Out-of-India - From Theory to Truth: Part 2

The Strategic Issues & International Relations Forum is a venue to discuss issues pertaining to India's security environment, her strategic outlook on global affairs and as well as the effect of international relations in the Indian Subcontinent. We request members to kindly stay within the mandate of this forum and keep their exchanges of views, on a civilised level, however vehemently any disagreement may be felt. All feedback regarding forum usage may be sent to the moderators using the Feedback Form or by clicking the Report Post Icon in any objectionable post for proper action. Please note that the views expressed by the Members and Moderators on these discussion boards are that of the individuals only and do not reflect the official policy or view of the Bharat-Rakshak.com Website. Copyright Violation is strictly prohibited and may result in revocation of your posting rights - please read the FAQ for full details. Users must also abide by the Forum Guidelines at all times.
RajeshA
BRF Oldie
Posts: 16001
Joined: 28 Dec 2007 19:30

Re: Out-of-India - From Theory to Truth: Part 2

Postby RajeshA » 26 May 2016 00:28

shiv wrote:
RajeshA wrote:Something that I would welcome is an etymology dictionary of Persian words with their Sanskrit counterparts and origins.

Question is whether Persian or Iranian can themselves be considered a Prakrit.

That way, Iranians can themselves be seen as an extension of Indic, at least linguistically, and hence one does not need this artificial separation between Indian groups and Iranian groups among Indo-Iranians. The question is why should Parthians, Baloch, Bactrians, etc. be considered Iranian and not Indian?

Rajesh that totally cooked up name of a language "Avestan" is a prakrit.

Let me first explain by what cunning linguists are saying

First there was Avestan, then Old Persian, then Middle Persian and finally modern Persian (with much Arabic influence)

Students who know Sanskrit will understand "Avestan" straight off.

Old Persian is in the Behistun texts - it sounds bit like Sanskrit

The only thing I know about "middle Persian" is that the Parsi Holy book "Venidad" existed as a middle Persian text and it was transcribed in Brahmi script around 1300 AD by a Sanskrit scholar Naryosang Dhaval. All of what linguists call Avestan has been inferred/cooked up using comparisons with Sanskrit from this text which is itself 2300 years later than Linguists dates for "Avestan". A lot of things could have changes in 2300 years - but linguists claim that nothing changed and that the language they cooked up is Avestan. It could just as well be Sanskrit.

I suspect the original language of the Parsis was a Prakrit and may have been similar to what cunning linguists call Avestan - although they have cooked up the entire language and claim that is it a sister language of Sanskrit that existed 2300 years earlier :shock:

Parsis took an essentially Indic culture to Persia and preserved it until they were defeated by the Greeks a thousand years later. I am convinced that the Sindhu-Hindu, sapta-hepta went into the Greek language from a Sanskrit original via the Parsis.

The oldest evidence of old Greek is much much later than Rig Vedic Sanskrit - but linguists have forced the date of Rig Veda to 1200 BC to bring it closer to old Greek.


Thank you for that summary.

The s --> h sound change itself shows that Persian comes from Sanskrit.

The historians like to treat Iranians as a separate people than Indians, and perhaps we too did split off at some point in time. But Iranians origin is also India.
So on linguistic grounds, we should not allow historians to divide between Indian and Iranian languages. We need to get rid of the hyphen here, and treat these languages as Indian as well.

There is one Naryosang Dhaval who was the Zoroastrian Dastur (priest) who asked a king in Gujarat for permission to live there as they were fleeing from the advance of Islam in Iran. The date given for that is 651 AD.

Nilesh Oak
BRFite
Posts: 1670
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Out-of-India - From Theory to Truth: Part 2

Postby Nilesh Oak » 26 May 2016 01:51

RajeshA wrote:
RajeshA wrote:Triglavi means Three heads.


The Slavic word "Glava" which means head most probably derives from "grīva" which means neck, as in Hayagrīva (हयग्रीव).

So

Triglavi <= Trigrīva

or Dasha-griva (Ravana)

Prem
BRF Oldie
Posts: 21182
Joined: 01 Jul 1999 11:31
Location: Weighing and Waiting 8T Yconomy

Re: Out-of-India - From Theory to Truth: Part 2

Postby Prem » 26 May 2016 02:02

Krinvanto Vishwam Aryam = OIT so there they went West to control the Pest, East to tame the Beast,North to Teach the Lout and South to cover them in Cloth.

