Indo-Iranian Archaeology

[DMXX]

Opening this thread with a review written by Lamberg-Karlovsky from 2002:

This review of recent archaeological work in Central Asia and Eurasia attempts to trace and date the movements of the Indo-Iranians - speakers of languages of the eastern branch of Proto-Indo-European that later split into the Iranian and Vedic families. Russian and Central Asian scholars working on the contemporary but very different Andronovo and Bactrian Margiana archaeological complexes of the 2nd millennium B.C. have identified both as Indo-Iranian, and particular sites so identified are being used for nationalist purposes. There is, however, no compelling archaeological evidence that they had a common ancestor or that either is Indo-Iranian. Ethnicity and language are not easily linked with archaeological signature, and the identity of the Indo-Iranians remains elusive.

[PDF]

Although over a decade old, the review gives us a very good run-through of the features in Andronovo and BMAC which have corresponded to various traits found among modern Indo-Iranians. In addition, it provides a balanced account of the culture observed in both complexes. Kuz'mina's The Origin of the Indo-Iranians is a far more comprehensive and current read and I'd refer anyone interested in the intricacies to read it.

Goes without saying the authors' wariness towards genetics was appropriate for 2002, but the evidence-based boon experienced in population genetics since then would certainly warrant a re-assessment of that perspective now.

One interesting theme I have observed in Indo-Iranian archaeology papers is the deduction that the Andronovo-BMAC interactions were, relatively speaking, peaceful. There are fortified settlements in the BMAC, but don't appear to be in response to northern nomads, rather a relic of architectural traditions deriving from their origin in West Asia that were continued for religious reasons (article above). Drawing on H Haarmann's paper regarding the process of Indo-Europeanisation (link), it is reasonable to presume this "peace" stemmed from a lack of agricultural competition between the two (agro-pastoralism vs. subsistence farming).

[DMXX]

A lecture delivered by none other than David Anthony (Dec 2012). Although the first two thirds deals with the development of horse domestication and wheeled vehicles, Anthony discusses Sintashta and the BMAC in the final third.

Note that Anthony explains the Andronovo/Sintashta-BMAC interactions were not one-way and evidence of material borrowing from the BMAC (pyramid engravings on pots) was found all the way back in the Sintashta and Potapovka cultures for an amount of time.

Another point of interest is Anthony too subscribes to the idea of a "contact zone" between Andronovo and BMAC, although he specifies this is the case for Indo-Aryan, implying it is less so for Iranian. Is there any linguistic support for this distinction?

[Jean M]

Another point of interest is Anthony too subscribes to the idea of a "contact zone" between Andronovo and BMAC, although he specifies this is the case for Indo-Aryan, implying it is less so for Iranian. Is there any linguistic support for this distinction?

Yes. Indo-Aryan has many more words borrowed from the otherwise unknown language assumed to be that of the BMAC.

[DMXX]

Yes. Indo-Aryan has many more words borrowed from the otherwise unknown language assumed to be that of the BMAC.

I am aware of certain words in both Avestan and Sanskrit with non-IE origins; are you aware of any texts in the literature which outline the nature of these words?

One post-2000 paper (cannot recall title unfortunately) explains that these non-IE words were largely agricultural, religious or to do with everyday objects, but only one loanword was to do with weaponry (mace), prompting the authors to speculate the early Indo-Iranians had some sort of military advantage (contradicts the "peaceful" consensus view somewhat, doesn't it?).

[Jean M]

The paper you are looking for is Alexander Lubotsky, The Indo-Iranian substratum, in Early Contacts between Uralic and Indo-European: Linguistic and Archaeological Considerations. Papers presented at an international symposium held at the Tvärminne Research Station of the University of Helsinki 8-10 January 1999. (Mémoires de la Société Finno-ougrienne 242.) Chr. Carpelan, A. Parpola, P. Koskikallio (eds.). Helsinki 2001, 301-317. [free online in pdf. Just Google.]


I have a couple of other papers by Witzel, to which you have access. The 2005 one may be most useful in this context.

