Out-of-India - From Theory to Truth

All threads that are locked or marked for deletion will be moved to this forum. The topics will be cleared from this archive on the 1st and 16th of each month.
RajeshA
BRF Oldie
Posts: 15995
Joined: 28 Dec 2007 19:30

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

Postby RajeshA » 21 Jun 2012 18:27

Why is the horse evidence important? (from the AIT PoV)

The Rigveda speaks of the horse, to some extent glorifying it. So the Rigvedic people knew of the horse and the chariot. In India however the horse was not present until the (proto-)Rigvedic people came to India, and brought the horse and chariot with them. This happened after the Indus Valley Civilization because no horse remains have been found there or in India before the Rigvedic people brought the horse to India. Similarly no chariot remains have been found in India from a pre-Rigvedic age.

This means Rigvedic people knew of horse domestication, horse riding, chariot technology. Indus Valley Civilization people knew of no such thing.

Conclusion: Indus Valley Civilization precedes Rigvedic Age.

Why is the horse evidence irrelevant? (from the OIT PoV)

Assumptions are being made in the above AIT logic.

  1. The people who composed Rigveda, domesticated the horse

    Nowhere in Rigveda, there is any mention of the Rigvedic people domesticating the horse
    • no wild steppes, grasslands, etc.
    • no herds of wild horses roaming these grasslands.
    • no proto-Rigvedic Aryans cohabiting with the horse in such an environment
    • no capturing of the horses in the wild
    • no breaking of horses
    • no importance of the horse in pastoral life
    • no drinking of mare's milk
    • not necessary, but horse meat was not eaten

  2. One would find evidence of the horse in Indus Valley Civilization if horse had already been introduced
    • why would the bones of a horse be available in the middle of a city? If horses were to die, would they be left around. If horses were to be eaten, even then one would dispose of the bones, not in one's backyard.
    • most likely, horses would be in the royal stables, under a proper management, and when they died their remains would be carefully and dutifully disposed of either through cremation or through dumping them some distance away, perhaps in a pit, so that no diseases spread due to carcasses
    • considering that horses were traded with the Steppes, and there were only few in India, the possibility of finding the remains of those few horses would be even less.

  3. The people who composed Rigveda, had a memory of abundance of horses
    • hardly any common soldiers or even internal security people has access to horses either mounted, or chariot-riding
    • it was solely the preserve of the regal elite and the army generals
    • the prestigious position of the horse, itself points to its scarcity

  4. The horse was not domesticated such a long time ago as Rig Veda is dated by the proponents of Autochthonous Vedic Aryan Theory
    • The current understanding in archaeology is that horse was domesticated around 4000 BCE. The Botai findings put it at 3500 BCE.
    • This however only shows the earliest known date of domestication of horse. It has in the past been pushed back, so it can be again as more research is done. So it is possible that domestication happened earlier as well.
    • Many who propose OIT, can live with the 4000 BCE date as well.

  5. The horse cannot have been in India through trade in horses, only through introduction by proto-Rigvedic people
    • Actually Rigveda itself speaks of the Maruts who used to come from the North, crossing mountain passes, bringing their herd of horses to Indra's country.
    • Maruts need not be seen as belonging to the Vedic Aryans, but as an external agent, a different tribe, or a tribe identified by the Maruts as deities
    • Maruts are said to be allied with Indra, i.e. the regal power of the PUrus, from the PoV of the composers of Rigveda
    • Maruts come into the picture mostly after SudAs defeats the Anu Confederacy in the Battle of the Ten Kings, and moves into the Sapta-Sindhu area, thus making trade with the Maruts a possibility, who come through Afghanistan south, bringing their horses along, possibly from Central Asia, as the talk is mostly of mountains and rivers being in their way - Rasā, Krumu, Anitabha, Kubha, or Sindhu being in their path (RV 5.53.9).
Last edited by RajeshA on 21 Jun 2012 18:50, edited 1 time in total.

Sanku
BRF Oldie
Posts: 12526
Joined: 23 Aug 2007 15:57
Location: Naaahhhh

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

Postby Sanku » 21 Jun 2012 18:28

ManishH wrote:Sanku-ji: The only post which I can find is that by matrimc-ji:

viewtopic.php?p=1299935#p1299935



Manish-H ji there were other references too by Atri-ji. Please see
viewtopic.php?f=1&t=6381&p=1299648#p1299648

The star charts for MB shown by Narahari Achar are so famous and so clear cut beyond quibble that it is not possible to know of 3000 BCE as the year of MB for at least core parts.

and there are many others.

ManishH-ji

If you read the 2nd reference by H.H. Hock, it actually refutes that Vedic passages are unambiguous. I'll just quote the conclusion in that paper ...

