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 » 01 Jul 2012 16:32

A bit off-topic

Publication Date: September 30, 2011
Author: Lynne A. Isbell
The Fruit, the Tree, and the Serpent: Why We See So Well

Image

Review by Robert Martin, Field Museum wrote:In passing, she builds in her independent conclusion that primates must have originated far earlier than the known fossil record suggests, leading her to favour the "Out of India" model of their origins. This proposal is now supported by abundant molecular evidence but still encounters fierce resistance from paleontologists.


Primates may have originated in India!!!

member_23086
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 4
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

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

Postby member_23086 » 01 Jul 2012 18:23

shiv wrote:
A_Gupta wrote:^^^The Anatolian hypothesis is that of Colin Renfrew.

Thanks will correct my post

And the first few lines of your link tell a story that people on this thread need to know especially if they are impartial in searching for gyan.
http://languagecontinuity.blogspot.in/2 ... hesis.html
For many years, basically until the second half of the 20th century, the study of Indo-European (IE) was exclusively in the hands of linguists. They analyzed ancient languages, devising laws and family trees, and imagined the emergence and expansion of Indo-European as an event which involved a series of massive migrations or invasions occurring (what a coincidence!) a few centuries before the first attested documents written in IE languages. In the 1950s and 60s, the Lithuanian-American archaeologist Marjia Gimbutas provided the archaeological evidence to support the traditional view. Her theory, generally known as the Kurganic Theory, was later developed by other authors, e.g. J P Mallory. It can be summarized as follows: the original homeland of the proto-IE (PIE) speakers was in the Russian steppes; they started to spread into other Eurasian territories between 4000 and 3000 BC.


Fascinating thread. Wanted to highlight one point in the para above, in case it was not obvious. PIE was being ethnically defended a few pages earlier by asking "Why would Western archaeologists push for a Central Asian/Russian homeland if they were racially motivated?".

Well, lookie here. A Lithuanian "scientist" hypothesizes the PIE homeland to be in slavic region. Who da thunk it.

In the race to claim the home of language/civilization, it appears the west and east european academic community have joined hands, with the sdres on the other side.

Meri theory (Kurganic) science, tumhari theory (out of india) pani hai.

May the truth eventually prevail. Satyamev jayate.

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

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

Postby RajeshA » 01 Jul 2012 19:41

Published on Nov 27, 2010
No archaeological evidence to prove western invasion in the subcontinent: Experts: Hindu
NEW DELHI: Having set the tone for a discussion on the roots of Indian civilization, the seminar, “How deep are the roots of Indian civilization? An archaeological and historical perspective”, brought up some pertinent questions related to the subcontinent's past on Friday.

Day two of the seminar organised by Draupadi Trust in collaboration with the Ministry of Culture, the Indian Council for Cultural Relations and the Archaeological Survey of India was marked by inputs from renowned archaeologists and scholars.

In the first session, Omilos Meleton Cultural Institute (Greece) director Prof. N. Kazanas spoke about the “Collapse of the Aryan invasion theory” based on linguistic evidence in the Rigveda supporting the indigenous nature of Indian civilization and genetic evidence that there was “no influx of new genes after 10000 B. C. in India”.

Prof. Kazanas' presentation was followed by Case Western Reserve University Anthropology professor Jim G. Shaffer, who spoke about the “Harappan diaspora”, explaining how the increase in population density of Haryana and eastern Punjab and decrease in population in Cholistan in the late Harappan period suggest a “displacement from Harappan civilization towards the east”. He also said there was no archaeological evidence to prove western invasion in the subcontinent.

Vedic scholar Dr. Bhagwan Singh spoke about “Rigvedic Harappans: Their roots and legacy”, calling it “incorrect…to hold Aryan-speaking branch to be the sole author of Indus-Sarasvati civilization”. According to him, there were three major cultural strains- Aryan, Dravidian and Mandari -- that cannot be classified into any one familial scheme.

Shah Abdul Latif University (Pakistan) Vice-Chancellor Nilofar Shaikh presented recent evidence found by the excavation of Lakahn-Jo- Daro site in Pakistan. The architectural evidence at the site suggests a strong linkage to the “mature Indus” civilization, in addition to some unique features like “I- shaped bricks”.

Ms. Shaikh's presentation was followed by Maharaja Sayajirao University of Baroda's professor of Archaeology V.H. Sonawane's paper on “The Harappan scenario in Gujarat”; Department of Archaeology and Museums (Raipur) advisor Dr. A.K. Sharma's paper on “The Harappan Horse - A study in comparative occurrence during Harappan & post Harappan times” and ASI (Nagpur)'s Dr. Nadini Sahu's presentation on “Excavations at the Early Harappan site of Bhirrana”.

The last session included presentations by ASI secretary general K.N. Dikshit on “The decline and legacy of Harappan civilization” and ASI joint director-general Dr. B.R. Mani titled “From Janas to Janapadas”. The day concluded with BHU professor Purushottam Singh who raised some important questions at the end of his presentation on “Early archaeology in the Gangetic Plains”.

Prof. Singh pointed out that the Ganga Valley civilization had no evidence of religion except burial grounds found in some places. He also questioned the absence of a “label” like the Aryans or Harappans for the people of this civilization, who had contributed significantly to the history of the subcontinent.

SaiK
BRF Oldie
Posts: 36416
Joined: 29 Oct 2003 12:31
Location: NowHere

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

Postby SaiK » 01 Jul 2012 20:58

RajeshA wrote:A bit off-topic
..
Primates may have originated in India!!!

and that should be 1 out of 3 options.

1. India
2. Africa
3. South America

Just considering +/- 10* latitude from equator.

Without taming the fire, there is no way man is going to migrate to colder regions.. of course, I did not consider the non-ice age periods, and warmer times.

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

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

Postby RajeshA » 01 Jul 2012 21:11

Here is an effort of either ignorami to write a chronology of Indo-European expansion, or one by AIT-Nazis.

Indo-European Chronology

The next page is interesting.

However what I found interesting was the note about Achaeans.

2250 BC - Achaeans come to Greece
About this year, as we may believe, first Hellenic tribes who were calling themselves Achaeans reached Greece. At that time the country was inhabited by non-Indo-European peoples which could be relative to the ancient population of Crete and Asia Minor. Greeks called them sometimes Pelasgians, or Lelegs, or Carians (an analogy with later inhabitants of Asia). Hellenes could come to the peninsula via Balkans, but it is more likely that they first appeared on the islands in the Aegean Sea, and then on the continent. This, together with some historical materials (very ancient Greek names and settlements in Asia, like Milet or the name of Ahhiyawa) proves their way led from Asia to Europe across the Aegean Sea.

The peoples who inhabited Greece before Indo-Europeans arrived, now had to be assimilated. However, 1500 years later Herodot mentions Pelasgians who still lived in Thessalia, on some islands and in several small cities in Greece. Hellenic tribes borrowed some religious beliefs from them (the chthonic gods of Earth, like Gé), as well as several words in the language: place names which have -th-, -ss-, -nt- suffixes, and some other words.
1900 BC - Mycenae founded by Achaeans in Greece

Constant influence from higher civilizations from Crete and maybe from Egypt caused to fast progress in development of the first Indo-European state: Hellenes started to build cities, involve into sea trade with other lands of East Mediterranean, among which Troy, Crete, Aegean Islands, Egypt were the most important at that time.

The main region of building cities is called Argolis, the western part of the Peloponnese. Soon there more new cities will appear, all of them being independent states struggling with each other: Tyrinth, Pylos, Argos, Naphplio and others.

Mycenae gave a name to the first Indo-European civilization in Europe. Mycenaean language was an archaic form of Greek.


Interesting is that they followed the Southern Route, South of the Caspian Sea. Achaeans could have been an Anu subtribe from the Rig Veda.

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

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

Postby svinayak » 01 Jul 2012 21:13

kalnemi wrote:
Fascinating thread. Wanted to highlight one point in the para above, in case it was not obvious. PIE was being ethnically defended a few pages earlier by asking "Why would Western archaeologists push for a Central Asian/Russian homeland if they were racially motivated?".

Well, lookie here. A Lithuanian "scientist" hypothesizes the PIE homeland to be in slavic region. Who da thunk it.

In the race to claim the home of language/civilization, it appears the west and east european academic community have joined hands, with the sdres on the other side.

Meri theory (Kurganic) science, tumhari theory (out of india) pani hai.

May the truth eventually prevail. Satyamev jayate.

Out of India has not even started. Most of the facts only genetic right now for OIT.


While discussing AIT there should be no comparison with any other theory.

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

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

Postby RajeshA » 01 Jul 2012 21:49

Some Western academics, who seem to be sympathetic to the indigenist Aryans camp

Jim G. Shaffer
Associate Professor of Anthropology
Case Western Reserve University

J. Mark Kenoyer
Director, Center for South Asia
University of Wisconsin Madison

Edwin F. Bryant
Professor (Religions of India)
Department of Religion, School of Arts & Sciences
Rutgers, The State University of New Jersey

Klaus Klostermaier
Distinguished Professor in the Faculty of Arts
University of Manitoba, Canada
Last edited by RajeshA on 01 Jul 2012 23:11, 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 » 01 Jul 2012 22:29

From an old newsgroup discussion list among educators in USA trying to understand the Aryan Debate

Message posted Oct 13, 1996

Date: Sun, 13 Oct 1996 00:18:42 -0700
From: Edwin Bryant <efb3@columbia.edu>

The political ramifications of the Aryan debate have had some airing on this list, and there have been requests for more on the evidence so here goes...(those not interested in this aspect might want to hit the 'next message' button).

