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.
RoyG
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5181
Joined: 10 Aug 2009 05:10

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

Postby RoyG » 27 Apr 2018 12:22



It wont. The migration came in 2000-1500 BC. These guys were buried in 2600 BC. They will just say they were dravidian speakers and were displaced later by sweaty white men on horseback. They will completely ignore the linguistic/archaeological findings.

A big problem I see for the other side is this: Burial culture wasn't brought by Steppe guys. Also coupled with the linguistic, astronomical and hydrographic evidence, it reinforces the idea that Sanskrit was entirely indigenous and went out.

Prem Kumar
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2187
Joined: 31 Mar 2009 00:10

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

Postby Prem Kumar » 27 Apr 2018 13:29

Caravan Mag and Hartosh are habitual liars. So take whatever they say with a pinch of salt. Let the paper come out

But "if" what they say is true, then Niraj Rai has done an about-turn. He was a vocal opponent of AIT. But he seems to indicate that there was a Steppe influx post 2600 BCE.

As someone else pointed out, there are other skeletons from 2016. More data will confirm or dispute the theory. But this one skeleton not having Steppe DNA means that this skeleton is not favorable to an OIT scenario (per Rai).

Too early so say anything without the paper

Murugan
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4191
Joined: 03 Oct 2002 11:31
Location: Smoking Piskobidis

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

Postby Murugan » 27 Apr 2018 15:02

What were the attractions for Pastoralists and Agriculturists to cross difficult rivers like Indus, Saraswati and other big rivers to seed ugly hunter gatherers ?

Anshuman.Kumar
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 40
Joined: 08 Sep 2016 20:16

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

Postby Anshuman.Kumar » 27 Apr 2018 15:12

Expect a deluge of caste related stuff..Forget pushing dates of RgVeda Back ..Everything will be brushed aside.RgVeda will be fixed to 1200 BC .
A paper based on just one sample will be enough to establish AMT once and for all.
Worst part is out of over 200 skeletons excavated from.different places like Rakhigarhi Farmana Sanauli we have just one yielding significant DNA.and that paper alone will be used to push massive caste agenda in our country.

Chandragupta
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3469
Joined: 07 Dec 2008 15:26
Location: Kingdom of My Fair Lady

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

Postby Chandragupta » 27 Apr 2018 15:12

Does it not make sense for hunter gatherers & uncivilized to come to civilization than Iranian Agriculturists & Steppe Pastoralists to travel half a continent to a country of hunter gatherers? The whole construct is racist & just designed to discredit Hindu civilization which is atleast thousands of years older than anything else that can be compared.

Anshuman.Kumar
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 40
Joined: 08 Sep 2016 20:16

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

Postby Anshuman.Kumar » 27 Apr 2018 15:29

Yes that is the agenda and they have more or less succeeded .

I have nothing against good men here on this forum or else where who are pushing on a homegrown perspective on Indian ancient History and our roots..But you must accept that with zero evidence they have pushed AIT and then AMT without any real setback and.now with some.evidence however small..They will just destroy everything that is sacred for us.

A_Gupta
BRF Oldie
Posts: 11153
Joined: 23 Oct 2001 11:31
Contact:

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

Postby A_Gupta » 27 Apr 2018 16:13

Prem Kumar wrote:Caravan Mag and Hartosh are habitual liars. So take whatever they say with a pinch of salt. Let the paper come out

But "if" what they say is true, then Niraj Rai has done an about-turn. He was a vocal opponent of AIT. But he seems to indicate that there was a Steppe influx post 2600 BCE.

As someone else pointed out, there are other skeletons from 2016. More data will confirm or dispute the theory. But this one skeleton not having Steppe DNA means that this skeleton is not favorable to an OIT scenario (per Rai).

Too early so say anything without the paper


Niraj Rai, as a geneticist, has to go where the genetics points. Unless he has enough trusted expert backing from other areas.

The point is that in 1700 AD, an Indo-European language, English, came to India. Around 100 BC-100AD the Shakas brought along their Indo-European language. I'm sure there were other minor I.E. incursions also. There is nothing that says an steppes influx in 1800 BC, just like in the later two cases did not find I.E. already in India. The problem is the paucity of data, and that the content of Sanskrit texts can be waved away with a bunch of ad hoc explanations. Especially with language in the ancient world, what we mostly have is a series of inferences from circumstantial evidence.

One can hope that these findings will spur a great deal more of archaeological activity.