A_Gupta
BRF Oldie
Posts: 11639
Joined: 23 Oct 2001 11:31
Contact:

Re: Out-of-India - From Theory to Truth: Part 2

Postby A_Gupta » 26 May 2016 04:42

Shiv,
There is Avestan in old Persian-type script from around the beginning of the common era or so, written right to left; but as this article notes, http://www.ancientscripts.com/avestan.html , it is very, very close to Sanskrit. The analogy I think of is, e.g., the variation in Hindi of "v" <--> "b" across north India.

Also note this:
http://www.heritageinstitute.com/zoroas ... languages/
The comparative example of the Avestan and Rig-Vedic (Sanskrit) languages above demonstrate that the languages are so close that they are for all practical purposes dialects of the same language. They are nevertheless not identical. At the time of their writing, the people of the old Avesta and Rig Veda were likely close neighbours. A conclusion by extrapolation is that at an earlier time the two people shared a common language named by linguists as Proto Indo-Iranian. This is a deduction. There are no known examples of the presumed Proto Indo-Iranian language. Proto Indo-Iranian would have been the language of the ancient Aryans before their separation into the Avestan and Rig Vedic groups.


This would be like saying that there is Indian English and British English and though they are virtually identical they are nevertheless not the same language. At the time of this writing, they were not even close neighbors - separated by several thousand miles. There was proto-English prior to the separation of the peoples of India and Britain, etc.

A_Gupta
BRF Oldie
Posts: 11639
Joined: 23 Oct 2001 11:31
Contact:

Re: Out-of-India - From Theory to Truth: Part 2

Postby A_Gupta » 26 May 2016 04:46

The second link above also does say:
We are also grateful to Vaibhav Niku, for bringing to our attention a book by Prof. Hermann Brunnhofer titled Urgeschichte der Arier in Vorder- und Centralasien (Prehistory of the Aryans in West- and Central-Asia), 1893. On pages 1 and 2 of his Introduction Prof. Brunnhofer quotes Prof. H. Kern's book [from his book Over het woord Zarathustra (About the Word Zarathustra), p. 16, (1867)] as stating, "the Bactrian (i.e. Avestan) is so (greatly) related to the Old-Indian language (Vedic), and in particular, that of the Vedas, that without exaggeration it can be called a dialect thereof." By way of an example, Brunnhofer then quotes Yasna 10.8 in Avestan and follows the verse with what it would read like in Vedic Sanskrit (in much the same way as we have done above with Yasna 72.11) Click here for the Vedic-Sanskrit equivalent for Yasna 10.8 according to Brunnhofer and Bartholomae.


and

http://www.heritageinstitute.com/zoroas ... /yasna.htm
Yasna 10.8 (Portion) - Avestan with its Vedic equivalent

The example below furnished courtesy Vaibhav Niku, is a further demonstration of the closeness of the Avestan and Vedic languages. He adds that the languages are so close that the Vedic can be "read-off" from the Avestan.

Avestan Yasna 10.8 Transliterated in Roman Script

[Based on Karl F. Geldner's Avesta, the Sacred Books of the Parsis, Stuttgart (1896).

Ýô ýatha puthrem taurunem
Haomem vañdaêta mashyô
Frâ âbyô tanubyô
Haomô vîsâite baêshazâi

Vedic-Sanskrit Equivalent for Yasna 10.8 according to Brunnhofer and Bartholomae

Without accents:
yō yathā putram taruṇam
sōmam vandēta martyaḥ
pra ābhyas tanūbhyaḥ
sōmō viśatē bhēṣajāya

यो यथा पुत्रम् तरुणम्
सोमम् वन्देत मर्त्यः
प्र आभ्यस् तनूभ्यः
सोमो विशते भेषजाय

With accents:
yṓ yáthā putrám táruṇam
sṓmam vandēta mártyaḥ
prá ābhyas tanū́bhyaḥ
sṓmō viśatē bhēṣajā́ya

यो यथा॑ पु॒त्रम् तरु॑णम्
सोम॑म् व॒न्दे॒त॒ मर्त्य॑ः
प्र आ॒भ्य॒स् त॒नूभ्य॑ः
सोमो॑ वि॒श॒ते॒ भे॒ष॒जाय॑

Satya_anveshi
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3532
Joined: 08 Jan 2007 02:37

Re: Out-of-India - From Theory to Truth: Part 2

Postby Satya_anveshi » 26 May 2016 05:44

A_Gupta wrote:This would be like saying that there is Indian English and British English and though they are virtually identical they are nevertheless not the same language. At the time of this writing, they were not even close neighbors - separated by several thousand miles. There was proto-English prior to the separation of the peoples of India and Britain, etc.


