SV: Is the Aryan Invasion a Myth?

[Jacob Baltuch]

Dear Lars:

I keep getting attachments when you reply to a list message.
Here is what I got this time.

Jacob



>Elliot Stern wrote:
>
>I found your reply to the query below understandable, but less than helpful.
>There were 1050 items in the archives that turned up using the search term
>"Aryan," and most of those of course were totally unrelated to the topic.
>Of those that were, none (as far as my less-than-total review revealed)
>improved upon the following excerpt from a message Jayant Bapak rather early
>on in the debate:
>
>May I suggest that you in addition to "Aryan" also search for "Witzel".
>Witzel has on some occasions summed up the arguments in favour of the
>"invasion" (or rather "migration") theory. His emails will therefore give
>you a reasonably good overview of the "invasionist" argument.
>
>As for archaeology: it has been said several times on this list that
>archaeology is in no way so conclusive as som "indigenists" seem to think.
>There is no necessary link between ethnicity, race, material culture and
>language. (An argument for this was already developed by Boas in 1948, I
>believe in another context). The irony of the thing is that this insight
>now seems to have reached the Western side of the Indo-European question.
>After a 150 years or so of archaeological research, a number of tightly
>argued theories (e.g. Marija Gimbutas) and endless discussions, the German
>archaeologist Alexander Haeusler has reached the conclusion that there is
>no way European archaeology can be linked to an Indo-European invasion of
>Europe. Whoever they were, and whenever they came (assuming that they
>weren't here to begin with), archaeology doesn't give us any certain
>information.
>
>Looking for "proof" in archaeology is therefore a waste of time. What you
>do, is this: you collect as many data (linguistic and otherwise) as you
>can, configure them in such a way that they give a pattern that makes
>sense and interpret that pattern. It is the logic of the puzzle, and you
>may perform the following experiment: Imagine that you have a puzzle
>consisting of a 1000 pieces. Throw 800 of these pieces (chosen at random)
>away and then try to reconstruct the picture (or simply: guess what the
>picture represented).
>
>The best evidence is still the linguistic (and cultural) data. The value
>of archaeology (if any at all) is quite subsidiary.
>
>Best regards,
>
>Lars Martin Fosse
>
>Dr. art. Lars Martin Fosse
>Haugerudvn. 76, Leil. 114,
>0674 Oslo
>Phone: +47 22 32 12 19
>Fax:      +47 22 32 12 19
>Email: lmfosse at online.no
>
>
>Content-Type: application/ms-tnef
>
>Attachment converted: Alliance Drive:SV- Is the Aryan Invasion a Myt
>(????/----) (0000D45E)


-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: SV-_Is_the_Aryan_Invasion_a_Myt.bin
Type: application/applefile
Size: 113 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <https://list.indology.info/pipermail/indology/attachments/19981130/7620d8db/attachment.bin>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: SV-_Is_the_Aryan_Invasion_a_Myt.a
Type: application/octet-stream
Size: 2897 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <https://list.indology.info/pipermail/indology/attachments/19981130/7620d8db/attachment.a>