Indus Valley Civilisation was Dravadian and pre-Aryan
Arsalan Khan
stretching from Punjab in north to Sindh inthe south, i.e. modern
Pakistan. The people of Harrapan civilisation were known as 'Meluhha'
by their Sumerian, modern Iraq, trading partners. The Aryan invadors
called them 'Mleccha' which later they called all other despised
indeginous people of South Asia. 'Mleccha' in Sanskrit means "to speak
distinctly" clearly indicating that Meluhha/Mleccha were of different
liguistic group. Even today "Mleccha' is used for 'unclean' or
non-Aryan people by Brahamins.
From the west of Harappan civilization:
1. Sumerian cuneiform inscriptions indicate a distant kingdom and
trading
partner called Melukha/Meluhha.
2. Mesopotamians were trading with Dilmun (Bahrain), Makan (Oman) and
Meluhha(Indus Valley Civilization) being the farthest.
3. Products of Meluhha mentioned in Mesopotamia include gold, ivory,
peacocks (indigeneous to Indus Valley), and Lapis Lazuli (indigenous
to
Afghanistan).
4. Several Harappan seals and pottery were found in Mesopotamia
indicating
they were trading partners.
THE HARAPPANS OF MELUHHA
and
THE MOHEN-JO-DARONS OF MEKAN
The latest on the 5000 year old Pakistani civlization
by Moin-Ansari
The Nile, the Tigris-Euphrates delta, the Yangtsse Delta, and the
Indus,
are the wombs of all civilizations on our earth. These river valley
spawned
and nurtured humanity. Imagine a world with four superpowers at peace
with
each other. Imagine a planet where each civilization was immersed in
humongous construction projects, urban edification and trade. . How
did
these proto-world powers interact with each other? Imagine a
civilization
withut any implements of war. Let us look into pre-history and peek
into
the "seeds" of time. Let us look at the valleys of the world that
engendered the Superpowers of the ancient world..
The Indus Valley Civilization of South Asia was one of the inceptive
civilizations on the planet. It was contemporarious with the Chinese,
Egyptian, and Sumerian civilizations. Before we investigate the goings
on
on the banks of the Indus, let us look across the oceans and see what
was
going on in the holy lands in the lands of the prophets. These were
the
times when the Egyptians were building huge monuments to their
God-kings,
the pyramids and the Sphnix. These were the centuries when the Chinese
were
building palaces for the Shun dynesty. These were exciting aeons in
the
Holy lands too. These were the centuries when Moses was battling the
pharaohs, Abraham was building the Kaaba, David was ruling the
kingdom,
and Solomon was building the Temple of Yahweh. It was during these
centuries that the Indus Valley Civilization flourished and reached
its
zenith in South Asia.
The erudite research of international scholars in the nineteen
nineties
has demystified the third millennium Harappans. The IVC built well
planned
municipalities for its citizens. While the Egyptians spent three
generations of their labor force (estimated between 20,000-10000)
building
useless mausoleum-pyramids to bury the God-kings, the Harappans were
successful in eradicating, disease, hunger, and malnutrition. The
Harappans
of the IVC did not build huge commemorative, deifying, dedicatory,
cenotaphs. The Harappans of Meluhha-IVC built the finest cities of the
third millennium. Since the Indus Valley was a relatively
unstratified
society it did not built huge obelisks to its kings. The ruins of the
urban centers of the Indus Valley tell us a very interesting tale. The
evidence from the digs tell a fascinating narrative. As more and more
evidnece comes in, we find that the Harappans did not live in
isolation. We
find fascinating tales about artifacts that were found thousands of
miles
away in far away in Mesepotamia. We find that the old world not only
spoke
similar languages but we find that the proto-world traded with each
other
extensively.
THE MYSTERIES OF THE ORIENT: Mekan, Meluhha and Dilmun
The mysteries of the orient are as fascinating as the mysteries of the
Occident. This treatise will invetigate some of the riddles. How did
the
Indus seals end up in Mesopotamia? How did Ur, the capital of the
ancient
kingdom of Sumeria, and the birthplace of the prophet Abraham trade
with
Mohen-jo-daro? What did the Harappans of Meluhha get in return from
the
citizens of Ur? How did the Harappans use trade to enhance their
livelihood? What language did they speak? How did they communicate
with
each other? The Bronze age Harappans needed tin for their seals and
other
artifacts, but the nearest tin source was in Indonesia and Malaysia.
There
were some tin sources in Afghanistan and Iran. Where did the Harappans
get
their tin from? Only 250-430 of the Harappan seals have been
discovered.
Where are the rest? In spite of the claims to the contrary, the
pictographic Indus language remains undechipered. The short passages
on the
seals are a great impediment to translating the language. After the
decline
of the Harappans, the pictographic language disappeared from the
Subcontinent. What led to its destruction? Let us look into the sands
of
time and peek into pre-history and look at the historical records of
other
civilizations.
Circa 3000 B.C. The Pharoahs were ruling Egypt, and one of the earlies
Choeps pyramid is being built there. The Sumerians, Egyptians,
Hittites,
and the Phonecians worshipped the mother Goddess Innin and her son
Tammuz.
The IVC was at its peak from 2500 Bc to 1900 BC. Let us see what was
going
on in the other three civilizations that existed on the palnet.
Circa 2500 B.C. The prophet Abrahim would not leave Ur in Chaldea for
another 400 years (2100 B.C). The painted and black pottery were in
vogue
in China. The Egyptians discover papyrus (the plant for paper) begin
importing gold from Africa, and begin mummyfying their dead.
Agricultural
developments begin in the malayan peninsula. The Isrealities led by
Moses
would not leave Eghpt for Caan for another thousand years (1500 B.C.)
Circa 2000 B.C: The Hittites, Indo-European tribes for Asia Minor join
together in one kindgdom. The great Labrynth of Egypt by Amenhet III.
The
code of Hamurabi is canonized. King David would not acceede as king of
united kingdom of Judah and Israel for another thousand year (1000
B.C. to
960 BC). King Solomon (960-925 BC) still had not built the Yaweh
Temple in
Jeruslem. This is the same temple that is revered by all major
monotheistic
religions on earth.
The towns of the IVC were built at the time the towns of Ur flourished
in
the lands of the prophets. The towns in the IVC had better planning,
better construction materials and displayed a more stable
civilization. The
IVC was inhabited by advanced people who built great cities, and were
very
knowledgeable about science, mathematics, and town planning. The towns
of
Mohen-ja-Daro, Harappa were the "capitals" of the civilization, but
the
civilization may have had over a thousand cities mostly in what is
today
called Pakistan. Today many of the old cites of the IVC lie
underneath
other more modern South Asian metropolises.
Not all cities of the Harappanera have been discovered. Part of the
heritage is lost to the "efficiency" of the Scottish engineers who
plundered the bricks from the sites to build the Lahore-Multan railway
(1856-1911).
Urbanization in the Indus valley was just as gradual as in Egypt or
Mesopotamia, but the destruction of the Indus Valley was sudden? What
happened? Was the civilization razed under the hoofs of invading
hordes, or
did natural calamities like earthquakes, droughts or floods destroy
the
towns? The Harappan civilization did not know rice. Rice was
introduced
into the Subcontinent around 1000 BC. How was rice introduced to the
Subcontinent? Was the Gangetic civilization part of the Chinese
civilization or was it influenced by it?
1997: CURRENT STATUS OF THE SITES OF THE INDUS VALLEY CIVILIZATION
The results of recent monographs in world archaeology in the nineties
have
not been as dramatic as the virtual exploits of Hollywoods Dr. Indiana
Jones who leaped tall buildings, and survived a pit of snakes in
search of
the Ark of the Covenant, but the theoretical impact of the veritable
ventures into South Asian prehistory ---- the excavation work and
faunal
analysis done by the archaelogical administrator at Harrapa, Dr.
Richard
Meadows of Harvard has been just as profound. We know a lot more
about the
third Millennium Urbanism in general - and the Indus Valley
Civilization in
specific because of Parpola , Allchin, Shaffer, and Lichtenstein.
There is
still a lot of excitement in the South Asian air.
The Indus Valley Civilization (based on the fact that it existed on
the
banks of the currently surviving river called the Indus) is also
called the
Harrapan Civilization, (based on the archaelogical convention of
naming the
civilizatin on the first site of the discovery). The IVC is also
called,
the Painted Pottery (based on the commonality of pottery found in the
Indus
basin as compared to the pottery found in a previous era). The
Sumerians of
the time refer to the civilization as Meluhha of the Indus Valley and
Mekan
in the Indian Ocean, which basically seems to be defined as the Mekran
Coast or present day Pakistan..
Pre-Harappan cities that developed in South Asia: Damb Sadaouct
(Balauchistan), Kot Dijji (Sindh), Kile Glud Mohn (Balauchistan). This
is
what is called the Amri Pottery ware.
Harappan cities that developed in South Asia: Mohen-ja-Daro (Sindh),
Lothal (Gujrat), Ahar (Rajistan), Kalibhangan (Rajistan), Kot Dijji
(Sindh)
Neolithic: Bai Napalli, Madra, Tek Kala Kota, (Mysore), Burzahon
(Kashmir)
HARAPPA: For half a decade, Berkeley's George Dales led a team of
archaelogists that included Possehl, and Richard Meadows. They
continued
valuable research on Harrapa for five years and came up with two big
volumes that give us valuable insight into the lifestyles of the
Harappans.
After the death of Dales, the excavations have resumed and Jonathan
Mark
Kenoyeris in charge of the sites. The treatise of Mark Kenoyer
(University
of Wisconsin) is trying to prove that there were 2nd-millennium BC
cities
buried under today's cities and towns, e.g. Multan. which would
fully
bridge the Mohenjo-daro to Taxila gap. Todays real life "Indian
Jones",
Kenoyer and Rita Wright are busy investigating the ruins of Harappa.
Rita
Wright whose work on the pottery is fabulous. She has specialized on
the
female contribution to the Harappan pottery. Koneyer who is in charge
of
the Harappan team writes regularly in World Archaeology. There are
Germans/Danes like Ardeleanu-Jansen, who've been re-analyzing the dig
data
in the "city of the dead (Mo-hen-jadaro). Asko Parpola has spent a
lifetime
of research dechipering the Indus script.
According Ben Dibold of Yale University:
" The Monograph from Prehistory Press, which contains many excellent
articles on a wide range of topics. It's
centered on the site of Harappa in particular, though, and only
touches
glancingly on Mohenjo Daro.
What is so great about third milleneum urbanism in South Asia? Let us
see
why these armies of archaeologist are intersted in third world ruins.
This is what N.S. Rajaram says apropos the Indus Valley Civilization:
"Even a superficial study of Harappan sites suggests that its builders
were extremely capable town planners and engineers. And this requires
a
sophisticated knowledge of mathematics especially geometry. Elaborate
structures like the Great Bath of Mohen-jo-daro, the Lothal harbour or
the
citadel at Harappa are inconcievable without a detailed knowldge of
geometry. The world had to wait 2000 years more, till the rise ofthe
Roman
civilisation for sanitation and town planning to reach a comparable
level"
HARAPPA: This is what Andrew Kasdan (Archaeology March/April 1997) in
Archaeology' Travel guide South and Southeast Asia says about
Harappa:
Harappa (annual excavations January 15-April 15): Harappa, one of the
great ancient cities of the Indus Valley Civilization, (ca. 2600-1900
B.C.), has a mounded area covering more than 210 acres. Visible to the
public are the restored or stabilized remains f brick structures in
areas
cleared during 1920s and 1930s. During the excavation season, newly
uncovered remains can also be visited by prior arrangement. The small
site
museum contains a good cross-section of Harappan artifacts, including
inscribed seals and molded tablets with signs of the undechipered
Indus
Valley script. Also displayed are ornaments, beads, and small objects
of
faince, semiprecious stone, shell, and ivory, along with pottery,
other
ceramic artifacts, bronzes, chipped and ground stone, and
reconstruction of
two Harappan graves. An American and Pakistani team has been
excavating the
site since 1986. Getting there: Harappa is about halfway between
Lahore and
Multan, off the main highway between Lahore and Multan, off the main
highway about four miles from the Harappan station. Travel time by car
from
Lahore is between three and four hours. It is possible to reach the
site by
car, train, or bus. The site and museum are open daily during daylight
but
may be closed during Muslim high holidays. There is a small entrance
fee.
No appointment is necessary to visit the site or to secure a guide,
but one
is necessary to see the excavations. Refreshments and public toilets
are
near the museum. Hotels and restaurants are located in Sahiwal, 12
miles
north. Contact. Richard H. Meadow, Harappa Archaeological Research
Project.
Peabody museum. Harvard University, 11 Divinity Avenue, Cambridge, MA
02138. Tel: 617-495-3354, Fax: 617-495-7535.E-Mail:
mea...@fas.harvard.edu;
or Mohammad Bahadur Khan, Curator, Harappa Museum, Harappa, District
Sahiwal, 57170 Punjab, Pakistan. Tel: 011-92-441-399
MOHEN JO-DARO: This is what Andrew Kasdan (Archaeology March/April
1997)
in Archaeology' Travel guide , South and Southeast Asia says about
Mohen-Ja-Daro:
Mohen-jadaro (on going restoration): A flourishing city of the Indus
Valley civilization, Mohen-jadaro was home to as many as 40,000 people
between 2500 and 1500 B.C. Sophisticated town planning and city
drainage
suggest some sort of effective municipal authority. Extensive brick
architecture covers 370 acres. Dwellings range from single-room houses
to
"mansions" with courtyards and up to 12 rooms. Hearths and bathrooms
are
found in nearly every dwelling, while private wells have been
discovered in
some of the larger houses. A Buddhist mud-brick stupa dating to the
second
century A.D. is now being restored, and a site museum houses
sculpture,
ornaments, pottery, and tools from both the Indus Valley and the
Buddhist
periods. Getting there: One flies in to Mohen-jadaro from Karachi. At
the
airport soldiers will provide escort to the site, which is open daily.
8.30-12.30 and 2.30-5.30 between April and September, and 9.00-4.00
from
October to March. There is a small entrance fee. Archaeology Resthouse
at
the site, most visitors fly back the same day. Contact: Curator of the
Mohen-jadaro Museum, Mohen-jadaro, Sindh, Pakistan.
The word literally means "Mound of the Dead". The city streets had
straight North to West streets, and the urban planning displayed a
wealth
of knowledge about cities. "Main street-Mohen Ja-daro" was 9.1 meters
wide.
There is a large granary, and a "Citadel". Single quartered kiosk may
have
been sentry watch towers. The social stratification of Mohen-Jo-Daro
was
non existent if compared to the cities of Ur or Egypt. The
square-footage
and the plan of the houses display an agrarian society. The
Mohen-Jo-Daroans lived in almost the same sized houses. Each house had
a
separate bathroom. There was a large public bath, and the
Mohen-Jo-Darans
took great care to make it water tight. Mohen-Jo-Daro is in Sindh off
the
coast of Mekran. There may be as many as ten cities buried one on top
of
the other. This is what Joe Bernstein says about Mohenjadaro:
When Sir Mortimer Wheeler excavated it in 1950 he attempted to go
down to virgin soil, but after excavating 15 meters he hit the water
table.
Going down another nine meters with pumps he still failed to reach
bottom and had to call it off with his 54 foot deep trench now a well.
All the streets have drainage channels and there are public wells and
shelters for watchmen.
Just the idea of having watchmen suggests social stratification...
There were also huge public barns, granaries and baths.
Building with kiln dried brick does not mean considerable labor
was not required to do the work. Most of the structures appear
to be built according to a central plan. They are of the same style,
laid out in straight lines, all the buildings have square corners
and plumb walls except for the central citadel tower.
This suggests to me that the city was planned on a rectangular grid
of streets and avenues usually associated with the much later
Greeks and Romans. They included sophisticated indoor plumbing,
and were well lighted and ventilated.
It was clearly planned by people who had worked out a fairly
sophisticated and systematic approach, suggesting they had
already done this once or twice before.
Some dispute the social stratification of the IVC. Here is Poiter
....The kiln-dried brick involves work. For at least
two millennia this was India's *fancy* construction method as opposed
to
"mud" brick! -- In your discussion of things like grid plans etc. you
should
be aware that Wheeler was generalizing a fair bit (as of course did
his
predecessors) on the basis of fairly narrow trenches. This is still
prevalent simply because narrow trenches are all people can normally
get
funded.
All the same, the *absence* (per Ardeleanu-Jansen and co.) of poor
neighbourhoods *may* imply lack of social stratification, or it *may*
imply
that we know rather less about Mohenjo-daro than we think. In which
case we don't know much about its grid planning either..."
Urbanization in the Indus valley was just as gradual as in Egypt or
Mesopotamia... And contemporary (as also in the Amu Darya/Oxus
valley).
(circa 1980 by F. Raymond Allchin and his wife , and by D. P. Agrawal.
From: jit <a...@csar.com>
Newsgroups: soc.culture.indian,soc.culture.pakistan
Subject: Indus Civilization Remnants: From Preservation to Ruins
Date: Thu, 24 Apr 1997 11:20:17 -0700
Organization: Earthlink Network, Inc.
mage] From Ruins to Preservation and Back Again
Search the World Excavated Parts of Ancient City in Pakistan
Use Search the World Crumble Back Into Dust
to find news,
reference materials By Kenneth J. Cooper
and Internet resources Washington Post Foreign Service
for more than 220 Tuesday, April 8 1997; Page A11
countries and The Washington Post
territories. Type a
country or territory Brick by ancient brick, the capital of one
of the
name below: world's earliest civilizations has been
slowly
crumbling to dust on the saline plains
along the
Indus River.
International Section: Two decades of preservation work have
eliminated
specialized news and the threat that a heavy flood would
suddenly wash
Web resources away the ancient ruins at Moenjodaro, but
salt
customized for every drawn from the soil continues to corrode
the
country in the world. remnants of brick structures erected 4,500
years
ago. So far, none of the techniques tried
has
International Breaking halted the damage from salt deposits left
behind
News: 24-hour-a-day by a more ancient sea.
updates in the Today's
Top News section. Some of the first ruins excavated since
work
began here in 1922 have been reduced to
heaps of
All international dust and broken bricks; the walls of
buildings
stories from this uncovered in later digs have begun to crack
and
morning's Washington flake. Still, enough of the ancient city
remains
Post. to show that this was a planned city with a
grid-like design, sophisticated sewer
system and
diversified economy.
"Moenjodaro was the first planned city in
the
world," said Ahmad Hasan Zani, a Pakistani
historian who has worked for decades to
save the
ruins. "We don't have any planned city in
[ancient] Egypt, Mesopotamia or China. We
don't
have another one until the Greek era. That
was
2,000 years later."
American schoolchildren learn that the
Indus
River valley was one of the world's three
cradles
of civilization, along with ancient Egypt
and
Mesopotamia, in present-day Iraq. What few
Americans know is that most of the Indus
civilization lies not in modern India but
in
Pakistan.
Many scholars believe Moenjodaro, about 200
miles
from the port city of Karachi, was capital
of a
civilization that extended into what are
now
India and Afghanistan. Harappa, the first
Indus
city discovered, is also in Pakistan. Other
settlements have been excavated in northern
India.
Older than most of Egypt's pyramids, though
less
spectacular, Moenjodaro's ruins reflect the
advanced nature of the Indus civilization.
Streets form a grid, dividing into four
zones: a
religious area with a hostel for priests
and a
rectangular pool for ritual bathing, a
wealthy
neighborhood of large homes with thick
walls, a
working-class neighborhood of smaller
dwellings,
and what may have been a military post --
although no weapons have been found.
Most bricks used in construction had
exactly the
same dimensions.
