File:  <ind-euro.htm>                                          <Migrations Index>                     <Archeology Index>                     <Home>           Next►

 

For teaching purposes only; do not review, quote or abstract.

[References for this review may be found at <Nyland>]

 

[Note:  All Basque words are in Italics and Bold-faced Green]

 

INDO-EUROPEAN LANGUAGES *

  [Contacts]

 

          An ancient language form that originated in the North African area of our most ancient civilizations has been studied by Nyland (2001).  He found that many words used to describe names of places and things in the world seem to be closely related to the ancient language, which is being called Saharan.  It appears that the Basque language is a close relative to the original Saharan.  Following is a discussion of this relationship:

 

          History relates that in early times a variety of people came to the British Isles from the continent of Europe. These people had names such as Angles, Saxons, Friesians, Vikings, Celts, Normans, etc. They all brought their own peculiar and primitive little languages along with them. These languages then somehow magically blended into the beautiful, rich and practical language we speak today. History also tells us that small groups of people arriving in a new country usually accept the language of their new environment, within two or three generations and surely this happened in Britain. However, what happened to the highly developed language that was spoken by the first inhabitants of Britain? That this language existed we know from the writings of the early missionaries. They even used it in their Ogam inscriptions on stone and in the Auraicept na n'Eces, the operations manual of the Benedictine clergy. In Scotland, the original language was called Pictish, in Ireland Cruithin and often it was referred to as the "Iron Language". How did it disappear and what was it like? Surely there must be something left of this first language of the British Isles.  Languages do not disappears without a trace, especially not in their home country.


         Linguists, in the 20th Century, decided that the early language of Britain had been non-Indo-European and many of them agreed that all of Europe at one time was unilingual, i.e. all people everywhere spoke the same language. We are told this also in Genesis 11:1, "Now the whole earth had one language....". This begs the question: If everyone spoke the same non-Indo-European language, what happened to change this into a plethora of unstable Indo-European and other languages? The answer is: Genesis 11:7 which tells us: "Come let us go down, and there confuse their language so they may no longer understand one another's speech". Could it be that the switch from the Universal language to the confusion of new and unstable languages was brought about through religious action? Was this sentence to be taken as a biblical command, demanding action? Genesis 11:9: "It was in Babel that the Lord confused the language of all the earth; and from there the Lord scattered them abroad over the face of the earth". Could all the Indo-European languages be the product of highly skilled religious linguists? It may be hard to believe but that is exactly what happened.

 

A THEORY IN QUESTION

 

          Sir William Jones was dispatched to India as a judge in 1783. Being an amateur linguist, he spent his evenings teaching himself Sanskrit, a dead language that was being maintained by priests who memorized its sacred hymns. In 1786 he told a gathering of the Asiatick Society in Calcutta that many of the classical languages, such as Sanskrit, Greek, Latin, Gothic, Celtic and Persian must come from the same source:

 

         "a stronger affinity ... than could possibly have been produced by accident; so strong, indeed, that no philologer could examine them all without believing them to have sprung from some common source, which, perhaps, no longer exists".

 

          The "perfect" relationship between the examples he gave was there for everyone to see and Bingo!, the genetic family of Indo-European languages was born, soon to be joined by a baffling assortment of laws of phonological correspondence and an Ur-mother-language which had supposedly given birth to the whole mess. The academic world built a big bandwagon and all jumped on, linguists, archeologists, anthropologists, geographers, etc.. All are now using the classification "Indo-European" as if it were a reality. Over the past two centuries, thousands of highly paid linguists have conducted their endless and fruitless research into the perceived genetic relationship. All they need now is a few more years of study to answer all the questions

 

          While studying the language "family" some of the more astute linguists realized there was something irregular. They decided that the truth could be established by using classical comparative methodology. To accomplish this they proposed four criteria supposed to be diagnostic:


1) phonological correspondence,
2) shared vocabularies,
3) common grammatical features,
4) identical constructive particles.


