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

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 11 Jul 2017 09:56

Here is how Asko Parpola words his "CYA" statement in Edwin Bryants book

This is the starting point for the following scenario, which is put forward as a
set of theses for further substantiation or falsification. Undoubtedly, many details
need adjustment and are subject to correction. However, this is a holistic attempt
to fit together several interacting factors, and it seems difficult to find any other
archaeological model which in general could equally well explain the areal and
temporal distribution of the Indo-European and Uralic languages and the internal
contacts between them at different times and in different places. This applies
especially if the invention of wheeled transport is taken as the terminus post quem
for the dispersal of Late Proto-Indo-European.

syam · Post by **syam** » 11 Jul 2017 10:01

SriJoy wrote: I do not follow. why would horses in Iraq, syria etc not be arabian horses, given that it is also part of Arabia ?!

See your above post. You still didn't answer the origin part. We are discussing about origins. Not where the horse trotted.

@Dipankar , you too. The origin of Horse is still debatable.

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 11 Jul 2017 10:03

SriJoy wrote:
shiv wrote: Aryan is not an Indian word. There is nothing to reclaim.

Please desist from making personal remarks.
Jew is also not a Hebrew word. they reclaimed it.

They cannot reclaim what they did not own. We cannot claim to reclaim what we never owned. Someone coined the racist term "Aryan". That is as you have repeatedly stated, an English word.

It is also as I have repeatedly stated, a racist term for white people and no Indian source has coined the term even if Indian have used it out of ignorance of its racist connotation

Rudradev · Post by **Rudradev** » 11 Jul 2017 10:05

shiv wrote:Here is how Asko Parpola words his "CYA" statement in Edwin Bryants book

This is the starting point for the following scenario, which is put forward as a
set of theses for further substantiation or falsification. Undoubtedly, many details
need adjustment and are subject to correction. However, this is a holistic attempt
to fit together several interacting factors, and it seems difficult to find any other
archaeological model which in general could equally well explain the areal and
temporal distribution of the Indo-European and Uralic languages and the internal
contacts between them at different times and in different places. This applies
especially if the invention of wheeled transport is taken as the terminus post quem
for the dispersal of Late Proto-Indo-European.

I think somebody's computer just exploded

syam · Post by **syam** » 11 Jul 2017 10:12

SriJoy wrote: Ok. Archaelogically we have Arabian horse in Assyria, decisively, from 1200 BC period. So why should we consider origin myths of people who came much later (Jews, who did not write the OT till 900-800 BC) as the 'origin story' ?
that myth about Solomon getting a gift, is as credible as stealing ' Huwawa, the God of seven shimmering auras, slain by Gilgamesh' from the far older Sumerians. Unless of course, you think Huwawa= Yahweh (name of Jewish God) and 'seven auras of Huwawa = seven heavens and seven hells' is all just a big coincidence.

So it's not Arabian horse but Assyrian horse. May be it's time to change the name from Arabian to Assyrian.

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 11 Jul 2017 10:20

SriJoy wrote: So my question to you, is if Jews can reclaim a foreign word used derogatively, why can't we use a word (Aryan), which is far closer to its original word (Arya) than Jew is to 'Yahud', in a context that pleases us ?

Wait wait wait!

Let me get this right.

YOU want ME to provide justification for doing something that YOU think needs to be done. Not my problem sir. Not my problem. You have to figure that one out for yourself.

syam · Post by **syam** » 11 Jul 2017 10:30

SriJoy wrote: Sure. But what is Assyria, has been seen as 'core of Arabia' for almost 1500 years. So people will see it as semantics.

So Assyrian Empire is Arabian Empire as in Ancient Arabian world. Seems like these arabians were big people. Allah(PBUH) must been very gracious to them.

Still doesn't explain the origin story. Admit it, old man. You have no idea about it.

syam · Post by **syam** » 11 Jul 2017 10:47

SriJoy wrote: Almost all 'origin stories' of monotheism are plagiarism of older faiths. Ie, pure invention.
So i do not see what relevance a Jewish plagiarism from 800-900 BC has to do to counter archaeological evidence of an earlier time.

That still doesn't explain Arabian Horse origin.

