06-07-2007, 11:03 AM (This post was last modified: 06-07-2007, 11:41 PM by dhu.)
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->In this connection, we also point out that as far as astronomical
observations are concerned, there are some truly intricate observations about
planetary movement that occurred only in 9,300 and 5,200 BC that seems to
have been recorded in the Vedic literature. In particular, Mahajani et al., (2005)
have shown that there is a record of movement of Mars through the head of
Taurus in the literature. The last passage of Mars occurred in 5284 BC and prior to that
in 9860BC, 9828 BC, 9371 BC and 9339 BC. These periods coincide
with the major rises in the sea level which would not have been noticed by the
inland civilisations while they would clearly have made a great impact on the sea
side civilisation. We suggest that this is also an indication of exchange of
knowledge between the two cultures and their merging. http://www.tifr.res.in/~vahia/harappa.pdf<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->7) Dating of Rohi-akaa-Bheda
Parag Mahajani, M N Vahia, Mohan Apte, A P Jamkhedkar
Annals of the Bhandarkar Oriental Research Institute, 2006
Rohi-akaa-Bheda (RSB) is referred in Indian literature as an event of great
significance. RSB is said to occur when either Saturn or Mars pass through the
triangle formed by a, e and g stars of the Taurus Constellation (or the Vabha).
We have searched the literature and found descriptions of RSB recorded by
several authors. We have compiled the various references to this event and
show that the event has been given considerable importance in the literature, with only minor changes in the description over the millenniums. Based on this,
we have derived a common minimal interpretation of the same. In some literature,
this event is correlated with a huge disaster.
We have searched the astronomical database using the latest ephemeris
for RSB. We found a series of RSB events with Mars. The latest event occurred
in 5284 BC but before that, it occurred several times during the 10th millennium
BC. However, since 5284 BC, the event has not occurred and is not expected to
occur till 10,000 AD.
During 10,000 to 9,000 BC, the end of the last ice age indicates that there
was a sudden rise in the sea level by 60 meters over a few hundred years
indicating a yearly rise of 22 mm per year. This rise reached a plateau around
9,000 BC when the rate of increase came down to about 2 mm per year until
about 5,500 BC when once again it rose significantly by 10 mm/year for about a
thousand years to reach the currently observed levels.
We therefore suggest that whoever correlated RSB with huge disasters
must have done so around 5284 BC and could have had some idea about the
disasters that coincided with the earlier phases of RSB which occurred in
9860BC, 9828 BC, 9371 BC and 9339 BC. This suggests that the tradition of
intricate astronomical observations is older than seven thousand years from
present. http://www.tifr.res.in/~vahia/10-paper-abstracts.pdf<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
06-08-2007, 06:14 PM (This post was last modified: 06-08-2007, 06:21 PM by Husky.)
Found something relevant to the red bit in the following:
<!--QuoteBegin-rajesh_g+Jan 22 2006, 08:18 AM-->QUOTE(rajesh_g @ Jan 22 2006, 08:18 AM)<!--QuoteEBegin--><!--QuoteBegin-Sushmita+Jan 21 2006, 04:22 PM--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Sushmita @ Jan 21 2006, 04:22 PM)<!--QuoteEBegin-->[...]
Koenraad Elst's article "Sati en andere zelfdoding" (Sati and other suicide
[...]
<!--QuoteBegin--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin--><b>Origin</b>
People sometimes say that widow-burning was brought into India in a later migration from Central-Asia, that of the Shakas or Scythians, in the middle or end of the first millenium B.C. These Scythian tribes are then supposed to have been the ancestors of the martial Rajput caste in Rajasthan, the caste to which Rup Kanwar and the most famous satis belonged. This seems to me an attempt to push away from oneself a difficult to defend custom. Of the Scythians, it is indeed known that they sent widows to their death with their husband, as well as servants and horses with their master â whether <b>burnt with them or buried with them</b>. From archaeological excavations in Southern-Russia it appears that widows were already climbing the funeral pyres of their deceased husbands in the fourth millennium before our chronology, in the so-called Kurgan-culture, an apparantly proto-Scythian and definitely Indo-European culture.
