Re: [tied] Scythians, Zoroastrians, etc.

From: george knysh
Message: 12520
Date: 2002-02-27

--- michael_donne <michael_donne@...> wrote:
> >The linguistic affinity of the
> >second "Nomad" aristocracy, that of the Catiari or
> >Cotieri is yet to be determined. Perhaps they were
> >Indic
>
> > Indic? In what way were they Indic?
>
> *****GK: Perhaps in the same way as the Sinds and
> Maeotians further east. I must confess that my
> "probably" was rather loose here. "Possibly" would
> be
> better.******
>
> I didn't mean to challenge you. I was just wondering
> what aspects of
> their language or culture makes them likely to be
> Indic? Where were
> the Maeotians located?

*****GK: Yours is a very good question rather than a
challenge. The Maeotic tribes were located along the
eastern shore of the Sea of Azov. The recent work of
the Russian linguist Trubachov has established that
they were "Pontic Indo-Aryans". Whether they were a
relict of those "Indics" who moved southeastwards and
south, or some reflux is still under discussion. The
presence of "Indics" further to the West is trickier
to establish, and might just be illusory, since we
have so little to go on: one perhaps two major
hydronyms, a possible ethnos (but Piotr Gonsiorowski
doesn't think the Indic etymology of "Alizones" is a
viable proposition), perhaps two (but Trubachov's
"Dandarii" is equally questionable), and a very
tantalizing term in Ptolemy. That's about it. The case
for the Thracian/Thrakoid nature of the population
west of the Dnipro is stronger.******
>


__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Greetings - Send FREE e-cards for every occasion!
http://greetings.yahoo.com