Ancient Man and His First Civilizations.Proving Aryan Invasion Theory is a myth and severe lie

[Joe Shearer]

I got it, you mean land of Dravida people was called Drāvida similar to other terminology with land and people all across ancient India.

Yes.

I will assume the lack of content here is due to just cynicism.



Again the focus on semantics and not on the issue.

A scholar like you can certainly do much better. While we surely have major differences in opinions, it doesn't mean personal differences and being cynical like this.

आपको शोभा नहीं देता.
আপনার জন্য উপযুক্ত কি না.

Sorry if the Bengali translation is off the mark. I don't read and write the language.

It's simple.

I don't appreciate patient, careful presentation of the facts being met with coarse ethnic abuse. There are half-a-dozen posters whose manners and general attitude are appalling. It would not be difficult to respond in kind; I choose not to.

 

[INDIC]

That is exactly the question I also asked to the unfaithfulguy and others with no clue but keeps on blabbering...

Unfortunately it has become a political issue with strong vested interests from different quarters. The strong Indian response to this atrocity is just beginning to emerge compared to the centuries of vested interests parading the theory that has become mainstream all over.

I don't believe in rightist Out of India theory but there is a section of pro-Atheism Marxist historians who are desperate to prove that Hinduism was the worst thing happened to India while rest of the world with their widespread slavery, sectarian-religion based discriminations were angels of equality.

 

[Joe Shearer]

I am surprised why Aryans only invaded India and why there is no Aryan invasion theory for other countries.

Oh, but there is. The best known case is of the Greeks, where the Aryan-speaking tribes came into the peninsula in several waves, submerging, but not destroying the previous layers of population, culture and language (emphasis added).

You may already be aware of this, and of the strong resemblance between what has been reconstructed, and some aspects of thinking about ancient India.

So, if so called Aryan enslaved Dravidians and displaced them to South, so how low caste Hindus of South India were found to be having high ancestry from the so called Aryan proved by genetic studies.

This is not clear. Could you clarify please?

BTW The Rigvedic period originated from Cemetery H culture, part of last phase of Indus Valley civilization. The second Veda was composed as Indo-Gangetic tradition. In last phase of Indus valley civilization, IVC was divided into three phases known as Cemetery H phase(between Indus and Yamuna-Ganges), Rangpur phase(Gujarat) and Jhukar phase(Sindh) all disconnected. Cemetery H culture together with Gandhara Grave gave rise to Vedic culture which continued to expand in Gangetic plains due to more fertile plains.

Cemetery H Culture Dish or lid
What happened after 1800 BCE? | Harappa

This is not proven. The links between archaeology and literary culture that you have presented are not established, but only hypothesised, much like other features of Indian pre-history.

 

[INDIC]

Oh, but there is. The best known case is of the Greeks, where the Aryan-speaking tribes came into the peninsula in several waves, submerging, but not destroying the previous layers of population, culture and language (emphasis added).

You may already be aware of this, and of the strong resemblance between what has been reconstructed, and some aspects of thinking about ancient India.

I have never heard anyone using the term Aryan invasion theory for any Indo-European culture except for India.

This is not clear. Could you clarify please?

Indian population have ancestry from two sets of races called Ancestral North Indians(ANI) which are Eurasian related to people outside India and entirely native Indian races called Ancestral South Indians(ASI) related to no one outside South Asia. The two races kept on mixing from 4200-1900 years ago until there is origin of endogamy(marriage within same caste) around 1900 years ago. The genetic studies was done on 74 castes of India by Harvard Medical School and CSIR-Hyderabad.

The South Indians in general have 40-55% of ANI ancestry including low caste Hindus in South. Even the remote tribes and nomadic communities have this ANI ancestry. Same way all North Indian have high percentage of ASI ancestry ranging from 35-60%. Now, such genetic test puts a big question mark on the garbage that came attacked with Aryan invasion theory.

This is not proven. The links between archaeology and literary culture that you have presented are not established, but only hypothesised, much like other features of Indian pre-history.

You can read the links I posted, that's a good site of reputed archaeologists, it will tell what existed between Indus Valley civilization and Vedic culture.

Cemetery H culture(1900-1300BC) also called Ochre coloured Pottery phase matches with Rigvedic geography of Sapta Sindhu(purple in the map) and there is also strong signs of early Hinduism. The culture is named as cemetery H culture because of the proofs of cremation in Harappa in Cemetery H region. After Indus valley civilization's last phase there was migration of people into more fertile Gangetic plains from semi-arid Indus valley plains where they were able to cultivate Kharif crops instead of barley.

This one Late Indus Valley civilization divided into three disconnected regions Cemetery H(purple), Jhukar(yellow) and Rangpur(red)

What happened after 1800 BCE? | Harappa

 

[Joe Shearer]

I have never heard anyone using the term Aryan invasion theory for any Indo-European culture except for India.

I am baffled.

Why should that matter?