"The people of Moenjodaro had the means of
surveying in straight lines, surveying
straight
streets and cutting them at right angles,"
said
Shereen Ratnagar, an Indian archaeologist
and
Indus civilization specialist. "Every
Indian
schoolchild knows their bricks are of
uniform
size."
Every home had a bathroom connected to
brick-lined, covered drains that carried
wastewater into cesspools and ultimately
the
Indus River -- a sewer system more
elaborate than
many in South Asia today. Two brick toilets
near
a well in the working-class section of
Moenjodaro
are the oldest ever found.
The economy was based on irrigated
cultivation of
wheat, cotton and other crops as well as
extensive trade with other Indus cities,
Mesopotamia and Egypt. A customs house,
perhaps
the world's first, used stone seals to
stamp
shipments.
Because the script on the stamps has not
been
deciphered, much mystery surrounds the
identity
of Moenjodaro's inhabitants, where they
came from
and why after 700 years they abruptly
abandoned
the city in about 1800 B.C.
Most researchers have connected the script
to
Dravidian languages spoken by the
subcontinent's
original inhabitants and today by most
residents
of southern India. In addition, Ratnagar
said,
the city planning suggests the first
inhabitants
were resettled from nearby places, followed
by a
cosmopolitan influx of traders and migrants
reflected in the varied facial features of
surviving human statues.
For instance, Moenjodaro's most famous
relic, a
bronze statue of a woman known as "the
dancing
girl," has a distinctly African face. Some
African American scholars have theorized
that
migrants from Africa populated the Indus
civilization, based partly on passages in
ancient
Hindu texts describing inhabitants as
dark-skinned.
Moenjodaro's residents appear to have
practiced a
religion similar to Hinduism. They engraved
a
bull on many customs seals, may have
worshiped
water and sculpted phallic symbols
resembling
those associated with a Hindu god, Shiva.
But for all of Moenjodaro's significance,
some
Westerners and Indians have questioned
Pakistan's
commitment to preserving it -- or Harappa
or
other ruins from a pre-Islamic era.
When India was partitioned at independence
in
1947 to create a haven for the
subcontinent's
Muslims in Pakistan, history was
partitioned as
well: In Pakistan's standard textbooks,
history
begins with Islam's arrival, 500 years
after the
decline of Moenjodaro, while India's
textbooks
describe the Indus civilization as part of
a
glorious past.
Pakistan's government has put an image of
Moenjodaro on the 10-rupee note and built
an
airport near the ruins to serve tourists
arriving
on the national airline. But most funding
for
preservation has come from outside
Pakistan, and
the excavation work done since independence
has
been directed by foreigners.
Last December, preservation work at the
500-acre
site was suspended after funding from the
government and international organizations
ran
out, according to a resident archaeologist.
This
month, the U.N. Educational, Scientific and
Cultural Organization (UNESCO) will
officially
wrap up a $10 million project conducted
over two
decades that succeeded in protecting the
Moenjodaro ruins from flooding.
Pakistani officials referred repeated
inquiries
about the government's role in preserving
Moenjodaro to Zani, who has advised UNESCO
and
the Culture Ministry. He said the
government will
take over preservation work at the site and
allocate about $25,000 a year for that
purpose.
Other financial support is being sought
from
Japan and European countries.
Meanwhile, the ancient capital continues to
deteriorate. So far, installing water pumps
in
wells around the ruins and covering some
surfaces
with mud have failed to halt the decay. The
only
sure solution to the salinization problem
--
carrying irrigation water to nearby fields
through pipes instead of open ditches -- is
too
expensive for Pakistan.
"We need a better method for removing the
salt.
Once that is done, conservation won't be so
difficult. So far, we are experimenting,"
Zani
said.
© Copyright 1997 The Washington Post
Company
Back to the top
.
TAXILA: The ruins were originally discovered around the year 1920.
This
city is in the North West Frontier province of Pakistan. Excavation
was
originally started in the thirties by Bainerjee and Sir John Marshall.
The
discovery of Taxila and subsequent discoveries of Mohenjadaor and
Harappa
revolutionized the historical data of the planet. The two hundred year
British rule spawned hundreds of British historians who made their way
to
the British colony and wrote about it.
CHAMNI DARO: The city in Sindh was discovered in 1931 and showed the
same
basic architecture of Mohen-Ja-Daro.
BALAUCHISTAN (Cholistan and other sites): Several Pre-Harappan,
Neolithic
sites were discovered in Zhob and the Quetta Valley. Other
Pre-Harappan
cities were: Damb Sadaouct, Kile Glud Mohn . This is what is called
the
Amri Pottery ware. .
The works of Rafique Mughal, one of the foremost authorities on
Arachaelogy are gold mines of information on the digs in Balauchistan.
Many
of his unpublished papers are available through arch networks. We will
try
to produce these as soon as they become available.
REVIEWS: ANCIENT CHOLISTAN: Archaeology and Architecture, BY:
Mohammad
Rafique Mughal ISBN 969 0 01350 5. Copyright @ 1997, PUBLISHED B
Subir
> The Aryan invadors of South Asia encountered an advanced civilization
> stretching from Punjab in north to Sindh inthe south, i.e. modern
> Pakistan.
Sir, there were no Dravidian people living there, was there ?
Arsalan Khan
> arsalanal...@yahoo.com (Arsalan Khan) wrote in message news:<e6d22781.03060...@posting.google.com>...
> > The Aryan invadors of South Asia encountered an advanced civilization
> > stretching from Punjab in north to Sindh inthe south, i.e. modern
> > Pakistan.
>
> Sir, there were no Dravidian people living there, was there ?
The Dravidian speaking Brahuis living in Baluchistan are livinig
testiment of Dravidian culture extending from Indus to Southern India
and was later inundated by Aryan invadors. The Brahuis live in remote
mountanous areas of Baluchistan and were remnants of larger Dravadian
culture.
The Indus Valley Civilisation (IVC) was Dravadian and was known as
Meluhha by their Sumerian trading partners. They were called Mlecchas
by Aryan invadors and later all despised local people were called
'Mlecchas' by these Aryan invadors.
Henry Polard
arsalanal...@yahoo.com (Arsalan Khan) wrote:
> subi...@concert.com (Subir) wrote in message
> news:<44d24a1f.03060...@posting.google.com>...
> > arsalanal...@yahoo.com (Arsalan Khan) wrote in message
> > news:<e6d22781.03060...@posting.google.com>...
> > > The Aryan invadors of South Asia encountered an advanced civilization
> > > stretching from Punjab in north to Sindh inthe south, i.e. modern
> > > Pakistan.
> >
> > Sir, there were no Dravidian people living there, was there ?
>
> The Dravidian speaking Brahuis living in Baluchistan are livinig
> testiment of Dravidian culture extending from Indus to Southern India
> and was later inundated by Aryan invadors. The Brahuis live in remote
> mountanous areas of Baluchistan and were remnants of larger Dravadian
> culture.
>
> The Indus Valley Civilisation (IVC) was Dravadian and was known as
> Meluhha by their Sumerian trading partners. They were called Mlecchas
> by Aryan invadors and later all despised local people were called
> 'Mlecchas' by these Aryan invadors.
While I think that one cannot rule out a Dravidian language for the IVC,
I have seen no positive evidence for a Dravidian language being spoken
by the inhabitants of the IVC. Is there any?
If there is no such evidence, then the language of the IVC is simply
indeterminate given current evidence, right?
So:
What evidence is there that the inhabitants of the IVC could not have
spoken a language related to other nearby languages than Dravidian
languages?
What evidence is there that the inhabitants of the IVC could not have
spoken a language unrelated to currently known languages?
What evidence is there that the inhabitants of all of the IVC sites must
have spoken the same language, even if they used the same writing
system, given that the Arabic, Cyrillic and Roman alphabets (with
modifications) are each used to write languages from unrelated families?
What evidence is there that there was no change in language or even
language family in a given site throughout the time that the site was
inhabited?
What evidence is there that all strata of the IVC used the same language?
It seems to me that the question of the IVC language is still wide open.
Henry Polard || I mean, the IVC spoke, like, Valley Talk, fer sure!
I Support Operation Infinity Justice
very interesting post. are you sure that rice was introduced into the
Subcontinent around 1000 BC?
also, are you a pakistani or south indian? i'm confused. however, i
don't care what you are, since your article was great and not hateful.
Seppo Renfors
Henry Polard wrote:
>
> In article <e6d22781.03060...@posting.google.com>,
> arsalanal...@yahoo.com (Arsalan Khan) wrote:
>
> > subi...@concert.com (Subir) wrote in message
> > news:<44d24a1f.03060...@posting.google.com>...
> > > arsalanal...@yahoo.com (Arsalan Khan) wrote in message
> > > news:<e6d22781.03060...@posting.google.com>...
> > > > The Aryan invadors of South Asia encountered an advanced civilization
> > > > stretching from Punjab in north to Sindh inthe south, i.e. modern
> > > > Pakistan.
> > >
> > > Sir, there were no Dravidian people living there, was there ?
> >
> > The Dravidian speaking Brahuis living in Baluchistan are livinig
> > testiment of Dravidian culture extending from Indus to Southern India
> > and was later inundated by Aryan invadors. The Brahuis live in remote
> > mountanous areas of Baluchistan and were remnants of larger Dravadian
> > culture.
> >
> > The Indus Valley Civilisation (IVC) was Dravadian and was known as
> > Meluhha by their Sumerian trading partners. They were called Mlecchas
> > by Aryan invadors and later all despised local people were called
> > 'Mlecchas' by these Aryan invadors.
When are people going to get over this antiquated mantra? There was no
"Aryan invasion" at all. There was a migration of people, over about a
millennia, said to have spoken an Aryan LANGUAGE - though even that is
assumed. They had no early writing at all. The earliest text is from
around 500 BCE, another millennia after the immigration had ended.
> While I think that one cannot rule out a Dravidian language for the IVC,
> I have seen no positive evidence for a Dravidian language being spoken
> by the inhabitants of the IVC. Is there any?
It is commonly known as the Harappan civilisation - though some do use
the Indus civilisation for the same mob. There is plenty of evidence
that they did have a language, including writing. A number of seals
have been found - some other bits as well dating back to about 1500
BCE. The swastika is a Harappan symbol.
> If there is no such evidence, then the language of the IVC is simply
> indeterminate given current evidence, right?
The Harappan civilisation is generally said to have been the
Dravidians, and a Dravidian group of languages does exist.
[..]
--
SIR -Philosopher Unauthorised
------------------------------------------------------------------
" Don't resent getting old. A great many are denied that privilege "
---------------------------------------------------------------
Arsalan Khan
This issue is very important in context of sociopolitcal issues in
South Asia. The "Vadic Aryan' group has long established 'caste
system' which is basically puts the fair complexion Aryans on the top
while the indeginous dark complexion non-Aryans at the bottom of
social ladder. These upper caste deny any Aryan invasion or migration
to South Asia and instead claim that Aryan moved out from South Asia
to other parts of the world. This strategy is to deny any rights to
indegenous tribe that are fighting for basic human rights and claim to
their lands. The racial discrimination against aboriginal people of
South Asia is so extreme that they are termed as 'untouchables' in
Vedic Aryan scriptures. You should visit website mainained by these
indeginous people, they call themselves 'Dalits, to get their side of
the story.
Henry Polard
Seppo Renfors <Ren...@not.ollis.net.au> wrote:
> Henry Polard wrote:
in message: <hremovethispolard-E...@nntp.mindspring.com>
> >
> > In article <e6d22781.03060...@posting.google.com>,
> > arsalanal...@yahoo.com (Arsalan Khan) wrote:
> >
> > > subi...@concert.com (Subir) wrote in message
> > > news:<44d24a1f.03060...@posting.google.com>...
> > > > arsalanal...@yahoo.com (Arsalan Khan) wrote in message
> > > > news:<e6d22781.03060...@posting.google.com>...
> > > > > The Aryan invadors of South Asia encountered an advanced civilization
> > > > > stretching from Punjab in north to Sindh inthe south, i.e. modern
> > > > > Pakistan.
> > > >
> > > > Sir, there were no Dravidian people living there, was there ?
> > >
> > > The Dravidian speaking Brahuis living in Baluchistan are livinig
> > > testiment of Dravidian culture extending from Indus to Southern India
> > > and was later inundated by Aryan invadors. The Brahuis live in remote
> > > mountanous areas of Baluchistan and were remnants of larger Dravadian
> > > culture.
> > >
> > > The Indus Valley Civilisation (IVC) was Dravadian and was known as
> > > Meluhha by their Sumerian trading partners. They were called Mlecchas
> > > by Aryan invadors and later all despised local people were called
> > > 'Mlecchas' by these Aryan invadors.
>
> When are people going to get over this antiquated mantra? There was no
> "Aryan invasion" at all. There was a migration of people, over about a
> millennia, said to have spoken an Aryan LANGUAGE - though even that is
> assumed. They had no early writing at all. The earliest text is from
> around 500 BCE, another millennia after the immigration had ended.
The "Aryan invasion" bit is Subhir's; I am in agreement with you.
> > While I think that one cannot rule out a Dravidian language for the IVC,
> > I have seen no positive evidence for a Dravidian language being spoken
> > by the inhabitants of the IVC. Is there any?
>
> It is commonly known as the Harappan civilisation - though some do use
> the Indus civilisation for the same mob. There is plenty of evidence
> that they did have a language, including writing.
Of course. While I did not say so explicitly that the IVC (I used the
conventions of the person that I was responding to) had a (or at least
one) language writing, I thought that it was inplied in the following
question from my original article:
"What evidence is there that the inhabitants of all of the IVC sites
must
have spoken the same language, even if they used the same writing
system, given that the Arabic, Cyrillic and Roman alphabets (with
modifications) are each used to write languages from unrelated families?
"
I guess I need to be clearer.
BTW, there are several ancient urban sites other than Harappa in the
Indus valley, at least according to http://www.harappa.com/har/har1.html.
How current is the term "Harappan civilisation"?
And this site seems very well done; could anyone with expertise in the
field comment on how reliable it is?
> A number of seals
> have been found - some other bits as well dating back to about 1500
> BCE. The swastika is a Harappan symbol.
It seems to be a symbol used by lots of people; if you meant that the
swastika is uniquely Harappan, could you please point me to the relevant
evidence?
> > If there is no such evidence, then the language of the IVC is simply
> > indeterminate given current evidence, right?
>
> The Harappan civilisation is generally said to have been the
> Dravidians, and a Dravidian group of languages does exist.
Of course there is a Dravidian group of languages. And not everything
that is generally said is correct.
What I am curious about is the evidence linking the Dravidian group of
languages to these ancient sites. That the IV/Harrapan civilization
spoke a Dravidian language is not necessarily a foregone conclusion.
After all, the fact that Semitic languages exist and they are and were
in the vicinity of Sumeria does not in itself mean that the Sumerians
spoke a Semitic language (and in fact Sumerian has not been conclusively
demonstrated to be related to Semitic - or any other languge for that
matter).
Can you point me to any evidence linking the Dravidian group of
languages to IV/Harappan civilization?
Henry Polard || But then Sumerian is Basque, as is every other languge,
and since everyone is Celtic, the Basques, Sumerians, and IVC - not to
mention the Maya and Patagonians - are Celtic, too - at least according
to H*r*ld N*l*nd. ( :-) for the humor-impaired).
M. Ranjit Mathews
> arsalanal...@yahoo.com (Arsalan Khan) wrote:
>
> > subi...@concert.com (Subir) wrote ...
> > > arsalanal...@yahoo.com (Arsalan Khan) wrote ...
> > > > The Aryan invadors of South Asia encountered an advanced civilization
> > > > stretching from Punjab in north to Sindh inthe south, i.e. modern
> > > > Pakistan.
> > >
> > > Sir, there were no Dravidian people living there, was there ?
> >
> > The Dravidian speaking Brahuis living in Baluchistan are livinig
> > testiment of Dravidian culture extending from Indus to Southern India
> > and was later inundated by Aryan invadors. The Brahuis live in remote
> > mountanous areas of Baluchistan and were remnants of larger Dravadian
> > culture.
> >
> > The Indus Valley Civilisation (IVC) was Dravadian and was known as
> > Meluhha by their Sumerian trading partners. They were called Mlecchas
> > by Aryan invadors and later all despised local people were called
> > 'Mlecchas' by these Aryan invadors.
>
> While I think that one cannot rule out a Dravidian language for the IVC,
> I have seen no positive evidence for a Dravidian language being spoken
> by the inhabitants of the IVC. Is there any?
The theory that Indo-Aryan languages have a Dravidian substrate.
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/cybalist/message/14110
> If there is no such evidence, then the language of the IVC is simply
> indeterminate given current evidence, right?
> So:
>
> What evidence is there that the inhabitants of the IVC could not have
> spoken a language related to other nearby languages than Dravidian
> languages?
>
> What evidence is there that the inhabitants of the IVC could not have
> spoken a language unrelated to currently known languages?
>
> What evidence is there that the inhabitants of all of the IVC sites must
> have spoken the same language, even if they used the same writing
> system, given that the Arabic, Cyrillic and Roman alphabets (with
> modifications) are each used to write languages from unrelated families?
There is no evidence that they all spoke the same language.
M. Ranjit Mathews
> Henry Polard wrote:
>>>The Indus Valley Civilisation (IVC) was Dravadian and was known as
>>>Meluhha by their Sumerian trading partners. They were called Mlecchas
>>>by Aryan invadors and later all despised local people were called
>>>'Mlecchas' by these Aryan invadors.
>
> When are people going to get over this antiquated mantra? There was no
> "Aryan invasion" at all
Didn't Persians and Sakas invade India? If they did, there were Aryan
invasions.
>. There was a migration of people, over about a millennia, said to
> have spoken an Aryan LANGUAGE - though even that is assumed.
How did these migrants acquire their martial traditions?
> They had no early writing at all. The earliest text is from
> around 500 BCE, another millennia after the immigration had ended.
If we wanted to look for these migrants' descendants, in which
georgraphic locations and which sections of society would we be most
likely to find their genes?
Subir
There have been excavations which show the ancient peoples of India
had the same features like the people living in the area today. The
"Aryan" invasion theory is being eroded by more current studies and
research.
> This issue is very important in context of sociopolitcal issues in
> South Asia. The "Vadic Aryan' group has long established 'caste
> system' which is basically puts the fair complexion Aryans on the top
> while the indeginous dark complexion non-Aryans at the bottom of
> social ladder.
The caste system is based on more than skin color as dark skinned
brahmins can still claim superiority over light skinned non-brahmins.
In any case, hindoo religion is legally separated from state affairs,
i.e. the context is moot.
> These upper caste deny any Aryan invasion or migration
> to South Asia and instead claim that Aryan moved out from South Asia
> to other parts of the world. This strategy is to deny any rights to
> indegenous tribe that are fighting for basic human rights and claim to
> their lands.
The Muslims who invade koofar lands to steal, loot and rape the local
peoples have absolutely no right to bitch about "human rights" and
"claims to their land". The "Aryan Invasion" is central to their
pathetic excuse for their yallah sanctified invasions and atrocities.
> The racial discrimination against aboriginal people of
> South Asia is so extreme that they are termed as 'untouchables' in
> Vedic Aryan scriptures.
The aboriginal peoples live in remote areas. The "untouchables" live
in urban areas and do not have the features of the aboriginals.
> You should visit website mainained by these
> indeginous people, they call themselves 'Dalits, to get their side of
> the story.
>
> http://www.dalitstan.org/
You should overcome your superficial, madrassa-trained understanding
of indian history and go straight to the nearest secular library. On
second thoughts, it is more fun to hear the madrassa refrain.
> >The Harappan civilisation is generally said to have been the
> >Dravidians, and a Dravidian group of languages does exist.
It is now *generally* believed that the "Dravidian" theory is now
flawed. It will be proved that Dravidians never lived in Harrappa as a
civilization, but had their own civilization.
