Forums
Aryan Invasion/migration Theories & Debates -2 - Printable Version

+- Forums (http://india-forum.com)
+-- Forum: Indian History & Culture (http://india-forum.com/forumdisplay.php?fid=3)
+--- Forum: Indian History (http://india-forum.com/forumdisplay.php?fid=10)
+--- Thread: Aryan Invasion/migration Theories & Debates -2 (/showthread.php?tid=567)

Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21


Aryan Invasion/migration Theories & Debates -2 - dhu - 06-27-2006

Archive/Link to Part-1
http://indiaforumarchives.blogspot.com/200...n-theories.html
______________________________________________________

Husky,

Why should the Indologists go for the simple explanation when witzelian "complex scenarios" are always possible. You see, absolutely nothing can discourage the Indologist, heir to the precious enlightenment. See here:

<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->wiki on horse domestication
<i>The traditional scenario, in which the horse would have been domesticated in one isolated locale in the 5th millennium BC, is not without some serious anthropological puzzles.</i><b> For instance, how could the Ukraine's indigenous nomadic hunter-gatherers proceed to the sophistication of proto-Tocharian disk-wheeled ox-drawn wagons in such a short time span? </b>[1] Use of the wheel in this fashion commonly appears much later in the historical record (see Wheel), and wagon construction techniques require advances in carpentry that might seem beyond the reach of Neolithic peoples (see History of Ukraine). <i>Also questioned is why these advanced peoples suddenly appear and then disappear from the local archaeological record.</i> External influences are suggested but unknown; others may suggest transported evidence <!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->

The author should learn from the Indologists how to counteract "serious anthropological puzzles".

The civilizing gypsies from SSVC sindh-punjab, famous for their ox-drawn wagons, could certainly account for the sudden and extraordinary rise in two-bit ukraine's material culture.


Aryan Invasion/migration Theories &amp; Debates -2 - dhu - 06-28-2006

An interesting admission by the reviewer Tom Palaima when discussing the specifically Semitic contributions to pre-greek substrate:

<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->The lexicon of ancient Greek is noteworthy for the large proportion of potentially non-Indo-European words (60 per cent or more).  link<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->

This would place the balkan-greek substrates in a Basque-etruscan-tyrrhenian- rhaetic- lemnian- cretan- pelasgian- kartvellian- circassian- chechen continuum. Palaima's specific arguments about semetic are irrelevent as far as india outbound migrations are concerned.


Aryan Invasion/migration Theories &amp; Debates -2 - dhu - 06-28-2006

<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->Well unless there have been some new discoveries only microlithic
stone tools have been discovered at Bhimbetka.

How do you know those spears don't simply have stone, bone or other
non-metal spearheads?

Regards,
Paul Kekai Manansala<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->


Aryan Invasion/migration Theories &amp; Debates -2 - Guest - 06-28-2006

Post 244:
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->you say that indians are the most advance society ,the mother of all civilisations?<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->Now, that's where you went wrong. In any case, most here (if not all) have said nothing about us being the mother of all civilisations. Not even Will Durant's famous quote on India said that.

However, what we have indicated repeatedly is that our ancestors have been the sole and whole authors of our <i>ancient</i> civilization - that is, the Hindu civilization of the Dharmic religions (Hindu, Jain, ...). This is what we have always known and been taught, until Europe showed us its worst face: colonisation and missionary activity. When that started (just a few centuries ago), European missionaries did the usual pseudo-research and concluded that some fictional Oryan race must have existed and invaded India and authored all our accomplishments except the Indus Valley civilization. Then they blamed our religion for some imagined racial divide that supposedly persists in something they named caste system. They claimed our civilization came from them, the Oryans: our language, our philosophy, our sciences, our ancestors' mentality, all our "good genes" (Europeans couldn't see past the darker brown skin of South Indians to see that Southern facial features are similar to North Indians'). And oh yes, they claimed that our beknighted condition after Islam and our poverty after European colonialism was caused by the miscegenation of those imagined Oryans with the indigenous races: our nation had fallen from the superior civilizational white ancestry because of having committed the European Christian taboo of intermarriage with dark indigenous races. They were stuck with such racist ideas and tried to poison us with them, infusing the nonsense into our education.

Our own recorded history (given in the Puranas and inferable from the Vedas and other nationwide Indian literature) tells us different: that we are the descendants of ancestors native to the same lands that Indians occupy now (+ Pakistan, Bangladesh, Afghanistan, Nepal and eventually transported to Sri Lanka). Our histories tell of one people, who eventually divided into many tribes but were linked by the same Dharma and culture. Our history tells us that our ancestors' accomplishments were their own and are our heritage, but are to be shared for the benefit of humanity. We do not need to steal the accomplishments of other people - whose civilizations, whether older or younger, more or less advanced than ours is not the question here. No need to blow others' candles out to make ours seem brighter, we are content with our happy flame.