 
         However, the early grammarians, active over the last four millennia, were well ahead of them. They had, very early on, recognized that spoken languages do change into dialects and independent languages and thus they had long ago built these same four criteria into the various languages they created, giving the impression of a genetic relationship. When the 18th century linguists jumped on the I.-E. band-wagon they had reasoned that if the observed relationship was not accidental, it had to be genetic, thereby totally underestimating the skill and determination of the ancient grammarians. Through the years there have been a few courageous linguists who had doubts about the troublesome Indo-European theory. One of them, M.E. Landsberg of Columbia University S.C., wrote:

 

          "Indeed, courses in historical linguistics at Universities all over the world, in spite of much perplexing evidence to the contrary, mostly still persist in adhering to strict Indo-European theories".

 

          In spite of them, no one thought to ask if there could possibly be another explanation, e.g. an invented relationship. To this day, this question is not being asked. Edo Nyland maintains that there never were any Indo-Europeans, there was no proto-Indo-European language and the family of Indo-European languages is a long perpetuated academic fraud.  It an academic fraud because the truth has long been known to a select group of religious scholars, who have kept this knowledge secret, as was done in the past millennia. If controversy is the lifeblood of scholarship, where are the real linguistic scholars, where are the dissenters? Where is their courage?

 

ENGLISH LANGUAGE MANIPULATED

 

          Other manipulated languages are  German, Latin, Greek, Russian, Sanskrit, Hebrew, Hungarian, Japanese etc. etc.


          Our English etymological dictionaries do no justice to the tremendous language creation efforts of the
Benedictine clergy and their grammarians. Almost every English word existing at the time of Shakespeare, was invented by these marvelous linguists. It happened in their scriptoria of Canterbury, Rochester, York etc. that the Benedictines created the practical and expressive language that is ours today. The Celts, Vikings, Saxons and whatever ruffians came drifting to the shores of Britain, had nothing to do with the creation of the English language. The language used in this enormous effort was Saharan, once the universal language of continental Europe and Britain, but now best represented by the Basque Language. The grammarians, who were professional linguists, worked for almost one millennium with the Benedictines. They came primarily from Liguria, located in Northern Italy and the Alps. Their Ligurian language was, as far as can be determined, identical to Basque. The method of new word construction used by them was generally done with the vowel-interlocking (Ogam) formula, which utilized the first three letters (VCV) of each Saharan word in the description. The VCV's which were then agglutinated, always had to have their vowels interlocked. To make the product pronounceable, several vowels were removed and one or more h's, if present. The system is best illustrated with a couple of simple examples.  Take the word "begin", using the description: "Someone start the action", which makes good sense. Where vowels had been removed from the word, a dot is placed, which needs to be replaced by the missing vowel, using the VCV dictionary.

 

begin:
.be-egi-in.
ibe - egi - ino
ibeni - egindura - inor
to start - the action - someone
"Someone start the action."

 

dog:
.do-og.
ado - ogu
adoretsu - oguzi
brave - speaks out loud
"Brave and speaks out loud."

 

doctor:
.do-ok.-.to-or.
odo - oke - eto - ora
odoldun - okerkeria - etorri - orain
bloody - injury - to come – quickly


A bloody injury, come quickly.

 

          It is clear from these and hundreds of other examples, that The English language is an invented language.


          For many more examples of invented words, please refer to Nyland’s:
"Origin of English ".

 

 

NAME INVENTION CONTINUES

 

          Most academics accept the Indo-European theory uncritically, teaching it to their students as proven science and using the term in a variety of publications. However, there are still some linguists who know the truth.  Who these individuals are is still kept secret. In the 20th century, many names have been attached to individuals in different parts of the world that clearly indicate that the secret of the vowel-interlocking formula and its associated language is still preserved and used. The most prominent example is probably the name of the British royal family, Windsor.

 

Windsor (the 'w' is meaningless)
in.-.d.-so-or.
ino - odo - oso - oro
inorenganatu - odolgarbitasun - osoro - orotar
to bequeath - nobility - thorough – united


Bequeath thoroughly united nobility.

 

          The British royal family adopted the name Windsor early in this century. It is fair to say that they must have known exactly what they were doing. They could not have picked a more appropriate name, but some linguist must have advised them. The name Windsor is of course a much older name, which was probably made up by some Benedictine linguists whose names have been long forgotten.

 

          Another high profile name invented in the 20th Century is Stalin,

 

Stalin:
.sta-ali-in.
asta - ali - ino
astapotro - alienatu - inola
in a brutish way - to kill a person - in any way possible


In a brutish way he kills people any way possible.