Arsalan Khan
>Arsalan Khan <arsalanal...@yahoo.com> wrote in message news:<ua8pdvcehgq7e3n1c...@4ax.com>...
>
>There have been excavations which show the ancient peoples of India
>had the same features like the people living in the area today. The
>"Aryan" invasion theory is being eroded by more current studies and
>research.
>
The Indian Aparthied System a.k.a. caste system clealry shows that as
you go up the caste hierarchy the the more Mediterrainian complexion.
The lower caste people are darker complexion. There is a article in
current issue of National Geographical about 'untouchables' of India.
http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2003/06/0602_030602_untouchables.html
India's "Untouchables" Face Violence, Discrimination
Hillary Mayell
for National Geographic News
June 2, 2003
More than 160 million people in India are considered
"Untouchable"用eople tainted by their birth into a caste system that
deems them impure, less than human.
Human rights abuses against these people, known as Dalits, are legion.
A random sampling of headlines in mainstream Indian newspapers tells
their story: "Dalit boy beaten to death for plucking flowers"; "Dalit
tortured by cops for three days"; "Dalit 'witch' paraded naked in
Bihar"; "Dalit killed in lock-up at Kurnool"; "7 Dalits burnt alive in
caste clash"; "5 Dalits lynched in Haryana"; "Dalit woman gang-raped,
paraded naked"; "Police egged on mob to lynch Dalits".
"Dalits are not allowed to drink from the same wells, attend the same
temples, wear shoes in the presence of an upper caste, or drink from
the same cups in tea stalls," said Smita Narula, a senior researcher
with Human Rights Watch, and author of Broken People: Caste Violence
Against India's "Untouchables." Human Rights Watch is a worldwide
activist organization based in New York.
India's Untouchables are relegated to the lowest jobs, and live in
constant fear of being publicly humiliated, paraded naked, beaten, and
raped with impunity by upper-caste Hindus seeking to keep them in
their place. Merely walking through an upper-caste neighborhood is a
life-threatening offense.
One out of six Indians are born into the country's "Untouchable"
caste.
Photograph copyright William Albert Allard
See more photographs by William Albert Allard of India's
"Untouchables" in the current issue of National Geographic magazine.
Go >>
Stunning photography, every month of the year. Click here to get one
year of National Geographic magazine and a free gift.
Earth's cultures and the events from history that have helped shape
the world we live in. Get stories, photographs, maps, and lesson plans
from the Nationalgeographic.com History and Culture Guide. Go >>
More News
Adventure & Exploration
Archaeology & Paleontology
Animals & Nature
Science & Technology
People & Culture
Diary of the Planet
The Environment
Travel
National Geographic Today
Special Series
Digital Lifestyles:
feature by Sony
EarthPulse
National Geographic Out There
Oceans
Volvo Ocean Race
Mount Everest Expedition
Nearly 90 percent of all the poor Indians and 95 percent of all the
illiterate Indians are Dalits, according to figures presented at the
International Dalit Conference that took place May 16 to 18 in
Vancouver, Canada.
Crime Against Dalits
Statistics compiled by India's National Crime Records Bureau indicate
that in the year 2000, the last year for which figures are available,
25,455 crimes were committed against Dalits. Every hour two Dalits are
assaulted; every day three Dalit women are raped, two Dalits are
murdered, and two Dalit homes are torched.
No one believes these numbers are anywhere close to the reality of
crimes committed against Dalits. Because the police, village councils,
and government officials often support the caste system, which is
based on the religious teachings of Hinduism, many crimes go
unreported due to fear of reprisal, intimidation by police, inability
to pay bribes demanded by police, or simply the knowledge that the
police will do nothing.
"There have been large-scale abuses by the police, acting in collusion
with upper castes, including raids, beatings in custody, failure to
charge offenders or investigate reported crimes," said Narula.
That same year, 68,160 complaints were filed against the police for
activities ranging from murder, torture, and collusion in acts of
atrocity, to refusal to file a complaint. Sixty two percent of the
cases were dismissed as unsubstantiated; 26 police officers were
convicted in court.
Despite the fact that untouchability was officially banned when India
adopted its constitution in 1950, discrimination against Dalits
remained so pervasive that in 1989 the government passed legislation
known as The Prevention of Atrocities Act. The act specifically made
it illegal to parade people naked through the streets, force them to
eat feces, take away their land, foul their water, interfere with
their right to vote, and burn down their homes.
Since then, the violence has escalated, largely as a result of the
emergence of a grassroots human rights movement among Dalits to demand
their rights and resist the dictates of untouchability, said Narula.
Lack of Enforcement, Not Laws
Enforcement of laws designed to protect Dalits is lax if not
non-existent in many regions of India. The practice of untouchability
is strongest in rural areas, where 80 percent of the country's
population resides. There, the underlying religious principles of
Hinduism dominate.
Hindus believe a person is born into one of four castes based on karma
and "purity"揺ow he or she lived their past lives. Those born as
Brahmans are priests and teachers; Kshatriyas are rulers and soldiers;
Vaisyas are merchants and traders; and Sudras are laborers. Within the
four castes, there are thousands of sub-castes, defined by profession,
region, dialect, and other factors.
Untouchables are literally outcastes; a fifth group that is so
unworthy it doesn't fall within the caste system.
Although based on religious principles practiced for some 1,500 years,
the system persists today for economic as much as religious reasons.
Because they are considered impure from birth, Untouchables perform
jobs that are traditionally considered "unclean" or exceedingly
menial, and for very little pay. One million Dalits work as manual
scavengers, cleaning latrines and sewers by hand and clearing away
dead animals. Millions more are agricultural workers trapped in an
inescapable cycle of extreme poverty, illiteracy, and oppression.
Although illegal, 40 million people in India, most of them Dalits, are
bonded workers, many working to pay off debts that were incurred
generations ago, according to a report by Human Rights Watch published
in 1999. These people, 15 million of whom are children, work under
slave-like conditions hauling rocks, or working in fields or factories
for less than U.S. $1 day.
Crimes Against Women
Dalit women are particularly hard hit. They are frequently raped or
beaten as a means of reprisal against male relatives who are thought
to have committed some act worthy of upper-caste vengeance. They are
also subject to arrest if they have male relatives hiding from the
authorities.
A case reported in 1999 illustrates the toxic mix of gender and caste.
A 42-year-old Dalit woman was gang-raped and then burnt alive after
she, her husband, and two sons had been held in captivity and tortured
for eight days. Her crime? Another son had eloped with the daughter of
the higher-caste family doing the torturing. The local police knew the
Dalit family was being held, but did nothing because of the
higher-caste family's local influence.
There is very little recourse available to victims.
A report released by Amnesty International in 2001 found an "extremely
high" number of sexual assaults on Dalit women, frequently perpetrated
by landlords, upper-caste villagers, and police officers. The study
estimates that only about 5 percent of attacks are registered, and
that police officers dismissed at least 30 percent of rape complaints
as false.
The study also found that the police routinely demand bribes,
intimidate witnesses, cover up evidence, and beat up the women's
husbands. Little or nothing is done to prevent attacks on rape victims
by gangs of upper-caste villagers seeking to prevent a case from being
pursued. Sometimes the policemen even join in, the study suggests.
Rape victims have also been murdered. Such crimes often go unpunished.
Thousands of pre-teen Dalit girls are forced into prostitution under
cover of a religious practice known as devadasis, which means "female
servant of god." The girls are dedicated or "married" to a deity or a
temple. Once dedicated, they are unable to marry, forced to have sex
with upper-caste community members, and eventually sold to an urban
brothel.
Resistance and Progress
Within India, grassroots efforts to change are emerging, despite
retaliation and intimidation by local officials and upper-caste
villagers. In some states, caste conflict has escalated to caste
warfare, and militia-like vigilante groups have conducted raids on
villages, burning homes, raping, and massacring the people. These
raids are sometimes conducted with the tacit approval of the police.
In the province Bihar, local Dalits are retaliating, committing
atrocities also. Non-aligned Dalits are frequently caught in the
middle, victims of both groups.
"There is a growing grassroots movement of activists, trade unions,
and other NGOs that are organizing to democratically and peacefully
demand their rights, higher wages, and more equitable land
distribution," said Narula. "There has been progress in terms of
building a human rights movement within India, and in drawing
international attention to the issue."
In August 2002, the UN Committee for the Elimination of Racial
Discrimination (UN CERD) approved a resolution condemning caste or
descent-based discrimination.
"But at the national level, very little is being done to implement or
enforce the laws," said Narula.
M. Ranjit Mathews
> Arsalan Khan <arsalanal...@yahoo.com> wrote in message news:<ua8pdvcehgq7e3n1c...@4ax.com>...
>
> There have been excavations which show the ancient peoples of India
> had the same features like the people living in the area today. The
> "Aryan" invasion theory is being eroded by more current studies and
> research.
There seems to be something wrong with these studeis. How could the
features of the people in the area have remained the same when there
have been large influxes of S'akas, Kushanas, Hunas, Turks, etc.?
Seppo Renfors
You can't tell a persons skin colour from their language you know! Nor
is it known what "skin colour" the migrants between 2500 -> 1500 BCE
had. These are modern racists concerns and claims.
You are again making the mistake of referring to "aryans" as an
ethnicity/race, it isn't such simply isn't known - it is a language,
and a language only now called "Indic" more often! The Harappan
civilisation was very advanced at the time. It "died" as a result of
natural causes - geographic change. Nothing whatever to do with the
immigrants.
The Indic speaking (Aryan speaking) immigrants - who lived in harmony
with the pre-existing civilisation - survived, probably because they
were nowhere near as advanced as the Harappan civilisation, nor had
they established cities or shipping and international trade. They were
semi nomadic to nomadic people living a subsistence life. The early
Vedic period is referred to as "the dark ages". Writing was lost for a
millennia, and little is known of that period.
But if you are on about politics, you are posting to a wrong group -
leave sci.archaeology out of it.
> These upper caste deny any Aryan invasion or migration
> to South Asia and instead claim that Aryan moved out from South Asia
> to other parts of the world.
The "cast" system is a relatively modern evolution and like with many
religions, misunderstood, or more likely deliberately misrepresented.
The mention of the people by a term was a reference to their trade
originally, nothing else. It was a reference to a socio-economic
groups, if you like. People move in and out of such groups, depending
on their skills, learning and more importantly, opportunity.
> This strategy is to deny any rights to
> indegenous tribe that are fighting for basic human rights and claim to
> their lands.
It is quite stupid to talk about "native people" when it is so far
back. Who knows where the first people came from initially, or even if
the Dravidians were the "first" in any event (which I seriously
doubt).
> The racial discrimination against aboriginal people of
> South Asia is so extreme that they are termed as 'untouchables' in
> Vedic Aryan scriptures.
Again the term "Vedic Aryan" is wrong, it is only "Vedic". The Rig
Veda doesn't mention "untouchables" as far as I know. It is later more
modern texts that do - a bastardisation that has evolved over time and
not original.
> You should visit website mainained by these
> indeginous people, they call themselves 'Dalits, to get their side of
> the story.
I'm not interested in "stories", I prefer actual knowledge - and I
don't care what the political ramifications might be of the actual
knowledge. Whatever such ramifications may be are the result of spin
doctoring and pure fabrication in any event, nothing from 4,500 ->
3,500 years ago is relevant to today's life.
I don't know much about India's politics, but this I know, all are
equals in India, only that some are more equal than others!
Daryl Krupa
<snip>
> "Aryan invasion" at all. There was a migration of people, over about a
> millennia, said to have spoken an Aryan LANGUAGE - though even that is
> assumed. They had no early writing at all. The earliest text is from
> around 500 BCE, another millennia after the immigration had ended.
"Millennia" is plural.
"Millennium" is singular.
Just so we're all speaking the same language,
Daryl Krupa
Subir
> The Indian Aparthied System a.k.a. caste system clealry shows that as
> you go up the caste hierarchy the the more Mediterrainian complexion.
The Muslim Aparthied System a.k.a musla-quffar system as documented in
the unholy quoran clearly shows the double standard in muslim
hierarchy where non-muslims are relegated to "evil","untrustworthy",
"jealous", etc. categories and characterisations.
A visit to any muslim country will show how the muslim peoples treat
the non-muslim peoples, i.e., repression, juzia taxes, killings, rape,
property confiscations, temple destruction, religious suppressions.
etc.
The "Aryan Invasion" theory is badly needed to be cut'n'pasted
validated so as to escure the muslim invasions.
Reference: The Recital, author - yallah.
Horace LaBadie
icyc...@yahoo.com (Daryl Krupa) wrote:
Also one great television show for two years.
>Just so we're all speaking the same language,
>Daryl Krupa
HWL
Subir
There were even constant influxes of peoples before these specific
groups. The Aryan theory is based on the Dravidian people being a
unique, isolated people who were driven off from the Indus Valley to
the Godavari in the south, by a distinct Aryan group of people.
The mixture of physical features in the skeletons from the Harappa
times are being found to be similar to current indian features. I am
not a full time researcher (I wish I had more time to catalog what I
read) so I am afraid I cannot cite you a reference on this specific
topic.
However, on a related note, why not check out the "Journey of Man"
which attempts to map the migration of man during the Ice Age, mainly
from the genetic evidence ?
Seppo Renfors
Yes, I was aware it wasn't your text. Thought I would attempt to knock
this old wives tale on the head once again.
> > > While I think that one cannot rule out a Dravidian language for the IVC,
> > > I have seen no positive evidence for a Dravidian language being spoken
> > > by the inhabitants of the IVC. Is there any?
> >
> > It is commonly known as the Harappan civilisation - though some do use
> > the Indus civilisation for the same mob. There is plenty of evidence
> > that they did have a language, including writing.
>
> Of course. While I did not say so explicitly that the IVC (I used the
> conventions of the person that I was responding to) had a (or at least
> one) language writing, I thought that it was inplied in the following
> question from my original article:
>
> "What evidence is there that the inhabitants of all of the IVC sites
> must
> have spoken the same language, even if they used the same writing
> system, given that the Arabic, Cyrillic and Roman alphabets (with
> modifications) are each used to write languages from unrelated families?
> "
>
> I guess I need to be clearer.
>
> BTW, there are several ancient urban sites other than Harappa in the
> Indus valley, at least according to http://www.harappa.com/har/har1.html.
>
> How current is the term "Harappan civilisation"?
That term is still used today. Some also use the term Indus
civilisation. The latter is more accurate but appears less popular.
> And this site seems very well done; could anyone with expertise in the
> field comment on how reliable it is?
That site has some good information this is one of the least
politically infected sites that is so common with most of them from
India.
> > A number of seals
> > have been found - some other bits as well dating back to about 1500
> > BCE. The swastika is a Harappan symbol.
>
> It seems to be a symbol used by lots of people; if you meant that the
> swastika is uniquely Harappan, could you please point me to the relevant
> evidence?
http://ignca.nic.in/agra062.htm#SVASTIKA
NOTE: I point to this site only for the picture.
> > > If there is no such evidence, then the language of the IVC is simply
> > > indeterminate given current evidence, right?
> >
> > The Harappan civilisation is generally said to have been the
> > Dravidians, and a Dravidian group of languages does exist.
>
> Of course there is a Dravidian group of languages. And not everything
> that is generally said is correct.
There is a lot going for that theory just the same. I don't know that
it is a theory that is proven beyond doubt yet, but there appears
little in the way of alternatives.
> What I am curious about is the evidence linking the Dravidian group of
> languages to these ancient sites. That the IV/Harrapan civilization
> spoke a Dravidian language is not necessarily a foregone conclusion.
No it isn't and it is thought to have died out in fact.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/334517.stm
Here is a counter point:
http://www.safarmer.com/meadow.html
Rajaram appears to have non scientific motives of his own.
See also:
http://www.harappa.com/indus2/124.html
> After all, the fact that Semitic languages exist and they are and were
> in the vicinity of Sumeria does not in itself mean that the Sumerians
> spoke a Semitic language (and in fact Sumerian has not been conclusively
> demonstrated to be related to Semitic - or any other languge for that
> matter).
>
> Can you point me to any evidence linking the Dravidian group of
> languages to IV/Harappan civilization?
I was always more interested in tracing the origins of the the late
comers than the Dravidians or the Harappan civilisation per se, but
this one will keep you busy for weeks!
http://www.ucl.ac.uk/~ucgadkw/indology1.html
> Henry Polard || But then Sumerian is Basque, as is every other languge,
> and since everyone is Celtic, the Basques, Sumerians, and IVC - not to
> mention the Maya and Patagonians - are Celtic, too - at least according
> to H*r*ld N*l*nd. ( :-) for the humor-impaired).
Yeah, that'd be about right :-)
Arsalan Khan
>Arsalan Khan <arsalanal...@yahoo.com> wrote in message news:
<288qdv80dtttc0235...@4ax.com>...
>
The concept of a Sudra Holocaust is generally denied by the Brahmanist
Government. It does not require the knowledge of an archaeologist,
however, to grasp the historicity of the Sudra Holocaust. Elementary,
day-to-day facts indeed prove that such an event occurred.
Dravidians in the South
The very fact that the Dravidians are located in the South proves the
historicity of the Sudra Holocaust. Their presence in the South
virtually eliminates their post-Aryan immigration from a more southern
region.
Brahuis and Northern Dravidians
The survival of Brahuis and other Dravidian isolates in remote regions
of the North indicates that they were pushed aside by invading Aryans.
Northern drift of the Brahuis into already existing Aryan populatin is
refuted by the Brahuis' habitation of isolated mountains - a feature
which can only be explained by their being driven from the plains.
Caste System
The survival of a caste system, with the three Aryan castes of
Brahmins, Kshatriyas and Vaishyas and the Negroid Sudras at the bottom
is a merely a replication of what occurred in the US South. Caste
systems were establisherd wherever one race conquered another. The
Sudras are repeatedly referred to as `black', `thick-nosed' and
`full-lipped' in Sanskrit and Prakritic texts, and caste in Sanskrit
is `varna' or skin-color. A section of the Sudras comprise the
Chandallas or Black Untouchables - the people who later came to be
known as Dalits. The caste system is thus, in itself proof of a Sudra
Holocaust.
Continuing Caste Wars
Caste wars rage in various parts of India. In Bihar, the Bhumihar
sub-caste of Brahmins is engaged in violent struggle against the
Dalits. In Sri Lanka, the Sinhala-Buddhists are engaged in civil war
against the Tamil Shaivas.
Four Castes
Whereas all Indo-European peoples possessed three castes, the
Indo-Aryans possess four. The fourth caste thus necessarily represents
the enslaved and subjugated indigenous Sudras. The Latins possessed
the Flavians (priests), Milites (warriors) and Plebins (commoners),
which ocrrespond to the Aryan Brahmins, Kshatriyas and Vaishyas.
Annihilation of Shaivism in North India
That the Shaiva religion flourished in the Indus Valley civilization
is proven by the discovery of Harappan seals bearing the figure of
seated ithyphallic Shivas. However, at the present day, Shaivism is
confined to the Dalits and Adivasis, who form 25 % of the population.
There are also very few Shiva temples, and Brahmanism (Vedism and
Vaishnavism) are the predominant religions of North India. Shaivism,
meanwhile, continues to flourish in south India, with Tamil Nadu as
its prime locus. This fact once again can only be explained by
invoking the Sudra Holocaust, with the Shiva temples and Shaivite
civilization which was built up by the indigenous Sudroids being wiped
out by the Vaishnava Aryans.
History of Ancient Indian Conquest Told in Modern Genes, Experts Say
Robert Cooke, Newsday
Like an indelible signature enduring through a hundred generations,
genes that entered India when conquering hordes swooped down from the
north thousands of years ago are still there, and remain entrenched at
the top of the caste system, scientists report. Analyses of the male Y
chromosome, plus genes hidden in small cellular bodies called
mitochondria, show that today's genetic patterns agree with accounts
of ancient Indo-European warriors' conquering the Indian subcontinent.
