The Reign of Non-History

[anonymus]

Even if you say it was patronage by the establishment, majority of these establishment folks were NI Brahmins. Without overwhelming support from all these people it would not have been possible. What about the common folks? How could they forget their own history?

Camp followers writing ballads for their King.


Common folks of North India are staunch anti-marxist. You would find zero Marxist in Punjab, Haryana, Rajasthan, and to large extent UP also. Maoist advocating equal distribution of property would be beaten blue and black.In North India, people have very strong sense of ownership of their property.

 

[possumlot]

...........Everything about him, his style of dressing, his contempt of saints and sadhus, just about everything reeked of contempt for Hindus and Hinduism.

Also his enmity with Jinnah had nothing to do with his dislike of Islam, more of 2 selfish egos butting heads.

Nehru came from Allahabad which had strong muslim culture so it would not have been unusual for him to absorb some of that. Its no surprise. ........ but there is a rumour/story about his love child from a sadhavi Shraddha Mata as revealed by his private secretary M.O. Mathai

Camp followers writing ballads for their King.
Common folks of North India are staunch anti-marxist. You would find zero Marxist in Punjab, Haryana, Rajasthan, and to large extent UP also. Maoist advocating equal distribution of property would be beaten blue and black.In North India, people have very strong sense of ownership of their property.

You have knowingly or unknowingly mentioned the key factor that give rises to marxist supports. LAND OWNERSHIP.

Almost all marxist supports are landless citizens who primarily come from states which has/had the largest number of landless citizens. Kerala, Bengal, Bihar, Nepal, parts of UP, Andhra Pradesh etc.

You want to eliminate marxism or maoists, staring giving out land titles.

 

[Indrani]

Nehru came from Allahabad which had strong muslim culture so it would not have been unusual for him to absorb some of that. Its no surprise. ........ but there is a rumour/story about his love child from a sadhavi Shraddha Mata as revealed by his private secretary M.O. Mathai

Allahabad is also Prayag which is holy for Hindus. That influence missed him entirely. He obviously had affairs with many women. Her religion was just incidental.

 

[INDIC]

@anonymus I always knew Arya was not a race, last year I read about references from Hindu scriptures that Dravida is Sanskrit in Origin and was a geographic term for three kingdoms of Chera-Chola-Pandya(Kerala and Tamil Nadu), Telugus called Andhra or Andhraka and the Karnataka was Karnata, which means entire South wasn't called Dravida. Now, colonial historian turned Aryan and Dravidian into races and we don't care to tell students the real history, instead still cling to the old colonial garbage written to malign Hinduism, Indian culture and to create North-South divide. I found lots of people calling genetic studies of Harvard Medical School as Hindutva propaganda because it don't support Northern Aryan and Southern Dravidian races bullcrap.

 

[possumlot]

Allahabad is also Prayag which is holy for Hindus. That influence missed him entirely. He obviously had affairs with many women. Her religion was just incidental.

You know what I mean, the culture of the people he interacted in daily life, right from childhood. It is not fair to say that the effects of the distant prayaga missed him completely, the effects of english culture in his immediate surrounding influenced him much more.

Anyway this is off topic.

 

[anonymus]

@anonymus I always knew Arya was not a race, last year I read about references from Hindu scriptures that Dravida is Sanskrit in Origin and was a geographic term for three kingdoms of Chera-Chola-Pandya(Kerala and Tamil Nadu), Telugus called Andhra or Andhraka and the Karnataka was Karnata, which means entire South wasn't called Dravida. Now, colonial historian turned Aryan and Dravidian into races and we don't care to tell students the real history, instead still cling to the old colonial garbage written to malign Hinduism, Indian culture and to create North-South divide. I found lots of people calling genetic studies of Harvard Medical School as Hindutva propaganda because it don't support Northern Aryan and Southern Dravidian races bullcrap.

Aryan certainly does not denote Race but it is extremely probable that Aryan word denoted ethnicity by virtue of tribal membership. In rig-veda Aryan word has been repeated used to denote tribes with tribes been divided into Aryan and meleccha category.Another instance of Aryan denoting ethnicity would be shifting boundary of Aryavrata with time.

