Discredited. Based on an convenient interpretation when it was still being argued that North Indian & South Indians were of different racial stocks. No one believes that South Indians have flat noses anymore.
Now used only by people pushing particular agendas.
Only one reference talks about flat noses; the reference to dark skin is in various places as noted in my post and the referenced text.
Periyar is not a scholar.He simply swallowed Max Muller's Aryan Invasion Theory.Which has absolutly no evidence what so ever.
Agastya is a proper Tamil legend. And Periyar used Vedic texts themselves as proof of the militaristic nature of the Vedic elite.
You are contradicting yourself.Is it Migration or Invasion.Because both are very different.And Give me the page no.
Migration is often heralded by invasion. Already gave the Rig Vedic references to dark skin.
We both know the reason. Having been here for a long time.
Come back when you can conduct a rational discussion without seeking refuge in desperate claims of "identity crisis".
I deny completely that interpretation.
That's your interpretation. Other scholars have different interpretations. You can accuse them of having an agenda, but the same is true of you -- more so, I dare say.
...and only people who have no idea of what is in those texts & rely purely on convenient interpretations alone make such statements.
Again, the similarities between Vedic and Tamil legends of Agastya suggest they refer to the same event. Now you will say the Tamils themselves do not know how to interpret their own legends.
It means that any Vedic influence outside of those regions was a foreign imposition. Was it done through conquest or "flower power"?
Oh wait. The Vedic texts themselves tell us that the Vedic gods brought "enlightenment" upon their enemies through conquest. Granted, many of these enemies were in the north, but Vedic culture did find its way to the south eventually. Did the Vedic gods suddenly have a change of heart and change tack to flower power when bringing "enlightenment" to the south?
Agastya.
Are you saying the Tamils had no culture prior to "enlightenment" by Vedic culture? Is all the talk of ancient Dravidian cultures a fabricated myth?
Some do, some do not. Aishwary Rai is fairer than most North Indians. In any case, irrelevant when I'm not buying the claim that there were any references to dark skinned people and believe that to be the most abused interpretation.
As a group, south Indians have darker skin than northerners. As for your particular interpretation, I already responded above. You are welcome to deny anything you like, but that won't stop established scholars from doing their work.
Yes we can and yours passes the first test & fails the second.
Mine, and the scholars', passes the test of simplicity. For example, I explained about the legend of Agastya in the previous post.
His explanation is that which is mostly discredited & is used by people as if the last two decades of research, both on the Sarasvati & genetics never happened.
Now you are deflecting to talk of a physical massive Aryan migration
into the subcontinent. That particular debate is irrelevant to this discussion.
Regardless of whether the Aryan tribes were indigenous to north India or not, the debate here is about the infusion of northern Vedic culture into southern Dravidian culture.
