Dholavira- The zenith of Harappan town planning!

[war&peace]

It was in fact not originated in this area but elsewhere. The culture spread here, in a manner of speaking.

Those interested might like to read either A. K. Narain, who wrote an excellent book called The Indo-Greeks sometime in the 50s, or, since some of us don't like Indian authors, W. W. Tarn's The Greeks in Bactria and India, written before the war, but subsequently revised and updated, again in the 50s, on the subject.

Very briefly, in the aftermath of the sudden and untimely death of Alexander III in Babylon, his successors, the Diadochoi, divided his kingdom into four parts, with Seleucus getting the massive part in the east (the others got Egypt, Syria and Macedon respectively). The territory was so vast that the fringes of it broke away into an independent Greek settlement at Balkh. These kings, under several dynasties, ruled as far east as Kanauj, but distance weakened them as much as it had weakened Seleucus earlier. Their kingdom divided, in its own turn, and the Graeco-Bactrian kingdom became the Graeco-Bactrian and the Indo-Greek (correctly, the Graeco-Indians) kingdoms.

The Indo-Greeks ruled from Kabul, from Peshawar, from Taxila, and from Charsadda. The term Gandhara comes from Vedic references, but it became prominent only under the Indo-Greek breakaways from the Graeco-Bactrian kingdom. It is interesting that the Mahabharata was being expanded and added to just about around this time, and the character of Gandhari, the princess from Gandhar, who married the blind king Dhritarashtra and bore Duryodhana and his ninetynine brothers and a sister, has a prominent part to play. As also her brother, now a byword for unscrupulous cunning and courtier politics, Shakuni, the master of gambling.

The fusion of Indian and Greek culture continued; the region was known for its religious philosophy, as Buddhism spread there, and several of the kings may actually have been Buddhist themselves (there are references to the Sramanas among the Bactrians in Greek writing, at a time when 'Bactrian' meant oriental Greek).

The Indo-Greek part was much weaker than its parent kingdom, but extended from Jalalabad to Mathura. It was overthrown, or succeeded, by one of its Scythian generals. Gandhar the region, as distinct from Gandhar the culture, continued to exist through Indo-Scythian, Indo-Parthian and finally Kushanas, with the Ephthalites providing an unpleasant coda, until the Shahi kings took over, lasting until Mahmud of Ghazni's massive raids. This border kingdom was one of the first to fall, and it was ever afterwards ruled from Kabul or Lahore. Internally, the power of the Ephthalites was broken by the later Guptas, and they ruled the interior, and gave the sub-continent administrative systems and conventions that lasted well into the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries. However, the borderland was traditionally the stronghold of the Shahi kings well into the period when the Rajputs ruled north India.

I realise the temptation for such-minded commentators to slip in the allusion that in the separation between the Shahi kings on the borders and the Guptas, and their successors, culminating in the Rajputs finally in the interiors, there is already the beginning of a segregation between the land of the Indus and the land of the Ganges. The absurdity of this kind of dualism which appears as a fixed fact in the historical imagination of some of us is worth a separate essay.

Good piece of writing and I appreciate your effort. However I have some questions if you see the the highlighted parts. So acc. to you/your ref. they ruled from Kabul, from Peshawar, from Taxila, and from Charsadda. Were these four different states or at different times?
What was the age of princess Ghandari since I find it incredible that she gave birth to 101 children..How? Normally a woman can bear a child at the max age of 45-50 yrs and if she started at an early age of 14, she had max of 36 years so she bore more than two children each time and she just kept mass producing without any interval...was a she rabbit or what? And how can we trust such stories and thus trust the historians.

 

[Joe Shearer]

Good piece of writing and I appreciate your effort. However I have some questions if you see the the highlighted parts. So acc. to you/your ref. they ruled from Kabul, from Peshawar, from Taxila, and from Charsadda. Were these four different states or at different times?

My conjecture is that they had shifting capitals, due to the exigencies of constant warfare and a need to stay close to the active front as that front kept shifting around.

What was the age of princess Ghandari since I find it incredible that she gave birth to 101 children..How? Normally a woman can bear a child at the max age of 45-50 yrs and if she started at an early age of 14, she had max of 36 years so she bore more than two children each time and she just kept mass producing without any interval...was a she rabbit or what? And how can we trust such stories and thus trust the historians.

