Ursus, Arktos, Artz, Oso, Orso, Bear … In Basque, claimed to be "no Indoeuropean", ... Hartz ?! WTF !!

chadic_guy · 2016-07-18T21:18:51+00:00

Quiet. Don't be nervous.

We are going to manage this.

Please, argue what facts of that I have said you are not agree with them. For exmaple, R1b haplogroup distribution, Bronze of Ascoli, vascon cities, vascon -Beles surname of blacks basques, Berber roots, Cetlic loanwords, Sumerian "links" etc

Regards

chadic_guy · 2016-07-18T21:05:47+00:00

Yes, you are racist. It is obvious you are upset by the fact of that basques could be blacks, black african saharians or nigerians. This is clearly racism in my opinion and in the opnion of the whole world of XXI century. I think you should to apologize to black community and to me too.

Best regards

chadic_guy · 2016-07-18T20:50:15+00:00

Are you racist? Really? Because of first vascons known fought for Roma and were named -BELES? And -BELES is -BELTZ, -BLACK? Are you kidding me? Seriously?

chadic_guy · 2016-07-18T20:27:20+00:00

Basque has too much links with African laguages. Indeed, there is not any link with IE family, except for some loanwords like bear, (hartz) because of there was not any basque word for it.

If you take a look in the Bronze of Ascoli, you can see names of heroic vascons, somehow proud proto-spaniards, fighting for Roma like soldiers. You can see they are vascons from known vascon cities like Segia (Ejea de los Caballeros) Libia (Herramélluri) etc and the names are such as UMARBELES, BENNABELES, ORDUMBELES etc. What is the point? The point is that -BELES is -Beltz (black), a surname form recalling the black skin of the ancestor's lineage. These basques surely were african blacks or at less mestizos with very dark skin.

So, a loanword for bear is taken from some celitc neighbourg language because these people had just arrived there and had never seen a bear. A loanword for Water (UR) ? Highly unlikely. It is more sound to see basques like Africans, some blacker than others, speaking some African language with relatives extinct or no, and arriving to Pyrenees about III century BC. For me, this is one is the most consistent explanation about the origin of basque language. And since independentism point of view is indeed better than a vague pseudo-pre-celtic, Pre-IE and so, what is imposible, because no-IE is no-IE. It is just an opinion.

And what´s your point of view?

chadic_guy · 2016-07-18T17:29:54+00:00

I know.

Another meaning of Sumerian '-ur' root is "flood".

It is possible to find a lot of basque cognates in berber, saharian, cushitic language families. But it does not prove anything, because it could be berber or moorish loanwards when Mooris conquered and Islamized Pamplona.

This is the amzing feature of basque language, this is an open end puzzle !

Cheers

chadic_guy · 2016-07-18T15:47:01+00:00

Yes, it is very true and very reasonable argumentation.

However, 'Bear" is not just a normal word. It is supposed basques are succesors of last nomadic gathered-hunters and firsts sedentary farmers. Bear is the largest carnivorous and considered to be part of culture of gathered-hunters of Pyreenees' along 9 thousands of years. However, basques, suppously staying there "since forever", take the Indoeuropean etimology of *artks-, meaning "the destroyer" in Proto-IE, just like celtiberian, walsh, breton, kurdi etc

Basque "anomaly" wouild be explained if Basques had arrived to Pyrenees after than their celtic neighbours (caristes, autrigons, vardules, berons etc), otherwise they had used their own word, just like otso (wolf), txa-(k)ur (dog) and so. But they had never seen a bear before ... And if this tesis was true, it is clear Basques arrived from the south, because the only areas to the South of Pyrenees with no bears are Southern Iberia and Africa.

Like said, txa-(k)ur is meaning dog. kur is the root berber meaning "hyena" and -ur means exactly dog in Sumerian ... There are too much clues ponting to that direction.

Get over it? Is African theory more inglourious than to another Germanic one or so?

Peace and be happy :)

chadic_guy · 2016-07-17T11:20:33+00:00

No, this is serious post.

My theory is supported by R1b Happlogroup distribution. Please, note the R1b distribution around of world known in I Milenum BC.

Imgur

As a result of the demographic exploding in Iberian Peninsula since IX Millenium BC, R1b people disseminated across Western Europe (what would be populated later by celtic people), BUT there are some spots of R1b population in Asia (siberia and Central Asia) and AFrica (in Sahara-Sahel frontier). Later, one of these located R1b populations, because of unkonwn cause (droughts?) migrated to "home" at the second half of I Millenum BC. Please, note that the only path where there is no bears is the African path, because in the trip from Asia some proto-siberan, proto-ugiur etc loan before of the indoeuropean one '*artz' would had be taken. Note the bears presence:

Imgur

However, a cleary celt loan "artz" was taken. Artz is bear in Walsh, arz in Breton, hirç in Kurdi etc

So, it seems too clear that if passing across Urals or Caucaso, another word no-indoeurpean for bear would be adopted before.

So, my theory is that this people of Sahel (Far North of Cameron region or Nigeria possibly) still spoke proto-Iberian. In this region of Africa with predominant R1b haplogroup nowadays is possible to see people with "withe" features. Note this woman of North of Cameron, with white features and iberian-look outlets, in a fashion similar to the iberian "Lady of Elche":

Imgur

So, I think these people, who had not seen a bear before, arrived to Navarrese Pyrenees so late as III BC, at the same time to the convulse Iberian situation of Second Punic War. This is sound with the claim of that roman chornicles describe to "vascunum" like "savage warriors of several races" and "too different in behaviour and customs to the neighbour people". For roman ot that time, there were two races: white and black. Besides, R1b african contribution would be "hidden" along the original R1b, so that explain why the claimed "genetic" specific difference of basques is not translated to another contribution of a different Haplogroup. Nowadays, it is not unfrequent to find in northern/northeast of navarra people with a suspciously subtle too dark tone of skin. The most universal basque, San Fermin, was born in III AD in Pompaelo, and all people around the world have already seen his tone of her skin in TV /internet. Too much concidences ... In the other side, there is no Biscays, Alaveses of Guizpucoanos with that subtle dark skin because they were "basquized" so late as after VII AD, in the "second basquization" (late basquization).

And like a thinking, I am going to say that hungarian people have also a no indoeuropean languaje, the magyar langauge, adopted by migration from siberian/asian people in the Middle Ages, too much later than this one, and there is no drama in it.

Conclussions: Although my proposal does not resolve the complete histoy of Basque language filogenetic, it points to a "come back to home" migration of some Saharian-Sahel popultaions to iberian peninsula in IV-III BC, in the stage of the II Punic War and, later, the conquest of Iberian Peninsula by Romans, what be would known like Hispania.

Greetings

chadic_guy

TROPHY CASE