PS: All this is largely the result of sitting on our bums and having a huge deficit in knowledge-production. Knowledge production doesn't mean always original research. Simply making the corpus of world knowledge available in people's mother tongues is also knowledge production. We also have to understand the rest of the world with the intensity that they study us. As another example, suppose e.g., we write Greek or cuneiform in an Indian alphabet - I mean to say, a people that have to condense Thiruvanantapuram to Trivandrum - do you think they are reading ancient Greek correctly? I'm also struck by e.g., the ancient Greeks' "Sandrocottus" for "Chandragupta". We take it for granted that that is the way to pronounce what the ancient Greeks wrote. It is the same way that Avestan is created as a new language. That is how Hittite becomes an Indo-European language. How many Indian scholars can read Egyptian hieroglyphics? We are taking in everything at best through a layer of translation, not through direct pratyaksha. **Everything** has to be re-examined, with an Indian eye. Maybe mostly the result will be only that old findings are reconfirmed. Nevertheless, that knowledge will now be within the Indian civilization.
Last edited by A_Gupta on 27 Apr 2018 16:37, edited 1 time in total.

Anshuman.Kumar
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 40
Joined: 08 Sep 2016 20:16

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

Postby Anshuman.Kumar » 27 Apr 2018 16:29

We must also accept that the Harvard paper has taken lot of effort..Creation of EMBA and MLBa among the steppe people..specific "outliers" called IP..specific treatment of Iranian Neolithic as something stand alone and masking any contribution to steppe which then could be seen in later day South Asians .literally dumping Y Haplogroup based conclusions aa they would not support any specific theory and finally ensuring nothing much comes out of Rakhigarhi..but just "1" sample is stuff that creates admiration for these guys to the length these guys go..for.pushing a specific theory ..

Our guys are incapable of it..they would be either brown coolies or get influenced easily ..

They also know who to use and when ..our guys are happy to.play along

Anshuman.Kumar
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 40
Joined: 08 Sep 2016 20:16

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

Postby Anshuman.Kumar » 27 Apr 2018 16:38

Also with just one sample what exactly would this paper add to what we have with this Harvard paper.. absolutely nothing to be honest except just add to it.had it been even lil off the mark..AMT guys would have trashed it because it is based on one new sample ..but if it somehow supports it..it will be lapped up and would be the final say on everything as can be seen in the caravan and open magazine article.wirst part is..Shinde has been pushed to a side show in this Caravan magazine as his slight protestation in the Open mag article seemed of nuisance value..so it's all Rai..shame

Murugan
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4191
Joined: 03 Oct 2002 11:31
Location: Smoking Piskobidis

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

Postby Murugan » 27 Apr 2018 17:00

Image

Twenty years after (VeeSaTiVaSaBhiSiTen) his coronation, Beloved-of-the-Gods (deVaNaPiYen), King Piyadasi (PiyaDasin), visited this place and worshipped because here the Buddha, the sage of the Sakyans (SaKYoMuNiTi), was born . He had a stone figure and a pillar set up (SiLaViGaDaBhiCha) and because the Lord was born here, the village of Lumbini ( LuMiNiGaMe ) was exempted from tax and required to pay only one eighth (AthaBhaGiYeCha) of the produce.

Word Sakyamuni used for Lord Buddha in 2nd line fourth word.
Date: 3rd Century BCE

iamge:
https://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Page:Aso ... a.djvu/223

Murugan
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4191
Joined: 03 Oct 2002 11:31
Location: Smoking Piskobidis

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

Postby Murugan » 27 Apr 2018 17:22

Image

word soup (soopathaya = for making soup or curry written in Brahmi) inscribed on ashokan rock edict.

9th line, last four letters and 11th line letter 6,7,8,9 soo pa tha ya

Translation:
Beloved-of-the-Gods, King Piyadasi, has caused this Dhamma edict to be written. Here (in my domain) no living beings are to be slaughtered or offered in sacrifice. Nor should festivals be held, for Beloved-of-the-Gods, King Piyadasi, sees much to object to in such festivals, although there are some festivals that Beloved-of-the-Gods, King Piyadasi, does approve of.

Formerly, in the kitchen of Beloved-of-the-Gods, King Piyadasi, hundreds of thousands of animals were killed every day to make curry. But now with the writing of this Dhamma edict only three creatures, two peacocks and a deer are killed, and the deer not always. And in time, not even these three creatures will be killed.

shiv
BRF Oldie
Posts: 35017
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Pindliyon ka Gooda

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

Postby shiv » 27 Apr 2018 17:53

I need some help

I want the following lines written in Bengali, Gujarati and Hindi using Roman alphabet. Don't worry about pronunciation - just write what you can using Roman

My name is Ashok
My mother cooks food
My father is a farmer

I am going to reconstruct Sanskrit. OK add Marathi if you like. Maybe Punjabi but my brain may get frazzled by too many langauges

shiv
BRF Oldie
Posts: 35017
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Pindliyon ka Gooda

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

Postby shiv » 27 Apr 2018 17:58

RoyG wrote:


It wont. The migration came in 2000-1500 BC. These guys were buried in 2600 BC. They will just say they were dravidian speakers and were displaced later by sweaty white men on horseback. They will completely ignore the linguistic/archaeological findings.

