A Brief History of The Warrior Rajputs

[Shabaz Sharif]

Ghaggar-Hakra was monsoon fed and thus most suitable for winter cultivation and unlike Indus there was no risk of rise in water level when snow melts during standing crops. That was the reason that most of the Indus valley sites on Ghaggar-Hakra instead of Indus. BTW Ghaggar-Hakra did originate from the Himalayas from Shivalik ranges even if it was a monsoon fed river and many prominent historians still believe it is the Saraswati of Rigveda as it matches with the description of being in between Sutlej and Yamuna.

Many so called antique historians at this point believed that Ghaggar river used to be mountain fed once upon a time, which 2012 report proved that it was not the case at all. So all those who believed it to be Saraswati does not matter, we have come a long way since then. And as we all know Saraswati importance was 2nd to mighty Indus in Rig Vedic society.

Rig Veda Rivers
"There are rare mentions of rivers to the east. the Yamuna is invoked a handful of times; the Ganges no more then twice at the most; and the Saraswati, a fabled eastern river that dried up around 1000 BCE, is only praised in later layers of the text." Empire of Indus, Alice Albania

Just in case anyone acuse PNAS of being anti-India. The study was done by 5 countries including Pakistan & India.

 

[INDIC]

http://www.iisc.ernet.in/currsci/oct25/articles20.htm

Experts to trace roots of Saraswati River - The Times of India

Saraswati The Lost River

Amazing facts about - Ancient India: Mystery of Sarsavati River

The Myth of Aryan Invasion of India

Even in Mahabharata this Mighty River was mentioned flowing through Gujarat.

Between 2200-1900BC, the river changed the course numerous times and ultimately dried up around 1900BC.

 

[Srinivas]

This Pakistani river Ghaggar-Hakra is monsoon fed, while Rig Vedic Saraswati river was himalaya fed. Even then in Rig Veda the most important and mightiest river is Indus by far while mythical Saraswati is 2nd most important. 2012 study by reputable international PNAS proved.

''Also recent definitive study by Giosan et al in PNAS (Fluvial landscapes of the Harappan Civilization; 2012; June 26; 109 (26): e1688-94) which clearly demonstrated that the the much touted Ghaggar-Hakra was a monsoon-fed river, not the Vedic Sarasvati fed by the melting snows of high mountains.''

You can search more on this and see the complete report.

Saraswathi river was Himalayan Born(not glacier fed) but Mansoon fed, with the change of climate the river and tectonic plate shifts the river changed its course and eventually dried up.

On of the tributaries have joined the Ganges near Varanasi reason why people call "Triveni Sangaman"

the place where Ganga, Yamuna and Saraswathi meet.

iamkart: Book Review: The Lost River - On the Trail of the Saraswati

Yahoo Groups

 

[INDIC]

Many so called antique historians at this point believed that Ghaggar river used to be mountain fed once upon a time, which 2012 report proved that it was not the case at all. So all those who believed it to be Saraswati does not matter, we have come a long way since then. And as we all know Saraswati importance was 2nd to mighty Indus in Rig Vedic society.

Rig Veda Rivers
"There are rare mentions of rivers to the east. the Yamuna is invoked a handful of times; the Ganges no more then twice at the most; and the Saraswati, a fabled eastern river that dried up around 1000 BCE, is only praised in later layers of the text." Empire of Indus, Alice Albania

Just in case anyone acuse PNAS of being anti-India. The study was done by 5 countries including Pakistan & India.

Yeah, invent your own history by naming Saraswati as second most important river. The monsoon fed Ghaggar-Hakra was most suitable for Agriculture compared to Indus river. The Ghaggar-Hakra changed courses during 2200-1900BC and dried up around 1900BC. It didn't dried up around 1000BC as you are claiming. Anyway, Ghaggar-Hakra originated in Shivalik ranges of Himalayas and that must be the reason for such description.

 

[Shabaz Sharif]

Saraswathi river was Himalayan Born and Mansoon fed, with the change of climate the

It was monsoon fed for at least 10.000 years, long before Rig Vedic people migrated to Indus valley from somewhere central russia. While Rig Veda clearly mention Saraswati being mountain fed river. Its all in PNAS report avaible on internet.

 

[Srinivas]

It was monsoon fed for at least 10.000 years, long before Rig Vedic people migrated to Indus valley from somewhere central russia. While Rig Veda clearly mentio Saraswati being mountain fed river. Its all in PNAS report avaible on internet.

Please read my post, I have edited it.

And regarding the fantasy of some blue eyed guys migrating from Russia .... I leave those things to you.

 

[Shabaz Sharif]

Yeah, invent your own history by naming Saraswati as second most important river. The monsoon fed Ghaggar-Hakra was most suitable for Agriculture compared to Indus river. The Ghaggar-Hakra changed courses during 2200-1900BC and dried up around 1900BC. It didn't dried up around 1000BC as you are claiming. Anyway, Ghaggar-Hakra originated in Shivalik ranges of Himalayas and that must be the reason for such description.