The invaders apparently shoved the local men aside, took their women
and set up the rigid caste system that exists today. Their descendants
are still the elite within Hindu society.
INVADING CAUCASOIDS
Thus today's genetic patterns, the researchers explained, vividly
reflect a historic event, or events, that occurred 3,000 or 4,000
years ago. The gene patterns ``are consistent with a historical
scenario in which invading Caucasoids -- primarily males --
established the caste system and occupied the highest positions,
placing the indigenous population, who were more similar to Asians, in
lower caste positions.''
The researchers, from the University of Utah and Andhra Pradesh
University in India, used two sets of genes in their analyses.
One set, from the mitochondria, are only passed maternally and can be
used to track female inheritance. The other, on the male-determining Y
chromosome, can only be passed along paternally and thus track male
inheritance.
The data imply, then, ``that there was a group of males with European
affinities who were largely responsible for this invasion 3,000 or
4,000 years ago,'' said geneticist Lynn Jorde of the University of
Utah.
If women had accompanied the invaders, he said, the evidence should be
seen in the mitochondrial genes, but it is not evident.
According to geneticist Douglas Wallace of Emory University in
Atlanta, the work reported by Jorde and his colleagues ``is very
interesting, and is certainly worth further study.''
Along with Jorde, the research team included Michael Bamshad, W.S.
Watkins and M.E. Dixon from Utah and B.B. Rao, B.V.R. Prasad and J.M.
Naidu, from Andhra Pradesh University.
UPWARDLY MOBILE WOMEN
By studying both sets of genetic markers, the research team found
clear evidence echoing what is still seen socially, that women can be
upwardly mobile, in terms of caste, if they marry higher-caste men. In
contrast, men generally do not move higher, because women rarely marry
men from lower castes, the researchers said.
``Our expectations in this natural experiment are borne out when we
look at the genes,'' said Jorde. ``It's one of the few cases where we
know the mating situation in a population for 150 generations. So it's
kind of a test for how well the genes reflect a population's
history.''
The ancient story holds that invaders known as Indo-Europeans, or true
Aryans, came from Eastern Europe or western Asia and conquered the
Indian subcontinent. The people they subdued descended from the
original inhabitants who had arrived far earlier from Africa and from
other parts of Asia.
During the genetic studies, in 1996 and 1997, researchers took blood
samples from hundreds of people in southern India. The analyses
compared the genes from 316 caste members and 330 members of tribal
populations, looking for signs of Asian, European and African
ancestry.
In the mitochondrial genes passed along by females, Jorde said, they
could see the clear background of Asian genes. ``All of the caste
groups were similar to Asians, the underlying population'' that had
originally been subdued.
But, he added, ``when we look at the Y chromosome DNA, we see a very
different pattern. The lower castes are most similar to Asians, and
the upper castes are more European than Asian.''
Further, ``when we look at the different components within the upper
caste, the group with the greatest European similarity of all is the
warrior class, the Kshatriya, who are still at the top of the Hindu
castes, with the Brahmins,'' Jorde said.
``But the Brahmins, in terms of their Y chromosomes, are a little bit
more Asian.''
So the genetic results are ``consistent with historical accounts that
women sometimes marry into higher caste, resulting in female gene flow
between adjacent castes. In contrast, males seldom change castes, so Y
chromosome'' variation occurs only as a result of natural mutations,
Jorde said.
CASTE SYSTEM STILL ALIVE
He added that even though India's ancient caste system was abolished
legally in the 1960s, it is still entrenched socially.
``People are very well aware of their caste membership,'' he said,
noting that in some cities the housing is still arranged along caste
lines. So ``one might argue, unfortunately so, that it (the caste
system) does exist in people's minds.''
In terms of who marries whom, the researchers described the Hindu
caste system as ``governing the mating practices of nearly one-sixth
of the world's population.''
The blood samples taken from tribal people in southern India are still
being analyzed, Jorde added.
But so far, ``the tribal populations are more similar to the lower
castes than to anyone else, similar to the original residents of
India,'' he said.
The Sudra Holocaust involved the most inhuman torture of the
indigenous Sudras at the hands of the Aryan invaders. Not only were
Sudras killed en masse during wartime, they were often executed in
peace-time by the most heinous methods imaginable and for the
flimsiest of reasons. This peace-time murder of Sudras lasted for much
longer periods than the intermittent warfare, and made a significant
cumulative contribution to the total democide of the Sudra Holocaust
and the ultimate annihilation of Sudroids in the Indus-Ganges valley.
Pouring of Boiling Oil into Sudra Mouth
The Aryan Brahmins imposed the most inhuman systems of repression upon
the non-Brahmins which involved the most perverse and inhuman acts of
torture imaginable. The heinous forms of murder included the pouring
of boiling oil into the ears of Sudras -
Manu Smrti VIII.272
" If a Sudra arrogantly teaches Brahmins their duty, the king shall
cause hot oil to be poured into his mouth and into his ears."
Pouring of Molten Metal into Sudra Ears
Not only was boiling oil poured down the ears of independant Sudras,
in certain other cases molten metal was used instead. Thus, the
Brahman law-giver Gautama prescribes the following savage punishment
for Sudras who listened to recitations of the Aryan Vedas -
Gautama Dharma Sutra 12.4
" Now if a Sudra listens intentionally to (a recitation of) the Veda,
his ears shall be filled with (molten) tin or lac. "
Cutting off of Sudra Tongues
Another cruel and inhuman method which the `holy' Hindu texts
prescribe for torturing Sudras is the cutting off of their tongues for
speaking out against the Aryan and, later, the Brahmanic tyranny. -
Manu Smrti VIII.270
" A once-born man (a Sudra), who insults a twice-born man with gross
invective, shall have his tongue cut out; for he is of low origin. "
Gautama Dharma Sutra 12.5
" If a Sudra recites (Vedic texts), his tongue shall be cut out. "
Negationist Hindutva and Pseudo-Secular historians often claims that
these laws were not enforced in actual practice. This theory is
refuted by the testimony of several travellers, who explicitly mention
that this Brahmanic punishment was actually practiced. Indeed, many
travellers were eye-witness to such cases. Witness the following
passage by Al-Beruni -
Al-Beruni
Confirms Amputation of Sudra Tongues
" The Vaisya and the Sudra are not allowed to hear it [ the Veda ],
much less to pronounce and recite it. If such a thing can be proved
against one of them, the Brahmans drag him before the magistrate, and
he is punished by having his tongue cut off. "
`Al-Beruni's India,' transl. E.C.Sachau, Vol.I, Ch.XII, p.125 ]
Thrusting of Iron Nails into the Mouth
Another cruel method of torture which the Aryan regimes enforced upon
the Sudras was the thrusting of a red-hot iron nail into the mouth of
Sudras who had committed minor transgressions -
Manu VIII.271
" If he mentions the names and castes (Jati) of the (twice-born) with
contumely, an iron nail, 10 fingers long, shall be thrust red-hot into
his mouth ."
Chopping off of Limbs
For the most trivial of infringements, the Sudra could have his hands,
feet or legs chopped off by his Aryan tormentors. The savage Brahmins
never hesitated to immediately inflict the heinous tortures perscribed
in the Vedic texts and mercilessly chopped off the hands, feet, legs
and fingers of their Sudra slaves.
Manu VIII.279-280
" With whatever limb a man of a low caste does hurt to (a man of the
three highest castes) even that limb shall be cut off ; that is the
teaching of Manu. He who raises his hand or a stick, shall have his
hand cut off ; he who in his anger kicks with his foot, shall have his
foot cut off ."
Manu VIII.282
" If out of arrogance he [ a Sudra ] spits (on a superior), the king
shall cause both his lips to be cut off; if he urines (on him), the
penis; if he breaks wind (against him), the anus."
" If ha lays fold of the hair(of a superior), let the king
unhesitatingly cut off his hands , likewise (if he takes him) by the
feet, the breard, the neck or the scrotum."
Such punishments were also meted out during the totalitarian regime of
Pandit Kautilya " "If a woman labourer after receiving her wages did
not turn up for work, her thumb was cut off." [ Arthasastr.II.23 cited
in Jain, p.234 ]
The traveller John Fryer, who visited India in the 1670s and hence an
eye-witness to Brahminist oppression, described the dehumanising
effects of Brahmin rule in Maharashtra : " The cruel exactions of
Mahratta rule were patent on all sides. The great fish preyed upon the
little ones, until the poorer classes wer brought into eternal
bondage. The Brahman officials tortured the revenue farmer and the
farmers tortured the cultivators." [ Wheeler and Macmillan, p.62 ].
This was during the tyrannical rule of the Peshwa Brahmins and
confirms the cumulative effects of their oppression of Marathas and
Dalits.
Gashing and Branding
Another inhuman method of torturing Sudras was the method of gashing
and branding. " If a low-caste man who tries to place himself on the
same seat with a man of a high caste, shall be branded on his hip and
is banished, or (the king) shall cause his buttock to be gashed." [
Manu VIII.281 ]
Sawing alive
If a Sudra Negroid remembered verses from the `holy' Vedas, he would
be sawed alive -
Gautama Dharma Sutra 12.6
" If he [ a Sudra ] remembers them [ Vedic Verses ], his body shall be
split in twain. "
The reason for these inhuman acts was solely religious bigotry on the
part of first the Aryan invaders who followed the hate-filled verses
of the Vedas, and subsequently by the unparalleled fanaticism of the
Brahmins who ruthlessly enforced the savage Manu-Smrti and Kautilya
Arthasastra upon the Sudras.
The life of a Sudroid Negro is, as per the `holy' Hindu law-books,
lower than that of an animal. " The Vaisya and the Sudra are not
allowed to hear it [ the Veda ], much less to pronounce and recite it.
If such a thing can be proved against one of them, the Brahmans drag
him before the magistrate, and he is punished by having his tongue cut
off ." [ al-Beruni.i.125 Ch.XII ]
The Arab traveller further noted the manner in which the Brahmins
persecuted the Sudras - " Every act that is considered the privelege
of the Brahman, such as saying prayers, the reciting of the Veda, and
offering of sacfirices to the fire, is forbidden to him, to such a
degree that when, eg. a Sudra or a Vaisya is proved to have recited
the Veda, he is accused by the Brahmans before the ruler, and the
latter will order his tongue to be cut off . However, the meditation
on God [ is not prohibited ]." [ al-Beruni.ii.127 Ch.LXIV ]
In general, the life of an indigenous Sudra is considered lower than
that of an animal -
Manu Smrti XI.132
" Having killed a cat, an ichneumon, a blue jay, a frog, a dog, an
iguana, an owl, or a crow, he shall perform the penance for the murder
of a Sudra."
After such mind-boggling atrocities, it is indeed surprising that the
Sudras survived. This was due to their sheer will of survival. No
surprise then, that Mani Varadarajan has called for the observance of
a `Dalit Holocaust Day' -
"Dalit Holocaust Day - August 18"
Mani Varadarajan , alt.hindu, Thu, 17 Aug 1995
Dear Friends,
Please observe a moment of silence in the memory of all those human
beings who were slaughtered by the merciless sword of uppercaste Hindu
References
`Labour in Ancient India,' by P.C.Jain, Sterling Publishers Ltd. New
Delhi 1st ed. 1971.
`European Travellers in India,' by James Talboys Wheeler and Michael
Macmillan, reprint Susil Gupta India Ltd. Calcutta, 1956.
`Alberuni's India' transl. Dr. E.C.Sachau, 2 vols., Routledge and
Kegan Paul Ltd., London 1888.
Arsalan Khan
<ranjit_...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>Seppo Renfors wrote:
>> Henry Polard wrote:
>
>>>>The Indus Valley Civilisation (IVC) was Dravadian and was known as
>>>>Meluhha by their Sumerian trading partners. They were called Mlecchas
>>>>by Aryan invadors and later all despised local people were called
>>>>'Mlecchas' by these Aryan invadors.
>>
>> When are people going to get over this antiquated mantra? There was no
>> "Aryan invasion" at all
>
>Didn't Persians and Sakas invade India? If they did, there were Aryan
>invasions.
The Aryan invasion around 1500 BC was colonisation as nomadic Aryan
tribe moved and settled in South Asia. They changed the demographic
character of South Asia. The later Saka, Hunna, Persian, etc invasion
were in smaller scale and just added to Aryan society. Even British,
Potuguese, and French colonies may have added few genes to South
Asian gene pool.
>>. There was a migration of people, over about a millennia, said to
>> have spoken an Aryan LANGUAGE - though even that is assumed.
>
>How did these migrants acquire their martial traditions?
It is generally accepted that nomadic people are more militaristic
compared to settled people i.e. tradesmen living in cities and farmers
on farms. The Aryans, Saka, Hunna, and later Mongols dispalyed the
martial traditions of nomadic people.
>> They had no early writing at all. The earliest text is from
>> around 500 BCE, another millennia after the immigration had ended.
>
>If we wanted to look for these migrants' descendants, in which
>georgraphic locations and which sections of society would we be most
>likely to find their genes?
The higher you go in caste hierarchy closer you come to descendents of
these invadors. The lower caste are far more indegenous than higher
castes. Most of the armies that invaded and settled usually took local
women and had children from them.
Arsalan Khan
The Dravadian features are similar to Mediterranian quite different
from Nagas and other tribal group that have Australo-Negroid features.
Although whole tribes of Aryan moved into South Asia there probably
were more men than women as Aryan armies were mostly young men. In
French Lousiana and Spanish Cuba the white men took Black African
females as concubines and had many childrens. The 'Placage' system in
French Lousiana where White French men kept two households: one
legally married white French while another Black concubine. May be
there was racial mixing due to fewer women in Aryan armies and before
the total force of caste system was applied.
M. Ranjit Mathews
> "M. Ranjit Mathews" <ranjit_...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> >Subir wrote:
> >> Arsalan Khan <arsalanal...@yahoo.com> wrote in message news:<ua8pdvcehgq7e3n1c...@4ax.com>...
> >>
> >> There have been excavations which show the ancient peoples of India
> >> had the same features like the people living in the area today. The
> >> "Aryan" invasion theory is being eroded by more current studies and
> >> research.
> >
> >There seems to be something wrong with these studeis. How could the
> >features of the people in the area have remained the same when there
> >have been large influxes of S'akas, Kushanas, Hunas, Turks, etc.?
>
> The Dravadian features
Dravidian is a language, so there are no Dravidian features.
> are similar to Mediterranian quite different
> from Nagas and other tribal group that have Australo-Negroid features.
> Although whole tribes of Aryan moved into South Asia there probably
> were more men than women as Aryan armies were mostly young men. In
> French Lousiana and Spanish Cuba the white men took Black African
> females as concubines and had many childrens. The 'Placage' system in
> French Lousiana where White French men kept two households: one
> legally married white French while another Black concubine. May be
> there was racial mixing due to fewer women in Aryan armies
... and later, in British armies:
In late colonial India, miscegenation emerged as a "problem" of `poor
whites', and not just as a "problem" of bourgeois sexuality and its
repression (whether psychic or moralistic). Whilst miscegenation had
been widely practiced by middle-class men, a sufficient number of
middle-class women began arriving from Britain in the mid-nineteenth
century, enabling white middle-class men to subscribe quite closely to
the imperial norm of same-race marriage. White
women thus served the dual purpose of controlling the British domestic
sphere in the colony, and preventing colonial men from forming
inter-racial relations with native women.
http://www.sussex.ac.uk/Units/HUMCENTR/usjch/SatoshiMizutani.pdf
> and before the total force of caste system was applied.
Indians didn't force Aryans (or whoever else came to India) to follow
the caste system. Aryas borrowed the caste system from Indians and
started following it, thus becoming divided into innumerable
endogamous groups (castes) rather than melting into homogenity in a
melting pot.
Social class had ill-effects on even those considered upper class; in
the following example, it turned British men into destitutes and
loafers because they couldn't take jobs that were "out of class".
British capitalism arrived in India in search of cheap native labour,
which turned out to be abundant. Naturally, there was no room for the
British working-class, who were not only unaccustomed to the Indian
environment but claimed more pay than native `coolies'. A white
working-class presence was also politically undesirable. Around the
time of the SCCS, a journal article graphically articulated the shared
sentiment against the working-class in India:
The European cannot be a hewer of wood, and a drawer of water, in the
same field
with the Asiatic. Here his function is to govern and to war, to
instruct, direct and educate, to root out the baneful superstitions
and noxious errors of the native mind... He may not descent into the
rough field of common labour, by the side of the black man, nor earn
his daily bread with the daily sweat of his brow, in the same field of
emulative toil with his coloured brother. As an unwanted presence in
colonial society, the subordinate white class fell into
destitution all too readily. In fact, the presence of `white loafers'
soon became a visible fixture of the colonial scene, especially in big
cities.
http://www.sussex.ac.uk/Units/HUMCENTR/usjch/SatoshiMizutani.pdf
Seppo Renfors
"M. Ranjit Mathews" wrote:
>
> Seppo Renfors wrote:
> > Henry Polard wrote:
>
> >>>The Indus Valley Civilisation (IVC) was Dravadian and was known as
> >>>Meluhha by their Sumerian trading partners. They were called Mlecchas
> >>>by Aryan invadors and later all despised local people were called
> >>>'Mlecchas' by these Aryan invadors.
> >
> > When are people going to get over this antiquated mantra? There was no
> > "Aryan invasion" at all
>
> Didn't Persians and Sakas invade India? If they did, there were Aryan
> invasions.
I have just finished dealing with another who claimed that garbage
(and was proven wrong) - NO they are NOT "aryans" - there ARE NO
"aryans" and never ever were any "Aryans" -ever. IT IS A LANGUAGE
GROUP NAME! That name was given to the language by one Max Muller in
the early to mid 1800's. What they called themselves is UNKNOWN.
> >. There was a migration of people, over about a millennia, said to
> > have spoken an Aryan LANGUAGE - though even that is assumed.
>
> How did these migrants acquire their martial traditions?
WHAT "martial traditions"?
> > They had no early writing at all. The earliest text is from
> > around 500 BCE, another millennia after the immigration had ended.
>
> If we wanted to look for these migrants' descendants, in which
> georgraphic locations and which sections of society would we be most
> likely to find their genes?
You need to re-evaluate your ideology - it is a racist one in the
extreme, if you even consider that GENES belong to social groups! That
is abject nonsense. As for "their genes", you can find common genes
everywhere. You'll be happy to know that Australian Aborigines most
likely originated from around India. So there is one connection for
you, but you will also find matching genes among the Inuits in the
Arctic. There IS NO such thing as "race" - other than the human race!
You see, we are all born alike, with exactly the same social status -
stark naked with nothing - and we all use the same language too -
BWAAAAAAaaaaaa!
Subir
> Although whole tribes of Aryan moved into South Asia there probably
> were more men than women as Aryan armies were mostly young men. In
This is speculation and not proof. There is no record of any "Aryan
Army" ever existing.
Subir
> Dravidians in the South
> The very fact that the Dravidians are located in the South proves the
> historicity of the Sudra Holocaust.
The very fact that Dravidians are located in South India proves that
they had little to do with the Harrapp civilisation.
> Brahuis and Northern Dravidians
> The survival of Brahuis and other Dravidian isolates in remote regions
> of the North indicates that they were pushed aside by invading Aryans.
The disapperance of Latins and Prakrit speaking peoples would then be
a true statement.
> Northern drift of the Brahuis into already existing Aryan populatin is
> refuted by the Brahuis' habitation of isolated mountains - a feature
> which can only be explained by their being driven from the plains.
Sorry, try simple explanations at place where simple minds attend.