Our scriptures speak of emigrations from our lands - especially emigrations from the Northwest. Immigrations are not mentioned. Genetics results, such as they are now, have confirmed this.
Archaeology has shown that the Indus Valley was never destroyed by any invaders and that it was not created by the people who according to the Invasion Theory were pushed down south and whom the west calls Dravidians today. In fact, archaeology has confirmed that there was a continuous culture there and anthropology has shown that the people who live in that region today are anthropologically the same as the people who lived there when the Indus Valley civilization was still thriving.
The European fantasy is fading like a fog in the bright sun. What we had always been taught and known about our own people's history is being confirmed.

We are happy for all civilizations in the world: the Chinese, Greek, Roman, African, American, etc., etc. What would the world be without diversity and varied progress and evolution?
But we are also happy to know that eventually the truth about our own civilization will be established: that in time, the credit for our ancestors' accomplishments, the validity of their experiences, their nativeness to the ancient India's soil, their time of life, sometimes even their existence itself (which quite a few ancient Indians have been denied), will be restored to them. Satyameva Jayate.
Likewise, I'd be very glad to see many other oppressed people in the world be given back their history. For instance, the Zimbabweans whose ancestors had built their city, which the European colonisers then claimed must have been built by white men.


Aryan Invasion/migration Theories &amp; Debates -2 - Guest - 06-28-2006

Romani - does that mean you are a member of the Roma?
I'd not have expected a Romani to so enthusiastically crow over Romania's and the Balkans' accomplishments.
In the Balkans and Romania, Roma were kept as slaves for over 5 centuries, until the 19th century. In both places, the biggest Roma slaveholders were - as is to be expected - the Churches and monasteries, who mistreated them more than any slaves had been until Africa's exploitation. They were often chained in the monasteries and overworked.

The Churches did much worse than enslave and mistreat them, of course. They're the cause for why the Roma, like the Jews, were ostracized from European society. But being Roma, you'd probably not require me to go into the details which you'd already know all too well.


Aryan Invasion/migration Theories &amp; Debates -2 - Guest - 06-28-2006

Post 249 (Dhu):
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin--><!--QuoteBegin--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->some serious anthropological puzzles<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd--><!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->It seems that the AIT is a mind-virus that prevents people from solving basic puzzles. Brains that have been exposed to and been infected by it are unable to think of the possibilities existing beyond the AIT which might negate it. After all, the virus' life hangs in the balance: if the person solves the puzzle in such a way that the AIT is ignored or even undone, then it's all over for the AIT bug.
Thankfully, some brains develop immunity after exposure and so can expell the AIT from their worldview. Yupp, I'm a survivor too.

Yes, the ox-drawn wagons originating in the sindh-punjab that you brought to my attention do indeed seem to solve the whole mystery in a manner that makes one want to say "Of course! It's so simple!"

<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->Why should the Indologists go for the simple explanation when witzelian "complex scenarios" are always possible. <!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->Are you implying that the Indological explanations I predicted (using the Infallible Indological Methods) are simple and not convoluted enough? <!--emo&Big Grin--><img src='style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/biggrin.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='biggrin.gif' /><!--endemo-->
What? <!--emo&:o--><img src='style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/ohmy.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='ohmy.gif' /><!--endemo--> Didn't you see Post 237-point (b) on how the Indological brain ducked the probable, the possible, the straightforward and went directly for the preposterous: "but them non-Oryan-Vanavasi-tribal-animistics can't draw - they've accidentally drawn horses which they've never seen before, instead of drawing their pets - all because we <i>know</i> horses came in 1500bce and <i>not</i> before". (Added a touch of circular reasoning there to make it seem more authentically Indological)
Could things be more complex and further from plausible than that? True, I'm not expert enough in Indology and require more practise, but I thought I had done well for my first attempt. Anyway, I don't want to sacrifice all my neurons by permanently ceasing to exercise them during Indology training. Don't want to end up like a Whatzel or a Fumer - not a pretty sight.


