# The Aryans did not come from India; they conquered it



## Kambojaric

A CENTURY and a half ago linguists invented a new map of the world. Their research showed that a single family tree stretches its branches almost unbroken across most of Eurasia: from Iceland to Bangladesh, most people speak languages descended from “Proto-Indo-European”. The philologists had a theory to explain why Sanskrit, the ancient forebear of Hindi, has closer cousins in Europe than in south India. They speculated that at some point before the composition of the Vedas, the oldest texts of Hinduism, an Aryan people had migrated into India from the north-west, while their kin pushed westward into Europe.

Long before the Nazis dreamed of an exalted master race, imperialists seized on what some dubbed the “Aryan invasion” theory to paint Britain’s rule of India as the extension of a “natural” order. Indians, too, found a use for it. Caste-bound Hindu conservatives declared that the paler-skinned intruders must be ancestors of higher-caste Brahmins and Kshatriyas. Such talk stirred a backlash in southern India, where generally darker-skinned speakers of Dravidian languages were urged to see themselves as a separate nation.

Hindu nationalists took a different tack. The West, some said, had made up the theory to set Hindus against each other. Christian missionaries and communists were using it to stoke caste hatred and so to recruit followers, they claimed. Worse, the theory challenged an emerging vision of Mother India as a sacred Hindu homeland. If the first speakers of Sanskrit and the creators of the Vedas had themselves been intruders, it was harder to portray later Muslim and Christian invaders as violators of a purity that good Hindus should seek to restore. So it was that some proposed an alternative “Out of India” theory. This held that the original Aryans were in fact Indians, who carried their Indo-European language and superior civilisation to the West.

Yet, even as Hindu nationalism has gained politically, culminating in the current rule of the conservative Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP), evidence has mounted against the out-of-India hypothesis. Philologists have determined with a fair degree of certainty that the Vedas were probably composed between 1500BC and 500BC. Archaeology, meanwhile, indicates that a sophisticated urban civilisation had flourished in the Indus Valley around a thousand years earlier, but had collapsed before the Vedic Age.

The culture depicted in Sanskrit texts has different traits. It was largely rural and pastoral, relied on iron instead of bronze and appears to have used horses, chariots and bows and arrows—all of which are absent from the original Indus settlements. Proponents of the Aryan invasion conclude that a large influx of outsiders would neatly explain all this. Another clue: the proportion of Indians who can tolerate cows’ milk decreases markedly towards the east, suggesting that cattle-herders migrated into the country from the west.

Even so, fierce exchanges in Indian social media have greeted every new study. Academic researchers have found themselves branded Christian missionaries, “sickularists” or even Chinese agents. Lately, however, such controversy has shifted from linguistics and archaeology to genetics. As techniques of extracting, analysing and tracking DNA through time and place improve, a clearer picture is emerging.

An accumulating pile of research using DNA from both ancient human remains and modern people indicates strongly that, beginning around 2000BC, north-west India was indeed infused with new blood. The newcomers appear to have shared the same roots in what is now southern Russia as did the invaders of a similar-sized peninsula to the west called Europe. Strikingly, too, the genetic markers identifying this group seem to be far more prevalent among modern north Indian Brahmins than among other Indians.

Because of the difficulty in collecting ancient DNA, such research has until recently relied on relatively few samples. But an international team of 92 scholars, including David Reich, a geneticist at Harvard University who has pioneered techniques to analyse DNA more quickly and precisely, is set to publish data recovered from 362 “ancient individuals” from across South and Central Asia. Among their conclusions: there was probably an early migration of agriculturalists into India from what is now Iran, around 4000BC, and this was followed two millennia later—just before the Vedic Age—by a large influx from what is now southern Russia (see map).







The wider study not only confirms that “Aryans” (geneticists avoid the term) probably migrated from the steppes around the Volga and Don rivers to both India and Europe at around the same time. It also shows that their genetic markers later spread southwards across India, and are indeed particularly prevalent in “groups of priestly status”.

https://www.economist.com/news/asia...it-new-study-squelches-treasured-theory-about

Reactions: Positive Rating Positive Rating:
1 | Like Like:
11


----------



## Maarkhoor

Na na..

All Indians are pure aryan race....just look at them, tall, green to blue eyes golden hairs.

Reactions: Like Like:
7


----------



## DrasticMeasure

Khatri, Jatt, Brahmin, Rajput, Kamboj, pathan etc are some of the prominent Aryan races in south asia. Both races are found in northern India and Pakistan.


----------



## Vapnope

Kambojaric said:


> If the first speakers of Sanskrit and the creators of the Vedas had themselves been intruders, it was harder to portray later Muslim and Christian invaders as violators of a purity that good Hindus should seek to restore.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## timmy_area51

*Scythian*
ANCIENT PEOPLE
WRITTEN BY: 

The Editors of Encyclopaedia Britannica
See Article History
Alternative Titles: Sacae, Saka, Scyth
Scythian, also called Scyth, Saka, and Sacae, member of a nomadic people, originally of Iranian stock, known from as early as the 9th century BCE who migrated westward from Central Asia to southern Russia and Ukraine in the 8th and 7th centuries BCE. The Scythians founded a rich, powerful empire centred on what is now Crimea. The empire survived for several centuries before succumbingto the Sarmatians during the period from the 4th century BCE to the 2nd century CE.





Scythian gold belt buckle with turquoise inlay, from Siberia; in the Hermitage, St. PetersburgNovosti Press Agency
Until the 20th century, most of what was known of the history of the Scythians came from the account of them by the ancient Greek historian Herodotus, who visited their territory. In modern times that record has been expanded chiefly by Russian and other anthropologists excavating kurgans in such places as Tyva and Kazakhstan.

The Scythians were feared and admired for their prowess in war and, in particular, for their horsemanship. They were among the earliest people to master the art of riding, and their mobility astonished their neighbours. The migration of the Scythians from Asia eventually brought them into the territory of the Cimmerians, who had traditionally controlled the Caucasus and the plains north of the Black Sea. In a war that lasted 30 years, the Scythians destroyed the Cimmerians and set themselves up as rulers of an empire stretching from west Persia through Syria and Judaea to the borders of Egypt. The Medes, who ruled Persia, attacked them and drove them out of Anatolia, leaving them finally in control of lands which stretched from the Persian border north through the Kuban and into southern Russia.

The Scythians were remarkable not only for their fighting ability but also for the complex culture they produced. They developed a class of wealthy aristocrats who left elaborate graves—such as the kurgans in the Valley of the Tsars (or Kings) near Arzhan, 40 miles (60 km) from Kyzyl, Tyva—filled with richly worked articles of gold, as well as beads of turquoise, carnelian, and amber, and many other valuable objects. This class of chieftains, the Royal Scyths, finally established themselves as rulers of the southern Russian and Crimean territories. It is there that the richest, oldest, and most-numerous relics of Scythian civilization have been found. Their power was sufficient to repel an invasion by the Persian king Darius I about 513 BCE.

The Royal Scyths were headed by a sovereign whose authority was transmitted to his son. Eventually, about the time of Herodotus, the royal family intermarried with Greeks. In 339 the ruler Ateas was killed at age 90 while fighting Philip II of Macedonia. The community was eventually destroyed in the 2nd century BCE, Palakus being the last sovereign whose name is preserved in history.

The Scythian army was made up of freemen who received no wage other than food and clothing but who could share in booty on presentation of the head of a slain enemy. Many warriors wore Greek-style bronze helmets and chain-mail jerkins. Their principal weapon was a double-curved bow and trefoil-shaped arrows; their swords were of the Persian type. Every Scythian had at least one personal mount, but the wealthy owned large herds of horses, chiefly Mongolian ponies. Burial customs were elaborate and called for the sacrifice of members of the dead man’s household, including wife, servants, and a number of horses.

Despite these characteristics, their many and exquisite grave goods, notably the animal-style gold artifacts, reveal that the Scythians were also culturally advanced. Further, some gold ornaments thought to have been created by Greeks for the Scythians were shown to have predated their contact with Greek civilization. _See also_ Scythian art.



https://www.britannica.com/topic/Scythian

*Saka*
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

For the land of the Saka under the Sassanid dynasty, see Sakastan. Not to be confused with the Sakha, the endonym of the Yakut people of Siberia. For other uses, see Saka (disambiguation).



Scythia and Parthia in about 170 BC (before the Yuezhi invaded Bactria).
Part of a series on
*Indo-European topics*



Languages[show]
Philology[show]
Origins[show]
Archaeology[show]
Peoples and societies[show]
Religion and mythology[show]
Indo-European studies[show]

v
t
e
The *Saka* or *Saca* (Persian: old _Sakā_, mod. ساکا; Sanskrit: Śaka; Ancient Greek: Σάκαι, _Sákai_; Latin: _Sacae_; Chinese: 塞, old _*Sək_, mod. _Sāi_) was the term used in Middle Persian and Sanskrit sources for the Scythians, a large group of Eurasian nomads on the Eurasian Steppe speaking Eastern Iranian languages.[1][2][3] Modern scholars usually use the term Saka to refer to Iranians of the Eastern Steppe and the Tarim Basin.[4]

René Grousset wrote that they formed a particular branch of the "Scytho-Sarmatian family" originating from nomadic Iranian peoples of the northwestern steppe in Eurasia.[5] They migrated into Sogdia and Bactria in Central Asia and then to the northwest of the Indian subcontinent where they were known as the Indo-Scythians. In the Tarim Basin and Taklamakan Desert region of Northwest China, they settled in Khotan and Kashgar which were at various times vassals to greater powers, such as Han China and Tang China.



*Contents*
[1Usage of name

2History
2.1Greek and Persian reports
2.2Sakas in the Ili valley and Bactria
2.3Indo-Scythians
2.4Kingdom of Khotan
2.5Shule Kingdom


3Language

4See also

5Notes

6References
6.1Citations
6.2Bibliography


7External links


*Usage of name[edit]*



Gold artifacts of the Saka in Bactria, at the site of Tillya Tepe, northern Afghanistan.
Modern debate about the identity of the "Saka" is partly from ambiguous usage of the word by ancient, non-Saka authorities. According to Herodotus, the Persians gave the name "Saka" to all Scythians.[6] However, Pliny the Elder (_Gaius Plinius Secundus_, AD 23–79) claims that the Persians gave the name Sakai only to the Scythian tribes "nearest to them".[7]The Scythians to the far north of Assyria were also called the _Saka suni_ (Saka or Scythian sons) by the Persians.[_citation needed_] The Neo-Assyrian Empire of the time of Esarhaddonrecord campaigning against a people they called in the Akkadian the _Ashkuza_ or _Ishhuza_.[8] However, modern scholarly consensus is that the Eastern Iranian language ancestral to the Pamir languages in North India and the medieval Saka language of Xinjiang, was one of the Scythian languages.[9]

Another people, the _Gimirrai_,[8] who were known to the ancient Greeks as the Cimmerians, were closely associated with the Sakas. In Biblical Hebrew, the _Ashkuz_ (_Ashkenaz_) are considered to be a direct offshoot from the Gimirri (Gomer).[10]




A cataphract-style parade armour of a Saka royal, also known as "The Golden Warrior", from the Issyk kurgan, a historical burial site near ex-capital city of Almaty, Kazakhstan
The Saka were regarded by the Babylonians as synonymous with the _Gimirrai_; both names are used on the trilingual Behistun Inscription, carved in 515 BC on the order of Darius the Great.[11](These people were reported to be mainly interested in settling in the kingdom of Urartu, later part of Armenia, and Shacusen in Uti Province derives its name from them.[12]) The Behistun Inscription initially only gave one entry for saka, they were however further differentiated later into three groups:[13][14][15]


the _Sakā tigraxaudā_ – "Saka with pointy hats/caps",
the _Sakā haumavargā_ – interpreted as "haoma-drinking saka" but there are other suggestions,[13][16][17]
the _Sakā paradraya_ – "Saka beyond the sea", a name added after Darius' campaign into Western Scythia north of the Danube.[13]
An additional term is found in two inscriptions elsewhere:[18]


the _Sakā para Sugdam_ – "Saka beyond Sugda (Sogdia)", a term was used by Darius for the people who formed the limits of his empire at the opposite end to Kush (the Ethiopians), therefore should be located at the eastern edge of his empire.[13][19]
The _Sakā paradraya_ were the western Scythians (European Scythians) or Sarmatians. Both the _Sakā tigraxaudā_ and _Sakā haumavargā_ are thought to be located in Central Asia east of the Caspian Sea.[13] _Sakā haumavargā_ is considered to be the same as Amyrgians, the Saka tribe in closest proximity to Bactria and Sogdia. It has been suggested that the _Sakā haumavargā_ may be the _Sakā para Sugdam_, therefore _Sakā haumavargā_ is argued by some to be located further east than the _Sakā tigraxaudā_, perhaps at the Pamir Mountains or Xinjiang, although Syr Darya is considered to be their more likely location given that the name says "beyond Sogdia" rather than Bactria.[13]

In the modern era, the archaeologist Hugo Winckler (1863–1913) was the first to associate the Sakas with the Scyths. John Manuel Cook, in _The Cambridge History of Iran_, states: "The Persians gave the single name Sakā both to the nomads whom they encountered between the Hunger steppe and the Caspian, and equally to those north of the Danube and Black Sea against whom Darius later campaigned; and the Greeks and Assyrians called all those who were known to them by the name Skuthai (Iškuzai). Sakā and Skuthai evidently constituted a generic name for the nomads on the northern frontiers."[13] Persian sources often treat them as a single tribe called the Saka (_Sakai_ or _Sakas_), but Greek and Latin texts suggest that the Scythians were composed of many sub-groups.[20][21] Modern scholars usually use the term Saka to refer to Iranian-speaking tribes who inhabited the Eastern Steppe and the Tarim Basin.[4][22]

*History[edit]*



Artifacts found the tombs 2 and 4 of Tillya Tepe and reconstitution of their use on the man and woman found in these tombs
*Greek and Persian reports[edit]*
The Saka people were an Iranian people who spoke a language belonging to the Iranian branch of the Indo-European languages. They are known to the ancient Greeks as Scythians and are attested in historical and archaeological records dating to around the 8th century BC.[23] In the Achaemenid-era Old Persian inscriptions found at Persepolis, dated to the reign of Darius I (r. 522-486 BC), the Saka are said to have lived just beyond the borders of Sogdia.[24] Likewise an inscription dated to the reign of Xerxes I (r. 486-465 BC) has them coupled with the Dahae people of Central Asia.[24] The contemporary Greek historian Herodotus noted that the Achaemenid Empire called all of Scythians as "Saka".[24]




Captured Saka king Skunkha, from Mount Behistun, Iran, Achaemenid stone relief from the reign of Darius I(r. 522-486 BC)
Greek historians wrote of the wars between the Saka and the Medes, as well as their wars against Cyrus the Great of the Persian Achaemenid Empire where Saka women were said to fight alongside their men.[25] According to Herodotus, Cyrus the Great confronted the Massagetae, a people related to the Saka,[26] while campaigning to the east of the Caspian Sea and was killed in the battle in 530 BC.[27] Darius I also waged wars against the eastern Sakas, who fought him with three armies led by three kings according to Polyaenus.[28] In 520–519 BC, Darius I defeated the _Sakā tigraxaudā_ tribe and captured their king Skunkha (depicted as wearing a pointed hat in Behistun).[4] The territories of Saka were absorbed into the Achaemenid Empire as part of Chorasmia that included much of the Amu Darya (Oxus) and the Syr Darya (Jaxartes),[29] and the Saka then supplied the Achaemenid army with large number of mounted bowmen.[15] They were also mentioned as among those who resisted Alexander the Great's incursions into Central Asia.[25]

*Sakas in the Ili valley and Bactria[edit]*
The Saka were known as the Sak or Sai (Chinese: 塞) in ancient Chinese records.[30][31] These records indicate that they originally inhabited the Ili and Chu River valleys of modern Kyrgyzstan and Kazakhstan. In the _Book of Han_, the area was called the "land of the Sak", i.e. the Saka.[32] The exact date of the Sakas' arrival in the valleys of the Ili and Chu in Central Asia is unclear, perhaps it was just before the reign of Darius I.[32] Around 30 Saka tombs in the form of kurgans(burial mounds) have also been found in the Tian Shan area dated to between 550–250 BC. Indications of Saka presence have also been found in the Tarim Basin region, possibly as early as the 7th century BC.[23]

The Saka were pushed out of the Ili and Chu River valleys by the Yuezhi, thought by some to be Tocharians. An account of the movement of these people is given in Sima Qian's _Records of the Grand Historian_. The Yuezhi, who originally lived between Tängri Tagh (Tian Shan) and Dunhuang of Gansu, China,[33] were assaulted and forced to flee from the Hexi Corridor of Gansu by the forces of the Xiongnu ruler Modu Chanyu, who conquered the area in 177-176 BC.[34][35][36][37] In turn the Yuezhi were responsible for attacking and pushing the Sai (i.e. Saka) west into Sogdiana, where around 140 and 130 BC the latter crossed the Syr Darya into Bactria. The Saka also moved southwards towards to the Pamirs and northern India where they settled in Kashmir, and eastwards to settle in some of the oasis city-states of Tarim Basin sites like Yanqi (焉耆, Karasahr) and Qiuci (龜茲, Kucha).[38][39] The Yuezhi, themselves under attacks from another nomadic tribe the Wusun in 133-132 BC, moved again from the Ili and Chu valleys and occupied the country of Daxia (大夏, "Bactria").[32][40]

