Notice: This is the official website of the All Empires History Community (Reg. 10 Feb 2002)
THE ORIGIN OF ALL CIVILIZATIONS |
Post Reply 
|
Page <123> |
| Author |
 Share Topic Printable Version Google Delicious Digg StumbleUpon Windows Live Yahoo Bookmarks reddit Facebook MySpace Newsvine Furl Topic Search  Topic Options
|
Guests 
Guest 
|
 Quote Reply
 Topic: THE ORIGIN OF ALL CIVILIZATIONSPosted: 10-Apr-2005 at 17:40 |
|
No, they were possibly early Scythians who became master horse riders. Also central asian steppe nomads utilized horses since the much more ancient times... And I think a new Indo European unification btw our members is possible in the future. Please consider to discuss Ural-Altay and be fair...
|
|
 |
|
|
magavan
Pretorian 
Joined: 13-Apr-2005 Location: France Online Status: Offline Posts: 171 |
Quote Reply
Posted: 17-Apr-2005 at 08:06 |
|
there was no aryan invasion. There is not different races, aryan is a ghost a spirit. Aryan come from the vedas this is a ghost
|
|
|
|
|
Guests
Guest
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 05-May-2005 at 18:48 |
|
Hmmm... but the archaeological evidence tell a different story, but there may have not been an invasion but a gradual moving in of a foreign element into the Indian sub-continent. Then again that will be contradicted because of the complete and utter downfall of the Harappan civilization. |
|
|
|
|
Sharrukin
Chieftain 
Joined: 04-Aug-2004 Online Status: Offline Posts: 1314 |
Quote Reply
Posted: 10-May-2005 at 22:50 |
|
But the term "Aryan" is not restricted to the Vedas. It is used in Iranian literature and inscriptions, including the Zend Avesta, to designate a people, a language, and even a land.
|
|
|
|
|
magavan
Pretorian
Joined: 13-Apr-2005 Location: France Online Status: Offline Posts: 171 |
Quote Reply
Posted: 19-May-2005 at 14:37 |
|
No because Iran pre zoroastrian was Vedic, So aryan is refered to the vedas |
|
|
|
|
Sharrukin
Chieftain
Joined: 04-Aug-2004 Online Status: Offline Posts: 1314 |
Quote Reply
Posted: 25-May-2005 at 03:54 |
|
You do realize that you are applying an Indian term to Iranian lands. We never refer to pre-Zoroastrian Iran as "Vedic". The term only applies to India. The language of the Zend Avesta displays the same level of archaisms and innovations as Sanskrit, and so should be viewed as contemporary, not younger than the Vedas. In the Zend Avesta, the term "Aryan" is used to designate a land and a people. Later Iranian literature and inscriptions continue to use the term for a land and a people as well as the language of the land.
|
|
|
|
|
Moustafa Pasha
Samurai 
Joined: 19-Jun-2005 Location: Canada Online Status: Offline Posts: 133 |
Quote Reply
Posted: 05-Jul-2005 at 21:06 |
|
The origin of all civilization is Ancient Egypt. The Greeks learned from Egypt a lot of things that were further developped over time.Then the Arabs learned from the Greeks and translated thei work into arabic. Arab Spain was a centre of learning when Europe was in the Dark Ages.The Spaniards conquered El Andalus in 1256 and it took them 200 years to translate Arabic books into Latin. That is what trigered the renaissance in Europe,especially Italy.
Edited by Moustafa Pasha |
|
|
|
|
ramin
General 
Joined: 16-Feb-2005 Online Status: Offline Posts: 921 |
Quote Reply
Posted: 05-Jul-2005 at 21:32 |
|
Sir you missed about 2000 years of civilization at the beginning and about 1500 years in between.