When I pointed out to Vagheesh that Rakhigarhi graves were not steppe graves this is exactly what he said.
With no steppe DNA in Rakhigarhi - the story will continue that steppe people brought language. But mark my words - people are getting upset by the "migration". They need to open their eyes and ask "What is PIE?" How was it a real language in steppe? In the short term this is all that we need to look at...

shiv
BRF Oldie
Posts: 35017
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Pindliyon ka Gooda

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

Postby shiv » 27 Apr 2018 18:15

Murugan wrote:Image

word soup (soopathaya = for making soup or curry written in Brahmi) inscribed on ashokan rock edict.

9th line, last four letters and 11th line letter 6,7,8,9 soo pa tha ya

Translation:
Beloved-of-the-Gods, King Piyadasi, has caused this Dhamma edict to be written. Here (in my domain) no living beings are to be slaughtered or offered in sacrifice. Nor should festivals be held, for Beloved-of-the-Gods, King Piyadasi, sees much to object to in such festivals, although there are some festivals that Beloved-of-the-Gods, King Piyadasi, does approve of.

Formerly, in the kitchen of Beloved-of-the-Gods, King Piyadasi, hundreds of thousands of animals were killed every day to make curry. But now with the writing of this Dhamma edict only three creatures, two peacocks and a deer are killed, and the deer not always. And in time, not even these three creatures will be killed.

Is it Left to Right or Right to Left?

Anshuman.Kumar
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 40
Joined: 08 Sep 2016 20:16

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

Postby Anshuman.Kumar » 27 Apr 2018 18:19

Does it matter Doctor Sahab what is PIE? Language is just a tool..Idea was and will always remain that the so called UC's particularly the Brahmin are evil outsider Aryans ..And hence to be hated but others not to be ..As they are just doing what the original.outsiders do..N unlike brahmins the later outsiders brought the egalitarian religion and technology ..Brahmins on the other hand brought everything that is bad..In this country.. Particularly "Brahmanism" which we today call Hinduism..Now since the Brahmins are outsiders and hence evil..Follow the egalitarian Outsiders and their religion..

This is what was at stake.. PIE..Sanskrit etc is just sideshow..Just a means

shiv
BRF Oldie
Posts: 35017
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Pindliyon ka Gooda

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

Postby shiv » 27 Apr 2018 18:26

Anshuman.Kumar wrote:Does it matter Doctor Sahab what is PIE?

As I see it you are pulling me into a philosophical discussion. I don't really care. If I can change two people and bring them to look at the truth - I feel I have done something. I have not lost as long as I am alive and I will spare no time to think about what has been and what may be if the former continues. When we start from the bottom - it is a long long way up and I am not going to look down at how far I will fall as I climb.

What others want to think or do is their call..

RoyG
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5181
Joined: 10 Aug 2009 05:10

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

Postby RoyG » 27 Apr 2018 18:35

Prem Kumar wrote:Caravan Mag and Hartosh are habitual liars. So take whatever they say with a pinch of salt. Let the paper come out

But "if" what they say is true, then Niraj Rai has done an about-turn. He was a vocal opponent of AIT. But he seems to indicate that there was a Steppe influx post 2600 BCE.

As someone else pointed out, there are other skeletons from 2016. More data will confirm or dispute the theory. But this one skeleton not having Steppe DNA means that this skeleton is not favorable to an OIT scenario (per Rai).

Too early so say anything without the paper


It's not about genetics. It never has been. It's about language/culture. There were migrations into India and out just like anywhere else. However, there is a reason why Europeans don't talk about 'invasions' when they speak of their past. It can rip them apart just as easily as Rwanda and Sri Lanka. Language spread can only be established by textual evidence and archaeology. Sanskrit spreading to all of Asia is a 'fact' despite no major migration of Indian dna.

In any case, I'm not hopeful that A_Gupta's vision of academic rigor will be realized especially with the way that education is treated in the country. Who knows maybe the paper will be the first to talk about this issue and force many to ponder hard on divisiveness of the traditional interpretation of data.

Prem Kumar
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2187
Joined: 31 Mar 2009 00:10

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

Postby Prem Kumar » 27 Apr 2018 18:40

Agree with Shiv here.