The ancient Greco-Roman geographer Strabo noted that the four tribes that took down the Bactrians in the Greek and Roman account – the _Asioi_, _Pasianoi_, _Tokharoi_ and _Sakaraulai_ – came from land north of the Syr Darya where the Ili and Chu valleys are located.[5][32] Identification of these four tribes varies, but _Sakaraulai_ may indicate an ancient Saka tribe, the _Tokharoi_ is possibly the Yuezhi, and while the Asioi had been proposed to be groups such as the Wusun or Alans.[5][41]

Grousset wrote of the migration of the Saka: "the Saka, under pressure from the Yueh-chih [Yuezhi], overran Sogdiana and then Bactria, there taking the place of the Greeks." Then, "Thrust back in the south by the Yueh-chih," the Saka occupied "the Saka country, Sakastana, whence the modern Persian Seistan."[5] According to Harold Walter Bailey, the territory of Drangiana (now in Afghanistan and Pakistan) became known as "Land of the Sakas", and was called Sakastāna in the Persian language of contemporary Iran, in Armenian as Sakastan, with similar equivalents in Pahlavi, Greek, Sogdian, Syriac, Arabic, and the Middle Persian tongue used in Turfan, Xinjiang, China.[24] This is attested in a contemporary Kharosthi inscription found on the Mathura lion capital belonging to the Saka kingdom of the Indo-Scythians (200 BC - 400 AD) in North India,[24] roughly the same time the Chinese record that the Saka had invaded and settled the country of _Jibin_ 罽賓 (i.e. Kashmir, of modern-day India and Pakistan).[42]

Migrations of the 2nd and 1st century BC have left traces in Sogdia and Bactria, but they cannot firmly be attributed to the Saka, similarly with the sites of Sirkap and Taxila in ancient India. The rich graves at Tillya Tepe in Afghanistan are seen as part of a population affected by the Saka.[43]

The Shakya clan of India, to which Gautama Buddha, called _Śākyamuni_ "Sage of the Shakyas", belonged, has been suggested to be Sakas by Michael Witzel[44] and Christopher I. Beckwith.[45]

*Indo-Scythians[edit]*
Main article: Indo-Scythians
The region in modern Afghanistan and Pakistan where the Saka moved to become known as "land of the Saka" or Sakastan.[24] The Sakas also captured Gandhara and Taxila, and migrated to North India.[46] An Indo-Scythians kingdom was established in Mathura (200 BC - 400 AD).[24] Weer Rajendra Rishi, an Indian linguist, identified linguistic affinities between Indian and Central Asian languages, which further lends credence to the possibility of historical Sakan influence in North India.[46][47] According to historian Michael Mitchiner, the Abhira tribe were a Saka people cited in the Gunda inscription of the Western Satrap Rudrasimha I dated to 181 CE.[48]

*Kingdom of Khotan[edit]*
Main article: Kingdom of Khotan



Coin of Gurgamoya, king of Khotan. Khotan, first century.
_Obv:_ Kharosthi legend, "Of the great king of kings, king of Khotan, Gurgamoya.
_Rev:_ Chinese legend: "Twenty-four grain copper coin". British Museum
The Kingdom of Khotan was a Saka city state in on the southern edge of the Tarim Basin. As a consequence of the Han–Xiongnu War spanning from 133 BCE to 89 CE, the Tarim Basin (now Xinjiang, Northwest China), including Khotan and Kashgar, fell under Han Chinese influence, beginning with the reign of Emperor Wu of Han (r. 141-87 BC).[49][50] The region once again came under Chinese suzerainty with the campaigns of conquest by Emperor Taizong of Tang (r. 626-649).[51] From the late eighth to ninth centuries, the region changed hands between the rival Tang and Tibetan Empires.[52][53] However, by the early 11th century the region fell to the Muslim Turkic peoples of the Kara-Khanid Khanate, which led to both the Turkification of the region as well as its conversion from Buddhism to Islam.




A document from Khotan written in Khotanese Saka, part of the Eastern Iranian branch of the Indo-European languages, listing the animals of the Chinese zodiac in the cycle of predictions for people born in that year; ink on paper, early 9th century
Archaeological evidence and documents from Khotan and other sites in the Tarim Basin provided information on the language spoken by the Saka.[24][54] The official language of Khotan was initially Gandhari Prakrit written in Kharosthi, and coins from Khotan dated to the 1st century bear dual inscriptions in Chinese and Gandhari Prakrit, indicating links of Khotan to both India and China.[55] Surviving documents however suggest that an Iranian language was used by the people of the kingdom for a long time Third-century AD documents in Prakrit from nearby Shanshan record the title for the king of Khotan as _hinajha_ (i.e. "generalissimo"), a distinctively Iranian-based word equivalent to the Sanskrit title _senapati_, yet nearly identical to the Khotanese Saka _hīnāysa_ attested in later Khotanese documents.[55] This, along with the fact that the king's recorded regnal periods were given as the Khotanese _kṣuṇa_, "implies an established connection between the Iranian inhabitants and the royal power," according to the Professor of Iranian Studies Ronald E. Emmerick.[55] He contended that Khotanese-Saka-language royal rescripts of Khotan dated to the 10th century "makes it likely that the ruler of Khotan was a speaker of Iranian."[55] Furthermore, he argued that the early form of the name of Khotan, _hvatana_, is connected semantically with the name Saka.[55]

Later Khotanese-Saka-language documents, ranging from medical texts to Buddhist literature, have been found in Khotan and Tumshuq (northeast of Kashgar).[56] Similar documents in the Khotanese-Saka language dating mostly to the 10th century have been found in the Dunhuang manuscripts.[57]

Although the ancient Chinese had called Khotan _Yutian_ (于闐), another more native Iranian name occasionally used was _Jusadanna_ (瞿薩旦那), derived from Indo-Iranian _Gostan_ and _Gostana_, the names of the town and region around it, respectively.[58]

*Shule Kingdom[edit]*
Main article: Shule Kingdom
Much like the neighboring people of the Kingdom of Khotan, people of Kashgar, the capital of Shule, spoke Saka, one of the Eastern Iranian languages.[59] According to the _Book of Han_, the Saka split and formed several states in the region. These Saka states may include two states to the northwest of Kashgar, and Tumshuq to its northeast, and Tushkurgan south in the Pamirs.[60] Kashgar also conquered other states such as Yarkand and Kucha during the Han dynasty, but in its later history, Kashgar was controlled by various empires, including Tang China,[61][62] before it became part of the Turkic Kara-Khanid Khanate in the 10th century. In the 11th century, according to Mahmud al-Kashgari, some non-Turkic languages like the Kanchaki and Sogdian were still used in some areas in the vicinity of Kashgar,[63] and Kanchaki is thought to belong to the Saka language group.[60] It is believed that the Tarim Basin was linguistically Turkified before the 11th century ended.[64]

*Language[edit]*
Main article: Saka language



Drawing of the Issyk inscription
Attestations of the Saka language show that it was an Eastern Iranian language. The linguistic heartland of Saka was the Kingdom of Khotan, which had two varieties, corresponding to the major settlements at Khotan (now Hotan) and Tumshuq (now Tumxuk).[65][66] Both the Tumshuqese and Khotanese varieties of Saka contain many borrowings from the Middle Indo-Aryan Prakrit, but also share features with modern Wakhi and Pashto.[67]

The Issyk inscription, a short fragment on a silver cup found in the Issyk kurgan (modern Kazakhstan) is believed to be an early example of Saka, constituting one of very few autochthonous epigraphic traces of that language.[_citation needed_] The inscription is in a variant of Kharosthi. Harmatta identifies the dialect as Khotanese Saka, tentatively translating its as: "The vessel should hold wine of grapes, added cooked food, so much, to the mortal, then added cooked fresh butter on".[68]

The Saka heartland was gradually conquered during the Turkic expansion, beginning in the 4th century and the area was gradually Turkified linguistically under the Uyghurs.

*Introduction to the Saka*
The Saka included groups who were part of the Zoroastrian and Aryan families of nations. They included the Chorasmi from Khairizem / Khvarizem / Khwarezm (Gk. Chorasmia), the Parthava (Parthians), the Dahi (Dahae) and the Sistani. 

The largest number of ancient Zoroastrian related ruins and artefacts, including a dakhma, a Zoroastrian burial tower known as a 'Tower of Silence', have been uncovered in Chorasmia / Khwarezm. The Dahi were one of the first five nations or people amongst whom Zarathushtra preached his message. The Parthava (Parthians) liberated Iran-Shahr from Macedonian rule and reconstructed the Zoroastrian scriptures, the Avesta that had been destroyed by Alexander. Sistan's heroes, Sam, Zal and Rustam, were the pahlavans, the strongmen and protectors of the imperial Iranian throne. Their stories occupy the largest sections in Ferdowsi's epic poem, the Shahnameh. 

For the main part, the traditional land of the Saka forms part of Turkmenistan, Uzbekistan, Kazakhstan and Kyrgyzstan today.





Map of Saka lands- Modern. Click to enlarge
Herodotus (485 BCE - c. 420 BCE) and Strabo (c. 63/64 BCE - 24 CE) described the Saka (Sacae) in general as nomads who engaged in perpetual warfare plundering their neighbours and far off lands. However, Strabo and Herodotus mention exceptions to this generalization. Their comments together with supporting evidence indicate there were both settled and nomadic Saka. Strabo sums up the reputation of the Saka as follows: "They are self-assertive, uncouth, wild, and warlike, but, in their business dealings, straightforward and not given to deceit."


Encyclopedia of Ukraine (click for a larger map)
Scythia itself was a fairly small nation. The father of modern history, Herodotus, states the extent of Scythia in his _Histories_ 4.21: Travelling west to east, "Across the Tanais (commonly today's Don River in the Ukraine) it is no longer Scythia; the first of the districts belongs to the Sauromatae, whose country begins at the inner end of the Maeetian lake (commonly taken to mean the Sea of Azov at the north of the Black Sea) and stretches fifteen days' journey north, and is quite bare of both wild and cultivated trees. Above these in the second district, the Budini inhabit a country thickly overgrown with trees of all kinds." 

From about 800 to 300 BCE, the Scythia of Greek texts (also see Herodotus 4.21 above) extended east from the Carpathian Mountains in Central Europe - that is east of Rumania, Eastern Ukraine and Poland of today - east from the Carpathians to the Don River. To the south of Scythia was the Sea of Azov (the Maeetian Lake) and to the north, the start of the forests. 

In other words the land of Scythia was a relatively small country that consisted of the grasslands of today's Moldova, Ukraine and Crimea. It was far removed from the eastern Saka lands and people. Certainly, as with any group in history, there would have been contact through conquest, plundering raids and even trade resulting in an osmosis of language elements and a borrowing of words. Nevertheless, in our investigation on the Saka, we have found no ethnic link between the Scythians and the Saka. Nor have we found an instance of the two forming a single community. Indeed, if we read the classical Greek accounts careful, we find it stated that the origins of the Saka are to be found in the east as part of the Central Asian Aryan family and not the west. As we shall see below, the Saka's links as well as their making or breaking of community are found with the Aryan and Zoroastrian family of nations. 

The Saka were not Scythians - nor any variation thereof. 

[Reader's need to make allowance that many ancient and modern writers were and are not scientific or circumspect in their writing. Many filled the gaps in their information with their imagination or skewed information to support a political or racial motive. For instance, Greek writers added to their substantive and convoluted mythology that the nations of Persia (and Media) were formed by Greek gods. Expropriators of The Irano-N. Indian Aryan heritage (including symbols) claim eastward migrations of their 'race'. Other machinations had the Caucasus Mountains as a birthplace of the white Caucasian 'race'. At one time, the Soviet Russians actively promoted the concept of eastward 'Scythian' migrations perhaps to bolster their imperial acquisition of the once Saka lands in Central Asia. Also see our page: Western Views on the Aryans. We are, however, pleased to see some modern writers beginning to voice a contrary opinion to the old Eurocentric bias. Wikipedia's page of Scythian Languages starts with the statement, "The Scythian languages are a group of Eastern Iranian languages of the classical and late antiquity (Middle Iranian) period...." While we feel it is untenable to link language associations categorically to genetics (or race) as so many linguists and philologists attempt to do, or to equate the spread of languages solely to migrations of 'races' (race-based constructs provide racists with academic support and thereby legitimacy for their bogus postulations), and while the Wikipedia page persists in using the term 'Scythian' in contexts where 'Saka' is the correct and authentic term, the page nevertheless provides some refreshing insights. 

Some authors such as Oswald Szemerényi imply that the Sogdians were Scythians i.e. Saka. The Sogdians and various Saka are listed as separate groups in Achaemenid inscriptions. The Sogdians and Saka though separate did live in close proximity and there are indications that some Saka did inhabit parts of Sogdian lands at different points in history. When times of mutual accommodation gave way to competition, there were likely repeated inroads of one group into the lands of the other.]


6.19: "_Ultra sunt Scytharum populi. Persae illos Sacas universos appellavere a proxima gente, antiqui Aramios, Scythae ipsi Persas Chorsaros et Caucasum montem Croucasim, hoc est nive candidum_". For the primary translation of this passage, we get, "Beyond* (the Jaxartes River/Syr Darya mentioned previously in 6.18) are the Scythian people. The Persians call all as Saka after the nearest people, the ancient Arami, Scythians themselves Persians Chorsares (Chorasmian?*) and/also the Caucasian Mountain Croucasis, that is snow white/whitened (cf. Safeed Kuh/Paropamisus)." We get a secondary translation by inserting 'call': "Beyond (the Jaxartes River/Syr Darya) are the Scythian people. The Persians call all as Saka after the nearest people, the ancient Arami, Scythians themselves (call) Persians Chorsares (Chorasmian?**) and/also (call) the Caucasian Mountain Croucasis, that is snow white." [*"Beyond" the Jaxartes means east of the Jaxartes. **Khor in Old Iranian = Sun; as in Khorasan and Khorasmia/Chorasmia.] 

Significantly, Pliny places his description of the 'Scythians' after his chapter on the Caspian Sea and before his chapter on the Seres (eastern most lands). His passage states (as does Herodotus) that the Persians call all those 'Scythians" descended from the Arami as Saka. 'Aram' is an Irano-N. Indian word. It could also be a corruption of Herodotus' 'Amyrgi'. Pliny lived during the Parthian reign of Aryana and we also know of Parthava as Khorasan. This might explain Pliny's statement regarding the "Persians Chorsares". Paradoxically, even though the West called the Parthians under the general appellation of 'Persians', the Parthians were originally a Saka group. 

A note by Maj. Gen. Sir A. Cunningham in his article (at p. 223) published in the Royal Numismatic Society's _Numismatic Chronicle (Great Britain, 1888)_ states, "In the Babylonian version of the inscriptions of Darius (likely at Behistun), Namiri (N'amiri?) is substituted for Saka. Perhaps Aramii should be Amarii." King Darius' inscription at Behistun that chronicles a secession by the Saka Tigra-Khauda is on column five. Gen. Cunningham's note indicates a possible relationship between 'Arami', 'Amyrgi' via 'Amiri' and the Saka Tigra-Khauda. 

Darius in responding to the secession of the Saka Tigra-Khauda, states in his inscription that went he marched with his army to the Saka lands, he crossed a 'draya', a river, likely today's Syr Darya before encountering the Saka. Modern translators inevitably translate 'draya' as 'sea' and therefore translate 'para draya' incorrectly as 'across the sea'.


11.8.1, writes: "As one proceeds from the Hyrcanian Sea towards the east, one sees ... the tribe of the Parthians (Parthava) and that of the Margianians (Mouru) and the Arians; and then comes the desert which is separated from Hyrcania (Verkani/Gorgani) by the Sarnius River as one goes eastwards and towards the Ochus (Murghab) River...Then comes Bactriana, and Sogdiana, and finally the [Sacae] nomads." 

In the account above, travelling west to east, Strabo's sources encounter the Saka beyond, i.e. east, of the Sogdians. Since the Syr Darya (River Jaxartes) formed the eastern Sogdian border, that would place those Saka to the east of the river. However, Strabo adds below, that the Saka are also to be found on the left (north) of the traveller starting with the Dahi who lived to the north of Varkana and Parthava (Hyrcania and Parthia) immediately after the Caspian, followed by the great Karakum (Garagum) desert, and then the Massagetae. 

Strabo 11.8.2: "On the left and opposite these peoples are situated the [Sacae] or nomadic tribes, which cover the whole of the northern side. Now the greater part of the [Sacae], beginning at the Caspian Sea, are called Däae (Dahi), but those who are situated more to the east than these are named Massagetae and Saca, whereas all the rest are given the general name of [Sacae], though each people is given a separate name of its own. They are all for the most part nomads. But the best known of the nomads are those who took away Bactriana from the Greeks, I mean the Asii, Pasiani, Tochari, and Sacarauli, who originally came from the country on the other side of the Iaxartes (Jaxartes or Syr Darya or Sihun) River that adjoins that of the Sacae and the Sogdiani and was occupied by the Sacae. And as for the Däae, some of them are called *Aparni** (see below), some Xanthii, and some Pissuri. Now of these the Aparni are situated closest to Hyrcania (Verkani/Gorgani) and the part of the sea that borders on it, but the remainder extend even as far as the country that stretches parallel to Aria." 

Strabo 11.8.3: "Between them (Sacae) and Hyrcania and Parthia and extending as far as the Arians is a great waterless desert, which they (the Sacae) traversed by long marches and then overran Hyrcania (Verkani/Gorgani), Nesaea (Nisa), and the plains of the Parthians Parthians (Parthava). 