This is brilliant analogy Gupta ji. Namaskaram for thinking this.

shiv
BRF Oldie
Posts: 34982
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Pindliyon ka Gooda

Re: Out-of-India - From Theory to Truth: Part 2

Postby shiv » 26 May 2016 08:22

A_Gupta wrote:Shiv,
There is Avestan in old Persian-type script from around the beginning of the common era or so, written right to left; but as this article notes, http://www.ancientscripts.com/avestan.html , it is very, very close to Sanskrit. The analogy I think of is, e.g., the variation in Hindi of "v" <--> "b" across north India.

Also note this:
http://www.heritageinstitute.com/zoroas ... languages/
The comparative example of the Avestan and Rig-Vedic (Sanskrit) languages above demonstrate that the languages are so close that they are for all practical purposes dialects of the same language. They are nevertheless not identical. At the time of their writing, the people of the old Avesta and Rig Veda were likely close neighbours. A conclusion by extrapolation is that at an earlier time the two people shared a common language named by linguists as Proto Indo-Iranian. This is a deduction. There are no known examples of the presumed Proto Indo-Iranian language. Proto Indo-Iranian would have been the language of the ancient Aryans before their separation into the Avestan and Rig Vedic groups.


This would be like saying that there is Indian English and British English and though they are virtually identical they are nevertheless not the same language. At the time of this writing, they were not even close neighbors - separated by several thousand miles. There was proto-English prior to the separation of the peoples of India and Britain, etc.


Also see
http://www.sacred-texts.com/zor/sbe04/sbe0403.htm
The Zend Avesta, Part I (SBE04), James Darmesteter, tr. [1880], at sacred-texts.com
Avesta received an unlooked-for light from the poems of the Indian Rishis, and the long-forgotten past and the origin of many gods and heroes, whom the Parsi worships and extols without knowing who they were and whence they came, were suddenly revealed by the Vedas.


The language and religion of the Avesta record but a moment in the long life of the Iranian language and thought, so that we are unable to understand them, unless we know what they became and whence they came. What they became we learn directly from tradition, since the tradition arose from the very ideas which the Avesta expresses; whence they came we learn indirectly from the Vedas, because the Vedas come from the same source as the Avesta. Therefore it cannot happen that the tradition and the Veda will really contradict one another, if we take care to ask from each only what it knows, from one the present, and the past from the other.


The comparative school developed Indo-Iranian mythology. Roth showed after Burnouf how the epical history of Iran was derived from the same source as the myths of Vedic India, and pointed out the primitive identity of Ahura Mazda, the supreme god of Iran,

shiv
BRF Oldie
Posts: 34982
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Pindliyon ka Gooda

Re: Out-of-India - From Theory to Truth: Part 2

Postby shiv » 26 May 2016 08:26

Satya_anveshi wrote:
A_Gupta wrote:This would be like saying that there is Indian English and British English and though they are virtually identical they are nevertheless not the same language. At the time of this writing, they were not even close neighbors - separated by several thousand miles. There was proto-English prior to the separation of the peoples of India and Britain, etc.


This is brilliant analogy Gupta ji. Namaskaram for thinking this.

Arun that is a perfect illustration of the sort of bluffs that linguists have resorted through in almost any era and any language you might care to examine just to fit into a story Eurocentric story that they like.

shiv
BRF Oldie
Posts: 34982
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Pindliyon ka Gooda

Re: Out-of-India - From Theory to Truth: Part 2

Postby shiv » 26 May 2016 08:44

What students who read linguists works today will never realize unless they dig really deep is the manner in which linguists have taken Sanskrit on the one hand, and they have taken a cooked up language on the other hand and called them "sister languages' descended from an earlier "Indo-Iranian" language. I repeat for clarity that the language cooked up by linguists is Avestan. It has been "reconstructed" using a 12th century text by Neryosang Dhaval and existing Gujarati texts.

Any Sanskrit scholar who compares Parsi Gathas with the Atharva Veda can see the similarities. I am no scholar but I can name two people who did that and said exactly that
1. James Darmeister
2. Jatindra Mohan Chatterji http://www.avesta.org/chatterj_opf_files/slideshow.htm

Nilesh Oak
BRFite
Posts: 1670
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Out-of-India - From Theory to Truth: Part 2

Postby Nilesh Oak » 26 May 2016 13:49

shiv wrote:What students who read linguists works today will never realize unless they dig really deep is the manner in which linguists have taken Sanskrit on the one hand, and they have taken a cooked up language on the other hand and called them "sister languages' descended from an earlier "Indo-Iranian" language. I repeat for clarity that the language cooked up by linguists is Avestan. It has been "reconstructed" using a 12th century text by Neryosang Dhaval and existing Gujarati texts.

