TURNING POINT IN THE HISTORY OF INDIAN SUBCONTINENT

[scorpionx]

simha (lion) is found in india too if am right , gujrat

i did not get wat exactly u are trying to say

Sorry for the inconvenience. What I wanted to say was,India being over populated by tigers at that time, it is in fact possible, Rg veda was written much before penetrating towards east.

 

[Joe Shearer]

simha (lion) is found in india too if am right , gujrat

i did not get wat exactly u are trying to say

The lion extended all over northern and north-west India. What he is trying to tell you is that the incoming people encountered that animal first, then the more easterly tiger. Western lion, later eastern tiger.

 

[Rig Vedic]

While the OIT is an interesting proposition, there is simply no archaeological evidence to back it up

No archaeological evidence only if you a-priori assume that the Saraswati settlements are non-Vedic, which leads to many other severe inconsistencies.

conventional linguistic ideas seem to be against it

Linguists of the AIT school have apparently created from scratch an entirely conjectural PIE language .... not sure how well founded that exercise is. What if the Sanskritic words in European languages are loan words brought by migrating elites. For example, if you built a theory on the assumption that Urdu is a descendant of Arabic, that theory would have severe problems. I have not as yet looked into that debate.

 

[neokautilya2]

How do you get that connection with the Europeans flowing from the theory that the Indo-Aryan speaking migrants came into India from elsewhere? The Europeans were the first to acknowledge that these philosophical speculations were unique.

sir my point is ..... they may be the first to acknowledge

but they were the first too in linking it with indo-european aryan thingy

do u really think anyone in the whole world wud have been interested to claim aryan heritage..... if it was not about the blue eyes, blonde hair, straight nose and white complexion

according to me "NO"

 

[Joe Shearer]

What now? You don't even agree to this gentleman's claims of being an archaeologist ?

Anyway here is some more bad news, from another source.



This also fits in with the assertion made by Henri-Paul Francfort (a French archaeologist and member ("directeur de recherches") of the CNRS)



Pretty devastating for the current form of the AIT if accepted.

Why? Because of the consequent age of the Saraswati, and because the Rg Veda must have seen it long before it declined, and therefore at some time anterior to 1500 BC? Not really that devastating; first, we are concerned only with its dying days, as the Rg Veda may have been a century older. If there is pottery ware in the river bed, and that pottery can be dated to 1200 BC, why must we not agree on 1300 BC for the river to have been in full flow?

Because the ruins of Kalibangan gave us a radio-carbon dating of 2000 BC. Even if that dating is accepted, and we take the date of the composition of those portions of the Rg Veda (two occurrences, please recall, out of the many references to Saraswati) another five hundred to six hundred years back, there is space in time enough to accommodate the coming off the peaks, roaming the north-west and the Punjab for a couple of centuries, and beginning and ending the Rg Veda in that time around the end of the IVC. In fact, this fits in nicely with the finding of shards of both cultures intermingled at certain points.

No archaeological evidence only if you a-priori assume that the Saraswati settlements are non-Vedic, which leads to many other severe inconsistencies.

Linguists of the AIT school have apparently created from scratch an entirely conjectural PIE language .... not sure how well founded that exercise is. What if the Sanskritic words in European languages are loan words brought by migrating elites. For example, if you built a theory on the assumption that Urdu is a descendant of Arabic, that theory would have severe problems. I have not as yet looked into that debate.

And archaeological evidence only if you a priori assume that the Saraswati settlements are Vedic, which is not necessitated.

As for the soundness of the founding of the PIE, look it up for yourself, preferably with a linguist. They will laugh at your assertions (sorry to mention the word). Look into that debate and give it the benefit of your powerful intellect.

 

[Rig Vedic]

The shards of pottery were found in the middle of the river bed.

so?

Surely you can see for yourself the fallacy in this line of analysis.

If it is possible to trace the temporal progress of a language, why is that analysis not acceptable when it shows that the most ancient part of the language matches the language of a western neighbour most closely?

What is being discussed is chronology of books and what the authors knew about.

