TURNING POINT IN THE HISTORY OF INDIAN SUBCONTINENT

[DarkPrince]

middle eastern invaders

 

[Bang Galore]

First, the genetics issue.

The biggest question about the AIT came with the finding that Indians were a homogeneous mass, very slightly distinguishable one from the other, certainly not conforming to the assumptions that seemed to accompany the AIT: a genetically distinct master-race visible through their features and physiognomical characteristics from the subject race that they conquered, during their triumphant sweep down from the mountain passes.

To be honest, this outcome was more of a self-goal than a ripping off of a mask from the villainous features of the British and European conspirators to keep the ancient, universe-centric role of India a secret from its own people and from the people of the world that revisionists seem to take as almost scriptural truths. The time that the Indo-Aryan language took to percolate to the east may have been as long as 700 years. If the Rg Veda was finally in place complete sometime around 1500 BC, and if the dates of the Buddha are around 600 BC, assuming that it took a couple of centuries at least for the new political orders to settle in, the gap that emerges is around seven centuries.

Just as an aside, a similar religious and cultural interpolation occurred in the 11th century, and took 600 years, till the reign of Aurangzeb, scion of the latest wave of conquerors, akin, ironically, to the first Turks who came in with the Ghurid. In this period, they managed to lay down the foundations of a similar society, but never managed to overcome the existing religion and culture, which existed side by side. Looking at what this wave 'achieved', if achieved is the right word, gives us a lot of insight into what might have happened in similar circumstances in a similar span of centuries two and a half millennia earlier.

Clearly, the new entrants did not come in a tidal wave of humanity. They did come in as family units, and women and children were definitely present, but they were not an overwhelming mass. What the geneticists remind us is that the leading wave must have marched fast and hard, but through very small distances initially, throughout the seven centuries that we are considering. Did they carry the entire people with them? If we are to believe accounts of cattle raids and assaults on walled or protected settlements, the chances are that they did not. That was not what raiders did in any culture in any location. It does not take much reasoning to conclude that during this long period of seven centuries, each succeeding impulse of conquest or absorption involved a further dilution of the original people, until the vast masses became an indistinguishable pool of almost-identical character.

Seven centuries was enough to drive all distinctive genetic characteristics into the background mass, and it was enough to achieve the same two and a half millennia later too. It is equally significant that the Muslims who claim to have been the Man on Horseback in this era are also indistinguishable from those they conquered and held in bondage for almost the same period of time. Which is why it is surprising that we did not draw the right inferences earlier; but not surprising considering that people tended to go by superficial characteristics, fairness of skin, for instance, height, nasal character, features in general, beards and their characteristics and the like.

Of course the geneticists were right; the total absence of any inference of biased thinking may have been due partly to their transparent objectivity, and second, due to the obvious understanding of observers that they had overlooked an evident fact.

My questions are almost never based on the genetic argument since I'm not really sure how much change is required to show up clearly in a population the size of India. This issue helps only in rebutting the most primitive ideas of the AIT. However having got that wrong, it makes the AIT vulnerable because of a proven chink in that armour. The essence of my argument is with the dating of the Rg veda. This is simply because if the dating of the Rg veda changes, then the AIT would be more holes than substance because they would then have to prove the existence of other branches to the same period to sustain. The presence of the Kassites and the Mitanni which is a part of recorded history starts to make this neatly dated theory more than a bit vulnerable. However the key to that vulnerability is the Sarasvati, for so long dismissed as a figment of imagination, then as a name for some other river(the Indus) & at times the Helmand(Haraxvaiti). If we agree that the Sarasvati was a large river flowing in the Ghaggar-Hakra system & it dried out due to geological changes, the problem for the AIT dating becomes acute. The Mahabharata, a much later work still speaks of the Sarasvati existing, though clearly dying & drying out in the desert. Once the date for the Mahabharata starts being pushed backward because we are now approaching recorded history where the river must find mention for the dating to sustain, the dates for all compositions before the Mahabharata also needs pushing back. Since painted grey ware sites are dated to 1000 BCE on the bed of the river, it must have dried out completely well before that. The date given for the drying of the river is at the very least 1800 BCE. If the river was flowing when the Rg veda was composed, the dating for the movement of people would be pushed way far back, something the AIT cannot sustain. That starts getting it very close to the supposed dates of the IVC, resulting in more & more confusion. This, simply is the reason I believe that many supporters of the AIT are not willing to look at the Rg veda & the Sarasvati with appropriate seriousness.