> Caste System
> The survival of a caste system, with the three Aryan castes of
> Brahmins, Kshatriyas and Vaishyas and the Negroid Sudras at the bottom
> is a merely a replication of what occurred in the US South.
The US slave industry extended from Boston down to Mississippi. There
is absolutely no archeological evidence that "white" peoples enslaved
"black" peoples" circa 2500 BC.
> Caste
> systems were establisherd wherever one race conquered another.
In the cases of the Mongolians and Greeks who conquered other peoples,
these examples contradicts this assertion.
> The
> Sudras are repeatedly referred to as `black', `thick-nosed' and
> `full-lipped' in Sanskrit and Prakritic texts, and caste in Sanskrit
> is `varna' or skin-color.
Skin color was and still is important. Nobody has been able to prove
that the Sudras were actually "black" and non-Sudras "white".
> A section of the Sudras comprise the
> Chandallas or Black Untouchables - the people who later came to be
> known as Dalits. The caste system is thus, in itself proof of a Sudra
> Holocaust.
Dalit ? Sudra Holcaust ? from a mussulman who vehemently denies its'
past glories of genocide, thievery and rapine ?
>
> History of Ancient Indian Conquest Told in Modern Genes, Experts Say
> Robert Cooke, Newsday
> The data imply, then, ``that there was a group of males with European
> affinities who were largely responsible for this invasion 3,000 or
> 4,000 years ago,'' said geneticist Lynn Jorde of the University of
> Utah.
How sad. The migration of man from Africa started 40,000 years ago.
These people need to explain why there was an "invasion" 4,000 years
ago and that too, only one.
>
> If women had accompanied the invaders, he said, the evidence should be
> seen in the mitochondrial genes, but it is not evident.
>
> According to geneticist Douglas Wallace of Emory University in
> Atlanta, the work reported by Jorde and his colleagues ``is very
> interesting, and is certainly worth further study.''
Exactly, without further study, the theory that there was one single
"invasion" by some "Aryan Army", will forever remain a theory.
>
> The ancient story holds that invaders known as Indo-Europeans, or true
> Aryans, came from Eastern Europe or western Asia and conquered the
> Indian subcontinent.
There has to be evidence of conquest, otherwise it is simply the
continuing sagaa of people movement.
>
> CASTE SYSTEM STILL ALIVE
> He added that even though India's ancient caste system was abolished
> legally in the 1960s, it is still entrenched socially.
No shit !
... other cut'n'paste of Indian scripts and texts by mussulmanic
fundoo snipped ..
M. Ranjit Mathews
> "M. Ranjit Mathews" <ranjit_...@yahoo.com> wrote ...
> > Subir wrote:
> > > Arsalan Khan <arsalanal...@yahoo.com> wrote ...
> > >
> > > There have been excavations which show the ancient peoples of India
> > > had the same features like the people living in the area today. The
> > > "Aryan" invasion theory is being eroded by more current studies and
> > > research.
> >
> > have been large influxes of S'akas, Kushanas, Hunas, Turks, etc.?
>
> There were even constant influxes of peoples before these specific
> groups. The Aryan theory is based on the Dravidian people being a
> unique, isolated people who were driven off from the Indus Valley to
> the Godavari in the south, by a distinct Aryan group of people.
The primary portion of the theory that has not changed over time is
the notion that Aryan languages came from outside the subcontinent.
Much of the rest has changed over time. Dravidians being driven away
would not fit into a currently prevalent theory that IndoAryan
languages developed partly by Dravidians speaking Aryan languages with
a Dravidian accent, mixing in elements of Dravidian grammar rather
Indians currently mix Indian words and some grammar into English,
resulting in the oddities of Indian English.
> The mixture of physical features in the skeletons from the Harappa
> times are being found to be similar to current indian features. I am
> not a full time researcher (I wish I had more time to catalog what I
> read) so I am afraid I cannot cite you a reference on this specific
> topic.
Antropometry Indus Valley seems to turn up some material, although I
don't havetime to read it at the moment.
http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&lr=&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&q=anthropometry+indus+valley&btnG=Google+Search
> However, on a related note, why not check out the "Journey of Man"
> which attempts to map the migration of man during the Ice Age, mainly
> from the genetic evidence ?
Thanks.
M. Ranjit Mathews
> "M. Ranjit Mathews" wrote:
> > Seppo Renfors wrote:
> > > Henry Polard wrote:
>
> > >>>The Indus Valley Civilisation (IVC) was Dravadian and was known as
> > >>>Meluhha by their Sumerian trading partners. They were called Mlecchas
> > >>>by Aryan invadors and later all despised local people were called
> > >>>'Mlecchas' by these Aryan invadors.
> > >
> > > When are people going to get over this antiquated mantra? There was no
> > > "Aryan invasion" at all
> >
> > Didn't Persians and Sakas invade India? If they did, there were Aryan
> > invasions.
>
> I have just finished dealing with another who claimed that garbage
> (and was proven wrong) - NO they are NOT "aryans" - there ARE NO
> "aryans" and never ever were any "Aryans" -ever. IT IS A LANGUAGE
> GROUP NAME! That name was given to the language by one Max Muller in
> the early to mid 1800's. What they called themselves is UNKNOWN.
What they called themselves is neither here nor there. We call
Socrates a Greek, so he was a Greek as per our definition regardless
of what he called himself. As for what Persians and Sakas called
themselves, we have an instance of a Persian calling himself an Arya,
son of Arya and of a Saka calling Old Bactrian "the Arya language".
> > >. There was a migration of people, over about a millennia, said to
> > > have spoken an Aryan LANGUAGE - though even that is assumed.
> >
> > How did these migrants acquire their martial traditions?
>
> WHAT "martial traditions"?
In "this earliest text from 500 BCE" you allude to, is there no
mention of martial traditions; were the people referred to therein
like Buddhist monks?
> > > They had no early writing at all. The earliest text is from
> > > around 500 BCE, another millennia after the immigration had ended.
> >
> > If we wanted to look for these migrants' descendants, in which
> > georgraphic locations and which sections of society would we be most
> > likely to find their genes?
>
> You need to re-evaluate your ideology - it is a racist one in the
> extreme, if you even consider that GENES belong to social groups!
Endogamous groups. A social group is not necessarily endogamous,
although it can be. Consider the following statement: "Some castes of
the aphid Colophina arma require Colophina arma require a growth spurt
as part of their life-cycle. These and only these castes inherit the
micro-organisms that make the chemicals on which this growth spurt
depends ...".
http://www.usyd.edu.au/hps/preprints/preprint8/GriffithsI.html
Would you be surprised to learn that there are castes of humans too
who have various genetic traits, such as susceptibility to certain
diseases?
> That is abject nonsense. As for "their genes", you can find common genes
> everywhere.
Certainly; for example, there are genes common to Englishmen and
Indians. When asked where one is most likely to find the genes of
English migrants to India today, would you therefore say they may be
found in any Indian or would you say that people identified as
Anglo-Indians are the ones most likely to be among the descendants of
English migrants?
> You'll be happy to know that Australian Aborigines most
> likely originated from around India. So there is one connection for
> you, but you will also find matching genes among the Inuits in the
> Arctic. There IS NO such thing as "race" - other than the human race!
Ergo, all laws against racial discrimination ought to be abolished ...
> You see, we are all born alike, with exactly the same social status -
> stark naked with nothing - and we all use the same language too -
> BWAAAAAAaaaaaa!
... since we are all alike and have no races and hence, it is
impossible for there to be such a thing as racial discrimination:-)
Daryl Krupa
It was a thousand-to-one shot that it would last that long ...
Horace LaBadie
>hwlab...@nospam.highstream.net (Horace LaBadie) wrote in message
news:<hwlabadiejr-04...@1cust128.tnt2.tpa2.da.uu.net>...
>> In article <c70365ef.03060...@posting.google.com>,
>> icyc...@yahoo.com (Daryl Krupa) wrote:
>> ><snip>
>> >
>> > "Millennia" is plural.
>> > "Millennium" is singular.
>>
>>
>> Also one great television show for two years.
>
> It was a thousand-to-one shot that it would last that long ...
Well, two thousand, if you accepted the countdown clock they used...<g>
The third season was the killer.
HWL
Henry Polard
subi...@concert.com (Subir) wrote:
> Arsalan Khan <arsalanal...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> news:<vusrdvk37nojknp1f...@4ax.com>...
>
> > Dravidians in the South
> > The very fact that the Dravidians are located in the South proves the
> > historicity of the Sudra Holocaust.
>
> The very fact that Dravidians are located in South India proves that
> they had little to do with the Harrapp civilisation.
<snip>
I don't see this.
First, current popuation distributions do not necessarily reflect those
of the past. The fact that there are Dravidians are located in South
India therefore does not rule out their presence elsewhere in the past.
Second, Brahui, a Dravidian language, is spoken even today by large
numbers of people in Baluchistan and the adjoining areas in Afghanistan
and Iran; this is cited by e.g., <http://www.harappa.com/script/maha3.html>
as evidence for the Harappan civilization being Dravidian. These areas
ar not, as far as I understand, in South India. So even if current
locations reflect ancient locations, one cannot on that basis rule out a
Dravidian Harappan civilization.
BTW, I find assigning any linguitstic affiliation to the IVCs to be
extremely speculative.
Henry Polard ||The only constant is change.
Yusuf B Gursey
: What they called themselves is neither here nor there. We call
: Socrates a Greek, so he was a Greek as per our definition regardless
: of what he called himself. As for what Persians and Sakas called
: themselves, we have an instance of a Persian calling himself an Arya,
: son of Arya and of a Saka calling Old Bactrian "the Arya language".
reference?
M. Ranjit Mathews
> In sci.archaeology M. Ranjit Mathews <ranjit_...@yahoo.com> wrote :
>
> : What they called themselves is neither here nor there. We call
> : Socrates a Greek, so he was a Greek as per our definition regardless
> : of what he called himself. As for what Persians and Sakas called
> : themselves, we have an instance of a Persian calling himself an Arya,
> : son of Arya and of a Saka calling Old Bactrian "the Arya language".
>
> reference?
Arya Ahmi, Arya Puthro Ahmi - I am an ARYAN, Son of an Aryan
http://members.ozemail.com.au/~zarathus/var33.html
when Kanishka refers to "the Aryan language" he surely means Bactrian
http://www.gengo.l.u-tokyo.ac.jp/~hkum/bactrian.html
Yusuf B Gursey
thanks.
: Yusuf B Gursey <y...@TheWorld.com> wrote ...
Seppo Renfors
"M. Ranjit Mathews" wrote:
>
> Seppo Renfors <Ren...@not.ollis.net.au> wrote ...
> > "M. Ranjit Mathews" wrote:
> > > Seppo Renfors wrote:
> > > > Henry Polard wrote:
> >
> > > >>>The Indus Valley Civilisation (IVC) was Dravadian and was known as
> > > >>>Meluhha by their Sumerian trading partners. They were called Mlecchas
> > > >>>by Aryan invadors and later all despised local people were called
> > > >>>'Mlecchas' by these Aryan invadors.
> > > >
> > > > When are people going to get over this antiquated mantra? There was no
> > > > "Aryan invasion" at all
> > >
> > > Didn't Persians and Sakas invade India? If they did, there were Aryan
> > > invasions.
> >
> > I have just finished dealing with another who claimed that garbage
> > (and was proven wrong) - NO they are NOT "aryans" - there ARE NO
> > "aryans" and never ever were any "Aryans" -ever. IT IS A LANGUAGE
> > GROUP NAME! That name was given to the language by one Max Muller in
> > the early to mid 1800's. What they called themselves is UNKNOWN.
>
> What they called themselves is neither here nor there.
Isn't it? If so, why do you insist on calling "Persians" and "Sakas"
who already have a name, as "aryans" - specially when they were NEVER
called that?
> We call
> Socrates a Greek, so he was a Greek as per our definition regardless
> of what he called himself. As for what Persians and Sakas called
> themselves, we have an instance of a Persian calling himself an Arya,
> son of Arya and of a Saka calling Old Bactrian "the Arya language".
That is bogus!
> > > >. There was a migration of people, over about a millennia, said to
> > > > have spoken an Aryan LANGUAGE - though even that is assumed.
> > >
> > > How did these migrants acquire their martial traditions?
> >
> > WHAT "martial traditions"?
>
> In "this earliest text from 500 BCE" you allude to, is there no
> mention of martial traditions; were the people referred to therein
> like Buddhist monks?
I suppose you are aware what "martial" refers to?
MARTIAL - adjective, of or appropriate to war; warlike - OED.
There are no know warriors, wars or warlike acts by the immigrants.
They were peasants of semi nomadic lifestyle. They were a peaceable.
> > > > They had no early writing at all. The earliest text is from
> > > > around 500 BCE, another millennia after the immigration had ended.
> > >
> > > If we wanted to look for these migrants' descendants, in which
> > > georgraphic locations and which sections of society would we be most
> > > likely to find their genes?
> >
> > You need to re-evaluate your ideology - it is a racist one in the
> > extreme, if you even consider that GENES belong to social groups!
>
> Endogamous groups. A social group is not necessarily endogamous,
> although it can be. Consider the following statement: "Some castes of
> the aphid Colophina arma require Colophina arma require a growth spurt
> as part of their life-cycle. These and only these castes inherit the
> micro-organisms that make the chemicals on which this growth spurt
> depends ...".
> http://www.usyd.edu.au/hps/preprints/preprint8/GriffithsI.html
By the look of the quote it was written by an idiot! How the hell can
you be sucked in by utter crap like that? That passage is about giving
birth to ALIENS!!
> Would you be surprised to learn that there are castes of humans too
> who have various genetic traits, such as susceptibility to certain
> diseases?
No, but I'm not surprised there are people who WANT to believe such
utter CRAP! It feeds their prejudices, so that the prejudice sucks in
more crap like that and it becomes self perpetuating.
> > That is abject nonsense. As for "their genes", you can find common genes
> > everywhere.
>
> Certainly; for example, there are genes common to Englishmen and
> Indians. When asked where one is most likely to find the genes of
> English migrants to India today, would you therefore say they may be
> found in any Indian or would you say that people identified as
> Anglo-Indians are the ones most likely to be among the descendants of
> English migrants?
I don't know, and in any event it is irrelevant to anything. mtDNA
studies are longitudinal studies that relate to people movement over
millennia. They show that there is no such thing as "race". They show
that people living in particular regions inherit more of like
haplogroups and the predominance of occurrence of these is how the
movements can be postulated to have occurred. They have absolute zero
relevance to anything today.
> > You'll be happy to know that Australian Aborigines most
> > likely originated from around India. So there is one connection for
> > you, but you will also find matching genes among the Inuits in the
> > Arctic. There IS NO such thing as "race" - other than the human race!
>
> Ergo, all laws against racial discrimination ought to be abolished ...
That is what Hitler said too - while gassing Jews! Does that mean that
a "race" exists? HELL NO! It means that unspeakable EVIL exists.
>
> > You see, we are all born alike, with exactly the same social status -
> > stark naked with nothing - and we all use the same language too -
> > BWAAAAAAaaaaaa!
>
> ... since we are all alike and have no races and hence, it is
> impossible for there to be such a thing as racial discrimination:-)
Idiots are created, prejudices are manufactured in order to persecute,
discriminate against others. Only the very same people sing a totally
different tune when it occurs AGAINST THEM!
Seppo Renfors
Arsalan Khan wrote:
>
> On Tue, 03 Jun 2003 18:49:58 GMT, "M. Ranjit Mathews"
> <ranjit_...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> >Seppo Renfors wrote:
> >> Henry Polard wrote:
> >
> >>>>The Indus Valley Civilisation (IVC) was Dravadian and was known as
> >>>>Meluhha by their Sumerian trading partners. They were called Mlecchas
> >>>>by Aryan invadors and later all despised local people were called
> >>>>'Mlecchas' by these Aryan invadors.
> >>
> >> When are people going to get over this antiquated mantra? There was no
> >> "Aryan invasion" at all
> >
> >Didn't Persians and Sakas invade India? If they did, there were Aryan
> >invasions.
>
> The Aryan invasion around 1500 BC was colonisation as nomadic Aryan
> tribe moved and settled in South Asia. They changed the demographic
> character of South Asia. The later Saka, Hunna, Persian, etc invasion
> were in smaller scale and just added to Aryan society. Even British,
> Potuguese, and French colonies may have added few genes to South
> Asian gene pool.
This is incredibly uneducated dribble!
> >>. There was a migration of people, over about a millennia, said to
> >> have spoken an Aryan LANGUAGE - though even that is assumed.
> >
> >How did these migrants acquire their martial traditions?
>
> It is generally accepted that nomadic people are more militaristic
> compared to settled people i.e. tradesmen living in cities and farmers
> on farms. The Aryans, Saka, Hunna, and later Mongols dispalyed the
> martial traditions of nomadic people.
More uneducated dribble!
> >> They had no early writing at all. The earliest text is from
> >> around 500 BCE, another millennia after the immigration had ended.
> >
> >If we wanted to look for these migrants' descendants, in which
> >georgraphic locations and which sections of society would we be most
> >likely to find their genes?
>
> The higher you go in caste hierarchy closer you come to descendents of
> these invadors. The lower caste are far more indegenous than higher
> castes. Most of the armies that invaded and settled usually took local
> women and had children from them.
Nothing but racist CRAP!
Sunil Prasannan
Gregory Possehl, Prof. of Anthropology at the University of
Pennsylvania, wrote in 1999 in his 'Indus Age':
'In the end there is no reason to believe today that there ever
was an Aryan race that spoke Indo-European languages and was possessed
of a coherent or well-defined set of Aryan or Indo-European
cultural features.'
Colin Renfrew, at Cambridge:
'As far as I can see there is nothing in the Rig Veda [the first of
four Vedas] which demonstrates the Vedic-speaking population were
intrusive [to India]; this comes rather from a historical ASSUMPTION
about the 'coming' of the Indo-Europeans.'
(my emphasis)
Sunil Prasannan
> Arsalan Khan <arsalanal...@yahoo.com> wrote in message news:<vusrdvk37nojknp1f...@4ax.com>...
>
> > Dravidians in the South
> > The very fact that the Dravidians are located in the South proves the
> > historicity of the Sudra Holocaust.
>
> The very fact that Dravidians are located in South India proves that
> they had little to do with the Harrapp civilisation.
Tamil legends point to them being in South India since at least the end of the Ice Age (we're talking c.10000 years
ago).
Yusuf B Gursey
> Yusuf B Gursey wrote:
>
> > In sci.archaeology M. Ranjit Mathews <ranjit_...@yahoo.com> wrote in <1d4c67e3.03060...@posting.google.com>:
> >
> > thanks.
> >
> > : Yusuf B Gursey <y...@TheWorld.com> wrote ...
> > :> In sci.archaeology M. Ranjit Mathews <ranjit_...@yahoo.com> wrote :
> > :>
> > :> : What they called themselves is neither here nor there. We call
> > :> : Socrates a Greek, so he was a Greek as per our definition regardless
> > :> : of what he called himself. As for what Persians and Sakas called
> > :> : themselves, we have an instance of a Persian calling himself an Arya,
> > :> : son of Arya and of a Saka calling Old Bactrian "the Arya language".
> > :>
> > :> reference?
>
> > : Arya Ahmi, Arya Puthro Ahmi - I am an ARYAN, Son of an Aryan
> > : http://members.ozemail.com.au/~zarathus/var33.html
>
> > : when Kanishka refers to "the Aryan language" he surely means Bactrian
> > : http://www.gengo.l.u-tokyo.ac.jp/~hkum/bactrian.html
>
> Gregory Possehl, Prof. of Anthropology at the University of
> Pennsylvania, wrote in 1999 in his 'Indus Age':
>
> 'In the end there is no reason to believe today that there ever
> was an Aryan race that spoke Indo-European languages and was possessed
> of a coherent or well-defined set of Aryan or Indo-European
> cultural features.'