It is true that Dravidian word does not find mention in ancient texts.

Any genetic study done on Indians are bound to find great degree of mixing a gradual change in genetic composition from North to south for a simple reason that there is only one route to enter into India and that is from north west and every group that has ever entered into India has came from that direction.

Only other explanation possible is that humans originated from India, an assertion which has been proven wrong.

Regarding AIT, it is best not to make it into a big issue of it as the particular group was only one among long list of groups that have entered India, both before and after them .

 

[INDIC]

Aryan certainly does not denote Race but it is extremely probable that Aryan word denoted ethnicity by virtue of tribal membership. In rig-veda Aryan word has been repeated used to denote tribes with tribes been divided into Aryan and meleccha category.Another instance of Aryan denoting ethnicity would be shifting boundary of Aryavrata with time.

It is true that Dravidian word does not find mention in ancient texts.

Any genetic study done on Indians are bound to find great degree of mixing a gradual change in genetic composition from North to south for a simple reason that there is only one route to enter into India and that is from north west and every group that has ever entered into India has came from that direction.

Only other explanation possible is that humans originated from India, an assertion which has been proven wrong.

Regarding AIT, it is best not to make it into a big issue of it as the particular group was only one among long list of groups that have entered India, both before and after them .

The word Arya was mostly associated with people following Vedic culture which can be extended in ethnic sense but the meaning was applicable to foreigners also assimilated into Vedic culture, Iranian too call themselves as Aryans but both of them don't consider each other as Aryans.

While human migration is true and explain the Indian history in the non-insulting way but when we refer to Aryan invasion theory, it means people are referring to bunch of theories composed by colonial historians with fabricated theories and fabricated dates to suit their vested interest. Also, it has been obsession with Colonial historian and their Marxist apologists to refute any theory that connects Indus Valley civilization with Vedic culture as it will go against the popular myth of Aryan invasion theory and people who try to find connection of Indus Valley civilization and Vedic culture are instantly branded Hindutva revisionists.

Most bizarre thing I found is that Hindu mythology of Indra's battles was used for proving Aryan Dravidian theory but the same historians want to reject the existence of Saraswari river even after Ghaggar-Hakra matching the description of Rigvedic Saraswati river and cling to calling Saraswati as mythical river. If Ghaggar-Hakra was indeed Saraswati river which dried in 1900BC, it only means one thing that Rigvedic period was the part of Indus Valley civilization while Samaveda, Yajurveda and Atharvaveda were the part of Indo-Gangetic tradition. But there are many historians who will never accept any theory that connects Indus valley civilization with Vedic culture.

 

[abjktu]

there is only one route to enter into India and that is from north west and every group that has ever entered into India has came from that direction.

Mostly,but not entirely....
A good portion of migrations and intermixing happened in South India,particularly in goa,coastal Karnataka and Kerala was via Arabian Sea...
eg.-anglo Indian Christians,Knanaya Christians of Kerala,Kerala Jews etc etc...

 

[anonymus]

Mostly,but not entirely....
A good portion of migrations and intermixing happened in South India,particularly in goa,coastal Karnataka and Kerala was via Arabian Sea...
eg.-anglo Indian Christians,Knanaya Christians of Kerala,Kerala Jews etc etc...

None of the communities are ancient. They were able to migrate only after development of good sea faring vessels.

 

[abjktu]

None of the communities are ancient. They were able to migrate only after development of good sea faring vessels.

???...Knanaya Christians are one of the most ancient Christian communities in the world..,They were in Kerala for more than 1600 years and assimilated into larger Malayali community...
Cochin,Kerala Jews are here for more than 2000 years...
Only anglo Indians are recent arrivals..

 

[anonymus]

???...Knanaya Christians are one of the most ancient Christian communities in the world..,They were in Kerala for more than 1600 years and assimilated into larger Malayali community...
Cochin,Kerala Jews are here for more than 2000 years...
Only anglo Indians are recent arrivals..

So none of them are of B.C.E. vintage; something easily explained by the fact that Ships capable of navigating open seas were build close to 500 BCE.

