Indo-European studies

**blitzkrieg80** · 09-01-2007, 04:33

Hmm... I thought you meant Armenian history, like on some website somewhere...

I'm sure its a typo, I woudn't worry too much... one can easily see them condensing two phrases and forgetting/missing something. It IS something definitely that should be corrected, though. I say this because I have not ever seen a single EB member use the word Aryan except in the context of India, but it is possible someone with specific views wrote that who does not represent EB, but regardless, a good thing to catch- thank you.

*hmm, just looked it up in my Merriam Webster dictionary and Aryan is commonly used to refer to Indo-European, so I don't think the term was used for any reason other than simplification, but that doesn't mean it should not be changed... it still needs to go.

Also, I guess I missed that other comment, but I completely agree that pre-Indo-European peoples have been VERY important in the development of different cultures, to the point that some interesting theories take place, such as pre-Greeks or pre-Germans, who constitute quite a bit to what we think of as those cultures... luckily, we KNOW the Etruscans were influential, but it is a shame we have very little evidence of their language... the Basque get a good reputation as being non-Indo-Euro, but deserve it.

**artavazd** · 09-01-2007, 07:27

the swastica is found in armenia dating 5000 years. I dont care what hitler said and what is connected with ww2 but the swastica and the term aryan is connected with armenia.

**Anastasios Helios** · 09-01-2007, 09:06

Swastikas were also found in the cultures of the ancient Jews and on various Native American pottery...does that mean they are Aryans also?

**blitzkrieg80** · 09-01-2007, 09:15

sorry, my bad... swastikas are unrelated, as universal as the sun, but an example of how people bring their own baggage to art, not the other way around

well, the fact is that Indo-Iranians DID largely impact Armenia... the steppe is RIGHT THERE, thus why Indo-Iranians DID largely impact Persia... the only thing wrong with the statment in the historical description which was pointed out, is that Greeks and Romans are not "technically" Aryan... it's an easy typo to fix... and it IS important that it is fixed, not because of Hitler, because there is no reason his or anyone else's stupidity should affect fact, but because the term Aryan technically means a specific branch of Indo-European and was only mistakenly categorized the same as all Indo-Europeans, which is modern society's fault (yes I blame you, society

)

**bovi** · 09-01-2007, 10:10

So basically it's just to remove the Aryan reference? The rest is correct? Easily done.

**bovi** · 09-01-2007, 10:54

That is... I can't find that reference anywhere, neither in the internal or public version. Which version of EB, and which file are you reading this in?