|
|
|
"I won't laugh if a philosophy halves the moon"
|
|
|
|
|
Phallanx
Chieftain
Joined: 07-Feb-2005 Location: Greece Online Status: Offline Posts: 1283 |
Quote Reply
Posted: 05-Jul-2005 at 22:05 |
Well, Otto Neugebauer has presented his own little theory, some accept it others don't. What is interesting is that none of the scholars that reject his theory have managed to prove that the Egyptians had the scientific knowledge to 'handle' statistical sum equations needed to construct their temples/buildings/pyramids and that all archeologic finds indicate primitive knowledge of astrology. Anyway, what is quite interesting about the IE theory, is that this is the first time linguistics manage to discard all archeologic finds. Munen(sp?) tells us that in order to "invent" the linguistic connection, they've compared Sanscrit of the 1st mil., Hellinic of the 8th BC, Latin of the 4th BC, Gothic of the 4th AD.... They totally ignored the standard procedure of the "synchronic method" and obviously adopted a "diachronic". So we find them comparing languages that have a difference of several centuries between them. Another interesting issue, is that of knowledge of the horse. How can it be possible that the "Europeans" had no knowledge of it, prior to the alleged invasion of (what is the date this time 1600, 2500, 4300?) when we know of the finds in the Lascaux cave, that are dated to the 15th millenium. |
|
|
To the gods we mortals are all ignorant.Those old traditions from our ancestors, the ones we've had as long as time itself, no argument will ever overthrow, in spite of subtleties sharp minds invent.
|
|
|
|
|
snowybeagle
Baron 
Joined: 02-Aug-2004 Location: Singapore Online Status: Offline Posts: 474 |
Quote Reply
Posted: 06-Jul-2005 at 02:58 |
|
So the mother of all civilisation was the one who invented the chariot but one branch of her children who went to America forgot all about the wheel?
Edited by snowybeagle |
|
|
|
|
Decebal
Arch Duke 
Digital Prometheus Joined: 20-May-2005 Location: Canada Online Status: Offline Posts: 1791 |
Quote Reply
Posted: 06-Jul-2005 at 09:51 |
|
Phallanx, it wasn't that the humans "had knowledge of " the horse as proved by the Lascaux caves, but rather who domesticated it. Most historians agree that this momentous event happened around 4000 years ago in the steppes north of the Black and Caspian seas. Also, when you talk about supposed connections between languages, and dismisss them on the basis of a few hundred years difference chronologically, would you please take into account that these languages were also a few thousand kilometers distant? It takes time to migrate such distances... Besides, a language doesn't change that much in a few hundred years. Look at Shakespeare's English: 400 years old, a bit different but still very much recognizable, with the basis of the language the same. So these languages can be compared without much controversy. Also, the historians doing the analysis had to work with what was available. We have no written records of 1st millenium Gothic, for example. Snowybeagle, the people of America actually had the wheel: they used it in children's toys. Lacking beasts of burden (or due to the mountainous terrain), they didn't find a practical use for it though. Also, it is known that people immigrated to America over 11,000 years ago, long before "civilization" ever appeared. Civilization appeared in several places independently, each culture different from others. The most ancient is probably in Mesopotamia, but we can't really talk about civilization spreading from there to the other centres, such as China, India or Egypt. While there was some contact, it is certainly not a case of people suddenly learning civilization from the Sumerians, or anything like that. Rather, various cultures developed their own civilizations, and there was some diffusion and influence with neighboring areas. |
|
|
What is history but a fable agreed upon?