The ambiguity of texts and error probability was earlier discussed on this very thread. Eg:

viewtopic.php?p=1280862#p1280862


The above was also shown to be incorrect understanding of astronomical observations

viewtopic.php?p=1281359#p1281359
and here
viewtopic.php?p=1281503#p1281503

after which you did not reply to the above and moved on to some other topic. The data that clearly exists, saying it is ambiguous to me, does not make it incorrect. if it is ambiguous to some it hardly means that its datas fault -- others are able to quite easily use that.

gashish
BRFite
Posts: 265
Joined: 23 May 2004 11:31
Location: BRF's tailgate party, aka, Nukkad thread

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

Postby gashish » 21 Jun 2012 18:38

ManishHji

this is off-the-horse question: Anthony's book says indra is a borrowed non-PIE word. Do you dispute that?

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.


Could you please provide the source for this info? I looked up for root ind here:

Indo-European etymology says:

Proto-IE: *yend- (Gr h-)
Meaning: grown-up, strong
Old Indian: índra- 'stark'

Pokorny Master PIE Etyma drew blank

Lalmohan
BRF Oldie
Posts: 13262
Joined: 30 Dec 2005 18:28

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

Postby Lalmohan » 21 Jun 2012 18:58

"freeing of the waters"?
reference to a great flood? melting of the ice sheets/glaciers? we know that in many parts of the world, ice dammed lakes burst creating huge inundations...

brihaspati
BRF Oldie
Posts: 12410
Joined: 19 Nov 2008 03:25

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

Postby brihaspati » 21 Jun 2012 19:30

ManishH wrote:
brihaspati wrote:I have started reading up on the PIE and language change dogma/sacred "laws" of sound change state-of-the-art [like Gary Miller].


B-ji: small mouth, big talk from me ...

Course on Phonetics and Phonology is a pre-req for studying Historical Linguistics, otherwise many things look like axioms.


I am sorry, may I know why you assume that I have had no exposure to phonetics and phonology? If you had had such a pre-req training, surely you must know that most of that material is based on current and ongoing experiments based on live speakers of extant languages? People in the area acknowledge that it is not geology - where you can assume that processes remain unchanged over long periods of time.

The phonetics+phonology is one of the clutches of the historic linguists - who try to say, look we have found this group xxx in continent y who show drifts and changes z1, z2, z3 simultaneously - and since human voice-box/sound production physical parameters have not changed much physiologically over the millenia, xxx' group in continent y' must have shown drifts z1',z2',z3' simultaneously - out of which z1' and z3' "vanished".

Conveniently dropping the very argument of constancy over time that was used to claim that "this is how drifts must have happened" but then going silent over the existence in stable convergence of all three in the current template.

I think I did mention that I have been working with linguists for two years. I started off with phonology and phonetics. It does not take me years to master a subject if I choose to master it. Don't worry, same will happen with historical linguistics. :P

brihaspati
BRF Oldie
Posts: 12410
Joined: 19 Nov 2008 03:25

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

Postby brihaspati » 21 Jun 2012 19:34

gashish wrote:ManishHji

this is off-the-horse question: Anthony's book says indra is a borrowed non-PIE word. Do you dispute that?

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.


Could you please provide the source for this info? I looked up for root ind here:

Indo-European etymology says:

Proto-IE: *yend- (Gr h-)
Meaning: grown-up, strong
Old Indian: índra- 'stark'

Pokorny Master PIE Etyma drew blank


He is drawing it from Sanskrit not PIE.

SaiK
BRF Oldie
Posts: 36415
Joined: 29 Oct 2003 12:31
Location: NowHere

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

Postby SaiK » 21 Jun 2012 19:44

per dasavatar myth, Parasuram (avatar from Kerala) is older than Ram and Krishna. If we go by the story of floods in dwarka, and the likely age being ice-age melt, which means at least 12k years back.. then, there exists a possibility that saraswati river still existed then flowing... and perhaps after that, the river dried up.. or got diverted elsewhere or became now indus.

during the same periods giant floods changed landscape in amrikhan lands too, creating what we see as grand canyon now.

so, the ocean floor rising is more or less provable with an approximate age of ending-13k year back, and perhaps beginning some 20k years back. saraswati would not have dried suddenly.. so, it would have taken 1000s of years for that to happen. but, what could be assured is saraswati existed when the floods came in., as seen in google maps now.

is there a mention of rig veda in krishna stories? so, if we can prove that vedas were written before krishna times, then we have a better basis for OoI.

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

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

Postby shiv » 21 Jun 2012 19:45

ManishH wrote:The horse was part of their lifestyle, not urban centres.