The second part is something that i have touched on before & that is the almost complete cultural absorption of the "invading" culture leaving behind almost no traces of the previous culture. It could happen but very unlikely. Using the analogy of the Muslim invasion, even after an longer period of time, there has not been a complete removal of previous history from memory. Why that should happen with a supposedly less violent time is difficult to imagine. Why it should also happen non-Aryan lands of south India is even more difficult to explain.

 

[Developereo]

New turning point of Indian subcontinent will be when Bangladesh dives under the sea in 2050

Was that necessary? or constructive in any way?

I know there has been an ugly war on this forum recently between Pakistanis and Bangladeshis, but there's no need to drag it out.

Thanks.

 

[Joe Shearer]

The Sarasvati dilemma bothers the proponents of the AIT the most.

Hmm.

Remarkably balanced and rational, perhaps, but certainly with a propensity for using superlatives in place of comparatives, and comparatives where a simple statement would do. We did have a slightly different, marginally eccentric to this thought, comment just a bit earlier:

..."the geneticists who blew the biggest hole in the AIT

I personally am able to console myself with the thought that blowing the biggest hole does not tantamount to, as my Punjabi friends' quaint adaptation of the Queen's English has it, bothering the proponents the most. You blow holes where you like, I shall get bothered where I like.

The Saraswati in the Rg veda is quite clearly a river in northern India, not the Afghanistan river.

Not really. The Saraswati in the Rg Veda was not one thing, it was several things, all independent of each other. Why should this be disturbing, considering the number of people involved in composing the Rg Veda? The name is used for the Goddess of Learning, for a mysterious ideal river of all rivers, for the river in north India, and, for all we know, the Haraoathi as well. The single usage can be disproved; what was implied cannot be so easily proved. As a wag put it, the absence of proof is not proof of absence.

Statistically speaking, also, this identification is weak; there are two references to the river as being in north India, against the very many more as a Goddess, initially a personification of a mystic 'disappearing' river, and as that mystic river itself, which might well refer to the Afghanistan river.

On a more serious note, while there are indubitably passages which indicate an existing river in northern India, there are other passages which indicate a Goddess, or an ideal, or perhaps an Iranian river. It is forcing the case a bit to insist that the north Indian river must be the only interpretation. Why so? There is nothing which demands that. Assuming that this is true at some points, what does that give us? That was a river Saraswati which was in rude good health from the hydrological traces at the beginning of the second millennium, but which dried and shrank and disappeared perhaps around 1300 BC.

The reference to the Saraswati flowing to the ocean can be side-stepped quite reasonably. The term used for ocean was Sindhu on one occasion, Samudra on other occasions. We, with our facility with Classical Sanskrit, duly polished and neutered and disciplined by Panini, and our easy familiarity with the awful fate of those desperadoes who dared to cross Kala Pani and did not perform ritual purifications, do not feel comfortable with the etymological roots of the word Samudra, which point to different water-bodies:

This matches the Rigvedic description of the Sarasvati flowing to the samudra, which at that time meant 'confluence', 'lake', 'heavenly lake, ocean'; the current meaning of 'terrestrial ocean' was not even felt in the Pali Canon.