If it is plagiarism, then we have to stop calling it Arabian horse. But the whole world calls it arabian horse.

syam · Post by **syam** » 11 Jul 2017 10:54

SriJoy wrote: the whole world calls it Arabian horse because the region is called arabia NOW. Just like nobody says 'Volga is in Volga-Bulgaria' and says 'Volga is in Russia' because Volga-Bulgaria is Russia now.
I don't think origin of Arabian horse can be explained through mythologies.

That region is called Iran too NOW. May be we can call it Iranian horse.

svenkat · Post by **svenkat** » 11 Jul 2017 10:55

Some random thoughts on Aryan themes in Indian polity.
1)The people of southern TN are darkest while Cashmeres are fairest.The skin colour becomes darker towards south and east.
2)THe aryan-dravidan meme is strongest in TN.East Bengali peasants converted to Islam.The majority of Hindus in East Bengal were chandalas(rechristened namashudras)
3)Bihar was the leader of the heterodox challenge.Buddha who rejected Vedas attained enlightenment in Gaya.
4)The greatest Shiva temple(in terms of prestige) is Vishwanath temple,Kashi in Eastern UP.
5)Afghans ridicule pakjabis as originally worshippers of shivalingam who were brought to the "Light of Islam" by Mahmud of Ghazni.
6)The greatest no ofhymns in Rigveda is for Indra,Varuna,Agni but Hinduism is defined by worship of Shiva,Narayana and Mother goddess.Narayana is not a word/term found in the samhita portion of vedas according to scholars.
7)Mother Goddess(Kali/Shakthi)worship is almost absent in Rigveda.
8)The Aryas worshipped by yagnas.Temple worship is the main mode of worship for hindus including brahmanas today.
9)The right to study vedas is strictly limited.Brahmanas have gotras.
10)The Rigvedas geography is NW India+Kubha river in afghanisthan according to scholars.The Yajurvedas geography indicates a shift towards Eastern UP+Mithila and awareness of southern people like andhras.
11)All evidence suggest that Aryas had an extraordinary tradition called vedas and those people were shifting to east and they were assimilating ideas/beliefs(Shiva/Narayana/Atman/Karma).In time West Punjab was becoming unorthodox and the centre of gravity of Arya people became UP.Yet in the far east,East Bengal was anaarya.These were vraatyas-beyond the pale.Paundra Vasudeva was the imposter par excellence.

Hindus of North India see themselves as defenders of Vedic heritage though in reality it is the southern brahmanas who defended vedic orthodoxy most as North India capitulated before muslim aggression.The north indian polity and society was incapable of resisting mlecchas.It seems as if something greater than literal veda was at work.(Karma?)Pakjab became muslim and perhaps even East Punjab would have succumbed but for the message of Veda.Nanak who rebelled against vedic literalism saved the day for "Hindu"Punjab.

There is a verse in Upanishad which I am not able to locate.May be some one in BRF can help.

"The Veda is there not for Vedas sake but for the sake of Atma"

chetak · Post by **chetak** » 11 Jul 2017 11:21

^^^^^^^

@SriJoy

exactly, what are you saying?? That the AIT is right, alive and well??

svenkat · Post by **svenkat** » 11 Jul 2017 11:23

Sayana's veda bhasyas were the basis of goras translation of veda.Sayana considers Yajur Veda as the heart of Veda.For Veda was not a book to be studied in reading rooms,but to traditional brahmanas,Veda was to be lived by brahmanas and doing yagnas was the svadharma of brahmanas.

One can then argue that UP was the heart of Hindu civilisation but then the obsession with Rigveda has to be given up.My 2nayapaise.

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 11 Jul 2017 12:48

SriJoy wrote:
Until you can demonstrate why it is okay to re-define Jew from racially derogative to ethnically neutral and not okay to do so for Aryan, you have no case. Simple. Pleas of 'its not an original word' is fallacy,because Jew is also not a Hebrew word, neither is Swastika the perfect Sanskrit version of the word.

The reason is simple. You have an idea that I disagree with for reasons that I have stated before and will state again below. I am not going to debate your idea with you because there is no debate as far as I am concerned

Aryan is a racist word. That needs to be known by more and more people

Aryan is not an Indian word. We cannot reclaim what is not ours

There is absolutely no reason for us to claim the racist word Aryan as ours and then protest that it is not racist despite overwhelming printed literary evidence that it has never lost its racist connotation.