Aryan Invasion/migration Theories &amp; Debates -2 - Guest - 06-28-2006

[quote=Husky,Jun 28 2006, 05:56 PM]

Well then,im agree whit what you say. I heard this theory from some indian nationalists that India do it all while they didnt bring trustfull suport evidence.This theory was in contradition whit all know.But dont worry ,i heard same things from kurds,germans or bulagrians. My belive is that are more cultures that contibuted more or less,influencing or being influence.I dont know what culture is the bigest all cultures but an least in Eurasia we see 4 big cultures Middle east,India,China ,Europe.
I was bring the word about Balkan neolithic culture because i see many similarites whit Indus Valley civilisation.let not be full by the fact that balkanic countries are less develop the West europeans.What is today wasn't alwais. <!--emo&Smile--><img src='style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/smile.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='smile.gif' /><!--endemo-->
No im not a roma,the word romani mean romanians.Al though i live next to gipsy,i was having collegs and enemies among them.The ting whit slavery,romanian peasents was not far from the gipsy situation. In fact many gipsy ,especialy those who do work in noble houses,have a better situation then romanian peasents who make hard working on the fields.My grand-grand father and other peasents was beting repetatly whit the whip by the boyars(nobles man),and this was hapening just before the second world war,when suposely Romania was a civilised country.Also many nobles who rule at that time was from diferent nations greeks,hungarians,muslim turks etc.My fathers and gipsy was in the same situation.
Being a indo-european speaker my self,find puzzeling how this linguistic family is spread so wierd especialy that genetic indians are diferent then europeans.was no close distance ,no big comercial rutes nothing to sugest a comon origin.
Hope that moderators will be kind and wouldnt erase my posts.


Aryan Invasion/migration Theories &amp; Debates -2 - Guest - 06-30-2006

romani,
Don't give reference from anti-Pagan, witch and missionaries’ sites to debunk or proof any theories.

<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->Hope that moderators will be kind and wouldnt erase my posts. <!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Your posts are queued, it will appear only if it’s related to topic or not promoting any vested agenda. Any question please send an email to moderator or admin.


Aryan Invasion/migration Theories &amp; Debates -2 - dhu - 06-30-2006

<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->Further to the west but still within the <b>Ganges valley</b> some studies of deposits at sites such as <b>Sanai Tal lake</b> have reported <b>cereal pollens dated to ca. 13000 BC, </b>indicating that this region may have exhibited some of the earliest-known Neolithic traits <i>(National Seminar on the Archaeology of the Ganga Plain, December 2004, Lucknow, India).</i> wiki<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->


Aryan Invasion/migration Theories &amp; Debates -2 - dhu - 06-30-2006

<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->......I dont know what culture is the bigest all cultures but an least in Eurasia we see 4 big cultures Middle east,India,China ,Europe.....<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->

probably, you have never visited continental India. One sojourn in Paharganj and you will realize the truth of OIT. according to my analysis, a similar journey is what finally enthused the noncommittal Manansala.

as for balkans in comparision to India... the only entity comparable to India is China. Mesopotamia, Egypt, and SEAsia then come second tier. Europe was a nonentity in ancient times. Nor do we see in europe the mobility of the mounted Mongolian hordes. IE albino hordes is another 19th century construct.


Aryan Invasion/migration Theories &amp; Debates -2 - dhu - 06-30-2006

<img src='http://www.uparchaeology.org/images/rice.gif' border='0' alt='user posted image' />

<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->http://www.uparchaeology.org/seminar.htm  Dr. Rakesh Tiwari
It is believed that the agricluture began in the west Asia around the begining of Holocene in a region known as "Fertile Cresent" with the domestication of Barliey and wheat of which the region has been a natural habitat. During the past few decades another Fertile Crescent has emerged in East Asia in China, where the cultivation of rice began much earlier than the emergence of agriculture in west Asia. Apart from this researches carried form Africa and Europe and another parts of the world have brought to light new evidences regarding the indiginous development and spread of early agricluture. The invistigations comprising studies of Palynological remains, phytolith, diatom, DNA etc. and the advent of AMS dating have added new facets to these researches. As far as the Indian subcontinent is concerned, the begining of <b>wheat and barliey cultivation at Kachi Plain in Baluchistan(Pakistan) goes back to seventh millennium BC. </b>More recently the evdience for <b>rice cultivitation in seventh millennium BC </b>has also been recorded from Lahuradewa in the Ganga Plain.<b> Studies on lake cores at Lahuradewa and sanai Tal</b> in the same region indicates that it <b>might have even earlier genesis as early as in the concluding Pleistocene phase of the earliest Holocene.</b><!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->


