Unmasking AIT

[Husky]

Post 1/2



Was looking into the Indian rhino.

Probably this next had already been read by interested Indians at the time, but being slow, I only noticed it now.



Apparently both the horse and the rhino - and several other sets of mammals - originated in India (presumably before this hurtled itself into the Asian landmass).



The relevance - if any - to the thread is in the comments copied from the link as well as material in blockquotes following the article.



thehindu.com/news/horses-and-rhinos-originated-in-india/article6622486.ece

Updated: November 21, 2014 23:03 IST

'Horses and rhinos originated in India'



PTI





Horses and rhinos likely originated in the Indian subcontinent, over 54 million years ago, according to a new study.



Working at the edge of a coal mine in India, researchers at the Johns Hopkins University and colleagues have filled in a major gap in science's understanding of the evolution of a group of animals that includes horses and rhinos.



The group likely originated on the subcontinent when it was still an island headed swiftly for collision with Asia, the researchers said.



Modern horses, rhinos and tapirs belong to a biological group, or order, called Perissodactyla. Also known as "odd-toed ungulates", animals in the order have, as their name implies, an uneven number of toes on their hind feet.



Though paleontologists had found remains of Perissodactyla from as far back as the beginnings of the Eocene epoch, about 56 million years ago, their earlier evolution remained a mystery, said Ken Rose, a professor of functional anatomy and evolution at Johns Hopkins.



In 2001, Prof. Rose and Indian colleagues began exploring Eocene sediments in western India. In an open-pit coal mine northeast of Mumbai, they uncovered a rich vein of ancient bones. The mine yielded what Prof. Rose said was a treasure trove of teeth and bones.



More than 200 fossils turned out to belong to an animal dubbed Cambaytherium thewissi, about which little was known.



In 1990, researchers at the Stony Brook University suggested that several groups of mammals that appear at the beginning of the Eocene, including primates and odd and even-toed ungulates, might have evolved in India while it was isolated. Cambaytherium is the first concrete evidence to support that idea, Prof. Rose said.



Keywords: Johns Hopkins University, origin of horses, origin of rhinos, Indian subcontinent

Some of the comments:

Vedam Vedaprakash Research at Independent Research from CHETPUT



Wadia pointed out some 40 years back about the finding of fossils of horses around the Madhyapradesh region. Now historians have to answer after 54 million years, whether they were domesticated or not. Particularly, the Harvard experts and Indian pundits should explain their hypotheses and theories. Whether Indian history would be updated with the scientific data or downgraded with the petty hypotheses and theories. Indian Historiography should come out of ideological bias, prejudice and preconceived notions and present history in right perspective. Of course, they might argue that they need not require any "objectivity" in their writing of history, but the common people have been reading and watching their stands and therefore, they have to reassess and write properly. Otherwise, people may have to change them soon. History is not what was / has been written, but it is actually what happened in the past and therefore, presenting past historians should have honesty, integrity and unbia

Points

300

6 months ago



(The oryanist west initially demanded Hindus produce evidence for horse in India before the date set for the AIT.

When the Hindus produced the requested evidence, the west changed the demands: declared that the evidence presented wasn't the 'true horse' - of oryan invasionism - and demanded Hindus produce evidence of the specific species the west had in mind. Not even arguing that the Vedas doesn't actually speak of the specific 'true horse' - but only of a kind known regionally (mention of 17x2 ribs) - was sufficient to dismiss oryanist assumptions.)



Jay from BEAVERTON



This is an interesting find as it shatters the theory of some American Indologist that ancient Indians never had HORSES and so the civilization could never use chariots.....! These foreign Indologist have polluted the minds of many to the extent that they would like to believe that Indian Civilization is a MYTH.

6 months ago



("*Some* AmriKKKan indologists"? And also, what is the difference between "foreign" indologists and native parrots? Nothing. Indology is all about outsiders looking in, trying to read/write themselves into Hindoos' religio-civilisation, and it is predicated on IE. There is no other indology and no point re-defining it to mean something suddenly acceptable to natives either.

