Does India have a history of 10000 years?

[Hassan Guy]

It wont go in your head, because for Pakistan India has not history. You are a jealous, impossible lot.

I asked you, please provide proof of what you say, I don't have to believe what you think. I don't make statements of my own. For everything I say i provide proof.

I mean if you don't know India become a country in 1947 - what do you want me to do?

 

[Nalini]

I mean if you don't know India become a country in 1947 - what do you want me to do?

India was called not only a country, it was also called a continent before all invasions. That's why the term Indian Sub-Continent.

Let me know if this also doesn't go in to your head. I can give you a long range of proofs for it.

 

[friendly_troll96]

 

[TISSOT]

Again read my post.... I wrote 5 rivers of Punjab, Indus and Saraswati (Ghaghar Hakra) which total 7.
Point you ignored was that Septa-Sindhu was not referred to the whole of subcontinent; but to a small part of it at a certain point in time.

South of Vindya, the influence of Sinskrit or Vedic teaching can be traced to about first century B.C. or first century C.E.

Saptarsi calender is a modern interpretation to fit certain elements in term of new findings.

There are a total of 31 rivers mentioned in the Rg veda. What is so special about the rivers of punjab ? Nothing.

Nothing special about the septa sindhu either. The vedas are not a lesson in history or geography. Its a religious text in which the rivers are mentioned.

The names of the river mentioned in the Rg. veda does not even match the current names of the rivers you claim. The mapping is a total guess work.

The rivers are,

Vitasta , Asikni , Parusni , Vipas , Sutudri , Marudvrdha.


It was assumed that these rivers refer to the rivers in punjab.


The ONLY rivers that retain the names mentioned in the Vedas are Ganga, Yamuna and Sarayu.


The oldest book in south India is the Agattiyam written by Rshi Agastya of the Vedic period. Not 100 BC.

There is nothing modern about the Saptarsi calendar since it was abandoned for the Kali Calendar from 3102 BC. But the details of measurement is provided in several Puran's. The shifting of stars due to precession was observed and forms the basis of this calendar. It even gives a time frame of 27,000 years for one cycle which is incredibly close to the modern day measurement of 25,800 year.s

 

[Kashmiri Pandit]

Millions of years ago, whether Homo Sapiens Sapiens existed? The indigenous may be the aboriginals in India then.

or may be Neanderthals .
Latest research have found out they were more intelligent than previously thought off .

Millions of years ago, whether Homo Sapiens Sapiens existed? The indigenous may be the aboriginals in India then.

or may be Neanderthals .
Latest research have found out they were more intelligent than previously thought off .

 

[Alternative]

Which is exactly what I said.

.


You are free to spin your own theories. I am not going to waste my time challenging them.

IVC, Septa-Sindhu, Bharat-Versha, Mahajanapada, etc are different names to different land parts, inhibited by various different cultures and nations at different courses of time are facts not theories.
All above show the eastward movement of Aryans and its influence (culture, Sanskrit, religion etc) then south of Vindyas, Aryan influence reached south in first century B.C or first century C.E. This is not theory but fact.

However, the existence of the picture of a Giraffe being hunted by men on horses painted inside one of the caves in Bhimbetka is a fact.

Same is true for the image of the captured horse. These are Facts, not fairly tales.

Fairy tales are those that ignore Facts.

Drawings may be facts (unadulterated), but the time frame that you are attributing to them is not fact and not supported.
There is no technique that I know of that can date a drawing or picture directly; A relative study of items sheds some light and risk of unintentional adulteration is there.
As of Harapan horse myth; there was a great debate in The Hindu news paper, which I remembered for a long time and some excerpts are posted below with link to original article;
Harappan horses?

To begin with, he claims that "both the spoke-wheel and the horse were widely used by the Harappans." He quotes S.P. Gupta, without naming him, from a recent book (The Dawn of Indian Civilisation, ed. by G.C. Pande, 1999). According to Gupta the horse (Equus caballus) "was widely domesticated and used in India during the third millennium BC over most of the area covered by the Indus-Sarasvati (or Harappan) Civilisation. Archaeologically this is most significant since the evidence is widespread and not isolated." Nothing in this assertion is correct, even if — or rather because — it comes from an archaeologist and inventive rewriter of history, S.P. Gupta. For example, the horses found in the early excavations at Mohenjo-Daro and Harappa do not come from secure levels and such `horse' bones, in most cases, found their way into deposits through erosional cutting and refilling, disturbing the archaeological layers.
Even more importantly, the only true native equid of South Asia is the untamable khur (Equus hemionus, onager/half-***) that still tenuously survives in the Rann of Kutch. Both share a common ancestor which is now put at ca. 1.72 million years ago (while the first Equus specimen is attested already 3.7 mya.). The differences between a half-*** skeleton and that of a horse are so small that one needs a trained specialist plus the lucky find of the lower forelegs of a horse/onager to determine which is which, for "bones of a larger khur will overlap in size with those of a small horse, and bones of a small khur will overlap in size with those of a donkey." (Meadow 1996: 406).
...............
To merely compare sizes, as Rajaram does following the dubious decades old Harappan data of Marshall, and then to connect the long gone "Equus Sivalensis" with the so-called "Anau horse", resulting in the "Indian country" type, is just another blunder, but Rajaram, the scientist, is not aware of it.