Any Sanskrit scholar who compares Parsi Gathas with the Atharva Veda can see the similarities. I am no scholar but I can name two people who did that and said exactly that
1. James Darmeister
2. Jatindra Mohan Chatterji http://www.avesta.org/chatterj_opf_files/slideshow.htm


Oh my, Oh my!

What a find! I am referring to #2.

Read only first few pages of this JMC book. (I had read James Darmeister (only looked through few stray verses) while reading Orion of B G Tilak.)

Too bad the book is not available in PDF. But that is only a minor inconvenience, considering it's worth.

Nilesh Oak
BRFite
Posts: 1670
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Out-of-India - From Theory to Truth: Part 2

Postby Nilesh Oak » 26 May 2016 13:52

^^ RajeshA or Shiv ji,

(My searching abilities within BRF are limited).

I recall that in old OIT thread, there was a mention (either by RajeshA or someone else) of some reference to Zaratushtra for ~6000 BCE (from some other book).

Could either of you point me to it...

TIA
--
Added later...

I did find the reference I was looking for.

The book is 'A manual of Kshuhnoom'.

It refers to time of Zaratushtra as that of ~7551 BCE.

I have to read to see if it presents, any evidence, in its support..

In any case, as a first conjecture.. I can 'firmly' 'believe' it to be true.
--

There is a parallel to what possibly happened to this 'Athara veda' followers. (followers is the term used loosely). i.e. they splitting into two styles of Worship.. while still following principles of Atharva veda.

--
Something similar did happen during Mahabharata times (6th Millennium BCE) to Yajurveda - followers of it developing two different traditions.. in contrast to each other (but still adhering to Yajurveda).

Vaishampayan and Yajdyavalkya going their own ways (Maternal-uncle - nephew...by relation) going their ways as Shukla and Krishna Yajurveda.

shiv
BRF Oldie
Posts: 34982
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Pindliyon ka Gooda

Re: Out-of-India - From Theory to Truth: Part 2

Postby shiv » 26 May 2016 15:23

Nilesh I think I have both a manual of Kshnoom and a pdf of JM Chaterji. If I do I will make sure you get it.

Nilesh Oak
BRFite
Posts: 1670
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Out-of-India - From Theory to Truth: Part 2

Postby Nilesh Oak » 26 May 2016 16:18

shiv wrote:Nilesh I think I have both a manual of Kshnoom and a pdf of JM Chaterji. If I do I will make sure you get it.

TIA.

I have PDF of 'Manual of Kushnoom'.

If you do have (or find) PDF of JM chaterji, that would be great!

Nilesh

panduranghari
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3778
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Out-of-India - From Theory to Truth: Part 2

Postby panduranghari » 26 May 2016 17:20

Nilesh ji,
Your 'When did MBH war actually happen' has found a lot of traction amongst HSS UK. You will be contacted sometime soon by someone very influential. I hope you did not mind me giving this person your email address.

Nilesh Oak
BRFite
Posts: 1670
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Out-of-India - From Theory to Truth: Part 2

Postby Nilesh Oak » 26 May 2016 17:42

panduranghari wrote:Nilesh ji,
Your 'When did MBH war actually happen' has found a lot of traction amongst HSS UK. You will be contacted sometime soon by someone very influential. I hope you did not mind me giving this person your email address.

I appreciate it very much. Any update from Panchag makers of India?

panduranghari
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3778
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Out-of-India - From Theory to Truth: Part 2

Postby panduranghari » 26 May 2016 18:01

None sir. There is no movement. I will try chasing it up again.

Nilesh Oak
BRFite
Posts: 1670
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Out-of-India - From Theory to Truth: Part 2

Postby Nilesh Oak » 26 May 2016 18:05

panduranghari wrote:None sir. There is no movement. I will try chasing it up again.


It is a great medium for distribution of knowledge. It reaches masses, is utilized by many and is repetitive in nature..

Thanks again, irrespective of the final outcome...

Satya_anveshi
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3532
Joined: 08 Jan 2007 02:37

Re: Out-of-India - From Theory to Truth: Part 2

Postby Satya_anveshi » 26 May 2016 18:40

Jatindra Mohan Chaterjee's book was earlier pointed to by Gupta ji back in 2012 and I had posted very brief synopsis of the same HERE

If you follow few posts preceding mine (few pages), you should see discussion and other excellent references on Zarathustra (in context of dating) by Rajesh A ji and others.

