Out-of-India - From Theory to Truth

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 19 Jun 2012 17:45

ManishH wrote:
shiv wrote:Manishji, Shri David Anthony's arguments about how the Rig Veda came from central Asia is based on quite a number of assumptions.
Nowhere have I seen anyone claiming ṛgveda "came from central asia".

Really? The language, the people, the culture and the religion all came from Central Asia as per Shri Anthony.
Read on: Pages 454 to 456

By 1600 BCE all the old trading towns, cities, and brick-built fortified
estates of eastern Iran and the former BMAC region in Central Asia were
abandoned . Malyan, the largest city on the Iranian plateau, was reduced
to a small walled compound and tower occupied within a vast ruin,
where elite administrarors, probably representatives of Elamite kings still
resided atop the former city. Pastoral economies spread across Iran and
into Baluchistan, where clay images of riders on horseback appeared at
Pirak about 1700 BCE. Chariot corps appeared across the Near East as a
new military technology. An Old Indic-speaking group of chariot war-
riors took control of a Hurrian-speaking kingdom in north Syria about
1500 BCE. Their oaths referred to deites (Indra, Varuna, Mithra, and the
Nasatyas) and concepts (r'ta) that were the central deities and concepts in
the Rig Veda, and the language they spoke was a dialect of the Old Indic
Sanskrit of the Rig Veda. 39 The Mitanni dynasts came from the same eth-
nolinguistic population as the more famous Old Indic-speakers who si-
multaneously pushed eastward into the Punjab, where, according to many
Vedic scholars, the Rig Veda was compiled about 1500-1300 BCE. Both
groups probably originated in the hybrid cultures of the Andronovo/
Tazabagyab/ coarse-incised-ware type in Bactria and Margiana 40

The language of the Rig Veda contained many traces of its syncretic ori-
gins. The deity name ["dra and the drug-deity name Soma, the two central
elements of the religion of the Rig Veda, were non-Indo-Iranian words
borrowed in the contact zone. Many of the qualities of the Indo-Iranian
god of might/victory, Verethraghna, were transferred to the adopted god
Indra, who became the central deity of the developing Old Indic culture 41
Indra was the subject of250 hymns, a quarter of the Rig Veda. He was as-
sociated more than any other deity with Soma, a stimulant drug (perhaps
derived from Ephedra) probably borrowed from the BMAC religion. His
rise to prominence was a peculiar trait of the Old Indic speakers. Indra
was regarded in later Avestan Iranian texts as a minor demon. Iranian dia-
lects probably developed in the northern steppes among Andronovo and
Srubnaya people who had kept their distance from the southern civiliza-
tions. Old Indic languages and rituals developed in the contact zone of
Central Asia

The Old Indic of the Rig Veda contained at least 383 non-Indo-European
words borrowed from a source belonging to a different language family.
Alexander Lubotsky has shown that common Indo-Iranian, the parent of
both Old Indic and Iranian, probably had already borrowed worcis trom
the same non-Indo-European language that later enriched Old Indic.
Among the fifty-five terms borrowed into common Indo-Iranian were
the words for bread (*nagna-), ploughshare (sp'ara), canal (*iavia), brick
(*ift(i)a-, camel (*Huftra-), ass (*/!'ara-) sacrificing priest (*ufig-), soma (*an{u-),
and Indra (*indra-). The BMAC fortresses and cities are an excellent source

for the vocabulary related to irrigation agriculture, bricks, camels, and don-
keys; and the phonology of the religious terms is the same, so probably came
from the same source. The religious loans suggest a close cultural relation-
ship between some people who spoke common Indo-Iranian and the occu-
pants of the BMAC fortresses. These borrowed southern cults might possibly
have been one of the features that distinguished the Petrovka culture from
Sintashta. Petrovka people were the first to migrate from the northern
steppes to Tugai on the northern edge of Central Asia.

Lubotsky suggested that Old Indic developed as a vanguard language
south ofIndo-lranian, closer to the source of the loans. The archaeological
evidence supports Lubotsky's suggestion. The earliest Old Indic dialects
probably developed about 1800-1600 BCE in the contact zone south of
the Zeravshan among northern-derived immigrants who were integrated
with and perhaps ruled over the declining fortunes of the post-BMAC
citadels. They retained a decidedly pastoral set of values. In the Rig Veda
the clouds were compared to dappled cows full of milk; milk and butter
were the symbols of prosperity; milk, butter, cattle, and horses were the
proper offerings to the gods; Indra was compared to a mighty bull; and
wealth was counted in fat cattle and swift horses. Agricultural products
were never offered to the gods. The people of the Rig Veda did not live in
brick houses and had no cities, although their enemies, the Dasyus, did
live in walled strongholds. Chariots were used in races and war; the gods
drove chariots across the sky. Almost all important deities were mascu-
line.The only important female deity was Dawn, and she was less powerful
than Indra, Varuna, Mithra, Agni, or the Divine Twins. Funerals included
both cremation (as in Federovo graves) and inhumation (as in Andronovo
and Tazabagyab graves). Steppe cultures are an acceptable source for all
these details of belief and practice, whereas the culture of the BMAC,
with its female deity in a flounced skirt, brick fortresses, and irrigation
agriculture, clearly is not.