Yes. And the most likely reason was that there were no urban centers in the time when the Rig Veda was composed. After all poets tend to record what they see and feel and it is hard to miss seeing and feeling urban centers in a predominantly settled urban environment. They saw the horse and wrote about it. They saw no urban settlements and failed to mention them.

Of course I note the argument by your oft quoted source Anthony who implies that the people who composed the Rig Veda and later compiled it in Punjab were central Asians who somehow missed the huge BMAC civilization, moved south and picked up Indra from the Mitannis (an argument that Anthony accepts as true) and then went into Punjab and totally missed the urban settlements of the Indus Valley and Harappan civilizations. I just think that the story is too far fetched.

I can see evidence of urban settlements in the Rig Veda area. I am not lying. I can see no horse remains. But the Rig Veda says there were horses but says nothing about urban settlements. We assume the people who wrote the Rig veda are not lying. Didn't you say "horses were part of their lifestyle"? That means they had horses, whether anyone finds bones or not. It is only the people who insist on finding horse bones who imply that the people who wrote the Rig Veda may be bluffing. The Rig Veda says they had horses. I say they had horses. You say they had horses. What is the problem then?

The older the organic remains the less likely they are to survive. The absence of horse bones from earlier eras is unsurprising but only supports the conclusion that the Rig Veda is older than currently dated by people who think they know.

It is likely that the Rig Veda merely pre dated the Harappan civilization. Does an earlier date of the Rig veda seriously affect all the backward-working linguistic conclusions reached about proto-languages?

brihaspati
BRF Oldie
Posts: 12410
Joined: 19 Nov 2008 03:25

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

Postby brihaspati » 21 Jun 2012 19:54

ManishH ji,
regarding horse and explicit descriptions of speckled/bay etc: one thing that intrigues me is that in some places you assume that the whole of RV represents a single period origin of all the verses.

For example, by your logic - what happens to the verses that do not mention "bronze"? Since they do not mention bronze, they need not be constricted to have been composed after "bronze"? Could not they have been originally framed before "bronze"?

Even linguists find it difficult to force all of the verses into a single period origin. Why are you insisting on this in your arguments? Without such an assumption, you cannot enforce a single later date as the origin point of all the verses as your bronze example illustrates.

I find it rather amusing, that with the linguistic training/exposure you illustrate, you refuse to acknowledge the possibility that

(1) a concept/expression could be overloaded and mutated in usage over time - based on a continuity over "functionality". The same word could be used to point to different entities - as and when new entities appear that seems to fit the functionality of the older ones or even better than older ones. Aswa could have started off on the onager and then taken on attributes of caballus - based on the continuity of general form, speed, and other functional characteristics. In this Sanskrit maintains the tendency.

The Marut example posted by RajeshA ji is a good illustration. I will not analyze it - as superficially it might seem like jeopardizing both linguists as well as what RajeshA ji has interpreted it as. But at a deeper level it shows how the minds of those who composed such verses worked.

(2) the linguistic style of what is being expressed, does not necessarily reflect the antiquity of content.

(3) a technology or concept could be adapted by different groups according to the resources available to them. The aswa or ratha or ayas available to earliest groups whose experiences are handed down through verses in RV - might have been based on what was available to them in their environment. If they had onagers they hitched onagers to solid wheeled rathas with hubs of their ayas.

The same would be done differently by Steppenwolfs - who hitch horses to lighter chariots with copper or whatever.

Interactions, diffuse the ideas back onto later RV-ians if they add to advantages.

History of tech shows that ideas once found advantageous would be adopted by others, and modified or improved upon based on local material - and such improvements go back and forth in copying or mimicking.
Last edited by brihaspati on 21 Jun 2012 20:06, edited 1 time in total.

brihaspati
BRF Oldie
Posts: 12410
Joined: 19 Nov 2008 03:25

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

Postby brihaspati » 21 Jun 2012 20:03

SaiK wrote:per dasavatar myth, Parasuram (avatar from Kerala) is older than Ram and Krishna. If we go by the story of floods in dwarka, and the likely age being ice-age melt, which means at least 12k years back.. then, there exists a possibility that saraswati river still existed then flowing... and perhaps after that, the river dried up.. or got diverted elsewhere or became now indus.

during the same periods giant floods changed landscape in amrikhan lands too, creating what we see as grand canyon now.

so, the ocean floor rising is more or less provable with an approximate age of ending-13k year back, and perhaps beginning some 20k years back. saraswati would not have dried suddenly.. so, it would have taken 1000s of years for that to happen. but, what could be assured is saraswati existed when the floods came in., as seen in google maps now.

is there a mention of rig veda in krishna stories? so, if we can prove that vedas were written before krishna times, then we have a better basis for OoI.


Even MB could be a collective memory of multi-period events. Some parts of MB could be based on events that happened around 7700 ybp - especially the Dwarka submergence bit.