"Aryan" as synonym for "indo-european" in general is wrong. so in that
way this is right.
also "Aryan" as a "race" is wrong, so the statement is correect in
this sense as well.
as for the iranian speakers calling themselves "aryan", which many
did, one can debate on how a "well-defined set" they are. such
group(s) existed and this is well attested.
>
>
> Colin Renfrew, at Cambridge:
>
> 'As far as I can see there is nothing in the Rig Veda [the first of
> four Vedas] which demonstrates the Vedic-speaking population were
> intrusive [to India]; this comes rather from a historical ASSUMPTION
> about the 'coming' of the Indo-Europeans.'
> (my emphasis)
this has to do with the literal reading of the Rig Veda.
M. Ranjit Mathews
By reading the Rg Veda and nothing but the Rg Veda, would it be possible
to be certain that the Vedic speaking population was intrusive?
M. Ranjit Mathews
> Sunil Prasannan <dr_suni...@yahoo.co.uk> wrote ...
> "Aryan" as synonym for "indo-european" in general is wrong.
> also, "Aryan" as a "race" is wrong, so the statement is correct in
> this sense as well.
What did a certain Persian monarch mean by Arya here:
Arya Ahmi, Arya Puthro Ahmi - I am ARYA, Son of an Arya
http://members.ozemail.com.au/~zarathus/var33.html
Yusuf B Gursey
:> Sunil Prasannan <dr_suni...@yahoo.co.uk> wrote ...
:> "Aryan" as synonym for "indo-european" in general is wrong.
:> also, "Aryan" as a "race" is wrong, so the statement is correct in
:> this sense as well.
: What did a certain Persian monarch mean by Arya here:
(well, we don't know that this legendary character is supposed to be
specifically "persian", he is from a legendary province of "the land the
Aryans" i.e. "(greater) Iran"). however, such sayings were adopted by real
life sasanian shah's.
: Arya Ahmi, Arya Puthro Ahmi - I am ARYA, Son of an Arya
: http://members.ozemail.com.au/~zarathus/var33.html
so?
still, "race" is not scientific.
:> > Colin Renfrew, at Cambridge:
M. Ranjit Mathews
> In sci.archaeology M. Ranjit Mathews <ranjit_...@yahoo.com> wrote :
> : y...@theworld.com (Yusuf B Gursey) wrote ...
> :> Sunil Prasannan <dr_suni...@yahoo.co.uk> wrote ...
>
>
> (well, we don't know that this legendary character is supposed to be
> specifically "persian", he is from a legendary province of "the land the
> Aryans" i.e. "(greater) Iran").
His lineage was supposedly Xakhamanya - Persian from Pasargadae.
> however, such sayings were adopted by real
> life sasanian shah's.
>
> : Arya Ahmi, Arya Puthro Ahmi - I am ARYA, Son of an Arya
> : http://members.ozemail.com.au/~zarathus/var33.html
>
> so?
> still, "race" is not scientific.
Would you say he thought Aryas were a race? Or did he mean something
other than a race when he said "I am Arya"?
Dr. Sunil
How do you know the writers of the Rig were intrusive to India?
I Support Operation Infinity Justice
i was just thinking about this: how do we know that the IVC was not austro-mundic?
M. Ranjit Mathews
possible to be certain they were intrusive. The question remains open
for anyone to answer.
Anand Vibhav
to believe by co-religionists.
<crap deleted>
Anand Vibhav
> Subir wrote:
>> Arsalan Khan <arsalanal...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
>> news:<ua8pdvcehgq7e3n1c...@4ax.com>...
>>
>> There have been excavations which show the ancient peoples of India
>> had the same features like the people living in the area today. The
>> "Aryan" invasion theory is being eroded by more current studies and
>> research.
>
> There seems to be something wrong with these studeis. How could the
> features of the people in the area have remained the same when there
> have been large influxes of S'akas, Kushanas, Hunas, Turks, etc.?
>
"large influxes".
You are erronously assuming that phrase means, the new peoples completely
displaced the native populations and settled in the area.
Kiran
> By reading the Rg Veda and nothing but the Rg Veda, would it be possible
> to be certain that the Vedic speaking population was intrusive?
No. Moreover, Aryan simply meant "nobleman". Only "junk scholarship"
could come up with the wild unsupported notion of an Aryan "race" that
"invaded" India. Its discernible aims appear to be to justify the real
Islamic and European invasions, and to undermnine the coherence of
Indian society.
M. Ranjit Mathews
S'akas, Kushanas, Hunas, Turks, etc. did not completely displace anyone.
Where did I assume so?
M. Ranjit Mathews
Many scholars hold that there was an Indo-European invasion of Greece.
http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&q=%22indo-european+invasion%22+greece&btnG=Google+Search
Is it junk scholarship? Is it discernible that all of them aim to
justify the Islamic invasion of Greece? If some of them have other
aims, what might some of those other aims be?
Kiran
> Kiran <ki...@spam.proof> wrote ...
> > M. Ranjit Mathews <ranjit_...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> >
> > > By reading the Rg Veda and nothing but the Rg Veda, would it be possible
> > > to be certain that the Vedic speaking population was intrusive?
> >
> > No. Moreover, Aryan simply meant "nobleman". Only "junk scholarship"
> > could come up with the wild unsupported notion of an Aryan "race" that
> > "invaded" India. Its discernible aims appear to be to justify the real
> > Islamic and European invasions, and to undermnine the coherence of
> > Indian society.
>
> Many scholars hold that there was an Indo-European invasion of Greece.
>...
> Is it junk scholarship? Is it discernible that all of them aim to
> justify the Islamic invasion of Greece? If some of them have other
> aims, what might some of those other aims be?
I have no idea about the Greek case and can't pass any judgment on the
scholarship, its quality or causes.
M. Ranjit Mathews
> "M. Ranjit Mathews" wrote:
> >
> > Seppo Renfors <Ren...@not.ollis.net.au> wrote ...
> > > "M. Ranjit Mathews" wrote:
> > > > Seppo Renfors wrote:
> > > > > Henry Polard wrote:
>
> > > > >>>The Indus Valley Civilisation (IVC) was Dravadian and was known as
> > > > >>>Meluhha by their Sumerian trading partners. They were called Mlecchas
> > > > >>>by Aryan invadors and later all despised local people were called
> > > > >>>'Mlecchas' by these Aryan invadors.
> > > > >
> > > > > When are people going to get over this antiquated mantra? There was no
> > > > > "Aryan invasion" at all
> > > >
> > > > Didn't Persians and Sakas invade India? If they did, there were Aryan
> > > > invasions.
> > >
> > > I have just finished dealing with another who claimed that garbage
> > > (and was proven wrong) - NO they are NOT "aryans" - there ARE NO
> > > "aryans" and never ever were any "Aryans" -ever. IT IS A LANGUAGE
> > > GROUP NAME! That name was given to the language by one Max Muller in
> > > the early to mid 1800's. What they called themselves is UNKNOWN.
> >
> > What they called themselves is neither here nor there.
>
> Isn't it? If so, why do you insist on calling "Persians" and "Sakas"
> who already have a name, as "aryans" - specially when they were NEVER
> called that?
Why do we call Agamemnon, Socrates, Archimedes, etc. Greek though they
were NEVER called that? The retronym Aryan is applied to them because
they spoke Aryan languages.
> > We call
> > Socrates a Greek, so he was a Greek as per our definition regardless
> > of what he called himself. As for what Persians and Sakas called
> > themselves, we have an instance of a Persian calling himself an Arya,
> > son of Arya and of a Saka calling Old Bactrian "the Arya language".
>
> That is bogus!
Is calling Socrates a Greek bogus? As for the other titbits, what is
bogus about them?
Darius the Great, King of Achaemenid Persia, expressly states,"I am an
Arya, son of an Arya"? ('Aryan Tribes and the Rigveda', by B.S.Dahiya)
Arya Ahmi, Arya Puthro Ahmi - I am ARYA, Son of an Arya
http://members.ozemail.com.au/~zarathus/var33.html
"when Kanishka refers to "the Arya language" he surely means Bactrian
http://www.gengo.l.u-tokyo.ac.jp/~hkum/bactrian.html
> > > > >. There was a migration of people, over about a millennia, said to
> > > > > have spoken an Aryan LANGUAGE - though even that is assumed.
> > > >
> > > > How did these migrants acquire their martial traditions?
> > >
> > > WHAT "martial traditions"?
> >
> > In "this earliest text from 500 BCE" you allude to, is there no
> > mention of martial traditions; were the people referred to therein
> > like Buddhist monks?
>
> I suppose you are aware what "martial" refers to?
>
> MARTIAL - adjective, of or appropriate to war; warlike - OED.
>
> There are no know warriors, wars or warlike acts by the immigrants.
> They were peasants of semi nomadic lifestyle. They were a peaceable.
Which text are you alluding to?
> > > > > They had no early writing at all. The earliest text is from
> > > > > around 500 BCE, another millennia after the immigration had ended.
> > > >
> > > > If we wanted to look for these migrants' descendants, in which
> > > > georgraphic locations and which sections of society would we be most
> > > > likely to find their genes?
> > >
> > > You need to re-evaluate your ideology - it is a racist one in the
> > > extreme, if you even consider that GENES belong to social groups!
> >
> > Endogamous groups. A social group is not necessarily endogamous,
> > although it can be. Consider the following statement: "Some castes of
> > the aphid Colophina arma require Colophina arma require a growth spurt
> > as part of their life-cycle. These and only these castes inherit the
> > micro-organisms that make the chemicals on which this growth spurt
> > depends ...".
> > http://www.usyd.edu.au/hps/preprints/preprint8/GriffithsI.html
>
> By the look of the quote it was written by an idiot! How the hell can
> you be sucked in by utter crap like that? That passage is about giving
> birth to ALIENS!!
Are aphids aliens?
a·phid: Any of various small, soft-bodied insects of the family
Aphididae that have mouthparts specially adapted for piercing and feed
by sucking sap from plants. Also called plant louse.
http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=aphid
> > Would you be surprised to learn that there are castes of humans too
> > who have various genetic traits, such as susceptibility to certain
> > diseases?
>
> No, but I'm not surprised there are people who WANT to believe such
> utter CRAP! It feeds their prejudices, so that the prejudice sucks in
> more crap like that and it becomes self perpetuating.
Do doctors who believe in genetic disorders "want to believe utter
crap"?
http://dir.yahoo.com/Health/Diseases_and_Conditions/Genetic_Disorders/
There are nearly 4,000 genetic diseases known that afflict the world's
population. However, in almost every ethnic, racial, or demographic
group, certain genetic diseases occur at higher frequencies among
their members than in the general population. Such is the case for the
Jewish people.
http://www.mazornet.com/genetics/index.asp
> > > That is abject nonsense. As for "their genes", you can find common genes
> > > everywhere.
> >
> > Certainly; for example, there are genes common to Englishmen and
> > Indians. When asked where one is most likely to find the genes of
> > English migrants to India today, would you therefore say they may be
> > found in any Indian or would you say that people identified as
> > Anglo-Indians are the ones most likely to be among the descendants of
> > English migrants?
>
> I don't know, and in any event it is irrelevant to anything. mtDNA
> studies are longitudinal studies that relate to people movement over
> millennia. They show that there is no such thing as "race". They show
> that people living in particular regions inherit more of like
> haplogroups and the predominance of occurrence of these is how the
> movements can be postulated to have occurred. They have absolute zero
> relevance to anything today.
Ah, so? Then, how can there be such a person as racist? If
Dr. Sunil
So, no evidence that the writers of the Rig were actually foreigners.
Seppo Renfors
Kiran wrote:
>
> M. Ranjit Mathews <ranjit_...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> > Kiran <ki...@spam.proof> wrote ...
> > > M. Ranjit Mathews <ranjit_...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > > By reading the Rg Veda and nothing but the Rg Veda, would it be possible
> > > > to be certain that the Vedic speaking population was intrusive?
> > >
> > > No. Moreover, Aryan simply meant "nobleman". Only "junk scholarship"
> > > could come up with the wild unsupported notion of an Aryan "race" that
> > > "invaded" India.
Hear Hear!!
> > > Its discernible aims appear to be to justify the real
> > > Islamic and European invasions, and to undermnine the coherence of
> > > Indian society.
> >
> > Many scholars hold that there was an Indo-European invasion of Greece.
> >...
> > Is it junk scholarship? Is it discernible that all of them aim to
> > justify the Islamic invasion of Greece? If some of them have other
> > aims, what might some of those other aims be?
>
> I have no idea about the Greek case and can't pass any judgment on the
> scholarship, its quality or causes.
The Greeks ARE Indo Europeans (IE) and have always been. No real
scholars considers greeks to be "invaders"! The notion to tie "Islam"
with IE is absurd - there is no correlation. Islam wasn't truly
created till about 670 AD, after the death of Muhammad.
Seppo Renfors
Yusuf B Gursey wrote:
>
> In sci.archaeology M. Ranjit Mathews <ranjit_...@yahoo.com> wrote in <1d4c67e3.03060...@posting.google.com>:
> : y...@theworld.com (Yusuf B Gursey) wrote ...
> :> Sunil Prasannan <dr_suni...@yahoo.co.uk> wrote ...
>
> :> "Aryan" as synonym for "indo-european" in general is wrong.
> :> also, "Aryan" as a "race" is wrong, so the statement is correct in
> :> this sense as well.
>
> : What did a certain Persian monarch mean by Arya here:
>
> (well, we don't know that this legendary character is supposed to be
> specifically "persian", he is from a legendary province of "the land the
> Aryans" i.e. "(greater) Iran"). however, such sayings were adopted by real
> life sasanian shah's.
Why are you still trumpeting this bogus crap?
[..]
Seppo Renfors
"M. Ranjit Mathews" wrote:
>
> Seppo Renfors <Ren...@not.ollis.net.au> wrote in message news:<3EDFEC83...@not.ollis.net.au>...
> > "M. Ranjit Mathews" wrote:
> > >
[..]
> > > Endogamous groups. A social group is not necessarily endogamous,
> > > although it can be. Consider the following statement: "Some castes of
> > > the aphid Colophina arma require Colophina arma require a growth spurt
> > > as part of their life-cycle. These and only these castes inherit the
> > > micro-organisms that make the chemicals on which this growth spurt
> > > depends ...".
> > > http://www.usyd.edu.au/hps/preprints/preprint8/GriffithsI.html
> >
> > By the look of the quote it was written by an idiot! How the hell can
> > you be sucked in by utter crap like that? That passage is about giving
> > birth to ALIENS!!
>
> Are aphids aliens?
YES - in that they are NOT humans, and humans do NOT give birth to
aphids - comprende!
[..]
> > Idiots are created, prejudices are manufactured in order to persecute,
> > discriminate against others. Only the very same people sing a totally
> > different tune when it occurs AGAINST THEM!
--
M. Ranjit Mathews
>
> "M. Ranjit Mathews" wrote:
>
>>Seppo Renfors <Ren...@not.ollis.net.au> wrote in message news:<3EDFEC83...@not.ollis.net.au>...
>>
>>>"M. Ranjit Mathews" wrote:
>
>>>>Endogamous groups. A social group is not necessarily endogamous,
>>>>although it can be. Consider the following statement: "Some castes of
>>>>the aphid Colophina arma require Colophina arma require a growth spurt
>>>>as part of their life-cycle. These and only these castes inherit the
>>>>micro-organisms that make the chemicals on which this growth spurt
>>>>depends ...".
>>>>http://www.usyd.edu.au/hps/preprints/preprint8/GriffithsI.html
>>>
>>>By the look of the quote it was written by an idiot! How the hell can
>>>you be sucked in by utter crap like that? That passage is about giving
>>>birth to ALIENS!!
>>
>>Are aphids aliens?
>
> YES - in that they are NOT humans, and humans do NOT give birth to
> aphids - comprende!
So? Any species can have castes. Aphids can and likewise, so can humans.
M. Ranjit Mathews
>
> Kiran wrote:
>
>>M. Ranjit Mathews <ranjit_...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>
>>
>>>Kiran <ki...@spam.proof> wrote ...
>>>
>>>>M. Ranjit Mathews <ranjit_...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>By reading the Rg Veda and nothing but the Rg Veda, would it be possible
>>>>>to be certain that the Vedic speaking population was intrusive?
>>>>
>>>>No. Moreover, Aryan simply meant "nobleman". Only "junk scholarship"
>>>>could come up with the wild unsupported notion of an Aryan "race" that
>>>>"invaded" India.
>
> Hear Hear!!
>
"Aryan" till the 18th century. Since then, it has mean whatever its
users (speakers of European languages) meant by it. In European
languages, it currently is a term for IndoIranian languages, except to
NeoNazis who think the term applies to them or a master race they belong
to. To date, it still doesn't mean anything in any Indian language.
>
>>>>Its discernible aims appear to be to justify the real
>>>>Islamic and European invasions, and to undermnine the coherence of
>>>>Indian society.
***
>>>
>>>Many scholars hold that there was an Indo-European invasion of Greece.
>>>...
>>>Is it junk scholarship? Is it discernible that all of them aim to
>>>justify the Islamic invasion of Greece? If some of them have other
>>>aims, what might some of those other aims be?
>>
>>I have no idea about the Greek case and can't pass any judgment on the
>>scholarship, its quality or causes.
>
> The Greeks ARE Indo Europeans (IE) and have always been. No real
> scholars considers greeks to be "invaders"! The notion to tie "Islam"
> with IE is absurd - there is no correlation. Islam wasn't truly
> created till about 670 AD, after the death of Muhammad.
Your statements reworded to apply to IndoAryans (speakers of IndoAryan
languages) would go as follows:
IndoAryans ARE IndoEuropeans (IE) and have always been. No real scholars
consider IndoAryans to be "invaders"! The notion of tying Islam with IE
is absurd - there is no correlation. Islam wasn't truly created till
about 670 AD, after the death of Muhammad.
Do these statements make sense? To take one portion of them, "to tie
Islam with IE is absurd":
If it is absurd, then it is also absurd to tie the Aryan invasion theory
with Islam (*** above).
To consider anotherportion, "no real scholars consider Greeks to be
invaders:
Is it inconceivable that the person who wrote the following history of
Ikaria is a "real scholar"?
http://www.island-ikaria.com/culture/history.asp
The Greeks called these early inhabitants of the Aegean Pelasgians, and
they probably controlled Icaria until the second millennium B.C. when
the Carians, another indigenous Aegean people, got a foothold in Icaria.
These terms, Pelasgians and Carians, are very vague and it is perhaps
best to simply think of the early settlers of Icaria as pre-Greek. The
Greeks entered the Aegean in ca. 1500 B.C., and by 1200 B.C. had taken
most of the Aegean islands, though there is no sign of any Greek
settlement on Icaria until much later. The Greeks may have been
discouraged by the lack of harbors, the shortage of arable land, and
thick forests. Greeks from Miletus colonized Icaria in ca. 750 B.C,
probably establishing a settlement at Therma then Oenoe (modern day
Campos.) The purpose of these Milesian outposts on Icaria were probably
to aid Milesian ships on their way north to Milesian colonies in the
Propontis.
Sunil Prasannan
The most stratified human societies are all **east of India**, in SE Asia and Oceania.
Yusuf B Gursey
>
> Why are you still trumpeting this bogus crap?
until someone shows that all the evidence this is based upon is forged.
>
> [..]
Yusuf B Gursey
> Islam wasn't truly
> created till about 670 AD, after the death of Muhammad.
a greek - arabic papyrus with the hijra date of 22, confirming the
islamic era, and a greek account two yeras after Muhammad's death
woudl say otherwise.