Aryan Invasion/migration Theories &amp; Debates -2 - Guest - 06-30-2006

You mean Pahaganj from Delhi?
Is true that this cultures aint have same number of population ,but i talk more about influence on the world.. Is true that Europe wasnt a unified entity,this cultural unification started whit halstad in 1200Bc and especialy whit greeks starting from 500BC.BUT this is true also for India,for exemple,in neolithic Bengal and Tamil Nadu cultures was dieferent the Indus civilisation. You said that Europe was behind oriental cultures.THis aint true an least not for 7000-3000BC and 1500-2006 period.Thw existence of large number of megalites from that required a high tehnology is a evidence for this.Also the religion show continuity.The paleolithic Dancing wizard is find also in celtic cult and also in indus pashupati-lord of beasts.Is true that indian paleolithic art is more diverese then european one ,were in paleolithic India you find so much expresivity as in Altamira or Lascaux paintings?
Acording to paleolitic linguistric theory,the IE languages developed in central-asia(a few say middle east),and spread in Europe in 22000BC(the gravetian culture).the gravetian genes represents today 60-70% of european genom.10% of euro genom belong to europeans came in europe in 40000BC such as basque.The ice age separated europe in several izolated human pokets each forming a linguistic IE family .The central-asians who remain in central-asia develop a form of proto-agriculture,increase large in number,as agriculture suport more people then hunting,and in 15000Bc they reach india.During the ice age the north india was desert or semi-desert cos of ice age.They form the indo-iranian branch of IE.Are some genetics that show a split betwin slavs and indians 8000-15000 years ago.However this studies doesnt show what percent of indians are from central-asia nor what was the population of india prior to 15000bc.This study is incomplete from that point of view.
If all non-african genom came from India,which is hard to belive,this aint answer to the qwestion of why india have a majority of IE speakers.If all non-african genom came from india and the families of language was already formed,india today should be a big mozaic of language families ; turco-mongoles,IE,sino-tibetan,finno-ugric,malayesian,australian,basque,amerindian,caucasian etc etc.The IE will be in a small minority most posible.But what we find?MOstly only 2 language families,IE and tamilian.About mongoloid speakers in india,genetic show that they came in india recently in 4000 bc.THis theory doesnt resolve the linguistic problem but put the same question as in AIT: how a small minority IE can impose his language over a much large non-IE majority?
Is true that north and south indians are from the same genetic stock.However south indians have some admixture of australoid genes,but this admixture also have the south chinese ,malayesians,thailandese and may be even some iranian or arabs.Is a comon mistake to see australoids as africans only becose their black skinand broad noses.Australoids are as far from africans as white europeans are.Are 5 races:caucasoid(north africa,europe,midle east,india),mongoloid(china,siberia),australoid(australia,some small pokets in south east asia),afroid(subsaharian africa)amerindian(maya inca).
Neolithic theory belive that IE was spread from Turkey and Kurdistan were was a agricultural revolution.We see this expansion to europe as:turkey,to balcans,to italy ,to spain and central europe;a movement from SE to NV and V.And from V to E as :turkey ,to afganistan-pakistan(Mehrgarh),to indus ,to gange.This agriculturalist from kurdistan and turkey form 20% of european genom. This theory have 3 problems:1-this revolution wasnt spread only to europe and india but also in sumer and arabia and we dont find IE speakers here.2-this agriculturist was in minority(only 20% in europe) ,how they succed to impose their language to a more biger populatrion.3-were this agriculturalist apear especialy in the places were we find large populations of non-IE speakers like cretans ,etruscians,pelasgian ,lemnian etc.So,most probably this agriculturalists was non-IE speakers..
The old towns and vilages are a reproduction at a small scale of the mitical univers.The 2 main roads folow the cardinal points N-S and E-V.This old model we find in towns of africa ,india, midle east.When the population reach a limit the son or sons of king or guvernator left whit a part ofpopulation and establish a new village or town similar in structure whit the mother town( this u can find in history of religions by MIrcea Eliade).
You say that a town from india is from 7000bc.well Jerihon -Israel is from 9000bc. THe cucuteni culture towns(10000loc) are biger the the pre-sumerian towns(5000loc) of pre-sumerian AL-Ubaid culture.Catal Huyuk from turkey is older even the this al ubaid towns,so i dont know why some regards sumerians as the inventatores of the town.
A few words abt balkanic neolithic cultures:like indus people ,they inhumate their deads,after invasions they start to incinerate their deads;they colored the wall houses whit red,blue,green,yellow;the house walls have decorations;they have similar yoga tehnics and also practice acupuncture(their acupuncture is female base ,while chinese one is male base),;they have same cult of fertility gods as indus people;they have similar artistic principles;etc.Starting from 4000bc the balkanic culture fall one after another under repeated invasions of kurgan peoplefrom the north of black sea.In the same time the climate become more dryier.The europe enter in his first dark age.THis make the end of a posible civilisation at the same hight as the egipt,sumer or indus.
You cant compare Vedas whit semitic writings because only IE languageshave the natural tendency for philosophy while semitic languages have a tendency for law and morality.Similar whit veda are avesta and especialy the hittite hymns, which also have a elevate language.Though veda arent philosophical in the true sense of the word .What we call philosophy sistem starts from 800bc.The pre-cristian religions in europe was very similar whit brahmanism.The germans,thracians (the most noumeros people after indians -Herodot say,),celts and most of europe was belive in reincarnation.The diference whit indian religion was the lack of philosophy.The greeks and etruscans was having a diferentreligion.Iven they shared the gods of europeans their life conception was more similar whit sumer and egiptian one.For exemple reincarnation just as in sumer or egipt,didnt play any role .The reincarnation concept was introduced by the thracians whit their mystery cults of Orfeus and Dioniossos,which have a great influence over greek philosophers like PLaton( who develop a philosophy similar whit jainism).
In a clasament made by ancient greeks over the nation whit philosophy and wisdom they put the greeks on the first place,brahmans on the secons place,thracians(ancestors of romanians and bulgarians)on the 3th,and egiptians on 4.This was true for philosophy ,but in medicine,metalurgy ,astronomy etc ,thracians was far superior the greeks.


