New preprint claims that the Rigveda and Mittani/Hurrian song (hymn to Nikkal) have the same cadence and are from the same musical foundation

[u/UnderstandingThin40]

What do you guys think?

Paper: https://www.preprints.org/manuscript/202506.1669/v2

Not an expert but this seems like a stretch?

Also the author doesn’t seem to know that the Mitanni come from the steppe and not India, making him seem less credible.

The paper also in general doesn’t come off as professional.

[u/PuzzleheadedMetal141]

1. There is zero linguistic evidence that the Vedic pantheon originated in the steppe. On the other hand there are multiple indo aryan river names cited in the hymns of the Rig Veda. Hydronyms are the last names to change in a language which points to an indigenous naming of rivers.

2. Archaeologically the Mittani have elephant and peacock motifs (only found in India at this time) in their pottery which strongly suggests that they had a strong cultural influence from NW India. You can’t paint pots with elephants if you’ve never seen them before.

3. Linguistically look into the chronological gap in the rigveda and what you find is that the Mittani retain the “Old” Rigvedic form vs the “New” Rig Veda - suggesting that they were in India during the time period of the formation of the Rig Veda.

[u/UnderstandingThin40 → u/PuzzleheadedMetal141]

1. Your point 1 is laughably wrong, if you genuinely believe that then you don’t understand the basic of linguistics lol.

2. Thinking having a peacock seal and elephant motifs means people from India migrated their and conquered the land is not even close meaning they had strong cultural influence lol. I guess that means England was ruled by people from the Middle East because they had lion motifs in the 12th century.

3. Incorrect again, the Mitanni and rigvedic words spawn from the same root. That means ofc the Mitanni words will be closer to old rigvedic words compared to newer ones. It’s like you don’t understand the basics of the linguistics. 

[u/-Mystic-Echoes- → u/UnderstandingThin40]

If evidence of peacocks (an animal unique to India) and literal imported Indian elephants in Mitanni doesn't mean influence from India, then presence of horses in 2nd millennium BCE India shouldn't mean influence from the steppe.

[u/UnderstandingThin40 → u/-Mystic-Echoes-]

lol it’s evidence they knew about them, not that they imported them or were the ruling class. Do you think Englands aristocracy was ruled by North Africans because they had Lion sigils  ? Because that’s the logic you’re using lol.

Your second sentence is equally stupid, because we have evidence of domesticated horse bones in India and the Rigveda literally speaks about horses. Thinking that amount of evidence is comparable to a peacock and elephant seal just demonstrates you have no idea what you’re talking about ahha 

[u/-Mystic-Echoes- → u/UnderstandingThin40]

This can't be compared to England at all. England already had a cultural consciousness of Lions through Bible stories. Lions were already used throughout Europe as a symbol in the medieval period. The aristocracy already were familiar with lions. In comparison the middle East never had any knowledge of peacocks. Peacock motifs appear at the EXACT same time that Indo-Aryan loanwords and influence starts to appear. This is literally called cultural transfer. You have to be a fool to ignore this evidence.

And yes, we already have evidence of domesticated horse bones in IVC sites like Surkotada. Nothing to do with the steppe.

[u/UnderstandingThin40 → u/-Mystic-Echoes-]

Wrong , bones at surkotada have not been confirmed to be domesticated horses

[u/-Mystic-Echoes- → u/UnderstandingThin40]

Do you just make things up hoping it's true?

https://www.researchgate.net/figure/Horse-bones-from-Surkotada-in-Katchchh_fig1_237413669

[u/UnderstandingThin40 → u/-Mystic-Echoes-]

Yes, that article / paper doesn’t confirm they are domesticated horse bones, thanks for proving my point lol 

One or two archeologists thinking they are domesticated horse bones doesn’t mean it has been confirmed considering other don’t think they are 

[u/-Mystic-Echoes- → u/UnderstandingThin40]

"Sharma’s well-known identification of horse remains (Fig. 1) at Surkotada (in Katchchh) was endorsed by the late Hungarian archaeozoologist Sándor Bökönyi, an internationally respected authority in the field; in 1991, taking care to distinguish them from those of the local wild ass ( khur ), he confirmed several of them to be “remnants of true horses,” and what is more, domesticated horses."

"Contemporary with the Harappan period, the culture of the Chambal valley (in Madhya Pradesh) was explored by the respected archaeologist M. K. Dhavalikar, with layers dated between 2450 and 2000 BCE. His observations are remarkable: Let us stress that just as at Surkotada, the horse at Kayatha was domesticated"

[u/UnderstandingThin40 → u/-Mystic-Echoes-]

Yes and various scholars like don’t think they are domesticated horse bones, hence it is not settled or definitive. Once again thanks for confirming my point lol. 

[u/-Mystic-Echoes- → u/UnderstandingThin40]

Cite those scholars.

[u/UnderstandingThin40 → u/-Mystic-Echoes-]

Ajita payel and Richard meadows 

[u/-Mystic-Echoes- → u/UnderstandingThin40]

Cite where they disagree

[u/-Mystic-Echoes- → u/UnderstandingThin40]

Many don't think the steppe theory is true either, so it's definitive.

[u/UnderstandingThin40 → u/-Mystic-Echoes-]

lol now you’re moving goalposts and shifting the convo, classic Reddit response 😂😂

Please continue to utilize your amazing debate skills at WhatsApp university 

[u/-Mystic-Echoes- → u/UnderstandingThin40]

Literally Just using your own logic