Good Heavens, man, are you reading those fables seriously? All that we can derive from it is that there was a region named Gandhar in the vicinity of Kabul, and extending over the mountains into the cis-Hindu Kush highlands, and that the inhabitants were closely tied in with the rest of the culture of Upper India at the supposed time of the supposed war. You might like to ask what constituted Upper India according to the Mahabharata, but that is a separate question.

Second, this is NOT history. For that matter, neither is the Indus Valley Civilisation history. Most of this falls into pre-history, a period during which there are no written records or historical evidence of any sort. Material evidence does not constitute historical evidence by itself, as I understand it.

You may be interested to know that these fables, and even the tangible material culture evident at the IVC sites, are not only not history, they are not even proto-history; an example of proto-history is the reference to Indians of various sorts among the Persian King's army which attacked Greece in 492 BC. Indian history therefore begins with the invasion of Alexander III the Great, in 326 BC. according to one school of opinion.

That leaves us with the problem of the Buddha, whose dates are reasonably held to be around 600 BC, but which cannot be authenticated with greater accuracy than that. He was an historical figure, most certainly, and his life and works are described in Buddhist scripture in great detail. However, his dates are established by reconstruction; by figuring out who his contemporaries were, and who their descendants and successors were, right down to the time when we can figure out which of those descendants or successors can be timed with some confidence.

Another very interesting and seminal work was by F. E. Pargiter, whose reconstruction of Indian pre-history by cleaning up the lists of kings in various Puranas helps us to glimpse into the period before historical definition was possible. It is an incredible piece of detective work, and thrilling to read, if one can get past the constant repetition of very strange names occurring over and over again, very often in contexts which are flatly contradictory to one another.

Don't touch the Gandhari fable with a barge-pole, just pick up the Gandhar part of it to link to the early Puranic civilisation of Upper India, and leave it at that.

Incidentally, if you are Punjabi by ethnicity, you will find a rich trail in tracing the Kambojas, not only back to the Mahabharata, but also in the grammar of Panini (600 BC). The Parama Kamboja lived beyond the mountains (they were reputed to be fabled horse-breeders, probably from what later became known as Ferghana, fierce, warlike tall men and great horsemen, irresistible cavalry whose charges could not be withstood). As you know, there are still Kambojas in the Punjab.

Good piece of writing and I appreciate your effort. However I have some questions if you see the the highlighted parts. So acc. to you/your ref. they ruled from Kabul, from Peshawar, from Taxila, and from Charsadda. Were these four different states or at different times?
What was the age of princess Ghandari since I find it incredible that she gave birth to 101 children..How? Normally a woman can bear a child at the max age of 45-50 yrs and if she started at an early age of 14, she had max of 36 years so she bore more than two children each time and she just kept mass producing without any interval...was a she rabbit or what? And how can we trust such stories and thus trust the historians.

I am so glad that you asked these questions. Nobody asks intelligent questions or takes an intelligent interest in these historical (and pre-historical ) matters.

 

[Levina]

Wait all i got is billions spent by a certain country to prove it existed or am i using the wrong search engine

I had posted something about the river on this thread
https://defence.pk/threads/the-fraud-of-saraswati-river-hindu-myth-busted.419558/

Reposting it so that you know why finding Saraswati works in Pakistan's favour too

Thanks for redirecting me to one of your latest threads @Atanz.


so more maps and more theories?
Mr. ET you should stop misleading your people.

There's physical evidence of the river and I can show it to you.(watch the link below).

https://www.facebook.com/video.php?v=1592437231009174

1) The man giving details in the video is a Pakistani archaeologist. So i guess you will find the video authentic.

2) When a river flows over a place for long, the water seeps down into the rocks below the river bed. And this fact has been proven by satellite images of Saraswati's riverbed (now dry). Ground water levels around Saraswati's dried path are unusually high for an arid region, marked by distict light blue in the map shown below, in contrast to the red (dry) region around it.


View attachment 289783


why is it important to locate Saraswati river?

The places through which the mighty river used to flow is now dry. As shown in the map.
But if we can access the water thats trapped below the dry river bed then it will help thousands of farmers living in the arid parts of thar desert.
If the river bed is located then it will help your people and mine.



View attachment 289784

https://www.facebook.com/video.php?v=1592441691008728

@Atanz do you still believe Saraswati is a hindu propaganda?

Brace up ET...