Before I start, in response to Laurie: I put 'evidence' in quotes in my last message to emphasize that we are recreating scenario's of 4, 5 or 6 millenium ago both on the basis of mute archaeological artifacts open to a myriad of interpretations that, for the most part, cannot be indisputably connected with a language family. We are also dependent on linguistic features in cognate languages (separated by several millenium from the hypothesized proto-forms) which, in turn, cannot be uncontroversially correlated with an archaeological culture. These problems are well known, and I do not mean to suggest the endeavor is useless, merely that we should not be too dedicated to promoting one particular version of things. Regarding your second question, yes, I do think the Indig. Aryan school has a case that merits consideration, particularly regarding the archaeological and textual evidence. That's why I believe its worthwhile compiling and articulating the most salient arguments that have been made in this regard--they're quite intriguing. The appeal lessons when people try to claim India as the homeland for all the IE's except, as I said before, when this is done as an intellectual exercise to show how the same facts can be used to support different conclusions. Obviously, if the Aryans were indig. to India their relationship with the other IE lang's has to be accounted for. I don't think the Indig. Aryan school has an adequate representation of the data involved in historical linguistics (which is how this whole thing was put together in the first place). There are only two facilities in India today where one can even study hist. ling. But scholars are beginning to be aware of and turn their attention to this lacuna. Anyway, more on the Ling. aspects later.

Some comments regarding Georges concerns, namely the horse, the Indus Valley /Vedic connection: In the Indus Valley, the horse (equus caballus Linn) was first reported in 1931 in Mohenjo-daro (Sewell and Guha). Mackay reported a clay model in the same site in 1938. Bhola Nath reported horse bones in 1963 from Harappa, Ropar and Lothal. Piggott reported a horse figurine from Periano Ghundai. Other reports include the Swat Valley (Stacul), Gumla (Sankalia), Pirac (Shaffer) Malvan (Sharma, A.K.) Kalibhangan (ibid), Kuntasi (Sharma, R.S.), Rangpur (Rao R.S.), Lothal (ibid), Rana Ghundai (Ross), Surkotada (Sharma, A.K)

The exact species of horse is the crucial issue here--equus caballus Linn is the Aryan steed. A horse tooth had been found in Rana Ghundai by the excavator E.J.Ross from a pre-Harappan level but had been questioned by Zeuner, who claimed it could have been a lowly hamione (equus hamonius khur). The two animals can only be distinguished through certain teeth and phalanges, so if other parts of the animal were found, detractors of the Indig. Aryans could always reject their reliability. The whole issue became so politicized that it took a Hungarian horse bone specialist, Sandor Bokonyi, to confirm that bones he examined from Surkotada were, indeed, caballus Linn. I don't think there is much debate any more that the horse was a feature of the Indus Valley (so horse trainers could have gone to the Mittani). However, there has only been one reporting (that I'm aware of) from pre-Harappan sites. This leaves open the possiblity that the horse could have been introduced into the Mature Indus Civ. by incoming Aryans.

More interesting are the reports of horse findings near Allahabad dated from 2265-1480 BCE and from a Neolithic site in Karnataka--both well before the Aryans are supposed to have come in introducing the animal and much too far East and South. I'll have to check the status of these reports with Jim Shaffer next time I meet him, along with another report of a finding in Rajasthan that was dated 4500 BCE. Just as we struggle to comprehend the world view that composed the Vedic hymns, the ancient Indo-Aryans, in turn, might have found it very peculiar that their place in the history of the subcontinent from the perspective of our modern age depends, to such a great extent, on the discovery of a few equine phalanges or molars dug up from burial grounds and refuse dumps. Be that as it may, the horse is now the most sought after animal in the Indus Valley.

I have all the above ref's (mostly primary, some secondary) at my fingertips but can't imagine everyone will want a whole list. I recommend Sharma, G.K's article "the horse was buried under the dunes of..." in Puratattva no 23, 1922-3 pp 30-34 for a poignant article with a few ref's.

Perhaps a more significant feature of the Indus Valley (IV) heralded by the Indig. Aryan school as proof of a Vedic presence is the discovery of the Sarasvati (hence the title of the conference in Atlanta--'Indus Sarasvati Age'--remember?) Some scholars recommend changing the name of the Indus Valley civ to the Sarasvati, or Indus-Sarasvati civ. This is because the Indus river has only about three dozen sites on it, but a huge dry river bed, called the Hakra in Pakistan and the Ghaggar in India has been discovered which has over 400 sites simply along a 300 mile stretch of it.

The Sarasvati is considered to be the principal river in the Rig with 50 references in 46 hymns dedicated to her. She flows from the mountains to the sea. Her prestige is such that many kings and the five Aryan tribes dwell on her banks. However, unlike the other rivers mentioned in the Rig such as the Indus etc. she is no more, hence Hindus call her the 'supta nadi' (sleeping river) or state that she flows underground or mystically to Prayag. THe dry Hakra/Ghaggar river bed is situated where the Sarasvati is described as being situated in the Rig. viz between the Sutlej and the Yamuna. Landsat imagery reveals that the Sutlej and Yamuna once flowed into the GHaggar/Hakra as revealed by paleochannels, but were deviated due to tectonic disturbances causing her to loose her water supply. See Pal, Yash et al, "Remote Sensing of the 'Lost' Sarasvati" in Frontiers of the Indus Civ. B.B.LAL and S.P.Gupta eds., New Delhi: Books and Books, 1984. Other ref's available on request.

Assuming this river is the Sarasvati (as the Indig. Aryan school, and most Indian archaeologists do) the crucial issue is when was she the mighty river of the Vedic hymns flowing from the mountains to the sea? Mughal proposes that on the Pak side, the Hakra was a perennial river in the 4th and early 3rd mill BCE and that the whole river had dried up about the end of the second (Possehl G.ed's Harappan Civ, N. Delhi: Oxford & IBH, pp85-94) Other dates range from 2500-2200 BCE and 2200-1700 BCE. A French team (who have scant regard for mythico-poetic references to Sarasvati in what they consider to be much later Vedic texts) insist that it had been dry well before any proto-historic people had settled in the Indus area. (I have to chase down some of the other publications by this team) Again, granting all this, it can still be argued that the Aryans came into the Indus Civ. sometime in the 3rd or 2nd mill. BCE and settled on the banks of the river (unless the Indo-French dates are authoritative, in which case the Indig. Aryan school could claim the Vedic ref's to Sarasvati predate the whole Indus Civ. making the Veda much earlier than the Indus Civ). Anyway, taking the lowest of all these dates, this evidence suggests that the Vedic Aryans knew the Sarasvati well before the end of the second mill BCE when she was already completely dry, and therefore they must have been in the Indus Valley. The large number of sites on the river bed, which go back to early and mature Harappan periods, are suggestive of the inhabitations of the five Aryan tribes who are said to live upon Sarasvati's banks.

Another I-A feature found in the Indus Civ. is the fire altars. These have been found in Kalibhangan and Lothal causing even Aryan Invasion supporters such as Allchin to allow that the Indo-Aryans must have at least coexisted in the Indus Valley civ. Some of these altars are domestic, some public, on a raised platform and arrayed in a row of seven facing East (suggesting the 7 dhish.nya hearths where the sacrificer had to face East). Nearby were a well and the remains of bath pavements suggesting ceremonial bathing. These altars were found both in the early and later stages of occupation of the towns from at least 2200 BCE (Lal, B.B "Some Reflections on the Structural Remains at Kalibangan" in Frontiers of the Indus Civ. Lal, B.B. & Gupta S.P New Delhi: Books and Books, 1984. ALso, Thappar, B.K. "Kalibangan: A Harappan Metropolis beyond the Indus Valley" in Expedition,17.2 (1975) 19-33).

So the big dichotomy between the Vedic and Indus world needs to be reconsidered--although it can always be argued that the Aryans still came into the subcontinent albeit much earlier than has been held so far, and coexisted with the Indus Valley people. In this regard, some final arch ref's I recommend are the articles by Jim Shaffer and Mark Kenoyer. They argue for a continual organic archaeological development reflecting indigenous cultural development from pre- to proto-historic periods with absolutely nothing that can be considered intrusive from the North West (or anywhere else) in the archaeological record. Of course, lots of Indian archaeologists have been saying the same thing for years, but since the charge of Hindutva or anti-colonial bias can be levied against them, try Shaffer's article in George Erdosy's ed. called "Language, Material Culture and Ethnicity:The Indo-Aryans in Ancient South Asia" Berlin: W. deGruyter, 1995 also, his article in "The People of South Asia" Lukacs, John ed N.Y & London:Plenum Press, 1984.. These articles are easily obtainable, but any of his articles will do. We should bear in mind, that there must have been a significant enough number of Aryans speakers intruding to have completely obliterated all traces of a pre-Aryan language across most of the subcontinent (with the exception of Brahui etc. which could as easily have migrated North from the South as other Dravidian tribes have done in the historic period) and one would have a right to expect such an intrusion to show up somewhere in the archaeological record. By the way, Laurie, I'm curious where you got your ref's from stating the PGW has been found in the Caspian, because my ref's say it has not been found outside the subcontinent which specifically disqualifies it from being correlated with the Aryans. Anyway, B.B.Lal who was promoting PGW as proof of the Aryan intrusion, seems now to have become an Indig. Aryanist.