RajeshA
BRF Oldie
Posts: 16001
Joined: 28 Dec 2007 19:30

Re: Out-of-India - From Theory to Truth: Part 2

Postby RajeshA » 27 May 2016 02:36

Nilesh Oak wrote:RajeshA,

(My searching abilities within BRF are limited).

I recall that in old OIT thread, there was a mention (either by RajeshA or someone else) of some reference to Zaratushtra for ~6000 BCE (from some other book).


1) I have kind of lost the exact references in Mahabharata, as the images I posted are gone. It had I believe something to do with Narada going to a far off country and narrating that there was a new religion coming up. Here is the post. I'll have to look for these sometime later.

2) Age of Zarathustra according to Greeks.

3) Taking up point 1 again.

Hope it helps, though I know it wouldn't. :(

shiv
BRF Oldie
Posts: 34982
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Pindliyon ka Gooda

Re: Out-of-India - From Theory to Truth: Part 2

Postby shiv » 27 May 2016 16:11

RajeshA wrote:
The historians like to treat Iranians as a separate people than Indians, and perhaps we too did split off at some point in time. But Iranians origin is also India.
So on linguistic grounds, we should not allow historians to divide between Indian and Iranian languages. We need to get rid of the hyphen here, and treat these languages as Indian as well.

Historians are biased people who will ignore stuff if they feel like it due to personal biases. No wonder history is no science

See this:
http://idrw.org/chabahar-and-its-implic ... more-96096
The word Chabahar comes from the Hindustani word, char, which means four, and bahar, which means spring. True to its name, it is an all-season but cool port located in Baluchistan and Sistan province of Iran. The 10th century scholar and historian, Al-Beruni, identifies Chabahar from its earlier name, Tiz, which is the starting point of old India.

RajeshA
BRF Oldie
Posts: 16001
Joined: 28 Dec 2007 19:30

Re: Out-of-India - From Theory to Truth: Part 2

Postby RajeshA » 27 May 2016 16:33

The word Chabahar comes from the Hindustani word, char, which means four, and bahar, which means spring. True to its name, it is an all-season but cool port located in Baluchistan and Sistan province of Iran. The 10th century scholar and historian, Al-Beruni, identifies Chabahar from its earlier name, Tiz, which is the starting point of old India.


Interesting!

JE Menon
Forum Moderator
Posts: 7052
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Out-of-India - From Theory to Truth: Part 2

Postby JE Menon » 27 May 2016 17:46

Speaking of ancient India, and the antiquity of it and the knowledge of it, here's a link that throws up some intriguing possibilities:

https://books.google.nl/books?id=POxJAw ... le&f=false

Amhara, of course, is an area now in Ethiopia, whose language is still called Amharic...

Nilesh Oak
BRFite
Posts: 1670
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Out-of-India - From Theory to Truth: Part 2

Postby Nilesh Oak » 27 May 2016 18:21

JE Menon wrote:Speaking of ancient India, and the antiquity of it and the knowledge of it, here's a link that throws up some intriguing possibilities:

https://books.google.nl/books?id=POxJAw ... le&f=false

Amhara, of course, is an area now in Ethiopia, whose language is still called Amharic...

Dr. P V Vartak refers to 'Soma-giri' and 'Neela- Sarovar (now Lake Victoria) in the context of river Nile (and ancient Geography).. I think in his book 'Wastav Ramayanaa'.

When I read it many years ago...I thought of it as only wild speculation. It may not be.

vishvak
BR Mainsite Crew
Posts: 5836
Joined: 12 Aug 2011 21:19

Re: Out-of-India - From Theory to Truth: Part 2

Postby vishvak » 28 May 2016 00:02

shiv wrote:Nilesh I think I have both a manual of Kshnoom and a pdf of JM Chaterji. If I do I will make sure you get it.

Such books should be made default reference material in 9th standard onwards rather than exotic subjects like indology etc. that present some or other version/corollary of the same old AIT. Imagine teaching that Persians had a single holy book but not clarifying anything further.

Nilesh Oak ji if you can mention some page numbers of JM Chatterji book in your spare time. The author must have had very good command over Hindu philosophy.

A_Gupta
BRF Oldie
Posts: 11639
Joined: 23 Oct 2001 11:31
Contact:

Re: Out-of-India - From Theory to Truth: Part 2

Postby A_Gupta » 28 May 2016 17:36

JE Menon wrote:Speaking of ancient India, and the antiquity of it and the knowledge of it, here's a link that throws up some intriguing possibilities:

https://books.google.nl/books?id=POxJAw ... le&f=false

Amhara, of course, is an area now in Ethiopia, whose language is still called Amharic...