One minor setback and we get into a collective rhona-dhona mode!!

We must keep plugging away and fighting the good fight. We have to build our civilizational narrative and brush aside anyone who gets in the way. OIT is not dead just because a Hartosh Bal or a Niraj Rai thinks so.

AIT became a hegemonic discourse because the whites didn't quit at the first sign of trouble

Anshuman.Kumar
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 40
Joined: 08 Sep 2016 20:16

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

Postby Anshuman.Kumar » 27 Apr 2018 18:45

Shiv Ji.you are taking it in a wrong way.My concern is how we are going to handle.I.am not a qualified Geneticist or a Mathematician..just an engineer.

But the way i see it..is that we have to take a very deep look at their methods.and how new.methods and terms which are essentially sleight of hand ..get easily taken up by all of us without asking what made them use these new terms.

What is steppe ancestry and it's origin and what is EMBA and MLBA..

Why is EMBA not being used but MLBA Used.

Why a single Swat sample having R1a that too from 500-300 BC and an ancestor of z-93 means steppe.pastoralists came from outside.

What is this Indus periphery and how old R1b samples or R samples or R1 a samples from Iran get over looked ..how Hajji Firuj sample.of R1b from 5500-6000 BC can't be seen as some.sort of precursor to that so called majkop culture and.later yamnaya expansion..and such samples are just brushed aside by fuzzing dates later on..everything inconvenient to them gets brushed aside .

And we can't even question them.

I am not qualified to get an answer to.this.

But I have questions

chanakyaa
BRFite
Posts: 1251
Joined: 18 Sep 2009 00:09
Location: Hiding in Karakoram

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

Postby chanakyaa » 27 Apr 2018 18:48

shiv wrote:I need some help

I want the following lines written in Bengali, Gujarati and Hindi using Roman alphabet. Don't worry about pronunciation - just write what you can using Roman

My name is Ashok
My mother cooks food
My father is a farmer

I am going to reconstruct Sanskrit. OK add Marathi if you like. Maybe Punjabi but my brain may get frazzled by too many langauges

Marathi
1. Maze nav Ashok aahe
2. Mazhi aai jevan karte (or banavte)*
3. Mazhe vadil (or "baba" informally speaking) shetkari aahet*

*adding the letter "h" above can be personal preference as in: Mazhi or Mazi, Mazhe or Maze (my)

RoyG
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5181
Joined: 10 Aug 2009 05:10

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

Postby RoyG » 27 Apr 2018 18:54

Prem Kumar wrote:Agree with Shiv here.

One minor setback and we get into a collective rhona-dhona mode!!

We must keep plugging away and fighting the good fight. We have to build our civilizational narrative and brush aside anyone who gets in the way. OIT is not dead just because a Hartosh Bal or a Niraj Rai thinks so.

AIT became a hegemonic discourse because the whites didn't quit at the first sign of trouble


It's not a setback. It never was. Its all about how the data will be interpreted. All the paper would need to do is separate the linguistics from the genetics and point to problems in the traditional linguistic model. This is all that is needed. They keep treating OIT as a genetic issue. It clearly isn't.

The terrible thing about this whole situation is that GoI simply has no interest in constituting a team of homegrown researchers to help arrive at very objective findings based on all the data collected.

Prem Kumar
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2187
Joined: 31 Mar 2009 00:10

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

Postby Prem Kumar » 27 Apr 2018 18:57

There are 2 main approaches as I see it
1) Shiv's approach, which argues that genetics does not mean language. Sanskrit is likely several thousand years old. It or its predecessor was spread over large parts of Iran. And it likely could have spread to Europe and Steppes from there

2) We look into what exactly is "Steppe DNA" and if it has Indo-Iranian origins. To me, Steppe DNA is just a label. No reason why people in the Steppes cannot be modeled as having ancestors from India. When people make grandiose claims like "No Steppe DNA in IVC", it sounds like bullshit to me. If we are all Africans, are you telling me that there are no common DNA strands or SNPs between IVC people and Steppe people?

shiv
BRF Oldie
Posts: 35017
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Pindliyon ka Gooda

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

Postby shiv » 27 Apr 2018 18:58

Anshuman.Kumar wrote:
I am not qualified to get an answer to.this.


Most of us are not. It makes me laugh but the gobbledygook of linguistics is an exact analogy.

As I see it no serious person (such as you, or me, or Arun or Rudradev) would be able to critique this particular paper easily. Even geneticists will not be able to critique it easily. Even studying the data will take time. We must wait for more studies. If you ask my opinion there is a rush to get certain studies out soon. No longer is it pure science. It is about fame and funding.