Regarding the racial references--as was pointed out, Indra and other rishis whose Aryan pedigree can hardly be doubted are also called black, and sometimes the term seems to be used to refer to powers of darkness. A favourite example often used by the Indig. Aryan school to demonstrate how 19th cent. European scholars gave racial glosses to words due to predetermined convictions is the word anasa applied to the dasas. 19th cent philologers decided it was a-nasa, 'noseless'. If the dasas were noseless then they must have been black aborigines. Sayana, glosses the word as an-asa 'faceless' or 'mouthless', which could be taken to mean devoid of fair speech, uncouth. So, like so much of all this, the same evidence can be reconstrued and interpreted very differently. Indig. Aryanists argue that Arya and Dasya are cultural terms with no racial connotations whatsoever.

I had promised to keep my postings short but we're dealing with a massive amount of material here. There are all kinds of disparate data--the possibility of the Vedic texts recording astronomical information pertaining to the solstices which, due to the precession of the equinoxes, can be dated to the 3rd or 4th mill BCE is another piece of evidence that keeps resurfacing in Indig. Aryan discourses. Thibaut and Whitney attempted to refute this line of reasoning, but their rebutals have not been accepted by many Indig. Aryanists and the debate merits reexamination. Pingree does not allow the early Indo-Aryans; basic astronomical skills because the texts do not specifically outline such skills. In my analysis of the debate I suggest that the references themselves could be taken as evidence of such skills and that it remains possible that the statements in the Satapatha and elsewhere do refer to the solstices and equinoxes at a time far anterior to the date commonly allowed for these texts. Of course, even if this were accepted, it could still be argued that the Indo-Aryans brought these ancient memories with them from outside India and recorded them in their texts.

Subash Kak recently drew my attention to two articles by the historian of science Seidenberg who insisted that the geometry of the sulba shastras must have been the origin of the Babylonian system and accordingly would date it no later than 1700 BCE. This would make the Veda much older still (as would the astro. info in the braahma.nas, if valid (see Seidenberg's 2 articles in 'Archive for Exact Science, vol 1.1, 1960 pp 488-527; and vol 18 1978, pp 301-342 entitled 'the Ritual Origin of Geometry' and 'the Origin of Mathematics' respectively). Incidently, this whole debate is not simply about the indigenousness of the Aryans, but also about issues of antiquity, specifically revolving around the date of the Veda.

There's lots more, but I'm spending more time on email than on my dissertation and its late already. We'll have to talk about linguistics another time, George. Misra's point about the MIA features of the Mittani, which is dated circa 1400 BCE is that the Veda must be much older still. There are other linguistic features he points out [semi-vowels not assimilated in conjunction with plosives (vartana>wartana); nasals also not assimilated to plosives (.rtamna>artamna); .r>ar (v.rdh>bard); Norman pointed out pt>tt, labialisation of a>u after v (ashvasani>assussanni); assimilation of sh>ss after labialisation of a>u (as in above). Even if all these features can be interpreted as quirks of the script or whatever, they can also be seen as MIA features and that's the whole point: the Indig. Aryan school has a case. I'm trying to articulate the more convincing elements of it. How we evaluate it will be an individual thing. All I'm saying is that there are plenty of reasonable arguments being offered by the Indig. Aryan school which are based on critical methods of scholarship and I think they should be treated in kind. Let them be given a fair hearing and critiqued and good luck to them.

Hope some of this is of some use to some of you, and do let me know when you all get tired of this topic.

Vayutuvan
BRF Oldie
Posts: 10600
Joined: 20 Jun 2011 04:36

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

Postby Vayutuvan » 01 Jul 2012 22:42

A_Gupta wrote:2. Writing our own history is important. But approaching Veda, Upanishad, Purana on a historical basis only is like consuming the mango skin only.

A_Gupta ji, while I agree with the general thrust of what you are saying, does the above mean we should discard astrochronological dating a la Subhash Kak? I ask because there is something I want to post from Olson's book about 0.

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

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

Postby RajeshA » 01 Jul 2012 22:52

Friends of South Asia :roll: , more like friends of White Aryan Mythology

Code: Select all

http://www.friendsofsouthasia.org/textbook/ComingOfAryans.html

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

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

Postby RajeshA » 01 Jul 2012 23:13

Good article by Klaus Klostermaier for ISKCON

Published June 1998
By Klaus Klostermaier
Questioning the Aryan Invasion Theory and Revising Ancient Indian History

disha
BR Mainsite Crew
Posts: 7397
Joined: 03 Dec 2006 04:17
Location: gaganaviharin

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

Postby disha » 01 Jul 2012 23:16

RajeshA wrote:
Date: Sun, 13 Oct 1996 00:18:42 -0700
From: Edwin Bryant <efb3@columbia.edu>

..... By the way, Laurie, I'm curious where you got your ref's from stating the PGW has been found in the Caspian, because my ref's say it has not been found outside the subcontinent which specifically disqualifies it from being correlated with the Aryans. Anyway, B.B.Lal who was promoting PGW as proof of the Aryan intrusion, seems now to have become an Indig. Aryanist....


^^^ Another big ding to the AIT/AMT. I am collecting photos from the SIVC and already finding some interesting correlation. Extremely busy, hope to upload some by the end of the month.

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

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

Postby svinayak » 01 Jul 2012 23:23

RajeshA wrote:Friends of South Asia :roll: , more like friends of White Aryan Mythology

Code: Select all

http://www.friendsofsouthasia.org/textbook/ComingOfAryans.html


if you believe that peoples who can trace their geneology all the way to India have somehow more claims to its citizenship, than others whose geneologies can be traced to areas outside the current-political boundaries. While this is a dangerous idea to promote anywhere, we note that as South Asian Americans practicising religions of faraway lands in the US, we MUST reject this notion entirely and with vehemence.

This is the bogus argument which they are trying to pin to this whole political game. All of India has a population 99% local and all human migrations have atleast 50k-100k BP timeline. So they are trying to give a false image to the political ideology using a strawman argument when the rest of the public is not even aware of these facts.

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

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

Postby vishvak » 01 Jul 2012 23:51

Acharya wrote:Out of India has not even started. Most of the facts only genetic right now for OIT.


While discussing AIT there should be no comparison with any other theory.

Old habits don't die, perhaps even genetics can cure rabid bigots.

The narrative of OIT should be with those who own it, not the usual theory mongers and random secularists. Genetics as a science is interest-neutral but people are not.

2 khota sikka onlee.

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

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

Postby RajeshA » 02 Jul 2012 00:22

Coming back to the discussion of linguistics, there was something that ManishH ji had pointed to me earlier. And it had stuck in my mind somewhere.

By Dr. Koenraad Elst
Linguistic aspects of the Aryan non-invasion theory

Moreover, the discovery of a small and extinct kentum language inside India (Proto‑Bangani, with koto as its word for "hundred"), surviving as a sizable substratum in the Himalayan language Bangani, tends to support the hypothesis that the older kentum form was originally present in India as well. This discovery was made by the German linguist Claus Peter Zoller (1987, 1988, 1989). The attempt by George van Driem and Suhnu R. Sharma (1996) to discredit Zoller has been overruled by the findings made on the spot by Anvita Abbi (1998) and her students. She has almost entirely confirmed Zoller's list of kentum substratum words in Bangani. But as the trite phrase goes: this calls for more research.

Zoller does not explain the presence of a kentum language in India through an Indian Homeland Theory but as a left-over of a pre-Vedic Indo-European immigration into India. He claims that the local people have a tradition of their immigration from Afghanistan. If they really lived in Afghanistan originally, their case (and their nuisance value for the AIT) isn't too different from that of the Tocharians, another kentum people showing up in unexpected quarters. But if even the Vedic poets could not recall the invasion of their grandfathers into India (Vedic literature doesn't mention it anywhere, vide Elst 1999:164-171), what value should we attach to a tradition of this mountain tribe about its own immigration many centuries ago? Could it not rather be that they have interiorized what the school-going ones among them picked up in standard textbooks of history, viz. the AIT model? Their presence in Afghanistan or in Garhwal itself is at any rate highly compatible with the OIT.


I propose a different theory from Koenraad Elst here.

Let's say the Druhyu language was Centum and not Satem. When Yayati distributed his kingdoms among the five sons: Yadu, Turvasu, Druhyu, Anu and Puru; Druhyu set up their kingdom in the West - in Sapta-Sindhu, Punjab. Later on they were pushed towards Afghanistan, and Anus moved in into Sapta-Sindhu.