In India, besides the Rajputs, the martial Marathas and Sikhs also knew this custom, though to a lesser extent. Other castes did not know this practice at all or specifically disapproved of it, in particular the brahmans (although they too practised sati in British-Bengal, in particular after the modernisation of the law of succession). In most duty-prescribing books (400 B.C. to 200 A.D?), among others of Manu and Yajnavalkya, there is no mention of widow-burning at all. Only the Vishnu-dharma-shastra gives the widow the choice between celibacy and self-immolation.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->[right][snapback]45297[/snapback][/right]<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->[right][snapback]45313[/snapback][/right]<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->Don't know why "The connection with India should however not be sought in the Scythian invasion of the 1st century B.C., but in the much older common Indo-European roots".
Because, see here, an interesting bit about China - China, which is not classed as 'IE' just yet:
<b>Extract from 'The Giant Book of Facts', Octopus Books, 1987, London</b>
p.248
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin--><b>Who was the 'First Emperor'?</b> He was Cheng Ying, who adopted the tite; of Shih Huang-ti (meaning the 'First Emperor') when he became ruler of the whole of China in 221 BC.
Shi-Hunag-ti was by no means the first emperor of China, but he was probably the first really powerful one. He reogranized the country's economy, standardizing its coinage and its weights and measures, which helped to speed up trade and so make people more prosperous.
<b>Standardization</b> One reform that helped trade perhaps more than any other measure was the regulating of the width of carts and wagons. The soft ground of the roads wore into deep ruts, which exactly fitted the carts of each region. With standardization, goods no longer had to be off-loaded from one cart on to another when they reached a frontier between one state and another.
<b>Terracotta regime</b> When the 'First Emperor' died he was buried in great state. <b>Earlier rulers of China</b> went to their graves accompanied by a large entourage of courtiers, wives and servants (who either voluntarily committed suicide or were put to death). In an ingenious way, Shih Huang-ti went as close as he dared to reviving this ancient custom.
He, too, was buried with a huge retinue - an army of 6,000 soldiers. But these soldiers were modelled lifesize in terracotta, a kind of pottery. Each one has an individual face; they were not mass-prodiced.
The huge tomb which contains the remains of the emperor and his model army was found in 1974, and is still being excavated.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->From what I understand, Sati doesn't mean death of all the 'servants, courtiers or slaves' as it did in China or among Germanic people.
Then why not seek an Indian connection with China; why only with the 'IE' world? Better yet, I'd say China and Germanic people had more points in common w.r.t this form of ritual suicide, than there are between India and either in this case.
<b>No, no, I'm not implying</b> that this is some 'IE' link between China and Europe - although I daresay IE-dude Victor Mair would jump around about how this is conclusive proof that the 'Oryans did indeed bring civilisation to China'.
My point is merely that many cultures have certain behaviours in common - and that oftentimes, this is just by coincidence. Rituals around death occur in all human societies, it is not impossible that some societies independently came up with a few which many others also happened to have practised in some seemingly similar form. (For instance, some African communities have rain dancing, so do some Native American ones. Doesn't immediately imply a connection.)
But when India has some phenomenon vaguely like any in Europe, it is immediately pounced on as something common to 'IE'. Like in this case; even though as far as I know, India's Sati is different from the suicide-ritual practised by Germanic and Chinese people. (That is, I am not aware that in Sati people other than the - usually Kshatriya - wife burn themselves after a husband passes away.)
Herodot:
"Thracians have the folowing customs.Each one have several wifes;when some among man dies ,a great quarrel start among womens to find out which of them was the most beloved one.To the chosen one the folow honoring is made:over whelm by praise of womens and mans,she is strangle next to the tomb by her closest realive and buried to her husband.The other wifes try a deep pain ,because for them is consider the bigest shame to not be chosen.
They expose the death 3 days then they sacrifice all kinds of animal,make a banquet..then they buried the body burning it or buried it;after that they make all kind of competitions in which the bigest rewards are give for free fighting."