1) The article that you have posted is old.
View attachment 289802

2) I have already posted pictures from remote sensing satellites. Remote sensing images of the ISRO and the Geological Survey of India (gsi) have already found the existence of palaeo-channels of a mighty river, call it any whatever name yoru choose- Saraswati or ghagar- hakra.
ISRO is one of the most reliable sources I can quote. Remember Chandrayaan and Mangalyaan??Just few of ISRO's achievements.

3) A geophysical survey undertaken by the RGWD in the Tanot and Longewala areas indicated the existence of coarse sediments in the depth range of 30 to 60 metres pointing to the possibility of the existence of a river in the region.
Nearly 2000 of the 2600 Harappan sites that have been discovered, are situated on the old palaeo-channels of Saraswati.

View attachment 289808

4) I have already told you how river water seeps through the rocks while it flows over a region and then remains trapped there for long.
One of the video that i posted earlier was from Pakistan, where tube wells were dug after farmers stumbled upon some of Saraswati's palaeo-channels.
On this side of the border RGWD scientists were amazed by the fact that fresh water was available in many places of Jaisalmer district(Rajasthan) and some wells never dried up. Let me tell you Jaisalmer's water is known to be saline. Investigations revealed that about 100 metres away from the site of the fresh water the groundwater was saline.
Interesting isnt it???
How do you think its possible???
Further, some of CGWB's observation stations for monitoring groundwater have found fresh water in the depth range of 30-40 metres. These stations are located in a linear pattern in the northeast-southeast direction, and never go dry. Any explanation???
During the survey alluvial sediments were found at a depth of 78-100 metres, pointing to the existence of a flow channel. It also points towards the existence of a fresh water source along the palaeo-channel.

5) The ground water so discovered was then tested by Bhabha atomic research center (BARC), Mumbai. And they found the water dated back 4000-8000years.

View attachment 289819

source:

View attachment 289820
and the authors are NOT indians.

6) Who will benefit from the project to trace Saraswati's channels?
a) Poor farmers of the thar desert (which covers the western borders of India shared with Pakistan).
b)Soldiers- Indian defence ministry has shown its ineterst in the project as it could mean adequate water supply to its soldiers stationed on the India-Pakistan border.



so if you still believe that Saraswati was a mythical river then you're gonna miss the bus again. Just heads-up.



..

 

[Zibago]

@Tergon18 ap ki kuya raye hay?

 

[Maira La]

Harappans were Black not Pakistanis or indians!

How would you know? Did you find any fossil skull fragments and take measurements? :p

Historically only people of Caucasian or North Asian (purer Mongoloid) ancestry have been observed to be capable of developing 'high culture' that involves attachment to man made objects (and sometimes distant, more archaic human populations have been able to assimilate into these cultures when invaded by these tribes).

Even today, if you look around, you will see that the indigenous cultures of Africans and tropical people (peninsular Indians, SE Asians, Pacific Islanders) are "close to nature" - i.e. they are unable to craft complex culture based on abstract ideas. I say 'even today', because that fact that they're in the 21st century has no bearing on a phenomena that's rooted in genetics.

 

[war&peace]

My conjecture is that they had shifting capitals, due to the exigencies of constant warfare and a need to stay close to the active front as that front kept shifting around.

May that's possible though a few modern countries also have more than one capital and each normally with different functions, or sometimes even a winter and a summer capital (e.g. South Africa and Libya before the US genocide/invasion) . That can also possible that basically where king moved, the capital also moved as the concept of "capital" was fixed to the king not a city...well just guesses

Good Heavens, man, are you reading those fables seriously? All that we can derive from it is that there was a region named Gandhar in the vicinity of Kabul, and extending over the mountains into the cis-Hindu Kush highlands, and that the inhabitants were closely tied in with the rest of the culture of Upper India at the supposed time of the supposed war. You might like to ask what constituted Upper India according to the Mahabharata, but that is a separate question.

Second, this is NOT history. For that matter, neither is the Indus Valley Civilisation history. Most of this falls into pre-history, a period during which there are no written records or historical evidence of any sort. Material evidence does not constitute historical evidence by itself, as I understand it.

Oh sir there was no spoiler alert and I assumed I was reading a historian's account and when I first read, I just ignored but then I returned and read it again slowly and carefully...though it was my mistake that ignored the word "Mahabharta" which just contains fables and stories. What is the origin of this word Hindu Kush, does it has something to do with Kushans?
Yes What constituted Upper India? because I may think of northern India but I don't know the exact bounds.

