Paul K. Manansala kabalen at MAIL.JPS.NET
Tue May 12 21:01:45 UTC 1998

"Yaroslav V. Vassilkov" <yavass at YV1041.SPB.EDU>

> Miguel Carrasquer Vidal wrote:
> <"Altaic peoples" in the Ukraine 4000-3500 BC?  Impossible.
> <The first signs of r-Turkic tribes (Huns, Xiongnu) moving into the
> <Eastern steppe are from the last centuries BC.  Before that, there is
> <abundant and overwhelming evidence (e.g. written records in
> <Khwarezmian, Sogdian, Saka (Khotanese), Scytho-Sarmatian and
> <Bactrian, borrowings into Finno-Ugrian and Slavic lgs., etc.) that
> <the steppe (both Eastern and Western) was inhabited by Iranian
> <peoples.
>         Not only by Iranian. In the languages of the Volga and Permian Finns
> (Mordovian, Mari/Cheremis, Udmurt/Votyak and Komi) there are many loanwords
> from Indo-Iranian and Proto-Indo-Aryan languages. They coincide with evident
> loans in the fields of mythology and ritual. This contacts can be dated by
> 3rd - 2nd mill. B.C. In Indo-Aryan there are, on the other hand, some
> borrowings from Proto-Uralic (dated by the Neolithic period).

Well, there is certainly much in common between Altaic and Uralic. So
much so, that even Western scholars at one time considered them as
part of the same genetic family (many scholars particularly in the "Turanian
world" still do).  The early comparative linguists did not consider Uralic and IE
as even distant cousins.

> I could
> give examples but I am sure that no reasonable arguments, no proven facts
> can make the protagonists of the "India as homeland of all mankind" theory
> change their opinion and betray their holy cause.

For the record, I don't support any such theory, nor the AIT theory.
I believe the answer is much more complicated than any of these

Paul Kekai Manansala

More information about the INDOLOGY mailing list