To paraphrase the above: various Saka groups, Saka being a general term, inhabit the northern plains that stretch from the Dahae lands that lie to the east of the Caspian Sea all the way to Aria (today's Herat Afghanistan), and that between these Saka and the southern kingdoms of Hyrcania (Varkana/Gorgan), Nesaea (Nisa), the plains of the Parthians (plains just north of the Kopet Dag, Bactria (Northern Afghanistan) and Aria lies a great desert that some of the northern predatory Saka tribes crossed by long marches to raid the kingdom along the south of the desert and particularly Varkana, Nisa, and the Parthian plains. The Saka who lived beyond the Jaxartes River (Syr Darya) coincides with Saka Para-Darya, the 'Saka across the river'. The name *Aparni** (see above) is found in the Middle Persian Zoroastrian text, the _Bundahishn_ as Aparnak, one of the six male children of the legendary Saka king, paladin and champion of Iran-shahr, Sam, Rustam's grandfather. Aparnak was given over-lordship of the land of Aparshahr derived from Aparnak-shahr. The Aparni were apparently a royal house of the Dahi. 

According to Strabo, the Saka consisted of:
- an eponymous group called the Saka as well as
- Dahi (largest) consisting of the clans such as the Aparni, Xanthii, and Pissuri and who were situated closest to the Caspian Sea
- Massagetae (who were situated east across the desert - today's Karakum/Garagum), and
- Asii, Pasiani, Tochari, and Sacarauli who original came from east of the Jaxartes (Syr Darya) and located presumably between the Oxus (Amu Darya) and Jaxartes (Syr Darya). The name Sacarauli appears to be Saka-rauli. 

Unlike Strabo, Pliny in his _Natural History_ at 6.19 (see above), does not mention any Saka (Sacae) nation west of the Jaxartes (Syr Darya). Those Saka that others understand as living west of the Jaxartes, Pliny names and the places in the east, but admits, as we have quoted above, "Indeed, upon no subject that I know of are there greater discrepancies among writers...." His account states that the Sacae (Saka) occupied lands east of the Jaxartes. His enumerates the Saka groups as follows: 

The Saka groups are the, "Sacae (here spelt differently than his previous spelling of Sakas), the Massagetae, the Dahae, the Essedones (Issedones situated in today's Kyrgyzstan?), the Ariacae (They dwelt, according to Ptolemy, along the southern banks of the Jaxartes), the Rhymmici, the Paesici, the Amardi (Mardi, near Caspian), the Histi, the Edones, the Camae, the Camacae, the Euchatae (today's Bukhara?), the Cotieri, the Anthusiani, the Psacae, the Arimaspi, the Antacati, the Chroasai, and the Cetei; among them the Napaei are said to have been destroyed by the Palaei. 

"The rivers in their country that are the best known, are the Mandragæus and the Carpasus. ...He (M. Varro) adds also, that under the direction of Pompey, it was ascertained that it is seven days' journey from India to the river Icarus, in the country of the Bactri, which discharges itself into the Oxus, and that the merchandize of India being conveyed from it through the Caspian Sea into the Cyrus, may be brought by land to Phasis in Pontus, in five days at most. There are numerous islands throughout the whole of the Caspian sea: the only one that is well known is that of Tazata."


Parthia (Parthava) as an Iranian kingdom was in existence around 1000 BCE. It was a successor nation to Nisaya, the fifth nation mentioned in the Zoroastrian scriptures', the Avesta's, book of Vendidad (see Vendidad nations). As a result, it is sometimes known was Parthaunisa. The Parthians liberated Iran-Shahr for Macedonian-Greek rule left behind by Alexander. They reassembled the Iranian federation of kingdoms, Iran-Shahr and they also reassembled fragments of the Zoroastrian scriptures, the Avesta destroyed by Alexander (see our page on the destruction and recompilation of the Avesta). 

The Parthians are thought to be a part of Dahi-Saka, (Dahae in western literature) a part of the greater Iranian-Aryan family that had its origins in an area around the upper reaches of the Syr Darya (Jaxartes) river. The Dahi migrated 1,500 km westward towards land around the southeast Caspian coast and the Kopet Dag mountains. The Dahi are mentioned in one of the oldest chapters of the Zoroastrian scriptures, the Avesta, as one of the five original people to accept Zarathushtra's message, i.e. become Zoroastrian. 

The Parthava may have in this manner shared origins with the ancestors of legendary Rustam of Sistan. The strongmen of both groups are called pahlavans, a word related to Pahlavi, a later form of Parthava. The Parthava in turn have Saka roots. The Saka pahlavans were protectors of Iran-Shahr and the Iranian throne, a role they would fulfil very well when they liberated Iran-Shahr from Macedonian rule. The word Sagzi is used in as a title for Rustam with the implication that the word is derived from Sakzig, a derivative of Saka. [We find Sakzig reminiscent of Tagzig (commonly thought to be Tajik), the nation where the Tibetan Bon claim spiritual roots.]


Farvardin Yasht 13.144where the fravashis (spiritual souls) of the Dahi's men and women are revered. The implication is that the Dahi, or some Dahi, were Zoroastrians - Zoroastrians worthy of perpetual veneration in each recitation of the scriptures. Contemporaneous with the life of Zarathushtra, Dahi, together with Airya (-nam), Tuirya (-nam), Sairima (-nam) and Saini (-nam), are the oldest in the Zoroastrian family of nations - nations that participated in the start of the Zoroastrian era.


Airyana Vaeja, ancient Airya, around the upper to mid Syr Darya or Jaxartes river. Today, that region extends from the Fergana Valley in Tajikistan to Tashkent in Uzbekistan. 

According to Justinus, internal discord between the Saka forced the Parthians to leave their original homeland and migrate to new lands. The Dahi (Gk. Dahae) did the same and both migrated nearly 1500 km westwards towards the Caspian Sea. [For a further discussion, please see our Dahi page.] The entire area in-between the upper Syr Darya and the southern Caspian were settled by different Saka groups. Some Saka would have migrated eastward into present-day Kyrgyzstan as well. 

The Saka connection with Eastern Iran's Sistan region appears to have taken place via two routes. The first and the more ancient was via the connection with ancient Parthava (Parthians), the Pahlavans or Paladins of Iran-shahr. The second took place during the liberation of Iran-shahr from Macedonian-Greek rule about 2,100 years ago resulting in the formation of Sagastan (Sakastan).





Map of Iranian-Aryan Nations of Central Asian, Dahi lands & migrations.
Click to see a larger map. Base Image Credit: Microsoft Encarta. Notations © K. E. Eduljee

_Shahnameh_, the _Book of Kings_. 

The name Sagastan (Sakastan, meaning the land of the Saka), and Sistan are relatively modern names. We do not find these names in the Zoroastrian scriptures, the Avesta or the Achaemenian inscriptions listing the nations of the Persian Empire (700-330 BCE) where we find the name *Zraka* or *Zaranka* (Gk. *Drangiana*) instead. The name Sagastan emerges in history during the Persian Sassanian empire (c. 200-650 CE) where we find the satrapy or kingdom of Sagastan located in the area of today's Sistan / Seistan province in eastern Iran. George Curzon in _Persia and the Persian Question_, vol 1 (1892), writes, "The derivation of the name Seistan or Sejestan from Sagastan, the country of the Sagan, or Sacae, has, says Sir H. Rawlinson, never been doubted by any writer of credit, either Arab or Persian." Not every writer shares Curzon's certitude. 

In their flight from the invading Arabs c 650 CE, the Persians and their allies mounted significant resistance at Zarang in Sagistan (another name variation). 

As we have stated above, the Saka connection with Eastern Iran appears to have taken place via two routes. The first and the more ancient was via the connection with ancient Parthava (Parthians), the Pahlavans or Paladins of Iran-shahr. The second took place during the liberation of Iran-shahr from Macedonian-Greek rule about 2,100 years ago resulting in the formation of Sagastan (Sakastan).


Ferdowsi's _Shahnameh_, Rustam's grandfather Sam received from his overlord, King of Iran-Shahr, Manuchehr, a throne of turquoise, a crown of gold, a ruby signet-ring and a golden girdle. Manuchehr further gave Sam with a charter investing him him lands under his domain. These included:
• the whole of Kabul (Gandhara),
• Dunbur (derived from Sanskrit Udyanapura to Adynpur to Dunpur - a major city of Lamghanat, on the right bank of the River Kabul),
• May-e Hind (from Vay-hind, capital of Gandhara and the region between the Kabul and Indus rivers above their confluence),
• Land from the Darya-e Chin (Chen-ab River, an Indus tributary which irrigates Multan) to Darya-e Hind (Indus River),
• Land from Zabulistan to the other side of Bust/Bost (Lashkar-gah, Southern Afghanistan). 

Similarly, Rustam's overlord Kayanian King Kay Qubad granted him a fiefdom from Zabulistan to the Darya-e Sind, with the throne and crown of Nimruz; and Kabul to be given to Mihrab. Maintaining the tradition, Kayanian King Kay Khusrow bestowed on Framarz, Rustam's son, the kingdom of all Hind from Qinnauj (derived from Sanskrit Kanyakubja to Kanauj, a region of the Ganges) to Seistan, Hind (Sind), Dunbur, May, Bust, Zabul/Zabol, Kabul. 

These immense lands cover what is today Seistan and Baluchistan in Iran, Afghanistan northern Pakistan, Kashmir and a large part of northern India. 

If this is indeed history in some form, then the greater quasi-empire of Sakastan, a sub-empire if you will of the greater Iranian-Aryan (later Persian) empire, included what the Persians refer to as Hind i.e. India, and there was ample opportunity for Saka influence in India. There is some suggestion - a very tenuous one - that we have evidence of the Sakas in India. In Mathura, North-Central India (north of Agra and on the banks of the River Yamuna, a tributary of the Ganges, is a first century BCE inscription on the Mathura lion capital "honouring all Sakastanasa" cf. Sakastan, meaning land of the Saka. That reading of the words is debated and in any event, the sub-empire of Rustam would have long predated the 1st century BCE.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## AMG_12

@Kaptaan


----------



## Max

DrasticMeasure said:


> Khatri



Who are Khatri? do they have presence in Pakistan?


----------



## 大汉奸柳传志

only Dravidians are native to the land.. there is even a faint link between Dravidians and the long lost IVC.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Joe Shearer

Max said:


> Who are Khatri? do they have presence in Pakistan?



Khatri are today traders and business folk, but they formed the core of the Sikh faith, starting from Guru Nanak himself; if I remember correctly, all the Gurus were Khatri. Originally they seem to have been a peaceful set of people. When they were forced to take to arms, with the militarisation of Sikh society by Guru Gobind Singh, they took to it like ducks to water, and soon became a very strong military power by themselves, in spite of their relatively small numbers.

I presume that they exist in Pakistan, as all septs and groups were represented reasonably evenly throughout the Punjab (there were some who were confined to Potohar, I am told by Pakistani friends, but I am not knowledgeable about this).

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Max

Joe Shearer said:


> Khatri are today traders and business folk, but they formed the core of the Sikh faith, starting from Guru Nanak himself; if I remember correctly, all the Gurus were Khatri. Originally they seem to have been a peaceful set of people. When they were forced to take to arms, with the militarisation of Sikh society by Guru Gobind Singh, they took to it like ducks to water, and soon became a very strong military power by themselves, in spite of their relatively small numbers.
> 
> I presume that they exist in Pakistan, as all septs and groups were represented reasonably evenly throughout the Punjab (there were some who were confined to Potohar, I am told by Pakistani friends, but I am not knowledgeable about this).



Thank you, from wikipedia i learned their caste is disputed, They claim they are Kshatriya but Kshatriya don't accept them, they consider them lower caste.


----------



## PurpleButcher

My great great great grandfather, around early 1800's was a Khatri, who accepted Islam. He belonged to Gujar Khan region (Potohar)

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Kambojaric

Max said:


> Who are Khatri? do they have presence in Pakistan?





Joe Shearer said:


> Khatri are today traders and business folk, but they formed the core of the Sikh faith, starting from Guru Nanak himself; if I remember correctly, all the Gurus were Khatri. Originally they seem to have been a peaceful set of people. When they were forced to take to arms, with the militarisation of Sikh society by Guru Gobind Singh, they took to it like ducks to water, and soon became a very strong military power by themselves, in spite of their relatively small numbers.
> 
> I presume that they exist in Pakistan, as all septs and groups were represented reasonably evenly throughout the Punjab (there were some who were confined to Potohar, I am told by Pakistani friends, but I am not knowledgeable about this).



From what I have read online "khatri" seems to be a designation within the caste hierarchy of the region. Included within it are tribes like Uppal, Syal (sialkot is named after them), Sehgal, Malik, Sethi and others. I suppose on the Pakistani side the term never gained any popularity with tribes preferring their own names.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Joe Shearer

utp45 said:


> only Dravidians are native to the land.. there is even a faint link between Dravidians and the long lost IVC.



After the latest publishing of genetic analysis referred to in the OP by @Kambojaric, this is no longer a faint link. Just to remind you, while the IVC peoples themselves were a mixture of agriculturists and settled urban people from the high plateaux to the west of the Indus Valley and hunter-gatherers from the South Asian sub-continent, after the decline of the IVC, two things happened.

Some survivors of the gradual, 600-year decay drifted north, north-east and east, moving from the great cities to increasingly smaller, and less and less imposing urban clusters. There they mingled with the original hunter-gatherers, and migrants from the steppes, to form what is known today as the Ancestral North Indian type. It is increasingly probable that the steppe migrants brought the Indo-Aryan branch of PIE into India, and helped north India and west India to become predominantly Aryan-speaking. These, as mentioned, were the ANI, the Ancestral North Indians, and almost all north Indians are descended from this stock.

Other survivors drifted east, south east and south, moving into the Deccan plateau and perhaps further. There they mixed once again with the hunter-gatherers who had contributed to their original parentage, at the time of the building of the IVC. All of these today speak one Dravidian language or the other; unless the IVC people spoke a completely different language, that is now lost, it seems the simplest thing to deduce from this is that the IVC people themselves spoke some sort of Dravidian language.

This southern branch of survivors, incidentally, are genetically what is called today the Ancestral South India, the other root stock from which present-day Indians are descended, in this case, south Indians. It is the simplest explanation to link the IVC people to the south Indians who speak Dravidian languages today.



Max said:


> Thank you, from wikipedia i learned their caste is disputed, They claim they are Kshatriya but Kshatriya don't accept them, they consider them lower caste.



Actually, the other way around. They don't think Rajputs are genuine kshatriyas, but they themselves are. There is no 'other' kshatriya as you mentioned; these are the only two left to fight it out (in the north; in the south, there are claimants).



Kambojaric said:


> From what I have read online "khatri" seems to be a designation within the caste hierarchy of the region. Included within it are tribes like Uppal, Syal (sialkot is named after them), Sehgal, Malik, Sethi and others. I suppose on the Pakistani side the term never gained any popularity with tribes preferring their own names.



It is difficult to tweeze out what is caste and what is tribe, in this context. What the Brahmins tried their level best to convert into a work-based occupational group, or jati, those who had nothing to do with the Brahmins saw these distinctions and differences as tribal. The names are the same, the people are the same, on one side, and within the penumbra of an egalitarian religion, they are perceived as tribes, on the other side, with a religion and a culture obsessed with taxonomy, they are perceived as castes and sub-castes.



PurpleButcher said:


> My great great great grandfather, around early 1800's was a Khatri, who accepted Islam. He belonged to Gujar Khan region (Potohar)



There we go, then. I wasn't sure of this; thanks for confirming it.

@Kambojaric

So glad you published that commentary as the OP. Such a lot becomes clear on reading the report on the genetics of the region.

Reactions: Like Like:
8


----------



## hembo

Joe Shearer said:


> After the latest publishing of genetic analysis referred to in the OP by @Kambojaric, this is no longer a faint link. Just to remind you, while the IVC peoples themselves were a mixture of agriculturists and settled urban people from the high plateaux to the west of the Indus Valley and hunter-gatherers from the South Asian sub-continent, after the decline of the IVC, two things happened.
> 
> Some survivors of the gradual, 600-year decay drifted north, north-east and east, moving from the great cities to increasingly smaller, and less and less imposing urban clusters. There they mingled with the original hunter-gatherers, and migrants from the steppes, to form what is known today as the Ancestral North Indian type. It is increasingly probable that the steppe migrants brought the Indo-Aryan branch of PIE into India, and helped north India and west India to become predominantly Aryan-speaking. These, as mentioned, were the ANI, the Ancestral North Indians, and almost all north Indians are descended from this stock.
> 
> Other survivors drifted east, south east and south, moving into the Deccan plateau and perhaps further. There they mixed once again with the hunter-gatherers who had contributed to their original parentage, at the time of the building of the IVC. All of these today speak one Dravidian language or the other; unless the IVC people spoke a completely different language, that is now lost, it seems the simplest thing to deduce from this is that the IVC people themselves spoke some sort of Dravidian language.
> 
> This southern branch of survivors, incidentally, are genetically what is called today the Ancestral South India, the other root stock from which present-day Indians are descended, in this case, south Indians. It is the simplest explanation to link the IVC people to the south Indians who speak Dravidian languages today.
> 
> 
> 
> Actually, the other way around. They don't think Rajputs are genuine kshatriyas, but they themselves are. There is no 'other' kshatriya as you mentioned; these are the only two left to fight it out (in the north; in the south, there are claimants).
> 
> 
> 
> It is difficult to tweeze out what is caste and what is tribe, in this context. What the Brahmins tried their level best to convert into a work-based occupational group, or jati, those who had nothing to do with the Brahmins saw these distinctions and differences as tribal. The names are the same, the people are the same, on one side, and within the penumbra of an egalitarian religion, they are perceived as tribes, on the other side, with a religion and a culture obsessed with taxonomy, they are perceived as castes and sub-castes.



Excellent as always Joe!!

Could you articulate a little more on eastern and north-eastern stock please. I'm particularly interested in the native Assam and adjoining area's populace of 2000 BCE to 1200 CE (i.e. prior to arrival of the Ahoms)....


