01-08-2012, 09:02 AM
[quote name='dhu' date='08 January 2012 - 08:21 AM' timestamp='1325990598' post='114160']
The so-called linguistic evidence was taken care of by Johanna Nichols quite ably. Her conclusion was that IE originated in the Eastern part of the Southern arc and the trajectories are all westwards into the linguistic refugia of Europe.
[/quote]
No one denies westward trajectories from the eurasian steppes into Europe. Please cite the paper where it gives IE origins in South Asia. Does it actually mention Sanskrit as origin of IE languages like Greek, Latin ?
Do you mean Mitanni languages are derived from Sanskrit ? :-)
This shows a profound ignorance of archaeological parameters needed to conclude Horse domestication. Either horse furniture (in form of bit), or bit wear data on the molars is needed. The article talks of none. Mere statue of horse doesen't prove domestication. Note that the same criteria are applied even in Eurasian steppes - horse imagery and remains are found way before the claimed date of horse domestication (in Botai). The established date for domestication is based on bit wear on horse molars.
Bokonyi's paper whom Elst quoted, also said that the very rare horse remains found in Indus sites are imported, not indigenous to India.
E Sivalensis is an extinct species whose last known remains are 75,000 YBP. There is a huge gap between then and Indus Valley civilization of 5000 YBP where horse is missing in Indian fossil record. Situation is not different from continental US where fossil remains of Pleistocene horses are found. That doesen't mean Native American tribes rode the descendants of Pleistocene horses :-)
The so-called linguistic evidence was taken care of by Johanna Nichols quite ably. Her conclusion was that IE originated in the Eastern part of the Southern arc and the trajectories are all westwards into the linguistic refugia of Europe.
[/quote]
No one denies westward trajectories from the eurasian steppes into Europe. Please cite the paper where it gives IE origins in South Asia. Does it actually mention Sanskrit as origin of IE languages like Greek, Latin ?
Quote: There is even a westward sanskritic trajectory: the Mittani/Kassites,
Do you mean Mitanni languages are derived from Sanskrit ? :-)
Quote:Latest on horse domestication is here:
[url="http://news.discovery.com/animals/horse-domestication-saudi-arabia-110825.html"]Horses Domesticated 9,000 Years Ago in Saudi Arabia[/url]
The Arabian horse is related to the E. Sivalensis in tropical Asia and to the Barb in Africa which was pointed out by PK Manansala long ago. K. Elst also anticipated the Arabian findings: "Even supporters of the AIT have admitted that the horse was known in Mohenjo Daro, near the coast of the Arabian Sea..."
This shows a profound ignorance of archaeological parameters needed to conclude Horse domestication. Either horse furniture (in form of bit), or bit wear data on the molars is needed. The article talks of none. Mere statue of horse doesen't prove domestication. Note that the same criteria are applied even in Eurasian steppes - horse imagery and remains are found way before the claimed date of horse domestication (in Botai). The established date for domestication is based on bit wear on horse molars.
Bokonyi's paper whom Elst quoted, also said that the very rare horse remains found in Indus sites are imported, not indigenous to India.
E Sivalensis is an extinct species whose last known remains are 75,000 YBP. There is a huge gap between then and Indus Valley civilization of 5000 YBP where horse is missing in Indian fossil record. Situation is not different from continental US where fossil remains of Pleistocene horses are found. That doesen't mean Native American tribes rode the descendants of Pleistocene horses :-)