‘Indian history was distorted by the British’

[dronedevta]

His dynasty started somewhere 800BC when Magadh grew stronger. Bimbisara and Ajatashatru are two well known kings of that dynasty. Before 800BC it is said that Magadh was ruled by Jarasandh's descendents.

That's utter Rubbish ,How you are saying he was in 800 BC ? what sources ?

kuch bhi ?

This is well know he was a contemporary to buddha and mahavira which makes his existence around 4-5th BCE .

 

[anonymus]

Islam was never spread by mughals or afghans in india..... afghans themselves were slaughtered by babur......... and besides Aurangzeb who adopted strict policies no mughal king ever forced anybody to convert not even aurangzeb.....and afghans were always looters not spreaders of faith.

Umm........

Sikandar lodhi

Firoz shah tuglaq......

 

[anonymus]

Discredited. Languages change, would be foolish to connect genetics to language directly.

While language is not 100% true indicator of genetic heritage, but linguistic development has historically followed the migration pattern of each linguistic group which usually could be traced by reverse tracing the changes made in language.

The limitation of this method is that it depend on written account of language which is only 5000 years old."Proto-Sanskrit" which is regarded as mother of Indo-European group of language is the oldest common language that could be traced as the written "language is only 5000 years old.If we could go further in history all languages in the world would be converge.

I am not a historian and have read about Ncert level history,which i find as shameless propaganda done by ideologically motivated individuals but i have read extensively regarding linguistics as part of Psychology course.The theory of migration based on linguistic change is not without basis.

You could read language and linguistics chapter from Britannica to get an overall view.

No, it does not. You might be shocked to know that the reverse is true. Sarasvati is found in the earliest mandalas & the Indus in the later mandalas.

Somewhere i have read that sarswati that is being referred was helmand river in reality.

 

[Screambowl]

kishi desh ko barbaad karna hai to wahan ka culture re paint kardo. this is the policy of British.

 

[anonymus]

Mahabharata is older than 600BC, around 800BC Bimbisara founded Empire of Magadh while legend of Jarasandh is even older than this.

Oldest known dynasty of haranaykas is traced to 684BC not 800BC.

Mahabharata is older than 600BC, around 800BC Bimbisara founded Empire of Magadh while legend of Jarasandh is even older than this.

Oldest known dynasty of haranaykas is traced to 684BC not 800BC.

 

[Screambowl]

Aryan word has nothing to do with color, race, genetics. It has only to do with knowledge. Who has knowledge and is noble can be called as Aryan.

it is just like if you want to call some one noble call him aryan and if you want to call some one @sshole call him gand*

 

[INDIC]

That's utter Rubbish ,How you are saying he was in 800 BC ? what sources ?

kuch bhi ?

This is well know he was a contemporary to buddha and mahavira which makes his existence around 4-5th BCE .

Bimbisara never existed in 800BC but but I read in history book Magadh grew stronger in 800BC. Before 800BC historians don't know about who ruled Magadh apart from the legend of Jarasandh and his descendents.

 

[INDIC]

Oldest known dynasty of haranaykas is traced to 684BC not 800BC.



Oldest known dynasty of haranaykas is traced to 684BC not 800BC.

I mixed the things, read my last comment. I think Ajatashatru existed in the lifetime of Lord Buddha.

 

[anonymus]

I mixed the things, read my last comment. I think Ajatashatru existed in the lifetime of Lord Buddha.

You are right on this and he was son of bimbisar who is considered to be founder of magadh empire in 543-493 BC.Before this magadh was only one of the 16 mahajanpadas.It is usually confusing as father of ashoka was named bindusara.

 

[INDIC]

You are right on this and he was son of bimbisar who is considered to be founder of magadh empire in 543-493 BC.Before this magadh was only one of the 16 mahajanpadas.It is usually confusing as father of ashoka was named bindusara.

I once saw a discovery/NGC documentary about the existence of Hastinapur. Archelogist founds remains of pottery of that time at those locations.

 

[anonymus]

I once saw a discovery/NGC documentary about the existence of Hastinapur. Archelogist founds remains of pottery of that time at those locations.

I also knew about some finds in district of merrut from 800BC but they were not related to magadh in any way.History of Magadh is traced from jatak katha sources.Anyway it is postulated that mahabharata describes the conditions which were much older even older than ramanya chronologically and mahabharata is considered as describing later times since it was compiled later.These findings would bolster that theory.

 

[INDIC]

Educate yourself , you mean turkic ancestry and not Turkish as there is the difference between the two.