----------



## Max

Joe Shearer said:


> Actually, the other way around. They don't think Rajputs are genuine kshatriyas, but they themselves are. There is no 'other' kshatriya as you mentioned; these are the only two left to fight it out (in the north; in the south, there are claimants).



From wikipedia..

Kenneth W. Jones quoted that "*the Khatris claimed with some justice and increasing insistence, the status of Rajputs, or Kshatriyas, a claim not granted by those above but illustrative of their ambiguous position on the great varna scale of class divisions" [14]* Khatris claim that they were warriors who took to trade.[15] *The 19th-century Indians and the British administrators failed to agree whether the Khatri claim of Kshatriya status should be accepted, since the overwhelming majority of them were engaged in Vaishya (mercantile) occupations.[16]* There are Khatris that are found in other states of India and they follow different professions in each region. The Khatris of Gujarat and Rajasthan are said to have tailoring skills like "Darji" (tailor) caste.[17

Khatris maybe claiming higher status in anger of not being accepted as Kshatriya

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## SoulSpokesman

@Joe Shearer 

*What the Brahmins tried their level best to convert into a work-based occupational group, or jati,*

As you know, I have no formal education in these matters but I am inclined to believe that bammans had nothing to do with it. There was a strong ecological and economic rationale to form hereditary endogamous occupational groups - an argument which is made by some geographers to justify the caste system.

Regards


----------



## Joe Shearer

hembo said:


> Excellent as always Joe!!
> 
> Could you articulate a little more on eastern and north-eastern stock please. I'm particularly interested in the native Assam and adjoining area's populace of 2000 BCE to 1200 CE (i.e. prior to arrival of the Ahoms)....



You are a mind-reader! Not enough work done on that, and I am dying to read what they find. Being reportedly 30% Tibeto-Burmese myself, this is of vital interest to me - to all of us. 

And your point about the pre-Ahom status is very sharp. Most of us don't know, for instance, that most of Terai and beyond areas in north India (beyond meaning southward, NOT northward) were under Tibetan rule for some time in the 10th and 11th centuries; remember, this was exactly the time that Islam had come to what some later called Khorasan, and was pushing back Hindu Shahis in Afghanistan, Uzbegs and Turkish tribes on the steppes, and the imperial Tibetans in between, back towards the Tibetan Plateau.

I really wish somebody would get down to this.



Max said:


> From wikipedia..
> 
> Kenneth W. Jones quoted that "*the Khatris claimed with some justice and increasing insistence, the status of Rajputs, or Kshatriyas, a claim not granted by those above but illustrative of their ambiguous position on the great varna scale of class divisions" [14]* Khatris claim that they were warriors who took to trade.[15] *The 19th-century Indians and the British administrators failed to agree whether the Khatri claim of Kshatriya status should be accepted, since the overwhelming majority of them were engaged in Vaishya (mercantile) occupations.[16]* There are Khatris that are found in other states of India and they follow different professions in each region. The Khatris of Gujarat and Rajasthan are said to have tailoring skills like "Darji" (tailor) caste.[17
> 
> Khatris maybe claiming higher status in anger of not being accepted as Kshatriya



Quite possible. 

I don't like to get into these ethno-nationalist fights. Best leave them to battle it out with whoever is opposing them.

Essentially, the subject of your extract could well have been part of the problem.



SoulSpokesman said:


> @Joe Shearer
> 
> *What the Brahmins tried their level best to convert into a work-based occupational group, or jati,*
> 
> As you know, I have no formal education in these matters but I am inclined to believe that bammans had nothing to do with it. There was a strong ecological and economic rationale to form hereditary endogamous occupational groups - an argument which is made by some geographers to justify the caste system.
> 
> Regards



Personally, I doubt it strongly. There is a detailed discussion about to start elsewhere. That might be interesting to follow.

What your quoted 'geographers' have cited is not by itself a problem; prophets of a unique Indian development model are a problem. Their solutions are to revert to the static form of society, a form that was never imposed on society until the 7th and 8th centuries. That is a very long time - from roughly 1500 BC to 600 AD, about 2,100 years - for occupational fluidity. And it is also very curious that it suddenly closed up, people could not change their occupation any more and the locks were put on.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Kambojaric

Joe Shearer said:


> It is difficult to tweeze out what is caste and what is tribe, in this context. What the Brahmins tried their level best to convert into a work-based occupational group, or jati, those who had nothing to do with the Brahmins saw these distinctions and differences as tribal. The names are the same, the people are the same, on one side, and within the penumbra of an egalitarian religion, they are perceived as tribes, on the other side, with a religion and a culture obsessed with taxonomy, they are perceived as castes and sub-castes.



I would dare say that it might even predate the advent of egalitarian religions. In Sutta 93 of the Majjhima Nikaya for example Buddha states 

"What do you think, Assalayana? Have you heard that in Yana & Kamboja and other outlying countries there are only two castes — masters & slaves — and that having been a master one (can) become a slave, and that having been a slave one (can) become a master?".

This denotes a system more similar to Greco-Roman or Persian slave master relationship. At the end of the day however yes, there is nothing differentiating a Sethi from either side of the border other than religion. The values that we derive from them ultimately shape perceptions of who we are.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Joe Shearer

Kambojaric said:


> I would dare say that it might even predate the advent of egalitarian religions. In Sutta 93 of the Majjhima Nikaya for example Buddha states
> 
> "What do you think, Assalayana? Have you heard that in Yana & Kamboja and other outlying countries there are only two castes — masters & slaves — and that having been a master one (can) become a slave, and that having been a slave one (can) become a master?".
> 
> This denotes a system more similar to Greco-Roman or Persian slave master relationship. At the end of the day however yes, there is nothing differentiating a Sethi from either side of the border other than religion. The values that we derive from them ultimately shape perceptions of who we are.



You have a point, an excellent one! Of course! And, in fact, manumission is usually, in such societies, very carefully structured; escape from servitude is always possible. 

A striking point, Sir.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## thesolar65

Just when I need a Time Machine desparately........ There isn't one! For these kinds of threads...


----------



## war&peace

Max said:


> Who are Khatri? do they have presence in Pakistan?


Khatri is a hindu caste...above or below Brahmin..

@Kaptaan @Talwar e Pakistan something of your interest guys..

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Talwar e Pakistan

Kambojaric said:


> Another clue: the proportion of Indians who can tolerate cows’ milk decreases markedly towards the east, suggesting that cattle-herders migrated into the country from the west.


Heres the map, peaks in Pakistan, Sindh; fades off in North Western India.







correlates with milk consumption








Kambojaric said:


> The culture depicted in Sanskrit texts has different traits. It was largely rural and pastoral, relied on iron instead of bronze and appears to have used horses, chariots and bows and arrows—all of which are absent from the original Indus settlements.


Vedic/Sanskrit texts regarded the people/Kingdoms inhabiting modern day Pakistan as having a separate culture and being a seperate people/race. They were despised for their hostility towards Brahmins and Casteism.


_"I remember from the days of my youth that a slaughter-ground for kine and a space for storing intoxicating spirits always distinguish the entrances of the abodes of the (Vahika) kings. On some very secret mission I had to live among the Vahikas. In consequence of such residence the conduct of these people is well known to me. There is a town of the name of Sakala (modern day Sialkote), a river of the name of Apaga, and a clan of the Vahikas known by the name of the Jarttikas. The practices of these people are very censurable. They drink the liquor called Gauda, and eat fried barley with it. They also eat beef with garlic. They also eat cakes of flour mixed with meat, and boiled rice that is bought from others. Of righteous practices they have none. (8,44)"

"Where these five rivers, Shatadru, Vipasha, the third Iravati, Chandrabhaga and Vitasta flow and where there are Pilu-forests and (where) Sindhu is the sixth to flow out, this country is called Aratta…”

"that (region) where these five rivers, emerging from the mountains flow, this Aratta is called Balhika where the Arya should not stay even for two days"
_
_"The Prasthalas, the Madras, the Gandharas, the Arattas, those called Khasas, the Vasatis, the Sindhus and the Sauviras are almost as blamable in their practices (8:44)." _(All of the named Kingdoms fall within modern-day Pakistan)

The Kingdoms in modern-day Pakistan were referred to as "Vahika" or "Bahika" meaning "outsider". The people were considered degraded Kshatriyas for their hostility towards Vedic culture and Casteism.

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## Joe Shearer

Something that never ceases to catch me off guard:

During a 'normal' discussion, an average Pakistani knows nothing about India or Indians, least of all about Hindu Indians and their practices, beliefs and mythical or epic or scriptural passages.

When they are not under observation, however, an amazing amount of information comes pouring out. Then they know about the Vedas, with specific reference to the differences among the four, and the theogony of the Vedic Age; they know about the Vedic language and the lifestyle depicted in the Vedas; they know about the social structure and the divisions in society described there; they know about how with their increasing access to the middle reaches of the Ganga-Yamuna Valley, their earlier point of entry became more and more remote, and more and more alien; how Buddhism impacted the then Hindu practices, and how it became a way of life for Indians in the Ganga Valley; how the Greek invaders and the inhabitants of a small kingdom in Alexander's way clashed, and what may, or may not have happened in that last of the four set piece battles that Alexander fought; the caste system and possible modern-day social foot print within what is today Pakistan of that system; the role of Rajputs and of other clans and castes within the then Hindu and Buddhist and Jain states of India; the way of life in mediaeval India, before the advent of Islam; the detailed narrative within the Chachnama, and on and on.

There must be a built-in off and on switch, that brings on this flood of memory on occasion, and shuts it off firmly, leaving a monotheist individual totally ignorant of the practices of these pagans next door. 

Remarkable.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Kambojaric

Joe Shearer said:


> Something that never ceases to catch me off guard:
> 
> During a 'normal' discussion, an average Pakistani knows nothing about India or Indians, least of all about Hindu Indians and their practices, beliefs and mythical or epic or scriptural passages.
> 
> When they are not under observation, however, an amazing amount of information comes pouring out. Then they know about the Vedas, with specific reference to the differences among the four, and the theogony of the Vedic Age; they know about the Vedic language and the lifestyle depicted in the Vedas; they know about the social structure and the divisions in society described there; they know about how with their increasing access to the middle reaches of the Ganga-Yamuna Valley, their earlier point of entry became more and more remote, and more and more alien; how Buddhism impacted the then Hindu practices, and how it became a way of life for Indians in the Ganga Valley; how the Greek invaders and the inhabitants of a small kingdom in Alexander's way clashed, and what may, or may not have happened in that last of the four set piece battles that Alexander fought; the caste system and possible modern-day social foot print within what is today Pakistan of that system; the role of Rajputs and of other clans and castes within the then Hindu and Buddhist and Jain states of India; the way of life in mediaeval India, before the advent of Islam; the detailed narrative within the Chachnama, and on and on.
> 
> There must be a built-in off and on switch, that brings on this flood of memory on occasion, and shuts it off firmly, leaving a monotheist individual totally ignorant of the practices of these pagans next door.
> 
> Remarkable.



There is a growing number of people interested in the history and culture of the region which they inhabit. Whilst historically many Pakistanis have stayed clear of this topic due to the fear of being termed "Indian", there is a growing realisation that the two do not go hand in hand. One can read and understand the history of the Indus region without being a supporter of a union with the Republic of India. Personally I think this is good as this will eventually lead to an Iberian/Spain like process where a state born on the basis of religion eventually comes to terms with its predecessors in a healthy manner. Pakistan is and will remain a Muslim country, but that does not mean or require Arabization.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Jaanbaz

Joe Shearer said:


> There must be a built-in off and on switch, that brings on this flood of memory on occasion, and shuts it off firmly, leaving a monotheist individual totally ignorant of the practices of these pagans next door.



Its hidden somewhere in the genes.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Joe Shearer

Kambojaric said:


> There is a growing number of people interested in the history and culture of the region which they inhabit. Whilst historically many Pakistanis have stayed clear of this topic due to the fear of being termed "Indian", there is a growing realisation that the two do not go hand in hand. One can read and understand the history of the Indus region without being a supporter of a union with the Republic of India. Personally I think this is good as this will eventually lead to an Iberian/Spain like process where a state born on the basis of religion eventually comes to terms with its predecessors in a healthy manner. Pakistan is and will remain a Muslim country, but that does not mean or require Arabization.



I liked your reply, but do hope that you realise my comment was not intended for you; not at all. There are other members, sometimes ignoring all the things I had mentioned in a most pointed manner, who then break out into the most learned disquisition at the most unexpected moment. Needless to add, it is engaging, but I did want to share my mild amusement at the phenomenon.

As it happens, what you have stated is something most desirable; any reasonable person must hope for that denouement, even if it takes a few decades more or less. Since you mentioned Spain, even up until their Civil War, they had not got over the overhang of their religion-based state, and the attendant social conservatism that accompanies it. So that is from Ferdinand and Isabella (actually from the , to Juan Carlos? Worth the wait, and my fellow countrymen, well-intentioned Indians who keep jumping up and down wishing for a swifter transition should remember this episode and hold on.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Joe Shearer

Jaanbaz said:


> Its hidden somewhere in the genes.



 

So now we know.


----------



## Taimur Khurram

DrasticMeasure said:


> Khatri, Jatt, Brahmin, Rajput, Kamboj, pathan etc are some of the prominent Aryan races in south asia. Both races are found in northern India and Pakistan.



Yes, but the ones in Hindustan have much less Eurasian in them than the ones in Afghanistan or Pakistan, due to our countries being at the forefront of these migrations.


----------



## DrasticMeasure

Max said:


> Who are Khatri? do they have presence in Pakistan?


Do you watch Indian movies/bollywood or cricket?? Ever heard of Kapoor, Khanna, Malhotra, Roshan, Dhawan, Kohli etc etc. 

Khatris are probably the most educated, fair skinned and financially most prosperous caste in India even ahead of Brahmins. They are everywhere where there is money, fame and literacy.



dsr478 said:


> Yes, but the ones in Hindustan have much less Eurasian in them than the ones in Afghanistan or Pakistan, due to our countries being at the forefront of these migrations.


Well good for you guys. What exactly do you guys plan to do with those good looks??


----------



## Taimur Khurram

DrasticMeasure said:


> Well good for you guys. What exactly do you guys plan to do with those good looks??



???

Where does good looks come into this?


----------



## Joe Shearer

dsr478 said:


> Yes, but the ones in Hindustan have much less Eurasian in them than the ones in Afghanistan or Pakistan, due to our countries being at the forefront of these migrations.



Don't be silly. Read the report. If I hadn't been a polite old man, I might have allowed myself to say something like "racist little dimwit". But I shan't say that.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Taimur Khurram

Joe Shearer said:


> Don't be silly. Read the report. If I hadn't been a polite old man, I might have allowed myself to say something like "racist little dimwit". But I shan't say that.



It's not racism, the genetics of someone from Afghanistan or Pakistan will almost definitely have significantly higher amounts of Eurasian as compared to someone from Hindustan. Why are you getting riled up over it? If anything, that only reflects poorly on you since it's clear you associate a lower frequency of Eurasian genes with racial inferiority.


----------



## Joe Shearer

dsr478 said:


> It's not racism, the genetics of someone from Afghanistan or Pakistan will almost definitely have significantly higher amounts of Eurasian as compared to someone from Hindustan. Why are you getting riled up over it? If anything, that only reflects poorly on you since it's clear you associate a lower frequency of Eurasian genes with racial inferiority.



Are you kidding? Why would I get riled up due to some random juvenile remark? That is why I said read the report.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Politico

My maternal grandfather was British White who used to boast about his father being a General who plundered British India. I feel a teeny bit guilty about my genes whenever I log onto this forum


----------



## Taimur Khurram

Joe Shearer said:


> Are you kidding? Why would I get riled up due to some random juvenile remark? That is why I said read the report.



It wasn't juvenile at all, don't over think things. I was simply stating the facts:

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Vapnope

Max said:


> Who are Khatri? do they have presence in Pakistan?


There khatri in Sindh. I have Khatri friends.


----------



## Talwar e Pakistan

Joe Shearer said:


> Don't be silly. Read the report. If I hadn't been a polite old man, I might have allowed myself to say something like "racist little dimwit". But I shan't say that.


What's wrong with his statement?



Max said:


> Who are Khatri? do they have presence in Pakistan?


There are/were a lot, most of them were historically absorbed into other Baradaris.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Srinivas

TOtal load of rubbish, ivc is far older than what the current history tells.


----------



## Taimur Khurram

Srinivas said:


> TOtal load of rubbish, ivc is far older than what the current history tells.



How does that disprove the Aryan migrations?


----------



## Kambojaric

dsr478 said:


> It wasn't juvenile at all, don't over think things. I was simply stating the facts:
> 
> View attachment 465437



From what I understand and quote me if I am wrong here but North Indian Brahmins have the highest west Eurasian component in their genepool which again points to the migration trend from west to east. I remember reading a study a couple of years ago which pointed out how the closest kin to North Indian Brahmins are ironically Pakistanis.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## newb3e

did aryan shit in open?


----------



## DESERT FIGHTER

Max said:


> From wikipedia..
> 
> Kenneth W. Jones quoted that "*the Khatris claimed with some justice and increasing insistence, the status of Rajputs, or Kshatriyas, a claim not granted by those above but illustrative of their ambiguous position on the great varna scale of class divisions" [14]* Khatris claim that they were warriors who took to trade.[15] *The 19th-century Indians and the British administrators failed to agree whether the Khatri claim of Kshatriya status should be accepted, since the overwhelming majority of them were engaged in Vaishya (mercantile) occupations.[16]* There are Khatris that are found in other states of India and they follow different professions in each region. The Khatris of Gujarat and Rajasthan are said to have tailoring skills like "Darji" (tailor) caste.[17
> 
> Khatris maybe claiming higher status in anger of not being accepted as Kshatriya


I have a hindu friend from Sindh (lawyer).