During the initial phase of contact, the Sintashta or the Petrovka cul-
tures or both borrowed some vocabulary and rituals from the BMAC,
accounting for the fifty-five terms in common Indo-Iranian. These in-
cluded the drug soma, which remained in Iranian ritual usage as haoma. In
the second phase of contact, the speakers of Old Indic borrowed much
more heavily from the same language when they lived in the shadows of
the old BMAC settlements and began to explore southward into Afghan-
istan and Iran. Archaeology shows a pattern quite compatible with that
suggested by the linguistic evidence.

member_22872 · Post by **member_22872** » 19 Jun 2012 17:49

ṛgveda before Harrappan civilization is even more unlikely as there is no evidence for chariotry and horse around Sindhu before 3000 BC. Even evidence of bronze age starts appearing only around 3000 BC in India.

Manish ji,
how does one define chariots? what makes one be sure that the chariot description AIT supporters are seaching for, are the same as the ones ridden by vedic Indians? Kanzas says that chariots in India are basically are carts and he provides archeological proof of their existentence during the dates you mentioned.

Lalmohan · Post by **Lalmohan** » 19 Jun 2012 17:50

shiv - the above quote has rigveda composed in the punjab

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 19 Jun 2012 17:56

Lalmohan wrote:shiv - the above quote has rigveda composed in the punjab

Compiled. Not composed. The suggestion is that it was composed earlier.

SaiK · Post by **SaiK** » 19 Jun 2012 18:03

that is where i am disputing .. it is not like a big bang theory that composition happened in a flash!

just read adi shankara's story.. how much he had to struggle to win the giants of vedic scholars to prove his concepts.

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 19 Jun 2012 18:14

SaiK wrote:that is where i am disputing .. it is not like a big bang theory that composition happened in a flash!

Hey! E-v-e-r-y-b-o-d-y knows that. Try telling that to the people who come up with these theories.

That question was answered right at the begining of this thread. It is quite easy for bards to compose on the move.

So they composed on the move. In old Indic (Sanskrit) and compiled in Punjab after picking up the god Indra from the Avestan speaking Zoroastrians on the way.

The timeline? All cooked up. The archaeological evidence? 2500 km away. The linguistic evidence? Cooked up.

SaiK · Post by **SaiK** » 19 Jun 2012 18:33

marten, that is a good nudge.. pointer-to-a-pointer. every clan, sect or group would like to add politics to the core and make stories to their own ends. i think, that itself shows shiva's representation in multiple forms, and acceptable concept of matter and form.

one story (shivites) is about the fierce rudra tandav after he beheads daksha.. since then rudra.
another story (vaishanavites) is about asuras born from vishnu's ears, threatened brahma (actually sitting on top of lotus-stemed at vishnu's naval), and brahma became angry.. from that anger rudra was born.

see.. how stories twist to taste, and carries hidden propaganda!

member_22872 · Post by **member_22872** » 19 Jun 2012 19:14

just read adi shankara's story.. how much he had to struggle to win the giants of vedic scholars to prove his concepts.

They think studying Rg Veda and composing it is very similar to Sydney Sheldon novel. For Hindus, Vedas are pramaana, They base everything on the instructions of these texts. Vedic rituals are based on these, marriages are based on these, death rituals are based on these, even naming a baby is based on these. When so much importance is given to Vedic cannon, would it be possible for nomadic people to compose them on the move?

If one takes the a vedic's scholar's IQ to be average, and he spends 10-15 years just memorizing the Vedas(may be just one not all 4), would be possible for these nomadic Aryans to compose, memorize and transmit by the word of mouth, all when on the move? To think and pondered about intricacies of life etc, one needs to have peace of mind, to have peace of mind, one needs to have security, food rations, clothing, etc, when you are leading nomadic life style, being a TFTA warrior and all, you are leading that life style because you have scarcity of food supply and/or are running scared of getting killed by rival groups, hence you are also a warrior always on the move. And now you also found time to compose Rg Veda and transmit it such that the no sound change occurred for hundreds of years?

gashish · Post by **gashish** » 19 Jun 2012 19:20

Thanks shiv & ManishH for excellent debate.

Excerpt from Anthony's book as posted above by shiv:

The Old Indic of the Rig Veda contained at least 383 non-Indo-European
words borrowed from a source belonging to a different language family.
Alexander Lubotsky has shown that common Indo-Iranian, the parent of
both Old Indic and Iranian, probably had already borrowed worcis trom
the same non-Indo-European language that later enriched Old Indic.
Among the fifty-five terms borrowed into common Indo-Iranian were
the words for bread (*nagna-), ploughshare (sp'ara), canal (*iavia), brick
(*ift(i)a-, camel (*Huftra-), ass (*/!'ara-) sacrificing priest (*ufig-), soma (*an{u-),
and Indra (*indra-). The BMAC fortresses and cities are an excellent source

So the PIE speakers named their main hero/god in RV with a term borrowed from non-PIE language?

what non-PIE language does Indra come from?

Indra rode horse in RV. There was a discussion few pages ago where declining importance of Indra (or change in his vehicle from horse to elephant) in post-RV period was cited as adaptability of natural religion and offered as an analogy to why PIE speakers might have forgotten about their steppe rivers by the time of RV compilation.
Most important god, Indra, rode most important native animal, horse, was the main thrust of one of the key arguments of AIT/AMT. But name Indra itself is borrowed, if above is true. If that is plausible, then RV compilers "borrowing" horse as main ride of Indra doesn't seem far-fetched either, IMHO.