You may be interested to know that these fables, and even the tangible material culture evident at the IVC sites, are not only not history, they are not even proto-history; an example of proto-history is the reference to Indians of various sorts among the Persian King's army which attacked Greece in 492 BC. Indian history therefore begins with the invasion of Alexander III the Great, in 326 BC. according to one school of opinion.

Well yes I am getting interested and I remember when I first visited Lahore Museum, that was my introduction to the history of subcontinent (otherwise history text books were not that interesting for me so I just read them to clear the exams) and terms like pre- and proto- history and exactly the same time I came to know about Ramayana and Mahabarta, Dr Liaqat Niazi was the director of Lahore museum, a very learned person and a friend of my father. So I was able to visit some of the galleries that were not open for public. But soon I had exams so I just forgot about it.
I remember that when I first saw the naked figurines/sculptures the lady accompanying us put her hands over my eyes and still I could see the glimpses through the gaps
So my question is how was the dressing of men and women in India before the arrival of Islam to the subcontinent? Because most of the figures and sculptors from pre-Islamic India show nudity (as per modern definition of it).
Thanks rekindling my interest in the history.

 

[Joe Shearer]

You ask the damnedest questions. I've never had a better time!

May that's possible though a few modern countries also have more than one capital and each normally with different functions, or sometimes even a winter and a summer capital (e.g. South Africa and Libya before the US genocide/invasion) . That can also possible that basically where king moved, the capital also moved as the concept of "capital" was fixed to the king not a city...well just guesses

No, not guesses, but precisely on target. Consider: the English Court was wherever the monarch happened to be, not at a fixed point. It was for this reason that their (unwritten) constitution saw the change-over from the Great Seal to the Little Seal, and from that to the Signet, each testamentary object becoming the ward of a different official, successively closer and closer to the king. That helped the king to slip out of the entanglement of rules and processes in which the barons were trying to trap him. This runs right through the period of the Plantagenets into Tudor times. From the Stuarts onwards, all this Divine Right got knocked into a cocked hat.

So, too, the Mughal throne. It shifted from place to place, between reigns, and within reigns. When Aurangzeb spent the entire end of his life in the Deccan, obviously it was local towns over there that became the seats of empire, or at least the seats of the imperial court.

I'd say you are bang on in your analysis.

As for the winter and summer capital, both India (Calcutta and Simla, then Delhi and Simla) and Kashmir (Jammu in winter, Srinagar in summer) had this practice. As a state, Bengal didn't move formally to Darjeeling in summer, but it was close to that as could be; all of society was at Keventer's or strolling down the Mall, or lunching at the Planters' Club.

Oh sir there was no spoiler alert and I assumed I was reading a historian's account and when I first read, I just ignored but then I returned and read it again slowly and carefully...though it was my mistake that ignored the word "Mahabharta" which just contains fables and stories.

Sorry about that ; I took it for granted that people would disregard the Mahabharata and the older Ramayana as a given.

What is the origin of this word Hindu Kush, does it has something to do with Kushans?

There are two stories about the name, which is actually Koh-i-Hind, or Kuh-i-Hind, or Hind-Kuh. You have already identified the least likely, the third.

One story, which nationalists of a particular kind liked to talk about and still do, with a soft, melancholy but bitter hatred of the invading Muslims, is that it meant Hindu-killer, or Kill the Hindus. This was the explanation I grew up with, and it is supposed to stem from the huge crowds of slaves that Mahmud of Ghazni took back from his raids, a very large number of whom died in transit, in the high mountain passes. [As a complete aside, you might like to look up the large Hindu, not just Indian contingent, in his armies!!!! Mainly composed of slaves from martial conquest, they still had their separate organisation, their separate officer corps and their separate generals.] What is uncomfortable about this is that the original is Hind-Kuh, or Kuh-i-Hind, and Hind is by no means Hindu, it's just Indian. As in Sarhind, to a particular kind of geographical consciousness, the beginnings of Hind. I no longer think much of this.

Incidentally, some analysts mark the origin of the gypsies, the Travellers of Europe, to these periods of dislocation, when in the 11th century, and later, in the 13th century, during Timur's invasion, thousands of slaves were taken away from India.They passed into Persia,and then drifted down to Egypt, from where they went to Italy, where they were known, from their most recent country of origin, as 'gypsies, from Egypt. They speak a language that Rajasthanis and some others, the Haryanvis, can apparently understand; their chiefs are Rai, his wife is Rani, and it goes on.