 

          This is a fascinating name because the linguists told Stalin was that it came from the Russian word "stal" (steel), man of steel. What was not conveyed was that it also isa word play in the Basque language, the meaning of which tells a very different, but more realistic, story.

 

          A much more recent name is Habiari'mana, the Hutu president of Rwanda who, in 1994, organized and initiated the mass-murder of the minority Tutsi people, long living in his country.

 

Habiari'mana:
   .ha-abi-ari   '  ma-ana.
aha - abi - ari   '  ma - ana
ahalguzti - abiatsu - arimagalduku  '   manatu - anaihilketa
almighty - impulsive - ruthless  '   to demand – fratricide


(Our) god, impulsive and ruthless, demands fratricide.

 

          It is not known who made up this name, but it is a frightening thought that this mentality still exists in our world. It is a good possibility that the scholar who made up this name is still alive. He is not advertising his skills because this specialized knowledge is jealously guarded by some secret society.

 

UNILINGUAL EUROPE

 

          As the glaciers on the Alps and Caucasus melted, the air-circulation around the Mediterranean changed drastically. The most affected area was the Central Sahara, which was populated by a large population of independent tribes involved in grazing, simple agriculture and some irrigation. Some tribes living along the west, north and east shores of the Sahara, called the Sea-Peoples by the Egyptians, had developed boat-building, star navigation and long distance ocean travel. By 5,000 bce. the Central Sahara had become unlivable and most of the people had to flee to the coast, where the Sea-Peoples were ready to ferry them to Europe/Europa

 

Europa
euri-opa
euri ' opa
rain  '  longing for


"Longing for Rain"
a rather appropriate name. At the same time the name Africa was coined:

 

Africa
afa - ari - ika
afa - arinari eman - ikaradura
happy - to escape – tragedy


"We are happy to have escaped the tragedy."

 

          All these people spoke the same Saharan language, adhered to the same Goddess religion, practiced a democratic and matrilineal system of tribal solidarity, and had the same strong oral traditions. There were no weapons of destruction and no fortifications; there was little violence, because all living things were precious and respected. There also was no inter-marriage between the different groups and inter-tribal cooperation was strictly formalized. These tribes were being ferried to the pleasant south shores of Europe, the beautiful Danube river valley and the fertile lands adjoining the Dnepr river. In general those who came from the Central Sahara appear to have settled in Central Europe, the Near East and Russia, while the Sea Peoples reserved all the islands and the coastal areas for themselves, especially on the Atlantic islands and southern Sweden.

 

          There were modern people (Homo sapiens) in Europe before the Saharans arrived, as the beautiful 30,000-year-old art in the massive caves of southern France and northern Spain has shown. These people must have lived there through much of the glacial period, occupying south facing caves and hunting the large animals associated with a peri-glacial climate. They practiced the same Goddess religion and may have spoken the same language.  If this was the case, there must have been contact and likely trade in animal skins for use in the skin-boats (ox hide) and for sails (reindeer skin). Their fabulously painted caves may have been very famous and pilgrimage sites for the believers. Wherever the newcomers lived together with the original people, the two groups likely merged, as appears to have been the case in the Basque country.

 

          However, in general, the European continent was very empty, especially those lands vacated by the glaciers and ice fields of central Europe, Caucasus and Scandinavia. One easily identifiable group of migrants was the Berber Sea Peoples from Algiers and Morocco, whose migrations and settlements can still be traced by their Rh-negative blood type. Even today, there are Berber tribes in the Atlas mountains region, which have 40% of their members with Rh-negative blood type. They sailed the Atlantic Ocean and became the Basques (32%), the western Irish (25%), the Scots (25%) and the Old Norse on the western islands of Norway (about 17%). They also left some of their unusual blood type among the Lapps. At the time of their migration, they could not yet travel through the North Sea, because that shallow sea was still dry land, so they were forced to go west of Ireland.

 

EXAMPLES OF LINGUISTIC RELATIONSHIPS

 

          If the languages are not genetically related, the Indo-European group cannot be a family. The Indo-European confusion started about 200 years ago when Sir William Jones discovered the relationship between Sanskrit, Greek, Latin, and Germanic etc. It looked so obvious, the "perfect" relationship between these words was there for everyone to see and, bingo!, the genetic family of Indo-European languages was born, complete with assorted laws of phonological correspondence and an Ur-mother language which gave birth to all. Even though controversy is the lifeblood of scholarship, all our academics happily climbed on the bandwagon and the common people swallowed it, but where did this wagon take them? Here are two words to which the VCV formula has been applied.