RajeshA · Post by **RajeshA** » 19 Jun 2012 19:42

I read somewhere the following

Sthapatya veda prescribes detailed principles of the construction of temples, homes, and cities. One of the main principles of Sthapaatya Veda is that cities be laid out on an exact north-south grid, with all houses facing due east. Another is that the buildings be oriented to the east with a slope to teh east and any body of water on the east. Mehrgarg and most other cities of the Saraswati and Indus valleys followed these principles exactly.

While it is unknown when the principles of architecture were codified into the system described in the Sthapatya Veda, it is reasonable to conclude that the knowledge was well known and practiced during the earliest periods of this civilization. Thus, since Mehrgarg was built on these principles, the Sthapatya Veda was known at a time prior to that. Considering that the Sthapatya Veda is a part of the Atharva Veda, and the Atharva Veda came atleast 1000 years after the Rig Veda, it can be assumed that the origins of this ancient civilization date at least to 8,000 BC.

May be someone who knows can comment on this:

a) In Mehrgarh are the buildings really in a North-South, East-West orientation with the front of the houses facing East?

b) Is such a recommendation really a part of scripture?

Lalmohan · Post by **Lalmohan** » 19 Jun 2012 19:49

in hot climates, and in some cultures, streets were traditionally laid out to ensure that the city remained as cool as possible as the sun moved through the sky by creating sufficient shade. i believe some nomads also pitch their tents with the doorway facing east - probably, like farmers - to greet the day and figure out the weather so that they could get on with their daily routines in the best way
therefore such "guidance" could easily become scripture

RajeshA · Post by **RajeshA** » 19 Jun 2012 19:52

Lalmohan ji,
thanks. One would have to see if cities where "Indo-Aryans" could not have had an influence, also availed of this rational thinking.

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 19 Jun 2012 21:29

RajeshA, One way would be to look up maps of the cities on Wiki and confirm the layout. BTW Vedas are not scripture.

Only guidelines!

SaiK · Post by **SaiK** » 19 Jun 2012 21:46

brihaspati wrote: I guess the ancients used "saraswati" - the one who [has speed] flows, as a synonym for language process itself [saraswati is the generator the giver of language - and men have only 1/4th part] : as a dynamic process which merges many different streams/threads.

if you look at 23.342256,67.280273 coordinates in google map, the lands of the sunken arabian sea during ice ages, you would see the flow of the river -deep gorge - most likely saraswati.

if one would extend a map to current times, one could imagine gujarat could claim that place to be theirs.

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 19 Jun 2012 22:02

Indian identity is linked to the Vedas so it's not as if Indians will not be extra interested in the origins of the Vedas. it is quite OK if it is proved beyond reasonable doubt that the Vedas were originally scraped out of a toilet bowl in Europe or whelped by a clap ridden Arabian whore. We will have to learn to accept that.

But when we have a series of bullshitters making up things and then asking "So what? Whose history is it? Why are you bothered? Why can't you accept the crap that we dish out? " they need to be taught that things do not work that way.

The fundamental thing in all science and even in Indian culture is satya, not faeces or *SzzHitt or whatever the origin is said to be in PIE. I am astounded at the fudging and politicking that still goes on. It's not surprising that a lot of educated Indians are worked up. These people are basically fucxing with Indian history and are enjoying the bullshitting.

member_22872 · Post by **member_22872** » 19 Jun 2012 22:08

Shiv garu, as you already know, it isn't just history of India, today the argument that AIT/AMT took place and that the Aryans drove Dravidians to the south and Aryans are the true custodians of the Vedas is also dividing us. If this is not taken seriously, I wont be surprised if we end up with another LTTE on our hands. What these (Europeans) have done and are still doing by keeping this alive is not good for our country.

RajeshA · Post by **RajeshA** » 19 Jun 2012 22:10

Paper

Published on Nov 04, 2011
By T.R.S Prasanna
Department of Metallurgical Engineering and Materials Science
Indian Institute of Technology, Bombay

Ancient Indian Astronomy and the Aryan Invasion Theory

On scribd
@ iitb

=> All references lead to 3000 BC

The key verses are in Kausitaki [Keith 1920], Satapatha [Eggeling 1882-1900] and Pancavimsa [Caland 1931] Brahmanas and in Taittiriya Samhita [Keith 1914].

From the paper

Thibaut [1895] states “The ekashtaka the commentators declare to be the eighth day of the dark half of Magha, i.e. eighth day after full-moon in Magha, the months being counted as beginning with the light half… Sutra texts, which define ekashtaka, not merely as the eighth of the dark half of Magha, but more definitely as the eighth day after Magha full-moon.” He also states (p-93) that according to the commentators the terms “vyasta” and “vichchhina” in TS 7.4.8 and PB 5.9.1-6 “refer to the turn of the year connected with winter solstice”.

From his comments on the Sutra texts, he could have reached the obvious conclusion that new year began after amanta Magha new-moon at winter solstice. Instead, he gave two interpretations, one beginning with “If the year is viewed as beginning with Phalguni fullmoon...” This is incorrect as Phalguna full-moon at new year belongs to the earlier scheme.