Wilford's stuff, termed a forgery by a cunning Brahmin, can be found here (page 46)
https://archive.org/details/asiatickresearc06indigoog

RoyG
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5180
Joined: 10 Aug 2009 05:10

Re: Out-of-India - From Theory to Truth: Part 2

Postby RoyG » 29 May 2016 02:55

Indus era 8,000 years old, not 5,500; ended because of weaker monsoon

Jhimli Mukherjee Pandey | TNN | May 29, 2016, 01.37 AM IST

KOLKATA: It may be time to rewrite history textbooks. Scientists from IIT-Kharagpur and Archaeological Survey of India (ASI) have uncovered evidence that the Indus Valley Civilization is at least 8,000 years old, and not 5,500 years old, taking root well before the Egyptian (7000BC to 3000BC) and Mesopotamian (6500BC to 3100BC) civilizations. What's more, the researchers have found evidence of a pre-Harappan civilization that existed for at least 1,000 years before this.

The discovery, published in the prestigious 'Nature' journal on May 25, may force a global rethink on the timelines of the so-called 'cradles of civilization'. The scientists believe they also know why the civilization ended about 3,000 years ago — climate change.
"We have recovered perhaps the oldest pottery from the civilization. We used a technique called 'optically stimulated luminescence' to date pottery shards of the Early Mature Harappan time to nearly 6,000 years ago and the cultural levels of pre-Harappan Hakra phase as far back as 8,000 years," said Anindya Sarkar, head of the department of geology and geophysics at IIT-Kgp.

The team had actually set out to prove that the civilization proliferated to other Indian sites like Bhirrana and Rakhigarrhi in Haryana, apart from the known locations of Harappa and Mohenjo Daro in Pakistan and Lothal, Dholavira and Kalibangan in India. They took their dig to an unexplored site, Bhirrana — and ended up unearthing something much bigger. The excavation also yielded large quantities of animal remains like bones, teeth, horn cores of cow, goat, deer and antelope, which were put through Carbon 14 analysis to decipher antiquity and the climatic conditions in which the civilization flourished, said Arati Deshpande Mukherjee of Deccan College, which helped analyse the finds along with Physical Research Laboratory, Ahmedabad.

The researchers believe that the Indus Valley Civilization spread over a vast expanse of India — stretching to the banks of the now "lost" Saraswati river or the Ghaggar-Hakra river - but this has not been studied enough because what we know so far is based on British excavations. "At the excavation sites, we saw preservation of all cultural levels right from the pre-Indus Valley Civilization phase (9000-8000 BC) through what we have categorised as Early Harappan (8000-7000BC) to the Mature Harappan times," said Sarkar.

While the earlier phases were represented by pastoral and early village farming communities, the mature Harappan settlements were highly urbanised with organised cities, and a much developed material and craft culture. They also had regular trade with Arabia and Mesopotamia. The Late Harappan phase witnessed large-scale de-urbanisation, drop in population, abandonment of established settlements, lack of basic amenities, violence and even the disappearance of the Harappan script, the researchers say.
"We analysed the oxygen isotope composition in the bone and tooth phosphates of these remains to unravel the climate pattern. The oxygen isotope in mammal bones and teeth preserve the signature of ancient meteoric water and in turn the intensity of monsoon rainfall. Our study shows that the pre-Harappan humans started inhabiting this area along the Ghaggar-Hakra rivers in a climate that was favourable for human settlement and agriculture. The monsoon was much stronger between 9000 years and 7000 years from now and probably fed these rivers making them mightier with vast floodplains," explained Deshpande Mukherjee.

Indus Valley evolved even as monsoon declined

They took their dig to an unexplored site, Bhirrana — and ended up unearthing something much bigger. The excavation also yielded large quantities of animal remains like bones, teeth, horn cores of cow, goat, deer and antelope, which were put through Carbon 14 analysis to decipher antiquity and the climatic conditions in which the civilization flourished, said Arati Deshpande Mukherjee of Deccan College, which helped analyse the finds along with Physical Research Laboratory, Ahmedabad.
The researchers believe that the Indus Valley Civilization spread over a vast expanse of India — stretching to the banks of the now "lost" Saraswati river or the Ghaggar-Hakra river — but this has not been studied enough because what we know so far is based on British excavations. "At the excavation sites, we saw preservation of all cultural levels right from the pre-Indus Valley Civilisation phase (9,000-8,000 years ago) through what we have categorised as Early Harappan (8,000-7,000 years ago) to the Mature Harappan times," said Sarkar.