Aryan Invasion/migration Theories &amp; Debates -2 - dhu - 07-03-2006

<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->Is true that this cultures aint have same number of population ,but i talk more about influence on the world.. Is true that Europe wasnt a unified entity,this cultural unification started whit halstad in 1200Bc and especialy whit greeks starting from 500BC.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Halstead is known to have intruded into western Basque region during iron age, synonymous with the first westward venture west of celts. we are still waiting for witzel's mahaeuropa. i am sure it is hidden somewhere there in romanian hinterlands. Greeks considered themselves connected to mediterranean culture of egypt/mideast much more than northern barbarian land. but they still pale infront of mesopotamia and egypt.

<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->BUT this is true also for India,for exemple,in neolithic Bengal and Tamil Nadu cultures was dieferent the Indus civilisation. You said that Europe was behind oriental cultures.THis aint true an least not for 7000-3000BC and 1500-2006 period.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Not bengal but the northeastern culture is a derivative of the south chinese rice-based culture. ONly the roman and modern period are at levels commensurate with china and egypt, for example.

<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->The existence of large number of megalites from that required a high tehnology is a evidence for this.Also the religion show continuity.The paleolithic Dancing wizard is find also in celtic cult and also in indus pashupati-lord of beasts.Is true that indian paleolithic art is more diverese then european one ,were in paleolithic India you find so much expresivity as in Altamira or Lascaux paintings?<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
These megaliths are known are over the world. nothing special about europe in this regard. incidentally, european microlith period is dated tens of millenia behind srilanka and africa and is derivative. as for uniqueness of lascaux and altamira in france and spain, you shoud thank your basque ancestors.

<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->Acording to paleolitic linguistric theory,the IE languages developed in central-asia(a few say middle east),and spread in Europe in 22000BC(the gravetian culture).the gravetian genes represents today 60-70% of european genom. 10% of euro genom belong to europeans came in europe in 40000BC such as basque.The ice age separated europe in several izolated human pokets each forming a linguistic IE family .The central-asians who remain in central-asia develop a form of proto-agriculture,increase large in number,as agriculture suport more people then hunting,and in 15000Bc they reach india.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Indian neolithic derived form central asia, this has to be a joke. no one will believe 15,000 for central asia neolithic, whch is simply made up out of thin air. population of entire kazakstan is harldy comparable to one indian metro. also we should ask why Chinese is not spoken in africa since we are all descended from africa. this is a confusionistic argument which suppresses the fact of multiple waves of movement out of india at various timedepths - m17 being a major one and dated at 10,000 for origin with a later timed movement out of hindu kush- as reported by witzel himself. basque paleolitihc forms 80 % of albino lines. you should ask yourself why the fanatically intractable euro witzels were <i>forced </i>to move the IE center all the way over to central asia - glossed now as S Russia - i am sure it was not done out of the goodness of ther hearts. balkan neolithic is derived by everyone from Mideast/anatolia/hurrian/ mesopotamia etc- all of these are expressly non-IE and this is reflected in the teeming non-IE pelasgian etruscan chechen etc substrate of old europe- which forms 40-60% of greek balkan vocabulary. and no, it is not phoenician egyptian loans from greek period.