Yes PNAS are inventing history while hindutvas are teaching real history. It was monsoon fed for at least 10.000 years, long before Rig Vedic migrated to Indus valley from central/east russia.

Please read my post, I have edited it.

And regarding the fantasy of some blue eyed guys migrating from Russia .... I leave those things to you.

They can have brown eyes, does it matter? What is your fantasy of Indian people migrating to Iran just to explain similarities?

 

[INDIC]

Yes PNAS are inventing history while hindutvas are teaching real history. It was monsoon fed for at least 10.000 years, long before Rig Vedic migrated to Indus valley from central/east russia.

What you saying, nowhere I heard except your mouth that Saraswati wasn't the most important river of Rigvedic period, infact I read about the preference of monsoon fed Ghaggar-Hakra to Indus in some research paper. BTW please again don't mention that Ghaggar-Hakra dried around 1000BC, its actually 1900BC.

sir shites claim that those guest were daughter of Hazrat Ali(as) whose laqab was Bibi Pak Daman and 6 other ladies..Raja Dahir send them to multan raja before conquest of sindh and MUlatn raja send them to Lahore Raja......where they died....and there shrine is in Lahor (shahdara)
What you say about this story ?

I never knew that. BTW Can you tell me more about Muhammad Bin Allafi if you know about him.

 

[Shabaz Sharif]

What you saying, nowhere I heard except your mouth that Saraswati wasn't the most important river of Rigvedic period, infact I read about the preference of monsoon fed Ghaggar-Hakra to Indus in some research paper. BTW please again don't mention that Ghaggar-Hakra dried around 1000BC, its actually 1900BC.

Indus was most important in early hymes of Rig Veda, later on mythical Saraswati became 2nd most important. Neutral historians who studied Rig Veda say that. In Rig Veda there is nothing to suggest that they knew Saraswati was monson fed, stop inventing history now after PNAS report.

 

[INDIC]

Indus was most important in early hymes of Rig Veda, later on mythical Saraswati became 2nd most important. Neutral historians who studied Rig Veda say that. In Rig Veda there is nothing to suggest that they knew Saraswati was monson fed, stop inventing history now after PNAS report.

Then why most of the IVC sites are the bank of Ghaggar-Hakra. I was explaining the importance of Ghaggar-Hakra based on agricultural pattern making it more favorable compared to Indus, it was based on the research. As for Rigveda, it considers Saraswati as the most important river and while in later three Vedas, Ganges is considered as the most important river.

 

[Shabaz Sharif]

Then why most of the IVC sites are the bank of Ghaggar-Hakra. I was explaining the importance of Ghaggar-Hakra based on agricultural pattern making it more favorable compared to Indus, it was based on the research. As for Rigveda, it considers Saraswati as the most important river and while in later three Vedas, Ganges is considered as the most important river.

Mud sites you mean, main sites are not. I being from Rig Vedic land knows that our ancestors considered Indus the most important. You will not believe neutrals so there is no point in further discussion.

 

[DESERT FIGHTER]

Baraa hiii kameena haiii tuu !

Achaaa mereiii bhai how is life treating you these days ?

Yaar aik bachi bara sohni lagi hai ..

 

[Butchcassidy]

Yaar aik bachi bara sohni lagi hai ..

To bhai mamla kuch aagae badhao

 

[DESERT FIGHTER]

To bhai mamla kuch aagae badhao

Bai ji ahi irada aye .. Monday na ya paan GAi danday ya pangray .

 

[Multani]

Ghilzai call themselves Turkic pashtuns, not mughal pathans like Multani was claiming.



Yeah no, first it was OIT and now calling Rig Vedic a Gangetic civilization. Lol

shan, where did I say Ghilzais or Khilji call themselves Mughal Pathan

shan, you don't know about Mughals, and you claim Mughals of Punjab are fake. You don't know about Chughtais as well

please prove that Mughals in Punjab are fake

The Ghilzai call themselves what they are : Pashtuns

There is no difference between Ghilzais and Durranis at least not genetically and also culturally as both tribes practice the Pashtunwali. If the Ghilzai would be predominantly Turkic then they would also genetically cluster with Turkic peoples from CA or Afghanistan but they don't because they cluster the closest with Durrani Pashtuns in genetical tests. I know a Ghilzai Pashtun and he calls himself at first a Muslim and then Pashtun. He is not even aware of the partially Turkic origins of Ghilzais. If some Ghilzais want to see themselves as Turkic then they can do it. I don't have anything against it.

Thank you brother. Lets see if Shan can prove that the Mughals in Punjab or Kashmir or KPK/Baochistan and Sindh are fake

@shan