His second interpretation begins with “If, as said just now, months are counted from fullmoon to full-moon…” In both interpretations, he tries to interpret verses on ekastaka into preconceived hypotheses (“If…”) and not on merits. In our view, this is an indication that he was aware of the consequences of interpreting ekastaka on merits. He also states “As to the latter explanation I, however, must remark that it is contradicted by those Sutra texts, which define the ekastaka, not merely as the eighth day of the dark half of Magha, but more definitely as the eighth day after Magha full-moon”. Even as he acknowledged that Sutra texts contradicted his (purnimanta) interpretation, thereby accepting their authority, he would not mention dates they implied, which is truly surprising.

Clearly, he was aware that Sutra texts implied an amanta interpretation of ekastaka and led to 3000 BC. He was the Sanskrit scholar most familiar with mathematics and astronomy and had translated the Sulvasturas and Varahamihira‟s Pancasiddhantika (astronomical treatise). He translated the Sulvasutras in 1875. Seidenberg [1978] states “Thibaut himself never belaboured or elaborated these views; nor did he formulate the obvious conclusion, namely, that the Greeks were not the inventors of plane geometry, rather it was the Indians. At least this was the message Greek scholars saw in Thibaut‟s paper. And they didn‟t like it.” In 1899, he finally dated the Sulvasutras (which codified older mathematics) to 400 BC and underplayed their mathematics. Seidenberg [1978] states “the damage had been done and the Sulvasutras have never taken the position in the history of mathematics that they deserve”. Clearly, Thibaut deferred to the prevailing opinions of the day on the most crucial issues. His interpretation of ekastaka, especially, will diminish his high standing as a scholar.

7. Conclusion
Several astronomical references in Samhita and Brahmana texts consistently lead to 3000 BC. Independent confirmation that Rohini marked equinox and Krittika was on true east in this period is presented. References to Purva Phalguni full-moon marking new year can only be dated to 3000 BC (new year at winter solstice) or 1200AD (new year at spring) and nowhere near 800 BC. The Aryan Invasion Theory proposed by western Sanskrit scholars is proved to be wrong by their correct and unanimous interpretation of ekastaka to 3000 BC for the last 80 years. Verses on ekastaka are so specific that an alternate correct interpretation is most unlikely and also explains the unanimity among Sanskrit scholars. Verses on ekastaka, KB 19.3 and Mahasivaratri all refer to the same feature, amanta Magha new-moon at winter solstice (3000 BC), making it a very robust conclusion. Impossibly large errors are needed to date these references to 800 BC. Western Sanskrit scholars are unaware that their interpretations lead to dates ranging from 3000 BC to 800 BC to 1200 AD. They should have rejected AIT 80 years ago following Caland‟s correct interpretation of ekastaka but, unfortunately, were unaware that it led to 3000 BC.

ManishH · Post by **ManishH** » 19 Jun 2012 22:26

shiv wrote:
ManishH wrote: Nowhere have I seen anyone claiming ṛgveda "came from central asia".
Really? The language, the people, the culture and the religion all came from Central Asia as per Shri Anthony.
Read on: Pages 454 to 456

By 1600 BCE all the old trading towns, cities, and brick-built fortified
estates of eastern Iran and the former BMAC region in Central Asia were
abandoned . Malyan, the largest city on the Iranian plateau, was reduced
to a small walled compound and tower occupied within a vast ruin,
where elite administrarors, probably representatives of Elamite kings still
resided atop the former city.

Shiv: nowhere is this passage saying that the kings of Malyan or any other BMAC city were Indo-Aryans. All that is being said is that Indo-Aryans passed through this region; and this region too felt the after effects of the advent of pastoral economies from the steppes. The after-effect was the gradual end of urban economies in this region. Whether this was a violent transformation or not is another debate.

Not that this is a foregone conclusion - the trace of Andronovo pottery ends in Bactria. There is no trace of Andronovo pottery at all in India. That is one of the major discontinuities that Anthony's book doesn't mention.

Their oaths referred to deites (Indra, Varuna, Mithra, and the
Nasatyas) and concepts (r'ta) that were the central deities and concepts in
the Rig Veda, and the language they spoke was a dialect of the Old Indic
Sanskrit of the Rig Veda. 39 The Mitanni dynasts came from the same eth-
nolinguistic population as the more famous Old Indic-speakers who si-
multaneously pushed eastward into the Punjab, where, according to many

I have mentioned before, the Mitanni lexicon is too small to make a judgement that they are a sister to the Vedic culture of India, or a daughter. But whatever scant evidence there is - shows that Mitanni branch was sister. It has the older disyllabic diphthongs (aika v/s eka), it has the older glides (uaruna v/s varuna, uartana v/s vartana). Also evidence for hiatus (indara v/s indra).

Vedic scholars, the Rig Veda was compiled about 1500-1300 BCE. Both
groups probably originated in the hybrid cultures of the Andronovo/
Tazabagyab/ coarse-incised-ware type in Bactria and Margiana 40

Andronovo/Tazbaygyab is a pastoral culture found in Bactria/Margiana - it is not considered as the one that made the cities. The word compiled is unfortunate choice of words - it's a literal translation of sanskrit word 'samhita' which is used for Vedas.

