06-14-2009, 07:57 PM
<!--QuoteBegin-Bodhi+Jun 14 2009, 09:16 AM-->QUOTE(Bodhi @ Jun 14 2009, 09:16 AM)<!--QuoteEBegin-->will they ever learn!Â
Arya meant 'Noble'!
Whole of "India" was called 'Aryavarta' since the beginning of the term!
Aryavarta had two 'desha-s' gowda and dravida!!! <!--emo&
--><img src='style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/biggrin.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='biggrin.gif' /><!--endemo-->Â <!--emo&--><img src='style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/biggrin.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='biggrin.gif' /><!--endemo--> sorry too much now
"Most historians are simply bad logicians." -- and most historian-commentators are not only horrible in logic but actually illiterates as far as these matters are concerned.
[right][snapback]98730[/snapback][/right]
<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
It is obvious that many Hindus lack any sense of history, take it as a generalization if you will but it is obvious with interactions online.
Even one who is totally ignorant of linguistics like me knows that Aryavarta has meant different things at different times, in Manu Smriti itself I remember it was restricted to parts of North India, & Dravida's considered degraded Kshatriyas.
Again afaik some sources meant TN & Kerala by Dravida (deep south) but used Dakshinapatha to mean South in general (i.e everything south of the Vindyas including Maharashtra).
The main divisions I think were:
Uttarapatha: Panjab, Gandhara, & everything else upto Delhi.
Aparantha: Sindh, Kutch, Saurashtra, & Western Rajasthan
Madhya: MP, Bihar, rest of Rajasthan, Jharkhand
Purva: Orissa, Bengal, Assam, Arunachal, & rest of NE
Dakshinapatha & Dravida as I said before.
Arya meant 'Noble'!
Whole of "India" was called 'Aryavarta' since the beginning of the term!
Aryavarta had two 'desha-s' gowda and dravida!!! <!--emo&
--><img src='style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/biggrin.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='biggrin.gif' /><!--endemo-->Â <!--emo&--><img src='style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/biggrin.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='biggrin.gif' /><!--endemo--> sorry too much now"Most historians are simply bad logicians." -- and most historian-commentators are not only horrible in logic but actually illiterates as far as these matters are concerned.
[right][snapback]98730[/snapback][/right]
<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
It is obvious that many Hindus lack any sense of history, take it as a generalization if you will but it is obvious with interactions online.
Even one who is totally ignorant of linguistics like me knows that Aryavarta has meant different things at different times, in Manu Smriti itself I remember it was restricted to parts of North India, & Dravida's considered degraded Kshatriyas.
Again afaik some sources meant TN & Kerala by Dravida (deep south) but used Dakshinapatha to mean South in general (i.e everything south of the Vindyas including Maharashtra).
The main divisions I think were:
Uttarapatha: Panjab, Gandhara, & everything else upto Delhi.
Aparantha: Sindh, Kutch, Saurashtra, & Western Rajasthan
Madhya: MP, Bihar, rest of Rajasthan, Jharkhand
Purva: Orissa, Bengal, Assam, Arunachal, & rest of NE
Dakshinapatha & Dravida as I said before.