No Aryan migration into India / Pakistan? Its' all a myth?

[Hafizzz]

Very interesting article that questions the Aryan myth. I am posting only the link as per moderator guidelines:

Rajiv Malhotra: European Misappropriation of Sanskrit led to the Aryan Race Theory

Since the author of the article is an INDIAN (Rajiv Malhotra) and of course we would expect him to side with Indians.

 

[Joe Shearer]

Please don't misunderstand me, but this is the fourth or fifth time that this theme has recurred, and it is tiresome to repeat every single detailed argument. Perhaps we could have a discussion on whether or not there is sufficient demand for a round-up of all the current thinking, from all the different points of view, on this and associated subjects.

Meanwhile, some brief responses, which I shall be happy to elaborate after a few hours.

i think there was migration whether u call it aryan migration or whatever. & why i think so, because being a north indian i can understand bit of all indo aryan languages( hindi,punjabi,marathi, gujrati,bengal,odiya etc) but as far as south indian languages are concerned then it is complete blank for me ,
i can't understand even single word.

It isn't quite so. Perhaps putting it into point form is quickest; bear with me:

1. Most languages in northern south Asia belong to the Indo-European language system or family;
2. Most southern south Asian languages, specifically, Tamizh, Malayalam, Telugu, Kannada, Tulu are members of the Dravidian language system, or family;
3. There are still languages belonging to the Dravidian language family spoken in northern south Asia: Brahui, Kol, Mundari, and their like;
4. Indo-European languages spoken in northern south Asia have borrowed words from Dravidian languages in their oldest available versions;
5. It is unlikely that a migration, in the sense of large masses of population moving along, took place. Instead, it is likely that the new language(s) were adopted, first, jointly with the older ones, thereafter, over time, almost exclusively;
6. The language moved along, not so much the people;
7. Genetic studies show that most of the Indian population has not been disturbed by external introductions of people for nearly 40,000 years, perhaps more.

Please feel free to ask if something isn't clear.

Agree with you but what is the meaning of learning that history which is wrong all along?

You have a point; I am sorry if anything in my post implied that we should not take a lively interest in these issues, or keep up with them.

In fact, there have been major changes in historiography in India over the centuries, at least for the last two centuries. We could go back further, but that would nearly double the load of understanding and linking up these theories about history. What you have read in these posts on this thread has been the dialogue between two dramatically opposed positions. One was the colonialist proposition that the Aryans were a race, that they invaded India and subjugated the population and lived on as conquerors, a proposition introduced to justify the position of the British as conquering invaders entitled to rule.

The other was the Chitpavan Brahmin originated theory of Hindu supremacy stating that there was no migration into India, leave alone invasion, that the Indo-European languages originated in India, that the Aryans were the race speaking these languages, that they invaded Iran and central Asia and, in time, Anatolia and even Europe, that the Rig Veda was dated approximately 3000 BC rather than 1500 BC, that the Harappan civilisation was a Sanskrit speaking civilisation based around the lost river Saraswati, or Ghaggar, or Hakkar, and that all people dwelling in India were originally of one genetic stock, whether they were Brahmin or Sudra or anything in between, that the Muslims were not people dwelling in India, but people who had come into India from abroad and who didn't fit into the Indian way of life, and therefore should be expelled.

These theories were developed for political and motivated use, and should be studied with great care and respect for historical verification.

Since the author of the article is an INDIAN (Rajiv Malhotra) and of course we would expect him to side with Indians.

I do not understand your point and find it singularly immature. For your information, a derivative of this same Hindutvavadi formula was used to prepare an historical justification for Pakistan. If you have time, and inclination, please go through the post on the Battle of the Hydaspes which I have referred to. However, it is hard work, and you may prefer to leave the matter as it is, and continue to make shallow, ill-advised remarks.