Proper judgment is not possible as long as none of the above precautions are taken, and when — as is often done — just incomplete skeletons or teeth are compared, all of which is done without the benefit of a suitable collection of standard sets of onager, donkey and horse skeletons. Rajaram and his fellow rewriters of history thus are free to turn any local half-*** into a Harappan horse, just as he has already done (see Frontline, Oct./Nov. 2000) with his half-bull.

Further, the archaeologists claiming to have found horses in Indus sites are not trained zoologists or palaeontologists. When I need to get my teeth fixed I do not go to a veterinarian or a beauty salon. Typically, S.P. Gupta (1999) does not add any new evidence, and just repeats palaeontologically unsubstantiated claims that are, to quote Rajaram, "myths and conjectures... through the force of repetition."
http://www.thehindu.com/thehindu/op/2002/03/05/stories/2002030500130100.htm

These are Facts. ......... but feel free to ignore them for fairy tales and IVC/AIT.

Aryan invasion/migration is not the only one that happened in history of Subcontinent; before Dravidian and after Scythians, Greeks, Huns, mongols, central asians Turkic tribes made it a habit to attach after few hundred of years........... thats, how the flow of people happened in this part of world.
There is nothing fiction about it. Both linguistic and Archaeological studies support it.

Refer to my post #136

My observation and query was the following;

Maha-Bharata is called because it is a narrative of clash of the decedents of Bharata, son of Dushyanta and Shakuntal, the famous poem Shakuntala of Kalidasa.... Nothing to relate the land where the events were taking place.

As I would remember, only the decedents of Bharatas are alternatively addressed as Bharata in MahaBarata, no person relating to other tribe or state, for example, Kosala, Sindu, Magda etc were addressed as Bharata, ...................................................... I wondor why all indians are called Bharatis?

Source: https://defence.pk/threads/does-india-have-a-history-of-10000-years.468258/page-11#ixzz4Twv6I9k8

And you post#136 said that
Vishnu Puran gives the description of the country known as "Bharat".


uttaram yatsamudrasya himadrescaiva daksinam,
varsam tadbharatam nama bharati yatra santatih


Source: https://defence.pk/threads/does-india-have-a-history-of-10000-years.468258/page-10#ixzz4TwvigYbo

Vishnu Purana is dated at about first or second century C.E., that is the time, when Vedic influence solidified in South.

No one other than from the line of Bharata is called by tribal/family/surname Bharta......................... Much, much later in time..... land north of sea and south of himalaya is called Bharata.

 

[takeiteasy]

or may be Neanderthals .

Neanderthals DNA content is the least in South Asia and Nil among Negroes.

 

[Kashmiri Pandit]

Neanderthals DNA content is the least in South Asia and Nil among Negroes.

Then may be a Hybrid ?
Did they use to cross breed with other sapiens ?

The indigenous of that time may be pretty much dead due to waves of Mass murderers across the space and time .
We in South Asia are believed to be of Mixed race with certain areas showing more content of particular race .

 

[Sanchez]

US does have a 10,000 old history, just not as a nation or as a continuous civilization. Their native american civilization was almost wiped out.

India is a continuous civilization with documented history and past that goes much beyond what the cave painting depict.

This rock art depicts five horse riders hunting a giraffe.

Giraffe being a semi-desert open forest animal could have survived in Central India only up to before 5,500 BC. Thereafter the region became dense forest making giraffe extinct. Clearly horse taming and riding on the horse existed before 5,500 BC or 6000 BC in India.

So did forged weapons.


Similarly this painting depicts a Elk and Elk hunting.

However Elk do not exist in India today.

Elk lives in dry cold regions with grasses and enough water from rivers or lakes to drink. Such climate existed in Central India about 8000 BC to 5000 BC during the Holocene.

However one sub-species of Elk is still found in Kashmir till today, known as the hangul or Cervus canadensis hanglu.

