linguists-from-germany

"For what is more important and can be desired more urgently from the study of classical languages than the comparison of these with our mother tongue in its most ancient, most perfect form?”"

"Though Bopp, by the end of his life, was an internationally respected and honored scholar, his was not a career without conflict. Reflecting much later on the difficulties his teacher faced, Max Muller recalled the period in the 1820s and 1830s in which scholars and especially classicists would not believe that there could be any community of origin between the people of Athens and Rome, and the so-called Niggers of India.... No one ever was for a time so completely laughed down as Professor Bopp, when he first published his Comparative Grammar of Sanskrit, Zend, Greek, Latin, and Gothic. All hands were against him; and if in comparing Greek and Latin with Sanskrit, Gothic, Celtic, Slavonic, or Persian, he happened to have placed one single accent wrong, the shouts of those who knew nothing but Greek and Latin, and probably looked in their Greek Dictionaries to be quite sure of their accents, would never end."

"They would not have it, they would not believe that there could be any community of origin between the people of Athens and Rome, and the so-called Niggers of India. The classical scholars scouted the idea, and I still remember the time, when 1 was a student at Leipzig and begun to study Sanskrit, with what contempt any remarks on Sanskrit or comparative grammar were treated by my teachers. . . . No one ever was for a time so completely laughed down as Professor Bopp, when he first published his Comparative Grammar of Sanskrit, Zend, Greek, Latin and Gothic. All hands were against him. (28) Unlike some of his contemporaries, Muller was effusive in his admiration for things Indian (although he never subscribed to an Indian homeland). In his course of lectures "India: What Can It Teach Us?" (1883), he declared that she was "the country most richly endowed with all the wealth, power and beauty that nature can bestow," indeed, "a very paradise on earth," a place where "the human mind has most fully developed some of its choicest gifts, [and] has most deeply pondered on the greatest problems of life. [Such lavish praise was far too extreme for those who, as Muller himself noted, would be] "horror struck at the idea that the humanity they meet with [in India] . . . should be able to teach us any lesson."

"It is therefore historically irresponsible for the linguist to speak of 'Proto-Indo-European' in the 4th millen- nium, and linguistically meaningless for the archaeologist to argue about 'Proto-Indo-Europeans' living somewhere before ca 2500 B.C."

"The horse was well known by the Proto-Indo-Europeans, as best proven by several poetic formulas mentioning the 'swift horse', the 'horses of the sun', and using the adjectives 'characterized by good horses' and "having horses which are cared for". The formulas tell us nothing specific about the use of horses, but archaeology and history supply the necessary information."

"Zimmer (1990a) points out that the inference that the horse was known to the Indo-Europeans is primarily based on such poetic formulas as 'swift horse', 'horses of the sun', 'characterized by good horses', and so on. He feels that "the formulas tell us nothing specific about the use of horses, but archaeology and history supply the necessary information"."

"It must be stressed, and cannot be said often enough, that whatever date is given for 'PIE,' it is necessarily no more than pure speculation."

"Every attempt, then, to give absolute dates for 'Proto-Indo-European' (or dates for alleged different stages of'PIE') is either based on the speculative identification of an archaeological culture with the speakers of the 'language of the PIE's' (e.g. Gimbutas, Renfrew, Mallory) or on what may be called 'intelligent guesses,' deliberations of probability and feelings of appropriateness (e.g. Meid, Gamkrelidze-Ivanov)" (372). ... "The first type of proposal is usually contested by fellow archaeologists and doubted by linguists, the second, being purely subjective because objective arguments simply do not exist, is bound to remain noncommittal. As is easily to be seen, many dates of both types have found their way to an often far too skeptical public."

"Von Soden observes that “since the discovery of the Indus civilization … it has been almost universally accepted that the Sumerians immigrated from the east.” The immigrants are regarded as having arrived in lower Mesopotamia either at the beginning of the Ubaid period (c. 5000 B.C.) or at the beginning of the Uruk period (perhaps c. 3500 B.C., but perhaps as late as 3250). In either case, the Sumerians seem to have fitted easily into an advanced Chalcolithic culture where writing was already in the early stages of development. Therefore, the implication is that they must have been from another advanced culture, and that points to the East. Bottero agrees that “the Sumerians must have arrived in Mesopotamia during the fourth millennium, apparently from the southeast.” Von Soden further observes that “this immigration could have succeeded entirely by land if the Sumerians immigrated from somewhere in northern India,” and refers suggestively to “the westward migration of the Sumerian groups, whose language may have been related to the Dravidian languages of India.”"