When the Druhyus moved into Afghanistan, their language developed as Centum proto-Sanskrit. Most of the Druhyu tribes moved on northwards into Central Asia and the Uttara-Kurus (Tocharians) moved west into present Xinjiang. But for a long time these tribes were in Afghanistan.

It could well be that the proto-Banganis stayed back in Afghanistan and eventually moved back into India proper.

The point is after some time in Afghanistan, the Druhyus were not speaking Sanskrit with Satem phonetics but rather a quite similar language with Centum phonetics.

So the Proto-Indo-European language happened to be in India, but it would have been definitely very different than what they have come up with.

RamaY
BRF Oldie
Posts: 17249
Joined: 10 Aug 2006 21:11
Location: http://bharata-bhuti.blogspot.com/

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

Postby RamaY » 02 Jul 2012 00:29

^

RajeshA ji,

You may want to read the story of Yayati and his sons from MB Adiparva. It explains what existed in those regions before he ordered those sons to go there and have kingdoms setup.

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

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

Postby RajeshA » 02 Jul 2012 00:54

RamaY wrote:RajeshA ji,

You may want to read the story of Yayati and his sons from MB Adiparva. It explains what existed in those regions before he ordered those sons to go there and have kingdoms setup.

RamaY ji,

thanks for the hint. As far as I have understood, in the beginning the Druhyus were responsible for the Sapta-Sindhu area. Only later on were they pushed into Afghanistan. I presume the language must have developed there into the Centum variety.
Sapta-Sindhu seems to be too close to home to have Centum, and if it were the case, one would have observed that among the Anus as well.

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

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

Postby member_22872 » 02 Jul 2012 02:30

From TSP thread
Charlie wrote:
I recall my own bewilderment when I met the Pakistan High Commission’s press counsellor before my first visit to that country. Invited into his office, I was treated to a diatribe about how Pakistan was so different from squalid, beggar-infested India. “We come from Central Asia, galloping on horses across those wide open grasslands,” he told me, his hands pumping imaginary reins as he gazed past me at imaginary grasslands. “We feel caged in the tiny houses you have here.” He was referring to his Vasant Vihar flat.


See these buggers who got a moth eaten country because they hitched a free ride on the backs of our freedom fighters who died for India, the same TSP buggers who later stabbed them in the back, have the gall to talk of any history per se that too coming from CA at that!. No wonder these same ba$tards now work with Witzel and try to drive a wedge between dalits, south Indians and Indians in generals.

I don't know why some Indians who love their country with the whole hearts otherwise, who mean no wrong to India still support AIT based theories. Why can't they see how much AIT divides our country. TSP buggers want to justify the wrongs done by Islamic plunderers as something notnew to India through AIT, as Indians themselves are in fact 'nomadic Aryans' who plundered India as per these inbreeds.

There is indeed a greater need now to silence this AIT nonsense. Enough is enough.

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

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

Postby RajeshA » 02 Jul 2012 03:18

By Koenraad Elst
The Aryan Invasion Theory: more than meets the eye

The field of philology, such as it was, floundered until the 'discovery' of Sanskrit. Andrew Dickson White writes that the period between Leibnitz (1646 - 1716) arguing against the cherished "sacred theory" of languages, and this modern development was a period of philological chaos. It began mainly with the doubts which Leibnitz had forced upon Europe, and ended only with the beginning of the study of Sanskrit in the latter half of the eighteenth century,and with the comparisons made by means of the collections of Catharine [the Great], Hervas, and Adelung at the beginning of the nineteenth.

Further, such was that chaos of thought into which the discovery of Sanskrit suddenly threw its great light. Well does one of the foremost modern philologists say that this "was the electric spark which caused the floating elements to crystallize into regular forms." When the west encountered Sanskrit in the 18th century, the discovery brought about a fundamental change in its outlook. Sanskrit was instrumental in the development of the IE world-view and its associated fields like philology, linguistics and comparative studies. It was the driving force in the re-imagining of Europe's history, the origin of its peoples and languages.
Last edited by RajeshA on 02 Jul 2012 03:36, edited 1 time in total.

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 54684
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

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

Postby ramana » 02 Jul 2012 03:36

RajeshA, This map collection has ancient names of places in India:

http://dsal.uchicago.edu/reference/schwartzberg/

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

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

Postby svinayak » 02 Jul 2012 03:42

http://dsal.uchicago.edu/reference/schw ... object=111

South Asia in world affairs in the pre-independence period p. 74

Historical atlas of south Asia

SaiK
BRF Oldie
Posts: 36416
Joined: 29 Oct 2003 12:31
Location: NowHere

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

Postby SaiK » 02 Jul 2012 04:13

http://www.press.uchicago.edu/books/HOC ... apter1.pdf

page 17 "spread of literacy" map is wrong!

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

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

Postby RajeshA » 02 Jul 2012 09:32

ramana wrote:RajeshA, This map collection has ancient names of places in India:

http://dsal.uchicago.edu/reference/schwartzberg/

ramana garu,

thanks. will look at them.

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

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

Postby RajeshA » 02 Jul 2012 11:01

My reply to an Iranian on the lingforum.

I wrote:
mojobadshah wrote:It's critical because the Aryan phenomenon has everything to do with a people's identity and this identity the Irano-Afghan identity is being confused with Neo-Nazism. You don't have people confusing the ancient Greeks, Romans, and Celts with Nazis, neo-Nazis, and racial philosphers. In the case of the Aryans (Irano-Afghans) you do.


Hello,

my first post here.

If an attempt is being made here to correct the usage of the term "Aryan" in the teaching of history in schools, perhaps then one should do the correction correctly and not undertake some half-way effort.

The word "Arya" has two meanings:
a) In the narrow racial sense, it just refers to all those whose progenitors were from the Lunar Dynasty of India. Since the Anus - the PRthus (Parthians), ParSus (Persians), Pakthas (Pakhtoon), BhalAnas (Baluch), Sivas (Khwarezmi), ViSANins (Dards), all belong to the Lunar Dynasty, they were Aryans. But there are others who too belong to the Lunar Dynasty - the Purus, the Druhyus, the Yadus, the Turvashus. The Druhyus and Turvashus may have merged into other identities, but the Purus and Yadus would still claim "Arya" heritage in the racial sense.

b) In the broader sense, it refers to all those who are "noble" in thought and of deed and act according to Dharma. Here followers of all those religions which evolved out of Vedic principles - Hinduism, Jainism, Buddhism, Sikhism and to some extent Zoroastrianism (old split) could call themselves Arya, i.e. if they behave accordingly.

So there is nothing wrong in considering Iranian-Afghans as Aryans, but that forms just a subset.

Whether or not Europeans can call themselves Aryans, depends on whether any connections are found between them and the Druhyus, who left the Subcontinent and migrated northwards a very long time ago, in pre-Rigvedic times, and possibly due to the climes lost their melanin.

So Iranians and Afghans may have good reasons to call themselves Aryan, but without the Indian context, they would not know why!

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

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

Postby RajeshA » 02 Jul 2012 12:22

I think one strategy to take back the whole Aryan debate, is to bring others on board.

Of course, for Indians the stakes are the highest in this debate. But there are others who too have some stakes. The Iranians, the Afghans, the Tajiks, also see themselves as "Aryan". Just for the sake of proper perspective, we should not really forget that Iranians, Afghans and Tajiks really use "Aryan" to define themselves. They use the word in a racial sense. But it is part of their identity too.

Then there are many other groups, who recognize themselves as migrants to their present lands - Armenians, Kurds, Greeks, Slavs, Albanians, and Western Europeans.

Now it seems that the Anglo-Germans are in some way invested in the idea of seeing Central Eurasia as the homeland of Aryans, but never India. They want the glory of the "Aryan" but without its responsibilities.

But I think various other groups - Greeks and Slavs may not really be averse to the idea, i.e. the Orthodox Christian nations , or the Satem people, could be willing to support the Indian position (certainly not because of the Christianity, but due to other factors).

They know how powerful these racial ideologies can become once in the hand of people interested in world domination. If Anglo-Germans again get control over the "Aryan" identity, it is obvious they would again abuse it.

So my plea is to form an alliance of academics from Greece, Russia, Ukraine, Bulgaria, Czech Republic, Slovakia, Slovenia, Poland?, Rumania?, Albania, Armenia, Iran, Afghanistan and Tajikistan, and to put a stop to this Anglo-German AIT-Nazi Project and to reclaim the "Aryan" narrative.

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

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

Postby RajeshA » 02 Jul 2012 12:24

However giving the Iranians, Afghans, Tajiks a stake in reclaiming "Arya", "Aryan", it would also change the meaning of the term giving it again a racial note, something we in India are not really interested in.

So once the word "Arya" or "Aryan" has been reclaimed, Indians would have to emphasize that its usage is limited to Vedic/Dharmic adherence which can be a source of pride, but as a racial term it has long been deprecated if it ever had a racial background.

Anus, Anava (Iranians) could call themselves Arya not simply due to their Lunar Dynastic heritage but possibly due to their historic Vedic compliance as well. So the criteria would not have been "race" but "Vedic compliance", but since the whole tribe was in Vedic compliance, at least till Zarathustra decided to push his own version of religion, but may be even after that, one could have called the whole tribe "Arya" allowing all Iranians to identify themselves with the term, but that is history, and until they again come onto the same road, one should begrudge them the identity "Aryan".

