thank you for the mail.
I am not denying the Aryan element in Mittanni. Cf my earlier posts.
Also, it is universally agreed that there is no Aryan aristocracy in Mitanni. It is also agreed that there is no Iranaian influence on Mitannis. (cf the recent discussions in IER. I am yet to read the discussions in Ind Arch, the thread there also was initiated by me)
Yet, the Indic Aryan element (which was present solely in Royal and warfare issues in 15th c itself ) is yet to be explained correctly, though Bjarte has made some effort. I have offered a socialogical explanation earlier.
Now, the core issue revolves round two things, former of them being accepted by main stream westerners: one,. that the mitannis somehow determine the dating of RV and two, that if the influence of an Indic aryan (not Ilr or Iranian) is clearly present on mitannis, without the presence of the Aryans themselves, then where were they? So far I am concerned, it would be too premature to offer an explanation for this issue, since there are no archaelogical or liturargical data available. So far linguistics is concered, cf above, presence of Indic Aryans seemed to have thrown them into a confusion. - hitting at postulation of a proto Ilr .
This postulation was made because of the similarities between Iranian and Indic languages and hence, suggestions of a homeland, which is theoritically is where the branching is not existant. However, presence of only Indic Aryans (without Ilr or Ir) suggests that the branching, if any, must have taken place much earlier and this led the author to suggest that the branching must have been made at homeland itself !!!! In othere words, the very defintion of homeland is negated and it means there is no homeland at all.
I am not sure whether I am clear but this is what I am calling as ciruclar reference.
Kishore patnaik