Also, again: IIRC the Oryan argument eventually became/conveniently evolved into that Indians never had *true* horses, upon discovering that India had had horses after all. Though the irony is that the alleged oryan-invasive horse is not the one described in the Vedam.)



Rakesh from SANTA CLARA



Like so much other evidence against Aryan invasion theory propounded by Max Muller, now even the horses did not come from Central Asia.

[...]



(But Hindoos, you'd still have to prove that the "true" horses evolved within India and did not come from Central Asia/Eurozone/irgendwo. Nah? The oryanist side makes increasingly more unreasonable demands for proof from Hindus. And so the *modified* alien argument from at least about a decade back goes that the Vedas is supposed to speak only about 'true horses'. Though in actual fact, the Vedic horse was IIRC caught exhibiting a different numbers of ribs (17x2) than the New Only True Horse that oryanists favour (18x2 ribs), and hence if you can prove that the distinct Vedic horsey at least evolved within India, then you may win the point. Though by that time, the christo/dabbling west will merely move the goalpost further again.

So it's not quite enough any more to point out that the horse overall evolved within the Indian landmass. Except, of course, that people like Manansala and Danino already argued the point - back in 2006 itself - that the type of Vedic horsey has been around in SE Asia, [1]

and since a longer time than the alleged AIT.)





Arpan from NEW HAVEN



This should be another nail in the coffin for the Aryan invasion theories. Their long standing argument have been that aryan's brought horses to the subcontinent and post indus valley civilizations. This evidence along with the Bhimbetka rock paintings showing riders [1] will argue that Indians were using horses long before the so called aryan invasion happened. This should bring an end to the British propaganda of the aryan race that they introduced to divide and rule the subcontinent.

Points

180

6 months ago

[1] Arpan said "This evidence along with the Bhimbetka rock paintings showing riders will argue that Indians were using horses long before the so called aryan invasion happened."

-> As well as cave paintings found in Tamizh Nadu dated between 4000 to 3500 ago: Rock Galleries, The Chindu, archived at IF here, which is an article also originally found by dhu.

Experts say the rock paintings at both Mavadaippu and Karikkiyur could be dated to 2000 B.C. to 1500 B.C. [...] The paintings in white ochre include a procession of bisons, monkeys clambering up a tree branch, a herd of deer grazing, human beings welcoming one another with outstretched arms, a battle scene with men aiming at each other with bows and arrows, men on horseback engaged in battle, a shoulder-clasping dance after a successful boar-hunt, a man with a mask, the depiction of sun and its rays, a spiral, a tiger fighting another animal, and a man and his dog ** sleeping.



[img caption:] A battle scene at Karikkiyur, depicting men with bows and arrows and on horse back.

** Aside: an instance of a clearly domesticated wolf (=dog) in India 4000-3500 BP.





[2] "People like Manansala and Danino already argued the point - back in 2006 itself - that the type of Vedic horsey has been around in SE Asia, and since a longer time than the alleged AIT." Repeat:



archaeologyonline.net/artifacts/horse-debate

5. Is the Vedic horse the true horse?



Invasionists are usually unaware that they begin by making an important assumption: they take it for granted that the Vedic horse is the true horse, Equus caballus L. Although this might appear self-evident, it is not. In fact, as some scholars have pointed out, the Rig-Veda47 describes the horse as having 34 ribs; so does a passage in the Shatapatha Brahmana.48 However, the true horse generally has two pairs of 18 ribs, i.e. 36 and not 34.



This suggests that the horse referred to in the Rig-Veda may have been a different species, such as the smaller and stockier Siwalik [the extinct Equus Shivalensis, remains found in both TN and AP and Shivalik hills, Himalayan part of India/Nepal, assumed extinct during the last ice age which ended 10,000 BP] or Przewalski horses [a cuddly-looking endangered Mongolian horse], which often (not always) had 34 ribs. The scholar Paul Manansala, who stressed this point, concluded: "So the horse of India, including that of the asvamedha sacrifice in what is regarded as the oldest part of the Rgveda, is a distinct variety native to southeastern Asia."49



The question is far from solved, as experts in the field do not always see eye to eye, but it also cannot be wished away.