 

The first example isfather”:

 

SANSKRIT
Pitar:
pi-ita-ar.
pi - ita - ara
pindartu - itaun egin - arau
to get angry - to demand - descipline


"When angered he demands discipline".

 

LATIN
Pater:
.pa-ater
opa - ater
opa izan - aterpe
longing for - refuge


"Longing for my refuge".

 

GERMAN
Vater:
.fa-ater
afa - ater
happy - refuge


"Happy refuge".

 

------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 

Another example is "field":

 

SANSKRIT
ajras
aj.-.ra-as.
ajo - ora - ase
ajola izan - oraintxe - asetasun
to take care - right now - abundance


"Right now take care of the abundance".

 

GREEK
agros
ag.-.ro-os.
aga - aro - osa
aga - aroki - osatu
abundance - boasting - perfect


"Boasting (about) perfect abundance".

 

LATIN
ager
age-er.
age - ero
agerrune - errokatu
clearing - to settle


"A (forest) clearing to settle in".

 

DUTCH
akker
ak.-.ke-er.
aki - ike - ere
akitu - iketa - ereinlur
to get tired - you - land prepared for sowing


"You get tired preparing the land for sowing".

 

          As you can see, the perceived relationship between these words is not genetic, such as naturally derived from some imagined proto-language, but instead they are contrived creations by highly skilled linguists using the universal Neolithic language. The fact that most appear to be related is not due to a genetic relationship, but because of skillful manipulation by the grammarians using the VCV system of agglutination. . A very new system of organizing the world's languages is urgently needed to accommodate the language invention findings, as well as a different approach to the teaching of linguistics.

 

          A great deal of time was spent analyzing many words and names in different "Indo-European" and "Nostratic" languages to show that meaningful words or sentences, written in the Basque language, are hidden in many, if not all of them.  It certainly is revealing to see how the clergy handled the sensitive words relating to sexuality, several of which are shown in the following wordlist. Would they have been allowed to use such provocative language if it had been suspected that their agglutinations would some day be decoded?

 

Discussion

 

          It is necessary to point out that Genesis 11:1 was right; everyone did speak the same highly developed language wherever the Saharan refugees had settled. It couldn't have been any different because there was apparently no other highly developed language anywhere else in Europe, the Near East, even India (see Dravidians) , Japan (Ainu) and Polynesia.  They were settled by the migrants from the Sahara. It appears true that around 2,000 bce. the decision was made in Kizzuwadna, the religious center of Luvian male-domination, that the language, the religion and the tribal structure of the people from the Sahara was to be destroyed, to be replaced with invented languages, a male god, nationalism and private land-ownership. When this order was repeated in the Old Testament Bible it became a biblical command. That was the mission of  Benedictine clergy when they built their monasteries in Britain.

 

          The people who emigrated to Britain over the centuries, all spoke the same language, the Saharan language, which can still be detected as a substratum, throughout Europe. With the use of acrostic manipulation, using the vowel-interlocking formula, the original Saharan language was mutilated to the point where recognizing it was almost impossible. The one modern language, which apparently changed very little, is Basque.  The Basque dictionary written by Gorka Aulestia (University of Nevada, USA) is used primarily in the translations. Edo Nyland has been strongly supported with advice by many Basque speakers in Euskadi and the United States and urged to place this information on the internet.

 

          Most of the linguists who have bothered to look at Nyland's (2001 & 2002 ) research have suggested "more reasonable" possibilities to explain the observed inconsistencies in our present knowledge.. They then invariably decided to ignore the issue until a reason for a more thorough examination arose. In such cases, the status quo has always ruled and the needed examination has been stalled. The burden of proof is the task of those shaking the status quo. It is up to the shaker to provide evidence rather than for those simply suggesting that the evidence can be accounted for by existing paradigms. In this respect, Nyland has been told repeatedly by academics that nothing can be true outside of the status quo. Therefore, nothing outside the status quo needs to be investigated, which is a sure prescription for continued ignorance and high intellect superstition.

 

     Bibliography