But that is something for the time after AIT is dead and buried.

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

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

Postby svinayak » 02 Jul 2012 12:29

RajeshA wrote:I think one strategy to take back the whole Aryan debate, is to bring others on board.

Of course, for Indians the stakes are the highest in this debate.

So my plea is to form an alliance of academics from Greece, Russia, Ukraine, Bulgaria, Czech Republic, Slovakia, Slovenia, Poland?, Rumania?, Albania, Armenia, Iran, Afghanistan and Tajikistan, and to put a stop to this Anglo-German AIT-Nazi Project and to reclaim the "Aryan" narrative.

Key thing is to first make sure that there is no Indian supporting the Anglo-German AIT-Nazi Project
There should be not even one Indian in the India or west who will collaborate with them. We can have Indians who can collect data but never publish report in favor of the AIT.

Then setup a parallel research institute in India which keep doing research on the IVC but never debates the AIT. This should be a 100 year project.

A new generation of Indians will first give top priority to the Indian version of history but will only refer to the European version as a theory and a research subject not to be taken seriously.
This will attract all the nations which will join to find the real truth.

A_Gupta
BRF Oldie
Posts: 11638
Joined: 23 Oct 2001 11:31
Contact:

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

Postby A_Gupta » 02 Jul 2012 16:17

http://sudharma.epapertoday.com/
E-mail : sudharma.sanskritdaily@gmail.com
Phone : 0821-2442835 / 4287835
E-paper :sudharma.epapertoday.com
Annual subscription in India: Rs 400/-

http://www.deccanherald.com/content/261 ... holds.html

World's only Sanskrit daily holds out against odds
Mysore, July 2, 2012, (IANS)

Sudharma, possibly the only Sanskrit daily in the world, is struggling for survival as it approaches its 43rd anniversary later this year.

In the face of dwindling interest in a language that many feel has no future, and lack of financial support from advertisers, the husband-wife team publishing the single sheet daily from Mysore is disillusioned, but not disheartened.

"We will continue to run the paper against all odds, as it is a mission with us," editor Sampath Kumar, returning after two months in hospital for a mild heart attack, told IANS.
"There's no question of looking back, despite the gross indifference of the state government and the Directorate of Audio-Visual Publicity (DAVP) to release advertisements to us," added Jayalakshmi, the publisher.

It is not that Sudharma's subscription base is shrinking. The contents are a mix of news and views on all subjects.

"We have close to 4,000 subscribers that include institutions and individuals, academics and religious bodies. It's a pity the powers-that-be do not realise the historic role of Sanskrit, which has now been globally recognised as a scientific and phonetically sound language," Sampath told IANS.

According to Jayalakshmi, a study of Sanskrit is helpful as its knowledge improves pronounciation.

Lots of people who meet the duo wonder why they bring out the newspaper when it is not financially viable.

"My answer is that it is our shared responsibility and commitment to posterity not to let the language die, even as pro-globalisation forces are promoting use of English in a big way," Sampath explained.

Jayalakshmi reacted sharply to the charge of Sanskirt being a dead language.
"Who says Sanskrit is dead? Every morning, people recite shlokas, conduct pujas...ceremonies like marriage, childbirth and death are in Sanskrit. India is united by Sanskrit, the mother language sustaining so many languages... and now even IT professionals are saying it is useful," says Jayalakshmi.

Sudharma was started on July 15, 1970, by Sampath's father, Varadaraja Iyengar.
"On his (father) deathbed he made me promise that I would not let Sudharma be shut down. I am trying to keep the tradition and fire alive," Sampath told IANS.

Sudharma's annual subscription is Rs 400. The daily mostly contains articles on the Vedas, yoga and religion, as also on politics and culture.

Sampath recalls that his father took the initiative to get All India Radio broadcast regular news bulletins in Sanskrit.

Mysore has become an important centre for Yoga and Sanskrit learning. Thousands of students from all over India come to learn Yoga at the 40-odd centres in the city.
According to Sampath, interest in alternative medicines like Ayurveda has also helped increase interest in Sanskrit.

Beginning as manually printed, Sudharma now has a computerised printing facility. An e-paper too is available online, making its reach international.

Lamenting the lack of official patronage, Sampath said: "Being in Sanskrit, Sudharma never had sufficient revenue from advertisements. Despite ample lip service and appreciation, no concrete help comes our way. But constraints have never deterred us and we will continue to keep alive this glorious tradition."

The modest office in Agrahara has been visited by ministers, governors, Shankaracharyas, and other dignitaries. Sampath showed his vast collection of messages from politicians, scholars, intellectuals and business leaders.

The signs may not be too hopeful, but perhaps the paper, like the language it is published in, will be able to survive the test of time.

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

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

Postby RajeshA » 02 Jul 2012 16:54

The budget of Archaeological Survey of India in 2011-2012 was 439 cr INR (79 million USD).

That is half of the budget of a single big Hollywood movie.

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

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

Postby RajeshA » 02 Jul 2012 17:24

Books @openlibrary.org, one can read online

Image

Publication Date: 1888
By Charles Morris
The Aryan Race: Its Origins and its Achievements


Publication Date: 1892
By Charles Morris
The Aryan Race: Its Origins and its Achievements (Second Ediition)

Page 37
There can scarcely be a doubt that, in some instances, the vigor of the Aryans sufficed to impose their language on more numerous aboriginal peoples, with whom they became thoroughly mingled. Such for instance, is the case with the Celts, the Slavonians, and the Hindus. There is much reason to believe that in all these the original Aryan conquerors mingled their blood with that of a considerably more numerous conquered people. Yet the Aryan language has held its own with very little modification, while the aboriginal speech has vanished. Certainly the vigor, enterprise and persistent spirit of the Aryan migrants must have exerted a strong influence upon the more yielding aborigines, and we cannot be surprised if the latter often lost their language with their nationality.


One may like to search for "Hindus" in the document. Reading this is better than coffee and guarana. Note to all Bruce Banners in India: Don't read this!

Page 133
Less striking, yet more ancient and more persistent, than this system of worship was another, of which we see and hear but little, yet which formed the most generally observed religion of our far-off progenitors, so far as indications prove. This was the worship of ancestors, the home-worship of the Aryan family, the exclusive worship of the Aryan clan, the religion of the hearth and of the ancestral tomb, - the only worship that really reached the hearts of the early Aryans.


I guess "Aryan" was something the Europeans could project on to it, whatever they wanted and whatever suited their political agenda.
Last edited by RajeshA on 02 Jul 2012 18:53, edited 3 times in total.

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

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

Postby RajeshA » 02 Jul 2012 17:51

Books @openlibrary.org, one can read online

I think, he first introduced the word "Indo-European"

Image

Publication Date: 1885
Author: Franz Bopp
German linguist known for extensive comparative work on Indo-European languages
A comparative grammar of the Sanskrit, Zend, Greek, Latin, Lithuanian, Gothic, German, and Slavonic languages (Fourth Edition)

Original Publication Date: 1833
Vergleichende Grammatik des Sanskrit, Zend, Griechischen, Lateinischen, Litthauischen, Altslawischen, Gotischen und Deutschen

A_Gupta
BRF Oldie
Posts: 11638
Joined: 23 Oct 2001 11:31
Contact:

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

Postby A_Gupta » 02 Jul 2012 18:17

A_Gupta wrote:http://sudharma.epapertoday.com/
E-mail : sudharma.sanskritdaily@gmail.com
Phone : 0821-2442835 / 4287835
E-paper :sudharma.epapertoday.com
Annual subscription in India: Rs 400/-


Please do not count this as an endorsement as I don't know anything about Sudharma except what appeared in the newspaper. If it suits you, then

1. In India, you can subscribe to a postal edition.
2. The website talks about a subscription for people overseas, $50 a year. I do not know the details of what they provide.
3. Sudharma accepts PayPal and major credit card donations.

If a BRFer in the vicinity of Mysore can find out more about Sudharma, and post here, would appreciate it.

PS: I think this is relevant, in a small way it may help keep Sanskrit in India instead of being a dead language in Harvard.

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

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

Postby RajeshA » 02 Jul 2012 18:21

The Iranian View

By: M. Sadeq Nazmi-Afshar
The Origins of Aryan People: Iran Chamber Society

I am Darius, the great king, the king of kings
The king of many countries and many people
The king of this expansive land,
The son of Wishtaspa of Achaemenid,
Persian, the son of a Persian,
'Aryan', from the Aryan race

"From the Darius the Great's Inscription in Naqshe-e-Rostam"

The above scripture is one of most valid written evidences of the history of the Aryan race, and as can be seen, Darius I (Dariush in Persian), the Achaemenian king, in the 5th century BCE, declares himself a Persian and form the Aryan race. Herodotus, the father of history, writes (in his book: "History of Herodotus") at the same times: "In ancient times, the Greeks called Iranians "Kaffe", but they were renowned as Aryans among themselves and their neighbors". In another part of his book, Herodotus writes that the Medians were known as Aryans during a certain period. So in two of the oldest written human documents, the race of the Iranians have been mentioned as Aryan.

