steppes the originator of the true chariot.