M. Ranjit Mathews
> "M. Ranjit Mathews" wrote:
> > > You'll be happy to know that Australian Aborigines most
> > > likely originated from around India. So there is one connection for
> > > you, but you will also find matching genes among the Inuits in the
> > > Arctic. There IS NO such thing as "race" - other than the human race!
> >
> > Ergo, all laws against racial discrimination ought to be abolished ...
>
> That is what Hitler said too - while gassing Jews! Does that mean that
> a "race" exists? HELL NO! It means that unspeakable EVIL exists.
> >
> > > You see, we are all born alike, with exactly the same social status -
> > > stark naked with nothing - and we all use the same language too -
> > > BWAAAAAAaaaaaa!
> >
> > ... since we are all alike and have no races and hence, it is
> > impossible for there to be such a thing as racial discrimination:-)
>
> Idiots are created, prejudices are manufactured in order to persecute,
> discriminate against others. Only the very same people sing a totally
> different tune when it occurs AGAINST THEM!
If there is no race, then OTHERS and THEM cannot be races and how
OTHERS treat THEM or how THEY treat OTHERS, it cannot be racism. Then,
it stands to reason that there is no need for laws against racism. How
do people identify other people as OTHERS rather than as one of THEM?
Kiran
> Aryan didn't mean nobleman or anything else since there was no word
> "Aryan" till the 18th century. Since then, it has mean whatever its
> users (speakers of European languages) meant by it...
The Sanskrit word "Arya" did mean nobleman.
Of course, the term is not copy-righted and people can start using it
how they wish. Nazis decided to call thmeselves "Aryan". Tomorrow
somebody might name their computer chip or dating service or new
chicken salad recipe "Aryan". What is the interesting part here that we
are discussing?
M. Ranjit Mathews
> "M. Ranjit Mathews" wrote:
>
> > Seppo Renfors wrote:
> > >
> > > "M. Ranjit Mathews" wrote:
> > >
> > >>
> > >>>"M. Ranjit Mathews" wrote:
>
> > >>>>Endogamous groups. A social group is not necessarily endogamous,
> > >>>>although it can be. Consider the following statement: "Some castes of
> > >>>>the aphid Colophina arma require Colophina arma require a growth spurt
> > >>>>as part of their life-cycle. These and only these castes inherit the
> > >>>>micro-organisms that make the chemicals on which this growth spurt
> > >>>>depends ...".
> > >>>>http://www.usyd.edu.au/hps/preprints/preprint8/GriffithsI.html
> > >>>
> > >>>By the look of the quote it was written by an idiot! How the hell can
> > >>>you be sucked in by utter crap like that? That passage is about giving
> > >>>birth to ALIENS!!
> > >>
> > >>Are aphids aliens?
> > >
> > > YES - in that they are NOT humans, and humans do NOT give birth to
> > > aphids - comprende!
> >
> > So? Any species can have castes. Aphids can and likewise, so can humans.
>
> The most stratified human societies are all **east of India**,
> in SE Asia and Oceania.
Perhaps, but I was referring to biological castes here, not social strata.
Yusuf B Gursey
perhaos there are others who are "Aryan" but not "son of an Aryan", in
which case it woudln't racial.
Seppo Renfors
"M. Ranjit Mathews" wrote:
>
> Seppo Renfors wrote:
> >
> > Kiran wrote:
> >
> >>M. Ranjit Mathews <ranjit_...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >>>Kiran <ki...@spam.proof> wrote ...
> >>>
> >>>>M. Ranjit Mathews <ranjit_...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>>By reading the Rg Veda and nothing but the Rg Veda, would it be possible
> >>>>>to be certain that the Vedic speaking population was intrusive?
> >>>>
> >>>>No. Moreover, Aryan simply meant "nobleman". Only "junk scholarship"
> >>>>could come up with the wild unsupported notion of an Aryan "race" that
> >>>>"invaded" India.
> >
> > Hear Hear!!
> >
> Aryan didn't mean nobleman or anything else since there was no word
> "Aryan" till the 18th century. Since then, it has mean whatever its
> users (speakers of European languages) meant by it. In European
> languages, it currently is a term for IndoIranian languages, except to
> NeoNazis who think the term applies to them or a master race they belong
> to. To date, it still doesn't mean anything in any Indian language.
Try again.
> >>>>Its discernible aims appear to be to justify the real
> >>>>Islamic and European invasions, and to undermnine the coherence of
> >>>>Indian society.
>
> ***
> >>>
> >>>Many scholars hold that there was an Indo-European invasion of Greece.
> >>>...
> >>>Is it junk scholarship? Is it discernible that all of them aim to
> >>>justify the Islamic invasion of Greece? If some of them have other
> >>>aims, what might some of those other aims be?
> >>
> >>I have no idea about the Greek case and can't pass any judgment on the
> >>scholarship, its quality or causes.
> >
> > The Greeks ARE Indo Europeans (IE) and have always been. No real
> > scholars considers greeks to be "invaders"! The notion to tie "Islam"
> > with IE is absurd - there is no correlation. Islam wasn't truly
> > created till about 670 AD, after the death of Muhammad.
>
> Your statements reworded to apply to IndoAryans (speakers of IndoAryan
> languages) would go as follows:
> IndoAryans ARE IndoEuropeans (IE) and have always been. No real scholars
> consider IndoAryans to be "invaders"! The notion of tying Islam with IE
> is absurd - there is no correlation. Islam wasn't truly created till
> about 670 AD, after the death of Muhammad.
All of that is true to - but irrelevant. IE refers to language, as
does Indic (Indo Aryan). A language has no relationship to religion a
religion by a Semitic people at that. A language doesn't "cause" or
"create" a religion. IT merely enables it to be communicated.
> Do these statements make sense? To take one portion of them, "to tie
> Islam with IE is absurd":
> If it is absurd, then it is also absurd to tie the Aryan invasion theory
> with Islam (*** above).
BOTH are absurd! I have never said otherwise. There never was an
"Aryan invasion" at all - ever, not even using "Aryan" correctly as
the language name!
>
> To consider anotherportion, "no real scholars consider Greeks to be
> invaders:
> Is it inconceivable that the person who wrote the following history of
> Ikaria is a "real scholar"?
> http://www.island-ikaria.com/culture/history.asp
> The Greeks called these early inhabitants of the Aegean Pelasgians, and
> they probably controlled Icaria until the second millennium B.C. when
> the Carians, another indigenous Aegean people, got a foothold in Icaria.
> These terms, Pelasgians and Carians, are very vague and it is perhaps
> best to simply think of the early settlers of Icaria as pre-Greek. The
> Greeks entered the Aegean in ca. 1500 B.C., and by 1200 B.C. had taken
> most of the Aegean islands, though there is no sign of any Greek
> settlement on Icaria until much later. The Greeks may have been
> discouraged by the lack of harbors, the shortage of arable land, and
> thick forests. Greeks from Miletus colonized Icaria in ca. 750 B.C,
> probably establishing a settlement at Therma then Oenoe (modern day
> Campos.) The purpose of these Milesian outposts on Icaria were probably
> to aid Milesian ships on their way north to Milesian colonies in the
> Propontis.
I see, so you would be "invading" a place if you moved to that place,
right?
Seppo Renfors
Been there, done that already!
Seppo Renfors
Don't be bloody ridiculous!
Seppo Renfors
It isn't sinking in at all. Re-read this again, s l o w l y:
Idiots are created, prejudices are manufactured in order to persecute,
discriminate against others. Only the very same people sing a totally
different tune when it occurs AGAINST THEM!
But to put it another way. Racism is a PHOBIA - an irrational fear -
and of course we all know that a "phobia" is a mental illness!!
M. Ranjit Mathews
> It isn't sinking in at all. Re-read this again, s l o w l y:
>
> Idiots are created, prejudices are manufactured in order to persecute,
> discriminate against others. Only the very same people sing a totally
> different tune when it occurs AGAINST THEM!
>
> But to put it another way. Racism is a PHOBIA - an irrational fear -
> and of course we all know that a "phobia" is a mental illness!!
If there are no races, why do you call this phobia racism? I've read it
slowly and fast. It doesn't make sense. If there is racism, there are
races. Conversely, if there are no races, there can't be racism.
M. Ranjit Mathews
>
> "M. Ranjit Mathews" wrote:
>
>>Seppo Renfors wrote:
>>
>>>"M. Ranjit Mathews" wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>>Seppo Renfors <Ren...@not.ollis.net.au> wrote in message news:<3EDFEC83...@not.ollis.net.au>...
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>"M. Ranjit Mathews" wrote:
>>>
>>>>>>Endogamous groups. A social group is not necessarily endogamous,
>>>>>>although it can be. Consider the following statement: "Some castes of
>>>>>>the aphid Colophina arma require Colophina arma require a growth spurt
>>>>>>as part of their life-cycle. These and only these castes inherit the
>>>>>>micro-organisms that make the chemicals on which this growth spurt
>>>>>>depends ...".
>>>>>>http://www.usyd.edu.au/hps/preprints/preprint8/GriffithsI.html
>>>>>
>>>>>By the look of the quote it was written by an idiot! How the hell can
>>>>>you be sucked in by utter crap like that? That passage is about giving
>>>>>birth to ALIENS!!
>>>>
>>>>Are aphids aliens?
>>>
>>>YES - in that they are NOT humans, and humans do NOT give birth to
>>>aphids - comprende!
>>
>>So? Any species can have castes. Aphids can and likewise, so can humans.
>
>
> Don't be bloody ridiculous!
>
Do you find the following usages ridiculous?
SCIENCE FICTION
Zentradei -Homo sapiens zentran
Tirolians -Homo sapiens zor
These two closely related subspecies hail largely from a single
dimension. Both appear to be genetically altered humans, though their
precise origins and who performed the alterations were unclear to this
researcher. It is interesting to note that the zetran subspecies appears
to be effectively immortal while they remain in giant form, or at least
possess a greatly lengthened life span, with specimens still being in
their prime after 400 or more years. Both show caste-oriented
specialization in both physical and mental abilities, as well as a
predisposition to certain kinds of manipulation, specifically size
change (amongst the zentran subspecies) and cloning (amongst both).
http://www.rifts-rpg.com/reference/humanclass.html
Continuing our observation and experimentation on the Orkoid races, we
have refcently discovered anomalies within the genetic data that we
possess. Because of this new information we herewith enclose this
report as an addendum to our previous entries. (ref. 0115242000/6) To
this date, the subspecies had been distinctively categorised into four
seperate and individual castes.
http://www.roburky.uk2k.com/html/speed_freeks.html
M. Ranjit Mathews
> > Yusuf B Gursey wrote:
Arya-, Mazdayasni and Ethnicity: by Sarosh Manekshaw
http://members.ozemail.com.au/~zarathus/arya33.html
Professor Gherardo Gnoli, in his 1989 book: "The Idea of Iran,"
Instituto Italiano Per Il Medio Ed Estremo Oriente, Roma, has
discussed the origins of Iran, starting with its earliest recorded
references in history. The basis of his book is that, at its roots,
the term "arya-" was neither geographical nor political; but, rather,
that it started out as an ethnic term for a race of people.
Professor Gnoli reviews the Old Persian inscriptions of the
Achaemenians and finds that in them the term "arya-" is used in three
different contexts.
1) it refers to language:
ima dipi[vaidam] taya adam akunavam patisan aryâ âha
'This text that I made was then (written) in Aryan'.
2) it refers to ethnicity:
Both Darius and Xerxes declare themselves to be:
arya arya cisha (shishu in Sanskrit?)
'Arya, of Arya stock'.
In this sense, Prof. Gnoli states that: "Old Persian (OP) arya- ...
maintains to some extent an ethnic meaning that is connected not so
much with a political situation as with a cultural and religious
heritage" (page 17).
3) in the Elamite text corresponding to the Old Persian text DB IV, 60
and 62, Ahura Mazda is described as:
Uramasda nap harriyanum
'Ahuramazda the God of the Aryans'.
In other inscriptions Ahura Mazda is distinguished from other gods (of
other people who were not arya?) in the following statements:
Auramazdâ uta anyâha bagâha tayai hanti
'Ahuramazda and the other gods that exist', and
Auramazdâ haya mathista bagânâm
'Ahuramazda the greatest of gods'.
Prof. Gnoli states: "To the Achaemenians arya- was a traditional,
cultural and religious term that served to evoke their origin, a title
of particular nobility, as it were, denoting that one belonged to a
political and cultural hegemonic circle, in which the religious factor
played a predominant part."
Conclusion:
If one assumes Professor Gnoli's analysis to be correct, one may
deduce that, certainly upto Achaemenian times, only those people who
were ethnically arya- would have been Mazdayasni (Mazda worshippers)
and, hence, Zarathushtis. The other ethnic groups, referred to in the
Old Persian inscriptions as anarya-, would, of course, have been the
worshippers of anyâha bagâha tayai hanti, 'the other gods that exist'.
Thus, if we place Zarathushtra in circa 1080 BCE, then from his time
to that of the Achaemenians, the Zarathushti religion was most
certainly an ethnic religion, inherited from and practiced solely by
those people who were arya arya ciça, 'Aryan, of Aryan stock'.
This would nullify the claim being made by some that Zarathushtrianism
was, during the time of Zarathushtra, a "universal" religion. To the
contrary, it was very much an ethnic religion, limited to only those
people who were arya arya ciça.
There is no evidence presented by Prof. Gnoli to show that any of the
anarya- worshipped Ahura Mazda or that they practiced the
Zarathushtrian religion. But let us, for a moment, assume that the
Mazdayasni religion was "universal" and practiced by the anarya; it
would have then been rather preposterous (and very definitely
incorrect) for the Achamenians, once the religion had already spread
to the anarya, to have so proudly made the claim that Uramasda nap
harriyanum, 'Ahuramazda (was)the God of the Aryans'. So this
assumption must be considered to be false.
Yusuf B Gursey
: Yusuf B Gursey wrote:
:>
:> Seppo Renfors <Ren...@not.ollis.net.au> wrote in message news:<3EE73E86...@not.ollis.net.au>...
:>
:> >
:> > Why are you still trumpeting this bogus crap?
:>
:> until someone shows that all the evidence this is based upon is forged.
: Been there, done that already!
you didn't even look at it.
Yusuf B Gursey
:>
:> perhaos there are others who are "Aryan" but not "son of an Aryan", in
:> which case it woudln't racial.
: Arya-, Mazdayasni and Ethnicity: by Sarosh Manekshaw
: http://members.ozemail.com.au/~zarathus/arya33.html
: Professor Gherardo Gnoli, in his 1989 book: "The Idea of Iran,"
: Instituto Italiano Per Il Medio Ed Estremo Oriente, Roma, has
: discussed the origins of Iran, starting with its earliest recorded
: references in history. The basis of his book is that, at its roots,
: the term "arya-" was neither geographical nor political; but, rather,
: that it started out as an ethnic term for a race of people.
yes, "ethnic". "ethnic" and "racial" in current usage is not identical. at
any rate, even if they thought of it as racial, we now know better.
: Professor Gnoli reviews the Old Persian inscriptions of the
: Achaemenians and finds that in them the term "arya-" is used in three
: different contexts.
: 1) it refers to language:
: ima dipi[vaidam] taya adam akunavam patisan aryâ âha
: 'This text that I made was then (written) in Aryan'.
: 2) it refers to ethnicity:
: Both Darius and Xerxes declare themselves to be:
: arya arya cisha (shishu in Sanskrit?)
: 'Arya, of Arya stock'.
: In this sense, Prof. Gnoli states that: "Old Persian (OP) arya- ...
: maintains to some extent an ethnic meaning that is connected not so
: much with a political situation as with a cultural and religious
: heritage" (page 17).
OK.
: 3) in the Elamite text corresponding to the Old Persian text DB IV, 60
: Conclusion:
my understanding is that in the avesta ahura mazda assigns Jamshid (Yima)
the task of propagating the religion among the aryans and zarathustra
among mankind in general (of course, this may have been added later). so
at some point there was a change in policy. but yes, the aryans figure as
the central ethnic group.
: There is no evidence presented by Prof. Gnoli to show that any of the
Yusuf B Gursey
:>>>>>:> : What they called themselves is neither here nor there. We call
:>>>>>:> : Socrates a Greek, so he was a Greek as per our definition regardless
:>>>>>:> : of what he called himself. As for what Persians and Sakas called
:>>>>>:> : themselves, we have an instance of a Persian calling himself an Arya,
:>>>>>:> : son of Arya and of a Saka calling Old Bactrian "the Arya language".
:>>>>>:>
:>>>>>:> reference?
:>>>>
:>>>>
:>>>>
:>>>>>: Arya Ahmi, Arya Puthro Ahmi - I am an ARYAN, Son of an Aryan
:>>>>>: http://members.ozemail.com.au/~zarathus/var33.html
:>>>>
:>>>>
:>>>>
:>>>>>: when Kanishka refers to "the Aryan language" he surely means Bactrian
:>>>>>: http://www.gengo.l.u-tokyo.ac.jp/~hkum/bactrian.html
:>>>>
:>>>>Gregory Possehl, Prof. of Anthropology at the University of
:>>>>Pennsylvania, wrote in 1999 in his 'Indus Age':
:>>>>
:>>>>'In the end there is no reason to believe today that there ever
:>>>>was an Aryan race that spoke Indo-European languages and was possessed
:>>>>of a coherent or well-defined set of Aryan or Indo-European
:>>>>cultural features.'
:>>>
:>>>
:>>>"Aryan" as synonym for "indo-european" in general is wrong. so in that
:>>>way this is right.
:>>>
:>>>also "Aryan" as a "race" is wrong, so the statement is correect in
:>>>this sense as well.
:>>>
:>>>as for the iranian speakers calling themselves "aryan", which many
:>>>did, one can debate on how a "well-defined set" they are. such
:>>>group(s) existed and this is well attested.
:>>>
:>>>
:>>>
:>>>>Colin Renfrew, at Cambridge:
:>>>>
:>>>>'As far as I can see there is nothing in the Rig Veda [the first of
:>>>>four Vedas] which demonstrates the Vedic-speaking population were
:>>>>intrusive [to India]; this comes rather from a historical ASSUMPTION
:>>>>about the 'coming' of the Indo-Europeans.'
:>>>>(my emphasis)
:>>>
:>>>
:>>>this has to do with the literal reading of the Rig Veda.
:>>
:>>By reading the Rg Veda and nothing but the Rg Veda, would it be possible
:>>to be certain that the Vedic speaking population was intrusive?
:>
:>
:> How do you know the writers of the Rig were intrusive to India?
:>
: That is similar to the question I was asking Yusuf as to how it would be
: possible to be certain they were intrusive. The question remains open
: for anyone to answer.
IE speech was introduced to India from the outside, based on other
evidence. I don't know about the vedas.
M. Ranjit Mathews
> In sci.archaeology M. Ranjit Mathews <ranjit_...@yahoo.com> wrote in <xPoFa.93174$d51.158412@sccrnsc01>:
> :>>By reading the Rg Veda and nothing but the Rg Veda, would it be possible
> :>>to be certain that the Vedic speaking population was intrusive?
> :>
> :> How do you know the writers of the Rig were intrusive to India?
> :>
> : That is similar to the question I was asking Yusuf as to how it would be
> : possible to be certain they were intrusive. The question remains open
> : for anyone to answer.
>
> IE speech was introduced to India from the outside, based on other
> evidence. I don't know about the vedas.
This is the primary case for the so-called Arya presence having been
introduced from without, but the case cannot be made by reading only the
Rg Veda and nothing but the Rg Veda; one would have to examine more than
the Rg Veda to make a case for intrusion.
M. Ranjit Mathews
> > > : Arya Ahmi, Arya Puthro Ahmi - I am ARYA, Son of an Arya
> > > : http://members.ozemail.com.au/~zarathus/var33.html
> > other than a race when he said "I am Arya"?