Do you recall Ramar Pillai - petrol from water, or cold fusion? What is faulty will get called out - given time. As I see it we have spent 200 years believing crap and only in the last 15-20 years have we started taking this stuff seriously.

What has been done for 200 years? "Information space" has been flooded with certain views. So what must we do? We need to flood information space with the alternate view. The "opposition" will react with more of same. No need fight where they appear strong. Hit the weakest links. That is what I will do.

Anshuman.Kumar
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 40
Joined: 08 Sep 2016 20:16

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

Postby Anshuman.Kumar » 27 Apr 2018 19:05

Prem Kumar wrote:There are 2 main approaches as I see it
1) Shiv's approach, which argues that genetics does not mean language. Sanskrit is likely several thousand years old. It or its predecessor was spread over large parts of Iran. And it likely could have spread to Europe and Steppes from there

2) We look into what exactly is "Steppe DNA" and if it has Indo-Iranian origins. To me, Steppe DNA is just a label. No reason why people in the Steppes cannot be modeled as having ancestors from India. When people make grandiose claims like "No Steppe DNA in IVC", it sounds like bullshit to me. If we are all Africans, are you telling me that there are no common DNA strands or SNPs between IVC people and Steppe people?



Absolutely.

Prem Kumar
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2187
Joined: 31 Mar 2009 00:10

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

Postby Prem Kumar » 27 Apr 2018 19:07

The first thing to dismantle a narrative is to question the terms that are used casually as if they are self-evident. I will give 2 examples of such recent skullduggery

1) Steppe DNA: can some geneticist define what the heck this is? It better be some marker that is so goddamn unique that, just by looking at the DNA, I know it's a Steppe man. I think Steppe DNA is a bullshit term, just like Avestan (hat tip to Shiv)

2) ANI & ASI: a very pathetic attempt at bait-n-switch! In 2009, Reich proposed that ALL Indians are a mix of ANI & ASI. This was swallowed. But at least he postulated that ANI & ASI were 65K year old African migrants into India. What Vageesh's paper did was to move the date from 65K years ago to 4K years ago! But they retained the original definition - I.e eve though the "new ANI" is only 4K years ago, it's the ancestor of ALL Indians. This is bullshit again. Are they telling me that a heavily populated country like India had a few ANI folks come in and have sex with EVERYONE so that all Indians carry ANI. And all this sex happened in a 500-1000 year timeframe!

RoyG
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5181
Joined: 10 Aug 2009 05:10

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

Postby RoyG » 27 Apr 2018 19:12

Prem Kumar wrote:There are 2 main approaches as I see it
1) Shiv's approach, which argues that genetics does not mean language. Sanskrit is likely several thousand years old. It or its predecessor was spread over large parts of Iran. And it likely could have spread to Europe and Steppes from there

2) We look into what exactly is "Steppe DNA" and if it has Indo-Iranian origins. To me, Steppe DNA is just a label. No reason why people in the Steppes cannot be modeled as having ancestors from India. When people make grandiose claims like "No Steppe DNA in IVC", it sounds like bullshit to me. If we are all Africans, are you telling me that there are no common DNA strands or SNPs between IVC people and Steppe people?


Shiv's approach is the only way we can look at the spread of language. The strongest argument is the one that Talageri and Oak put forward along with archaeology. Talageri looks at the text themselves while Oak looks at the astronomical findings. Things like grave culture being present without Steppe component is a huge victory imo against the idea that they brought indo-european lang into subcontinent. Slowly the traditional linguistic model is being chipped away but more has to be done especially by GoI.

Another funny thing for A_Gupta and Shiv:

Linear Elamite was a writing system from ancient Persia, contemporary with Indus script, and resembling it strongly. There was a bilingual monument called the Table of the Lion in the Louvre museum, in Akkadian, a known writing system, and with the same text in Linear Elamite, still undeciphered.

Because of this bilingual monument, scholars gained knowledge of the sound values for a handful of Linear Elamite signs. Already having compiled a list of Indus script signs from examples of Indus seal photos at the website of Dr. Srinivasan Kalyanaraman, I compared Indus signs to Linear Elamite, and found matches; a broken line (na) and a triple S (shu). Then I compared Brahmi script to my Indus sign list, and was shocked to find more than a dozen similar or identical signs; a, o, ka, ga, da, dha, ja, nya, tha, ta, tha, pa, ba, ma, la, ya, and sa.


https://swarajyamag.com/culture/how-i-d ... ley-script

Tony Joseph and others cite Elamite as evidence that a Dravidian lang was spoken in IVC however Sue Sullivan uses it to prove Sanskrit.

