What's new

Busting the myth of "British Railway Gift" and other gifts to India

The point was that India didn't need Aryan migration to get a civilization. I don't argue that Aryans created a civilization and that is major part of India now as the Aryans have the numerical superiority, but at the same time the Dravidian developed there own civilization. You can understand the concept better if you know that south Indian/Dravidian languages bear no similarity to Aryan ones.

I sometimes feel that India has been a comfort zone, not much of predators, easy availability of food and shelter, not much of a hard time for anyone. People living in such conditions get a lot of time to develop a basic civilization. I think it was similar case with eastern regions of China. How advanced that civilization goes to be is a different matter, though Indians did a good job.

I get your point, but the fact is India's civilization is Vedic Aryan. Although Proto-Dravidian is different from Sanskrit, it borrowed a great from it. Rig Veda is holy to the dravidians as well.

No similarity with China.
 
.
So does the infamously ridiculous Out-of-India theory? :rofl: Save it for your India's amusement.


Without language, one cannot be civilized. Indus language was not deciphered. Vedic sanskrit is Aryans.

Not being deciphered is not equivalent to not existing. May there was no writing, may be the writing have been lost.

Any case, there are Dravidian languages which are independent of Sanskrit: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dravidian_languages

Doesn't changes the fact that Sanskrit originated in India.
 
.
Not being deciphered is not equivalent to not existing. May there was no writing, may be the writing have been lost.

Any case, there are Dravidian languages which are independent of Sanskrit: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dravidian_languages

Doesn't changes the fact that Sanskrit originated in India.

Exactly my point. There was an Indus civilization, but it perished.


Both Sanskrit and Avestan originated from Old Slavic in Ural region.
 
.
Not being deciphered is not equivalent to not existing. May there was no writing, may be the writing have been lost.

Any case, there are Dravidian languages which are independent of Sanskrit: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dravidian_languages

Doesn't changes the fact that Sanskrit originated in India.

They are just two languages families but ancestry of both North Indians and South Indians is same depending upon the variation of ANI and ASI among Indian population.
 
.
Are you saying people of Indus valley couldn't speak. Stop amusing up with your crap theories. :omghaha:

The people of Indus together with the language perished. That was what I said.
Learn how to use your brain better:rofl:
 
.
I get your point, but the fact is India's civilization is Vedic Aryan. Although Proto-Dravidian is different from Sanskrit, it borrowed a great from it. Rig Veda is holy to the dravidians as well.

No similarity with China.

I admit, the culture is shared. Its like two communities living closely would eventually develop common traits. There language will start mixing, culture, religion etc.

Indian peninsula has to an extent been isolated. Himalayas in North/west, desert, rainforest etc. One of the reasons we consider India to be one country despite all the princely states, because it has been isolated from outside, and have a shared culture and religion.

In such a geography, yeah, everyone shared a thing or two. But the claim that Aryans civilized the region is false, as Dravidians were fully capable of and did form a civilization.
 
.
The people of Indus together with the language perished.
Learn how to use your brain better:rofl:

When you don't know what language they spoke, how do you know that language perished. :girl_wacko:
 
.
They are just two languages families but ancestry of both North Indians and South Indians is same depending upon the variation of ANI and ASI among Indian population.

From what I know, the Dravidian languages have no common link with the Indo-Aryan languages, making them completely independent.
 
. .
I admit, the culture is shared. Its like two communities living closely would eventually develop common traits. There language will start mixing, culture, religion etc.

Indian peninsula has to an extent been isolated. Himalayas in North/west, desert, rainforest etc. One of the reasons we consider India to be one country despite all the princely states, because it has been isolated from outside, and have a shared culture and religion.

In such a geography, yeah, everyone shared a thing or two. But the claim that Aryans civilized the region is false, as Dravidians were fully capable of and did form a civilization.

There is not much of pre-Vedic culture that exists in India today. It's all Vedic, this is a fact.

India is connected to Middle east and central Asia, throughout history many invasion took place. In fact, India is a melting pot of ancient times. Himalayas only acts as a barrier against China.

There is no civilization that belonged to Dravidian or ASI. They were part of the Vedic civilization, however, dravidian culture did evolve on its own later on.
 
.
From what I know, the Dravidian languages have no common link with the Indo-Aryan languages, making them completely independent.

I was referring to ancestry, the two language families is what is remaining of our constituting ancestral races. Even the remote adivasis in South India have the part so called Indo-Aryan ancestry which geneticist call as ANI, the genes are significantly high among most of the South Indians and caste system only originated in first century. With the genetic studies, its proved that Aryan-Dravidian divide was a load of bullshit.
 
. . . . .
Back
Top Bottom