[parasar]

Anthony's book has Soma and Indra as non-IE among some 383 words in Indo-Aryan!
http://books.google.com/books?id=0FDqf415wqgC&pg=PA454

If we look at Mandala 6 of the Rg Veda considered to be the one of most archaic we see the following:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mandala_6

The dedication as given by Griffith is in square brackets

6.1 (442) [Agni.] tuváṃ hí agne prathamó manóta
6.2 (443) [Agni.] tuváṃ hí kṣaítavad yáśo
6.3 (444) [Agni.] ágne sá kṣeṣad ṛtapâ ṛtejâ
6.4 (445) [Agni.] yáthā hotar mánuṣo devátātā
6.5 (446) [Agni.] huvé vaḥ sūnúṃ sáhaso yúvānam
6.6 (447) [Agni.] prá návyasā sáhasaḥ sūnúm áchā
6.7 (448) [Agni.] mūrdhânaṃ divó aratím pṛthivyâ
6.8 (449) [Agni.] pṛkṣásya vŕṣṇo aruṣásya nû sáhaḥ
6.9 (450) [Agni.] áhaś ca kṛṣṇám áhar árjunaṃ ca
6.10 (451) [Agni.] puró vo mandráṃ diviyáṃ suvṛktím
6.11 (452) [Agni.] yájasva hotar iṣitó yájīyān
6.12 (453) [Agni.] mádhye hótā duroṇé barhíṣo râḷ
6.13 (454) [Agni.] tuvád víśvā subhaga saúbhagāni
6.14 (455) [Agni.] agnâ yó mártiyo dúvo
6.15 (456) [Agni.] imám ū ṣú vo átithim uṣarbúdhaṃ
6.16 (457) [Agni.] tuvám agne yajñân~āṃ
6.17 (458) [Indra.] píbā sómam abhí yám ugra tárda
6.18 (459) [Indra.] tám u ṣṭuhi yó abhíbhūtiojā
6.19 (460) [Indra.] mahâṁ índro nṛvád â carṣaṇiprâ
6.20 (461) [Indra.] dyaúr ná yá indra abhí bhûma aryás
6.21 (462) [Indra. Visvedevas.] imâ u tvā purutámasya kārór
6.22 (463) [Indra.] yá éka íd dháviyaś carṣaṇīnâm
6.23 (464) [Indra.] sutá ít tváṃ nímiśla indra sóme
6.24 (465) [Indra.] vŕṣā máda índare ślóka ukthâ
6.25 (466) [Indra.] yâ ta ūtír avamâ yâ paramâ
6.26 (467) [Indra.] śrudhî na indra hváyāmasi tvā
6.27 (468) [Indra.] kím asya máde kím u asya pītâv
6.28 (469) [Cows.] â gâvo agmann utá bhadrám akran
6.29 (470) [Indra.] índraṃ vo náraḥ sakhiyâya sepur
6.30 (471) [Indra.] bhûya íd ? vāvṛdhe vīríyāyaṁ
6.31 (472) [Indra.] ábhūr éko rayipate rayīṇâm
6.32 (473) [Indra.] ápūrviyā purutámāni asmai
6.33 (474) [Indra.] yá ójiṣṭha indara táṃ sú no dā
6.34 (475) [Indra.] sáṃ ca tvé jagmúr gíra indra pūrvîr
6.35 (476) [Indra.] kadâ bhuvan ráthakṣayāṇi bráhma
6.36 (477) [Indra.] satrâ mádāsas táva viśvájanyāḥ
6.37 (478) [Indra.] arvâg ráthaṃ viśvávāraṃ ta ugra
6.38 (479) [Indra.] ápād itá úd u naś citrátamo
6.39 (480) [Indra.] mandrásya kavér diviyásya váhner
6.40 (481) [Indra.] índra píba túbhya * sutó mádāya
6.41 (482) [Indra.] áheḷamāna úpa yāhi yajñáṃ
6.42 (483) [Indra.] práti asmai pípīṣate
6.43 (484) [Indra.] yásya tyác chámbaram máde
6.44 (485) [Indra.] yó rayivo rayíṃtamo
6.45 (486) [Indra.] yá ânayat parāvátaḥ
6.46 (487) [Indra.] tuvâm íd dhí hávāmahe
6.47 (488) [Indra, Etc.] svādúṣ kílāyám mádhumāṁ utâyáṃ
6.48 (489) [Agni and Others.] yajñâ-yajñā vo agnáye
6.49 (490) [Visvedevas.] stuṣé jánaṃ suvratáṃ návyasībhir
6.50 (491) [Visvedevas.] huvé vo devîm áditiṃ námobhir
6.51 (492) [Visvedevas.] úd u tyác cákṣur máhi mitráyor âṁ
6.52 (493) [Visvedevas.] ná tád divâ ná pṛthivyânu manye
6.53 (494) [Pusan.] vayám u tvā pathas pate
6.54 (495) [Pusan.] sám pūṣan vidúṣā naya
6.55 (496) [Pusan.] éhi vâṃ vimuco napād
6.56 (497) [Pusan.] yá enam ādídeśati
6.57 (498) [Indra and Pusan.] índrā nú pūṣáṇā vayáṃ
6.58 (499) [Pusan.] śukráṃ te anyád yajatáṃ te anyád
6.59 (500) [Indra-Agni.] prá nú vocā sutéṣu vāṃ
6.60 (501) [Indra-Agni.] śnáthad vṛtrám utá sanoti vâjam
6.61 (502) [Sarasvati.] iyám adadād rabhasám ṛṇacyútaṃ
6.62 (503) [Asvins.] stuṣé nárā divó asyá prasántā
6.63 (504) [Asvins.] kúva tyâ valgû puruhūtâ adyá
6.64 (505) [Dawn.] úd u śriyá uṣáso rócamānā
6.65 (506) [Dawn.] eṣâ siyâ no duhitâ divojâḥ
6.66 (507) [Maruts.] vápur nú tác cikitúṣe cid astu
6.67 (508) [Mitra-Varuna.] víśveṣāṃ vaḥ sat~âṃ jyéṣṭhatamā
6.68 (509) [Indra-Varuna.] śruṣṭî vāṃ yajñá údyataḥ sajóṣā
6.69 (510) [Indra-Visnu.] sáṃ vāṃ kármaṇā sám iṣâ hinomi
6.70 (511) [Heaven and Earth.] ghṛtávatī bhúvanānām abhiśríyā
6.71 (512) [Savitar.] úd u ṣyá deváḥ savitâ hiraṇyáyā
6.72 (513) [Indra-Soma.] índrāsomā máhi tád vām mahitváṃ
6.73 (514) [Brhaspati.] yó adribhít prathamajâ ṛtâvā
6.74 (515) [Soma-Rudra.] sómārudrā dhāráyethām asuryàm
6.75 (516) [Weapons of War.] jīmûtasyeva bhavati prátīkaṃ