shiv
BRF Oldie
Posts: 35017
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Pindliyon ka Gooda

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

Postby shiv » 27 Apr 2018 19:13

chanakyaa wrote:
shiv wrote:I need some help

I want the following lines written in Bengali, Gujarati and Hindi using Roman alphabet. Don't worry about pronunciation - just write what you can using Roman


I am going to reconstruct Sanskrit. OK add Marathi if you like. Maybe Punjabi but my brain may get frazzled by too many langauges

Marathi
1. Maze nav Ashok aahe
2. Mazhi aai jevan karte (or banavte)*
3. Mazhe vadil (or "baba" informally speaking) shetkari aahet*

*adding the letter "h" above can be personal preference as in: Mazhi or Mazi, Mazhe or Maze (my)

Thanks - will wait for some inputs from Guj, Bangla,

shiv
BRF Oldie
Posts: 35017
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Pindliyon ka Gooda

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

Postby shiv » 27 Apr 2018 19:29

RoyG wrote:
Another funny thing for A_Gupta and Shiv:

Linear Elamite was a writing system from ancient Persia, contemporary with Indus script, and resembling it strongly. There was a bilingual monument called the Table of the Lion in the Louvre museum, in Akkadian, a known writing system, and with the same text in Linear Elamite, still undeciphered.

Because of this bilingual monument, scholars gained knowledge of the sound values for a handful of Linear Elamite signs. Already having compiled a list of Indus script signs from examples of Indus seal photos at the website of Dr. Srinivasan Kalyanaraman, I compared Indus signs to Linear Elamite, and found matches; a broken line (na) and a triple S (shu). Then I compared Brahmi script to my Indus sign list, and was shocked to find more than a dozen similar or identical signs; a, o, ka, ga, da, dha, ja, nya, tha, ta, tha, pa, ba, ma, la, ya, and sa.


https://swarajyamag.com/culture/how-i-d ... ley-script

Tony Joseph and others cite Elamite as evidence that a Dravidian lang was spoken in IVC however Sue Sullivan uses it to prove Sanskrit.

The biggest issue as I see it is coolie mentality of colonized Indians who will swallow what comes from the west in a moment and laugh at Indian sources. They eat out of western hands - and the only possible future advantage we have is to grab the narrative by winning hearts and minds with logic and the truth.

I agree that I am talking about a propaganda offensive here but that is exactly the game that is being played. Please allow me to digress with some meta-thoughts. 15 years or so ago when I first heard expressions like "Tejo Mahalaya" I reacted with incredulity and later embarrassment because I felt it was the wrong approach as it was not handling the issue within the "credibility/peer review structure" from the west. My thought was "If we can't convince "them" we won't get anywhere. But I now feel that we need to convince ourselves and it is necessary to flood information space with alternate narratives which will suit every genuine and crazy viewpoint so that the regular western narrative is always questioned with some alternative - even if it is mocked.

I had an exchange on the biorxiv site where it was once again clear to me that even when it comes to alternate scientific (or well researched) findings - ultimately humans settle down to "what they like to believe". The only way is to allow the area to be flooded and the space gradually expand a better theory into the space created by a profusion of hypothesis.

There may be one more confounding factor for us as Indians. Too many people are science trained and science bhakts and do not see the value of belief. Parts of the western narrative work not because they are scientifically valid, but because they are believed by western bhakts

Nilesh Oak
BRFite
Posts: 1669
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

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

Postby Nilesh Oak » 27 Apr 2018 21:26

nachiket wrote:
Nilesh Oak wrote:For those interested....

Dieter's Koch's random shots at AV observation & other stuff including his own claim (repeating claim of Dr. Daftari) and my response.

Total 10 parts.

Here is part 1 of 10

https://nileshoak.wordpress.com/2017/05 ... ch-part-1/

Nilesh Oak ji, I always had one doubt about the A-V observation since I first read the discussion on BRF between you, shiv, etc. Since epoch of Arundhati lasted from ~11000 BCE to ~4500 BCE, why would Vyaas consider it as an omen around 5561 BCE? At that point it has been that way (Arundhati walking ahead of Vasishtha) for over 5000 years. Or am I mistaken in my understanding of this phenomenon?


Only to add to what Murugan ji has ably stated,

Majority of astronomy observations from the Mahabharata are stated in the context of 'Omen' and no one has bothered to ask or explain why they were considered 'omen'. Someone has to do work on this theory of omen and make it objectively testable. Until then, this astronomy evidence can be tested, objectively, only via astronomy theory.
--
If you are further interested in deeper aspects of omen and my responses to identical question (omen and AV) by likes of Elst and Talageri, check out my blog and search for "elst' or 'Talageri'. I have responded to them both, in 8 part series, each.