Finally, since you claim to be arguing a case, I must point out that shorn of your boasts, and shorn of rhetoric like "evidence to explode" other views; shorn of personal barbs like not having a spine or not dhoti shivering; and shorn
of emotional appeals about what Jews did you have not made any case for adopting a racist English word as an innocent Indian word.

syam · Post by **syam** » 11 Jul 2017 13:10

SriJoy wrote: Sure. You will find that place names often don't follow rhyme or reason. I try to not get hung up on labels more than the contents of said label.

You contradict yourself, old man. First nothing big deal about it. But then it is big deal. Only it is big deal if India involved in it.

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 11 Jul 2017 16:31

SriJoy wrote:
So you are implying, what Jews are capable of, Indians are not.
Impressive, o 'nationalist'.

As for emotional appeal about what Jews did, first off, your appeal is an emotional one as well and you are conflating an emotional appeal with an analogy.

Once I (or anyone else) writes anything - the words are out of the writers hands and a reader is free to make whatever he wants out of them. But if I make 100 posts saying the same thing and you make a dozen different interpretations, barbs and pointless appeals - the hundreds who read BRF are able to reach conclusions about who is talking crap and who is not.

SriJoy wrote: As i said, in due time, i will show 'India is origin point and Aryan has been used before Aryan suepriority theory' by Euros, thereby proving that the word is perverted, not invented by racists like you claim.

I am no astrologer. I cannot see the future. I can only say what I know now and what I want for the future.

What I know now is that no matter where the word "Arya" was conceived it was always Arya was never a racist expression. Aryan is an English word that is used in a racist sense. I would be happy to be woken up at that future date when your prediction has come true - but having heard people predict things on this forum I know that no matter how much time passes one is told that the event "will come later". Add this to the "explosive evidence" that is still to come. So I am sceptical about astrological/ouija board/tea leaf reading predictions that come alongside boasts, barbs, appeals and convoluted rhetoric - which is all that you have offered as "evidence" against the fact that Aryan is a racist word. Arya is a different word. That is Indian all right. It does not need reclaiming. No one took it.

Nilesh Oak · Post by **Nilesh Oak** » 11 Jul 2017 16:55

Shrikant Talageri's recent summary (10 July) on AIT. Good summary.

Of course, I wonder, how, even he, arrived at ~3000 BCE for the original home of PIE!

d. The evidence of linguistics shows that the different dialects (which later became distinct branches of Indo-European languages) were in contact with each other in an area of mutual influence in and around the Original Homeland (wherever this Homeland was located) till around 3000 BCE, and only started to separate and get cut off from each other at around that time.

http://talageri.blogspot.com/2017/07/th ... story.html

A_Gupta · Post by **A_Gupta** » 11 Jul 2017 17:25

On "Arya" vs. "Aryan" - if the argument has come down to reiterating one's positions, I request, please drop it, until there are fresh arguments to be had? Thanks in advance!

Primus · Post by **Primus** » 11 Jul 2017 19:22

svenkat wrote:Some random thoughts on Aryan themes in Indian polity.
1)The people of southern TN are darkest while Cashmeres are fairest.The skin colour becomes darker towards south and east.
2)THe aryan-dravidan meme is strongest in TN.East Bengali peasants converted to Islam.The majority of Hindus in East Bengal were chandalas(rechristened namashudras)
3)Bihar was the leader of the heterodox challenge.Buddha who rejected Vedas attained enlightenment in Gaya.
4)The greatest Shiva temple(in terms of prestige) is Vishwanath temple,Kashi in Eastern UP.
5)Afghans ridicule pakjabis as originally worshippers of shivalingam who were brought to the "Light of Islam" by Mahmud of Ghazni.
6)The greatest no ofhymns in Rigveda is for Indra,Varuna,Agni but Hinduism is defined by worship of Shiva,Narayana and Mother goddess.Narayana is not a word/term found in the samhita portion of vedas according to scholars.
7)Mother Goddess(Kali/Shakthi)worship is almost absent in Rigveda.
8)The Aryas worshipped by yagnas.Temple worship is the main mode of worship for hindus including brahmanas today.
9)The right to study vedas is strictly limited.Brahmanas have gotras.
10)The Rigvedas geography is NW India+Kubha river in afghanisthan according to scholars.The Yajurvedas geography indicates a shift towards Eastern UP+Mithila and awareness of southern people like andhras.
11)All evidence suggest that Aryas had an extraordinary tradition called vedas and those people were shifting to east and they were assimilating ideas/beliefs(Shiva/Narayana/Atman/Karma).In time West Punjab was becoming unorthodox and the centre of gravity of Arya people became UP.Yet in the far east,East Bengal was anaarya.These were vraatyas-beyond the pale.Paundra Vasudeva was the imposter par excellence.

