What's new

TURNING POINT IN THE HISTORY OF INDIAN SUBCONTINENT

There are always some distortions in History Even the Alexanders Invasions and achievements are distorted and written in his favour. The truth is Prithvi routed Ghori.

You mean that I should have written rout rather than defeat? Is that it?
 
Collaboration? These were conquered lands. Have you ever read the Behistun inscription? Do you know who Skylax was, and what he did?

I am rapidly losing respect for you.

sigh ... I am not looking for certificates from you. Why should it not be considered a weakness that they were conquered in the first place.
 
Prothomei bhool.

Drabeer bolay kono jat ba upojati chhilo na; shei nam-ta shudhu ek borgo bhasha -ke deoa hoy.

Alexander greek bhasha bolten. Otoyeb uni drabeer chhilen na.

dada akhane aryan bolte greek r persian invader der kotha bola hochche tumi kivabe deny korte paro j ara india te invade koreni

ami ancient time ar kotha bolchi akhane prochur invasion hoyechilo r punjab sobcheye beshi suffer koreche

punjabi ra average indian der theke fair tall howar main karon oder modhdhe invader der blood ache
 
Sigh ... DNA studies show that the Sanskritic peoples are as Adivasi as anybody else.

Where is the contradiction? It is quite clear, from similar examples from around the world, that a dominant class need not be present in overwhelming numbers. IIn fact, on the contrary, they tend to form a thin film on top of a conquered population. How long would it take the handful of people in the original tribes to intermingle and to revert to the original type??
 
Where is the contradiction? It is quite clear, from similar examples from around the world, that a dominant class need not be present in overwhelming numbers. IIn fact, on the contrary, they tend to form a thin film on top of a conquered population. How long would it take the handful of people in the original tribes to intermingle and to revert to the original type??

Even in that case you would not have diversity of "Aryan" markers in India being higher than in the alleged homelands. Besides the mountain of other evidence.
 
Why is it difficult for Hindus to accept that the ancient religion evolved from an admixture of two distinct racial types?

What is the primary motivational thrust for the Out of India theory?

I think the answer is Islam.
 
Why is it difficult for Hindus to accept that the ancient religion evolved from an admixture of two distinct racial types?

What is the primary motivational thrust for the Out of India theory?

I think the answer is Islam.

What ever things which we see now in Hinduism are evolved in India and are completely indigenous.
 
what according to u all was the reason for downfall of a country world leader in arts, science and technology?

what do you think stopped the scientific progress in india??

what acc to u turned an open minded society into a narrow minded one?

what according to you all is the turning point in the history of subcontinent?

turning points-

1.excessive preaching of peace, non violence after the ashoka era and neglecting the threats from central asia

2.attack by mohammad bin qasim

2. defeat of prithvi raj chauhan at the second battle of tarain

3. arrival of the britishers ( was it good)
Nice thread doc well i see it this way

1. up to some extend we as a race are quite emotional and get carried away very easily but add to that we were at least owr kings at that time were too greedy and kept infighting over looking the looming bigger danger
2. well it did gave us a wake up call but we down palyed it more than we could afford and it was relatively peacefull for another 300 years
3. not the defeat but his idioticy to let the eneny live to fight for another day
4. it was a blessing in disguise we hindus as british arrived were able to cut the sekkels on muslim domination on owr society and we had a bigger and smarter MASTER now & we made its full use first by reforming owr ill practices in 18th century and going for western education which helped us get back owr confidence and make way for better future
 
Why is it difficult for Hindus to accept that the ancient religion evolved from an admixture of two distinct racial types?

What is the primary motivational thrust for the Out of India theory?

I think the answer is Islam.

As far as I am concerned my motivation for looking at the subject is to get at the facts, on the basis of credible evidence.

Yes there were two races, but as per genetic studies the ANIs and ASIs have been around for many millenia.
 
What ever things which we see now in Hinduism are evolved in India and are completely indigenous.

I do not agree, but hypothetically say I do, how does that prove that all Hindus belong to a homogenous racial stock and are not in fact two different people comingled into an undecipherable one?

Same argument for Iranians today.

And their comingling has been way shorter and more recent.
 
As far as I am concerned my motivation for looking at the subject is to get at the facts, on the basis of credible evidence.

Yes there were two races, but as per genetic studies the ANIs and ASIs have been around for many millenia.

That in effect disproves the Out of India theory.

Time is highly relative bro.

What is many millenia compared to the advent of modern man, Homo erectus?
 
I do not agree, but hypothetically say I do, how does that prove that all Hindus belong to a homogenous racial stock and are not in fact two different people comingled into an undecipherable one?

Same argument for Iranians today.

And their comingling has been way shorter and more recent.


How come a country as vast as India can have a single race, Every Big nation on this earth is multi racial and India is not different.

This racial thing is not that important as it dates back many thousands of years.
 
Back
Top Bottom