RajeshA
BRF Oldie
Posts: 15995
Joined: 28 Dec 2007 19:30

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

Postby RajeshA » 21 Jun 2012 20:09

There is a lot of talk in the Rigveda about milk, where milk is often used even in a somewhat abstract sense, e.g. tilling the earth and availing of its bountiful produce in a similar manner as one milks a cow. Considering that cows were ever present in Vedic society and later in India, it is understandable that the Rig Veda composers speak of milk.

However if the argument is being made about Rig Veda people having a memory of "their life in the Steppes where they domesticated the horse", one would expect them to cherish the drinking of mare's milk.

So even as I read the English version of Rig Veda, I don't really find any references to drinking of mare's milk. It is totally absent as far as I can see! No dishes are spoken of consisting of mare's milk! Why?

The inhabitants of the Steppes, e.g. the Mongols, in whose lives horses play an important role - it is not just for riding, but also for drinking mare's milk. Russian Cossacks are also known to drink mare's milk.

So if the proto-Rig Vedic people made the long migration from Central Asia to India, didn't they drink mare's milk on the way? So why are no paeans sung about mare's milk? Were they herding cows all the way from Central Asia to India and drinking only cow's milk?

If the Rig Vedic people knowing their own history were so attached to the horse, why wouldn't they adore mare's milk? As far as I have heard mare's milk tastes quite good!

In fact, I know of no tradition to drink mare's milk in India!

So the AIT-wallahs really have to explain us a bit about how they can talk about Vedic Aryans having a memory of the old home in the Steppes but show no fondness for mare's milk in their Rigvedic compositions!

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 54560
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

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

Postby ramana » 21 Jun 2012 20:16

Lalmohan wrote:
* the missisippi and to a lesser extent the amazon basins are also in a similar latitudinal band, and there is evidence of ancient settlements along these rivers too, that have since dissappeared (but that is another discussion!)



Lalmohan, The evidence is that the Missisippi valley was also the populated region in North America and around 50 million by time of Cloumbus. The small pox virus that came via infected people brought by Spainiards wiped out the population to around 1.8M by the time of the Anglo-Saxon colonists. (Source: Book on genetics will get the title later)

The same virus waves devasted Mexico also by 1520s and paved the way for the Spanish conquest.

So you are right the idea of urbanization along

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 54560
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

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

Postby ramana » 21 Jun 2012 20:27

venug wrote:I can't believe a horse is writing Indian history, can you imagine that? Not the accounts of indigenous people, but a horse and people who are sitting thousands of miles who might have never set foot on my nation's soil, they believe in the remains of a horse than a SDRE.



Allegorically you are forgetting the Hyagriva avatar of Maha Vishnu! He is the one that is propriated before 'akshara bhaysam"!

RajeshA
BRF Oldie
Posts: 15995
Joined: 28 Dec 2007 19:30

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

Postby RajeshA » 21 Jun 2012 20:32

ramana wrote:RajeshA, Now tie in the prevalence of Lunar dynasty symbols to the artifacts found all over the Asian Middle East archaelogy. There was an old article in New Scientist(mid 90s) about how moon symbols are found all over ancient Middle East and was not unique to Islam.

I think even Muhammad appropriated the moon symbol onto his flag.

ramana garu,

I wasn't able to find that specific article in New Scientist. I'll try later again.

The world over, there were Moon Gods. It will be difficult to prove what was due to the Lunar Dynasty in India, or what was from Shiva's Crescent Moon, or what was from some local Moon Gods.

brihaspati
BRF Oldie
Posts: 12410
Joined: 19 Nov 2008 03:25

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

Postby brihaspati » 21 Jun 2012 20:35

Hayagriva - one who has the "neck" of the horse. It could be a qualifier intended as eulogy and not necessarily originally as horse headed deity. But "horse" in RV has little spiritual significance - compared to later literature. The horse was used more perhaps as a symbol of speed related strength - and perhaps also alternatively as a symbol connected to the sun.

brihaspati
BRF Oldie
Posts: 12410
Joined: 19 Nov 2008 03:25

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

Postby brihaspati » 21 Jun 2012 20:36

RajeshA wrote:
ramana wrote:RajeshA, Now tie in the prevalence of Lunar dynasty symbols to the artifacts found all over the Asian Middle East archaelogy. There was an old article in New Scientist(mid 90s) about how moon symbols are found all over ancient Middle East and was not unique to Islam.

I think even Muhammad appropriated the moon symbol onto his flag.

ramana garu,

I wasn't able to find that specific article in New Scientist. I'll try later again.

The world over, there were Moon Gods. It will be difficult to prove what was due to the Lunar Dynasty in India, or what was from Shiva's Crescent Moon, or what was from some local Moon Gods.