"Lexical borrowing was unidirectional, from Indo-European to Uralic."

"The movement of lexical borrowing was unilaterally directed from the Indo-European south to the Uralic north."

"Since the discovery of the Indus civilization … it has been almost universally accepted that the Sumerians immigrated from the east.... this immigration could have succeeded entirely by land if the Sumerians immigrated from somewhere in northern India... the westward migration of the Sumerian groups, whose language may have been related to the Dravidian languages of India."

"By separating the meaning of the Vedic varana from the classical one, Roth allowed himself to be led to believe that the elephant was still foreign to the songs of the Rigveda. If this statement were correct, the Vedic Indians would not have been Indians at all, for the elephant is inseparable from India. But as shown, it is erroneous; in addition to hastin and varana, athari and apsas could also be identified as Vedic words for "elephant". A further joint examination of the words ibha and ibhya has also shown us... that ibha also means nothing other than what it means in classical Sanskrit, namely "elephant". ... Not only ibha, but also ibhya has exactly the same meaning as in classical Sanskrit, and Sayana got it right because he was familiar with Indian views."

"The translations by Grassmann and Ludwig show once again quite strikingly the errors that an exegesis that wants to see in the Veda something other than a purely Indian monument and that does not take Indian views into account must lead to. ... Here, verse 1 says that the gods determined that the place where a man who makes a sacrifice is to be found is the east. Such a man, the text says directly, is the east, but verse 4 says that in the west is a miser who lets nothing come of it and a rich man who gives no gifts. ... "In the west are the ill-wishers whose horses are badly harnessed; in the east are those who are here for giving, who give a variety of gifts," i.e. the misers who have given bad horses are to be in the extreme west, the region of the sunset, thus of darkness and therefore of raksas, while the generous are to be in the east, the region of the sunrise, thus in the eternal light, which is what 10, 107,2 says. So 7,6,3 is to be translated quite literally: "He (Agni), the Eastern One, has made those who do not make sacrifices into Westerners," i.e. he, the bright one, has plunged them into deep darkness."

"[a]s regards all that refers to fields and gardens, the growing of flowers is the most recent conquest of European humanity. The pragmatism of prehistoric people had prevented them from discovering the attraction of these objects, so cherished by ladies and poets, in the same way that their ears remained deaf to the song of the lark and the nightingale. This only changed when flower scented perfumes from the East reached Europe and when man’s relationship with nature, at least in the upper echelons of society, began to become sentimental. (I, p. 151)"

"Out of the East came the light! ... the march of civilization has always tended to follow the light of the sun."

"All the peoples of Europe and, to begin with, those which were originally related and which gained supremacy at the cost of many wanderings and dangers, emigrated from Asia in the remote past. They were propelled from East to West by an irresistable instinct (unhemmbarer Trieb), the real cause of which is unknown to us.... The vocation and courage of those peoples, which were originally related and destined to rise to such heights, is shown by the fact that European history was almost entirely made by them."

"Lüling sees traces of the Christian controversies over the nature of Christ in the Qur’an’s denunciations of those who associate partners with Allah. Lüling sees the Muslim charge that the pagan Quraysh of Mecca were mushrikun, those who associated others with Allah in worship, as an indication that they had actually converted to orthodox Trinitarian Christianity, thereby reinforcing their rejection of Islam’s hardline monotheism and rejection of Christ’s divinity. As the Islamic faith began to develop as a distinct religion, it decisively rejected this faith in Christ and reinterpreted the Qur’an to fit its developing new theology. The hanifs, who were overwhelmed by the coming of Islam and its success, were the last remnants of those who held to creedally vague monotheism."

"The text of the Koran as transmitted by Muslim Orthodoxy contains, hidden behind it as a ground layer and considerably scattered throughout it (together about one-third of the whole Koran text), an originally pre- Islamic Christian text.” Earlier Qur’anic scholars such as Alois Sprenger and Tor Andrae have also identified a Christian substratum."