The elk bones have been excavations at Mohenjo-Daro by Sir John Marshall.



Maybe you would like to use your brain to come up with a different explanation ? Like Aliens did it.

There is no discontinuous Hindu culture or Today‘s Indian culture. Indian culture founded on Hinduism dated back 200 BC that is not direct decendant or heir of the ancient Indus river civilization. The Indus river civilization discontinued because of the vanished unity of religion、language、ethnicity and so on. Maybe the direct decendants genetically still exist but now they belong to different religion、ethinic groups and spread in different areas.

You Hindu Indians want to take everything for yourselves and it sounds a bit funny or absurd. To be frankly，after the Verdic whites invaded and ruled Indus river region for more than a thousand years， the locals might have forgotten their rulers were foreign. They created Buddism and later Hinduism to run away from the masters. In this sense Indus river civilization discontinued by an International definition.

On the other hand，a few Chinese characters found on 5000-7000 year old archilogical sites are still being used in our daily language and those sacred dragon figures are still being worshipped. Our people over 70% consist of three major haplotypes dated back to the same ancestors 30000 years ago after genetic split with Northern Asians. That’s called continuous and unique in the world. We are only 4000-5000 year old civilization with written records over 4000 years as recognized by the world.

No one would be able to deprive the heritage of hinduism from you but you can not claim everything of indus river civilization for yourself.

 

[TISSOT]

IVC, Septa-Sindhu, Bharat-Versha, Mahajanapada, etc are different names to different land parts, inhibited byhttp://www.newsproxy.xyz/index.php?q=aHR0cDovL2RlZmVuY2UucGsvZm9ydW1zL3dvcmxkLWFmZmFpcnMuNTkv various different cultures and nations at different courses of time are facts not theories.
All above show the eastward movement of Aryans and its influence (culture, Sanskrit, religion etc) then south of Vindyas, Aryan influence reached south in first century B.C or first century C.E. This is not theory but fact.

As mentioned earlier, Bharat Varsha referred to the entire Indian subcontinent.

Since there is no such thing as "aryan" race, there is no movement of them either. Neither eastward, nor westward nor to the south or north. I refuse to give legitimacy to this foolish theory.

Drawings may be facts (unadulterated), but the time frame that you are attributing to them is not fact and not supported.
There is no technique that I know of that can date a drawing or picture directly; A relative study of items sheds some light and risk of unintentional adulteration is there.
As of Harapan horse myth; there was a great debate in The Hindu news paper, which I remembered for a long time and some excerpts are posted below with link to original article;
Harappan horses?

Existence of horse men hunting a Giraffe and Elk speaks for itself since both could not have survived in India after 6000 BC.

Nothing in this assertion is correct, even if — or rather because — it comes from an archaeologist and inventive rewriter of history, S.P. Gupta. For example, the horses found in the early excavations at Mohenjo-Daro and Harappa do not come from secure levels and such `horse' bones, in most cases, found their way into deposits through erosional cutting and refilling, disturbing the archaeological layers.

Do you see how absurd the argument is ?

It rejects Facts for Assumptions that the horse bone was found due to "erosional cutting and refilling".

Even more importantly, the only true native equid of South Asia is the untamable khur (Equus hemionus, onager/half-***) that still tenuously survives in the Rann of Kutch. Both share a common ancestor which is now put at ca. 1.72 million years ago (while the first Equus specimen is attested already 3.7 mya.). The differences between a half-*** skeleton and that of a horse are so small that one needs a trained specialist plus the lucky find of the lower forelegs of a horse/onager to determine which is which, for "bones of a larger khur will overlap in size with those of a small horse, and bones of a small khur will overlap in size with those of a donkey." (Meadow 1996: 406).

Rig-Veda47 describes the horse as having 34 ribs; so does a passage in the Shatapatha Brahmana.48 However, the true horse generally has two pairs of 18 ribs, i.e. 36 and not 34.

This suggests that the horse referred to in the Rig-Veda may have been a different species, such as the smaller and stockier Siwalik or Przewalski horses, which often (not always) had 34 ribs.
co
Putting the archaeological evidence along with the text gives the proof of local horse in India.

...............
To merely compare sizes, as Rajaram does following the dubious decades old Harappan data of Marshall, and then to connect the long gone "Equus Sivalensis" with the so-called "Anau horse", resulting in the "Indian country" type, is just another blunder, but Rajaram, the scientist, is not aware of it.