On the other hand, in many contemporary books, one reads that the Aryans were not original residents of the land of Iran, and that they migrated to Iran from Central Asia or somewhere in the north of Europe. The point is that if some of the oldest written records of the human history confirm that the residents of the Iranian Plateau were Aryans, why should some claim otherwise?

We will discuss the origins of the Iranian race, and we will try to shed light on some unknown corners of history, which has been mixed with ignorance and lies.

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

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

Postby RajeshA » 02 Jul 2012 19:13

By Prof. Dinesh Agrawal
Penn State University, USA
Demise of Aryan Invasion/ Race Theory

Theory is not a subject of academic interest only, rather it conditions our perception of India's historical evolution, the sources of her ancient glorious heritage, and indigenous socio-economic-political institutions which have been developed over the millennia. Indian culture and nationalism have been evolved and fostered over the millenia by India's ancient rishis who at the banks of holy rivers of Saptasindhu and Saraswati had composed the Vedic literature - the very foundation of Indian civilization, and realized the eternal truths about the Creator, His creation, and means to preserve it. These pioneers of the ancient Vedic culture were indigenous people of mother India.

These facts are mendaciously denied by the Aryan Invasion theory, which professes their foreign origin, and thereby challenges the very raison d'etre of Indian culture and nationhood. In this article an attempt has been made to expose the myth of the (AIT) Aryan Invasion Theory (propagated by the west) by quoting scriptural, historical and archaeological evidences, and presenting proper interpretation of Vedic literature.

Now with the emergence of new information in last couple of decades, and an objective analysis of the archaeological data and scriptures, the validity of AIT is seriously challenged by scholars, and by many is outrightly discarded. The most weird aspect of the AIT is that it has its origin not in any Indian records but in European politics and German nationalism of 19th century. No where in any of the ancient Indian scriptures or epics or Puranas, etc. is there any mention of Aryan migration or invasion or Aryan race.

In the last couple of decades, the discovery of the lost track of the Rig Vedic river Saraswati, the excavation of a chain of Harappan sites from Ropar in the Punjab to Lothal and Dhaulavira in Gujarat all along this lost track, the discovery of the archaeological remains of Vedis (alters) and Yupas connected with Vedic Yajnas (sacrifices) at Harrapan sites like Kalibangan, decipherment of the Harappan/Indus script by many scholars as a language belonging to Vedic Sanskrit family, the view of the archaeologists like Prof. Dales, Prof. Allchin etc. that the end of the Harappan civilization came not because of the so called Aryan invasion but as a result of a series of floods, the discovery of the lost Dwarka city beneath the sea water near Gujarat coast and its similarity with Harappan civilization, and an objective, accurate and contextual interpretation of Vedas indicate convincingly towards the full identity of the Harappan/Indus civilization with post Vedic civilization, and demand a re-examination of the entire gamut of Aryan Race/Invasion Theories.

For thousands of years the Hindu society has looked upon the Vedas as the fountain-head of all knowledge: spiritual and secular, and the mainstay of Hindu culture, heritage and its existence. Never our historical or religious records have questioned this fact. Even western and far eastern travelers who have documented their experiences during their prolonged stay and sojourn in India have testified the importance of Vedic literature and its indigenous origin. And now, suddenly, in the last century or so, these the so-called European scholars are telling that the Vedas do not belong to Hindus, they were the creation of a barbaric horde of nomadic tribes descended upon north India and destroyed an advanced indigenous civilization. They even suggest that the Sanskrit language is of non-Indian origin. This is all absurd, preposterous, and defies the commonsense.

A nomadic, barbaric horde of invaders cannot from any stretch of imagination produce the kind of sublime wisdom, pure and pristine spiritual experiences of the highest order, a universal philosophy of religious tolerance and harmony for the entire mankind, one finds in the Vedic literature.

Origin of Aryan Race Theory:
Max Muller, a renowned Indologist from Germany, is credited with the popularization of the Aryan racial theory in the middle of 19th century. Though later on when Muller's reputation as a Sanskrit scholar was getting damaged, and he was challenged by his peers, since nowhere in the Sanskrit literature, the term Arya denoted a racial people, he recanted and pronounced that Aryan meant only a linguistic family and never applied to a race. But the damage was already done. The German and French political and nationalist groups exploited this racial phenomenon to propagate the supremacy of an assumed Aryan race of white people, which Hitler used to its extreme absurdities for his political hegemony and his barbaric crusade to terrorize Jews and other societies. This culminated in the holocaust of millions of innocent people.

According to the AIT theory, northern India was invaded and conquered by nomadic, light-skinned race of a people called 'aryans' who supposedly descended from central Asia (or some unknown land?) around 1500 BC, and destroyed an earlier more advanced civilization of the people habitated in the Indus Valley, and then imposed upon them their culture and language. These Indus Valley people were supposed to be either Dravidian, or Austrics or now--days' Shudra class etc.

The main elements on which the entire structure of AIT has been built are: Arya is a racial group, their invasion, they were nomadic, light-skinned, their original home was outside India, their invasion occurred around 1500 BC, they destroyed an advanced civilization of Indus valley, etc.

Real Meaning of the Word 'ARYA'
In 1853, Max Muller introduced the word 'Arya' into the English and European usage as applying to a racial and linguistic group when propounding the Aryan Racial theory. However, in 1888, he himself refuted his own theory (Biographies of Words and the Home of the Aryas, 1888, pg 120) and he wrote:

I have declared again and again that if I say Aryas, I mean neither blood nor bones, nor hair, nor skull; I mean simply those who speak an Aryan language...to me an ethnologist who speaks of Aryan race, Aryan blood, Aryan eyes and hair, is as great a sinner as a linguist who speaks of a dolichocephalic dictionary or a brachycephalic grammar.

In Vedic Literature, the word Arya is nowhere defined in connection with either race or language. Instead it refers to: gentleman, good-natured, righteous person, noble-man, and is often used like 'Sir' or 'Shree' before the name of a person like Aryaputra, Aryakanya, etc.

In Ramayan (Valmiki), Rama is described as an Arya in the following words: a;yR: sv;R-smWcewv: sdwv ip[y;dxRn (Aryah sarvasamashchaivah sadaiv priyadarshan ) :Arya - who cared for the equality to all and was dear to everyone.

Etymologically, according to Max Muller, the word Arya was derived from ar- (ar-), "plough, to cultivate". Therefore, Arya means - "cultivator" agriculturer (civilized sedentary, as opposed to nomads and hunter-gatherers), landlord;

V.S. Apte's Sanskrit-English dictionary relates the word Arya to the root r- (r-) to which a prefix a (a) has been appended to give a negating meaning. And therefore the meaning of Arya is given as "excellent, best", followed by "respectable" and as a noun, "master, lord, worthy, honorable, excellent", upholder of Arya values, and further: teacher, employer, master, father-in-law, friend, Buddha.

References in Rigveda

The voluminous references to various wars and conflicts in Rigveda are frequently cited as the proof of an invasion and wars between invading 'white-skinned' Aryans and 'dark-skinned' indigenous people. Well, the so-called conflicts and wars mentioned in the Rigveda can be categorized mainly in the following three types:

Conflicts between the forces of nature:
Indra, the Thunder-God of the Rig Veda, occupies a central position in the naturalistic aspects of the Rigvedic religion, since it is he who forces the clouds to part with their all-important wealth, the rain. In this task he is pitted against all sorts of demons and spirits whose main activity is the prevention of rainfall and sunshine. Rain, being the highest wealth, is depicted in terms of more terrestrial forms of wealth, such as cows or soma. The clouds are depicted in terms of their physical appearance: as mountains, as the black abodes of the demons who retain the celestial waters of the heavens (i.e. the rains), or as the black demons themselves. This is in no way be construed as the war between white Aryans and black Dravidians. This is a perverted interpretation from those who have not understood the meaning and purport of the Vedic culture and philosophy. An example of such distorted interpretation is made of the following verse:

The body lay in the midst of waters that are neither still nor flowing. The waters press against the secret opening of the Vrtra (the coverer) who lay in deep darkness whose enemy is Indra. Mastered by the enemy, the waters held back like cattle restrained by a trader. Indra crushed the vrtra and broke open the withholding outlet of the river.

(Rig Veda, I.32.10-11)

This verse is a beautiful poetic and metamorphical description of snow-clad dark mountains where the life-sustaining water to feed the rivers flowing in the Aryavarta is held by the hardened ice caps (vrtra demon), and Indra, the rain god by allowing the sun to light its rays on the mountains makes the ice caps break and hence release the water. The invasionists interpret this verse literally on human plane, as the slaying of vrtra, the leader of dark skinned Dravidian people of Indus valley by invading white-skinned Aryan king Indra. This is an absurd and ludicrous interpretation of an obvious conflict between the natural forces.