 

[Capt.Popeye]

The other was the Chitpavan Brahmin originated theory of Hindu supremacy stating that there was no migration into India, leave alone invasion, that the Indo-European languages originated in India, that the Aryans were the race speaking these languages, that they invaded Iran and central Asia and, in time, Anatolia and even Europe, that the Rig Veda was dated approximately 3000 BC rather than 1500 BC, that the Harappan civilisation was a Sanskrit speaking civilisation based around the lost river Saraswati, or Ghaggar, or Hakkar, and that all people dwelling in India were originally of one genetic stock, whether they were Brahmin or Sudra or anything in between, that the Muslims were not people dwelling in India, but people who had come into India from abroad and who didn't fit into the Indian way of life, and therefore should be expelled.

These theories were developed for political and motivated use, and should be studied with great care and respect for historical verification.

Hi Joe,
About the underlined part: you probably mean the "Hegdewar-Golwalkar" theory among others. But there was a great Notable of India's Freedom Movement who had postulated a similar theory; and I don't mean Sawarkar!

Be that as it might be; there is another theory about the origin of the Konkanastha Chitpavan Brahmins themselves. It runs thus: a ship-load of Jewish merchants were ship-wrecked off the Konkan coast. They came ashore, formed a settlement and became part of the community. Certain anthropological features persist; color of hair and eyes, facial features, body structure etc. Seems some-what plausible. Even Nissim Ezekiel (the late poet) had a take on this.

 

[JonAsad]

Who the fcuk are Aryans- and why are they so important to south Asians?-


Ufffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffff

 

[TheStrantrunCurve]

Most modern Indians descended from South Asians, not invading Central Asian steppe dwellers, a new genetic study reports.

The Indian subcontinent may have acquired agricultural techniques and languages—but it absorbed few genes—from the west, said Vijendra Kashyap, director of India's National Institute of Biologicals in Noida.

India Acquired Language, Not Genes, From West, Study Says

 

[Thoma Yosip]

Hi Joe,
About the underlined part: you probably mean the "Hegdewar-Golwalkar" theory among others. But there was a great Notable of India's Freedom Movement who had postulated a similar theory; and I don't mean Sawarkar!

Be that as it might be; there is another theory about the origin of the Konkanastha Chitpavan Brahmins themselves. It runs thus: a ship-load of Jewish merchants were ship-wrecked off the Konkan coast. They came ashore, formed a settlement and became part of the community. Certain anthropological features persist; color of hair and eyes, facial features, body structure etc. Seems some-what plausible. Even Nissim Ezekiel (the late poet) had a take on this.

Wouldn't that put a kink in the Nazi "Aryan super-race" theory!

 

[EastWest]

----------------------

 

[JonAsad]

Only two kinds of ppl care who or from where aryans came..

1) Nazis under hitler

and

2) some Pakistanis under thread-starter

Lol- and what about the third kind- the Indians who mostly starts these threads?-

 

[Capt.Popeye]

Wouldn't that put a kink in the Nazi "Aryan super-race" theory!

The Nazi "Aryan super-race" theory was infinitely kinked and knotted. A Super "Gordian Knot" in fact. And Hitler was no Alexander to have been able to unravel either the knot or the kinks!

 

[toxic_pus]

Rajiv Malhotra: European Misappropriation of Sanskrit led to the Aryan Race Theory

One should be very very very careful in selecting authors while researching on IVC. This Rajib Malhotra is a well known snake oil salesman coming from the same stable as N.S.Rajaram, Koenraad Elst, B.B.Lal (post '90), Stephen Knapp etc.

If these guys say sun rises in the east, one should check even that.

 

[MyPakistan1947]

Who the fcuk are Aryans- and why are they so important to south Asians?-

they are important to indians.Not all south asians have a bad inferiorty complex like this.

 

[MyPakistan1947]

imo,south indians(discluding tamils)are nicer and more understandig than north indians.

 

[Kyusuibu Honbu]

imo,south indians(discluding tamils) are nicer and more understanig than north indians.

Discluding?

 

[Agnostic_Indian]

imo,south indians(discluding tamils) are nicer and more understanig than north indians.

i am from south..tamils are very humble and loving people.

 

[MyPakistan1947]

i am from south..tamils are very humble and loving people.

they are the most annoying indians i have come across.feel sorry for rest of south india.