So, if incorporated from outside, not only did Indra show up in the earliest book of the Rg Vedic people, but became one with the most invoked!

24. May he with might unclose for us the cow's stall, whosesoe'er it be,
To which the Dasyu-slayer goes.
25. O Indra Satakratu, these our songs have called aloud to thee,
Like mother cows to meet their calves.
26. Hard is thy love to win: thou art a Steer to him who longs for steers:
Be to one craving steeds a Steed.
27. Delight thee with the juice we pour for thine own great munificence:
Yield not thy singer to reproach.
28. These songs with every draught we pour come, Lover of the Song, to thee,
As milch-kine hasten to their young
29. To thee most oft invoked, amid the many singers' rivalry
Who beg with all their might for wealth.
30. Nearest and most attractive may our laud, O Indra come to thee.
Urge thou us on to ample wealth.
31. Brbu hath set himself above the Panis, o'er their highest head,
Like the wide bush on Ganga's bank.

[DMXX]

Anthony's book has Soma and Indra as non-IE among some 383 words in Indo-Aryan!
http://books.google.com/books?id=0FDqf415wqgC&pg=PA454

Very interesting. The word "xar" is still used in modern Iranic languages and also in some Arabic dialects.

[Humanist]

Very interesting. The word "xar" is still used in modern Iranic languages and also in some Arabic dialects.

What is its meaning?

[DMXX]

What is its meaning?

xar (alternate spelling khar I suppose) means "donkey". Another Persian word for it is olagh, but I suspect it's Turkic in origin (given otagh, or "room", definitely is).

During my time in the Gulf Arab states, I frequently heard khara and hamaar used for "donkey", but my Arab friends told me only the latter is official.

[Humanist]

xar (alternate spelling khar I suppose) means "donkey". Another Persian word for it is olagh, but I suspect it's Turkic in origin (given otagh, or "room", definitely is).

During my time in the Gulf Arab states, I frequently heard khara and hamaar used for "donkey", but my Arab friends told me only the latter is official.

I am not familiar with "khar" = "donkey" but I am familiar with all of the other words. Forms of the word "hamaar" are attested in many Semitic languages. It is attested as long ago as Akkadian, in the form "himaru." In Sureth it is "hmara." The words "olagh" and "otagh" are both loans in my Sureth dialect, and are used quite frequently.