 

[Joe Shearer]

What a North Indian has to say about this debate

13. Aryan
People in India come from two different races...the North being Indo-Aryan and the South being Dravidian.
People in the North tend to be lighter and people in the South are much darker, although some in the North are 'dark' and some in the South are 'light' they are two completetly different races...this is evident from their facial features...people in the South are closer to Black Africans. Northern Indians have some Persian ancestry which is why they have more Caucasian features (ie. broad) nose and light hair (straight or curly but not kinky like Southerns!) and eyes (ie.green/grey).
True Hindustani and Jai Hind, you both are fuckin morons who don't know ****...so don't fuckin say that all Indian are the same cuz believe me Northerns are not the same as Southerns!!!!
True Hindustani and Jai Hind are fuckers who think Indians are all one...you guys must be from the South who wish they had some relations to the North lmao. Shut the **** up cuz the Northern Indians have Aryan blood and have no fuckin resemblance to Southerns so get your damn facts straight!

It is best that like last time, one of your own nation chastise you and send you back to the kennel.

 

[Bang Galore]

The lion extended all over northern and north-west India. What he is trying to tell you is that the incoming people encountered that animal first, then the more easterly tiger. Western lion, later eastern tiger.

Except that the tiger wasn't only in the east, tigers were found all the way in northern Afghanistan, northern Iran and parts of Central Asia in ancient times. It is also quite possible that Simha stood for both lion & tiger (according to Mark Kenoyer - the American archaeologist-http://www.anthropology.wisc.edu/people_kenoyer.php , it probably stood for the tiger rather than for the lion):

 

[Joe Shearer]

so?
What is being discussed is chronology of books and what the authors knew about.

1. So there was no flowing stream at that time.
2. The chronology of the books is decided purely by the archaism of the language.

Except that the tiger wasn't only in the east, tigers were found all the way in northern Afghanistan, northern Iran and parts of Central Asia in ancient times. It is also quite possible that Simha stood for both lion & tiger (according to Mark Kenoyer - the American archaeologist-http://www.anthropology.wisc.edu/people_kenoyer.php , it probably stood for the tiger rather than for the lion):

So, too, were lions found in Iran and on the steppes. The lion was more westerly at least in historical times. Whether or not it was so in pre-historic has to be established.

 

[Rig Vedic]

As for the soundness of the founding of the PIE, look it up for yourself, preferably with a linguist. They will laugh at your assertions (sorry to mention the word). Look into that debate and give it the benefit of your powerful intellect.

And these linguists are better than your eminent historians, hopefully.

 

[neokautilya2]

1. So there was no flowing stream at that time.
2. The chronology of the books is decided purely by the archaism of the language.



So, too, were lions found in Iran and on the steppes. The lion was more westerly at least in historical times. Whether or not it was so in pre-historic has to be established.

siberian tiger is still found while dere is no trace of lion atleast in western part

 

[Rig Vedic]

1. So there was no flowing stream at that time.

If the shards date from a period after the river dried up, how would it affect anything. Besides, rivers do tend to change course time to time, on a much shorter time scale. Rivers also tend to wash away debris from the banks, pottery laden boats may capsize etc. But one is open to any information.

2. The chronology of the books is decided purely by the archaism of the language.

No!

 

[Joe Shearer]

siberian tiger is still found while dere is no trace of lion atleast in western part

Why should that be relevant to the problem at hand? The Siberian Tiger is found in less populated areas. In more populated areas to the west, the lion was hunted down and wiped out long ago.

In Africa, lions can be found in savanna grasslands with scattered Acacia trees which serve as shade; their habitat in India is a mixture of dry savanna forest and very dry deciduous scrub forest. The habitat of lions originally spanned the southern parts of Eurasia, ranging from Greece to India, and most of Africa except the central rainforest-zone and the Sahara desert. Herodotus reported that lions had been common in Greece around 480 BC; they attacked the baggage camels of the Persian king Xerxes on his march through the country. Aristotle considered them rare by 300 BC. By 100 AD they were extirpated. A population of Asiatic lions survived until the tenth century in the Caucasus, their last European outpost.
The species was eradicated from Palestine by the Middle Ages and from most of the rest of Asia after the arrival of readily available firearms in the 18th century. Between the late 19th and early 20th century, they became extinct in North Africa and Southwest Asia. By the late 19th century, the lion had disappeared from Turkey and most of northern India, while the last sighting of a live Asiatic lion in Iran was in 1941 (between Shiraz and Jahrom, Fars Province), although the corpse of a lioness was found on the banks of the Karun river, Khūzestān Province in 1944. There are no subsequent reliable reports from Iran. The subspecies now survives only in and around the Gir Forest of northwestern India. About 400 lions live in the area of the 1,412*km2 (545*sq*mi) sanctuary in the state of Gujarat, which covers most of the forest. Their numbers have increased from 180 in 1974 mainly because the natural prey species have recovered.