Napoleon Bonaparte Even if you are a minority of one, the truth is the truth.- Mohandas Gandhi 
|
|
|
|
|
Phallanx
Chieftain
Joined: 07-Feb-2005 Location: Greece Online Status: Offline Posts: 1283 |
Quote Reply
Posted: 06-Jul-2005 at 17:05 |
|
Decebal
Interesting points. Let me use Hellas in my example. We allegedly have these Aryan invasions taking place in Hellas approx. 1200BC, where we find these 'superior' people come and introduce their language, Gods and some superior technology previously unknown, like pottery and metalworking etc In the example of Hellas (not familiar to other areas) several problems appear . You understand that pottery and metalworking are simply not worth the argument, thanks to the many archeologic finds that predate the alleged invasions by some millenia. One of the most interesting 'issues' is that the Dorians or which ever other 'tribe' they choose to use (note that there is NO reference to any Dorian or other invasion in any text nor myth but a return of the Herakledes) spoke a language that was obviously nothing more than a dialect of the Linear B' inscriptions found ( 1500BC) and thus Hellinic. All God names are obviously Hellinic, (some in order to support the invasions claim them as Pelasgian and them as non-Hellinic autochthonus people. Something than can also be rejected ) so they obviously either never brought either of the above with them or the invaders simply adopted the God names and language of the 'uncivilized' original population. ( unaccceptable based on the theory's logic ) Without being a linguist, if we return to language, here is what 'hits me'. It is simple logic that for a spoken form to evolve into written, it needs a 'process' of several years if not centuries. But we are arguing about some alleged adoption, when the first written form of Sanscrit (Brahmi) we've found, is dated to the 5th BC ( maybe 4th ) and as Diodorus Sicelus informs us, it was only known by the "high-priests" and have absolutely no inscriptions of the earlier forms of Vedic speech. So the supporters of this theory, want us to believe that some people of totally unknown origin, that left absolutely no traces of their previous life, 'shipped out' of God knows where and influenced the already written language of the Hellines with their non-existant written speech??? Now if we add to this the Nazi instructions as seen here: Historical Instruction in Nazi Germany
from New Rules for Historical Instruction in Germany (in Discussion and Correspondence), American Anthropologist, New Series, Vol. 36, No. 1. (Jan. - Mar., 1934), pp. 139-141.
The following article, published in 1939 in American Anthropologist
shows how the Nordicist tendencies of the National Socialist regime
affected historical instruction in Germany. Nordicist theories were
actually viewed with scorn among many educated Germans, and have been
abandoned altogether by science. The neo-Nordicists of today continue
in essence to plagiarize the Nordicists of the past, in the absence of
any scientific evidence for the alleged primacy of the Nordic race:
source: That is more than enough for me to reject it, since it is obvious that Europeans always wanted to invent a noble past for themselves, so they have created the 'Aryan' invasion myth to support their theories of their racial superiority over their colonies. They simply couldn't accept the probability of being inferior to the enslaved by the Ottomans, Hellines. It was impossible for a 'warn out' people to have a noble past and they, the superpowers, the people that colonized the world, could possibly be culturally inferior. So they simply came up with this ficticious story. Of course that's just my view on the topic. Edited by Phallanx |
|
|
To the gods we mortals are all ignorant.Those old traditions from our ancestors, the ones we've had as long as time itself, no argument will ever overthrow, in spite of subtleties sharp minds invent.
|
|
|
|
|
Guests
Guest
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 06-Jul-2005 at 20:13 |
|
Off topic: A new symptom, what is your obsession with Osman? I mean, if you have a problem with him and his sons, just wait until you have a little conversation with them when your time comes. If it is your life purpose of course... Closed. |
|
|
|
|
Phallanx
Chieftain
Joined: 07-Feb-2005 Location: Greece Online Status: Offline Posts: 1283 |
Quote Reply
Posted: 06-Jul-2005 at 20:50 |
|
Man, what can I say?????
I've made an entire post rejecting the alleged IE invasion theory and this masochist wants nothing more, than to f**k up a totally decent topic. Oguz, there will be other times and topics for that. Sorry but NOT this one. |
|
|
To the gods we mortals are all ignorant.Those old traditions from our ancestors, the ones we've had as long as time itself, no argument will ever overthrow, in spite of subtleties sharp minds invent.
|
|
|
|
|
Decebal
Arch Duke
Digital Prometheus Joined: 20-May-2005 Location: Canada Online Status: Offline Posts: 1791 |
Quote Reply
Posted: 06-Jul-2005 at 21:22 |
|
Sheesh! To all the Turks and the Greeks out there: could you please stop hijacking every single post with your squabbles? You could show some wisdom in not ruining it for everybody...
