Indo-Aryan im/e-migration (scholarly debate)

[anil k gupta]

I will be very grateful for examples of animal domesticated in one region
introduced in naother region without human migration,

Are you referring to trade in animals and distinguishing that through
permanent migration? in that case it is ok

anil
-----Original Message-----
From: Paul K. Manansala <kabalen at MAIL.JPS.NET>
To: INDOLOGY at LISTSERV.LIV.AC.UK <INDOLOGY at LISTSERV.LIV.AC.UK>
Date: Tuesday, May 05, 1998 8:07 AM
Subject: Re: Indo-Aryan im/e-migration (scholarly debate)


>> From:          "Jan E.M. Houben" <JHOUBEN at RULLET.LEIDENUNIV.NL>
>
>> [sorry for the previous, incomplete message]
>>
>> In March, taking up a suggestion by George Thompson that we should try to
make
>> a discussion on "Indo-Aryan im-e-migration" more "scholarly" (and hence
more
>> fruitful), I tried to collect some basic relevant literature on the issue
and
>> proposed to look for some basic arguments. As an example I referred to
the
>> 'horse-argument' as formulated by Parpola, and asked whether any
>> alternative/additional arguments were known which could serve as basic
topics
>> to be discussed in a future, more scholarly discussion on the subject. A
lively
>> discussion on the horse-argument followed immediately, but no-one came
with an
>> alternative or additional argument for Indo-Aryan im/e-migration. So,
besides
>> the complex and much-disputed linguistic evidence, only the horse
argument (in
>> my view still valid, though open to deconstruction according to others)
serves
>> to link speakers of Indo-Aryan in India with those in central
Asia/Europe?
>>
>
>You're greatly overstating your case, since the idea that horses could
>enter India through trade and such is quite possible. Also there is
>nothing in particular that connects the earliest IE speakers with
>horses.  Archaeological evidence suggests domesticated horses
>originated in Central Asia, but it does not suggest the language of
>the people who did the domesticating.  We also have no idea of what
>language was spoken by the people who introduced horses to India,
>if they were indeed introduced. The ancient Indian horse is genetically
>different than the Central Asian horse.
>
>However, the most important point is that the movement of horses or
>any other domesticated animal does not imply the migration of people.
>There are numerous examples of this in history. In fact, it happens
>all the time today with new breeds of domesticated animals imported
>from one country to the next.
>
>Regards,
>Paul Kekai Manansala
>