Compared to this, human migration has history of 80,000 years .

 

[abjktu]

So none of them are of B.C.E. vintage; something easily explained by the fact that Ships capable of navigating open seas were build close to 500 BCE.

Compared to this, human migration has history of 80,000 years .

Ancient means BC for you??..okey
Cochin jews are here for more than 2000 years(probably during BC times)..but exact time period is still unknown....

 

[Bang Galore]

The word Arya was mostly associated with people following Vedic culture which can be extended in ethnic sense but the meaning was applicable to foreigners also assimilated into Vedic culture, Iranian too call themselves as Aryans but both of them don't consider each other as Aryans.

It's funny that way. In the Rg veda, only the Purus & more specifically the Bharatas are the ones who have that word associated with them. The other tribes are not called that. It was the gradual expansion of the vedic culture later that assimilated more & more tribes into their fold.

If Ghaggar-Hakra was indeed Saraswati river which dried in 1900BC, it only means one thing that Rigvedic period was the part of Indus Valley civilization while Samaveda, Yajurveda and Atharvaveda were the part of Indo-Gangetic tradition.

That differentiation is not that clear. the Rg veda has its early origins in Haryana+Western U.P. It is true that there was a clear Bharata expansion into the Punjab during the period of the Rg veda. It is likely that other major cities of the Harappan civilsation (The term IVC is usually not preferred much anymore because of the many excavations that have been opened up on the Ghaggar-Hakra/Sarasvati area - so most go by the convention of naming after the first major excavation) but would likely have now been completely covered over by major cities. It might be possible that a civilisation stretched between both these rivers. The later separation (and a reduction in importance to the Punjab) is not necessarily connected to the Rg vedic period.

 

[INDIC]

It's funny that way. In the Rg veda, only the Purus & more specifically the Bharatas are the ones who have that word associated with them. The other tribes are not called that. It was the gradual expansion of the vedic culture later that assimilated more & more tribes into their fold.



That differentiation is not that clear. the Rg veda has its early origins in Haryana+Western U.P. It is true that there was a clear Bharata expansion into the Punjab during the period of the Rg veda. It is likely that other major cities of the Harappan civilsation (The term IVC is usually not preferred much anymore because of the many excavations that have been opened up on the Ghaggar-Hakra/Sarasvati area - so most go by the convention of naming after the first major excavation) but would likely have now been completely covered over by major cities. It might be possible that a civilisation stretched between both these rivers. The later separation (and a reduction in importance to the Punjab) is not necessarily connected to the Rg vedic period.

My curiousity is if Ghaggar-Hakra was Rigvedic Saraswati which dried in 1900BC which seem true, it means only one thing that Rigveda were composed during Indus Valley civilization while Samaveda, Yajurveda and Atharvaveda in post IVC. Even with this open truth, there will scores of traditional historians which deny this because it will push origin of Hinduism to Indus valley civilization which they staunchly opposed to at any cost. Infact, questioning Aryan invasion and claiming Hinduism's origin to IVC can instantly libeled you or me as Hindutva revisionists.

 

[Bang Galore]

My curiousity is if Ghaggar-Hakra was Rigvedic Saraswati which dried in 1900BC which seem true, it means only one thing that Rigveda were composed during Indus Valley civilization while Samaveda, Yajurveda and Atharvaveda in post IVC. Even with this open truth, there will scores of traditional historians which deny this because it will push origin of Hinduism to Indus valley civilization which they staunchly opposed to at any cost. Infact, questioning Aryan invasion and claiming Hinduism's origin to IVC can instantly libeled you or me as Hindutva revisionists.

I have always been sceptical about the dates conventionally proposed for the Rg veda because of the Sarasvati connection. You are right that earlier dating pushes it close to the IVC period but better to tread cautiously till there is a direct connection. established, the chances of which are probably lost because other such settlements are probably under major Indian cities.

As far as getting called Hindu revisionists or some such, that's par for the course. Depending on the topic, I get called a lot of things, usually contadictory to other things that I have been called elsewhere.