But from the most Russian comments I read, they believe that the Russians are pure Aryans, whilst the Indians are the mestizos between Aryans and Dravidians.
You must do what you think best. If what the Russians write appeals to you, and appears to represent the consensus within the academic community, then of course what they say is right, and you have unwittingly stumbled across the secret of the races.
Commendable.
Lol... according to the translation Kalash tribe lives in northern Afghanistan and northern india ?
Really ? Mother fukaz.... Kalash only livr in northern Pakistan... and Pak Afghan border (nuristanis who were converted by force by afghan king).
Whats ironic is that they constantly show indian sikhs (Panjabis) and than people from central india ...’as having same origin as russians lol.
Without any comment on the language and the approach of your post, I take the liberty to point out the following to those who are reading this thread:
- There is no ethnicity involved; it is a question of language.
- It is consensus that a large number of modern languages are members of a single language group. This is the Indo-European language group.
- These languages, this group, were derived from a reconstructed very ancient root language named PIE (Proto Indo European) by linguistic scholars.
- That root language soon divided across centuries into two families: the Centum languages, and the Satem languages.
- The Centum languages generally used the word Centum, or others very close to it, for the arithmetic express One Hundred. These languages include the Slavic group, that includes modern Russian, Germanic, Celtic, Latin and Greek; there are others, and this is not a complete list.
- The Satem languages started as a language now called Indo-Iranian, that split somewhere around 2000 BC to 1500 BC into Iranian and Indo-Aryan.
- Indo-Aryan speakers brought the language into south Asia, and it spread through the Indus plain and the Gangetic delta in around 9 centuries. By 600 BC, these languages were spoken by people (not all the people) as far east as the Brahmaputra Valley, and as far north as the foothills of the Himalayas, what we today describe as Nepal, Himachal Pradesh and so on.
- Traced backwards, it existed in more and more primitive (=original) forms in the mountains of the north-west. The Kalash speak those very old versions.
- These languages did not penetrate the Deccan Plateau for many more centuries, and then they took the western coastal route, down the Konkan coast through to almost the end of the peninsula. On the east, they penetrated until Odisha.
- The rest of the Plateau and the deep south remained Dravidian speaking, speaking several variations of Dravidian languages. Some that are widely used today include Kannada, Tulu, Andhra, Tamil, Malayalam, and so on.
- In 600 BC, a drastic grammatical reformation gathered up the loose ends of what had been centuries ago the language in which the Vedas were written, and codified the grammar, eliminating loose usages that had become difficult to reconcile with any meaningful rules. This codified language was known as Sanskrit. The film refers to this. Most modern Indian languages, however, are derived from the descended languages of the mainstream, which were known as Prakrit. So we have Punjabi, Dogra, Rajasthani, Gujarati and others derived from Saurasreni Prakrit. Others were derived from Magadhi Prakrit.
- None of this has anything to do with ethnicity. The speakers of Indo-Aryan were themselves a mixed group of people; the language they spoke spread widely through the Gangetic plain being spoken by diverse people.
I hope this helps.
Great. Indians should all fuk off back to Siberia in that case.
Coming along? We could use your bright and breezy humour to light up the dark evenings.
The Russians definitely aren't "pure" Aryans ... they are Caucasians, but not strictly Aryans. Also, the term "Aryan" is pretty subjective ... Indo-Iranians sometimes refer to themselves as Aryans. Heck, Hitler referred to specific Europeans as "pure" Aryans and Slavs as "Asiatic Beasts". So the term Aryan is ambiguous at best ... and if I recall from my history days, the Indians believe they are white because Alexander the Great conquered them thousands of years ago. I'm not sure why some Indians are obsessed with this "Aryan" or "Master Race" linkage ... in the States, calling oneself Aryan could be viewed as taboo.
Technically, everyone has the same origins in Ethiopia. So, saying the Russians have the same origins as the Indians is akin to saying the Indians have the same origins as Central Americans and so on. I'm not sure why you are venerating such a weak connection ... wouldn't that indicate Russian superiority?
I suppose this is a futile effort, but once more: Aryan is a group of languages, not a race. The Russians speaking a language from the Aryan group of languages has nothing to do with their genetic similarity or dissimilarity with Indians.
You can be successful in indian film industry if you have fair or fairish complexion. Many of the indian actresses who were said to be famous for decades as well as many new entrants went for skin whitening injections for entire body to turn fair.
Apart form two or three actresses rest of their actresses have acquired white tones through whitening injections methods.
She went from this to this
Presumably the lady is referring to those films that have wide circulation throughout south Asia and west Asia. Curious how those viewers are so socially retarded as to make these changes worthwhile.
You can be successful in indian film industry if you have fair or fairish complexion. Many of the indian actresses who were said to be famous for decades as well as many new entrants went for skin whitening injections for entire body to turn fair.
Apart form two or three actresses rest of their actresses have acquired white tones through whitening injections methods.