"It is not just on the level of simple isolated words but also at the level of syntax that the Arab commentators have misunderstood the Koranic text, to the extent of misinterpreting entire suras."

"Iranianist H. Humbach, too, emphasises the same similarity pointing out the polarisation of relations between the Ahuras and the Daevas in the Gathic Avesta and the reverse polarisation between Devas and Asuras which only begins to occur in the later books of the RV; he concludes: “All this suggests a synchrony between the later Vedic period and Zarathustra’s reform in Iran” (1991:23)."

"It must be emphasised that the process of polarisation of relations between the Ahuras and the DaEvas is already complete in the GAthAs, whereas, in the Rigveda, the reverse process of polarisation between the Devas and the Asuras, which does not begin before the later parts of the Rigveda, develops as it were before our very eyes, and is not completed until the later Vedic period. Thus, it is not at all likely that the origins of the polarisation are to be sought in the prehistorical, the Proto-Aryan period. More likely, ZarathuStra’s reform was the result of interdependent developments, when Irano-Indian contacts still persisted at the dawn of history. With their Ahura-DaEva ideology, the Mazdayasnians, guided by their prophet, deliberately dissociated themselves from the Deva-Asura concept which was being developed, or had been developed, in India, and probably also in the adjacent Iranian-speaking countries… All this suggests a synchrony between the later Vedic period and ZarathuStra’s reform in Iran."

"For the last category of religions, Ziegenbalg used the word ‘heathen’ as equivalent to ‘pagan’ or ‘gentile’. It denoted non-monotheistic people and connoted ‘ignorant’ and ‘uncivilized’. All heathens, Ziegenbalg said, are under the rule of the devil, whom they worship as a god. He leads them into idolatry and superstitious rites. The devil is the father of them all, but they have divided into many sects and in Africa, America, and East India, they differ in their gods and teachings. 7"

"Zeigenbalg’s missionary effort was typical of Christian missionary enterprise in India during the eighteenth century. No doubt the number of converts steadily increased and churches were founded in different parts of India. But it was the remittance from Europe that supplied the cost of building churches and feeding the congregation. Abbe Dubois (1,765-1848) published, at the end of the eighteenth or beginning of the nineteenth century, his Letters on the State of Christianity in India . In these he “asserted his opinion that under existing circumstances there was no human possibility of so overcoming the invincible barrier of Brahminical prejudice as to convert the Hindus as a nation to any sect of Christianity. He acknowledged that low castes and outcastes might be converted in large numbers, but of the higher castes he wrote: ‘Should the intercourse between individuals of both nations, by becoming more intimate and more friendly, produce a change in the religion and usages of the country, it will not be to turn Christians that they will forsake their own religion, but rather to become mere atheists.” (150-1)"

"Yet he considered it his duty to destroy idol worship, and wrote how he had destroyed idols in a prominent goddess temple. The Hindus were described as ‘being deeply affected with the sight so foppish a set of Gods’, and he proudly ‘threw some down to the ground, and striking off the heads of others’. He wanted to demonstrate to the ‘deluded’ Hindus that ‘their images were nothing but impotent and still idols, unable to protect themselves and much less their worshippers’. The most remarkable part of this incident was that the Hindus who gathered at the scene of destruction were agitated, but did not allow their agitation to turn violent. One man he described as a ‘pagan school teacher (upadhyayan )’ calmly entered into a theological debate and proceeded to show the missionary the folly of his actions. He concluded the debate by pointing out to the missionary that from the point of view of absolute being, all forms of matter are constructions of Maya, and that the pottery images the missionary broke were merely symbols."

"It was neither the powerful English nor the Dutch, but the Danes who sent the first Protestant mission to India, — to Tranquebar, an insignificant locality which they possessed in India. Zeigenbalg, the first missionary who reached India in 1706, candidly confessed that his mission had little success. He pointed out that the Christians in India were “so much debauched in their manners”, and “so given to gluttony, drunkenness, lewdness, cursing, swearing, cheating and cozening” and “proud and insulting in their conduct”, that many Indians, judging the religion by its effect upon its followers, “could not be induced to embrace Christianity”. Only a few poor or destitute persons were converted, and they had to be fed and maintained by the mission. When Ziegenbalg wanted to convert the upper classes by argument, he failed miserably. “In a notable debate held under the auspices of the Dutch in Negapatam, Ziegenbalg disputed with a Brahmin for five hours, and far from converting the Brahmin, the missionary came away with an excessive admiration for the intellectual gifts of his adversary”.(150)"

"[They] lead a very quiet, honest and virtuous life infinitely outdoing our false Christians and superficial pretenders to a better sort of religion."