Conflict between Vedic and Iranian people:
Another category of conflicts in the Rigveda represents the genuine conflict between the Vedic people and the Iranians. At one time Iranians and Vedic people formed one society and were living harmoniously in the northern part of India practising Vedic culture, but at some point in the history for some serious philosophical dispute, the society got divided and one section moved to further north-west, now known as Iran. However, the conflict and controversy were continued between the two groups often resulting into even physical fights. The Iranians not only called their God Ahura (Vedic Asura) and their demons Daevas (Vedic Devas), but they also called themselves Dahas and Dahyus (Vedic Dasas, and Dasyus). The oldest Iranian texts, moreover depict the conflicts between the daeva-worshippers and the Dahyus on behalf of the Dahyus, as the Vedic texts depict them on behalf of the Deva-worshippers. Indra, the dominant God of the Rigveda, is represented in the Iranian texts by a demon Indra. What this all indicate that wars or conflicts of this second category are not between Aryans and non-Aryans, but between two estranged groups of the same parent society which got divided by some philosophical dichotomy. Vedas even mention the gods of Dasyus as Arya also.

A well-known global phenomenon to share the natural resources like, water, cattle, vegetation and land, and expand the geographical boundaries of the existing kingdoms. This conflict between various indigenous tribal groups in no way suggests any war or invasion by outsiders on the indigenous people.

Excavations at Harappa and Mohenjo-daro

It is argued that in the excavations at Harappa and Mohenjo-daro the human skeletons found do prove that a large scale massacre had taken place at these townships by invading armies of Aryan nomads. Prof. G. F. Dales (Former head of department of South Asean Archaeology and Anthropology, Berkeley University, USA) in his "The Mythical Massacre at Mohenjo-daro, Expedition Vol VI,3: 1964 states the following about this evidence:

What of these skeletal remains that have taken on such undeserved importance? Nine years of extensive excavations at Mohenjo-daro (1922-31) - a city of three miles in circuit - yielded the total of some 37 skeletons, or parts thereof, that can be attributed with some certainty to the period of the Indus civilizations. Some of these were found in contorted positions and groupings that suggest anything but orderly burials. Many are either disarticulated or incomplete. They were all found in the area of the Lower Town - probably the residential district. Not a single body was found within the area of the fortified citadel where one could reasonably expect the final defence of this thriving capital city to have been made.

He further questions:

Where are the burned fortresses, the arrow heads, weapons, pieces of armour, the smashed chariots and bodies of in the invaders and defenders? Despite the extensive excavations at the largest Harappan sites, there is not a single bit of evidence that can be brought forth as unconditional proof of an armed conquest and the destruction on the supposed scale of the Aryan invasion.

Colin Renfrew, Prof. of Archeology at Cambridge, in his famous work, "Archeology and Language : The Puzzle of Indo-European Origins",Cambridge Univ. Press, 1988, makes the following comments about the real meaning and interpretation of Rig Vedic hymns:

"Many scholars have pointed out that an enemy quite frequently smitten in these hymns is the Dasyu. The Dasyus have been thought by some commentators to represent the original, non-Vedic-speaking population of the area, expelled by the incursion of the warlike Aryas in their war-chariots. As far as I can see there is nothing in the Hymns of the Rigveda which demonstrates that the Vedic-speaking population were intrusive to the area: this comes rather from a historical assumption about the 'coming' of the Indo-Europeans. It is certainly true that the gods invoked do aid the Aryas by over-throwing forts, but this does not in itself establish that the Aryas had no forts themselves. Nor does the fleetness in battle, provided by horses (who were clearly used primarily for pulling chariots), in itself suggest that the writers of these hymns were nomads. Indeed the chariot is not a vehicle especially associated with nomads. This was clearly a heroic society, glorifying in battle. Some of these hymns, though repetitive, are very beautiful pieces of poetry, and they are not by any means all warlike.”

To thee the Mighty One I bring this mighty Hymn,for thy desire hath been gratified by my praise In Indra, yea in him victorious through his strength, the Gods have joyed at feast, and when the Soma flowed. The Seven Rivers bear his glory far and wide, and heaven and sky and earth display his comely form. The Sun and Moon in change alternate run their course that we, 0 Indra, may behold and may have faith . . .

The Rigveda gives no grounds for believing that the Aryas themselves lacked for forts, strongholds and citadels. Recent work on the decline of the Indus Valley civilization shows that it did not have a single, simple cause: certainly there are no grounds for blaming its demise upon invading hordes. This seems instead to have been a system collapse, and local movements of people may have followed it."

M.S. Elphinstone (1841):(first governor of Bombay Presidency, 1819-27) in his magnum opus, History of India, writes:

"It is opposed to their (Hindus) foreign origin, that neither in the Code (of Manu) nor, I believe, in the Vedas, nor in any book that is certainly older than the code, is there any allusion to a prior residence or to a knowledge of more than the name of any country out of India. Even mythology goes no further than the Himalayan chain, in which is fixed the habitation of the gods...

...To say that it spread from a central point is an unwarranted assumption, and even to analogy; for, emigration and civilization have not spread in a circle, but from east to west. Where, also, could the central point be, from which a language could spread over India, Greece, and Italy and yet leave Chaldea, Syria and Arabia untouched?

There is no reason whatever for thinking that the Hindus ever inhabitated any country but their present one, and as little for denying that they may have done so before the earliest trace of their records or tradition.

So what these eminent scholars have concluded based on the archaeological and literary evidence that there was no invasion by the so-called Aryans, there was no massacre at Harappan and Mohanjo-dara sites, Aryans were indigenous people, and the decline of the Indus valley civilization is due to some natural calamity.

Presence of Horse at Indus-Saraswati sites
It is argued that the Aryans were horse riding, used chariots for transport, and since no signs of horse was found at the sites of Harappa and Mohanjo-daro, the habitants of Indus valley cannot be Aryans. Well, this was the case in the 1930 - 40 when the excavation of many sites were not completed. Now numerous excavated sites along Indus valley and along the dried Saraswati river have produced bones of domesticated horses. Dr. S. R. Rao, the world renowned scholar of archeology, informs us that horse bones have been found both from the 'Mature Harappan' and 'Late Harappan' levels. Many other scholars since then have also unearthed numerous bones of horses: both domesticated and combat types. This simply debunks the non-Aryan nature of the habitants of the Indus valley and also identifies the Vedic culture with the Indus valley civilization.

Origin of Siva-worship
The advocates of AIT argue that the inhabitants of Indus valley were Siva worshippers and since Siva cult is more prevalent among the South Indian Dravidians, therefore the habitants of Indus valley were Dravidians. But Shiva worship is not alien to Vedic culture, and not confined to South India only. The words Siva and Shambhu are not derived from the Tamil words civa (to redden, to become angry) and cembu (copper, the red metal), but from the Sanskrit roots si (therefore meaning "auspicious, gracious, benevolent, helpful kind") and sam (therefore meaning "being or existing for happiness or welfare, granting or causing happiness, benevolent, helpful, kind"), and the words are used in this sense only, right from their very first occurrence. (Sanskrit-English Dictionary by Sir M. Monier-Williams). Moreover, most important symbols of Shaivites are located in North India: Kashi is the most revered and auspicious seat of Shaivism which is in the north, the traditional holy abode of Shiva is Kailash mountain which is in the far-north, there are passages in Rigvada which mention Siva and Rudra and consider him an important deity. Indra himself is called Shiva several times in Rig Veda (2:20:3, 6:45:17, 8:93:3). So Siva is not a Dravidian god only, and by no means a non-Vedic god. The proponents of AIT also present terra-cotta lumps found in the fire-alters at the Harappan and other sites as an evidence of Shiva linga, implying the Shiva cult was prevalent among the Indus valley people. But these terra-cotta lumps have been proved to be the measures for weighing the commodities by the shopkeepers and merchants. Their weights have been found in perfect integral ratios, in the manner like 1 gm, 2 gms, 5 gms, 10 gms etc. They were not used as the Shiva lingas for worship, but as the weight measurements.

Discovery of the Submerged city of Krishna's Dwaraka
The discovery of this city is very significant and a kind of clinching evidence in discarding the Aryan invasion as well as its proposed date of 1500 BC. Its discovery not only establishes the authenticity of Mahabharat war and the main events described in the epic, but clinches the traditional antiquity of Mahabharat and Ramayana periods. So far the AIT advocates used to either dismiss the Mahabharat epic as a fictional work of a highly talented poet or if not fictional would place it around 1000 BC. But the remains of this submerged city along the coast of Gujarat were dated 3000BC to 1500BC. In Mahabharat's Musal Parva, the Dwarka is mentioned as being gradually swallowed by the ocean. Krishna had forewarned the residents of Dwaraka to vacate the city before the sea submerged it. The Sabha Parva gives a detailed account of Krishna's flight from Mathura with his followers to Dwaraka to escape continuous attacks of Jarasandh's on Mathura and save the lives of its subjects. For this reason, Krishna is also known as ranchhor (one who runs away from the battle-field). Dr. S. R. Rao and his team in 1984 - 88 (Marine Archaeology Unit) undertook an extensive search of this city along the coast of Gujarat where the Dwarikadeesh temple stands now, and finally they succeeded in unearthing the ruins of this submerged city off the Gujarat coast.

Saraswati River Discovered
It is well known that in the Rig Veda, the honor of the greatest and the holiest of rivers was not bestowed upon the Ganga, but upon Saraswati, now a dry river, but once a mighty flowing river all the way from the Himalayas to the ocean across the Rajasthan desert. The Ganga is mentioned only once while the Saraswati is mentioned at least 60 times. Extensive research by the late Dr. Wakankar has shown that the Saraswati changed her course several times, going completely dry around 1900 BC. The latest satellite data combined with field archaeological studies have shown that the Rig Vedic Saraswati had stopped being a perennial river long before 3000 BC.