What could be interesting is looking at the pattern of gender assignment to Moon and the Sun as gods/goddesses.

RajeshA
BRF Oldie
Posts: 15995
Joined: 28 Dec 2007 19:30

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

Postby RajeshA » 21 Jun 2012 20:41

brihaspati wrote:Hayagriva - one who has the "neck" of the horse. It could be a qualifier intended as eulogy and not necessarily originally as horse headed deity. But "horse" in RV has little spiritual significance - compared to later literature. The horse was used more perhaps as a symbol of speed related strength - and perhaps also alternatively as a symbol connected to the sun.


Linking my post on Hayagriva.

Again plays into the concept that an army endowed with horses in war, could only be destroyed by another force using a cavalry!

SaiK
BRF Oldie
Posts: 36415
Joined: 29 Oct 2003 12:31
Location: NowHere

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

Postby SaiK » 21 Jun 2012 21:10

did we get more information further from ASI's dwaraka deep sea findings further on? are they still diving to find any remains or the mission is over?

Lalmohan
BRF Oldie
Posts: 13262
Joined: 30 Dec 2005 18:28

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

Postby Lalmohan » 21 Jun 2012 21:19

what would a pastoral tribe look like?
we have live examples amidst the nilotic people of east and southern africa. the samburu and masai still live in kenya - herdsmen who patrol high grasslands on foot and who live in relatively static villages. maybe a thousands years ago, a number of the proto-tribe split off and headed south through the tsetse fly and arid zones down into the high veldt of southern africa. here there herds thrived and the tribes flourished - amongst their progeny are the xhosa and zulu of south africa. both have higher degree of 'urbanisation' or settled lifestyles than the samburu or masai, yet come from the same cattle culture - and also that of warfare and raiding each others herds. unlike asia, in africa the domesticated horse does not appear, and in my limited understanding, the languages are also much more distinct. yet one might see a parallel of how one population of herdsmen can mutate over time into something quite different (and here we are talking of a period of only 600-1000 years)

RajeshA
BRF Oldie
Posts: 15995
Joined: 28 Dec 2007 19:30

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

Postby RajeshA » 21 Jun 2012 21:33

As per Ramayana Aranyakanda Sarga 14, Gandharvi, daughter of Kamdhenu-Surabhi, is the mother of the horses.

Does this mean, horses come from Central Asia through Gandhara?

Agnimitra
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5150
Joined: 21 Apr 2002 11:31

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

Postby Agnimitra » 21 Jun 2012 21:36

RajeshA wrote:As per Ramayana Aranyakanda Sarga 14, Gandharvi, daughter of Kamdhenu-Surabhi, is the mother of the horses.

Does this mean, horses come from Central Asia through Gandhara?

Interestingly, the RigVeda verse that some interpretations take to mean horse sacrifice mentions "34" ribs. Now most horses have 18 pairs of ribs, i.e. 36 ribs, not 34. Only Arabian horses have 17 pairs, i.e. 34 ribs. So were the mysterious origins of Arabs actually Aryans?

SaiK
BRF Oldie
Posts: 36415
Joined: 29 Oct 2003 12:31
Location: NowHere

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

Postby SaiK » 21 Jun 2012 21:41

kamadhenu-surabhi is mother of the cows, and not horses. correct?

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 54560
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

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

Postby ramana » 21 Jun 2012 21:48

The Arabian Horses are the current race horses all over the world.

RajesahA, Gandhar could be the conduit for the horse being brought over. Even during Chandragupta time, the horse traders from Herat would bring horses for the Magadhan cavalry.

RajeshA
BRF Oldie
Posts: 15995
Joined: 28 Dec 2007 19:30

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

Postby RajeshA » 21 Jun 2012 21:48

SaiK wrote:kamadhenu-surabhi is mother of the cows, and not horses. correct?

Yes, but she has two daughters - Rohini, also mother of cows, and Gandharvi, mother of horses.

SaiK
BRF Oldie
Posts: 36415
Joined: 29 Oct 2003 12:31
Location: NowHere

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

Postby SaiK » 21 Jun 2012 21:52

holly horse! :)

RajeshA
BRF Oldie
Posts: 15995
Joined: 28 Dec 2007 19:30

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

Postby RajeshA » 21 Jun 2012 22:09

ramana wrote:The Arabian Horses are the current race horses all over the world.

RajesahA, Gandhar could be the conduit for the horse being brought over. Even during Chandragupta time, the horse traders from Herat would bring horses for the Magadhan cavalry.


Published on Aug 24, 2011
Saudis 'find evidence of early horse domestication': BBC News

Saudi officials say archaeologists have begun excavating a site that suggests horses were domesticated 9,000 years ago in the Arabian Peninsula.