"“Indo-Europeanists must exercise caution, lest they unwittingly support ideologically motivated agendas”!"

"He also expresses his opinion about the Vedas that “whatever their original and/or secondary purposes may have been, they were not intended as data bases for latter-day historians”, and suggests that “whatever historical evidence they contain, therefore, can only be gleaned by a careful, philologically well-grounded reading of the lines – and between the lines – of the texts” (HOCK 2005:303).He emphasizes the need for “other” and “better” evidence (than astronomical references in the Rigveda) “to establish a date for the Rigveda” (HOCK 2005:303) and (than isolated words in the Avesta) to determine “historical movements in the Indo-Iranian linguistic territory” (HOCK 2005:295)."

"The aim should be not to “forestall all dissenting voices”, but (a) to “invite meaningful debate”; (b) “to invite the scholarly challenges and ensuing debate that can lead to better insights and closer approximation of the truth”; (c) “to go beyond what can be grasped at first contact, and as a consequence of having to defend perceptions against competing views, to investigate matters more thoroughly”; (d) to “approximate truth more closely”; (d) to “go beyond initial impressions and beyond the validation of preconceived interpretations”; (e) to “embrace the scientific approach of being transparent and vulnerable – transparent by being open to verification in terms of providing supporting evidence and discussing potentially conflicting evidence, and vulnerable by being open to challenge and potential falsification“; (f) “to evaluate the very different perspectives that are current and thus to reach beyond the differences in perspective, ideology or bias” (HOCK 2005:282-3)."

"Best of all is his classic ending, declaring his honesty and openness: “Throughout I have endeavored to live up to the desiderata outlined at the beginning, namely being transparent and vulnerable – transparent by providing supporting evidence that is easily available to verification, and vulnerable by being open to challenge and potential falsification. As I stated at the outset, this, I believe, is the only way that we can establish a common ground for those working in Vedic studies. Without this common ground there is nothing to evaluate the many conflicting theories without either questioning each others’ motives, or saying ‘Trust me, trust me’. As I tell my students: If people merely say ‘Trust me, trust me’, don’t trust them, don’t trust them. And as to questioning each others’ motives, it is good to note that people as different in their motives as Elst and Zydenbos have stated on the Indology List that what really counts is the evidence and its interpretation – even racists and communalists can come to correct results if their evidence and their methodology are correct (however much we may deplore their ideologies and biases)” (HOCK 2005:303-4)."

"In the case of Pirak, however, it must be admitted that the cultural innovations do not appear to be clearly Indo-European. Perhaps there was only indirect contact via other ethnic groups in Seistan. (244)"

"Further, elsewhere in the Rig-Veda the word tvac- ‘skin’, which occurs in [1.130.8 ], [9.41.1,5], and [9.73.5], does not necessarily designate human or animal skin, but may refer to the surface of the earth. Examples of this use occur at RV 1.79.3, 1.145.5, 10.68.4, and possibly 4.17.14. The expression róma prthivyâh (1.65.8) ‘the body-hair of the earth’ ‘the plants’, suggests that the metaphor of tvac- as the ‘skin’ or surface of the earth was well established in the poetic language of the Rig-Veda. In [1.130.8 ], [9.41.1,5], and [9.73.5], therefore, the reference may well be to the ‘dark earth’ or ‘dark world’ of the dasas/dasyus that contrasts with the urújyótih ‘broad light’ of the aryas, which is lit up by the sun or by ‘fiery beings’. In this regard note the close similarity between the expressions ájanayan mánave ksâm ‘he created land for Manu’ in [2.20.7] and urújyótir janáyann âryaya ‘making broad light for the arya’."