The language of the Rig Veda contained many traces of its syncretic ori-
gins. The deity name ["dra and the drug-deity name Soma, the two central
elements of the religion of the Rig Veda, were non-Indo-Iranian words
borrowed in the contact zone.

This and all the rest of the statements basically are from Lubotsky "Indo-Iranian substratum", 2001. It's far from definite that Bactria-Margiana was the region of Indo-Iranian unity. The only corroborative evidence between linguistics and archaeology here is use of ephedra. But that too is not a unique shared feature with BMAC religion. Eg. even Tocharian mummies carried ephedra.

Anthony's methodology here has deviated from corroboration to gap-filling (as B-ji once said).

Based on ephedra, he may be right about 'soma' but Indra goes back to the root 'ind' for moisture or drop - it's related to the belief that Indra freed the waters.

Whether Bactria-Margiana region was the area of Indo-Iranian unity or not - the hypothesis of Eurasia as the origin of Indo-Iranians is quite definite.

RajeshA · Post by **RajeshA** » 19 Jun 2012 23:50

SaiK wrote:if you look at 23.342256,67.280273 coordinates in google map, the lands of the sunken arabian sea during ice ages, you would see the flow of the river -deep gorge - most likely saraswati.

Indeed a deep gorge! Just shows its ancient might!

'ámbitame nádītame dévitame sárasvati' indeed!

There may be many more cities or port cities rights at its delta under the sea.

SaiK · Post by **SaiK** » 19 Jun 2012 23:59

what is more evident is the ravine is deeper as we go away from the land into the deep sea.. and near the current edge, you can see the depth is shallower meaning naturally for so many years all those sediments that were washed away from land has fallen near by... and gives some idea that after a major eco/geo-disaster... we still have evidences somewhere to start a major theory and prove it.

plus, from gradients one could theorize on ice age melt, and water level rise and corroborate the facts.

so, my thought is by some measurement technique, one could estimate the age of that event happened. now, all it takes is some pee etch dee guy to work on it.

if you don't get a h&d guy, just hire (shamefully of course) james cameron. he will do it for us.

brihaspati · Post by **brihaspati** » 20 Jun 2012 00:13

Actually - the so-called retreat of urban cultures in the Iranian plateau, or even the so-called BMAC zone, actually coincides with a well known disruption and discontinuity in the climate records. This is a roughly 200 year period intense and +/- another 100 years of preceding and following effects/anticipator climatic events centred around the year 4000 ybp.

This was a global megadrought. We have adequate geologic evidence for this - and people acknowledge this effect on "civilizations" onlee on those which happen to be also acknowledged [hopefully purely accidental coincidence on the part of totally politically neutral linguists/archeologists] as somehow related to later origins of Judaeo-Christian memes.

That is Egyptian and Mesopotamian. Somehow, for some perhaps genuine linguistically academic reason, this megadrought effect is not considered that much in central asian, steppes, or Indian case of "abandonment" of "high civilization"urban centres.

An illustrative point is that in Europe, people have begun to explore the "dark ages" to try and show that they were not so dark after all. Previous claims were that of "abandonment" of "fortified Roman" centres etc. Now, people find "continuities" instead of discontinuities. I guess, that is difficult to allow on the Indian discourse, since the the ideological grip on that discourse is being challenged.

Archeological records are difficult to clearly rule in favour of "abandonment" and "IE" sweeping or drifting through ruins. That is simply a romanticization of a speculation not rooted in logic or empirical evidence. In fact the same sites are interpreted differently by Soviet era archeologists, and later Russian archeologists, and even later CAR state origin indigenous archeologists, and each new western academic group around its mentor has a new interpretation - to the polite but complete rejection or exclusion of the rival mentors lines.

Even more than urban populations, pastoralists would be more affected by droughts or changes in drainage patterns. This is why linguists avoid the climate angle of "abandonment" and try a vague mumbling of trade routes disrupted because of other areas problems. If a city had to be abandoned because of loss of rain and water, pastoralists would find the area dry too. In fact there are traces of drying up of large rivers or river systems in the central asian highlands in the period of "abandonment".

There is nothing to conclusively show that pastoralists did not visit the urban centres when the centres flourished. Or we cannot rule out urbanites engaged in animal husbandry. Urban centres were not and cannot reasonably be expected to be single strata societies.

The soc-alled drift of IE groups, could merely be the disproportionate share in the archeological evidence of a period of change in economy when the pastoralist element of the local economy outshines other elements.

SaiK · Post by **SaiK** » 20 Jun 2012 00:21

have you seen the show by spencer wells on his theory out of africa, and various migration theories.. first set, second set of migration etc.. he has a migration map from 60k year back etc.. and has done some good research.. he goes and meets people from all over.

one of the evidence that would help us here (within the past 60k year event period), is somewhere in turkmenistan/tajikistan, he discovers articles [archeology digging] of traded items, bronze and idols, that resembles saraswati, vina like instrument, some statues and gold ornaments, that resembles indic art. and these were traded, and found.. so people do come out to saraswati valley, trade and go back with these purchases.

people always have graduated or migrated from hotter regions to colder regions, and not the other way round. this should be the first axiom to begin with for out of india. and the migration happened when ice age melted.. so warmed up, and migration began.

the ice age melting period began some 20k year back, and only ended about 13k year back. so, for 7k years the ice was melting and earth was warming.