The vice-president of the Saudi Commission for Tourism and Antiquities said the discovery at al-Maqar challenged the theory it first took place 5,500 years ago in Central Asia.

Ali al-Ghabban said it also changed what was known about the evolution of culture in the late Neolithic period.

A number of artefacts were also found.

They included arrowheads, scrapers, grain grinders, tools for spinning and weaving, and other tools that showed the inhabitants were skilled at handicrafts.

Mr Ghabban said carbon-14 tests on the artefacts, as well as DNA tests on human remains also found there, dated them to about 7,000 BC.

"This discovery will change our knowledge concerning the domestication of horses and the evolution of culture in the late Neolithic period," he told a news conference in Jeddah, according to the Reuters news agency.

"The al-Maqar civilisation is a very advanced civilisation of the Neolithic period. This site shows us clearly, the roots of the domestication of horses 9,000 years ago," he added.

Although humans came into contact with horses about 50,000 years ago, they were originally herded for meat, skins, and possibly for milk.

The first undisputed evidence for their domestication dates back to 2,000 BC, when horses were buried with chariots. By 1,000 BC, domestication had spread through Europe, Asia and North Africa.

However, researchers have found evidence suggesting that the animals were used by the Botai culture in northern Kazakhstan 5,500 years ago.


Carl wrote:
RajeshA wrote:As per Ramayana Aranyakanda Sarga 14, Gandharvi, daughter of Kamdhenu-Surabhi, is the mother of the horses.

Does this mean, horses come from Central Asia through Gandhara?

Interestingly, the RigVeda verse that some interpretations take to mean horse sacrifice mentions "34" ribs. Now most horses have 18 pairs of ribs, i.e. 36 ribs, not 34. Only Arabian horses have 17 pairs, i.e. 34 ribs. So were the mysterious origins of Arabs actually Aryans?


Yes indeed. Some info on the Internet says
The Arabian has a different skeletal arrangement from other breeds. The Arab has 17 pairs of ribs, 5 lumbar vertebrae and 16 caudal vertebrae. In other breeds the arrangement is 18, 6 and 18. Interestingly the donkey has 5 lumbar vertebrae too.

The croup is relatively horizontal. The conformation is typical of breeds which excel at speed and distance.


Image

So here is another possibility of a 'Rig Vedic Horse'.

--------------

So if the Arabian Horse was domesticated around 7000 B.C. how far back can the Rig Vedic dating go without tripping over AIT proponents' tripwires???

:lol:

svinayak
BRF Oldie
Posts: 14223
Joined: 09 Feb 1999 12:31

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

Postby svinayak » 21 Jun 2012 22:13

RajeshA wrote:
Saudi officials say archaeologists have begun excavating a site that suggests horses were domesticated 9,000 years ago in the Arabian Peninsula.

So here is another possibility of a 'Rig Vedic Horse'.

--------------

So if the Arabian Horse was domesticated around 7000 B.C. how far back can the Rig Vedic dating go without tripping over AIT proponents' tripwires???

:lol:

AIT linguistic supporters have been running a scam for a long time. This information has been there for the last 2 decades.

RajeshA
BRF Oldie
Posts: 15995
Joined: 28 Dec 2007 19:30

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

Postby RajeshA » 21 Jun 2012 22:34

In this horse debate, we have

a) Arabian Horses domesticated since 7000 BCE, which have 34 ribs, just like Rig Veda says. So Rig Veda pertains to the Arabian Horse.

b) We have detailed hymns of Maruts, who represent people who come to Bharat with herds of horses, crossing over various rivers. Thus we have a trading connection supplying horses to Bharat.

Central Asian connection as a requirement w.r.t. horses is distracting and unnecessary.

So looking at what Mr. Witzel writes on Talageri's book
The following quotes from T.'s new elaboratum, however, are enough to cast aside this book just like its predecessors. (I may, perhaps?, write something on it once I have received it.)

For the moment just a few remarks -- for a perfect end to this weekend. Have fun:

* The Rgveda in 3400 – 2200 BCE -- is of course impossible as it is full of horses and chariots, which were invented (in the Ural area, or Mesopotamia as some maintain) only around 2000 BCE. The steppe animal, the horse, was introduced into South Asia only around 1800 BCE (and similarly into the Ancient Near East)

That alone is enough to throw out T's dating of his three layers of the RV (which even *as such* are wrong: books 3 and 7 can by no means be shown to be early; they belong to the end of the Bharata conquests under Sudas and are preceded by the books mentioning his ancestors, such as books 4, 6).


it is enough to tell him to go &%?§ himself! Witzel is a Witz for a scholar, an Uneven Cohen of history.
Last edited by RajeshA on 21 Jun 2012 22:46, edited 1 time in total.

brihaspati
BRF Oldie
Posts: 12410
Joined: 19 Nov 2008 03:25

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

Postby brihaspati » 21 Jun 2012 22:44

Have fun over the week end : who said Aryan invasion, migration was restricted to only people and horses? it was also about tectonic migrations - by which Arabia migrated geologically to the steppes first. bitter! bitter! Waes Hael Witzel?

