07-06-2006, 11:05 AM
First of all I must admit that I am a newcomer, and that though I have been interested in History since my childhood, I am no scholar.
Having read all that has been posted so far, I have noticed that most of the posts have ignored certain vital phases of Indian History.
Those being the numerous invasions by outsiders into the Indian Subcontinent. Long before the Arabs, the Turks and the Mughals, there occured a series of invasions by tribes from North and Central Asia into the Subcontinent. No, I am not referring to AIT again, but to invasions that took place much later.
The Greeks had invaded the fringes of North-Western India during the 3rd century BCE. Though Chandragupta Maurya eventually ended the Greek rule in that region, there were a large number of Greeks who adopted Budhism or Hinduism and settled down there.
Then there was reign of the Kushana dynasty. They are believed to have come from the West China - Central Asia region. Under Kanishka, their empire included large parts of modern day Pakistan, Punjab - Haryana - Himachal Pradesh region, Kashmir and even parts of Western Uttar Pradesh and Uttaranchal. Kanishka was renowned for his patronage of Budhism.
During the later parts of the Gupta age, another tribe - the Huns invaded Northern India. They could not penetrate deep into the country, and were assimilated within Indian society.
The people who occupy Gujarat today are belived to be the descendants of a Central Asian tribe that arrived in India sometime between the Gupta age and the rule of Harshavardhana.
Another gtoup of highly important invaders were the Scynthians or the Shakas, a tribe from Central Asia. Their descendants are the Rajputs. They adopted Hinduism, and at that an extreme form of it. A rigid Caste system, Sati and Jowhar are examples of that. Off course, within the Caste system, these invaders from Central Asia would occupy the Higher Castes. <i>Ben Ami</i> - probably that answers a few of your questions. Obviously the descendants of these Shakas, who arrived at a much later date, will have a fairer complexion than opthers in the Subcontinent.
These were a few of the invaders that I recall. The commen thing about them is that all of them were integrated within Indian Culture and Society. Hence, many of us today do not refer to them as 'invaders". Their dascendants are not considered to be "outsiders" (if that term has any significance in this case).
However, when we try to study History and talk about skin colour and gene pool, we must recognise the fact that a large part of the High Caste Hindu population of Nortern India may not be the direct descendants of those who composed the Vedas. The direct descendants of the actual originators of the ancient Hindu scriptures, the great Epics and other works of spiritual, mathematical and scientific value may, today, form only a small proportion of the North Indian High Caste population.
These facts must be taken into consideration before any scientific enquiry about the origins of the Aryans is done.
Even if some researchers may claim that certain sections of the High Caste North Indian population have genes similar to Europeans, that does not really hint that the actual Aryans had much to do with Europeans.
On the other hand studies claiming continuance of gene pools within the subcontinent may mean that Aryans originated in India and then headed west. Later, a part of the group tyhat had headed west came back to invade the subcontinent.
There can, off course, be numerous other conclusions.
Does that pose more question than it solves? <!--emo&:o--><img src='style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/ohmy.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='ohmy.gif' /><!--endemo-->
Having read all that has been posted so far, I have noticed that most of the posts have ignored certain vital phases of Indian History.
Those being the numerous invasions by outsiders into the Indian Subcontinent. Long before the Arabs, the Turks and the Mughals, there occured a series of invasions by tribes from North and Central Asia into the Subcontinent. No, I am not referring to AIT again, but to invasions that took place much later.
The Greeks had invaded the fringes of North-Western India during the 3rd century BCE. Though Chandragupta Maurya eventually ended the Greek rule in that region, there were a large number of Greeks who adopted Budhism or Hinduism and settled down there.
Then there was reign of the Kushana dynasty. They are believed to have come from the West China - Central Asia region. Under Kanishka, their empire included large parts of modern day Pakistan, Punjab - Haryana - Himachal Pradesh region, Kashmir and even parts of Western Uttar Pradesh and Uttaranchal. Kanishka was renowned for his patronage of Budhism.
During the later parts of the Gupta age, another tribe - the Huns invaded Northern India. They could not penetrate deep into the country, and were assimilated within Indian society.
The people who occupy Gujarat today are belived to be the descendants of a Central Asian tribe that arrived in India sometime between the Gupta age and the rule of Harshavardhana.
Another gtoup of highly important invaders were the Scynthians or the Shakas, a tribe from Central Asia. Their descendants are the Rajputs. They adopted Hinduism, and at that an extreme form of it. A rigid Caste system, Sati and Jowhar are examples of that. Off course, within the Caste system, these invaders from Central Asia would occupy the Higher Castes. <i>Ben Ami</i> - probably that answers a few of your questions. Obviously the descendants of these Shakas, who arrived at a much later date, will have a fairer complexion than opthers in the Subcontinent.
These were a few of the invaders that I recall. The commen thing about them is that all of them were integrated within Indian Culture and Society. Hence, many of us today do not refer to them as 'invaders". Their dascendants are not considered to be "outsiders" (if that term has any significance in this case).
However, when we try to study History and talk about skin colour and gene pool, we must recognise the fact that a large part of the High Caste Hindu population of Nortern India may not be the direct descendants of those who composed the Vedas. The direct descendants of the actual originators of the ancient Hindu scriptures, the great Epics and other works of spiritual, mathematical and scientific value may, today, form only a small proportion of the North Indian High Caste population.
These facts must be taken into consideration before any scientific enquiry about the origins of the Aryans is done.
Even if some researchers may claim that certain sections of the High Caste North Indian population have genes similar to Europeans, that does not really hint that the actual Aryans had much to do with Europeans.
On the other hand studies claiming continuance of gene pools within the subcontinent may mean that Aryans originated in India and then headed west. Later, a part of the group tyhat had headed west came back to invade the subcontinent.
There can, off course, be numerous other conclusions.
Does that pose more question than it solves? <!--emo&:o--><img src='style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/ohmy.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='ohmy.gif' /><!--endemo-->