Vayutuvan · Post by **Vayutuvan** » 20 Jun 2012 00:23

Murugan wrote:Hocks and Witzels will be there. can these guys pronounce sanskrit words properly?

Murugan ji
Prof. Hock teaches Sanskrit.

brihaspati · Post by **brihaspati** » 20 Jun 2012 00:25

There are two or three crucial identifications on which the whole AIT stands, and almost all of it is now purely linguistic. Archeologically, genetics - things have got so complicated and contradictory to the pre-existing AIT dogma, that pro-AIT linguists simply avoid or squat on a selection of archeological opinion as it suits them.

These are horse, chariot, iron. Linguistically each of these three depends on the claim of a word in an extant literature/narrative/epigraphy - identifying them.

Note that aswa, ratha, and ayas (especially krsna-ayas) - all have been identified with modern concepts based on their modern or immediate pre-modern usage. Linguists acknowledge that a culture might simply modify a pre-existing word in its own language to describe a new object, or overload the pre-existing word with an alternative identification indicating the newer object. However, they are absolutely unprepared to consider the possibility that such adaptations of meaning might have happened with these three too.

Moreover not only in the direction of influence they predicate - from NW->SE but it could have been in the other direction too. A proto-horse could have been eulogized in RVedic, could have been hitched to a modified bullock cart [without bits] for speed in northern India, all well before any IE. When this culture spreads or contaminates the steppes - they use their native proto-horse for the same purpose.

But no - linguists will not consider that possibility. It goes against their linguistic drift predictions based on an initial assumption about directionality.

SaiK · Post by **SaiK** » 20 Jun 2012 00:43

yes.. in the map of migrations, the first wave of migration happened some 60k year back to 130k year back out of africa - mitochondrial DNA analysis with madurai adivasis and people from africa who have been married within their sect only for known ages, were compared and patterns identified.

there was another wave of migration that happened during the same or earlier periods (>60k year back) towards china. he bases this migration theory based on ice age melt cycles, 20k periods of skin pigmentation changes, plus other factors to correlate... he investigates with chutchi(?) eskimos somewhere in mongolia.

so, there exists a reverse migration from about 30k year back onwards to about 20k year back.. then the water level rises, people were pushed away from the ocean and global warming happens till 13k year back.

again, the scope is restricted to his areas of research. similar to his research, OoI guys should fund a research of their own. tie up with Nat-geo, and get a wider base to fund.

SaiK · Post by **SaiK** » 20 Jun 2012 00:58

here is the map..

but, this is at 50k feet level thought, and focused on OoA theory... and mostly centered around sea route migration.

within one migration period, is all that takes to decide which all ways saraswati migration happened [after dry out].

member_22872 · Post by **member_22872** » 20 Jun 2012 01:39

^^^ Saik ji, this I assume is from Underhill 2009? if you look at M17, the path has been undermined in IF forum by Dhu, if you see M17 starts in Europe and starts to branch towards India. I will find the right post and post it here.

Bji,
Could you kindly comment on path taken by R1a1 post holocene? it is so messy to understand the current status of it. What I dont understand is, when R is based in Indian subcontinent, how come R1a1 is now is based in Central asia? are they talking about Y marker here?

brihaspati · Post by **brihaspati** » 20 Jun 2012 02:53

Local adoption of RV or proto-RV cultural memes/practices - could have used local resources. This would explain certain differences like absence of burials [funerary horse head offerings] in RV/India end while a plethora of burials in steppes [not many - oh so many burials actually].

Atri · Post by **Atri** » 20 Jun 2012 03:12

Following is an account of an equine expert after studying a fossil found in Harrappan site..

Through a thorough study done on the equid remains of the protohistoric settlement at Surkotada, Kutch excavated under Dr J P Joshi, I can conclude following - The occurrence of true horse (Equus caballus L.) was evidenced by the enamel pattern of the upper and lower cheek and teeth and by the size and form of incisors and phalanges. Since no wild horse ever lived in India is post-pliestocene period, the domestic nature of surkotada horse is undoubtful. This is also supported by inter-maxilla fragment whose incisor shows a clear sign of biting, a bad habit particularly found in domestic horses which are not extensively used for war. - Sandor Börkönyi - December 13th, 1993, in his letter director general of Archeological society of India.

This link shows proved Börkönyi's letter

2)One terracotta from late level of Mohenjodaro seems to represent a horse reminding us that jaw bone of horse has also been recovered at same site and that horse is known from considerably earlier period in Baloochistan.

http://books.google.dk/books?id=8VnAk14 ... t#PPA69,M1

It seems that horse was not only known to Saraswati Sindhu civilization people but was also domesticated.. They found a deformed horse skull from that era and the dental enamel showed that the horse was domesticated..

cannot paste the link properly.. kindly copy paste it while quoting..Else check page 69 of the book which shows up (Indo aryan controversy by Edward Bryant and Laurie Patton)

member_22872 · Post by **member_22872** » 20 Jun 2012 03:17

SaiK garu,
I was wrong about Underhill part. It is Spencer Wells alright. But this is what Dhu had said about M17:

It's Spencer Wells' familiar (NatGeo) scheme of a Northern route exodus from Africa. The blue arrow making the U-turn from Europe to India is M17. Of course, we know that the southern route is proven and that M17 exited India for Europe. These points will never be conceded since they do not fit AIT dogma.

brihaspati · Post by **brihaspati** » 20 Jun 2012 03:30

venug wrote:^^^ Saik ji, this I assume is from Underhill 2009? if you look at M17, the path has been undermined in IF forum by Dhu, if you see M17 starts in Europe and starts to branch towards India. I will find the right post and post it here.