Instead, just interpreting it in straight terms, as the Sparkling Snows of Hind or the Mountains of Hind, seems most reasonable.

As for the Kushan idea, there is the theory that originally, it wasn't a name for an entire range, but just for a peak in the vicinity of the Kushan Pass, named after the Kushans.

Yes What constituted Upper India? because I may think of northern India but I don't know the exact bounds.

Well yes I am getting interested and I remember when I first visited Lahore Museum, that was my introduction to the history of subcontinent (otherwise history text books were not that interesting for me so I just read them to clear the exams) and terms like pre- and proto- history and exactly the same time I came to know about Ramayana and Mahabarta, Dr Liaqat Niazi was the director of Lahore museum, a very learned person and a friend of my father. So I was able to visit some of the galleries that were not open for public. But soon I had exams so I just forgot about it.
I remember that when I first saw the naked figurines/sculptures the lady accompanying us put her hands over my eyes and still I could see the glimpses through the gaps
So my question is how was the dressing of men and women in India before the arrival of Islam to the subcontinent? Because most of the figures and sculptors from pre-Islamic India show nudity (as per modern definition of it).
Thanks rekindling my interest in the history.

 

[Joe Shearer]

May that's possible though a few modern countries also have more than one capital and each normally with different functions, or sometimes even a winter and a summer capital (e.g. South Africa and Libya before the US genocide/invasion) . That can also possible that basically where king moved, the capital also moved as the concept of "capital" was fixed to the king not a city...well just guesses


Oh sir there was no spoiler alert and I assumed I was reading a historian's account and when I first read, I just ignored but then I returned and read it again slowly and carefully...though it was my mistake that ignored the word "Mahabharta" which just contains fables and stories. What is the origin of this word Hindu Kush, does it has something to do with Kushans?
Yes What constituted Upper India? because I may think of northern India but I don't know the exact bounds.

1. One definition from old Sanskrit and Prakrit literature is Aryavarta, the place of the Aryans (the Iranians used the same term, more or less, for their part of the world!). Aryavarta was from the Himalayas to the Vindhyas, north to south; and from either Rajgir, south of present day Patna, or the eastern sea (remember that in those days, much of present day Bangladesh was still unbuilt by the centuries of sedimentation that followed) all the way to the western sea. According to these sources (the Manusmriti is most often quoted), Bengal and Assam were outside the Pale (the Pale is something used by the Anglo-Irish for their part of Ireland, and outside that part was barbarism).
2. There are texts such as the Vasistha Dharma Sutra that say it is between Himalayas and Vindhya, but east to west, it is between Kaalakavana (Rajgir) and the point where the Saraswati disappears in the desert.
3. Another text, the Baudhayan Dharma Sastra, says different things at different places. It names just the Gangetic Doab in one place; in another, the same as #2 above.
4. The Mahabhashya of Patanjali (a grammar, next only to that of Panini in significance) says it's the same as the Vasistha Dharma Sutra.

You more or less get the space between the high mountains of the north and the low, rocky outcrop of the Vindhyas in the south, and from Bihar to Rajasthan and Gujarat in the west.

Just a caution: this is Upper India, Aryavarta, not India.

If you left this and came to Bengal (Anga or Vanga), or to Assam (Pragjyothispur), you were unclean and needed to purify yourself when you returned. According to that snooty bastard Baudhayan, there was no caste beyond Gaya, and even today, Sindhis are peculiar Hindus, because they have no caste.

Bunch of jobless clowns, I tell you.

Well yes I am getting interested and I remember when I first visited Lahore Museum, that was my introduction to the history of subcontinent (otherwise history text books were not that interesting for me so I just read them to clear the exams) and terms like pre- and proto- history and exactly the same time I came to know about Ramayana and Mahabarta, Dr Liaqat Niazi was the director of Lahore museum, a very learned person and a friend of my father. So I was able to visit some of the galleries that were not open for public. But soon I had exams so I just forgot about it.
I remember that when I first saw the naked figurines/sculptures the lady accompanying us put her hands over my eyes and still I could see the glimpses through the gaps

Ask him, through your Dad, if possible, about the legendary A. H. Dani, the colossus of Indology and of Central Asian history from south Asia (I don't agree with some of his conclusions, which were driven by more or less the same sentiment as Aitzaz Ahsan's Indus Man thesis, but that he is a towering figure in the field is without any doubt).