Other day we were sitting , asked him about his caste.. 

Dude claimed to be a rajput... discussion went ahead and than he says that he’s a khatri/rajput.. his caste being Chawla... 

I being just a bit about this stuff pointed out that khatris aren’t rajput but trading community.. in panjab you have sethis etc who are khatris but well he stuck to the claim of rajputs lol.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Indus Pakistan

Covered this subject 100 times. All I can say is -
















A reminder for those who might be confused where the Indus River Valley is.









Where the Ganga Valley/Dravidia are.

Reactions: Like Like:
10


----------



## Hold up

Kaptaan said:


> Covered this subject 100 times. All I can say is -


Nobody cares about ivc here man, people got far more pressing things to worry about.


----------



## Indus Pakistan

Hold up said:


> here


Like trying to learn toilet manners. Oh okay. Sorry carry on.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Hold up

Kaptaan said:


> Like trying to learn toilet manners. Oh okay. Sorry carry on.


Toilet's more important than ivc, so yeah you right.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Joe Shearer

dsr478 said:


> It wasn't juvenile at all, don't over think things. I was simply stating the facts:
> 
> View attachment 465437



LOL.

For the third time, PLEASE read the report. I am happy with having used the word 'juvenile', and see no reason to substitute it with another.



Talwar e Pakistan said:


> What's wrong with his statement?



Irrelevant. 




> There are/were a lot, most of them were historically absorbed into other Baradaris.



It is difficult to understand how anyone can be 'absorbed' into another Baradari.



Politico said:


> My maternal grandfather was British White who used to boast about his father being a General who plundered British India. I feel a teeny bit guilty about my genes whenever I log onto this forum



YOU OWE US ALL A HALF-APOLOGY!

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Max

DESERT FIGHTER said:


> I have a hindu friend from Sindh (lawyer).
> 
> Other day we were sitting , asked him about his caste..
> 
> Dude claimed to be a rajput... discussion went ahead and than he says that he’s a khatri/rajput.. his caste being Chawla...
> 
> I being just a bit about this stuff pointed out that khatris aren’t rajput but trading community.. in panjab you have sethis etc who are khatris but well he stuck to the claim of rajputs lol.



i heard that too from many people, but wasn't aware of what titles Khatri use in Pakistan, probably they are more in ganga valley then in Pakistan.


----------



## Joe Shearer

Srinivas said:


> TOtal load of rubbish, ivc is far older than what the current history tells.



32,000 years, right?

Everybody has shat all over this topic; don't feel left out, come right in and squat.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Srinivas

Joe Shearer said:


> 32,000 years, right?
> 
> Everybody has shat all over this topic; don't feel left out, come right in and squat.




Check out the recently discovered site in turkey called Gobekli tepe, it dates 12500 years back.

There are enough evidences that human civilisation existed thousands of years ago. 

Aryan invasion theory is trying to correlate Vedics with a city based civilization which is not dated accurately.

There is no evidence that the Indus script or the Indus Valley people who were conquered in Vedas.

The truth is in plain site, it is the people and archeologists that are acting blind.



dsr478 said:


> How does that disprove the Aryan migrations?


Migrations happened through out the human history, but the question is whether it is inward or outward. There is no evidence that there is an aryan land any where else but epic Mahabharata describes India as Aryavartha, land of aryans.


----------



## Joe Shearer

Srinivas said:


> Check out the recently discovered site in turkey called Gobekli tepe, it dates 12500 years back.



Good man. I assure you, you will feel much better now that you have got this out of your system. Squatting is good for the temper; unfortunately, there is no evidence that squatting is good for the working of the brain. Otherwise you might have noticed that 12,500<>32,000. 



> There are enough evidences that human civilisation existed thousands of years ago.



If, by human civilisation, you mean that humans had started living in fixed locations, and that there were some humans who were not perpetually wandering in search of food, the horizon is around 10,000 years ago, and not much more. Is there any evidence that you will like to provide?



> Aryan invasion theory is trying to correlate Vedics with a city based civilization which is not dated accurately.



First, there is nothing called the Aryan Invasion Theory any more; it only exists in the minds of those who have no inkling of what historians and palaeo-anthropologists think currently, and cling on to the theories of the British colonial period, largely because they have, through trial and error, worked out refutations of these century-old arguments.

Second, the evidence quoted merely shows genetic evidence that there was an influx of an alien genetic type around 1500 BC, which is the date assigned to the initiation of the Indo-Aryan language by linguistic analysis. There is no mention of anything called Aryan; Aryan refers to the language family descended from PIE, and the geneticists cannot tell us who spoke what.

They can tell us that north Indians were descended from a prototypical profile called the Ancestral North Indian; this ANI profile was synthesised from a mixture of the steppe migrants, the descendants of the IVC people, and the hunter-gatherers of south Asia. Considering that this ANI is the starting point of the current population of north India, that they all speak Aryan languages, descended from Indo-Aryan, the language of the Vedas, and that this is thought to have started in 1500 BC, and that, finally, the geneticists have identified 1500 BC plus or minus 100 years is when the steppe descendants migrated into India, it is difficult to come to any conclusion other than what has been stated, without being perverse.



> There is no evidence that the Indus script or the Indus Valley people who were conquered in Vedas.



There is none. Nor is there any evidence that the Aztecs worshipped Sri Krishna. What else would you like to quote, about which there is no evidence?

The recent genetics analysis and the report about the analysis does not have anything to say about the Vedas and the civic locations described in the Vedas, and the IVC. 



> The truth is in plain *site*, it is the people and archeologists that are acting blind.



A Freudian slip, but a most serendipitous one. It is indeed from the sites, from archaeology that we get very important inputs. 

It is not clear from your sentence what you intend to convey by saying that 'it is the people and archeologists (sic) that are acting blind. Are you saying that you are neither people nor an archaeologist?



> Migrations happened through out the human history, but the question is whether it is inward or outward. There is no evidence that there is an aryan land any where else but epic Mahabharata describes India as Aryavartha, land of aryans.



There is no question any longer, not after the research findings that have been published recently.

As for the Aryan land being nowhere else, but in the Mahabharata, India being described as Aryavarta, you really must do your homework, and not make statements that will cause laughter among serious students. If @vsdoc were still a participating member, he might have dealt with you very harshly; as it is, as we do not wish to take up cudgels for him or his set of beliefs, let us just say that you are unprepared for taking part in this discussion. A lot more preparation is needed.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Talwar e Pakistan

Srinivas said:


> The truth is in plain site, it is the people and archeologists that are acting blind.


i'm pretty sure they have better credentials than you.


----------



## Taimur Khurram

Srinivas said:


> Check out the recently discovered site in turkey called Gobekli tepe, it dates 12500 years back.
> 
> There are enough evidences that human civilisation existed thousands of years ago.
> 
> Aryan invasion theory is trying to correlate Vedics with a city based civilization which is not dated accurately.
> 
> There is no evidence that the Indus script or the Indus Valley people who were conquered in Vedas.
> 
> The truth is in plain site, it is the people and archeologists that are acting blind.
> 
> 
> Migrations happened through out the human history, but the question is whether it is inward or outward. There is no evidence that there is an aryan land any where else but epic Mahabharata describes India as Aryavartha, land of aryans.



You guys really love to deny all evidence and dig your head in the sand, don't you? 

Also, these old Hindu stories were written post Aryan migrations AFAIK.


----------



## Corona

Every week, there is a new ancestry thread. And each time, people drag themselves back all the way to the stone age to prove....what?
In the immortal words of our Lord and Savior, Kylo Ren..


----------



## Kabira

uk29 said:


> Just want to know what happened to Rakhirgari evacuation findings? Any release date ..



They couldn't extract DNA from Rakhighiri. Anyway they finally got ancient DNA from Pakistan, Swat valley.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## timmy_area51

three places it is said the Aryans invaded the most , northern india , iranian plateua and eastern europe


----------



## Kabira

uk29 said:


> And did the dna samples from the valley matched with the people living there presently ?



Swat valley now is dominated by pashtuns who moved there in 16th century. But there are also some old indo-aryan groups living there. Its mixed area basically. 

Not seen proper results of ancient Swat samples. But from paper it looks like they didn't had much steppe ancestry. In fact they had less steppe ancestry then many modern indo-aryans. Also out of 41 samples only 1 was R1a.


----------



## Talwar e Pakistan

Kabira said:


> Swat valley now is dominated by pashtuns who moved there in 16th century. But there are also some old indo-aryan groups living there. Its mixed area basically.
> 
> Not seen proper results of ancient Swat samples. But from paper it looks like they didn't had much steppe ancestry. In fact they had less steppe ancestry then many modern indo-aryans. Also out of 41 samples only 1 was R1a.


Pashtuns did not move to the area in the 16th century....

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## django

Talwar e Pakistan said:


> Pashtuns did not move to the area in the 16th century....


The area was inhabited by Dardic tribes like Kohistanis until Yousafzias moved in and Pashtunised the place.Kudos

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Karl

''The Aryans did not come from India''

No shit lolll

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Kabira

django said:


> The area was inhabited by Dardic tribes like Kohistanis until Yousafzias moved in and Pashtunised the place.Kudos



Some of ancient Swat samples are very ASI shifted clustering with middle caste tamils, central indians etc. When comparing with moderns day groups they looked like christians and other similar communities in Pakistan.

This could be genetic make up of indus valley before IE speakers started coming in. Anyway waiting till all samples are uploaded so we can see what happened.


----------



## U-571

to be honest i have not found an ounce of aryan superior race theory (if it a race at all) to be intelligent and it leaves a very vague concept about who truly aryans were and were they even superior for instance

1) aryans have been never known to be the birth of civilizations for example, all the mesopotamian civilizations like akkad, sumerian, elam have been known to be non aryan (since they didn't speak aryan language but semitic ones), there is a theory that elam is infact proto tamilian and since its not discovered, its one of the theories

2) mesopotamians were not persians, please understand this big misconception, i was mislead to believe that mesopotamians were persians but they are not, babylon was not conquered by persian up until 500 BC by achemeaned empire

3) when i researched about persian script i was dumbfounded that persians had no original script, it was first borrowed from cunieform script used by mesopotamians and then arahmaic script was used by persians after that (in cyrus grave you clearly see sumerian cunieform written script)

4) persians didn't come to iran until 1500 BC, mesopotamia existed from 4000 BC or earlier, persians actually started expanding not until 800 BC and its 500 BC when they finally got control over on big cities like babylon and that too lasted only for mere 200 years

5) achaeminid empire existed for only 200 years compared to 150=180 years of mauryan empire, the much glorified perian empire only existed for 200 years was very surprising for me, before it there was median empire borders of which didn't exist more south than modern day azerbaijan, you hear correctly, azerbaijan

6) so my question is, how much real persians are persians themselves? azeris dont call themselves persians, kurds dont call themselves persians, the ''real persia'' today exists in the old civilization of elam and elam is basically thought to be a dravidian or south indian culture as opposed to ''aryans''

7) what was the civilization of so called ''aryans''? the western people boat about the persians and the greeks and the romans, but do you even know, if you read the ''real'' history, the aryan nomads who spoke indo european languages migrated to iran and became settled and civilized kicked the shit out of the babaric indo aryan race? persians adopted to the locl civilized culture and never identified themselves with their barbaric cousins up north.

8) greeks hated aryans, and coined the word ''barbarians'' to distinguish their civilized culture from the northern barbarian nomads who are though to be ''pure'' aryans.

9) greeks themselves didn't have any written script and thus they took generouly the eastern writing system just like persians and adapted it to their environment. all greek cultures, their religion their architecture are inspired by either near eastern civilization of levant (syria, iraq, jordan etc) and ancient egypt.

10) greeks started settling in italy and thus italians began civilized and it was the base of etrusians.

11) the romans who came after etrusians hated their aryan cousins so much that they built walls where they didn't conquer their lands like they build walls in england, hadrian wall it is called today, they practically isolated themselves from their barbaric cousins.

12) the mongolians were not aryans, they were just like any other barbaric nomads who roamed up north, so question arises if mongolians who were same as barbaric aryans, and their genes resembled a lot with their civilized cousins like chinese, japanese, was there any mythical race called aryan?

13) today we know that the turkic people who inhabit the lands of so called ''Caucasus'' are not Caucasus but a mix of Caucasian and mongoloid race, do were the supposed ''aryans'' mongolid and Caucasian mixture in the first place?

14) the brown iranians in the east are nothing like azeris or russians, does it mean that persians are not pure aryan race but they are mixture of aryan (caucasian and local semitic race)?

15) when it comes to indus valley, it is now understood that indus valley was not one ethnic but multi ethnic, from the statues of mohen jo dari it seems, they were not aryans, as they dont carry features of the european race, they resemble pretty much to indians. the indus valley was insanely multi ethnic and scholars such as Mark Kenoyer state that there were different languages spoken using the same indus script. the sino tibetan people wrote in indus, the indo europeans wrote the same script, te so called dravidians or tamils also used the same script, so it turns out india was multi ethnic sinceancient times and it debunks any theory of aryan invasion or migration

16) kushans migrated from east asia to the western present day western china and even though they were culturally linked to persians, they were not persian ethnic people but ethnic turks.

17) the sanskrit language is often called a result of aryan invasion but why is that sanskrit is native form of indo european and doesnt closely resemble languages which are european? this leads me to believe that indo european language had been present for a long long time in india and evolved into sanskrit, an indian language, so it debunkes any theory that sanskrit was spoken in central asia or Caucasus.

18) to me classing all indo european language speaking people is a big mistake, for me, indo european language cannot be termed as ''aryan languages'' or have one source, it is possible that indo european languages were dispersed in prehistoric times to large expanse of lands and settled indian people already knew it since prehistoric times.

19) when it comes to dravidian languages, the kanguage may well have been the main language of indus valley people and many mesopotamian cultures like jiroft and elam but because of sanskrit being language of hindu religoon people accepting hinduism started speak sanskrit language.

20) aryans are considered as superior race because they raided civilized lands, it sould be noted that nomadic tribes spent all their lives on the horse back hunting and gathering that the nomads who have to do gathering and hunting as their lands are unfit for agriculture are very hardy people, agriculture leads to lots of food with minimum labour, the history proves that civilized lands were always raided by nomadic tribes, whether it be mesopotamia, egypt and india was no exception, but to state that indians were originally an inferior race who were always subjugated by barbaric nomadic tribes were superior might be true because indians were civilized people, and they knew more about civilization building than fighting, this is the reason perhaps why no weapons are found in indus valley civilization.

21) through out history egypt and mesopotamia even china were also conquered and subjugated, but as we all know that mesopotamia and egypt along with indus valley and later were the first civilizations of the world

2) are all blue eyed, fair skinned people aryans and all dark skined people dravidians? the elamiites spoke proto tamil language in present day iran close to mesopotamia, and mesopotamians in present day syria iraq are very fair skinned people who never spoke indo european language, we know that egyptain people were anything but aryans, as their never spoke an ounce of indo european language, invanted their own script and spoke their own language. today most of arab speaking nations are fair skinned some even have blue and green eyes, can they be labelled as aryans? because they clearly speak a semitic language. and what about yemenis? are yemenic semitic?

so to conclude, aryan race is just a european made superiority complex term, the barbaric western europeans want to claim supremacy by relating their civilization to ancient india, mesopotamia, egypt etc, do you know at what time period the ''real aryans'' became civilized?

england = 1000 AD (that too by french normans)
norway = 1700 AD the earliest
spain = 400 AD
germany = 1400 AD
france = 1000 AD through normans

celts who are original indo european ''aryan'' tribe'' were all raped and converted into english ancestory by the romans and later french and germans, the true english people were raped and converted into civilized people, so aryans were raped by their own people become civilized and celts became scotish, irish, welsh barbarians who dwelled in the north.

now i will come to superiority complex of pakistanis, they should know their history for instance

1) pakistanis were hindus and buddhists and islam started arriving in pakistan when they were subjugated by turkic afghans. buddhism is a religion of east india not even west, buddha was born close to the place called Bihar and those dark skinned indian biharis not only founded buddhist religion but also founded mauryan kingdom which spread buddhism to present day Pakistan but also central asia.

2) indian buddhism spread for far and wide that all aruan homes in central asia became buddhist, numerous temples and shrines are witness to aryan superior race getting taste of dark skinned indian culture and religion

3) the fair skinned superior Pakistani aryans were hindus and buddhist until 1000 AD when they became muslims, both of these religions have nothing to do with superior aryans, aryans were backward nomadic barbarians who had no religion, persians adopted religion of the mesopotamians and accepted art of superior mesopotamian civilization whom they invaded

4) the numerous indic texts discovered from kabul in afghanistan to gilgit and peshawar are witness of indian scripts and languages which were popularly followed by superior fair skinned aryan pakistanis before dark skinned saudis introduced their semitic religion to them. today persians also follow semitic religion of islam and semitic arabic script and their culture is pretty much semitic all borrowed from arabs as well.

