Asha Logos video and the issue of Proto-Indo-European vs. Fryas

Post Reply
User avatar
Pax
Posts: 92
Joined: 31 Dec 2022, 13:58

Asha Logos video and the issue of Proto-Indo-European vs. Fryas

Post by Pax »

Asha Logos has uploaded a video (link) where he talks about “the Aryan peoples,” or “the Indo-European peoples.” The premise is the Proto-Indo-European (PIE) theory: that a once homogeneous people, speaking a single language, originated somewhere in the Caucasus plains and then spread from there, creating the Germanic languages, Romance languages and Indo-Iranian languages (Sanskrit etc.).

This theory is at odds with the Oera Linda book, which is a concrete piece of evidence, not a reconstruction. Thus, he misses the mark in this essay because it relies on the PIE theory, forcing him to warp everything to fit that framework. His presumably only knowing American English limits his linguistic research. That said, he brings up some interesting connections in other contexts; history is more his subject rather than linguistics. I should point out that he refers to the Fryas as “the Fryas, or Frisians,” which is a misunderstanding of who the Fryas were.

As an example of the contradiction between PIE and the OLB: in the 1st and 2nd millennia BC, where, according to the OLB, the Fryas language was spoken and written with a native alphabet by an advanced seafaring, horse-riding civilisation, the PIE theory ignores the OLB and suggests a reconstructed “Proto-Germanic,” evolved from PIE, was spoken by a patchwork of illiterate barbarians. In this theory, Proto-Germanic was never written except much later on a few runes (which look like Phoenician letters) because these barbarians only learned how to properly write once Christian monks taught them, using Latin letters borrowed from the Romans, who borrowed from the Greeks, who borrowed from the Phoenicians, who borrowed from the Egyptians. More contradictory examples could be made with ease.

A simpler and more logical way to look at the change of languages is to analyse them in terms of superstrata and substrata, which form when different peoples mix. Wikipedia gives a good summary:
[Superstrata and substrata] apply to a situation where an intrusive language establishes itself in the territory of another, typically as the result of migration. Whether the superstratum case (the local language persists and the intrusive language disappears) or the substratum one (the local language disappears and the intrusive language persists) applies will normally only be evident after several generations, during which the intrusive language exists within a diaspora culture. In order for the intrusive language to persist (substratum case), the immigrant population will either need to take the position of a political elite or immigrate in significant numbers relative to the local population (i. e., the intrusion qualifies as an invasion or colonisation; an example would be the Roman Empire giving rise to Romance languages outside Italy, displacing Gaulish and many other Indo-European languages). The superstratum case refers to elite invading populations that eventually adopt the language of the native lower classes. An example would be the Burgundians and Franks in France, who eventually abandoned their Germanic dialects in favor of other Indo-European languages of the Romance branch, profoundly influencing the local speech in the process. (source)
Thus, if peoples do not mix, languages remain stable. Fryas is a good example: because they did not permit foreigners, there was no language mixing, so their language was stable for hundreds if not thousands of years. They understood the writings of their distant ancestors as well as anything written yesterday:
... we can read our most ancient scriptures just as well as those that were written yesterday. (En 06)
One could analyse Sanskrit as arising from the mix of Fryas (from the Geartmen) and the then-native language spoken in Northern India, or analyse Latin as arising from the mix of some kind of Ancient Thracian/Trojan, Greek and Fryas.

Previous threads where the Proto-Indo-European theory has been discussed: EDIT: Clarified my argument and provided some examples.
Vigtig viden eller ligegyldig info?
half life over
Posts: 37
Joined: 02 Feb 2023, 20:05

Re: Asha Logos video and the issue of Proto-Indo-European vs. Fryas

Post by half life over »

I don't believe he misunderstands; rather, his learning began with the turn-of-the-century dogmas regarding the origin of the Aryan people, such as the idea that Sanskrit is an Aryan language. Later on, he discovered the Oera Linda Book, and his acceptance and belief in it grew, which may conflict with some of his earlier-held beliefs.

The Oera Linda Book challenges many of these dogmas. One common belief is that Indian Sanskrit is the original Aryan language, both orally and in writing. However, the Oera Linda Book calls this into question by suggesting that the Aryans arrived in India east of the Punjab, where an established society already existed. The Germanic people had to adhere to the local customs, indicating that they already had their own language. This implies that their language was most likely influenced by the Aryan language, not created by the Aryans. What supports this idea is the written form of Indian Sanskrit itself; its characters look vastly different from those used in the Oera Linda Book and more closely resemble ancient Egyptian Sanskrit. You can find a comparison between Indian Sanskrit and ancient Egyptian handwriting in this link (ref 1). This leads me to believe that Indian Sanskrit likely derives from the Finda's writing system (In her time, Finda also devised a script. But it was so pompous and full of flourishes and curls) but may have some influence from Frya's language.

From what I have observed, Asha Logos has become more invested in the Oera Linda Book and is gradually moving away from the Abrahamic historical narrative.

References:
1 - https://aryanscriptures.wordpress.com/2 ... ic-part-5/
Attachments
FRbR-7EXwAETpWk.jpg
FRbR-7EXwAETpWk.jpg (152.05 KiB) Viewed 1238 times
User avatar
Pax
Posts: 92
Joined: 31 Dec 2022, 13:58

Re: Asha Logos video and the issue of Proto-Indo-European vs. Fryas

Post by Pax »

Thanks for the reply. I was editing my post to clarify my argument and did not see your reply while I was editing it; I removed the detail about É/ÉW (nitpicky, and I misunderstood) and added an example about the contradiction between “Proto-Germanic” and Fryas.

What surprised me about Asha's essay was how tiny a role the Oera Linda book played in the overall argument. He created the video series about the Oera Linda book 2-3 years ago now and he showed many interesting connections between the book and other historical accounts and archaeological finds. So, given that, I expected him not to use the idea of Proto-Indo-European still.

I am not sure about the connection between ancient Egyptian handwriting and Sanskrit, although the possibility is interesting. I agree that Fryas very likely influenced Sanskrit, even the name itself.
Vigtig viden eller ligegyldig info?
Escapeyourcage
Posts: 11
Joined: 03 Jun 2023, 07:11

Re: Asha Logos video and the issue of Proto-Indo-European vs. Fryas

Post by Escapeyourcage »

I agree Pax, that it was odd how little he actually referred to OL,
Post Reply