Phallanx, you do have some valid points. History has been manipulated more than once to suit the interests of politics. The Aryan theory is one of many theories which may probably had some merit to begin with and then it was manipulated to suit the views of Nazis and other white supremacists in the West. I find it entirely possible that a pastoral, horse-based migratory group could have migrated from their ancestral home in Western Asia, or Eastern Europe after a population explosion due to the domestication of the horse, and intermixed with local populations in India, the Middle East and Europe. This could account for linguistic and cultural connections and changes we observe in the peoples of this region during the 2nd millenium BC. Of course, the afore-mentioned Nazis had to give it the "supremacy" spin, by saying that this population was whiter, more technologically advanced and ultimately superior to the "subjugated" populations. That is obviously just propaganda and should be taken with a grain of salt. But that doesn't necessarily change the fact that migrations have occured. On a local basis, talking about Hellas, wouldn't it be possible that the Dorians were actually a people related to Greeks already living in Hellas, who were forced off their lands by the Aryans, in the same manner that Germanic people were forced off their lands by Huns in the 4th century AD? I am not familiar with pottery and metalworking finds in the area, but isn't it possible that a cultural infusion may have occured without an invasion necessarily taking place? You also make a mistake in your argument by bringing writing out of the blue: the Aryans were supposed to have brought their language, but not necessarily their writing, since being a nomadic people they probably didn't have any. How much is known about the language spoken locally in Hellas before and after the alleged Dorian invasion anyway? |
|
|
What is history but a fable agreed upon?
Napoleon Bonaparte Even if you are a minority of one, the truth is the truth.- Mohandas Gandhi
|
|
|
|
|
Phallanx
Chieftain
Joined: 07-Feb-2005 Location: Greece Online Status: Offline Posts: 1283 |
Quote Reply
Posted: 07-Jul-2005 at 08:31 |
|
Decebal
The reasons we must reject the possibility of a Dorian or any other invasion are simple. Let's start with, no historic memories. I fell on this great article : Continuity in archaeology and folklore
www.thirdstone.demon.co.uk/download/bob_34.pdf Hope you find it interesting. So basically we are talking about a people, (the Hellines) that have ancient memories of the deluge and of traveling away from their original 'homeland'. Memories that are proven to be actually quite true, based on archeologic finds, yet absolutelly no memories nor any archeologic nor anthropologic evidence of this 'invasion/population movement". That is selective use of sources in my book. I can't really say I can totally 'rule out' your example of the Huns and the Germanic people. But there is a major difference, I do believe that we have an abundance of texts, archeologic and anthropologic finds to support this. (I might be wrong but honestly don't think so) while on the other hand, we see nothing more than an invention of terms, supported by non-existant facts. Need I mention the selective use of sources again As for the writing, you probably misunderstood. I didn't suggest that they brought writing, I meant that the alleged invaders, found a people with an already formed language that was already put into writting and supposedly influenced them with their obviously far more 'primitive' language (according to my previous logic on the evolution from speech to written form). If we use the Dorian invasion, we find the date of 1150BC but when we look at the Linear B' script (proven beyond any doubt to be Hellinic language) we find it preceeding the alleged invasions by 3-4 centuries maybe more. If we are to use the Linear A' still undeciphered, but obvious connections to Linear B' or the much older finds at Dispilio (see topic in archeology thread) the theory is obviously crushed. How does this 'primitive' language influence an already developed into written script lang? Edited by Phallanx |
|
|
To the gods we mortals are all ignorant.Those old traditions from our ancestors, the ones we've had as long as time itself, no argument will ever overthrow, in spite of subtleties sharp minds invent.
|
|
|
|
|
Decebal
Arch Duke
Digital Prometheus Joined: 20-May-2005 Location: Canada Online Status: Offline Posts: 1791 |
Quote Reply
Posted: 07-Jul-2005 at 09:24 |
|
You know Phallanx, I've been doing some looking up on the Dorian invasion/migration and nowhere have I found that they were Aryan, but rather that they were Greek. A more "barbarous" Greek people from the north, but still Greek. Apparently, even if they may have been considered Aryan in the 1940s, they are not thought of as such any longer. Also, If you reject the Dorian invasion, then how do you explain the sudden end of the Mycenean civilization? Anyway, how did we get on this topic? The Aryans are not considered "the origin of all civilizations" and Greece had a civilization long before the Dorian invasion. |
|
|
What is history but a fable agreed upon?