5) Pakistanis have no ounce of persian heritage in them, from buddhism/hinduism, to indian written script to indian adopted culture to indian art until 1000 AD, you were all indians in general unlike you were baptaised by invader turks and persians (again)

6) pashtun afghans shouldnt be high nd mighty as well, you were all hindus and buddhists, then converted, made slaves and destined to serve only arabs and turk kings.

this is nothing but funny


----------



## Kabira

U-571 said:


> to be honest i have not found an ounce of aryan superior race theory (if it a race at all) to be intelligent and it leaves a very vague concept about who truly aryans were and were they even superior for instance
> 
> 1) aryans have been never known to be the birth of civilizations for example, all the mesopotamian civilizations like akkad, sumerian, elam have been known to be non aryan (since they didn't speak aryan language but semitic ones), there is a theory that elam is infact proto tamilian and since its not discovered, its one of the theories
> 
> 2) mesopotamians were not persians, please understand this big misconception, i was mislead to believe that mesopotamians were persians but they are not, babylon was not conquered by persian up until 500 BC by achemeaned empire
> 
> 3) when i researched about persian script i was dumbfounded that persians had no original script, it was first borrowed from cunieform script used by mesopotamians and then arahmaic script was used by persians after that (in cyrus grave you clearly see sumerian cunieform written script)
> 
> 4) persians didn't come to iran until 1500 BC, mesopotamia existed from 4000 BC or earlier, persians actually started expanding not until 800 BC and its 500 BC when they finally got control over on big cities like babylon and that too lasted only for mere 200 years
> 
> 5) achaeminid empire existed for only 200 years compared to 150=180 years of mauryan empire, the much glorified perian empire only existed for 200 years was very surprising for me, before it there was median empire borders of which didn't exist more south than modern day azerbaijan, you hear correctly, azerbaijan
> 
> 6) so my question is, how much real persians are persians themselves? azeris dont call themselves persians, kurds dont call themselves persians, the ''real persia'' today exists in the old civilization of elam and elam is basically thought to be a dravidian or south indian culture as opposed to ''aryans''
> 
> 7) what was the civilization of so called ''aryans''? the western people boat about the persians and the greeks and the romans, but do you even know, if you read the ''real'' history, the aryan nomads who spoke indo european languages migrated to iran and became settled and civilized kicked the shit out of the babaric indo aryan race? persians adopted to the locl civilized culture and never identified themselves with their barbaric cousins up north.
> 
> 8) greeks hated aryans, and coined the word ''barbarians'' to distinguish their civilized culture from the northern barbarian nomads who are though to be ''pure'' aryans.
> 
> 9) greeks themselves didn't have any written script and thus they took generouly the eastern writing system just like persians and adapted it to their environment. all greek cultures, their religion their architecture are inspired by either near eastern civilization of levant (syria, iraq, jordan etc) and ancient egypt.
> 
> 10) greeks started settling in italy and thus italians began civilized and it was the base of etrusians.
> 
> 11) the romans who came after etrusians hated their aryan cousins so much that they built walls where they didn't conquer their lands like they build walls in england, hadrian wall it is called today, they practically isolated themselves from their barbaric cousins.
> 
> 12) the mongolians were not aryans, they were just like any other barbaric nomads who roamed up north, so question arises if mongolians who were same as barbaric aryans, and their genes resembled a lot with their civilized cousins like chinese, japanese, was there any mythical race called aryan?
> 
> 13) today we know that the turkic people who inhabit the lands of so called ''Caucasus'' are not Caucasus but a mix of Caucasian and mongoloid race, do were the supposed ''aryans'' mongolid and Caucasian mixture in the first place?
> 
> 14) the brown iranians in the east are nothing like azeris or russians, does it mean that persians are not pure aryan race but they are mixture of aryan (caucasian and local semitic race)?
> 
> 15) when it comes to indus valley, it is now understood that indus valley was not one ethnic but multi ethnic, from the statues of mohen jo dari it seems, they were not aryans, as they dont carry features of the european race, they resemble pretty much to indians. the indus valley was insanely multi ethnic and scholars such as Mark Kenoyer state that there were different languages spoken using the same indus script. the sino tibetan people wrote in indus, the indo europeans wrote the same script, te so called dravidians or tamils also used the same script, so it turns out india was multi ethnic sinceancient times and it debunks any theory of aryan invasion or migration
> 
> 16) kushans migrated from east asia to the western present day western china and even though they were culturally linked to persians, they were not persian ethnic people but ethnic turks.
> 
> 17) the sanskrit language is often called a result of aryan invasion but why is that sanskrit is native form of indo european and doesnt closely resemble languages which are european? this leads me to believe that indo european language had been present for a long long time in india and evolved into sanskrit, an indian language, so it debunkes any theory that sanskrit was spoken in central asia or Caucasus.
> 
> 18) to me classing all indo european language speaking people is a big mistake, for me, indo european language cannot be termed as ''aryan languages'' or have one source, it is possible that indo european languages were dispersed in prehistoric times to large expanse of lands and settled indian people already knew it since prehistoric times.
> 
> 19) when it comes to dravidian languages, the kanguage may well have been the main language of indus valley people and many mesopotamian cultures like jiroft and elam but because of sanskrit being language of hindu religoon people accepting hinduism started speak sanskrit language.
> 
> 20) aryans are considered as superior race because they raided civilized lands, it sould be noted that nomadic tribes spent all their lives on the horse back hunting and gathering that the nomads who have to do gathering and hunting as their lands are unfit for agriculture are very hardy people, agriculture leads to lots of food with minimum labour, the history proves that civilized lands were always raided by nomadic tribes, whether it be mesopotamia, egypt and india was no exception, but to state that indians were originally an inferior race who were always subjugated by barbaric nomadic tribes were superior might be true because indians were civilized people, and they knew more about civilization building than fighting, this is the reason perhaps why no weapons are found in indus valley civilization.
> 
> 21) through out history egypt and mesopotamia even china were also conquered and subjugated, but as we all know that mesopotamia and egypt along with indus valley and later were the first civilizations of the world
> 
> 2) are all blue eyed, fair skinned people aryans and all dark skined people dravidians? the elamiites spoke proto tamil language in present day iran close to mesopotamia, and mesopotamians in present day syria iraq are very fair skinned people who never spoke indo european language, we know that egyptain people were anything but aryans, as their never spoke an ounce of indo european language, invanted their own script and spoke their own language. today most of arab speaking nations are fair skinned some even have blue and green eyes, can they be labelled as aryans? because they clearly speak a semitic language. and what about yemenis? are yemenic semitic?
> 
> so to conclude, aryan race is just a european made superiority complex term, the barbaric western europeans want to claim supremacy by relating their civilization to ancient india, mesopotamia, egypt etc, do you know at what time period the ''real aryans'' became civilized?
> 
> england = 1000 AD (that too by french normans)
> norway = 1700 AD the earliest
> spain = 400 AD
> germany = 1400 AD
> france = 1000 AD through normans
> 
> celts who are original indo european ''aryan'' tribe'' were all raped and converted into english ancestory by the romans and later french and germans, the true english people were raped and converted into civilized people, so aryans were raped by their own people become civilized and celts became scotish, irish, welsh barbarians who dwelled in the north.
> 
> now i will come to superiority complex of pakistanis, they should know their history for instance
> 
> 1) pakistanis were hindus and buddhists and islam started arriving in pakistan when they were subjugated by turkic afghans. buddhism is a religion of east india not even west, buddha was born close to the place called Bihar and those dark skinned indian biharis not only founded buddhist religion but also founded mauryan kingdom which spread buddhism to present day Pakistan but also central asia.
> 
> 2) indian buddhism spread for far and wide that all aruan homes in central asia became buddhist, numerous temples and shrines are witness to aryan superior race getting taste of dark skinned indian culture and religion
> 
> 3) the fair skinned superior Pakistani aryans were hindus and buddhist until 1000 AD when they became muslims, both of these religions have nothing to do with superior aryans, aryans were backward nomadic barbarians who had no religion, persians adopted religion of the mesopotamians and accepted art of superior mesopotamian civilization whom they invaded
> 
> 4) the numerous indic texts discovered from kabul in afghanistan to gilgit and peshawar are witness of indian scripts and languages which were popularly followed by superior fair skinned aryan pakistanis before dark skinned saudis introduced their semitic religion to them. today persians also follow semitic religion of islam and semitic arabic script and their culture is pretty much semitic all borrowed from arabs as well.
> 
> 5) Pakistanis have no ounce of persian heritage in them, from buddhism/hinduism, to indian written script to indian adopted culture to indian art until 1000 AD, you were all indians in general unlike you were baptaised by invader turks and persians (again)
> 
> 6) pashtun afghans shouldnt be high nd mighty as well, you were all hindus and buddhists, then converted, made slaves and destined to serve only arabs and turk kings.
> 
> this is nothing but funny



hmmm interesting but wrong. Sanskrit origin isn't ganges but euroasian steppe. And now we have ancient DNA from region so no doubts left now.


----------



## timmy_area51

Aryans were not europeans , they raided europe . they were enemies of europeans.


----------



## Kabira

timmy_area51 said:


> Aryans were not europeans , they raided europe . they were enemies of europeans.



They were eastern Europeans from current day Russia/Ukraine border.


----------



## U-571

Kabira said:


> hmmm interesting but wrong. Sanskrit origin isn't ganges but euroasian steppe. And now we have ancient DNA from region so no doubts left now.



this is the exact crap which aryan theory states, if sanskrit was spoken in euroasian steppe, prove it.


----------



## Mamluk

utp45 said:


> only Dravidians are native to the land.. there is even a faint link between Dravidians and the long lost IVC.



Dravidian people are native (to tropical India), but the language came from ancient Elam in Iran.


----------



## Kabira

U-571 said:


> this is the exact crap which aryan theory states, if sanskrit was spoken in euroasian steppe, prove it.



What crap, stop believing in hindutva theory of ganges origin of sanskrit. After latest ancient samples there is little doubt left.


----------



## Mamluk

U-571 said:


> if sanskrit was spoken in euroasian steppe, prove it.



Sanskrit was not spoken in Steppe. It was the mother of Sanskrit. (Sanskrit is not even the language the Vedic people spoke.)


----------



## U-571

Kabira said:


> What crap, stop believing in hindutva theory of ganges origin of sanskrit. After latest ancient samples there is little doubt left.



what ancient samples? stop being a slave of european neanderthals claiming everything as aryan.


----------



## Asimzranger




----------



## U-571

[USER=25628]@xxx[/USER][{::::::::::::::::::> said:


> Sanskrit was not spoken in Steppe. It was the mother of Sanskrit. (Sanskrit is not even the language the Vedic people spoke.)



there is no way to prove what vedic people spoke as there is no written document, but the vedic chants are based on sanskrit and are infact the oldest indo european literature in existence.


----------



## Mamluk

U-571 said:


> there is no way to prove what vedic people spoke as there is no written document, but the vedic chants are based on sanskrit and are infact the oldest indo european literature in existence.



No Indian academic believes Vedic people spoke Sanskrit. Sanskrit was created much later by Panini. Ask around.


----------



## Kabira

U-571 said:


> what ancient samples? stop being a slave of european neanderthals claiming everything aryan.



Read OP. Aryans were not responsible for middle eastern and harappa civilization but neither were Indians aka austroasiatic people of ganges valley before aryans civilised them.


----------



## U-571

[USER=25628]@xxx[/USER][{::::::::::::::::::> said:


> Dravidian people are native (to tropical India), but the language came from ancient Elam in Iran.



so if indo european language is spoken in india and pakistan, the aryan migrated to sub continent, where as dravidians didn't come from elam if elam's language taken by ''native dravidians'' and elam given was part of mesopotamia was not expected to adopted various semitic languages of akkad and sumer but invent its own language and pass it on to indians

height of superiority complex and looking indians as inferiors 



[USER=25628]@xxx[/USER][{::::::::::::::::::> said:


> No Indian academic believes Vedic people spoke Sanskrit. Sanskrit was created much later by Panini. Ask around.



you should read history of sanskrit before making BS claims, sanskrit was very much spoken in vedic era and many vedic chants are based in sanskrit language. it is infact claimed that around 1500 BC aryans migrated and brought sanskrit with them, so it means it must have been spoken in ''europasian teppe''



Kabira said:


> Read OP. Aryans were not responsible for middle eastern and harappa civilization but neither were Indians aka austroasiatic people of ganges valley before aryans civilised them.



there is no aryan race, you are just brainwashed by your european masters, a race is not based on linguistics, aryan race is pretty much concocted based on indo european language theory nothing else. their is no any race other then mongoloids, caucasians and africans. indians are pretty much caucasians nothing else.


----------



## Kabira

U-571 said:


> there is no aryan race, you are just brainwashed by your european masters, a race is not based on linguistics, aryan race is pretty much concocted based on indo european language theory nothing else. their is no any race other then mongoloids, caucasians and africans. indians are pretty much caucasians nothing else.



Before it was based on linguistic but since few years we can get DNA from ancient skeletons. Which have proven AIT beyond any doubt and inferiority of Indians. Neither ganges had anything to do with Harappa and neither indo-aryan vedic civilization, both were born in IVC.

But proto-indo-aryan origin lies in steppe and I don't have problem admitting that.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## U-571

Kabira said:


> Before it was based on linguistic but since few years we can get DNA from ancient skeletons. Which have proven AIT beyond any doubt and inferiority of Indians. Neither ganges had anything to do with Harappa and neither indo-aryan vedic civilization, both were born in IVC.
> 
> But proto-indo-aryan origin lies in steppe and I don't have problem admitting that.



ancient skeletons? have we proven using ancient harappan skeleton DNA who these people where?

im a pakistani, but it is nothing but a laughing matter that some of my country men have so much identity crises.

you are a punjabi, so you are an indian, any foreign DNA fragment is mostly resulted from afghan turks raiding and raping your women for thousands of years, all your culture is indian, language is indian and religion for most part of your history was also indian. so you are basically an indian not russian from euroasian steppe.


----------



## Kabira

U-571 said:


> ancient skeletons? have we proven using ancient harappan skeleton DNA who these people where?
> 
> im a pakistani, but it is nothing but a laughing matter that some of my country men have so much identity crises.
> 
> you are a punjabi, so you are an indian, any foreign DNA fragment is mostly resulted from afghan turks raiding and raping your women for thousands of years, all your culture is indian, language is indian and religion for most part of your history was also indian. so you are basically an indian not russian from euroasian steppe.



You are Pakistani with muahjir background with huge identity crisis, I bet your surname is ansari, syed or khan. Your sucking up to ridiculous hindutva theories no longer stand ground.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## U-571

Kabira said:


> You are Pakistani with muahjir background with huge identity crisis, I bet your surname is ansari, syed or khan. Your sucking up to ridiculous hindutva theories no longer stand ground.



Punjabis







marathi people






Kerala people






your russian aryan masters


----------



## lastofthepatriots

^

LOL

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Kabira

U-571 said:


> Punjabis
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> marathi people
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Kerala people
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> your russian aryan masters



Random pictures doesn't disprove AIT lol


----------



## U-571

Kabira said:


> Random pictures doesn't disprove AIT lol



Punjabi wedding






maratha wedding






euroasian steppe wedding






Punjabi bride






kerala bride






euroasian teppe bride





do you want me to post more?

Punjabi food






Gujarati food






russian food






Punjabi musical instruments






hidustani musical instruments






carnatic musical instruments






russian musical instruments


----------



## Kabira

U-571 said:


> Punjabi wedding
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> maratha wedding
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> euroasian steppe wedding
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Punjabi bride
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> kerala bride
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> euroasian teppe bride
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> do you want me to post more?
> 
> Punjabi food
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Gujarati food
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> russian food



No one can deny difference in looks on average.

Northen Pakistan muslims






eastern Pakistan muslims






India Uttar Pradesh muslims






All three speak indo-iranian languages.

There you go, as one moves towards east people become darker and have more austroasiatic influence in looks. This is average look of these people. Nothing to do with Russians being masters but Indo-Iranian language origin is in eastern european steppe.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## U-571

Kabira said:


> No one can deny difference in looks on average.
> 
> Northen Pakistan muslims
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> eastern Pakistan muslims
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> India Uttar Pradesh muslims
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> All three speak indo-iranian languages.
> 
> There you go, as one moves towards east people become darker and have more austroasiatic influence in looks. This is average look of these people. Nothing to do with Russians being masters but Indo-Iranian language origin is in eastern european steppe.



is this Punjabi austroasian as well?


----------



## Taimur Khurram

U-571 said:


> so if indo european language is spoken in india and pakistan, the aryan migrated to sub continent, where as dravidians didn't come from elam if elam's language taken by ''native dravidians'' and elam given was part of mesopotamia was not expected to adopted various semitic languages of akkad and sumer but invent its own language and pass it on to indians
> 
> height of superiority complex and looking indians as inferiors
> 
> 
> 
> you should read history of sanskrit before making BS claims, sanskrit was very much spoken in vedic era and many vedic chants are based in sanskrit language. it is infact claimed that around 1500 BC aryans migrated and brought sanskrit with them, so it means it must have been spoken in ''europasian teppe''
> 
> 
> 
> there is no aryan race, you are just brainwashed by your european masters, a race is not based on linguistics, aryan race is pretty much concocted based on indo european language theory nothing else. their is no any race other then mongoloids, caucasians and africans. indians are pretty much caucasians nothing else.



Hindustanis are a mix, you are not purely caucosoid:


----------



## U-571

dsr478 said:


> Hindustanis are a mix, you are not purely caucosoid:
> 
> View attachment 466199



but somalis. ethiopians are caucasians, americans are mongoloid, got it 

bengalis are monogloids like chinese


----------



## Taimur Khurram

U-571 said:


> but somalis. ethiopians are, got it



Yes, actually they are caucosoid by skull type. This is why many Somalis don't consider themselves to be truly black people.

Caucosoid is a skull type, your colour has nothing to do with it.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## U-571

dsr478 said:


> Yes, actually they are caucosoid by skull type. This is why many Somalis don't consider themselves to be truly black people.
> 
> Caucosoid is a skull type, your colour has nothing to do with it.



wake up dear, get out of your british slave mentality.

the british treated you guys as slaves and didnt consider you their aryan brothers.

aryan theory has been proven false long time ago, only you stone age people seem to be stuck in this BS.