I am a Pakistani and am not telling you your history, you should know your history, if you did they you would know that land up to lahore has been only part of what is India twice.

You guys have no history so you try to steal pak history, religion has nothing to do with it, just because someone is a Hindu in west Bengal can't claim history of Indus valley civilisation.

Why, aren't Sindhi Hindus and Punjabis living in India too. Pakistan own the land only, you guys don't consider that pre-Islamic culture as your heritage, you must be knowing it. Our ancient culture originated from IVC. By the way aren't you guys claim Delhi Sultanate or Mughal Empire and even Tipu Sultan and Sirajuddaulah as Pakistan's history.

I think in Urdu there is one word Turk for Turkish and Turkic. You guys came to subcontinent only 1000 years back, don't teach me how we are related to IVC.

 

[Bang Galore]

While language is not 100% true indicator of genetic heritage, but linguistic development has historically followed the migration pattern of each linguistic group which usually could be traced by reverse tracing the changes made in language.

.....The theory of migration based on linguistic change is not without basis.

You are not incorrect but the point I was making was that when that theory came up against genetics, then genetics would have to be given precedence since languages can change but genetics is based on sounder facts.

Somewhere i have read that sarswati that is being referred was helmand river in reality.

True that that is the claim by AIT supporters (Helmand=Haraxvaiti, the Avestan form cognate to Sarasvati) but even they concede that only few references can be argued in that manner (geographic references for the rest clearly point to a North Indian river). Unlikely to be the case, now that we know that the Sarasvati was a mighty river and Helmand certainly has & is not. Still argued though.

 

[muse]

Friends:

The discussion would be so much more informative for all of us, if we do not present finds and suppositions with religious certitude -

 

[anonymus]

You are not incorrect but the point I was making was that when that theory came up against genetics, then genetics would have to be given precedence since languages can change but genetics is based on sounder facts.



True that that is the claim by AIT supporters (Helmand=Haraxvaiti, the Avestan form cognate to Sarasvati) but even they concede that only few references can be argued in that manner (geographic references for the rest clearly point to a North Indian river). Unlikely to be the case, now that we know that the Sarasvati was a mighty river and Helmand certainly has & is not. Still argued though.

I doubt any macro level genetic study like human genographic project has taken place in India.Small studies presents usually suffers from experimenter bias and in politically charged disciplines of humanities (history).They should be taken with a pinch of salt.moreover the genetic mapping done in genographic project has proved "Out of India" theory as baseless which also in a way makes Aryan invasion theory redundant.Aryan invasion theory even if true it would be more like "My granfather's grandfather came 500 year before your's ", rather than original inhabitants being displaced by outsiders.And if we go by later invasion of scythians,it is possible that the invasion/migration was never as cataclysmic as the proponents believe.

My opinion on the issue is that since India has a geography in which it is impregnable from three sides with one side open to anyone who wants to migrate,people at different point of time in history have migrated to India.This point could be well attested by constant stream of "Invasion/Migration" in the later part of history(Scythians,Kushans,sakas,rajputs,muslims).It is natural to believe that this has occurred earlier also.I think the only problem is that AIT is presented as something unnatural and cataclysmic.
But then i am not a historian.

Regarding languages,The fact that languages could be taught is the very fact that migration of linguistic groups could be traced.When a new group migrates into a new area,their language undergoes some change mostly to integrate new experiences they came across.They may either borrow words from existing language or coin new names for features they come across.These incremental changes lead to gradual metamorphism of a language and over a time could lead to emergence of a language which is different from the "original" one. If written record of languages is present,Comparative studies could reveal migration paths.This is the reason that in all of world languages,Nouns far outnumber verbs and adjectives.Even when they change,languages keep the integrity of verbs and adjectives (most of them need not be changed) and some basic nouns. Had languages being static,it would have been impossible to tell migration paths.

You could do a simple experiment on this forum only.

Persian language even though written in different script is phonetically similar to hindi.Some Iranian members on this forum hates dissent and are in habit of verbally abusing a member surenas.To make sure that their cuss words would not be detected by google translate,they use to write persian cusses in roman script but you would be able to easily get the meaning as they asr quite similar to the ones used in hindi (like h@rramkhor).

Friends:

The discussion would be so much more informative for all of us, if we do not present finds and suppositions with religious certitude -

Bring religious epics in discussion is not bad per Se. Usually epics contain some truth in them albeit exaggerated.Troy mentioned in Homeric epics has also been unearthed in turkey.The problem only occurs when people believe timelines and grandeur ad-verbatim.