Thanks.

Nilesh Oak
BRFite
Posts: 1669
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

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

Postby Nilesh Oak » 27 Apr 2018 21:46

RoyG wrote:


It wont. The migration came in 2000-1500 BC. These guys were buried in 2600 BC. They will just say they were dravidian speakers and were displaced later by sweaty white men on horseback. They will completely ignore the linguistic/archaeological findings.

A big problem I see for the other side is this: Burial culture wasn't brought by Steppe guys. Also coupled with the linguistic, astronomical and hydrographic evidence, it reinforces the idea that Sanskrit was entirely indigenous and went out.

I agree. It won't.

This is what I wrote at FB discussion group (in the context of Caravan mag article)

"Another 'hit job' and 'con job'. Folks, read it carefully, multiple times if required. Don't be exuberated, prematurely. The writer is saying confusing stuff.

Do read other MSM articles where this same Rai is quoted saying consistent stuff. Do recognize that Rakhigarhi aDNA, while important in its own right, its importance is exaggerated.

Dogmatic AITwallas would not be deterred. For example, assuming findings of aDNA is correct, AITwallas will claim that this means Aryans indeed came only after 4600 BP.

That is why phenomenal research works and writings of likes of Dr. Shiv Sastry, Shrikant Talageri, P Priyadarshi, Nilesh Oak (yours truly) & few others are key and decisive for final burial of AIT."

Anshuman.Kumar
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 40
Joined: 08 Sep 2016 20:16

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

Postby Anshuman.Kumar » 27 Apr 2018 21:57

I believe every single so called Steppe sample must be tested for that so called Iranian Neolithic admixture and then see how that relates with the swat samples. How much of Iranian admixture is in EMBA Steppe and MLBA Steppe.

Interesting thing is that EMBA Steppe Ancestry was dropped as a source for SWAT and modern SA and MLBA ancestry used..Which begs the question what was the need for it..Why divide bronze age steppe population into two parts ..What was missing and what was to be masked ..

A_Gupta
BRF Oldie
Posts: 11153
Joined: 23 Oct 2001 11:31
Contact:

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

Postby A_Gupta » 27 Apr 2018 22:14

One can only imagine how e.g, people at the time of Raja Ram Mohun Roy felt, faced with an increasing loss of political independence, and confronted with an alien knowledge system that they didn't really understand, increasing impoverishment and so on. India is independent now, and while there are still sepoys, there are plenty of independent minds who don't rely on a Raj for patronage; we understand much better how the sciences and social "sciences" knowledge-systems work, where they work well and where they produce garbage; and we are not isolated in our little corners of the world, but can talk to each other. But it is going to be a long slog. The question to me is always - is there the collective will to do this? A few scattered brilliant minds won't accomplish this, this is a sadhana of a people.

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 52582
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

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

Postby ramana » 27 Apr 2018 22:20

Anshuman.Kumar wrote:Yes that is the agenda and they have more or less succeeded .

I have nothing against good men here on this forum or else where who are pushing on a homegrown perspective on Indian ancient History and our roots..But you must accept that with zero evidence they have pushed AIT and then AMT without any real setback and. now with some.evidence however small..They will just destroy everything that is sacred for us.


What are you trying to say here? Blame us on the forum?

if you are whining please take it elsewhere.

shiv
BRF Oldie
Posts: 35017
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Pindliyon ka Gooda

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

Postby shiv » 27 Apr 2018 22:41

https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-018-03773-6
Arun could you look at this and point me to that blog article you had linked a few days ago that disputed something by David Anthony?

nachiket
Forum Moderator
Posts: 6835
Joined: 02 Dec 2008 10:49

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

Postby nachiket » 27 Apr 2018 23:03

Nilesh Oak wrote:Only to add to what Murugan ji has ably stated,

Majority of astronomy observations from the Mahabharata are stated in the context of 'Omen' and no one has bothered to ask or explain why they were considered 'omen'. Someone has to do work on this theory of omen and make it objectively testable. Until then, this astronomy evidence can be tested, objectively, only via astronomy theory.
--
If you are further interested in deeper aspects of omen and my responses to identical question (omen and AV) by likes of Elst and Talageri, check out my blog and search for "elst' or 'Talageri'. I have responded to them both, in 8 part series, each.

Thanks.

Thanks. I will look it up on your blog. Thanks to Murugan saar for his explanation as well.