What do our friends the archaeologists tell us? They tell us that Late Harappan pottery continued side-by-side with two different pottery types, probably representative of cultural progression. We have

Age	Name	Locations	Notes
12th to 9th century BCE	Black and Red Ware	Northern India, up to the Indus Valley, not to its west	Perhaps contemporaneous with Late Harappan pottery. May have given rise to Painted Gray Ware
1200 BC to 600 BC	Painted Gray Ware	Hastinapura, Mathura, Ahichhatra, Kampilya, Kurukshetra	Perhaps contemporaneous with Late Harappan pottery. Succeeded by Northern Black Polished Ware. Found in the channel of the Saraswati, hence occurring after the demise of that river system.
700 BC to 200 BC	Northern Black Polished Ware	Western Bengal	Coincided with the Mauryas, may have been coincident with the larger state-level organisation in India.

Most of these archaeological records and remains are found in the stream bed of the Hakkra/ Ghaggar/ Saraswati river complex. Not on the sides. It is not clear from the material at my disposal that there was any development on the sides of the Saraswati water channels. Therefore it is not clear that the river played quite the critical role in the life of the IVC that is being postulated by the revisionists. Which, then, raises the question of the identity of the surging, flowing Saraswati with a river that had almost died out at the time that the pottery says that the Post-Rg Veda, Puranic and early pre-Imperial political culture was in bloom.

Let us discuss the conclusions from these data separately.

My questions are almost never based on the genetic argument since I'm not really sure how much change is required to show up clearly in a population the size of India. This issue helps only in rebutting the most primitive ideas of the AIT. However having got that wrong, it makes the AIT vulnerable because of a proven chink in that armour. The essence of my argument is with the dating of the Rg veda. This is simply because if the dating of the Rg veda changes, then the AIT would be more holes than substance because they would then have to prove the existence of other branches to the same period to sustain. The presence of the Kassites and the Mitanni which is a part of recorded history starts to make this neatly dated theory more than a bit vulnerable. However the key to that vulnerability is the Sarasvati, for so long dismissed as a figment of imagination, then as a name for some other river(the Indus) & at times the Helmand(Haraxvaiti). If we agree that the Sarasvati was a large river flowing in the Ghaggar-Hakra system & it dried out due to geological changes, the problem for the AIT dating becomes acute. The Mahabharata, a much later work still speaks of the Sarasvati existing, though clearly dying & drying out in the desert. Once the date for the Mahabharata starts being pushed backward because we are now approaching recorded history where the river must find mention for the dating to sustain, the dates for all compositions before the Mahabharata also needs pushing back. Since painted grey ware sites are dated to 1000 BCE on the bed of the river, it must have dried out completely well before that. The date given for the drying of the river is at the very least 1800 BCE. If the river was flowing when the Rg veda was composed, the dating for the movement of people would be pushed way far back, something the AIT cannot sustain. That starts getting it very close to the supposed dates of the IVC, resulting in more & more confusion. This, simply is the reason I believe that many supporters of the AIT are not willing to look at the Rg veda & the Sarasvati with appropriate seriousness.


The second part is something that i have touched on before & that is the almost complete cultural absorption of the "invading" culture leaving behind almost no traces of the previous culture. It could happen but very unlikely. Using the analogy of the Muslim invasion, even after an longer period of time, there has not been a complete removal of previous history from memory. Why that should happen with a supposedly less violent time is difficult to imagine. Why it should also happen non-Aryan lands of south India is even more difficult to explain.

I will come to these, including your very important point about leaving behind no traces of the previous culture, in a moment. Make that ten or so.

 

[Developereo]

Sorry for butting in, but just a couple of questions:

My questions are almost never based on the genetic argument since I'm not really sure how much change is required to show up clearly in a population the size of India. This issue helps only in rebutting the most primitive ideas of the AIT. However having got that wrong, it makes the AIT vulnerable because of a proven chink in that armour.

Aren't some Indians fond of telling everybody how India dominated China culturally for centuries without sending a single soldier? One wouldn't expect a significant Indian genetic signature in the East Asian population, yet Buddhism thrives. Why is the absence of a large genetic footprint an automatic invalidation of foreign influence?

The Mahabharata, a much later work still speaks of the Sarasvati existing, though clearly dying & drying out in the desert.