Proper judgment is not possible as long as none of the above precautions are taken, and when — as is often done — just incomplete skeletons or teeth are compared, all of which is done without the benefit of a suitable collection of standard sets of onager, donkey and horse skeletons. Rajaram and his fellow rewriters of history thus are free to turn any local half-*** into a Harappan horse, just as he has already done (see Frontline, Oct./Nov. 2000) with his half-bull.

They only claim is that the proof is not conclusive enough.

However they do not take into account that this is consistent with the DNA studies which suggest that the modern Indian “true horses” are autochthonous to India, and the morphological studies which suggest that the Equus sivalensis was one of the ancestors of the “true horse”.

Further, the archaeologists claiming to have found horses in Indus sites are not trained zoologists or palaeontologists. When I need to get my teeth fixed I do not go to a veterinarian or a beauty salon. Typically, S.P. Gupta (1999) does not add any new evidence, and just repeats palaeontologically unsubstantiated claims that are, to quote Rajaram, "myths and conjectures... through the force of repetition."
http://www.thehindu.com/thehindu/op/2002/03/05/stories/2002030500130100.htm

Except the evidence of a spoked wheel built for speed defeats that argument.

Aryan invasion/migration is not the only one that happened in history of Subcontinent; before Dravidian and after Scythians, Greeks, Huns, mongols, central asians Turkic tribes made it a habit to attach after few hundred of years........... thats, how the flow of people happened in this part of world.
There is nothing fiction about it. Both linguistic and Archaeological studies support it.

Insignificant amount of migration always takes place in history and happens all over the world, not enough to change the culture of any land. The migrants adapt the culture of the majority, not the other way around.

There is no mention of any invasion in any of the purans, or ithias in Hinduism. So this whole thing is a fantasy.

Later day attacks by neighboring kings did nothing to change the culture of India.

My observation and query was the following;

Maha-Bharata is called because it is a narrative of clash of the decedents of Bharata, son of Dushyanta and Shakuntal, the famous poem Shakuntala of Kalidasa.... Nothing to relate the land where the events were taking place.

As I would remember, only the decedents of Bharatas are alternatively addressed as Bharata in MahaBarata, no person relating to other tribe or state, for example, Kosala, Sindu, Magda etc were addressed as Bharata, ...................................................... I wondor why all indians are called Bharatis?

Source: https://defence.pk/threads/does-india-have-a-history-of-10000-years.468258/page-11#ixzz4Twv6I9k8

And you post#136 said that
Vishnu Puran gives the description of the country known as "Bharat".

uttaram yatsamudrasya himadrescaiva daksinam,
varsam tadbharatam nama bharati yatra santatih

Source: https://defence.pk/threads/does-india-have-a-history-of-10000-years.468258/page-10#ixzz4TwvigYbo

Vishnu Purana is dated at about first or second century C.E., that is the time, when Vedic influence solidified in South.

No one other than from the line of Bharata is called by tribal/family/surname Bharta......................... Much, much later in time..... land north of sea and south of himalaya is called Bharata.

The land of Bharat was identified by the rulers of the land, not by the people. The same way Egypt was the land of the Pharaohs.

Details of the Jathi's were never recorded in ANY Hindu text due to the prevalence of Varna as the predominant factor. So the books talk about the roles and responsibilities of various Varna's not of their jaathis.

So tribal history was never part of Indian tradition, unlike Abhrahamic religion.

The problem arose when people of abrahamic religion tried to interpret Indian history through their own prejudice and colored lens of Tribal history.

There is no discontinuous Hindu culture or Today‘s Indian culture. Indian culture founded on Hinduism dated back 200 BC that is not direct decendant or heir of the ancient Indus river civilization. The Indus river civilization discontinued because of the vanished unity of religion、language、ethnicity and so on. Maybe the direct decendants genetically still exist but now they belong to different religion、ethinic groups and spread in different areas.

You Hindu Indians want to take everything for yourselves and it sounds a bit funny or absurd. To be frankly，after the Verdic whites invaded and ruled Indus river region for more than a thousand years， the locals might have forgotten their rulers were foreign. They created Buddism and later Hinduism to run away from the masters. In this sense Indus river civilization discontinued by an International definition.

On the other hand，a few Chinese characters found on 5000-7000 year old archilogical sites are still being used in our daily language and those sacred dragon figures are still being worshipped. Our people over 70% consist of three major haplotypes dated back to the same ancestors 30000 years ago after genetic split with Northern Asians. That’s called continuous and unique in the world. We are only 4000-5000 year old civilization with written records over 4000 years as recognized by the world.

No one would be able to deprive the heritage of hinduism from you but you can not claim everything of indus river civilization for yourself.