Bji,
Could you kindly comment on path taken by R1a1 post holocene? it is so messy to understand the current status of it. What I dont understand is, when R is based in Indian subcontinent, how come R1a1 is now is based in Central asia? are they talking about Y marker here?

It all depends on when who moved when. If you mean by "based in CA" that R1A1 is concentrated in absolute numbers or in demographic proportions - then perhaps that is not true. Or we may not have a sufficiently well represented sample from CA populations to make such demographic back-calculations. R1a1 dominance is actually - in number as well as proportion terms most strongly in India and in an East-north cline in Europe.

If R evolved in or around India, and a portion moved out at various stages - they will all - both the remaining and the emigrating group - become sub[or sub sub clades etc] of R. If the separation or spreading began to happen after evolution of R1a1, and the group reached Europe - both will inherit or show - R1a1 as root.

M17 spread appears to be more likely along the southerly root and not as Oppenheimer states. The accumulation of studies along both Y and X along the north-western sector of IOR appears to go against a huge backslush of M17 into India. But this sample accumulation is a slow process. Remember that there is a lot of resistance even within scientific community to go against sampling from areas in ways that are not guided by pre-existing theories. [You know how research funding is approved!]

Also sampling from populations crucial for us - all over ME - and CAR is difficult. Hardcore Islamist societies are highly suspicious of genetic studies.

member_22872 · Post by **member_22872** » 20 Jun 2012 04:02

Atri ji, AIT supporters, it appears don't consider any horse skulls as proof, they contend that horse skulls are difficult remains to ascertain that the bones indeed belong to that of a horse. They make the rules, which they only can break not everyone, it is certainly true if the proof goes against their fairy tales.

A_Gupta · Post by **A_Gupta** » 20 Jun 2012 04:05

Another quote from (The Origin of the Indo-Iranians By Elena E. Kuz'mina, Elena Efimovna Kuzʹmina, J. P. Mallory) regarding another invasion theory:

The hypothesis that envisaged the fourth millenium BC population of the Pontic steppes as warlike horsemen who descended upon the farming population of the Balkan-Danubian zone, destroyed their culture and imposed Indo-European speech upon them has been brought forward by the Ukranian scholars (Danilenko and Shmagliy 1972; Telegin 1973), developed by M. Gimbutas (1970; 1977) and later supported by D. Anthony (1986; Anthony and Brown 1991). However, their statements have been subjected to a serious criticism. The identification of an artifact from Dereivka as a cheek-piece turned out to be erroneous (Dietz 1992), the age distribution of the horses doesn't conform to that of a domesticated herd (Levine 1999, Rassamaki 1999), the IE languages have no common word for rider, and not until the last quarter of the 2nd millenium BC did the expansion of horse-riding take place (Kuz'mina 1981; 1994a,b).

member_22872 · Post by **member_22872** » 20 Jun 2012 04:20

Bji, thanks. I thought Oppenheimer too proposed and supported Southern route? did you mean to say Northern route as depicted in the image of Spencer Wells article posted by SaiK ji?
Yes wiki places R1a1 in central Asian. I guess they meant the placement of R1a1 is based on diversity?
So to understand what you said, R is placed in India both by numbers and by diversity, but R1a1 it's sub clade's diversity is more in CA? So it only suggests that migration of R happened from India. But is there another genetic migration to suggest that R1a1 entered India in the recent past from CA, the supposed origin of R1a1 to suggest AMT? Because I often saw AIT guys prop this up in their support.

A_Gupta · Post by **A_Gupta** » 20 Jun 2012 04:25

Another quote from (The Origin of the Indo-Iranians
By Elena E. Kuz'mina, Elena Efimovna Kuzʹmina, J. P. Mallory)

As for the prospects of finding ritual horse burials {in India}, there does not seem to be much hope of that. The Aryans came to a subcontinent with ecological conditions very unfavourable for horses, which were subjected to diseases and extinction there. The eating of horses ceased as their price grew. A religious ban to the bloody sacrifices was gradually introduced (Tull 1996:39)

In Iran after the Iranians had come there Zarathustra also appealed for a rejection of animal sacrifices. That's why a discovery of hecatombs is scarcely probable.

But the established cult of horse and chariot is witnessed by their numerous images in Hindu temples, especially the temple of Surya in Konarak, and by the processions with gigantic chariots kept in shrines, especially the procession of the famous chariot of Jagannatha in the temple in Puri.

{Curious one has to come to the Bay of Bengal to find the established cult of the horse and chariot.

}

After a discussion of Aryan funeral rites: "If inhumed, the dead were buried in the flexed position with the head turned to the west",

Yet what could be the archaeological traces of the Vedic Aryans funeral ceremony in India? Unfortunately they leave little hope for an archaeologist.