The late Harappan phase witnessed large-scale de-urbanisation, drop in population, abandonment of established settlements, violence and even the disappearance of the Harappan script, the researchers say. The study revealed that monsoon started weakening 7,000 years ago but, surprisingly, the civilization did not disappear.

The Indus Valley people were very resolute and flexible and continued to evolve even in the face of declining monsoon. The people shifted their crop patterns from large-grained cereals like wheat and barley during the early part of intensified monsoon to drought-resistant species like rice in the latter part. As the yield diminished, the organised large storage system of the Mature Harappan period gave way to more individual household-based crop processing and storage systems that acted as a catalyst for the de-urbanisation of the civilization rather than an abrupt collapse, they say.

http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/indi ... 485332.cms

Pulikeshi
BRFite
Posts: 1513
Joined: 31 Oct 2002 12:31
Location: Badami

Re: Out-of-India - From Theory to Truth: Part 2

Postby Pulikeshi » 29 May 2016 09:28

Ok for those interested - this is the paper...

Oxygen isotope in archaeological bioapatites from India: Implications to climate change and decline of Bronze Age Harappan civilization

PS: You can download the pdf in the link above.

The successive cultural levels at Bhirrana, as deciphered from archeological artefacts along with these 14C ages, are Pre-Harappan Hakra phase (~9.5–8 ka BP), Early Harappan (~8–6.5 ka BP), Early mature Harappan (~6.5–5 ka BP) and mature Harappan (~5–2.8 ka BP (8,17,18,20,34)).


Notice ka BP in the paper and how we should dumb it down to what happened before walking on water - aka BC ~
by an Indian Newspaper! "In the year of our Lord" by doornob onlee! :-? :cry:

The Ghaggar (in India)-Hakra (in Pakistan) river, referred to as mythical Vedic river ‘Saraswati’ (Fig. 1A) originates in the Siwalik hills, ephemeral in the upper part with dry river bed running downstream through the Thar desert to Rann of Kachchh in Gujarat3. More than 500 sites of Harappan settlements have been discovered in this belt during the last hundred years.


Saraswati is! what is mythical about her... and yes, she was, and how she was, why this need to keep a false open mind?
Except in the Witzelian universe - the paleo-channel so clear in satellite maps (google maps!) is the river Saraswati onlee!

It is difficult to point to one single cause that drove the Harappan decline although diverse suggestions from Aryan invasion, to catastrophic flood or droughts, change in monsoon and river dynamics, sea-levels, trade decline2,3,73,74,75,76,77,78,79 to increased societal violence and spread of infectious diseases26 have been proposed. The continued survival of Harappans at Bhirrana suggests adaptation to at least one detrimental factor that is monsoon change.


There it goes again... why mention this racist tripe of a theory in an otherwise decent attempt at looking at data?
Why tolerate the intolerance of others? So without realizing it the authors suggest Harappan people may be different from the white supremacist, racist - Aryans!

Good start, but soo far!

RoyG
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5180
Joined: 10 Aug 2009 05:10

Re: Out-of-India - From Theory to Truth: Part 2

Postby RoyG » 29 May 2016 15:20

Yes the grip of linguists is strong but this is a significant archaeological find which forces a rethink on the dating.

1700 BC is the limit by which ait could have occured.

A_Gupta
BRF Oldie
Posts: 11639
Joined: 23 Oct 2001 11:31
Contact:

Re: Out-of-India - From Theory to Truth: Part 2

Postby A_Gupta » 29 May 2016 16:46

^^^^ The people shifted their crop patterns from large-grained cereals like wheat and barley during the early part of intensified monsoon to drought-resistant species like rice in the latter part.

Rice is drought-resistant?

A_Gupta
BRF Oldie
Posts: 11639
Joined: 23 Oct 2001 11:31
Contact:

Re: Out-of-India - From Theory to Truth: Part 2

Postby A_Gupta » 29 May 2016 16:46

^^^^ The people shifted their crop patterns from large-grained cereals like wheat and barley during the early part of intensified monsoon to drought-resistant species like rice in the latter part.

Rice is drought-resistant?

A_Gupta
BRF Oldie
Posts: 11639
Joined: 23 Oct 2001 11:31
Contact:

Re: Out-of-India - From Theory to Truth: Part 2

Postby A_Gupta » 29 May 2016 16:46

^^^^ The people shifted their crop patterns from large-grained cereals like wheat and barley during the early part of intensified monsoon to drought-resistant species like rice in the latter part.

Rice is drought-resistant?