Hindus of North India see themselves as defenders of Vedic heritage though in reality it is the southern brahmanas who defended vedic orthodoxy most as North India capitulated before muslim aggression.The north indian polity and society was incapable of resisting mlecchas.It seems as if something greater than literal veda was at work.(Karma?)Pakjab became muslim and perhaps even East Punjab would have succumbed but for the message of Veda.Nanak who rebelled against vedic literalism saved the day for "Hindu"Punjab.

There is a verse in Upanishad which I am not able to locate.May be some one in BRF can help.

"The Veda is there not for Vedas sake but for the sake of Atma"

Mostly right, minor nitpicks.

6. Afghans themselves were once Hindus, but that's the typical attitude of muslims, older converts look down upon recent ones.
8. Arya Samaj does not worship in the traditional way, mainly yagnas (havan) and they have their own priests and temples. No idol worship, no designated deities like Shiva, Vishnu etc. Yet they are considered mainstream Hindus by most people, thus intermarriage is perfectly acceptable. Have several relatives who are Arya Samajis.
9. Other castes also have gotras, I am not a Brahmin but do have one.
10 and 11. Don't know much myself, but reading Michael Danino and others, it seems the eastward movement began once the Saraswati began drying up, although the basin of the mother river was massive and included over 3700 sites of the Harappan era.

The rest of your post is quite sensitive. I had alluded to the factors which led to the islamic conquest of north/north-west India on another thread and it became a difficult discussion to say the least. I think it is a sensitive topic and there are many reasons for the Hindu 'inability to resist mlecchas'. Suffice it to say there were many brave Hindus who fought almost impossible odds and resisted till the end. There were also many Hindus who became collaborators and facilitators for the invaders.

Agree with your last sentence.

Dipanker · Post by **Dipanker** » 11 Jul 2017 19:31

shiv wrote:
Rig Veda's mention of the number horse ribs coincided with the number of ribs Arabian horses have.

Volume/Verse ref. number ?

UlanBatori · Post by **UlanBatori** » 11 Jul 2017 19:41

Perhaps the right answer to the Dravida question is that we should seek the word root in Tamizh, not Samskrtam. Incidentally, the words "choru" (rice), "vair" (stomach) etc cited in the pages posted by Guptaji, occur in Malayalam, not in modern Tamil. Cooked rice is now "shadam" in TN and Tamil-speaking Sri Lanka.

More and more, I begin to wonder whether one should not seek the origins of Tamizh in Malloostan, not the other way round. Or is there a drastic jump to say, Indonesia, Kampuchea or Vietnam for the answers?

Of course, one cannot expect the British of 1870 to understand that Malloostani and Tamizh were two different languages. Even many Macaulay-ejjikated North Indian proud desis today consider everyone south of the Vindhays to be "Madrasis".

sudarshan · Post by **sudarshan** » 11 Jul 2017 20:40

"Choru/Soru" is also colloquial (modern) Tamil for cooked rice, and probably more commonly used than "saadam." And "Vair" definitely exists in modern Tamil, though it's kind of colloquialized now. You can say "thoppai," but that commonly means "paunch," although it also refers to "stomach." "Kodal" is intestine. UB ji, how familiar are you with Tamil really

? No offense intended.

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 11 Jul 2017 20:53

Dipanker wrote:
shiv wrote:
Rig Veda's mention of the number horse ribs coincided with the number of ribs Arabian horses have.
Volume/Verse ref. number ?

http://www.sacred-texts.com/hin/rigveda/rv01162.htm

The four-and-thirty ribs of the. Swift Charger, kin to the Gods, the slayer's hatchet pierces.

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 11 Jul 2017 21:05

Yak Herder - the roots of modern Tamil may lie in Old Kannada called "HaleGannada". Lot's of words in old Kannada are closer to Tamizh than modern Kannada. For example lots of "pa" words in Tamil and Old Kannada have become words starting with "ha" in modern Kannada.
But modern Kannada alphabet (like Malayalam I think) is similar to the a aa e ee of Devnagri.