"A great difficulty is the fact that archaeology offers no firm evidence either for the Aryan invasion theory or for the Aryan emigration theory, or even for the historically attested multiple later immigrations or invasions into South Asia - at least if we restrict ourselves to the evidence of skeletal types and general cultural tradition. As already indicated earlier, invasions of this kind probably do not leave the kind of traces that traditional archaeology would expect. (246)... We can therefore conclude that the Aryan invasion theory is preferable to the emigration theory. But this conclusion is only valid as long as our knowledge of Indo-European culture and expansion or of the Indus culture remains unchanged... If, on the basis of this decipherment, the language of the Indus culture should clearly prove to be Indo-Aryan, then our conclusion would of course have to be revised fundamentally. (246-7)... All existing interpretations of the early and prehistory of South Asia are at best scientific hypotheses, hypotheses that differ only in their degree of probability. In view of the often tense political situation in India with regard to the Hindutva and Dravida self-image, it is in my opinion appropriate to remember the hypothetical nature of these hypotheses. There is no such thing as complete certainty and there cannot be. Why should people then be hostile, heretical or even beat each other up over these hypotheses? (247)"

"A few things can be established with certainty, others with a good degree of likelihood, and yet others remain entirely uncertain."

"Early Sanskrit literature offers no conclusive evidence for preoccupation with skin color. More than that, some of the greatest Epic heroes and heroines such as Krshna, Draupadi, Arjuna, Nakula and (...) Damayanti are characterized as dark-skinned. Similarly, the famous cave-paintings of Ajanta depict a vast range of skin colors. But in none of these contexts do we find that darker skin color disqualifies a person from being considered good, beautiful, or heroic. Even more significant, in these and other passages in Sanskrit literature that characterize a person's skin color as dark, this characterization applies to individuals - we have no evidence of the classification of entire racial groups in terms of skin color."

"Words meaning white light are widely used in reference to the world of the Aryans or their gods, and so are terms meaning broad, wide (note the combination of broad and light in the uru jyotih broad light of [RV 7.5.3 - 6])."

"The expression róma prthivyâh (1.65.8) ‘the body-hair of the earth’ ‘the plants’, suggests that the metaphor of tvac- as the ‘skin’ or surface of the earth was well established in the poetic language of the Rig-Veda."

"He even-handedly takes up three Aryan Invasion interpretations and three Indian Origin interpretations from the Vedic texts, and cautions us at the very outset (HOCK 2005:283) that “the passages in question and their interpretation do not provide cogent support for the hypotheses they are supposed to support”, while reasonably conceding that “this does not mean that either of the two theories is therefore invalidated. It merely means that the evidence in question is not sufficiently cogent to provide support for the respective hypothesis and therefore must be considered irrelevant. First of all, neither hypothesis rests solely on the evidence here examined; and it is in principle perfectly possible that other evidence can show one hypothesis to be superior to the other”. He even reasonably concedes the possibility that “any new evidence or better interpretation would, in true scientific spirit, be able to overturn the so far victorious hypothesis”, or that “in principle none of the currently available evidence stands up under scrutiny and that nevertheless, one or the other hypothesis was historically coreect, except that the evidence in its favour has not been preserved for us”. ... And in his conclusion to the article, he writes: ”Personally, I feel that most of the evidence and arguments that have been offered in favor either of the Aryan In-Migration hypothesis or of the Out-of-India are inconclusive at closer examination” (HOCK 2005:303)."

"In the Gopatha Brahmana, brahmins are sukla white, while the Kathaka samhita uses the term sukla white to refer to the vaysia, and more significantly, characterizes the rajsanya as dhumra dark. Later on the caste colors are sukla white for the brahmin, rakta red for the kshatriya, pita yellow for the vasya, and krsna black for the sudra. Classifications of this type, for which there seem to be counterparts in Chinese and Japanese drama and ritual, make no sense in racial terms ... But the classical system of color association can be made sense of in 'ideological ' terms: white, i.e. ritually pure for the brahmin, red the color of blood for the warrior caste, yellow the color of ripe grain and perhaps also of gold... and black the opposite of ritually pure white for the serfs etc who came to be excluded from the ritual at a fairly early period."

"Note also the widespread use of uru- loka- 'wide space' found eg in RV 1.93.6.(Agni and Soma have made wide space for the sacrifice) and RV 6.23.7 (Indra is asked to create wide space for the worshipper) and note the related u loka- . The similarity to the uru jyotih found in some of our earlier examples goes beyond the fact that the two collocations are used in the same general contexts and with about the same meaning , and beyond the fact that the same adjective (uru) is used in both collocations - etymologically , loca is derived from the root ruc- shine and thus comparable in meaning to jyotih light."