Agnimitra
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5150
Joined: 21 Apr 2002 11:31

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

Postby Agnimitra » 21 Jun 2012 22:46

^^ LOL! Witzel's sly, cocksure attitude and covert hostility is rather transparent in his hasty dismissal of T's work.

Also, in the GDF thread on Epics, I posted alternative translations of RigVedic verses regarding horse slaughter/sacrifice. Post 1, post 2 and post 3. While slaughter may have been current, whether it was a central practice, and whether those parts of the Veda are just about that is debatable I think. Why is that exegetical key only restricted to ritual sacrifice, when if we proceed from the roots of the words and align it with the vast corpus of theory, the interpretations can be different? Madhva's exegetical key was available and written down around the same time as people like Sayana. Why was the latter taken and not the former, when Madhva is a towering figure in comparison?

Prem
BRF Oldie
Posts: 21161
Joined: 01 Jul 1999 11:31
Location: Weighing and Waiting 8T Yconomy

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

Postby Prem » 21 Jun 2012 22:51

Arabian Horses are the current race horses all over the world.


http://www.saudiaramcoworld.com/issue/2 ... -magar.htm

Equid species known to Neolithic humans in Africa and Asia included the African wild ass, Equus africanus somalicus, above; the onager, Equus hemionus onager, right; and the early wild horse, Equus ferus, opposite, from which today's domestic horse species are descended.His team identified maternal lines descending unambiguously from different female ancestors. "This means that multiple female horse lines were domesticated throughout the Neolithic period—during the last 10,000 years—in multiple locations of Eurasia, possibly including western Europe," says Achilli. "The very fact that many wild mares were independently domesticated in different places testifies to how significant horses have been to humankind. Taming these animals could generate the food surplus necessary to support the growth of human populations and the human capability to expand and adapt to new environments, or could facilitate transportation." Achilli adds that "unfortunately, we have no idea about the exact location of the domestication events," a question that only archeological dna sampling can answer. Olsen, though inclined to agree, cautions against accepting this as any kind of last word. She argues that humans and wild animals, as well as horses, all have different maternal lines. "I think that these multiple matrilines are the result of ancient horse herders occasionally catching and adding wild mares to their breeding populations," she says. And, she adds, in the other direction, "domesticated mares can be 'stolen' by wild stallions and incorporated into their harems."

Image

( GUys , Check the paintings in the link)

RajeshA
BRF Oldie
Posts: 15995
Joined: 28 Dec 2007 19:30

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

Postby RajeshA » 21 Jun 2012 22:54

RV 5.53.9: Maruts
So let not Rasā, Krumu, or Anitabha, Kubha, or Sindhu hold you back.
Let not the watery Sarayti obstruct your way. With us be all the bliss ye give.


A few rivers are mentioned: Rasā, Krumu, Anitabha, Kubha, Sindhu, Sarayti.

Does one have any idea which rivers these could be, so that one could perhaps understand from which direction the Maruts come to Bharat, and bring horses along?


Here some initial pointers
From Wikipedia:

Rasā = Avestan Rangha/Raŋhā (cannot be identified=.
Krumu = Kurram River
Anitabha cannot be identified
Kubha = Kabul River
Sindhu = Indus River
Sarayti = ?
Last edited by RajeshA on 21 Jun 2012 23:14, edited 1 time in total.

SaiK
BRF Oldie
Posts: 36415
Joined: 29 Oct 2003 12:31
Location: NowHere

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

Postby SaiK » 21 Jun 2012 23:01

so, are we saying that the direction of maruts here is destination bharat, and horses by themselves have not originated in the land?
Last edited by SaiK on 21 Jun 2012 23:01, edited 1 time in total.

Agnimitra
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5150
Joined: 21 Apr 2002 11:31

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

Postby Agnimitra » 21 Jun 2012 23:01

RajeshA wrote:RV 5.53.9: Maruts
So let not Rasā, Krumu, or Anitabha, Kubha, or Sindhu hold you back.
Let not the watery Sarayti obstruct your way. With us be all the bliss ye give.


A few rivers are mentioned: Rasā, Krumu, Anitabha, Kubha, Sindhu, Sarayti.

Does one have any idea which rivers these could be, so that one could perhaps understand from which direction the Maruts come to Bharat, and bring horses along?

Some speculation here:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rigvedic_rivers

In the geographical organization of the following list, it has to be kept in mind that some names appearing both in early and in late hymns may have been re-applied to new rivers during the composition of the Rigveda.