Dr. K Elst: <i>In the 19th century, it was not yet realized how the European branches of IE are all full of substratum elements, mostly from extinct Old European languages. For Latin, this includes such elementary terms as lapis and urbs, borrowed from a substratum language tentatively described as “Urbian”. For Germanic, it includes some 30% of the acknowledged “Germanic” vocabulary, including such core lexical items as sheep and drink. For Greek, it amounts to some 40% of the vocabulary, both from extinct branches of the Anatolian (Hittite-related) family and from non-IE languages. Update </i>

<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->During the ice age the north india was desert or semi-desert cos of ice age.They form the indo-iranian branch of IE.Are some genetics that show a split betwin slavs and indians 8000-15000 years ago.However this studies doesnt show what percent of indians are from central-asia nor what was the population of india prior to 15000bc.This study is incomplete from that point of view.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Here is the joker witzel himself quoting underhill who traces M17 to Hindu Kush, which is still a gross underestimation of its real origin in tribal india, where the related variant clades are found in abundant diversity. from joker list IER:

<i>P. UNDERHILL Is a geneticist at Stanford U., and participant in our yearly Round Tables. He gave an overview of the genetic data presently known for India. ... Of special interest is R1a1-M17 (which he discovered in 1995) and that has often been attributed to the spread of Indo-European (while Hindutvavadins let it originate in India). That is a gross simplification. According to him, it probably arose in the area around the Hindukush around 10,000 BC (+/- 3000 years), and spread eastwards and westwards. It has the largest impact on S. Asia (some 25%), but is found from E. Europe to India.</i>


Aryan Invasion/migration Theories &amp; Debates -2 - Guest - 07-04-2006

<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->University of Massachusetts Dartmouth, Center for Indic Studies
July 3, 2006
Press Release

<b>Scientists Collide with Linguists to Assert Indigenous origin of Indian Civilization</b>

Comprehensive population genetics data along with archeological and astronomical evidence presented at June 23-25, 2006 conference in Dartmouth, MA, overwhelmingly concluded that Indian civilization and its human population is indigenous.

<b>In fact, the original people and culture within the Indian Subcontinent may even be a likely pool for the genetic, linguistic, and cultural origin of the most rest of the world, particularly Europe and Asia</b>.

Leading evidences come from population genetics, which were presented by two leading researchers in the field, Dr. V. K. Kashyap, National Institute of Biologicals, India, and Dr. Peter Underhill of Stanford University in California. Their results generally contradict the notion Aryan invasion/migration theory for the origin of Indian civilization.

Underhill concluded "the spatial frequency distributions of both L1 frequency and variance levels show a spreading pattern emanating from India", referring to a Y chromosome marker. He, however, put several caveats before interpreting genetic data, including "Y-ancestry may not always reflect the ancestry of the rest of the genome"

Dr. Kashyap, on the other hand, with the most comprehensive set of genetic data was quite emphatic in his assertion that there is "no clear genetic evidence for an intrusion of Indo-Aryan people into India, [and] establishment of caste system and gene flow."

Michael Witzel, a Harvard linguist, who is known to lead the idea of Aryan invasion/migration/influx theory in more recent times, continued to question genetic evidence on the basis that it does not provide the time resolution to explain events that may have been involved in Aryan presence in India.

Dr. Kashyap's reply was that even though the time resolution needs further work, the fact that there are clear and <b>distinct differences in the gene pools of Indian population and those of Central Asian and European groups, the evidence nevertheless negates any Aryan invasion or migration into Indian Subcontinent.</b>

<span style='font-size:14pt;line-height:100%'>Witzel though refused to present his own data and evidence for his theories despite being invited to do so was nevertheless present in the conference and raised many questions.</span>  <!--emo&Big Grin--><img src='style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/biggrin.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='biggrin.gif' /><!--endemo-->  <!--emo&Big Grin--><img src='style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/biggrin.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='biggrin.gif' /><!--endemo-->  <!--emo&Big Grin--><img src='style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/biggrin.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='biggrin.gif' /><!--endemo--> Some of his commentaries questioning the credibility of scholars evoked sharp responses from other participants.

<b>Rig Veda has been dated to 1,500 BC by those who use linguistics to claim its origin Aryans coming out of Central Asia and Europe</b>. Archaeologist B.B. Lal and scientist and historian N.S. Rajaram disagreed with the position of linguists, in particular Witzel who claimed literary and linguistic evidence for the non-Indian origin of the Vedic civilization.

Dr. Narahari Achar, a physicist from University of Memphis clearly showed with <b>astronomical analysis that the Mahabharata war in 3,067 BC, thus poking a major hole in the outside Aryan origin of Vedic people</b>.

Interestingly, <b>Witzel stated, for the first time to many in the audience, that he and his colleagues no longer subscribe to Aryan invasion theory.</b>

<b>Dr. Bal Ram Singh, Director, Center for Indic Studies at UMass Dartmouth, which organized the conference was appalled at the level of visceral feelings Witzel holds against some of the scholars in the field</b>, but felt satisfied with the overall outcome of the conference.

"I am glad to see people who have been scholarly shooting at each other for about a decade are finally in one room, this is a progress", said Singh.

The conference was able to bring together in one room for the first time experts from genetics, archeology, physics, linguistics, anthropology, history, and philosophy. A proceedings of the conference is expected to come out soon, detailing various arguments on the origin of Indian civilization.