Supratik
BRF Oldie
Posts: 6167
Joined: 09 Nov 2005 10:21
Location: USA

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

Postby Supratik » 27 Apr 2018 23:15

There is a larger scale DNA study of Rakhigarhi going on in CCMB, Hyderabad and collaborators. In science absence of evidence is not evidence of absence. The Rai study if true just says that in that sample that is what they found. Although I am not sure whether Iran farmer is an artificial construct or there is actually some data on it. Onge exist. In all likelihood IVC, which ran for several thousand years, like other urban contexts right upto modern times will be a mixture of peoples with significant immigration.


Anshuman, more than 95% of the Hindu liturgy including the majority of the RV were composed in sub-continental context irrespective of who came from where. Just keep that in mind.

Anshuman.Kumar
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 40
Joined: 08 Sep 2016 20:16

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

Postby Anshuman.Kumar » 27 Apr 2018 23:24

Supratik wrote:There is a larger scale DNA study of Rakhigarhi going on in CCMB, Hyderabad and collaborators. In science absence of evidence is not evidence of absence. The Rai study if true just says that in that sample that is what they found. Although I am not sure whether Iran farmer is an artificial construct or there is actually some data on it. Onge exist. In all likelihood IVC, which ran for several thousand years, like other urban contexts right upto modern times will be a mixture of peoples with significant immigration.


Anshuman, more than 95% of the Hindu liturgy including the majority of the RV were composed in sub-continental context irrespective of who came from where. Just keep that in mind.


Obviously.

The two sets of responses I had here in this thread..Were about the immediate political aftrmath of these studies..Which is hugely problematic in near term and may be in long term
And..What can be done to take this on..What questions should be. Framed from our side and solving them....

As the more observant fellows here and on SM have noted ..Nick Patterson is the key man in the delivery of tailor made conclusions ..So we will need to have resources like him on our side to look into data and find out what is being done..What algorithms are at play there

RoyG
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5181
Joined: 10 Aug 2009 05:10

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

Postby RoyG » 27 Apr 2018 23:28

Supratik wrote:There is a larger scale DNA study of Rakhigarhi going on in CCMB, Hyderabad and collaborators. In science absence of evidence is not evidence of absence. The Rai study if true just says that in that sample that is what they found. Although I am not sure whether Iran farmer is an artificial construct or there is actually some data on it. Onge exist. In all likelihood IVC, which ran for several thousand years, like other urban contexts right upto modern times will be a mixture of peoples with significant immigration.


Anshuman, more than 95% of the Hindu liturgy including the majority of the RV were composed in sub-continental context irrespective of who came from where. Just keep that in mind.


This has already been conceded by Vigeesh so that in itself is a major victory. His thesis is PIE came, sanskrit as well as rig veda was formulated in subcontinent and spread out from there into NW into modern day Iran. So corpus of Rig Veda as well as Sanskrit is entirely subcontinental.

There is one major problem with his theory though. Indus seals were found as far as Haifa. If trade was so pervasive, why aren't their any Dravidian loan words West of Iran including Mediterranean and Europe. We however see the opposite. They have many loan words from Sanskrit. The dates of the seals are > 2600 BC.

Again it is 100% impossible that Steppe people could have carried indo-european language fam. Simply look at the damn textual, archaeological, and astronomic evidence.

shiv
BRF Oldie
Posts: 35017
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Pindliyon ka Gooda

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

Postby shiv » 27 Apr 2018 23:42

https://twitter.com/bennedose/status/98 ... 76896?s=19
Are Vedas a valid source of info?

If NO- then there were no Aryas & no migration

If YES - Then Aryas did exist along with Saraswati river 2500 BC. That is 1000 years before steppe migration.

Take your pick

Supratik
BRF Oldie
Posts: 6167
Joined: 09 Nov 2005 10:21
Location: USA

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

Postby Supratik » 27 Apr 2018 23:44

Anshuman,

We shouldn't be bothered about the non-scientific outcome of the results for two reasons. One everybody is an immigrant at certain point if you go back in time sufficiently. The Europeans are a mixture of native hunter gatherers (who at some point were also intruders to the region), middle eastern farmers and a third wave which is still being investigated and which probably brought IE languages. Does it mean it is the end of European civilization. Even the Onge/AASI and postulated Iranian farmers are immigrants to the land which is thought to be through the sea route from Africa for the former. Second, as I have mentioned above more than 95% of the Hindu liturgy has sub-continental context which doesn't change irrespective of what genetics says. We should take this only as a scientific project and not fall into the trap of politics which is what the Left and a section of Western Indologists want.

RoyG,

I think those people did exist and there was to and fro migration. I think the timlines are off. I don't know why it has to be specifically from the Steppes. My considered opinion.


Return to “Strategic Issues & International Relations Forum”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: kPrakash and 44 guests