Kabul River near Jalalabad
Swat River in Khyber Pakhtunkhwa
Harī Rūd in Afghanistan

Northwestern Rivers (western tributaries of the Indus):

Trstama (Gilgit)?
Susartu
Anitabha (listed once, in 5.53.9, with the Afghan rivers Rasa (Avestan Rangha/Raŋhā), Kubha, Krumu, Sarayu (Avest. Harōiiu)
Rasa (on the upper Indus (often a mythical river, Avestan Rangha, Scythian Rha)
Svetya
Kubha (Kabul), Greek Kophēn
Krumu (Kurrum)
Gomati (Gomal)
Sarayu (modern Hari River of Herat)
Mehatnu (along with the Gomati and Krumu)
Suvastu (Swat) in RV 8.19.37)
Gauri (Panjkora)??
Kusava (Kunar)??

The Indus and its minor eastern tributaries:

Sindhu (Indus; (sindhu also means "stream" generically)
Susoma (Sohan)
Arjikiya (Haro)?

Central Rivers (rivers of the Punjab):

Vitasta (Jhelum)
Asikni (Chenab)
Parusni (Ravi)
Vipas (Beas)
Sutudri (Sutlej)
Marudvrdha
East-central Rivers (rivers of Haryana):

Sarasvati (References to the Sarasvati river in the Rigveda are identified with the present-day Ghaggar River, although the Arghandāb River (a tributary of Helmand River) as a possible locus of early Rigvedic references has been discussed.)
Drsadvati, Apaya (RV 3.23.4, Mahabharata Apaga.)
Eastern Rivers:

Asmanvati (Assan)?
Yamuna
Ganges
Uncertain / other

Silamavati?
Urnavati?
Yavyavati (Zhob river?)

member_22872
BRFite
Posts: 1873
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

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

Postby member_22872 » 21 Jun 2012 23:09

I think I am coming to a kind of conclusion that this horse thing is a charade, you dig deep, you will also find horse, it's sister, aunt and uncle. The evidence is are very much there, it's not a patent that only Steppe people alone know how to domesticate a horse. On the other hand, they are too nomadic to compose Rg Veda. AIT/AMT is purely cock and horse story they tried to sell big time. You can kind of see frustration in WItzel's letter, you won't attack another unless you hate a person's guts, that too when your 50+ (what ever) years of "illustrious career" is being challenged by a guy who is not even a linguist.

RajeshA
BRF Oldie
Posts: 15995
Joined: 28 Dec 2007 19:30

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

Postby RajeshA » 21 Jun 2012 23:17

Carl ji,

thanks, I too was looking it up, just as you posted :)

---------

Link to a map of Afghanistan Rivers

Rigvedic Geography

Image

RajeshA
BRF Oldie
Posts: 15995
Joined: 28 Dec 2007 19:30

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

Postby RajeshA » 21 Jun 2012 23:20

SaiK wrote:so, are we saying that the direction of maruts here is destination bharat, and horses by themselves have not originated in the land?

Well I don't know. It is just a hypothesis I made.

member_22872
BRFite
Posts: 1873
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

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

Postby member_22872 » 21 Jun 2012 23:25

Sarasvati is river is as per Kochar and Thapar's analysis in the map.

RajeshA
BRF Oldie
Posts: 15995
Joined: 28 Dec 2007 19:30

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

Postby RajeshA » 21 Jun 2012 23:31

I think all one can say is that the Maruts used to bring the horses through Iran and Afghanistan down to Bharat, and when SudAs conquered Sapta-Sindhu from the Anu Confederacy, Indra was able to establish a much better relationship with the Maruts. :wink: in Afghanistan.

Whether they got their horses in Central Asia or from Arabia is a bit unclear. But Sarayu (Avest. Harōiiu), modern Hari River of Herat, does point in the direction of Iran i.e. Westwards from Afghanistan, and further towards Arabia and not Northwards towards Central Asia.

Also Anitabha could have something to do with the Anus, that is the Iranians.

Even if the horse trade was with Arabia and the Maruts used to bring horses from there, it could still have gone through Afghanistan and not through Baluchistan, as through Baluchistan would have been a much more hostile region for travel, whereas through Afghanistan there would have been enough water and grass for the horse herds.
Last edited by RajeshA on 21 Jun 2012 23:34, edited 1 time in total.

RajeshA
BRF Oldie
Posts: 15995
Joined: 28 Dec 2007 19:30

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

Postby RajeshA » 21 Jun 2012 23:31

venug wrote:Sarasvati is river is as per Kochar and Thapar's analysis in the map.

Yes that is the one with the question mark! :)


Return to “Trash Can Archive”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 24 guests