We can talk about a eurasian tradition-like in the case of storm gods like Indra ,which is found also among sumerians(god Enlil) or semitics(Baal).Also ,the mithology and gods of semitic are very similar whit IE ones-wich some explaind
that semitics live next to IE and aquiried these traditions from them.
Storm gods are found also in maya,aztec(quetzatquatl) and inca(Viracochas) cultures,but not among egiptians.Some explain that It was a invasion of IE people by ships which bring this gods to America.
Just once, I'd like to take up the claim, made endlessly on the
Web -- along with other debunked Indus Valley fantasies, including
those involving "perfectly proportioned" Indus weights and bricks,
astronomically aligned cities or graves, and "Indus writing" --
that "yoga" can be traced back to the Harappans.
Naga Ganesan brought it up again today on the List:
> On yoga origins, whether IE (Nick Allen's publications) or
> proto-Indian such as Yan Y. Dhyansky (The Indus Valley Origin of a
> Yoga Practice. Artibus Asiae, Vol. 48, No. 1/2, 89-108. 1987)....
I'd like to repeat that the only claimed evidence of "yoga" in the
Indus Valley comes in the fact that a few seals carry pictures of a
god or god imitator sitting cross-legged. The most famous example is
found in Marshall's egregiously misnamed "proto-Siva" seal:
In fact, cross-legged postures like this were common in many ancient
civilizations. In Egypt, cross-legged poses were common signs of Egyptian
scribes, who are invariably shown with papyrus scrolls in their laps
and "meditative" looking faces. Here is a famous example (out
of dozens) from the mid third millennium BCE (the "Scribe of
Saqqara", in the tomb of Ptahhotep):
So, if crossed legs mean "yoga," maybe "yoga" traces its origins to
Egypt?
Note the papyrus scroll in the scribe's lap: you can't mistake a *truly*
literate culture in antiquity, since images of writing, writing
instruments, etc., turn up all over the place (quite unlike the Indus
Valley, where all this evidence is absent).
If you don't think that the Scribe of Saqqara's pose looks twisted
enough to be called "yoga", check out the poses of the two figures at
the top of this drawing of a wall painting from the same tomb:
Cross-legged poses were also common in Mesoamerica, dating from
long before we hear of "yoga" in India. Cf., e.g., this figure from the
Olmec found in what looks to be a full-lotus position:
I could show dozens and dozens of similar examples -- as opposed to
the handful of atypical crossed-leg poses in India. (There is a typical
worshipping position in Indus iconography, but it doesn't look at all
like this.)
Basta, please, with "yoga" in the Indus Valley. It is another of the
bottomless supply of Indus fantasies, based on no evidence. Unfortunately,
that hasn't kept it from being repeated endlessly since the 1920s.
Steve
<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
What nonsense!! Indus valley seals show not just a CROSS-LEGGED POSTURE as he says, but advanced Yoga Asanas, in complete accordance to as described (later) in Sri gheraNya saMhitA and sri goraksha saMhita / hathyoga pradipika.
Advanced Asanas such as Siddha Asana, Goduhasana, Padmasan etc can be seen.
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->Cross-legged poses were also common in Mesoamerica, dating from
long before we hear of "yoga" in India. Cf., e.g., this figure from the
Olmec found in what looks to be a full-lotus position:
Neither the first one looks like padmasana, nor the last one a Yoga posture.
Well, another guy chimed in:
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->However, the posture of the seated figure in the proto-Siva seal is
worthy of further consideration. A clearer exemplar of this seal
appears here: http://www.harappa.com/indus/33.html
<http://www.harappa.com/indus/33.html>
In particular, I would note the description of the posture:
"The heels are pressed together under the groin and the feet project
beyond the edge of the throne. The feet of the throne are carved
with the hoof of a bovine as is seen on the bull and unicorn seals."
As far as I know, this posture is fairly unusual in comparative
iconographic studies. It is also rarely used in modern hatha-yoga.
<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
This is called goduhanasana in Hathayoga because this resembles the posture of a man milching a cow!! This is one of the very important yoga asanas. In Jain traditions, Bhagwan Mahaveer Swami is said to have attained Siddhi in this Asana. (and Bhagwan Buddha in Padmasana!)