That said if you can read Hindi, Kannada and Tamizh you can actually begin to see the similarities between Devnagri script and Tamizh script. In fact in some ways Kannada script is more different from Devnagari than Tamil/Tamizh

"la"
ल - Hindi
ள - Tamil
Can't do Kannada - my reinstalled sw after a disk crash is not complete yet. But la in Kannada looks like a 2/3 circle

"ka"
क - ka - Hindi
க் - ka Tamil

UlanBatori · Post by **UlanBatori** » 11 Jul 2017 21:22

Strange thing is that Tamil characters look like Malloostani, but for different sounds: Ha! Let me see what I can generate with my keyboard where, courtesy of an ill-advised Facebook experiment Caps Lock now goes into Malloostani.

ല is "la".
ന is "na"
നി is "ni"
ക is "ka" which looks very like the Tamil.

So one can seriously read wrong if one is looking for the railway station to get down, it's like trying to read Russian knowing only Angreji.

JE Menon · Post by **JE Menon** » 11 Jul 2017 21:23

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NVjvhcO-7Lg

Not strictly for this thread, but I am putting it there for all to watch because it will be useful in perusing this thread's other posts.
A lecture by Smt. Vishaka Hari at Sastra University

Occasionally she uses Tamil phrases here and there, but the overall is in English.

Watch it people. Everyone.

There are some sarcastic hits on NRIs, but she's fantastic. The spirit. It is coming back.

UlanBatori · Post by **UlanBatori** » 11 Jul 2017 21:26

how familiar are you with Tamil really ? No offense intended.

Ha! For my first 5.5 years of schooling, first 10 years of life, I had to do *all* my fighting in Tamizh. The purest lexicon of cuss words is mine forever. But I never learned to read & write, not in 5 years spent in the sheltered suburb of Chennai either.

svenkat · Post by **svenkat** » 11 Jul 2017 21:57

OT alert

shiv ji,

I believe you did a convincing job of trashing the claims of Old Persian/Avesta language and demolishing it as nothing but corrupted samskrtam.

I wonder why you think Tamizh is closer to Haale kannada than it is to Old Tamizh.I believe Haale itself is a relatively modern term -a corruption of pazhaya.It is well known pa becomes ha in kannada.The old 'zha' which existed earlier died out in kannada.

There is a view promoted by some tamils that all dravidian languages are daughters of tamizh.Others says all dravidian languages came out of proto dravidian.But no one knows what proto dravidian is.There are no extant works of haale kannada before 10th c. of CE.OTOH tamizh has a long history.It would seem more natural to suppose Haale kannada was a dialect of the proto dravidian language spoken throughout(with variations) in TN/KA or haale kannada was a dialect of old tamizh(because only this language is known) and this dialect diverged to become a distinct language.Infact it would seem haale kannada was already a distinct language by the first centuries of the CE(or even before) as ancient tamizh literature already marks out venkatam as the northern boundary of Tamizhakam.

svenkat · Post by **svenkat** » 11 Jul 2017 22:05

OT Alert
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kannada

A possibly more definite reference to Kannada is found in the 'Charition Mime' ascribed to the late 1st to early 2nd century CE.[41][42] The farce, written by an unknown author, is concerned with a Greek lady named Charition who has been stranded on the coast of a country bordering the Indian Ocean. The king of this region, and his countrymen, sometimes use their own language, and the sentences they speak could be interpreted as Kannada, including Koncha madhu patrakke haki ("Having poured a little wine into the cup separately") and paanam beretti katti madhuvam ber ettuvenu ("Having taken up the cup separately and having covered it, I shall take wine separately.").[43] The language employed in the papyrus indicates that the play is set in one of the numerous small ports on the western coast of India, between Karwar and Kanhangad.[

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 11 Jul 2017 22:11

svenkat wrote: I wonder why you think Tamizh is closer to Haale kannada than Old Tamizh.I believe Haale itself is a relatively modern term -a corruption of pazhaya.It is well known pa becomes ha in kannada.The old 'zha' which existed earlier died out in kannada.