But relevant are also the links/quoted material in the next post.





ADDED:

The Chindu article title "Horses and rhinos originated in India" and the article's opening statement that "Horses and rhinos likely originated in the Indian subcontinent, over 54 million years ago"

are a bit unclear. Because, looking up more info:



1. sciencedaily.com/releases/2014/11/141120081752.htm

"Out of India: Finding the origins of horses, rhinos"



But the journal ref is:



Journal Reference:



Kenneth D. Rose, Luke T. Holbrook, Rajendra S. Rana, Kishor Kumar, Katrina E. Jones, Heather E. Ahrens, Pieter Missiaen, Ashok Sahni, Thierry Smith. Early Eocene fossils suggest that the mammalian order Perissodactyla originated in India. Nature Communications, 2014; 5: 5570 DOI: 10.1038/ncomms6570

So a common ancestor certainly originated in India.



2. And again:



hub.jhu.edu/2014/11/20/india-fossils-perissodactyla



Ancient relative of horses, rhinos originated in India more than 50 million years ago, fossils show

Finding sheds light on the evolution of this group of animals





ADDED #2:



Can't make out from the news snippet if the dates are for the specific *therium - Cambaytherium - or for its mentioned temporary 'evolutes' (no such thing really) horses and rhinos etc. But either 56 and 54 mya are on the cusp of the merger of Indian plate with the Asian landmass (55-50 mya or even as recent as 35 million years ago):



en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indian_Plate

In the late Cretaceous, approximately 100 million years ago and subsequent to the splitting off from Gondwana of conjoined Madagascar and India, the Indian Plate split from Madagascar. It began moving north, at about 20 centimetres (7.9 in) per year,[10] and is believed to have begun colliding with Asia as early as 55 million years ago,[12] in the Eocene epoch of the Cenozoic. However, some authors suggest that the collision between India and Eurasia occurred much later, around 35 million years ago.[13] If the collision occurred between 55 and 50 Mya, the Indian Plate would have covered a distance of 3,000 to 2,000 kilometres (1,900 to 1,200 mi), moving faster than any other known plate. In 2012, paleomagnetic data from the Greater Himalaya was used to propose two collisions to reconcile the discrepancy between the amount of crustal shortening in the Himalaya (~1300 km) and the amount of convergence between India and Asia (~3600 km).[14] These authors propose a continental fragment of northern Gondwana rifted from India, traveled northward, and initiated the "soft collision" between the Greater Himalaya and Asia at ~50 Ma. This was followed by the "hard collision" between India and Asia occurred at ~25 Ma. Subduction of the resulting ocean basin that formed between the Greater Himalayan fragment and India explains the apparent discrepancy between the crustal shortening estimates in the Himalaya and paleomagnetic data from India and Asia.

An example problem concerning the dates being too close/falling within the time of the plate collision:

So even if Cambaytherium at 56 mya or earlier was still on the floating raft that was India around that time, is it known that by the time the raft collided with Asia some evolutionary stage of the creature didn't get "off" the raft and explore its whereabouts? <-> "Horses and rhinos likely originated in the Indian subcontinent, over 54 million years ago". (Say the plat collidded at 55 mya, then there was a million years to disembark and explore nearby Asia and evolve there... Not necessary, but not impossible/not ruled out by the brief description given in the news soundbyte.)



(Devil's advocate Of course, even if the reference to horse in The Chindu etc is correct - as seems not an invalid interpretation - just because horses evolved so long ago in the subcontinent doesn't guarantee anything about the much later time period. For instance, in one of the examples that was mentioned, horses had colonised north America long ago (IIRC they were still present several thousands of years ago) but they went extinct there, and were reintroduced into the Americas by European settlers. (Though the native Americans understood horses much better -naturally- and became inseparable, even as per European descriptions.)

On the other hand, it is still possible that in the Indian case there has been a continuous presence in the subcontinent of some lineage of horse from its first 'officially horse' ancestor deriving from Cambaytherium thewissi, which in time led to the Sivalensis etc. And which last Priyadarshi (see subsequent post) argues is the ancestor of modern Hindoo horses like the Marwari and the rest.