Could this not represent the famous adjacent chapters of Maheshwara khandam of Sri Skanda Purana - Mahishasura Mardana theme on front; and Shumba-Nishumbha-mardan on back?
Both are part of Maheshwar Khand - Shiva in meditation shown on front?
10) The Harappan Question
Mayank Vahia
Annals of the Bhandarkar Oriental Research Institute, 2006
One of the major problems of interpretation of early Indian history has been the
inconsistencies between the Harappan (Indus Valley) civilisation and the
Rigvedic literature. Problems arise from the fact that the Harappan Civilisation
was at its peak around second millennium BC (Allchin and Allchin, 1989 page
131). The period of creation of the Rigveda has also been put around 4000 to
2000 BC, though the writing down of the text has been dated to a much later
period around 2000 BC or later. The Rigvedic literature and its subsequent
developments have also been in the Indian subcontinent. There has therefore
been a strong temptation to connect the Harappans to the Vedic Civilisation.
However, there are several problems with this association, most graphically
portrayed in the `horse problem' (Thapar, 2003). Horses are integral to most
Rigvedic ritualistic customs while they are absent in the Harappan sites. There
are several other problems also. We re-visit this controversy in the light of some
recent developments and suggest that the Harappans belonged to the ancient
Homo sapiens who separated from the humans migrating from Africa as early as
sixty thousand years ago and travelled along the coast of the Arabian Sea (Wells,
2003). This group lost touch with the group that migrated to the Mediterranean
and evolved independently of them. We suggest that it was this group that set up
the Harappan civilisation. We suggest that the group that went to the
Mediterranean eventually moved east at the end of the Ice ages and passing
through northern Iraq, Iran and Afghanistan entered India (the Indo  Iranians)
where they met the earlier migrants who had come along the seas. They met at
the Harappan sites sometime around two and a half thousand years BC.
We
base this suggestion on new data on the genetic make up of aboriginal Indian
tribes (Thangaraj et al., 2002) and other studies of human migration, dating of
separation of languages (Gray and Atkinson, 2003) and broad based studies of
prehistoric human evolution (Mithen, 2003) as well as other evidence about the
appearance of horses in Asia, etc. We propose that the Vedas were composed by the Indo Iranian but they included upon the learning of the Harappans and this
mix of knowledge is also visible in the Vedic literature, especially in the
astronomical information in the literature.
about Bhagwan Mahaveer attaining Siddhi in that Asana:
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->Most of his meditation was accomplished in a standing posture - 'kayotsarga-mudra', though when on the 10th day of the later half of Vaisakha he attained 'keval jnan', he was in 'Godohana-mudra' - a posture one had when milking a cow. On the bank of river Rjukula, when he attained 'keval jnan' - all-knowing intuitive vision, he was sunk into 'shukla dhyan' - pure meditation.
Within the context of say AIT not have originated beyond "Akhand Bharat map", and lets assume up to Iranian region. Now, per vedas there is a lot of mention about Saraswati river and the whole dried up bed being studied by Indian scientists giving validity that Aryans weren't outside this map. Sounds like a logical conclusion.
But, what perplexes me is that there exists no equivalent texts other than the vedas or similar texts that is old enough to say Cauvery or some other southern Indian rivier being mentioned. What i am trying to analyze is (mating myth v/s science), how far back we can go and whether people who existed in southern lands was really different (race, langauge, color, religion, etc)?
All the migratory history points to North. I know there is a bunch of people who would bash spence wells left right and center, from a prejudiced view.. but instead of bashing, why not try to use his data for reasonings. He also mentions different time points of originations.
What I am thinking is this.. Lets say we had a previous migration (pre ice-age (no figures taken here for argument)) that predominated all coastal areas of India X years ago. And the Vedic migration happend Y years ago, and for argument sake I am putting X is much greater than Y, at least 20,000 years (going by again the melanin color change time requirements), sope we could easily attribute two different major type of migratory people existed in our land.