I have no studies of my own, But a friend of mine - a classmate and a millionaire physician in Florida (and a Tamilian) who along with his wife are deeply rooted in Indian culture told me that some findings suggest that. He did a lot of trips to India for archaeological stuff - he is an amateur archaeologist. I don't know but I trust his word because he generally does not bluff. I put it forward as an alternative theory. Tamil chauvinism is strong - as strong as any other Indian linguistic chauvinism. Kannadigas are relative wimps in comparison and one part of my mind suggests to me that a "dyed in the wool" (so to speak) Tamilian might be more likely to react to being called Dravidian race by saying "Yes I am and I don't give a flying fuk about you Aryans" This is the sort of damage that the AIT has done. Tamil Chauvinism has been aggravated by AIT. In fact there are Tamilians who have removed all "Sanskritic" names and converted them to swacch Tamil - ("sentamizh" I think), I knew a chap who called himself "Magizhko" - which is a direct translation of his original name which was something-Raj. The "Raj" became "ko" in Tamil IIRC

UlanBatori · Post by **UlanBatori** » 11 Jul 2017 22:13

venkatji, so is there a root to be traced in old Tamizh for "Dravida"? Getting more and more curious about this. I always assumed that there must be perfectly obvious answer to this. "Malayali" is "Hillbilly". "Keralam" is the land of the Kera vriksham (coconut tree). I wonder if the "Chekutan" mentioned in MB (cited above) is the legendary Chekutthaan (closest to Devil) of Malloo lore.

The letter corresponding to zha ഴ exists in Malloostani, and in pure old Tamizh, but very few present speakers in TN can use it.

UlanBatori · Post by **UlanBatori** » 11 Jul 2017 22:20

Note that in the JanaGanaMana.. the words are

..Dravida Utkala Vanga

Serious research must have gone into that. Tagore was no wimp or Conversionist, he would have used the original word.

shiv, drop by Rahul D's mansion and ask him where his ancestors got the name

symontk · Post by **symontk** » 11 Jul 2017 22:27

SriJoy wrote:
shiv wrote:
Wait wait wait!

Let me get this right.

YOU want ME to provide justification for doing something that YOU think needs to be done. Not my problem sir. Not my problem. You have to figure that one out for yourself.
Classic dodge. My point is simple. Jew has been used derogatively to imply venal, money-grabbing christ-killers for centuries, before Jews started opposing the word's racist connotations and succeeded.
And Jew is not even a Hebrew word or close to its Hebrew counterpart (Yahud). Ergo, if far tinier demographics of Jews can re-define a racially derogative word to an ethnically neutral term, Indians too can re-define Aryan to the proper cultural context of 'Arya' in Sanskrit.
to not do so, would be to allow racists to succeed in defining a word borrowed from our language to define us incorrectly.

Until you can demonstrate why it is okay to re-define Jew from racially derogative to ethnically neutral and not okay to do so for Aryan, you have no case. Simple. Pleas of 'its not an original word' is fallacy,because Jew is also not a Hebrew word, neither is Swastika the perfect Sanskrit version of the word.

Jew for Yahud is correct only. It was derived as Jew from the confusion between J and I.

https://www.reddit.com/r/europe/comment ... h=2bb248eb

There was a massive confusion of alphabets in Europe and J and I were the prime letters which was confused much. Although it was written as Jew, it was spelled as Iew as in Yuda for Yahudi's.

Another example is writing over Jesus Christ's cross, it wasnt INRI butit should have been JNRJ in modern english. It was spelt as Iseus Nazerene Rex Iudearom

My 2 cents

Dipanker · Post by **Dipanker** » 11 Jul 2017 22:29

shiv, drop by Rahul D's mansion and ask him where his ancestors got the name

RD is a Maharastrian from Indore, MP, living in Bangalore, Kerala. Most likely his last name D does not signify anything, it is just an adopted one.

svenkat · Post by **svenkat** » 11 Jul 2017 22:40

RDs ancestors are from TN,i think though i am not sure.Dravid is a marathi speaking .Some deshastha smarthas have this surname,not all.

Interestengly dravida,andhra,karnata,gurjara and maharashtra are the five 'sub sects' of pancha dravida.Dravida has a generic and particular meaning here.

svenkat · Post by **svenkat** » 11 Jul 2017 22:51

shiv ji,
I dont know why you brought the reference to chauvinism.Something is very old and documented does not mean that the documented stuff is great.even if it is great,much water has flown since then.

The intervening period cannot be wished away.We are what we are today though knowing our past is helpful.

We are trying to find something definite about our past.In terms of values,all we can say is that Veda stands for Satyam,Kushalam(skill),Jnanam(knowledge),goodness,etc and in general hindus accept these vedic values.I will not distract you any further.