So my question is how was the dressing of men and women in India before the arrival of Islam to the subcontinent? Because most of the figures and sculptors from pre-Islamic India show nudity (as per modern definition of it).
Thanks rekindling my interest in the history.

They dressed for the weather: men in shortish, dhoti-type garments, and a stole on the shoulders, and lots and lots of bling, women almost identical. You will find them dressed like that everywhere from Ajanta and Ellora to Khajuraho and Konarka. Actually, everywhere that humans were sculpted or painted. Nude? Hmm. Women in Kerala, (from some aristocratic classes) till about a century ago, wore no upper garment.

Life was, aah, easy on the eye, shall we say?

May that's possible though a few modern countries also have more than one capital and each normally with different functions, or sometimes even a winter and a summer capital (e.g. South Africa and Libya before the US genocide/invasion) . That can also possible that basically where king moved, the capital also moved as the concept of "capital" was fixed to the king not a city...well just guesses


Oh sir there was no spoiler alert and I assumed I was reading a historian's account and when I first read, I just ignored but then I returned and read it again slowly and carefully...though it was my mistake that ignored the word "Mahabharta" which just contains fables and stories. What is the origin of this word Hindu Kush, does it has something to do with Kushans?
Yes What constituted Upper India? because I may think of northern India but I don't know the exact bounds.

Well yes I am getting interested and I remember when I first visited Lahore Museum, that was my introduction to the history of subcontinent (otherwise history text books were not that interesting for me so I just read them to clear the exams) and terms like pre- and proto- history and exactly the same time I came to know about Ramayana and Mahabarta, Dr Liaqat Niazi was the director of Lahore museum, a very learned person and a friend of my father. So I was able to visit some of the galleries that were not open for public. But soon I had exams so I just forgot about it.
I remember that when I first saw the naked figurines/sculptures the lady accompanying us put her hands over my eyes and still I could see the glimpses through the gaps
So my question is how was the dressing of men and women in India before the arrival of Islam to the subcontinent? Because most of the figures and sculptors from pre-Islamic India show nudity (as per modern definition of it).
Thanks rekindling my interest in the history.

This was the old definition of Upper India; during the post-Gupta period, and the Rajput period, and the Sultanate, it was slightly different.

 

[war&peace]

1. One definition from old Sanskrit and Prakrit literature is Aryavarta, the place of the Aryans (the Iranians used the same term, more or less, for their part of the world!). Aryavarta was from the Himalayas to the Vindhyas, north to south; and from either Rajgir, south of present day Patna, or the eastern sea (remember that in those days, much of present day Bangladesh was still unbuilt by the centuries of sedimentation that followed) all the way to the western sea. According to these sources (the Manusmriti is most often quoted), Bengal and Assam were outside the Pale (the Pale is something used by the Anglo-Irish for their part of Ireland, and outside that part was barbarism).
2. There are texts such as the Vasistha Dharma Sutra that say it is between Himalayas and Vindhya, but east to west, it is between Kaalakavana (Rajgir) and the point where the Saraswati disappears in the desert.
3. Another text, the Baudhayan Dharma Sastra, says different things at different places. It names just the Gangetic Doab in one place; in another, the same as #2 above.
4. The Mahabhashya of Patanjali (a grammar, next only to that of Panini in significance) says it's the same as the Vasistha Dharma Sutra.

You more or less get the space between the high mountains of the north and the low, rocky outcrop of the Vindhyas in the south, and from Bihar to Rajasthan and Gujarat in the west.

Just a caution: this is Upper India, Aryavarta, not India.

If you left this and came to Bengal (Anga or Vanga), or to Assam (Pragjyothispur), you were unclean and needed to purify yourself when you returned. According to that snooty bastard Baudhayan, there was no caste beyond Gaya, and even today, Sindhis are peculiar Hindus, because they have no caste.

Bunch of jobless clowns, I tell you.

Oh Sanskrit terms are literally Sanskrit for me But I will try to understand that..my problem is that I'm not very well versed with even the geography of modern India ...so I need to spend some quality time on maps and find the locations of the cities and places you mentioned.

Ask him, through your Dad, if possible, about the legendary A. H. Dani, the colossus of Indology and of Central Asian history from south Asia (I don't agree with some of his conclusions, which were driven by more or less the same sentiment as Aitzaz Ahsan's Indus Man thesis, but that he is a towering figure in the field is without any doubt).