In the past, tigers were found throughout Asia, from the Caucasus and the Caspian Sea to Siberia and the Indonesian islands of Java, Bali and Sumatra. During the 20th century, tigers have been extirpated in western Asia and became restricted to isolated pockets in the remaining parts of their range. Today, their fragmented and partly degraded range extends from India in the west to China and Southeast Asia. The northern limit of their range is close to the Amur River in south eastern Siberia. The only large island inhabited by tigers today is Sumatra.

Tigers were extirpated on the island of Bali in the 1940s, around the Caspian Sea in the 1970s, and on Java in the 1980s. Loss of habitat and the persistent killing of tigers and tiger prey precipitated these extirpations, a process that continues to leave forests devoid of tigers and other large mammals across South and Southeast Asia. Since the beginning of the 21st century, their historical range has shrunk by 93%. In the decade from 1997 to 2007, the estimated area known to be occupied by tigers has declined by 41%.

Fossil remains indicate that tigers were present in Borneo and Palawan in the Philippines during the late Pleistocene and Holocene.

Tigers can occupy a wide range of habitat types but will usually require sufficient cover, proximity to water, and an abundance of prey. Bengal tigers live in many types of forests, including wet, evergreen, the semi-evergreen of Assam and eastern Bengal; the swampy mangrove forest of the Ganges Delta; the deciduous forest of Nepal, and the thorn forests of the Western Ghats. In various parts of their range they inhabit or have inhabited additionally partially open grassland and savanna as well as taiga forests and rocky habitats. Compared to the lion, the tiger prefers denser vegetation, for which its camouflage colouring is ideally suited, and where a single predator is not at a disadvantage compared with the multiple felines in a pride. A further habitat requirement is the placement of suitably secluded den locations, which may consist of caves, large hollow trees or dense vegetation.

If the shards date from a period after the river dried up, how would it affect anything. Besides, rivers do tend to change course time to time, on a much shorter time scale. Rivers also tend to wash away debris from the banks, pottery laden boats may capsize etc. But one is open to any information.


No!

Do you think there are code messages hidden in the text? I wouldn't be surprised.

 

[Joe Shearer]

And these linguists are better than your eminent historians, hopefully.

Since you don't pay attention, you missed my (very patient) explanation that the Aryan languages coming into India is not the subject matter for history, as it belongs to pre-historical periods. The linguists have made it their own.

Your own learning and information have proved so dismal right through that you should seek all the help you can, instead of wasting your breath trying to achieve a supercilious air, which fools nobody

 

[Rusty]

What a North Indian has to say about this debate

13. Aryan
People in India come from two different races...the North being Indo-Aryan and the South being Dravidian.
People in the North tend to be lighter and people in the South are much darker, although some in the North are 'dark' and some in the South are 'light' they are two completetly different races...this is evident from their facial features...people in the South are closer to Black Africans. Northern Indians have some Persian ancestry which is why they have more Caucasian features (ie. broad) nose and light hair (straight or curly but not kinky like Southerns!) and eyes (ie.green/grey).
True Hindustani and Jai Hind, you both are fuckin morons who don't know ****...so don't fuckin say that all Indian are the same cuz believe me Northerns are not the same as Southerns!!!!
True Hindustani and Jai Hind are fuckers who think Indians are all one...you guys must be from the South who wish they had some relations to the North lmao. Shut the **** up cuz the Northern Indians have Aryan blood and have no fuckin resemblance to Southerns so get your damn facts straight!

we are having a very nice discussion, please don't ruin it by being a troll.
And once you have to use swear words to get your message across, you have already lost.