BBC accepts that AIT is flawed

[Yeti]

It is just a theory not a actual fact just like when Darwin said the 'white man' had evolved out of africa quicker than asian counterparts this theory was later debunked by Polish anthropologist Malinowski

 

[Srinivas]

The linguist's support I get, I would just expect historians to be more rigorous in completely accepting that argument in the absence of archaeological support.

I'm aware that archaeologists do not agree with any other theory and I don't have an alternate theory that I'm inclined to accept, it is more the fact that the theory widely propounded has more holes than theory which is of interest to me. Please do not misconstrue my scepticism in the AIT as support for any other.





Err...I don't know. Wag a finger sternly in my face while giving the above lecture would be a possibility . You are the historian, you tell me. Just that I would have much preferred that people question a theory with so much baggage & actually not go ballistic when other incredible alternatives are proposed. The fact that some of those opposing seems have the support of right wing Hindu nationalists should not be the sole reason to completely dismiss all opposition. It tends to polarise the debate unnecessarily. Background of a person or his political inclinations need not necessarily be a bar for the relevance of a theory proposed if an attempt is made to actually present evidence. Especially in a case like this where evidence for the dominant theory too runs very thin.





I was talking about contradictions not across time but presently being used . Witzel himself is guilty of that. As are many more. An example would be to read some passages of the Rg veda in the old style, as a direct conflict between invading Aryans & the local population and yet call that a discredited position when arguing on the basis of the current version of the AIT



No reason at all. My point was more direct & narrow. Some references to the Sarasvati are clear in the geography mentioned. No arguments are usually made against it. However in other mandalas where the geographic position is not clear (not clear, not that it clearly mentions Afghanistan), it is automatically assumed that it probably refers to Helmand & not to the Indian Sarasvati. There is no logical reason to make that argument except in support of a theory of migration/invasion, i.e. the theory driving the conclusion.





My point as mentioned earlier. The theory driving the conclusion, not the evidence. If anything, the name Haraxvati is clearly derived from Sarasvati (S becoming H, not the other way around). Yet the argument is that it was originally called Sarasvati but as the Indo-Aryans moved on & the Iranians took their place they changed it to Haraxvati. Other than basing the idea on the theory propounded(which necessitates that conclusion), it could be argued that a simpler argument would have been to assume they carried the name westward. After all from what is known, the Sarasvati was by all accounts(and not just of the Rg veda) a much mightier & more important river.




Certainly is referring to some tribes (the Purus of the Bharatas mainly) but the assumption of who their enemies were has been based on the theory of invasion & subjugation of the local tribes & not just a reference to "intra-migrant" warfare. My point about intellectual dishonesty that has been made above does refer to this.




..and if I actually knew the answer to that, would I be engaging in this debate? That remains the billion dollar question. It is why I never rule out some possibility of a migration, contact etc. My opposition is simply to a theory being regarded as a certainty without rigorous testing, not in support of some other theory for which evidence is also lacking.

I agree with you. The migrants only added some elements to Indian culture but core of the culture was originated and flourished here in India.

 

[Bonkers]

Absolutely.

Sadly, some of our so called "scholars" and "historians" with official patronage have taken this line and anyone going against it is maligned, called names and abused.

The Congress has created a culture of patronage in this country that has killed originality and any critical thinking. The "official historians" and others who gain from this vast patronage network are slavishly trying to get a pat on the back from any Westerners and instantly they become famous and authoritative in India.

It is quite an unfortunate turn of events. There are some brave few who are trying to fight against the tide of this vast cozy network that is so intolerant and abusive of any contrary viewpoint.

PS: It is "widely accepted", only because we allow it to be accepted. The day we throw such notions to the dustbin, it will stay firmly there.

Only idiots think that West has no interest in India post 1947. Their entire history is joint and connected to the hip with India. Infact that is the Center of humanity!

The Indian Governmental setup including the Constitution, Judiciary, secularism, democracy all are a design to serve the ultimate interest.

There are 3 ways possible:

1) Europe ---> India
2) From some 3rd Place ---> India and Europe.
3) India ---> Europe.

1st option paved the way for AIT. That was disposed.