Why should we believe that the Mahabharata was speaking of contemporary events? Why could it not simply be a retelling of ancient (oral) traditions?

Most people accept that many Abrahamic religious tales, including Noah's Flood, are a retelling of the Babylonian Epic of Gilgamesh, which themselves are probably retellings of earlier myths.

 

[Joe Shearer]

So many nice kind words. Must have been one hell of a breakfast.......

Cornflakes and milk, two pieces of toast, a couple of eggs scrambled, a glass of guava juice, and that's it for the day. I'm on a crash diet, but nothing seems to happen. I still totter through life action side of a pear first.

 

[Joe Shearer]

middle eastern invaders

In pre-historic times?

You fascinate me. You really have a very fertile mind. Some day, when you have a little more time than now, you might like to look up the growing of roses. With a mind as fertile as yours, you should have a head start, so to speak.

PS: Oh, were you teeing off Ice wolf and did I interrupt? In which case consider me gone. Who am I to obstruct the path of true love?

 

[Rusty]

The problem seems to be that people who don't want to believe in Aryan invasion are trying to change what the theory says to what they want it to say, so they can "disprove it".

I can't believe i am having to explain this, as I thought this was just self evident.
But language and culture are independent of genetics. You can speak English and not be genetically from England. You can be Buddhist and not be genetically Chinese.

The Aryan invasion solves a lot of questions about our history.
How come languages from Celtic to Persian to Hindi and Bengali are more similar than other languages, such as Arabic or Chinese?

Now, if this makes you insecure about your history and the people you hate, then that is your problem.
The theory itself is sound.

 

[Joe Shearer]

The problem seems to be that people who don't want to believe in Aryan invasion are trying to change what the theory says to what they want it to say, so they can "disprove it".

I can't believe i am having to explain this, as I thought this was just self evident.
But language and culture are independent of genetics. You can speak English and not be genetically from England. You can be Buddhist and not be genetically Chinese.

The Aryan invasion solves a lot of questions about our history.
How come languages from Celtic to Persian to Hindi and Bengali are more similar than other languages, such as Arabic or Chinese?

Now, if this makes you insecure about your history and the people you hate, then that is your problem.
The theory itself is sound.

And of all the members of this forum, this one had to say it.

My feelings cannot be put in words.

All of a sudden, I don't feel well.

 

[Developereo]

But language and culture are independent of genetics. You can speak English and not be genetically from England. You can be Buddhist and not be genetically Chinese.

The Aryan invasion solves a lot of questions about our history.
How come languages from Celtic to Persian to Hindi and Bengali are more similar than other languages, such as Arabic or Chinese?

Agree with your logic, although the last sentence is a bit harsh.

People seem to confuse cultural invasion with physical invasion, as if the two must always be related.

 

[Joe Shearer]

Agree with your logic, although the last sentence is a bit harsh.

People seem to confuse cultural invasion with physical invasion, as if the two must always be related.

That's what I am trying to say, though with too many words, if your messages are anything to go by.

 

[Developereo]

That's what I am trying to say, though with too many words, if your messages are anything to go by.

Your detailed expositions are indispensable and very informative, but I am providing the parallel brief summary.

For the SMS/Twitter crowd.

 

[Rig Vedic]

The Aryan invasion solves a lot of questions about our history.
How come languages from Celtic to Persian to Hindi and Bengali are more similar than other languages, such as Arabic or Chinese?

If the theory you were taught has lots of holes, you should look for better answers.

Now, if this makes you insecure about your history and the people you hate, then that is your problem.

Good, keep that in mind.

 

[Rusty]

If your answer has lots of holes, you should look for a better answer.


Good, keep that in mind.

Please do tell, what holes are there in the theory?
(There actually are some holes, I want to see if you actually know what they are)
And just by having holes, does not negate the theory.
We have holes in our understanding of physics, but that doesn't mean it's a good idea to jump off a bridge

 

[Leader]

Creation of Hindu India was the biggest blunder in sub-continent's history