Napoleon Bonaparte Even if you are a minority of one, the truth is the truth.- Mohandas Gandhi
|
|
|
|
|
Phallanx
Chieftain
Joined: 07-Feb-2005 Location: Greece Online Status: Offline Posts: 1283 |
Quote Reply
Posted: 07-Jul-2005 at 11:09 |
|
Actually I've found a number of 'scholars' that support the 'idea' of Dorians being IE invaders. True I do strongly object to any invasion but obviousl don't reject their return '" which is quite different. Now as for the decline of the Mycenean civilization, even though there are a number of theories circulated (earthquakes, floods etc. It is quite interesting that that approx. the same time and some years before the return of the Dorians. We find large waves of Myceneans 'expanding' through out the Mediterranian. This 'expantion' obviously lead to the decrease of the population, since we find them populating Crete, Cyprus, Phoenicia........ (see the Sea People) We know that the Heraklides were descendants of Heracles, which makes them also descendants of Perseus original founder of Mycenae. So all they did was take back their lands from the Pelopides. No invasion, just one of the many 'inter-racial' wars seen in Hellinic history. How we got into this, is probably my fault. All I did was point out that there are some problems in naming Egypt as the 'center of civilization' and agree with magavan that the Aryan invasions are a myth. |
|
|
To the gods we mortals are all ignorant.Those old traditions from our ancestors, the ones we've had as long as time itself, no argument will ever overthrow, in spite of subtleties sharp minds invent.
|
|
|
|
|
Decebal
Arch Duke
Digital Prometheus Joined: 20-May-2005 Location: Canada Online Status: Offline Posts: 1791 |
Quote Reply
Posted: 07-Jul-2005 at 14:45 |
|
Heracles, Perseus: why should we mix mythical characters with history? As for the end of Myceanean civilization, I thought that archeological digs have found layers of ash, thereby indicating a fire possibly caused by an invasion. I never supported the theory that Egypt is the center of civilization. I think that civilization arose more or less independently in several areas. If I really did have to pick a center, I'd definitely go with Mesopotamia over Egypt. |
|
|
What is history but a fable agreed upon?
Napoleon Bonaparte Even if you are a minority of one, the truth is the truth.- Mohandas Gandhi
|
|
|
|
|
Phallanx
Chieftain
Joined: 07-Feb-2005 Location: Greece Online Status: Offline Posts: 1283 |
Quote Reply
Posted: 07-Jul-2005 at 15:39 |
|
Well according to Aristotle and Euemerus among others, "myths are history in disguise". (I find their opinion quite accurate) It has been proven time and time again that the myths when properly analyzed give us the same info that the later archeologic finds come to support. There are many examples, Troy, the Argonauts, foundation of Rome, the name Heracles, the 'sacrifice' of Ifigeneia and Agamemnon's connection...... the myths do give us correct info. It's all up to us to decipher them before the archeologists unearth the finds. While it is true that there have been finds of ashes in Mycenae, the major problem is that we have no similar finds in the near by cities of Tyrinth, Acini and Nauplio (to mention a few). A similar destruction (by fire) is found in Nestor's palace but that is miles away in a totally different region Messnia, which is what makes some archeologists skeptical and not all accept this theory. As for Egypt, I know you never supported it, I quoted Moustafa Pasha. Anyway, latest research shows that Egypt was nothing but a total desert before 9000BC, so it is obvious that there could be no form of civilization 'evolving' in that area. It was only after approx. that time that the area had "monsoonal weather" that actually influenced the whole African continent. |
|
|
To the gods we mortals are all ignorant.Those old traditions from our ancestors, the ones we've had as long as time itself, no argument will ever overthrow, in spite of subtleties sharp minds invent.
|
|
|
|
|
Post Reply
|
Page <123> |
| Forum Jump | Forum Permissions You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot create polls in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum |
Copyright ©2001-2009 Web Wiz
This page was generated in 0.094 seconds.