A_Gupta
BRF Oldie
Posts: 11639
Joined: 23 Oct 2001 11:31
Contact:

Re: Out-of-India - From Theory to Truth: Part 2

Postby A_Gupta » 29 May 2016 16:46

^^^^ The people shifted their crop patterns from large-grained cereals like wheat and barley during the early part of intensified monsoon to drought-resistant species like rice in the latter part.

Rice is drought-resistant?

shiv
BRF Oldie
Posts: 34982
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Pindliyon ka Gooda

Re: Out-of-India - From Theory to Truth: Part 2

Postby shiv » 29 May 2016 18:35

A_Gupta wrote:^^^^ The people shifted their crop patterns from large-grained cereals like wheat and barley during the early part of intensified monsoon to drought-resistant species like rice in the latter part.

Rice is drought-resistant?

Replying to all 4 accidental repeat posts :D

That statement surprised me too
That statement surprised me too
That statement surprised me too
That statement surprised me too

More seriously - I Googled and found that the Green revolution encouraged the spread of rice varieties that were less drought resistant, and efforts are now on to "turn back the clock" and breed drought resistant varities
http://www.nature.com/articles/srep14799

A_Gupta
BRF Oldie
Posts: 11639
Joined: 23 Oct 2001 11:31
Contact:

Re: Out-of-India - From Theory to Truth: Part 2

Postby A_Gupta » 29 May 2016 20:14

shiv wrote:
More seriously - I Googled and found that the Green revolution encouraged the spread of rice varieties that were less drought resistant, and efforts are now on to "turn back the clock" and breed drought resistant varities
http://www.nature.com/articles/srep14799


Shiv,
Take a look at table 3 here:
http://www.fao.org/docrep/S2022E/s2022e02.htm
Rice requires more water than wheat or beans.

peter
BRFite
Posts: 1207
Joined: 23 Jan 2008 11:19

Re: Out-of-India - From Theory to Truth: Part 2

Postby peter » 30 May 2016 08:15

johneeG wrote:....
Genetic dating is based on rate of mutation. Rate of mutation is
a) assumed
b) based on evolution theory.

...

This is a fair point I think.

shiv
BRF Oldie
Posts: 34982
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Pindliyon ka Gooda

Re: Out-of-India - From Theory to Truth: Part 2

Postby shiv » 30 May 2016 08:19

peter wrote:
johneeG wrote:....
Genetic dating is based on rate of mutation. Rate of mutation is
a) assumed
b) based on evolution theory.

...

This is a fair point I think.


It may be "fair" but point "b" is still complete nonsense.

peter
BRFite
Posts: 1207
Joined: 23 Jan 2008 11:19

Re: Out-of-India - From Theory to Truth: Part 2

Postby peter » 30 May 2016 08:20

JE Menon wrote:Speaking of ancient India, and the antiquity of it and the knowledge of it, here's a link that throws up some intriguing possibilities:

https://books.google.nl/books?id=POxJAw ... le&f=false

Amhara, of course, is an area now in Ethiopia, whose language is still called Amharic...

Are you aware of any later research on this connection? Which Puran mentions Amhara?

peter
BRFite
Posts: 1207
Joined: 23 Jan 2008 11:19

Re: Out-of-India - From Theory to Truth: Part 2

Postby peter » 30 May 2016 08:20

peter wrote:
johneeG wrote:....
Genetic dating is based on rate of mutation. Rate of mutation is
a) assumed
b) based on evolution theory.

...

This is a fair point I think.

shiv wrote:It may be "fair" but point "b" is still complete nonsense.

How so?

shiv
BRF Oldie
Posts: 34982
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Pindliyon ka Gooda

Re: Out-of-India - From Theory to Truth: Part 2

Postby shiv » 30 May 2016 08:24

peter wrote:
shiv wrote:It may be "fair" but point "b" is still complete nonsense.

How so?

How interested are you in finding out? I have already made one post stating my reasons. Please read and get back if there is something that is not clear.

shiv
BRF Oldie
Posts: 34982
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Pindliyon ka Gooda

Re: Out-of-India - From Theory to Truth: Part 2

Postby shiv » 30 May 2016 08:31

As a general comment on logic used for the purpose of rhetoric

1. The cow can be tied to a coconut tree to restrict its freedom
2. Coconut trees can restrict the freedom of cows
3. The name coconut milk is designed to promote coconuts and devalue cow's milk.
4. Coconut trees are the natural enemies of cows.


I would be happy for someone to take down the "logic" here but it is an illustration of the sorts of arguments used by people who call like to call themselves scholars, sometimes even on this forum.


Return to “Strategic Issues & International Relations Forum”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Merril, ssaravanan and 60 guests