She went from this to this
Presumably the lady is referring to those films that have wide circulation throughout south Asia and west Asia. Curious how those viewers are so socially retarded as to make these changes worthwhile.
1) Tamils dont (or need to) subscribe to the Ethiopia origin theory - they belief their origin is in Kumari Kandam ( a submerged continent). Though theres some cultural similarities between Tamils and African - which has been discussed in the following thread
https://defence.pk/pdf/threads/tamil-language-origins-anyone.536307/#post-10147154
2) If we use the video analysis, its claim is based on linguistic similarity, Tamil is a pure Dravidian language as opposed to the Indo-European language - Sanskrit and its offshoot Indian languages.
Mistake 1: There is nothing called a 'pure' Dravidian language; other than an artificially isolated dialect actively promoted by Dravidian politicians, there are a large number of loan words in Tamil. The name Karunanidhi is an example.
Mistake 2: Modern Indian languages are NOT offshoots of Sanskrit. They are derivatives of Prakrit, a set of languages derived from the Vedic Indo-Aryan; Sanskrit is 'cleaned up' Indo-Aryan.
Those high caste Hindus should move back to Russia where their true homeland belonged. And India belongs to the native Tamils.
Nothing as pompous as the pronouncements of the untutored about a subject about which they know nothing. That Russia was the homeland is moot; homeland for whom? And what is meant by Russia? The regions identified by (Russian) archaeologists comes into what is today the complex of nations called Kazakhstan, Uzbekistan, Turkmenistan, Kyrghizia and Tajikistan.
The native Tamils themselves claim to be descended from those emigrating from a lost continent beneath the seas.
It doesn't matter anymore who is the pure Aryan.
The original Aryans were long vanished people in the history, and claiming yourself Aryan won't add an inch of success to your home country.
What exactly is a pure Aryan? An ethnic type? The Scythians, one of the steppe people who may have been direct descendants of the steppe dwellers who formed the people speaking Indo-European included many ethnicities. Which is supposed to be the pure Aryan?
I read that the Bollywood is also relentlessly promoting the Anglo-Indian mixed celebrities.
We are enlightened. Perhaps some more reading will explain which Anglo-Indians these are. I know of Helen (Anglo-Burmese, but to a Han Chinese boor that is close enough); no one else comes to mind. On the other hand, Merle Oberon, Cliff Richards, Engelbert Humperdinck, and others apparently seem to have done reasonably well for themselves in western culture. Not to mention Anglo-Indian authors and sportsmen.
Most Indians simply love to white wash themselves.
I suppose we ran out of brown paint.
Yes you have heard it right. At the moment indian actress who is giving most hits , although i have heard she is only used as an eye candy but still she is casted in bold skin showing dance songs and they do become huge hit among indians, is an half britain and half kashmiri. She is not even indian by nationality.
Also offlately indian producers were on a nonstop spree of hiring pakistani tv actors in their films, its a total shame thatdespite india being such a hostile state many of our actors still went to work there for the greed of money. But it was an indian extremist group Rss who could not tolerate pakistani actors so they threatened directors and got paksitani actors banned from working in india. Pur actors got seriously humiliated and guess what they still have no regret ,they still want to go bakc and work in india. Disgusted by our pak actors greed to work in india i have boycotted the work of almost all those pak actors who worked there.
Will you accept a sincere apology on behalf of those stupid Bollywood directors and producers who didn't offer you a leading role? It is such a shame!
Yes, the original Aryans were Satem speaking Corded people lived in Russia, who were also the common ancestors for both proto-Balto-Slavs and proto-Indo-Iranians.
However, both proto-Balto-Slavs and proto-Indo-Iranians used to mix with other groups of people during the course of their migration, and that's how the modern ethnicities were formed.
So arguing who is the purest Aryan is pretty pointless and a waste of time.
Amazing.
A sensible and accurate post from a most unexpected source.
Even the confusion between ethnicity and language is almost resolved. Pity about the almost.
@Joe Shearer @Kaptaan @Juggernaut_is_here @Jacob Martin @django @Sher Shah Awan
DNA mapping along with X-chromosome analysis is called for here.
There was a very ancient ethno-religious movement some melenia back.... group used to move from Siberia to Persia and down Indus...
But if Out-of-India-Theory is valid, as claimed by many, then we must be able to find DNA 'finger prints' all over the place. And logically movement would be up North from down South..i.e. from Indian plains to Siberia.
Here in it is important also to analyse physcial characteristics... genetic diseasses, features...such as nose bridge and cheekbones....sans colour of skin.
It might be that the movement came from colder regions to hotter one... basic logic.
Anyhow let us see what you gents make of it.
A lot of work has been done already, and preliminary results back the classic hypothesis. No doubt more and more work is needed, but it is regrettable that these facts are being discussed in truly crass settings, by those who have no interest in science or in pre-history but just want to build snowballs with these findings, to throw at others.
A really appalling discussion.