"The fact that racial interpretations arose in the 19th century is not surprising , given the prevalence at the time of quasi-scientific attempts to provide a justification for racially based European imperialism , and the well known scramble of the European powers to divide up the non-European world. Moreover, the British take-over of India seemed to provide a perfect parallel to the assumed take-over of prehistoric India by the invading ‘Aryans’."

"Closer examination suggests an alternative interpretation of the terms ‘black’ or ‘dark’ as referring to the dark world of the dasas/dasyus in contrast with the light world of the aryas, an interpretation which is in perfect agreement with the contrast between good/light and evil/dark forces that pervades the Vedas (and has parallels in many, perhaps most other traditions around the world)."

"First, wherever there is sufficient context for interpretation (which excludes [11], [12], and [13]), either the same line or verse or a closely neighboring one contains a reference to the ‘sun’ [5], [6], and [9], to ‘broad light’ [7], or to ‘red’ or ‘fiery’ beings [8].23 These references are marked in roman."

"The abuse of linguistic prehistory and early history in Europe in the 19th and early 20th centuries is well known. A racial interpretation of the earliest stages of Vedic Sanskrit, projected back into Proto-Indo-European, formed fertile ground for the racist "Aryan" ideology, the most horrific outgrowth of which was the genocide of Jews, Gypsies or Roma and other so-called "inferior" races carried out by the Nazis in the name of Germany. It is also a fact that a somewhat milder form of racism characterizes a large part of the overall Indology of the 19th and early 20th centuries. (232)"

"A closer study of all the passages that provide sufficient context for interpretation shows that the black or dark of the Dasas/Dasyus is not contrasted with the light or white skin color of the Aryas, but with their bright, sunny world. (236)... Even the expression tvac "skin" does not need to be understood literally, but can also refer to the surface of the earth. In general, the assumption of racial self- and external identification, as well as the alleged parallel with the English conquest of India for the time of the alleged Indo-Aryan immigration to India, is extremely questionable. (236-7)"

"The word tvac 'skin' ... does not necessarily designate human or animal skin, but can also refer to the surface of the earth. Examples of this occur in RV 1.79.3, 1.145.5., 10.68.4, and possibly 4.17.14. An important variant, in the expression roma prtivyah (1.65.8) 'the body hair of the earth' = 'the plants', suggests that the metaphor of tvac as the skin or surface of the earth was well-established in the poetic language of the Rigveda. In [RV 1.130.8, 9.41.1-5, 9.73.5] , therefore, the reference may well be to the 'dark earth' or 'dark world' of the dasas/dasyus, which contrasts with the broad light of the aryas, which is lit up by the sun or by 'fiery beings'."

"Moreover, to get his racial interpretation in [RV 4.6.13-14], Geldner has to unnecessarily assume "attraction", i.e. inaccurate agreement between krsna black and sahasra 'thousands'. This is not necessary if we interpret krsna as a sandhi form krshnah and construe it as modifying puro 'forts'. Under this interpretation, of course, krsna refers not to people , but to forts."

"Moreover, in [RV 2.20.7 , 1.101.1] , Geldner's translations of the krsnayonih... as meaning 'having blacks or embryos of the blacks in their wombs' is quite recherché; a more natural interpretation would be 'having dark wombs', and this interpretation permits a reading 'having dark interiors' - which could refer either to dark interiors of the dasas forts or to the dark world in which the forts of the dasas /dasyus are located , in contrast to the 'light' world of the aryas. In fact the close similarity between the expressions... 'he created land for Manu' in [RV 2.20.7] and... 'making broad light for the arya' in [RV 7.5.3 - 6] provides strong support for the view that words for light and dark are indeed used to refer to the earth, land, or world of aryas vs dasas."

"[RV 1.100.18] is the only one among these that contains a word meaning white or light. Given that the very next line begins with a reference to the sun, it is perfectly natural to assume that white or light here refers to the brightness of the sun or of a world that is illuminated by the sun, see Sayana's interpretation. Geldner's tentative equation of white/light with skin color is not required by the context."