----------



## timmy_area51

Kabira said:


> They were eastern Europeans from current day Russia/Ukraine border.



i don't think so , scythians were people to the east of the caspian sea in the steppe . to the west of caspian sea they were called Sarmatians . scythians were enemies of dravidians in indian subcontinent , and of course the celtic population of europe .


----------



## Talwar e Pakistan

timmy_area51 said:


> i don't think so , scythians were people to the east of the caspian sea in the steppe . to the west of caspian sea they were called Sarmatians . scythians were enemies of dravidians in indian subcontinent , and of course the celtic population of europe .


Scythians never reached South India, which was and still is the homeland of the Dravidians.



U-571 said:


> you are a punjabi, so you are an indian, any foreign DNA fragment is mostly resulted from afghan turks raiding and raping your women for thousands of years, all your culture is indian, language is indian and religion for most part of your history was also indian. so you are basically an indian not russian from euroasian steppe.


What an ignorant and stupid statement to make. 

Punjabis make make up about 50% of Pakistan and around 2-3% of India. They have their own culture, native language and historically followed their own religions.

According to Vedic scripts they were considered as a part of the Bahlika (outsiders) and enemies of the Arya (Brahmins). 

Your disgusting comment about "afghans and turks raping Punjabi women" as an explanation for the high "foreign DNA" (You probably don't even know what DNA is) is the most stupid and pseudoscientific self-made theory i've ever seen. Pashtuns have about the same Eurasian component as Punjabis, does that mean that Pashtuns have also been "raped and raided" by Central Asians/Turks? 

Get out of this thread, because you surely don't know what you're talking about.



U-571 said:


> Punjabi wedding
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> maratha wedding
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> euroasian steppe wedding
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Punjabi bride
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> kerala bride
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> euroasian teppe bride
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> do you want me to post more?
> 
> Punjabi food
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Gujarati food
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> russian food
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Punjabi musical instruments
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> hidustani musical instruments
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> carnatic musical instruments
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> russian musical instruments


Even more stupidity



Comparing some Marathi Models with Punjabis and using that as evidence to prove "Punjabis are Indians". I have seen both Punjabis and Marathis in real life and not through cherry-picked google images; there is absolutely nothing in common between Punjabis and Marathis. 

By the way, look up the genetic differences between Pakistanis and South Indians like Marathis.

Reactions: Like Like:
8


----------



## U-571

Talwar e Pakistan said:


> Scythians never reached South India, which was and still is the homeland of the Dravidians.
> 
> 
> What an ignorant and stupid statement to make.
> 
> Punjabis make make up about 50% of Pakistan and around 2-3% of India. They have their own culture, native language and historically followed their own religions.
> 
> According to Vedic scripts they were considered as a part of the Bahlika (outsiders) and enemies of the Arya (Brahmins).
> 
> Your disgusting comment about "afghans and turks raping Punjabi women" as an explanation for the high "foreign DNA" (You probably don't even know what DNA is) is the most stupid and pseudoscientific self-made theory i've ever seen. Pashtuns have about the same Eurasian component as Punjabis, does that mean that Pashtuns have also been "raped and raided" by Central Asians/Turks?
> 
> Get out of this thread, because you surely don't know what you're talking about.



where do you think the name hindustan came from? its a persian name not related to native india name which is bharat

for persians which conquered Punjab everything east of indus was hindustan which derives from the name indus, the afghans named their mountains hindukush meaning the border where hindustan ended.

sindh and punjab both lie on the east of indus

if you are the same as afghans that means you guys were genetically altered so you are basically insulting yourself here.

i have seen african americans complaining after doing DNA test that they have some caucasian blood in them meaning, their ancestors were raped

you guys entire genetic makeup altered and being proud is a first for me.

View attachment 466233




Talwar e Pakistan said:


> Even more stupidity
> 
> 
> 
> Comparing some Marathi Models with Punjabis and using that as evidence to prove "Punjabis are Indians". I have seen both Punjabis and Marathis in real life and not through cherry-picked google images; there is absolutely nothing in common between Punjabis and Marathis.
> 
> By the way, look up the genetic differences between Pakistanis and South Indians like Marathis.



why dont you post punjabi and marathi and your aryan master wedding pictures and see where Punjabis belong, indian culture or your aryan master culture.

i let you discriminate how Punjabi culture is different than indian culture?


----------



## Indus Pakistan

Talwar e Pakistan said:


> there is absolutely nothing in common between Punjabis and Marathis.


Sorry Talwar. There is much in common from my considered perspective. Both have two legs, two arms, two eyes. Both breath air. Both drink water. Both can inbreed.

You should see the differance in Europe between English, Irish, Germans, Russians. The first have two legs, Irish three legs, Germans four legs and Russians have no legs but slide on the ground like worms. That is real differance.

And I won't even go into the cultural or religious differances between all of Europe, They are so different that they are all Christian. Can you believe that?

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## MultaniGuy

Kaptaan said:


> Sorry Talwar. There is much in common from my considered perspective. Both have two legs, two arms, two eyes. Both breath air. Both drink water. Both can inbreed.
> 
> You should see the differance in Europe between English, Irish, Germans, Russians. The first have two legs, Irish three legs, Germans four legs and Russians have no legs but slide on the ground like worms. That is real differance,


Well now there is nothing in common between Pakistani Punjabis and Indian Marathis.

We have nothing in common with the "Hindu culture."


----------



## Talwar e Pakistan

U-571 said:


> where do you think the name hindustan came from? its a persian name not related to native india name which is bharat





U-571 said:


> for persians which conquered Punjab everything east of indus was hindustan which derives from the name indus, the afghans named their mountains hindukush meaning the border where hindustan ended.




Both the name Hindustan and (latin) India comes from the Persian word _Hindhu _which comes from the word _Sindhu_, the name of the Indus River. People living on the Indus River were thus called _Hindus_ by the Persians while they were called _Sindhus_ by the Indians in their vedic texts (_Sindhus are referred to as a foreign people)_. 

Neither the Persians nor the Greeks had substantial knowledge of what was East to the Indus River. 

For example; if you look at the most accurate map of that time; map of Herodotus - Modern-day India is not even a part of the map.

Due to a lack of information, the land East of the Indus was also referred to as Indika (by the Greeks) and Hindhu (by the Persians), they thought that if they kept going East of the Indus, they would shortly reach the Caspian Sea, Central Asia or even the end of the world. 

As knowledge of the area grew, the name had already stuck. 

(Notice the tribes labelled on the Indus River are all Iranic/Central Asian) 







U-571 said:


> why dont you post punjabi and marathi and your aryan master wedding pictures and see where Punjabis belong, indian culture or your aryan master culture.


Aryans don't exist, even if they did - Punjabis will be Punjabis, Indians will be Indians and "Aryans" will be Aryans.



U-571 said:


> i let you discriminate how Punjabi culture is different than indian culture?


Okay,

Different historical religions
Different cultures (both historically and present day)
Different languages
Different physical features
Different histories
Different values
Different traditions
misc includes accents and many other things I cannot name

Reactions: Positive Rating Positive Rating:
1 | Like Like:
3


----------



## Pyara9

U-571 said:


> where do you think the name hindustan came from? its a persian name not related to native india name which is bharat
> 
> for persians which conquered Punjab everything east of indus was hindustan which derives from the name indus, the afghans named their mountains hindukush meaning the border where hindustan ended.
> 
> sindh and punjab both lie on the east of indus
> 
> if you are the same as afghans that means you guys were genetically altered so you are basically insulting yourself here.
> 
> i have seen african americans complaining after doing DNA test that they have some caucasian blood in them meaning, their ancestors were raped
> 
> you guys entire genetic makeup altered and being proud is a first for me.
> 
> View attachment 466233
> 
> 
> 
> 
> why dont you post punjabi and marathi and your aryan master wedding pictures and see where Punjabis belong, indian culture or your aryan master culture.
> 
> i let you discriminate how Punjabi culture is different than indian culture?



Your logic and few posters above me is like this..

Just because Planet earth from my point of view looks flat it must be flat, Regardless of overwhelming scientific evidence. 

If you want to ignore modern science and believe in your own theory go ahead. Just keep it to your self. Most people will disagree.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## U-571

Talwar e Pakistan said:


> Both the name Hindustan and (latin) India comes from the Persian word _Hindhu _which comes from the word _Sindhu_, the name of the Indus River. People living on the Indus River were thus called _Hindus_ by the Persians while they were called _Sindhus_ by the Indians in their vedic texts (_Sindhus are referred to as a foreign people)_.
> 
> Neither the Persians nor the Greeks had substantial knowledge of what was East to the Indus River.
> 
> For example; if you look at the most accurate map of that time; map of Herodotus - Modern-day India is not even a part of the map.
> 
> Due to a lack of information, the land East of the Indus was also referred to as Indika (by the Greeks) and Hindhu (by the Persians), they thought that if they kept going East of the Indus, they would shortly reach the Caspian Sea, Central Asia or even the end of the world.
> 
> As knowledge of the area grew, the name had already stuck.
> 
> (Notice the tribes labelled on the Indus River are all Iranic/Central Asian)
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Aryans don't exist, even if they did - Punjabis will be Punjabis, Indians will be Indians and "Aryans" will be Aryans.
> 
> 
> Okay,
> 
> Different historical religions
> Different cultures (both historically and present day)
> Different languages
> Different physical features
> Different histories
> Different values
> Different traditions
> misc includes accents and many other things I cannot name



okay lets for argument agree that Punjabis are not indians, just elaborate this


Different historical religions
Different cultures (both historically and present day)
Different languages
Different physical features
Different histories
Different values
Different traditions
misc includes accents and many other things I cannot name



Pyara9 said:


> Your logic and few posters above me is like this..
> 
> Just because Planet earth from my point of view looks flat it must be flat, Regardless of overwhelming scientific evidence.
> 
> If you want to ignore modern science and believe in your own theory go ahead. Just keep it to your self. Most people will disagree.



please state your scientific evidences as you please.


----------



## Talwar e Pakistan

U-571 said:


> hindustan came from? its a persian name not related to native india name which is bharat


Also as for your "native Indian Bharat name".

Vedic texts considered modern-day Pakistan as foreign to Vedic culture and not a part of Bharat. The Kingdoms of Madra (North Punjab), Sindhu (South Punjab and West Sindh), Gandhara (KPK), Saurivas (East Sindh), Kamboja (Punjab/KPK) - (all of these Kingdoms combined make up modern-day Pakistan) were considered Bahlikas; meaning "foreign" or "outsider" and hostile to the Arya (vedic peoples).

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Pyara9

U-571 said:


> okay lets for argument agree that Punjabis are not indians, just elaborate this
> 
> 
> Different historical religions
> Different cultures (both historically and present day)
> Different languages
> Different physical features
> Different histories
> Different values
> Different traditions
> misc includes accents and many other things I cannot name
> 
> 
> 
> please state your scientific evidences as you please.



Ok fun fact. Brown eyes are actually blue. Small medical procedure could bring them back to their true colo.


----------



## Water Car Engineer

Talwar e Pakistan said:


> Also as for your "native Indian Bharat name".
> 
> Vedic texts considered modern-day Pakistan as foreign to Vedic culture and not a part of Bharat. The Kingdoms of Madra (North Punjab), Sindhu (South Punjab and West Sindh), Gandhara (KPK), Saurivas (East Sindh), Kamboja (Punjab/KPK) - (all of these Kingdoms combined make up Pakistan) were considered Bahlikas; meaning "foreign" or "outsider" and hostile to the Arya (vedic peoples).




Even all the way in Gandhara after successive invasions of Persians, Greeks, several C. Asians, it still exhibit strong Indian, or whatever you wanna call it influences even after being at the frontiers. Go look at art work from 2nd century AD see which is the bases for that culture.


----------



## Talwar e Pakistan

Water Car Engineer said:


> Even all the way in Gandhara after successive invasions of Persians, Greeks, several C. Asians, it still exhibit strong Indian, or whatever you wanna call it influences even after being at the frontiers. Go look at art work from 2nd century AD see which is the bases for that culture.


Here is a Gandharan sculpture






and here is a Pheonician sculpture









Are Gandharans now Phoenicians? No

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Water Car Engineer

Talwar e Pakistan said:


> Here is a Gandharan sculpture
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> and here is a Pheonician sculpture
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Are Gandharans now Phoenicians? No




Both using Greco-Med art styles, yes.

But even in the 2nd Century after being overlorded by several groups of people, and currently being dominated by the Kushans, even simple things like they still having their idea of an aristocracy as a bearchested, dhoti wearing, turban wearing, huge earring that elongates the earlobes, is amazing.


----------



## Kabira

Water Car Engineer said:


> Both using Greco-Med art styles, yes.
> 
> But even in the 2nd Century after being overlorded by several groups of people, and currently being dominated by the Kushans, even simple things like they still having their idea of an aristocracy as a bearchested, dhoti wearing, turban wearing, huge earring that elongates the earlobes, is amazing.



Are they really Indian? I mean are they influenced by Gangistan aka real India? In that case you are right. But if its just indo-aryan vedic civlization which was born in IVC then its wrong to claim them as Indian.


----------



## Taimur Khurram

U-571 said:


> wake up dear, get out of your british slave mentality.
> 
> the british treated you guys as slaves and didnt consider you their aryan brothers.
> 
> aryan theory has been proven false long time ago, only you stone age people seem to be stuck in this BS.



Where does the British come into this? Our skull type is our skull type, stop going off-topic with this stupid racism crap. 

It's not false, it's been clearly proven true. Idiots like you just choose to bury your head in the sand.


----------



## itsanufy

An interesting read:-
https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com...sation-iit-kharagpur/articleshow/63776710.cms
@Joe Shearer and @Kaptaan specially for you


----------



## faithfulguy

With overwhelming evidence, India should just accept Aryan invasion and recognize the Dravidian are the natives of India. Northern Brahmins are just another invader.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Joe Shearer

itsanufy said:


> An interesting read:-
> https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com...sation-iit-kharagpur/articleshow/63776710.cms
> @Joe Shearer and @Kaptaan specially for you



This matches the genetic evidence and the archaeological evidence pretty closely.

The IVC probably lasted only until 1300 BC, in archaeological terms. This is very approximate.
This study says 1450 BC; not millions of years away. This is rather more accurate, though not hugely accurate in the overall scheme of things.
The genetic study shows that the admixture of IVC dweller, steppe migrant and the hunter-gatherers of the peninsula occurred around 1500 BC.
In other words, the migrants had little or no influence on the IVC.
How the IIT KGP analysts concluded that "These displaced people gradually migrated towards the Ganga-Yamuna valley towards eastern and central UP; Bihar and Bengal in the east; MP, south of Vindhyachal and south Gujarat in the south" is not clear.
It isn't relevant; the genetic study shows the same thing, through irrefutable evidence. It makes no mention of Bihar and Bengal, however, nor of MP.
The accumulated evidence, from different, independent sources, is an incrementally overwhelming argument about the course of events.

What the IIT KGP professors did not mention, perhaps partly because it is so obvious, is that all of the IVC dwellers did not migrate; some remained behind to form the core population of those areas in later years.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Brahmanic

as a "Brahmin" I hate is when people who have no connection with us or our ancestors try to speak about us as if they are one of "us". as a member of original 6 tribes that follow original Rig Vedic Religion i hate it when speak for me when we are not same.

yes, we were Invaders, first. we conquered Afghanistan, Pakistan, India, Bangladesh etc but it was thousands of years ago. this is what we Gave to South Asians.






we are a Separate People, Nation or Ethnicity of our own. i have nothing against any other people of the world, be it Euros or Blacks, Mongols or fellow south Asians.

we may share our Blood with Eurasians, West Asians, Munda Tribals and Dravidians but we are still a unique people of our own. we never mixed as much as we should in last 5000 years and our DNA Results, Phenotype proves that.

you can say that we are an Ethno-Religious community who are just 1% of South Asia.


----------



## Pakistani E

Vishwamitra said:


> as a "Brahmin" I hate is when people who have no connection with us or our ancestors try to speak about us as if they are one of "us". as a member of original 6 tribes that follow original Rig Vedic Religion i hate it when speak for me when we are not same.
> 
> yes, we were Invaders, first. we conquered Afghanistan, Pakistan, India, Bangladesh etc but it was thousands of years ago. this is what we Gave to South Asians.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> we are a Separate People, Nation or Ethnicity of our own. i have nothing against any other people of the world, be it Euros or Blacks, Mongols or fellow south Asians.
> 
> we may share our Blood with Eurasians, West Asians, Munda Tribals and Dravidians but we are still a unique people of our own. we never mixed as much as we should in last 5000 years and our DNA Results, Phenotype proves that.
> 
> you can say that we are an Ethno-Religious community who are just 1% of South Asia.



@django Guess who's back...back again..

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## django

Sher Shah Awan said:


> @django Guess who's back...back again..


OH God no
@waz @Horus gents that anti-Islam, anti-Pakistan ethnicities and Ghandaran wannabe clown @Vishwamitra is back, please spare us his drivel.Kudos gents

@Sher Shah Awan In his last id he was a 92yr old, this time he has undertaken cellular rejuvenation to roll back the clock by 70 years 



itsanufy said:


> An interesting read:-
> https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com...sation-iit-kharagpur/articleshow/63776710.cms
> @Joe Shearer and @Kaptaan specially for you


All assumptions without a shred of genetic evidence!

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Brahmanic

django said:


> OH God no
> @waz @Horus gents that anti-Islam, anti-Pakistan ethnicities and Ghandaran wannabe clown @Vishwamitra is back, please spare us his drivel.Kudos gents
> 
> @Sher Shah Awan In his last id he was a 92yr old, this time he has undertaken cellular rejuvenation to roll back the clock by 70 years
> 
> 
> All assumptions without a shred of genetic evidence!