>
> which case it woudln't racial.
I wonder how these students define an Arya-Persian:
Arya-Persian Students Association
http://sfuo.ca/section/persianstudents
Yusuf B Gursey
: y...@theworld.com (Yusuf B Gursey) wrote ...
it smacks of nationalism.
Yusuf B Gursey
: Yusuf B Gursey wrote:
:> In sci.archaeology M. Ranjit Mathews <ranjit_...@yahoo.com> wrote :
:> : y...@theworld.com (Yusuf B Gursey) wrote ...
:> :> Sunil Prasannan <dr_suni...@yahoo.co.uk> wrote ...
:>
:> : What did a certain Persian monarch mean by Arya here:
:>
:> (well, we don't know that this legendary character is supposed to be
:> specifically "persian", he is from a legendary province of "the land the
:> Aryans" i.e. "(greater) Iran").
: His lineage was supposedly Xakhamanya - Persian from Pasargadae.
:> however, such sayings were adopted by real
:> life sasanian shah's.
:>
:> : Arya Ahmi, Arya Puthro Ahmi - I am ARYA, Son of an Arya
:> : http://members.ozemail.com.au/~zarathus/var33.html
:>
:> so?
:> still, "race" is not scientific.
: Would you say he thought Aryas were a race? Or did he mean something
: other than a race when he said "I am Arya"?
this seems to be based on a modern novel, though imitating traditional
style.
http://members.ozemail.com.au/~zarathus/index.html
Yusuf B Gursey
> In sci.archaeology M. Ranjit Mathews <ranjit_...@yahoo.com> wrote in <1d4c67e3.0306...@posting.google.com>:
>
> :>
> :> perhaos there are others who are "Aryan" but not "son of an Aryan", in
> :> which case it woudln't racial.
>
> : Arya-, Mazdayasni and Ethnicity: by Sarosh Manekshaw
> : http://members.ozemail.com.au/~zarathus/arya33.html
>
> : Professor Gherardo Gnoli, in his 1989 book: "The Idea of Iran,"
> : Instituto Italiano Per Il Medio Ed Estremo Oriente, Roma, has
> : discussed the origins of Iran, starting with its earliest recorded
> : references in history. The basis of his book is that, at its roots,
> : the term "arya-" was neither geographical nor political; but, rather,
> : that it started out as an ethnic term for a race of people.
>
> yes, "ethnic". "ethnic" and "racial" in current usage is not identical. at
> any rate, even if they thought of it as racial, we now know better.
I looked and read the book, and it gives reasons why this and those of
the sasanian period shouldn't be read as "noble" and tehyare along the
lines I had deduced myslef and posted previously.
M. Ranjit Mathews
Very good.
> There never was an
> "Aryan invasion" at all
There were several Aryan invasions - the Pahlavas and S'akas, for
example.
> - ever, not even using "Aryan" correctly as the language name!
It is correct. Max Mueller was one of the first to define the meaning
of the European word "Aryan". Its meaning, which is different from the
meaning of the Indian word "Arya", was defined by him as follows:
"I have declared again and again that if I say Aryans, I mean neither
blood nor bones, nor hair nor skull: I mean simply those who speak an
Aryan language".
After Mueller's time, after there came to be a consensus that
protoIndoIranian was an intermediate stage between ProtoIndoEuropean
and IndoIranian languages, the meaning of Aryan changed from
IndoEuropean to IndoIranian. Hence the dictionary meaning of Aryan: 1.
Indo-Iranian.
http://www.bartleby.com/61/99/A0449900.html
> > To consider anotherportion, "no real scholars consider Greeks to be
> > invaders:
> > Is it inconceivable that the person who wrote the following history of
> > Ikaria is a "real scholar"?
> > http://www.island-ikaria.com/culture/history.asp
> > The Greeks called these early inhabitants of the Aegean Pelasgians, and
> > they probably controlled Icaria until the second millennium B.C. when
> > the Carians, another indigenous Aegean people, got a foothold in Icaria.
> > These terms, Pelasgians and Carians, are very vague and it is perhaps
> > best to simply think of the early settlers of Icaria as pre-Greek. The
> > Greeks entered the Aegean in ca. 1500 B.C., and by 1200 B.C. had taken
> > most of the Aegean islands, though there is no sign of any Greek
> > settlement on Icaria until much later. The Greeks may have been
> > discouraged by the lack of harbors, the shortage of arable land, and
> > thick forests. Greeks from Miletus colonized Icaria in ca. 750 B.C,
> > probably establishing a settlement at Therma then Oenoe (modern day
> > Campos.) The purpose of these Milesian outposts on Icaria were probably
> > to aid Milesian ships on their way north to Milesian colonies in the
> > Propontis.
>
> I see, so you would be "invading" a place if you moved to that place,
> right?
Not necessarily. See if you can figure out why the settlement of
Greeks in Greece, Ionia, etc. is often called an Indo-European
invasion:
M. Ranjit Mathews
> arsalan khan,
I was just thinking about this: how do we know that the IVC was not austro-mundic?
You might find these interesting:
http://indoeuro.bizland.com/project/script/indus.html
http://www.engr.mun.ca/~asharan/bihar/indus/indus~3.htm
M. Ranjit Mathews
See if you can make sense of this:
http://www1.shore.net/~india/ejvs/ejvs0501/ejvs0501b.txt
M. Ranjit Mathews
> subi...@concert.com (Subir) wrote in message news:<44d24a1f.03060...@posting.google.com>...
> > arsalanal...@yahoo.com (Arsalan Khan) wrote in message news:<e6d22781.03060...@posting.google.com>...
> > > The Aryan invadors of South Asia encountered an advanced civilization
> > > stretching from Punjab in north to Sindh inthe south, i.e. modern
> > > Pakistan.
> >
> > Sir, there were no Dravidian people living there, was there ?
>
> The Dravidian speaking Brahuis living in Baluchistan are livinig
> testiment of Dravidian culture extending from Indus to Southern India
> and was later inundated by Aryan invadors. The Brahuis live in remote
> mountanous areas of Baluchistan and were remnants of larger Dravadian
> culture.
>
> The Indus Valley Civilisation (IVC) was Dravadian and was known as
> Meluhha by their Sumerian trading partners. They were called Mlecchas
> by Aryan invadors and later all despised local people were called
> 'Mlecchas' by these Aryan invadors.
Brahwi speakers are mostly white. Tamil speakers are predominantly
black. So, where did Dravidian come from and how did its speakers come
to be spread from Baluchistan to Lanka to the vicinity of Bengal
(Malto, Kurukh, Oraon)? A Dravidian invasion?
http://www.google.com/search?q=pre-dravidian+&btnG=Google+Search&hl=en&lr=&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8
> > > BALAUCHISTAN (Cholistan and other sites): Several Pre-Harappan,
> > > Neolithic
> > > sites were discovered in Zhob and the Quetta Valley. Other
> > > Pre-Harappan
> > > cities were: Damb Sadaouct, Kile Glud Mohn . This is what is called
> > > the
> > > Amri Pottery ware. .
Seppo Renfors
"M. Ranjit Mathews" wrote:
>
> Seppo Renfors <Ren...@not.ollis.net.au> wrote in message news:<3EE880F5...@not.ollis.net.au>...
> > "M. Ranjit Mathews" wrote:
> > >
> > > Seppo Renfors wrote:
[..]
> > > Your statements reworded to apply to IndoAryans (speakers of IndoAryan
> > > languages) would go as follows:
> > > IndoAryans ARE IndoEuropeans (IE) and have always been. No real scholars
> > > consider IndoAryans to be "invaders"! The notion of tying Islam with IE
> > > is absurd - there is no correlation. Islam wasn't truly created till
> > > about 670 AD, after the death of Muhammad.
> >
> > All of that is true to - but irrelevant. IE refers to language, as
> > does Indic (Indo Aryan). A language has no relationship to religion a
> > religion by a Semitic people at that. A language doesn't "cause" or
> > "create" a religion. IT merely enables it to be communicated.
> >
> > > Do these statements make sense? To take one portion of them, "to tie
> > > Islam with IE is absurd":
> > > If it is absurd, then it is also absurd to tie the Aryan invasion theory
> > > with Islam (*** above).
> >
> > BOTH are absurd! I have never said otherwise.
>
> Very good.
>
> > There never was an
> > "Aryan invasion" at all
>
> There were several Aryan invasions - the Pahlavas and S'akas, for
> example.
Ai say again THAT is totally bogus - you cannot identify them as
"aryans", they already HAVE a name! Further more, *IF* the remainder
of your nonsense was true a people must be able to invade themselves -
what a lot of rot!
>
> > - ever, not even using "Aryan" correctly as the language name!
>
> It is correct. Max Mueller was one of the first to define the meaning
> of the European word "Aryan". Its meaning, which is different from the
> meaning of the Indian word "Arya", was defined by him as follows:
>
> "I have declared again and again that if I say Aryans, I mean neither
> blood nor bones, nor hair nor skull: I mean simply those who speak an
> Aryan language".
>
> After Mueller's time, after there came to be a consensus that
> protoIndoIranian was an intermediate stage between ProtoIndoEuropean
> and IndoIranian languages, the meaning of Aryan changed from
> IndoEuropean to IndoIranian. Hence the dictionary meaning of Aryan: 1.
> Indo-Iranian.
> http://www.bartleby.com/61/99/A0449900.html
You have an inordinate ability to find utter crap as the above! It is
just plain bogus garbage: "Thus "Aryan" came to be synonymous with
"Indo-European," and in this sense entered the general scholarly
consciousness of the day."
> > > To consider anotherportion, "no real scholars consider Greeks to be
> > > invaders:
> > > Is it inconceivable that the person who wrote the following history of
> > > Ikaria is a "real scholar"?
> > > http://www.island-ikaria.com/culture/history.asp
> > > The Greeks called these early inhabitants of the Aegean Pelasgians, and
> > > they probably controlled Icaria until the second millennium B.C. when
> > > the Carians, another indigenous Aegean people, got a foothold in Icaria.
> > > These terms, Pelasgians and Carians, are very vague and it is perhaps
> > > best to simply think of the early settlers of Icaria as pre-Greek. The
> > > Greeks entered the Aegean in ca. 1500 B.C., and by 1200 B.C. had taken
> > > most of the Aegean islands, though there is no sign of any Greek
> > > settlement on Icaria until much later. The Greeks may have been
> > > discouraged by the lack of harbors, the shortage of arable land, and
> > > thick forests. Greeks from Miletus colonized Icaria in ca. 750 B.C,
> > > probably establishing a settlement at Therma then Oenoe (modern day
> > > Campos.) The purpose of these Milesian outposts on Icaria were probably
> > > to aid Milesian ships on their way north to Milesian colonies in the
> > > Propontis.
> >
> > I see, so you would be "invading" a place if you moved to that place,
> > right?
>
> Not necessarily. See if you can figure out why the settlement of
> Greeks in Greece, Ionia, etc. is often called an Indo-European
> invasion:
The link is merely to a NEWS GROUP article - hardly of any value and
is no "authority" of any kind.
>
> http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&q=%22indo-european+invasion%22+greece&btnG=Google+Search
M. Ranjit Mathews
Aryans be called Aryan?
>
>>>- ever, not even using "Aryan" correctly as the language name!
>>
>>It is correct. Max Mueller was one of the first to define the meaning
>>of the European word "Aryan". Its meaning, which is different from the
>>meaning of the Indian word "Arya", was defined by him as follows:
>>
>>"I have declared again and again that if I say Aryans, I mean neither
>>blood nor bones, nor hair nor skull: I mean simply those who speak an
>>Aryan language".
>>
>>After Mueller's time, after there came to be a consensus that
>>protoIndoIranian was an intermediate stage between ProtoIndoEuropean
>>and IndoIranian languages, the meaning of Aryan changed from
>>IndoEuropean to IndoIranian. Hence the dictionary meaning of Aryan: 1.
>>Indo-Iranian.
>>http://www.bartleby.com/61/99/A0449900.html
>
> You have an inordinate ability to find utter crap as the above! It is
> just plain bogus garbage:
Why is a dictionary entry bogus garbage?
> "Thus "Aryan" came to be synonymous with
> "Indo-European," and in this sense entered the general scholarly
> consciousness of the day."
In the 20th century, Aryan = Indo-European was only in Nazi scholarship.
In general scholarship, Aryan was Indo-Iranian as per the dictionary
entry I gave you.
http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&q=%22indo-european+invasion%22+europe&btnG=Google+Search
>
I didn't say it was an authority. Look over what the semantics of
"invasion" are in writeups about the "IE invasion of Greece" or the "IE
invasion of Europe" and try the exercise of substituting alternate words.
karthika
I know white and black malayalees.
Invaders too pickup the language of the locals.
"M. Ranjit Mathews" <ranjit_...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1d4c67e3.03061...@posting.google.com...
M. Ranjit Mathews
> Language is not a character of a RACE.
> I know white and black malayalees.
> Invaders too pickup the language of the locals.
Do you propose that Brahwi speakers are descended from invaders who
picked up the language of local Dravidian speakers?
M. Ranjit Mathews
> "M. Ranjit Mathews" wrote:
> > There were several Aryan invasions - the Pahlavas and S'akas, for
> > example.
>
> Ai say again THAT is totally bogus - you cannot identify them as
> "aryans", they already HAVE a name! Further more, *IF* the remainder
> of your nonsense was true a people must be able to invade themselves -
> what a lot of rot!
What's this about a people invading themselves? When Russian Slavs
invaded Polish Slavs' country, were Russians invading themselves?
M. Ranjit Mathews
> M. Ranjit Mathews <ranjit_...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> > Aryan didn't mean nobleman or anything else since there was no word
> > "Aryan" till the 18th century. Since then, it has mean whatever its
>
> The Sanskrit word "Arya" did mean nobleman.
>
> Of course, the term is not copy-righted and people can start using it
> how they wish. Nazis decided to call thmeselves "Aryan".
... which is why there has been a post WWII shift from the term Aryan
to the less politically loaded term IndoIranian.
> Tomorrow
> somebody might name their computer chip or dating service or new
> chicken salad recipe "Aryan". What is the interesting part here that we
> are discussing?
... that a coinage in a different language doesn't necessarily have
the same meaning that accords to its etymology. In US English, Indian
means American Indian.
M. Ranjit Mathews
> Language is not a character of a RACE.
> I know white and black malayalees.
> Invaders too pickup the language of the locals.
Which place had the first Dravidian speaking locals? Is the place
closer to Baluchistan or Tamilnadu? Prior to the telegraph and the
modern electronic media, a language could indeed only be spread by
being physically taken from one place to the next. People who speak a
common language do so by living together as a community, and as such,
they will also intermarry and pass on their genes along with their
language and culture to their children. That is to say that there was
an original Proto-Dravidian speaking community whose language got
diversified into the existing Dravidian languages.
> "M. Ranjit Mathews" <ranjit_...@yahoo.com> wrote ...
Seppo Renfors
You don't see the difference? You are mixing entities. Russia and
Poland are nations - the people living ion them are identified as
Russians and Polish - which does NOT mean that are necessarilly
"Slavs" - merely people of those nation.
Why are you so hung up on ethnicity - specially for a period when such
is totally unknown? It is apparent that you are a racist, with all the
connotations that go with it.
Seppo Renfors
"M. Ranjit Mathews" wrote:
>
> y...@theworld.com (Yusuf B Gursey) wrote ...
> > "M. Ranjit Mathews" <ranjit_...@yahoo.com> wrote ...
> > > Yusuf B Gursey wrote:
>
> > > > : Arya Ahmi, Arya Puthro Ahmi - I am ARYA, Son of an Arya
> > > > : http://members.ozemail.com.au/~zarathus/var33.html
> > > >
> > > > so?
> > > > still, "race" is not scientific.
> > >
> > > Would you say he thought Aryas were a race? Or did he mean something
> > > other than a race when he said "I am Arya"?
> >
> > perhaos there are others who are "Aryan" but not "son of an Aryan", in
> > which case it woudln't racial.
>
> Arya-, Mazdayasni and Ethnicity: by Sarosh Manekshaw
> http://members.ozemail.com.au/~zarathus/arya33.html
It is apparent that you are a racist, with all the connotations that
go with it. This is such a site - it contains FICTION of with very
little value! The beginning tells the purpose of the "book":
"The basis of his book is that, at its roots, the term "arya-" was
neither geographical nor political; but, rather, that it started out
as an ethnic term for a race of people."
Which is a POLITICAL fantasy of the sicker variety of modern days! The
remainder goes on to FABRICATE the "proof" for this quite obvious and
blatant LIE.
[..]
Seppo Renfors
I proved you were talking a lot of garbage - made bogus claims that
simply didn't stand up to the slightest scrutiny! Like I said "Been
there, done that already"!!
Seppo Renfors
There is your answer already "FICTION" - no need for any more!!
[..]
M. Ranjit Mathews
> "M. Ranjit Mathews" wrote:
> >
> > Seppo Renfors wrote:
> > >
> > > "M. Ranjit Mathews" wrote:
> > >
> > >>Seppo Renfors wrote:
> > >>
> > >>>"M. Ranjit Mathews" wrote:
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>>
> > >>>>
> > >>>>>"M. Ranjit Mathews" wrote:
>
> > >>>>>>Endogamous groups. A social group is not necessarily endogamous,
> > >>>>>>although it can be. Consider the following statement: "Some castes of
> > >>>>>>the aphid Colophina arma require Colophina arma require a growth spurt
> > >>>>>>as part of their life-cycle. These and only these castes inherit the
> > >>>>>>micro-organisms that make the chemicals on which this growth spurt
> > >>>>>>depends ...".
> > >>>>>>http://www.usyd.edu.au/hps/preprints/preprint8/GriffithsI.html
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>By the look of the quote it was written by an idiot! How the hell can
> > >>>>>you be sucked in by utter crap like that? That passage is about giving
> > >>>>>birth to ALIENS!!
> > >>>>
> > >>>>Are aphids aliens?
> > >>>
> > >>>YES - in that they are NOT humans, and humans do NOT give birth to
> > >>>aphids - comprende!
> > >>
> > >>So? Any species can have castes. Aphids can and likewise, so can humans.
> > >
> > > Don't be bloody ridiculous!
> > >
> > What do you find ridiculous about it?
> >
> > Do you find the following usages ridiculous?
> >
> > SCIENCE FICTION
>
> There is your answer already "FICTION" - no need for any more!!
Is that yes or no? ... and why?
How about this:
- VQPRD:"Quality Wine Produced in a Delimited Region".
These are high quality wines, of limited number, obtained from castes
reported in an approved list and which exclusive source must be grapes
produced in a fixed region.
In each region there's a Viticultural Commission whose ability is to
attribute the categories of VQPRD, Regional Wine and Caste Wine.
Seppo Renfors
"M. Ranjit Mathews" wrote:
>
> Seppo Renfors wrote:
>
> > It isn't sinking in at all. Re-read this again, s l o w l y:
> >
> > Idiots are created, prejudices are manufactured in order to persecute,
> > discriminate against others. Only the very same people sing a totally
> > different tune when it occurs AGAINST THEM!
> >
> > But to put it another way. Racism is a PHOBIA - an irrational fear -
> > and of course we all know that a "phobia" is a mental illness!!
>
> If there are no races, why do you call this phobia racism? I've read it
> slowly and fast. It doesn't make sense. If there is racism, there are
> races. Conversely, if there are no races, there can't be racism.
You certainly demonstrate what I said well :-)
karthika
That is a possiblility.news:x2cGa.968676$Zo.220748@sccrnsc03...
karthika
Presents day tamis speak a mixed language but in your Kerala more evidences
available.
"M. Ranjit Mathews" <ranjit_...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1d4c67e3.03061...@posting.google.com...