Bal Ram Singh, Ph.D.
Director, Center for Indic Studies
University of Massachusetts Dartmouth
285 Old Westport Road
Dartmouth, MA 02747<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->


Aryan Invasion/migration Theories &amp; Debates -2 - Guest - 07-04-2006

Witzel theory and jokers from IER theory are now in <!--emo&:flush--><img src='style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/Flush.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='Flush.gif' /><!--endemo-->
Time to shutdown IER jokers club.

Should we organize proper burial to Aryan Invasion or Aryan tourism Theory or any theory comes from Communist worldwide?

I am waiting to see how IRFAN will react.


Aryan Invasion/migration Theories &amp; Debates -2 - dhu - 07-04-2006

<img src='http://www.harappa.com/indus/gif2/threeheadseal.jpg' border='0' alt='user posted image' />

Poster Adhin of HC list (3806) states that the two symbols on this seal are the three-tongued fire and the seven-tongued fire - both of which are associated with Agnideva, the three headed bull. What a stunningly simple explanation!!!.


Aryan Invasion/migration Theories &amp; Debates -2 - Guest - 07-05-2006

[Edited-Admin]
Dhu
YOU tink that europe is unified culture? until recent times east europe for exemple was very diferit from west.europe is not a continent by the way,is part of the continent eurasia.Is true that greeks have alot of learn from sumer-egipt,but they over pass this 2 cultures.One in the minoic culture which have more advance art and more liberal way of life then egiptians. Second,greeks over pass them in art(being the first culture that reach full maturity) and philosophy(egiptians never get out from the mitological thinking).Starting from 500bc greeks over pass their masters.India will start his artistic full maturity after 200 bc and only in the contact whit greeks.Before that ,indian sculpture for exemple was prity primitive,when you look at teracota sculptures from 400 bc.The indian arhitecture was from wood and share native elements whit assirian and persian influence.
SO i have wright ,Bengal and NE wasnt part of Indus culture but part of South china rice culture.So no MAHA-India at that time.
YOu cant compare asia whit roman empire . the richest economy of the roman empire was also in the asiatic provinces.Anyway you can say that europe was economicaly behinde asia but from tehnological,artistic and intelectual was equal whit asia if not superior.
WE can tanks basques for Altamira .By the way they are full europeans.About megalites i was wana show that it was tehnology and intelectuality in europe at that time ,not barbary as some say.

IS not 15000 bc begining of neolithic,but the begining of a proto-agriculture.The true neolithic agriculture begin in kurdistan by 9000bc and spread to pakistan by 7000bc.As i say,north india was a desert so it have a very small population.the monsoon wasnt there at that time.
Exactly,not chinese in africa ,the chinese wasnt exist at that time.From africa to india is middle east.People from africa just they jump middle east,and go directly in india? hard to belive.you sugesting that people from middle east died and remain only those from india? are genetic lines that go north and central asia directly from middle east ;this lines never reach india.Visit genographic site.Lineage N,C,D,Z,R etc never reach India but go up to north.
The language families wasnt formed at the time when this migrations out of india happend .This is a explination of why is no finno-ugric,basque etc,in India.yes is confuse,are only 2 language family in India;surprising if you consider that all language families exept africa was formed in india.The most of europe population was already form ,when it supose that new population from india came.So even if genes from india came ,they was in numeric inferiority.
No,basque didnt form 80% of european gene poll but only 10%. the other 60% was gravetian ,not basque.It can be sayd that in neolithic 40% of european population was non-IE(basque,etruscan etc) ,but 60% was IE.
I didnt say that non-IE greek words are loads.At the contrary this non-IE words are from 8000-6000BC in Greece.This language was very probably from the same family whit egiptian-afro-asiatic(also name hamito-semitic).If european languages have non-IE substratum,so what ? Exept basque,all the other non-IE languages are newer in europe then IE .
Better ask you self why all IE families are in Europe and only indo-iranian is in asia(exept for a small patetic tokharian).By the way a geneticist(i forgot his name)who study the DNA of tokharian mumies,say that they came from a place betwin Ukraine and Bulgaria.Guess which country is betwin Ukraine and Bulgaria.A linguistic principle say that were are gatheret the most families,or the most dialects that is the place of birth of a language or family language.So in europe we have balto-slavic,germanic,celt-italic,thracian,but in asia we have only indo-iranian.This show that IE in europe is older the IE in india,and it have more time to fragmentate him self.
We cant rely only to genetics,what some studies say that east europeans are more similar whit indians then whit west europeans is ridicoulos.
The iron age start in Turkey not in India
The rice culture start south china not in India
The grain agriculture Start in kurdistan not in India
THe full mature art start in Greece not in India
The city network start in Sumer(al ubaid) not in India
tHE writing start in Balkans not in India.
The movie start in France not in India
India almost never make great inventions but only bring to perfection what other invent.
The phoenicians invent the alphabet,but indians perfect it and bring the shape of the letters to expres the sound in a tube.
The anatolians made first iron tehnology by ,only indians make a full 6 tone iron .
The greeks made first full develop sculpture but indians bring sculpture to a enormous industry.By the way ,first Ajanta caves mimics the sculpte -caves from Lidya(Turkey) 400bc;not the fictious circ roof s of asoka or maurya palace or vedic houses. is no painting or sculpture in India to show round roof of a house or palace from maurya time only triunghiular roofs.And nowhere in India you find such a roof.
Tink,holywood exist before bolywood.If indian make the bigest number of movies ,thats not mean they invented the cinema.