A_Gupta · Post by **A_Gupta** » 20 Jun 2012 04:46

The identity of the Indo-Iranians remains elusive. When they are identiﬁed in the archaeological record it is by allegation rather than demonstration. It is interesting that the archaeological (and linguistic) literature has focused entirely upon the Indo-Iranians, overlooking
the other major linguistic families believed to have been inhabiting the same regions—the Altaic, the Ugric, and the Dravidian. Each of these has roots in the Eurasiatic steppes or Central Asia. The fact that these language families are of far less interest to the archaeologist may have a great deal to do with the fact that it is primarily speakers of Indo-European in search of their own roots who have addressed this problem

http://www.mapageweb.umontreal.ca/tuite ... lovsky.pdf

A_Gupta · Post by **A_Gupta** » 20 Jun 2012 04:50

From the same PDF, different author

Many interpretations of the archaeology of the Eurasian steppes suffer from anachronistic reasoning or what might be termed the Genghis Khan syndrome (even though the Great Khan came from the wrong ethnic group!). That is to say, current reconstruction of the subsistence economies on the western steppes during Bronze Age times unequivocally demonstrates that the classic
mixed-herd mounted pastoral nomadism that characterized the steppes during historic times and that has been amply documented by ethnographers was not yet in place. Aside from the question as to when horses were ﬁrst domesticated and ridden, peoples were dominantly herding cattle, not tending ﬂocks of sheep and goats (with an occasional Bactrian camel tossed in). Rather than noble conquering warriors capable of devastating anything in their path, the Bronze Age peoples of the western Eurasian steppes were impoverished cowboys in ponderous ox-drawn carts seeking richer pasture and escape from the severity of the climate, particularly the increasingly harsh winters they experienced as they moved eastwards across the rapidly ﬁlling steppe.

brihaspati · Post by **brihaspati** » 20 Jun 2012 05:16

venug wrote:Bji, thanks. I thought Oppenheimer too proposed and supported Southern route? did you mean to say Northern route as depicted in the image of Spencer Wells article posted by SaiK ji?
Yes wiki places R1a1 in central Asian. I guess they meant the placement of R1a1 is based on diversity?
So to understand what you said, R is placed in India both by numbers and by diversity, but R1a1 it's sub clade's diversity is more in CA? So it only suggests that migration of R happened from India. But is there another genetic migration to suggest that R1a1 entered India in the recent past from CA, the supposed origin of R1a1 to suggest AMT? Because I often saw AIT guys prop this up in their support.

So far no trace of Oppenheimers's postulated backflow through the North-west-passage. Even if there was - it was not revolutionary enough to show up in the samples so far as a far-enough-back-in-time significant process. There would be expected constant small-scale back-and-forth as clans exchange marital partners from distal ends while the whole group expands.

I think when people talk of migration, they do not understand how migration in the absence of passport control worked in historical reality. There as not been substantial research to understand possible/claimed/documented/narrative records of migration. It was not even diffusion - most likely. It was like extension of communities over space and time. Each generation perhaps not moving that far away, and not all of them either, from the parental population. People are simply exploring resources of fresh areas without necessarily having planned and conscious migration programmes. In the short time window, there will always be genetic flow in both spatial and time directions. Its the gradual long term trend that needs to be studied.

It is reasonable to hypothesize continuity in population movements rather than complete disconnect as is the norm since the days of exclusive imperial or state formation processes were first invented.

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 20 Jun 2012 05:32

ManishH wrote:
Based on ephedra, he may be right about 'soma' but Indra goes back to the root 'ind' for moisture or drop - it's related to the belief that Indra freed the waters.

I did not write my views on this because my post was already too long. I think the people who talk of ephedra as a hallucinogen or intoxicant are ignorant. The active compound is highly toxic to the body and can cause sudden death both in young and vigorous individuals as well as in older, susceptible people.

Ephedra is like an adrenaline shot. Only in books does make you do great things. But if you get one such shot your relatives may well be suing your doctor for having caused death.

brihaspati · Post by **brihaspati** » 20 Jun 2012 05:36

I have started reading up on the PIE and language change dogma/sacred "laws" of sound change state-of-the-art [like Gary Miller]. My thoughts on the "aswa" : speculative,
(1) possible: aswa meant generic fast footed large herbivorous quadrupeds with draught capabilities, with a "mane" and lack of horns that distinguishes it perhaps from bos/cow. this includes therefore as possibilities any of the wild equid or proto-equids likely to have been roaming in the Indus area. This could even be a species of donkey. [More research needs to be done on the still wild herds of Kutch].

(2) possible : aswa represented spiritual aspects or attributes, especially of a solar cult that emerged within the RV spectrum while parts of it was being standardized. As has been alleged in many other aspects of RV that things were "symbolic" and "metaphysical" rather than real whenever realistic interpretations would challenge or problematize the nice cocoons of linguistic dogma - the eulogizing of horse, even its sacrifice - could be symbolic. We have discussed token sacrifices before. The symbolic nature of sacrifices could imply a lack of funerary remains. We have traces of this tradition in the lack of idols/icons before the possibly ME influenced Buddhist spree of idolization and the long known Indian tradition of making idols on a temporary basis out of easily degradable but symbolic of spiritual clues [mud/wood] material and destroying them ritually afterwards.

(3) we might be able to use the very tools used by linguists, to establish such connections.

It is strange, that we only know about "ephedra==soma". I would request people to do some research on this [one of them being an Indian scientist] as to alternatives being suggested based on certain types of grass, and grass "juices".