Are we concerned with the sequence of events or what they were called?

Indian population have ancestry from two sets of races called Ancestral North Indians(ANI) which are Eurasian related to people outside India and entirely native Indian races called Ancestral South Indians(ASI) related to no one outside South Asia.

It is a common mistake to think that either was a pure race; these are genetic types, which were not existent in 'pure' form at any time. In fact, geneticists agree that there was an outward migration from India sometime around 30,000 BC and that since then, until the ANI/ASI juxtaposition, there was no change in the genetic composition of Indians.

The purest ASI stock is among the Andamanese Islanders, and there is not a single other case of undiluted ASI genetic composition.

There was and is no pure ANI stock. All the ANI genetic components came into the geography already partly diluted.

The two races kept on mixing from 4200-1900 years ago until there is origin of endogamy(marriage within same caste) around 1900 years ago. The genetic studies was done on 74 castes of India by Harvard Medical School and CSIR-Hyderabad.

The South Indians in general have 40-55% of ANI ancestry including low caste Hindus in South. Even the remote tribes and nomadic communities have this ANI ancestry. Same way all North Indian have high percentage of ASI ancestry ranging from 35-60%. Now, such genetic test puts a big question mark on the garbage that came attacked with Aryan invasion theory.

Why so? This just points to very deep and thorough admixture between 4200 years to 1900 years ago, which is what I presume is what you mean. That is an admixture through two thousand three hundred years. What isolation of genetic characteristics do you realistically expect to see after that long a period of free contact and socialisation?

You can read the links I posted, that's a good site of reputed archaeologists, it will tell what existed between Indus Valley civilization and Vedic culture.

Cemetery H culture(1900-1300BC) also called Ochre coloured Pottery phase matches with Rigvedic geography of Sapta Sindhu(purple in the map) and there is also strong signs of early Hinduism. The culture is named as cemetery H culture because of the proofs of cremation in Harappa in Cemetery H region. After Indus valley civilization's last phase there was migration of people into more fertile Gangetic plains from semi-arid Indus valley plains where they were able to cultivate Kharif crops instead of barley.

This one Late Indus Valley civilization divided into three disconnected regions Cemetery H(purple), Jhukar(yellow) and Rangpur(red)

What happened after 1800 BCE? | Harappa

Once again, I repeat: these are surmises, very intelligent and very instinctively appealing surmises, but surmises nevertheless. They are not proven, just as the immigration of Indo-Aryan speakers is not proven.

I happen to think that they are right on the ball as far as the fate of the descendants of the dwellers in the IVC are concerned, but not as far as forming a single point of development for later India. These are intelligent reconstructions of the diaspora from the IVC, but that does not mean that I consider them to be firm, established fact. They are not historically valid. And, most of all, they do not indicate that there was no linguist injection of a new language, probably introduced by external speakers of that language.

 

[bronxbull]

I don't think anybody objects to freely changeable occupational groups, which are not tightly restricted by birth. The argument is not against occupational differentiation, it is against occupational differentiation rigidly defined at birth, by birth. To argue that a voluntary association of civil engineers equates to the Indian caste system is extraordinary; I would rather not degrade the quality of the conversation by adding to that. Do you seriously believe it yourself?

well all kinds of non state social security is like that,i can show u numerous examples of castes rallying around each other,this is the varna system,i am sure u know enough economics to know that in a oligopoly,there are 3-4 power groups dominating the scene.

We brahmins were not zamindars in TN,even the land owners were very few compared to most of them.

Today everyone says we were denied education,but who was ready to lead such a strict lifestyle and apply their minds and look at our DNA records,you dont find us too far away from the rest,that shows that we are actually composed of the same people,that shows that the others are just weak meantally.

 

[INDIC]

Why so? This just points to very deep and thorough admixture between 4200 years to 1900 years ago, which is what I presume is what you mean. That is an admixture through two thousand three hundred years. What isolation of genetic characteristics do you realistically expect to see after that long a period of free contact and socialisation?

That's shows the evolution of caste system and becoming endogamy around first century unlike the garbage of Aryan enslaving Dravidian that came with Aryan invasion theory. there are theories that in earliest Vedic culture, caste system wasn't endogamous but based on profession. BTW, in earliest Varna culture Kashtriyas the ruling class were most powerful compared to priesthood Brahmins, Brahmins achieved highest dominance later on.

Once again, I repeat: these are surmises, very intelligent and very instinctively appealing surmises, but surmises nevertheless. They are not proven, just as the immigration of Indo-Aryan speakers is not proven.

I happen to think that they are right on the ball as far as the fate of the descendants of the dwellers in the IVC are concerned, but not as far as forming a single point of development for later India. These are intelligent reconstructions of the diaspora from the IVC, but that does not mean that I consider them to be firm, established fact. They are not historically valid. And, most of all, they do not indicate that there was no linguist injection of a new language, probably introduced by external speakers of that language.