Existence of primitive hieroglyphics script in china does not prove continuity, it only proves lack of imagination, intelligence and stable civilization.

Your dietary habits and lack of any art forms , religion or moral and ethical values indicates a civilization that never evolved beyond survival.


Beyond that there is no need to counter your absurd claims about Hindu civilization. You are free to imagine anything you want. Maybe you need to start with imagining a modern script for chinese.

 

[faithfulguy]

.


No one would be able to deprive the heritage of hinduism from you but you can not claim everything of indus river civilization for yourself.

Since the term India itself can be use as the land of Indian subcontinent, the majority India religion of Hinduism and its culture and finally, the country of India created in 1947, the Indian members are mingling these 3 "India" terms together.

Indus Valley civilization is in Indian subcontinent. But it's not related to the Hindu culture. The relationship between IVC and Hindus is similar to Mayans and the invading Spainiards. Except that IVC and Hindu relationships occurred before history. It's a prehistoric event.

 

[Sanchez]

Existence of primitive hieroglyphics script in china does not prove continuity, it only proves lack of imagination, intelligence and stable civilization.

Your dietary habits and lack of any art forms , religion or moral and ethical values indicates a civilization that never evolved beyond survival.


Beyond that there is no need to counter your absurd claims about Hindu civilization. You are free to imagine anything you want. Maybe you need to start with imagining a modern script for chinese.

You should be immediately banned for your pathetic attitude to others and fanatic claims of hinduism. This is not a BJP forum.

Since the term India itself can be use as the land of Indian subcontinent, the majority India religion of Hinduism and its culture and finally, the country of India created in 1947, the Indian members are mingling these 3 "India" terms together.

Indus Valley civilization is in Indian subcontinent. But it's not related to the Hindu culture. The relationship between IVC and Hindus is similar to Mayans and the invading Spainiards. Except that IVC and Hindu relationships occurred before history. It's a prehistoric event.

They calim so much yet they didn’t have any historic documentation until modern days，even the diary of Chinese monk became their only reference for the history in the 8th century. Their Verdic masters did bring Sanskrit as well as history observing culture to them but they were all abandoned.

 

[hell9214]

You will appreciate the irony when I tell you that the English Word "Man" comes from the fist Hindu man "Manu", while the Hindi word for Man is "Aadmi" which comes from the christian/Muslim first man "Adam".

Bro firstly Sanskrit is hindu language of past which is known as mother of all language not Hindi....

 

[faithfulguy]

You should be immediately banned for your pathetic attitude to others and fanatic claims of hinduism. This is not a BJP forum.



They calim so much yet they didn’t have any historic documentation until modern days，even the dairy of Chinese monk kbecame their only reference for the history in 8th century. Their Verdic masters did bring Sanskrit as well as history observing culture to them but they were all abandoned.

That is why I believe the current Indian civilization is not going any where. If they are not capable of keeping history of the Indo European Hindu invaders, which created the Hindu culture for them. How are they going to sustain the nation created for them by another Indo European people, the British. The native Indian race is not only incapable of creating a civilization, but sustaining one. No wonder Muslim invaders ruled India subcontinent for a thousand years until being replaced by the British.

Bro firstly Sanskrit is hindu language of past which is known as mother of all language not Hindi....

Sanskrit is the mother of all Indo branch of Indo .Iranian languages. Both Sanskrit and ancient Iranians derived from an even older language. This language in turn derived from the parent language of Germanic, Slavic, and Latin languages. India cannot create its own facts.

 

[hell9214]

without any proof. Carry on then and i will consider you another troller and nothing else. Next time speak with evidence or consider yourself another troller



If you lived in past then you should know that which dynasty having largest area in the history of the world and no one achieved that ever. Yes that is your master as well

Ok bt what is the importance in this topic..
Any Muslim dynasty not even present when Gupta dynasty is present nd never they dare to invade India
Nd I m talking about India histroy we r present as a nation way before mugals...

That is why I believe the current Indian civilization is not going any where. If they are not capable of keeping history of the Indo European Hindu invaders, which created the Hindu culture for them. How are they going to sustain the nation created for them by another Indo European people, the British. The native Indian race is not only incapable of creating a civilization, but sustaining one. No wonder Muslim invaders ruled India subcontinent for a thousand years until being replaced by the British.



Sanskrit is the mother of all Indo branch of Indo .Iranian languages. Both Sanskrit and ancient Iranians derived from an even older language. This language in turn derived from the parent language of Germanic, Slavic, and Latin languages. India cannot create its own facts.

Sanskrit is not derived frm Latin they r the sister languages...nd facts r fact we r not making new...