As Paul-Henri Francfort of CNRS, Paris recently observed, "...we now know, thanks to the field work of the Indo-French expedition that when the proto-historic people settled in this area, no large river had flowed there for a long time."

The proto-historic people he refers to are the early Harappans of 3000 BC. But satellite 'photos show that a great prehistoric river that was over 7 kilometers wide did indeed flow through the area at one time. This was the Saraswati described in the Rig Veda. Numerous archaeological sites have also been located along the course of this great prehistoric river thereby confirming Vedic accounts. The great Saraswati that flowed "from the mountain to the sea" is now seen to belong to a date long anterior to 3000 BC. This means that the Rig Veda describes the geography of North India long before 3000 BC. All this shows that the Rig Veda must have been in existence no later than 3500 BC. Aryan Invasion of India: The Myth and the Truth By N.S. Rajaram.

A lot of hyms in the Vedas indicate that the composers of the Vedic literature were quite familiar with the Saraswati river, and were inspired by its beauty and its vasteness that they composed several hymns in her praise and glorification. This also inidates that the Vedas are much older than Mahabharat period, which mentions Saraswati as a dying river.

New Archaeological findings
Since the first discovery of buried townships of Harappa and Mohenjo-Daro on the Ravi and Sindhu rivers in 1922, respectively, numerous other settlements, now number over 2500 stretching from Baluchistan to the Ganga and beyond and down to Tapti valley, covering nearly a million and half square kilometers, have been unearthed by various archaeologists. And, the fact which was not known 70 years ago, but archaeologists now know, is that about 75% of these settlements are concentrated not along the Sindhu or even the Ganga, but along the now dried up Saraswati river. This calamity - the drying up of the Saraswati - and not any invasion was what led to the disruption and abandonment of the settlements along Saraswati river by the people who lived a Vedic life. The drying up of the Saraswati river was a catastrophe of the vast magnitude, which led to a massive outflow of people, especially the elite, went into Iran, Mesopotamia and other neighboring regions. Around the same time (2000-1900 BC), there were constant floods or/and prolonged draughts along the Sindhu river and its tributaries which forced the inhabitants of the Indus valley to move to other safer and greener locations, and hence a slow but continuous migration of these highly civilized and prosperous Vedic people took place. Some of them moved to south east, and some to north west, and even towards European regions. For the next thousand years and more, dynasties and rulers with Indian names appear and disappear all over the West Asia confirming the migration of people from East towards West. There was no destruction of an existing civilization or invasion by any racial nomads of any kind to cause the destruction or abandonment of these settlements.

So, how can all these obvious anomalies and serious flaws be reconciled? By accepting the truth that the so-called Aryans were the original habitants of the townships along the Indus, Ravi, Saraswati and other rivers of the vast northern region of the Indian subcontinent. And no invasion by nomadic hordes from outside India ever occurred and the civilization was not destroyed but the population simply moved to other areas, and developed a new syncretic civilization and culture by mutual interaction and exchange of ideas.

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

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

Postby RajeshA » 02 Jul 2012 19:53

Books @openlibrary.org, one can read online

How it all began: The origins of Aryan Invasion Theory (AIT)

Image

Published 1807/1825
By Abbé Jean-Antoine Dubois
Moeurs, institutions et cérémonies des peuples de l'Inde: institutions et ...

Image

Published 1816/1906
By Abbé Jean-Antoine Dubois
Hindu Manners, Customs and Ceremonies

Wikipedia on the author
He was at first attached to the Pondicherry mission, and worked in the southern districts of the present Madras Presidency. On the fall of Seringapatam in 1799, he went to Mysore to reorganize the Christian community that had been shattered by Tipu Sultan.

Among the benefits which he conferred upon his impoverished flock were the founding of agricultural colonies and the introduction of vaccination as a preventive of smallpox. But his great work was his record of Hindu manners, customs and ceremonies. Immediately on his arrival in India, he saw that the work of a Christian missionary should be based on a thorough acquaintance with the innermost life and character of the native population.

Accordingly, he abjured European society, adopted the native style of clothing, and made himself in habit and costume as much like a Hindu as he could. He used to go around in the garb of sanyasi and abjured meat for many years. He gained an extraordinary welcome among people of all castes and conditions, and was spoken of in many parts of South India with affection and esteem as the prince's son, the noblest of Europeans. He was popularly called as Dodda Swamiyoru. He has mastered all the south Indian languages including Sanskrit.
Dubois's French manuscript was purchased for eight thousand rupees by Lord William Bentinck for the British East India Company in 1807. In 1816, an English translation was published, and about 1864, a curtailed reprint of this edition was issued. Abbé, however, largely recast his work, and in 1897, this revised text (now in the India Office) was published in an edition with notes by H. K. Beauchamp.


Image

Published 1823
By Abbé Jean-Antoine Dubois
Letters on the State of Christianity in India

Wikipedia says
Of more interest was his Letters on the State of Christianity in India, in which he asserted his opinion that under existing circumstances, there was no possibility of overcoming the invincible barrier of Brahminical prejudice so as to convert the Hindus to any sect of Christianity. He acknowledged that low castes and outcastes might be converted in large numbers, but of the higher castes, he wrote: "Should the intercourse between individuals of both nations, by becoming more intimate and more friendly, produce a change in the religion and usages of the country, it will not be to turn Christians that they will forsake their own religion, but rather ... to become mere atheists."


Image

Published 1824
By Reverend James Hough
A Reply to the Letters on the State of Christianity in India by Abbé Jean-Antoine Dubois

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

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

Postby RajeshA » 02 Jul 2012 19:57

By K. Kris Hirst
About.com Guide
Who Were the Aryans? The Aryan Invasion Myth:

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

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

Postby Agnimitra » 02 Jul 2012 20:33

RajeshA wrote:Anus, Anava (Iranians) could call themselves Arya not simply due to their Lunar Dynastic heritage but possibly due to their historic Vedic compliance as well. So the criteria would not have been "race" but "Vedic compliance", but since the whole tribe was in Vedic compliance, at least till Zarathustra decided to push his own version of religion, but may be even after that, one could have called the whole tribe "Arya" allowing all Iranians to identify themselves with the term, but that is history, and until they again come onto the same road, one should begrudge them the identity "Aryan".

I suppose we could call Iranics the 'Anus' of the Vedic cultural body. :mrgreen:

SaiK
BRF Oldie
Posts: 36416
Joined: 29 Oct 2003 12:31
Location: NowHere

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

Postby SaiK » 02 Jul 2012 20:42

I think we need to summarize on these research to prove that Aryans are indics onlee and they came from nowhere else.. But, we can continue to keep the AIT alive, in the sense ... :twisted:

Just flip the direction of invasion. :mrgreen:

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 » 02 Jul 2012 20:59

RajeshA wrote:The Iranian View

By: M. Sadeq Nazmi-Afshar
The Origins of Aryan People: Iran Chamber Society

I am Darius, the great king, the king of kings
The king of many countries and many people
The king of this expansive land,
The son of Wishtaspa of Achaemenid,
Persian, the son of a Persian,
'Aryan', from the Aryan race

"From the Darius the Great's Inscription in Naqshe-e-Rostam"

The above scripture is one of most valid written evidences of the history of the Aryan race, and as can be seen, Darius I (Dariush in Persian), the Achaemenian king, in the 5th century BCE, declares himself a Persian and form the Aryan race. Herodotus, the father of history, writes (in his book: "History of Herodotus") at the same times: "In ancient times, the Greeks called Iranians "Kaffe", but they were renowned as Aryans among themselves and their neighbors". In another part of his book, Herodotus writes that the Medians were known as Aryans during a certain period. So in two of the oldest written human documents, the race of the Iranians have been mentioned as Aryan.


This is what Wiki has to say about Darius's name
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Darius_I
Dārīus (or Dārēus) is the Latin form of the Greek Dareîos, which is a shortened form of the Old Persian Dārayavauš. The Old Persian form is also seen to have been reflected in the Elamite Da-ri-(y)a-ma-u-iš, Akkadian Da-(a-)ri-ia-(a-)muš, Aramaic dryhwš and archaizing drywhwš, and possibly the longer Greek form Dareiaîos. The translation of his name from Old Persian to English is "holding firm the good", which can be seen by the stem dāraya, meaning "hold", and the adjective vau, meaning "good".[2]


The word dharma apparently comes from the Sanskrit root "dhr" meaning "to hold". The Akkaian and Elamite names read a bit like Dharma.

All the languages Elamite, Akkadian etc are dead languages and pronunciation has been guessed by linguists. There was never any living speaker. It is entirely possible that this guy's name was "Dharm-something"

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 54684
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

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

Postby ramana » 02 Jul 2012 21:17

Shiv, Maybe Darius is named after 'Druhyus'


Note the Aramic spelling dryhwš !!!

RajeshA, What does Sanskrit Druhyus mean in English?


Return to “Trash Can Archive”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 26 guests