Why central asia-russia for IE ? First invasion in Europe starts from Kurgan culture in 4000BC.they bring incineration rite in europe.In 1900 bc also apear incineration in India.So in Europe incineration rite is older(4000bc).In vedas is mention incineration so Veda cant be older then 1900bc(exept it was writen in balkans).The mention of astral event in 4000bc in Vedas doesnt mean that Vedas is from 4000 bc.If Bible mention a guy name Iob(2600bc) doesnt mean that the Bible is from 2600bc.The first chariots apear in Hungary plain whit 2,4 and ever whit 3 wheels -4000bc and first chariots pull byy horse apear in Ural-2000 bc. While chariots from India have no more the 2700bc and are pull by bulls and donkeys.Regards <!--emo&Tongue--><img src='style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/tongue.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='tongue.gif' /><!--endemo-->


Aryan Invasion/migration Theories &amp; Debates -2 - Guest - 07-05-2006

romani,
Provide links to prove your funny facts. This is serious dicussion forum, not IER jokers club.
Thanks.


Aryan Invasion/migration Theories &amp; Debates -2 - dhu - 07-06-2006

<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->India will start his artistic full maturity  after 200 bc and only in the contact whit greeks.<b>Before that ,indian sculpture for exemple was prity primitive,</b>when you look at teracota sculptures from 400 bc.The indian arhitecture was from wood and share native elements whit assirian and persian influence.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->

<img src='http://faculty.cva.edu/Stout/IndianCambodian/MohenjoDaroPriestKing.jpg' border='0' alt='user posted image' />




Aryan Invasion/migration Theories &amp; Debates -2 - dhu - 07-06-2006

<img src='http://www.atributetohinduism.com/images/head.jpg' border='0' alt='user posted image' />
<i>
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
wiki: A copper item representing a human head styled in the manner described for the Rigvedic Vasishtas has been dated to around 3700 B.C. in three western universities using among other tests carbon 14 tests, spectographic analysis, X-ray dispersal analysis and metallography (Hicks and Anderson. Analysis of an Indo-European Vedic Aryan Head - 4500-2500 B.C., in Journal of IE studies 18:425-446. Fall 1990.).</i>

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"A Surprise Head"
===============
by Subhash Kak,
Louisiana State University, Baton Rouge.

from: "Yoga Journal", July/August 1992.
(taken without permission).
------------------------------------------------------------

In 1990, the prestigious "Journal of Indo-European Studies"
carried an article entitled "Analysis of an Indo-European
Vedic Aryan Head - 4th Millenium B.C." Authored by Harry
Hicks and Robert Anderson from California, this article has
created a storm of excitement among Indian scholars because
it presents technical evidence establishing that a bronze
head obtained by Hicks in Delhi in 1958 was cast more than
6000 years ago.

The life-sized head has a hairstyle that the Vedas describe
as being unique to the family of Vasishtha, one of the great
seers who composed parts of the "Rig Veda". The hair is
oiled and coiled with a tuft on the right, and the ears are
riveted. Vasishtha was a priest to the famous Vedic king
Sudas, who defeated a coalition of 10 kings in a battle on
the banks of the Parushni river.

Carbon-14 tests performed on carbon deposits from inside the
hollow head indicate that it was cast around 3700 B.C. with
an error in either direction of up to 800 years. The tests
were conducted at the Swiss Federal Institute of Technology
in Zurich and at the Cyclotron at the University of Califor-
nia, Davis. Independent metallurgical tests also indicate an
age consistent with the carbon tests.

Stylistically the head is unique, with some parallels from
the realistic torso that has survived from the Harappan era
of the third millennium B.C. The head bears an inscription
that was apparently added several thousand years after it
was cast, in a script that was in use until about 600 years
ago. Although identification of the head with Vasishtha may
yet be contested, it seems fairly certain that the head is
Vedic.