It has been a long time since then and I'm sure he won't be the director of the museum anymore since he was not museulogist but a civil servant and they keep transferring from place to place but I can contact through my dad and ask about those works nonetheless

They dressed for the weather: men in shortish, dhoti-type garments, and a stole on the shoulders, and lots and lots of bling, women almost identical. You will find them dressed like that everywhere from Ajanta and Ellora to Khajuraho and Konarka. Actually, everywhere that humans were sculpted or painted. Nude? Hmm. Women in Kerala, (from some aristocratic classes) till about a century ago, wore no upper garment.

Life was, aah, easy on the eye, shall we say?

Well my motivation is to learn about the past cultures, geography and history and try to relate to the contemporary trends to see the correlations and causations and their extent on the modern and future worlds. How religion can affect the local cultures is another interesting dimension to discuss and also the interface between local culture and the religion forms and affects the generations.
Great reading your post. I thoroughly enjoyed and I hope to discuss with you more and learn from you.

 

[Joe Shearer]

Oh Sanskrit terms are literally Sanskrit for me But I will try to understand that..my problem is that I'm not very well versed with even the geography of modern India ...so I need to spend some quality time on maps and find the locations of the cities and places you mentioned.

It has been a long time since then and I'm sure he won't be the director of the museum anymore since he was not museulogist but a civil servant and they keep transferring from place to place but I can contact through my dad and ask about those works nonetheless

Well my motivation is to learn about the past cultures, geography and history and try to relate to the contemporary trends to see the correlations and causations and their extent on the modern and future worlds. How religion can affect the local cultures is another interesting dimension to discuss and also the interface between local culture and the religion forms and affects the generations.
Great reading your post. I thoroughly enjoyed and I hope to discuss with you more and learn from you.

You're welcome. Any time.

 

[Levina]

So my question is how was the dressing of men and women in India before the arrival of Islam to the subcontinent?

We wore 9 yard sarees.

 

[war&peace]

We wore 9 yard sarees.

View attachment 309601

View attachment 309602

So the top/blouse was later addition but it happened before the arrival of Islam as this text claims but I guess this dress is no more in fashion due to practical reasons.

 

[Levina]

So the top/blouse was later addition but it happened before the arrival of Islam as this text claims but I guess this dress is no more in fashion due to practical reasons.

The climate of the sub continent was such that one didnt have to cover the upper body. Logical isnt it?
It doesnt make sense to cover body from head toe under scorching sun. Nothing scientific about it.
Yes ,they started covering their bare chest before Islam arrived. The rich and influential always wore a long cloth over their upper body, may because they could afford it. While the poorer people wore scantier clothes.

but I guess this dress is no more in fashion due to practical reasons.

Do you mean saree?
If so, saree is still worn by Indians. Majority of us wear it on all special occasions. Infact many schools and colleges have strict rules regarding the dress code.

 

[war&peace]

The climate of the sub continent is such that one didnt have to cover the upper body. Logical isnt it?
It doesnt make sense to cover body from head toe under scorching heat. Nothing scientific about it.

Noooo one must not expose body to sun too much it can cause skin cancer and shrivelled skin. However here my was not discuss pros and cons but to learn about historical facts about culture, civlisation in the past, present and future.

Do you mean saree?
If so, saree is still worn by Indians. Majority of us wear it on all special occasions. Infact many schools and colleges have strict rules regarding the dress code.

Okay Thanks and good to know but is it limited to women or men also wear occasionally?

 

[Levina]

Noooo one must not expose body to sun too much it can cause skin cancer and shrivelled skin. However here my was not discuss pros and cons but to learn about historical facts about culture, civlisation in the past, present and future

If too much sun exposure caused skin cancer then all our ancestors would have died of skin cancer.

Btw i had added this part to my previous post which you might have missed -
"Yes ,they started covering their bare chest before Islam arrived. The rich and influential always wore a long cloth over their upper body, may because they could afford it. While the poorer people wore scantier clothes."

Okay Thanks and good to know but is it limited to women or men also wear occasionally?

There are certain occasions where everyone wears traditional clothes, marriages being one such occasion. Down south, it is compulsory for men and women to wear traditional clothes to enter certain temples.
In northern India, specially the villages you will see men and women wearing traditional dresses.