2nd option is enforce now post WW2 and the Aryan mania led to loss of 60 million lives. This period has a new ingredient called PIE, where the roots of Indian civilization lie still outside India in this narrative. Somewhere in Central Asia, one part to India and the other to Europe.

The 3rd option would always be ridiculed and the West would never allow the formation of a non-biased truthful conscious of India to Europe migration.

The only thing which will cause the downfall of western world is Out of India Theory!

 

[Chak Bamu]

Only idiots think that West has no interest in India post 1947. Their entire history is joint and connected to the hip with India. Infact that is the Center of humanity!

The Indian Governmental setup including the Constitution, Judiciary, secularism, democracy all are a design to serve the ultimate interest.

There are 3 ways possible:

1) Europe ---> India
2) From some 3rd Place ---> India and Europe.
3) India ---> Europe.

1st option paved the way for AIT. That was disposed.

2nd option is enforce now post WW2 and the Aryan mania led to loss of 60 million lives. This period has a new ingredient called PIE, where the roots of Indian civilization lie still outside India in this narrative. Somewhere in Central Asia, one part to India and the other to Europe.

The 3rd option would always be ridiculed and the West would never allow the formation of a non-biased truthful conscious of India to Europe migration.

The only thing which will cause the downfall of western world is Out of India Theory!

Buddy, you are just what your name says...

Joe Shearer has made some acute observations and contributed valuable posts just to point out that Nationalism has precious little to do with Historiography. And then you write something as though you have not read a word he wrote. I feel like 'peeting' my 'Matha' in his place.

If we view entire Humanity as a family and not recognize any particular place as center of the world, we would all be better off.

 

[Bonkers]

Buddy, you are just what your name says...

Joe Shearer has made some acute observations and contributed valuable posts just to point out that Nationalism has precious little to do with Historiography. And then you write something as though you have not read a word he wrote. I feel like 'peeting' my 'Matha' in his place

Go back and read the history of the west as you know.

If we view entire Humanity as a family and not recognize any particular place as center of the world, we would all be better off.

Again BS idealism.

Humanity itself is a romanticist ideological concept derived by Western theologians in the 17th century.

Allah has already declared jihad on kaffir. Isn't Islam contradictory to what you assert?

 

[Chak Bamu]

Go back and read the history of the west as you know.

No need really. I would rather read the history of biased Pakistani writers and have fun. You go on and read all about how India is the center of the world and the biggest and the best civilizing influence and the reason why the Earth exists at all.

Again BS idealism.

Humanity itself is a romanticist ideological concept derived by Western theologians in the 17th century.

Much like how your ideological ancestors developed slogans like: Bharat Mata ki Jai, Mera Bharat Mahan, Jai Hind etc...

But whenever you raise slogans like these, do remember to thank British for giving you a dose of nationalism in the 19th century. South Asians never had an idea of this region being a single country.

Allah has already declared jihad on kaffir. Isn't Islam contradictory to what you assert?

No your trollness, this is what you have been taught so that you may feel superior to others. This is just your excuse for hating Muslims and Islam. You use such byte sized faux factoids to build a victim complex, and an idea of faded Hindu grandeur that must be recaptured and relived by trampling upon others.

You do justice to your name. I hope you get banned soon.

 

[Vinod2070]

^^ Let's not get Islam/Muslims and other unrelated stuff here.

Some people may believe that this "region" had nothing to bind it before some pious invaders came and relieved us of ignorance.

Some may believe otherwise. It is a matter of opinions and opinions have an annoying tendency to be quite different. Even when based on the same facts.

 

[Random Boy]

the only reason why AIT is Mainstream is because of linguistics, because europeans and Indians speak a distantly related language. even BBC admitts that there is no anthropological evidence for aryan invavsion or dicontinuity in the sub-continent, and neither can genetics prove it. some white nationalists actually Twist Rig Veda and genetics to Claim the aryan conquest of india. i agree graduall Assimilation through trade could be a reason to adopt another language or through scholarship, Urbanisation etc. like latin spread in the medieval world or english spreads right now. i mean we all speak english but you are Pakistani/indian and im austrian, no one conquered us and influenced our genes etc.