Nilesh Oak · Post by **Nilesh Oak** » 11 Jul 2017 22:51

svenkat wrote:RDs ancestors are from TN,i think though i am not sure.Dravid is a marathi speaking .Some deshastha smarthas have this surname,not all.

Interestengly dravida,andhra,karnata,gurjara and maharashtra are the five 'sub sects' of pancha dravida.Dravida has a generic and particular meaning here.

It is been stated in the history of my surname - OAK (now Maharashtrian for a long time and in the same sub-caste -Chitpavan Kokanastha Brahmins...
All Peshwas, Lokamnya Tilak, Gopal K Gokhale, Veer Savarkar, Nathuram Godse, Vinoba Bhave, Madhuri Dixit, et al) that "OAK's were originally from Andhra Pradesh.

Do not have any objectively testable evidence in support of that.

I was told that it originally sounded similar to 'vak' in Andhra. Don't know if it means something in Telagu. In marathi, it (Oak) does have a meaning, not a great one.

SBajwa · Post by **SBajwa** » 12 Jul 2017 00:26

How old are you SriJoy?

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 12 Jul 2017 06:48

svenkat wrote:shiv ji,
I dont know why you brought the reference to chauvinism.Something is very old and documented does not mean that the documented stuff is great.even if it is great,much water has flown since then.

The intervening period cannot be wished away.We are what we are today though knowing our past is helpful.

We are trying to find something definite about our past.In terms of values,all we can say is that Veda stands for Satyam,Kushalam(skill),Jnanam(knowledge),goodness,etc and in general hindus accept these vedic values.I will not distract you any further.

Did not mean to hurt any sentiments. As I see it the picture we have of the past has been muddied by a number of factors. I used the word chauvinism because I wanted to use something stronger than Tamil pride. There is Kannada pride as well but Tamil pride manifests more strongly and Tamil people are more openly forthcoming about a Tamil past. These are just my observations - but what has all this got to do with this thread? As I see it the Brits came via two ports - Chennai and Kolkata. They set up forts in these areas and employed locals (Tamilians and Bengalis) initially as clerks and labourers but much later our bureaucrats came from Bengal and Tamilnadu. Madras University is one of the oldest Universities and it was the "go to" place for people to study (in the system that the British set up). Both my grandfather and father got degrees from Madras Univ - there was no local university back then in Mysore state at least in my Grandfather's days.

The upshot of all this was that Tamilians (and Bengalis) filled up bureaucratic posts in Delhi when Delhi came under British control. Delhi, Madras and Calcutta fell under British India while Andhra was under the Nizam and Mysore state under a the Maharaja of Mysore. There was no "Delhi cadre" from Andhra or Mysore state. I don't know about Malloostan - will have to Googal for it. So the Tamilian became the face of the South in North India.

To my knowledge Indian historical narrative has never classified people of India as "North-South" or East or west the way we speak now. People from the South who travelled regularly on pilgrimages to Kashi or to Amarnath or Kailash never said "We are going to North India". The Indian tradition was always "peoples" and "lands" - not just North or South.

It was the AIT that broke India into Aryan north and Dravidian south. And because Tamilians became the "face of the south" in North India - the south became associated with Madras and the south Indian the Madrasi - a name hated by Kannadigas who were called Madrasi in Maharashtra by the Shiv Sena of the 1960s. And when the question of "National language==Hindi" arose it was Tamil pride that manifested itself much more forcefully than any other southern identity in the anti-Hindi agitation. That aside the AIT classification of "Aryan" and "Dravidian" had the effect of consolidating Tamil political identity as "Dravidian" leading to the formation of the Dravida Munetra Kazhagam (DMK) (Dravidian Progress federation". This internalization of Dravidian identity was less strong or absent in Andhra, Karnataka and Kerala. possibly because those people came under a separate quasi independent government and not directly under the Qyoon of Britain.

What I have stated above is simply my hypothesis of why things may have panned out the way they did. I would be happy to hear other views on this.

UlanBatori · Post by **UlanBatori** » 12 Jul 2017 06:58

The DMK was an offshoot of the original DK. Then the ADMK shot off that and the AIADMK from that... OT< sorry. But we still don't have an explanation for the meaning of the word Dravida. Maybe it is in Oriya/Sinhala?

UlanBatori · Post by **UlanBatori** » 12 Jul 2017 07:05

BTW, the term "Adi Dravida" now means "Dalit" and are viewed as a juicy Flock to convert by the Joshua Project.