Just saw his profile. I am neither a hindu haryanvi nor i uave blue eyes. admin @WebMaster can confirm. There are 2,35,000 of us in India.

I have to talk with TT members of this place tomorrow about Ancient Egyptian, Iranic and Rig vedic Religions. Also i Dont have any spare banana for you or your friend, ogabooga.


----------



## django

Vishwamitra said:


> Just saw his profile. I am neither a hindu haryanvi nor i uave blue eyes. admin @WebMaster can confirm. There are 2,35,000 of us in India.
> 
> I have to talk with TT members of this place tomorrow about Ancient Egyptian, Iranic and Rig vedic Religions. Also i Dont have any spare banana for you or your friend, ogabooga.


@Kaptaan @DESERT FIGHTER @Talwar e Pakistan @Spring Onion Who is this clown trying to kid, he spews the vilest drivel against Pakistan and all it's ethnicitys and here he is now playing all innocent, hope @Horus bhai takes care of him ASAP.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Talwar e Pakistan

Vishwamitra said:


> as a "Brahmin" I hate is when people who have no connection with us or our ancestors try to speak about us as if they are one of "us". as a member of original 6 tribes that follow original Rig Vedic Religion i hate it when speak for me when we are not same.
> 
> yes, we were Invaders, first. we conquered Afghanistan, Pakistan, India, Bangladesh etc but it was thousands of years ago. this is what we Gave to South Asians.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> we are a Separate People, Nation or Ethnicity of our own. i have nothing against any other people of the world, be it Euros or Blacks, Mongols or fellow south Asians.
> 
> we may share our Blood with Eurasians, West Asians, Munda Tribals and Dravidians but we are still a unique people of our own. we never mixed as much as we should in last 5000 years and our DNA Results, Phenotype proves that.
> 
> you can say that we are an Ethno-Religious community who are just 1% of South Asia.


You're saying that these guys conquered Afghanistan, Pakistan, India and Bangladesh?






Also please, tell me more about your "phenotype" and "DNA results".

Reactions: Like Like:
8


----------



## django

Talwar e Pakistan said:


> You're saying that these guys conquered Afghanistan, Pakistan, India and Bangladesh?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Also please, tell me more about your "phenotype" and "DNA results".


----------



## Taimur Khurram

Vishwamitra said:


> as a "Brahmin" I hate is when people who have no connection with us or our ancestors try to speak about us as if they are one of "us". as a member of original 6 tribes that follow original Rig Vedic Religion i hate it when speak for me when we are not same.
> 
> yes, we were Invaders, first. we conquered Afghanistan, Pakistan, India, Bangladesh etc but it was thousands of years ago. this is what we Gave to South Asians.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> we are a Separate People, Nation or Ethnicity of our own. i have nothing against any other people of the world, be it Euros or Blacks, Mongols or fellow south Asians.
> 
> we may share our Blood with Eurasians, West Asians, Munda Tribals and Dravidians but we are still a unique people of our own. we never mixed as much as we should in last 5000 years and our DNA Results, Phenotype proves that.
> 
> you can say that we are an Ethno-Religious community who are just 1% of South Asia.



I can almost guarantee most Pakistanis would have more ancestry from the Aryans than you. 

Heck, I wouldn't be surprised if north-west Hindustanis had more Aryan ancestry than you (unless of course you are one of them).

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Brahmanic

dsr478 said:


> I can almost guarantee most Pakistanis would have more ancestry from the Aryout ans than you.
> 
> Heck, I wouldn't be surprised if north-west Hindustanis had more Aryan ancestry than you (unless of course you are one of them).


majority of pakistanis are Of non r1a origin. If i am not wrong onoy 36% of total pakosTanis have r1a.

But i dont care about genetic make up because lineage from original 6 tribes is what metters. Others are just inferior bunch with unaryan origin or aassimilated Munda, dravida, Neolithic and other ogabugas.

Rig Vedic > Others.



Talwar e Pakistan said:


> You're saying that these guys conquered Afghanistan, Pakistan, India and Bangladesh?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Also please, tell me more about your "phenotype" and "DNA results".



Yes. Are you triggered ugabooga Chandal ?

Use some burnol Chamar da putt.


----------



## lastofthepatriots

Vishwamitra said:


> as a "Brahmin" I hate is when people who have no connection with us or our ancestors try to speak about us as if they are one of "us". as a member of original 6 tribes that follow original Rig Vedic Religion i hate it when speak for me when we are not same.
> 
> yes, we were Invaders, first. we conquered Afghanistan, Pakistan, India, Bangladesh etc but it was thousands of years ago. this is what we Gave to South Asians.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> we are a Separate People, Nation or Ethnicity of our own. i have nothing against any other people of the world, be it Euros or Blacks, Mongols or fellow south Asians.
> 
> we may share our Blood with Eurasians, West Asians, Munda Tribals and Dravidians but we are still a unique people of our own. we never mixed as much as we should in last 5000 years and our DNA Results, Phenotype proves that.
> 
> you can say that we are an Ethno-Religious community who are just 1% of South Asia.









shut the **** up.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Brahmanic

lastofthepatriots said:


> shut the **** up.



Says a converted maali/Gardner. Your bud bud language is a inferior mish mash of our pure Sanskrit.


----------



## lastofthepatriots

Vishwamitra said:


> Says a converted maali/Gardner. Your bud bud language is a inferior mish mash of our pure Sanskrit.



You people are ugly and feminine. That's the plain simple truth.


----------



## Brahmanic

lastofthepatriots said:


> You people are ugly and feminine. That's the plain simple truth.


Still not a converted maali.

Thank Indra for that.


----------



## lastofthepatriots

Vishwamitra said:


> Still not a converted maali.
> 
> Thank Indra for that.



Divine cow piss drinker, please come to grips with reality.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## newb3e

Talwar e Pakistan said:


> You're saying that these guys conquered Afghanistan, Pakistan, India and Bangladesh?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Also please, tell me more about your "phenotype" and "DNA results".


blue eyes check
white skin check
blonde check
tall check

yes Indians are true aryan! beautiful indian men!


----------



## Brahmanic

lastofthepatriots said:


> Divine cow piss drinker, please come to grips with reality.


Time to clean my toilet Dayus. Maybe i wil reward you with a glass of camel piss if you clean it nicely like your ancestors.

But first i have to ask Arabs if its okay to give you their Devine drink ?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## django

@waz @Horus Gents this clown Vishvamitra is back at it, insulting each and everything precious to Pakistanis, plz ban this Ghandaran wannabe immediately.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Brahmanic

K0pa Sh@msu said:


> well i guess it is time for the hendoos to clean our comodes and give us bj,come qand show me your bj skills hendoo  i will gift you cola from your mata "gau" if you cleaning skills are upto the mark like your hendoo ancestors.
> 
> But you know what?i think first i have to take approval from your mata gau if she willing to give you her divine vedic juice,what do you?will she permit you?


Ever wondered how you spesk bud bud language despite being thousands of miles aeay from eastern europe chandal ?

That bastard language is what we gave to you after we steamrolled your *** 5000 years ago Chamar.



django said:


> @waz @Horus Gents this clown Vishvamitra is back at it, insulting each and everything precious to Pakistanis, plz ban this Ghandaran wannabe immediately.



Still waiting for banana ugabooga ?


----------



## Brahmanic

K0pa Sh@msu said:


> Still worshipping that three headed x-man?ever wondered why hendoo vedics worship earth elements,statues when there is no proof is found of existence of your cartoon super gods?
> 
> you hendoo vedic blood was born when our pagan forefathers in desert played bob vegana with your grand ma and then mughals kept scoring goals in your mom vedic scumbags.
> those cartoons will not save you,did not save you when we fvked your arse and send you here before you started vedic drama with those three headed,ten handed cartoons and then we streamrolled your p***y for hald of thousand years,you have come out of our dik vedic scums



Nicentry but i am an rig vedic, my god is one Mighly Indra the fire one. 

Have you ever seen our rig veda ? We literally praise him for burning you native abos alive while we slay your other people.

BajiraoMastani is your reality aboriginal.

We enjoyed you and as result you and your filthy bundjabi, sindhi etc languages were born converted Chamar.

God damn you are a babgli tribal 

How was 1971 for you huh ? Still remember what 90,000 punjabi and Pathans did to 30,00,000 of you ?

It was literally Aryan invasion 2.0 for swamphole Mundas 

now i have to take a bath due to this aboriginal. @Kaptaan


----------



## Brahmanic

K0pa Sh@msu said:


> Padmavati is your reality vedic scum,not surprising hendoos are ashamed of their real daddy's identity
> not to mention others.
> we enjoyed you from your birth than enjoyed you again 1/5 of your existence as vedics
> we fvked you thats why there are too many hendoos there,pitty mughals weren't a fan of cndm
> You entire hendoos have come out of our dik,our sprm runs through vedic vein hendoo scum,even if you try to scratch it out you can't undo it
> 
> 
> how was 1971?uu man,you still remember?i heard pakis have checked you opening your dhotis?many hendoo who has gone there after war might have actually **** daddy



what a inbred Munda ABO lol, no wonder 30,09,000 rapes had no effect on your igabiiga kind.

Get a grip tribal, it seems You are triggered by Aryan invasion 2.0. 

Behave nively and maybe i will throw yiu a banana as well Uggabooga.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Brahmanic

K0pa Sh@msu said:


> so cute hendoo speaking pongaunga vedic penguage ,poor inbred of incest and elephant s*x,it is clear 1000 years of "second hammering" on your mother,grandma,her grandma's vegana hasn't strengthen your vedic cuck gene yet,might require a third hammer for longer like 10000 years
> still trying to figure out which is the real face of your dad in three face of that three headed x-man
> behave like a vedic hendoo,which you are supposed to do like your vedic ancestors did to us,give bj to us,may be i will convice your gau mata to shower devine juice on you hendoo hanuman


Who would win ?

90,000 punjabi and Pathan 1200 km away from their land vs bhangis of most populated region on the earth ?

30,00,000 bengali Bhangi women

Reactions: Negative Rating Negative Rating:
1


----------



## Zen0

@waz @WebMaster @The Eagle

Clean this thread, K0pa Sh@msu troll is at it again


----------



## Brahmanic

We enjoyed your bhangi womenas cuck. We used to spread your mothers, sisters, daughters and grandmas and fill her in fr9nt of your cuck males who used to work on our field. 

Your language reflects your origin, if i were in power i would give our punjabi men to help **** punjabi and Pathans to change your bhangi race as well. A famous pathan @Kaptaan s uncle enjoyed your women as well, maybe all we nedded to do is join our hand and give a better genes to Mundas like we gave till 1940s.


----------



## Brahmanic

Lol my family is from supreme Aryan Blood and lineage, our women are not like you bengalis.

My own Great grandfather from north west India yoused to own big Plantation in Khulna, Rangoon and he used to enjoy your women while their men used to work in field. I am disgusted by his taste but i have to accept that every one have their own fatish.

One of the main reason You wanted to leave India and join pakistan because brahman and Marwadi baniyas literally made you spaves in your swamphole. But pakistan did at once what we were doing for thousands of years so i uave no complain at all.

Maybe my grandpa is the resreson your women still spread their Lags when they see us in India, Or abrod whem they see Pakistani men.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Hold up

K0pa Sh@msu said:


> so cucky hindu gene inside that hindu body activated,for thousands of years,your ma,grandma,sister,daughter has spreaded their hindu legs for us when you cuck hindoo papa were watching and jerking small tiny hindu shiv penis who used to bj us before we drill your mothers,sisters and fill their holy vegana ,we enjoyed your rendian rendi woman for several centuries
> 
> your language talks of your insecurity because of cuck gene deeply rooted inside your hindu body.
> your vedic genes have been chaged through centuries by deserters,mughals,dutches,britishers,i mean who the hell can identify whose bastard son your vedic scums are
> 
> no only our forefathers enjoyed your mother,sisters,daughters they have totally bastardized you hindustani land ,what to say?
> and as for punjabi and pathan i heard p-a-k-i armies used to open dhoti of your people and then rape your mother daughter,make sure you are not son of one of those p-a-k-i army man,i mean after being son of a mughal,being bastartd son of a p a k i army man would be a great shame for you who is so vedic
> 
> 
> million hendoo dead and their mother,daughter,sister raped and carrying p-a-k-i gene,whom do you think have won vedic scum?
> i am not the one who is saying this,your govt bjp is saying p-a-k-i army has fvked your woman and filled their vegana


Who would want banglo genes yuck.


----------



## Hold up

K0pa Sh@msu said:


> COMING OUT OF A BASTARDIZED VEDIC GENE?
> 
> WAAKK THUUU


What's a vedic gene dude? LMAO banglos inventing new things everyday.






@K0pa Sh@msu Is this you?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Brahmanic

Hold up said:


> Who would want banglo genes yuck.


Relex man i have no Filthy Tribal blood on me.

He used to treat his farmdogs better than thesebo bongos. You can say that he hadknoledge of bang bang skeetskeet

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Talwar e Pakistan

Vishwamitra said:


> majority of pakistanis are Of non r1a origin. If i am not wrong onoy 36% of total pakosTanis have r1a.
> 
> But i dont care about genetic make up because lineage from original 6 tribes is what metters. Others are just inferior bunch with unaryan origin or aassimilated Munda, dravida, Neolithic and other ogabugas.
> 
> Rig Vedic > Others.


lol...






Your Brahmins are basically our Shudras

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Brahmanic

Talwar e Pakistan said:


> lol...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Your Brahmins are basically our Shudras


you see talwar i consider every pakistani indian nepali Lankan as my brother.

But your triggered reaction is making me change my view. I m enjoying beautiful (but harsh) sunset while chugging on cigar you should do the same.


----------



## Talwar e Pakistan

Vishwamitra said:


> Yes. Are you triggered ugabooga Chandal ?
> 
> Use some burnol Chamar da putt.


I'm sorry I can't understand you, are those the sounds that Brahmins make through their backsides when they defecate on holy Ganges?


----------



## Hold up

K0pa Sh@msu said:


> no man,he is 7589452146987422th avatar of shree Randon Access Memory,daily being worshipped by the aryan vedic here,i mean tal about taste,right?
> 
> Gay Shree Random Access Memory


I am not religious dude don't know what you on about.


----------



## Brahmanic

Talwar e Pakistan said:


> I'm sorry I can't understand you, are those the sounds that Brahmins make through their backsides when they defecate on holy Ganges?


Edited my first reply.

Nice try btw.


----------



## Talwar e Pakistan

Vishwamitra said:


> you see talwar i consider every pakistani indian nepali Lankan as my brother.
> 
> But your triggered reaction is making me change my view.


I'm not triggered, I asked you a legitimate question and you proceeded to childishly hurl Brahmin insults at us that we don't even understand.


----------



## Brahmanic

Hold up said:


> I am not religious dude don't know what you on about.



No tribal blood from banga in me

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Brahmanic

Talwar e Pakistan said:


> I'm not triggered, I asked you a legitimate question and you proceeded to childishly hurl Brahmin insults at us that we don't even understand.



I am stuck in desert hell hole so o guess weather is influencing my mood. I am from beautiful green plains and Mountains of north west.

We have no beer with you. Be our friend and we can learn many things from eachother, be our enemy and well see death and destruction.


----------



## Hold up

Talwar e Pakistan said:


> lol...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Your Brahmins are basically our Shudras


Why you so ashamed of your ancestry man deal with it.


----------



## django

Vishwamitra said:


> We enjoyed your bhangi womenas cuck. We used to spread your mothers, sisters, daughters and grandmas and fill her in fr9nt of your cuck males who used to work on our field.
> 
> Your language reflects your origin, if i were in power i would give our punjabi men to help **** punjabi and Pathans to change your bhangi race as well. A famous pathan @Kaptaan s uncle enjoyed your women as well, maybe all we nedded to do is join our hand and give a better genes to Mundas like we gave till 1940s.


@waz @Horus


----------



## Brahmanic

Hold up said:


> Why you so ashamed of your ancestry man deal with it.


I live in North west India man. Over 2/3 of my family from both side have Light eyes and Eurasian features. There is a reson indologiests and Imperialists are obsessed with us.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Hold up

Vishwamitra said:


> I live in North west India man. Over 2/3 of my family from both side have Light eyes and Eurasian features. There is a reson indologiests and Imperialists are obsessed with us.


But the gene pool's mixed with ASI now man its not pure anymore.


----------



## Talwar e Pakistan

Hold up said:


> Why you so ashamed of your ancestry man deal with it.


What does your statement have to do with my post? Also, what ancestry?


----------



## Hold up

Talwar e Pakistan said:


> What does your statement have to do with my post? Also, what ancestry?


You guys are Indos man. Only Pashtuns and Balochis can boast of Iranian genes.


----------



## Talwar e Pakistan

Hold up said:


> You guys are Indos man. Only Pashtuns and Balochis can boast of Iranian genes.


There's no such thing as Indos.

We're genetically distinct from Indians.

All Pakistani ethnic groups form a single genetic cluster which is distinct to both Iranians and Indians but somewhat close to Central Asia as represented here. Also no one here cares or "boasts" about Iranian Genes, maybe in India they do.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Hold up

Talwar e Pakistan said:


> There's no such thing as Indos.
> 
> We're genetically distinct from Indians.
> 
> All Pakistani ethnic groups form a single genetic cluster which is distinct to both Iranians and Indians but somewhat close to Central Asia as represented here.


Doesn't really matter man. End of the day all desis get along.


----------



## Kambojaric

@Mods, @waz , @WebMaster , @Horus

As the thread starter I request this thread be closed now. The point of the OP article has been read and discussed by the non-trolls. No point in continuing the thread now given the track record of the past two three pages.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------