I have no idea how the races fit in that but my point was the missing link between Indus Valley civilization and Vedic culture. You have the geographic extent of 'Ochre coloured pottery phase' (also called Cemetery H culture) from archaeology that matches with the geographic extent of Sapta Sindhu of Rigveda and date of composition of Rigveda , so it mostly point towards Satpa Sindhu and cemetery H phase are same thus Vedic culture was partly Late Indus Valley Civilization.

 

[Vinod2070]

It's simple.

I don't appreciate patient, careful presentation of the facts being met with coarse ethnic abuse. There are half-a-dozen posters whose manners and general attitude are appalling. It would not be difficult to respond in kind; I choose not to.

If calling India a fake nation, Indian people mulatto and as uncivilized as Australian aborigines sounds like "patient, careful presentation of the facts" I am afraid we are looking at very different things here.

I am not going to take abuse of my country and people silently. The people who behave respectfully get my respect.

Anyway, still no response to the issues, just the semantics and paraphernalia.

 

[ChineseTiger1986]

what has a lower ASI got to do with Brahuis ?

Genetical Brahuis display Haplogroups- R1A and J of the Y DNA (refer to diagrams)

Haplogroup R1a



Haplogroup J

Having R1a doesn't mean it is Indo-European, since there are many pre-Indo-European old R1a groups.

And the oldest R1a group actually being found in North China that is dated 21000 years ago.

R1A1 "Aryan"

 

[INDIC]

I am baffled.

Why should that matter?

Are we concerned with the sequence of events or what they were called?

The name always matters as its briefly describes what's the theory all about with strong message. The colonial Indologists always had vested interest to belittle the ancient Indian culture. There is no Aryan invasion theory for Iran or wannabe Aryans of Europe that's really surprising.

 

[Joe Shearer]

If calling India a fake nation, Indian people mulatto and as uncivilized as Australian aborigines sounds like "patient, careful presentation of the facts" I am afraid we are looking at very different things here.

I am not going to take abuse of my country and people silently. The people who behave respectfully get my respect.

Anyway, still no response to the issues, just the semantics and paraphernalia.

I called India a fake nation?
I called Indian people mulatto?
I called Indian people as uncivilised as Australian aborigines?

You must be out of your mind.

The deliberate deviation from patient, careful presentation of the facts was intended to demonstrate how strident and hostile a post can sound without such treatment .

My anger is due to the coarse and tasteless way in which people responded to my posts, not to some other issue. This is really too shallow an effort at diverting attention.

 

[bronxbull]

If calling India a fake nation, Indian people mulatto and as uncivilized as Australian aborigines sounds like "patient, careful presentation of the facts" I am afraid we are looking at very different things here.

I am not going to take abuse of my country and people silently. The people who behave respectfully get my respect.

Anyway, still no response to the issues, just the semantics and paraphernalia.

mulatto is not a bad word at all and indians r far far away from mulattoes.

@Joe Shearer

White man's intention & integrity in writing or rewriting Subcontinent history is suspect,i wont tell my children or nephews to believe NCERT fairytales.

 

[Joe Shearer]

The name always matters as its briefly describes what's the theory all about with strong message. The colonial Indologists always had vested interest to belittle the ancient Indian culture. There is no Aryan invasion theory for Iran or wannabe Aryans of Europe that's really surprising.

LOL.

This is grasping at straws, at best. India has the example of two widely divergent language groups, both still in vigorous existence; this had to be explained in striking and original terms.

I don't know about the wannabe Aryans of Europe who needed such a theory. The idea is neither appealing nor necessary.

 

[Azizam]

Sinhala chauvinists are capable of twisting and turning anything.

As per your mythological Mahabharata inspired Buddhist chronicle Mahavamsa, Thug Vijaya landed on Lankan shores with 700 followers who later married Pandyan women after committing genocide of the local indigenous tribe - veddas

So it remains a mystery how the 700 could later account for majority 72 % genetic admixture with Bengali ?

You are out of your mind if you take Mahavamsa seriously. It is full of lies with little facts. If you read the story of Vijaya, you would realize that it is no more than a bed time story for kids. In reality migration was a slow process and didn't happen in one single day as the Mahavamsa mentions.

 

[INDIC]

LOL.

This is grasping at straws, at best. India has the example of two widely divergent language groups, both still in vigorous existence; this had to be explained in striking and original terms.

I don't know about the wannabe Aryans of Europe who needed such a theory. The idea is neither appealing nor necessary.

Joe sir, India is not the only civilization having people from two races. There was vested interest to divide Hindu-Muslim, North-South and High-Low caste Hindu. Finally we found that a scheduled caste Tamils have 40% of Eurasian ancestry.

I have talked to many tom, dick and harry from Europe claiming that how they have more claims on term Aryan or our Vedic culture than Indians because of their fairer skin. Infact, unlike South Europe, North Europe lacked a golden history before converting to Christianity, so extending the term Aryan on them gave them reasons to claim our vedic culture.