Another interesting point is post ice age, it could be all that chimpz mutating to humans happened for 100s and thousands of years independently at various places where the chimps migrated. We (spencer) are measuring and doing DNA studies only on humans.. Perhaps they should do with the chimps and monkey types. That would also link up with Valies, Hanumans and Jambavan time periods. In the ramayana myths, there is always reference to Hanuman having born (argument: say having procreated from a DNA chain that belongs to the previous yuga).
Perhaps that could lead more evidence to different human species(=race) or categories exists today, originated and mutated after chimp migration periods pre ice-age. That would perhaps clear why spencers adam and eve have different time points.
06-15-2007, 10:35 AM (This post was last modified: 06-15-2007, 12:41 PM by dhu.)
<!--QuoteBegin-saik+Jun 15 2007, 03:33 AM-->QUOTE(saik @ Jun 15 2007, 03:33 AM)<!--QuoteEBegin-->All the migratory history points to North. I know there is a bunch of people who would bash spence wells left right and center, from a prejudiced view.. but instead of bashing, why not try to use his data for reasonings. He also mentions different time points of originations.
[right][snapback]70118[/snapback][/right]<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Saik,
If we go even by New World standards, the overarching gradients engendered by the Ice age are South-to-North:
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->Rather than migrations from north to south, <b>Nichols maintains that the interior of North America was colonized not directly from Siberia but almost entirely from the south. </b><i>Even the <b>Athabaskan </b>language family, now centered in northern Canada and Alaska, is more likely to have moved up from the south </i>than to have entered directly from Siberia. lInk<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Latest dates for the New World (40K see article) are stating that it was colonized at nearly the same time as europe itself (!!!), which (if we take a geographical view) is almost directly to the north of the India/Iran heartland. The case is basically set that we are dealing with same type of dynamics of language transfer as in post ice age New world, that is with an overarching South-to-North migration gradient.
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->At its core, yoga is a set of postures or asana (exercises) aimed at
calming the mind/soul to achieve an altered state (entasy, stasis,
samadhi, etc).
So, if a person is a cross-legged posture and looks as if in an
altered state it could be a form of "proto-yoga."
However, the same imagery could also suggest shamanic/ecstatic or
similar practices.
There are various images on Harappan seals that almost certainly are
related to other images found thousands of years later. <b>For example,
the "buffalo sacrifice" with the foot placed on the neck of a buffalo
while thrusting or throwing a spear is also found in much later Durga
images.</b>
<b>You'd have to be Farmeresque to insist that the Durga images
originated independently or came directly from "Eurasians" of some sort.</b>
Regards,
Paul Kekai Manansala<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
<!--QuoteBegin-dhu+Jun 15 2007, 12:05 AM-->QUOTE(dhu @ Jun 15 2007, 12:05 AM)<!--QuoteEBegin--><!--QuoteBegin-saik+Jun 15 2007, 03:33 AM--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(saik @ Jun 15 2007, 03:33 AM)<!--QuoteEBegin-->All the migratory history points to North. I know there is a bunch of people who would bash spence wells left right and center, from a prejudiced view.. but instead of bashing, why not try to use his data for reasonings. He also mentions different time points of originations.
[right][snapback]70118[/snapback][/right]<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Saik,
If we go even by New World standards, the overarching gradients engendered by the Ice age are South-to-North:
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->Rather than migrations from north to south, <b>Nichols maintains that the interior of North America was colonized not directly from Siberia but almost entirely from the south. </b><i>Even the <b>Athabaskan </b>language family, now centered in northern Canada and Alaska, is more likely to have moved up from the south </i>than to have entered directly from Siberia. lInk<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Latest dates for the New World (40K see article) are stating that it was colonized at nearly the same time as europe itself (!!!), which (if we take a geographical view) is almost directly to the north of the India/Iran heartland. The case is basically set that we are dealing with same type of dynamics of language transfer as in post ice age New world, that is with an overarching South-to-North migration gradient.
[right][snapback]70128[/snapback][/right]
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Within tropics, or a particular living zone is what I was thinking.. migration again could happen in reverse directions or perhaps it has recursed many times that it is hard to prove it.
Sope, agreeing to a theory there exists two or more races (please keep only time line and origins being the factors for argument) one migrating north the other south, and some never is all a plausible propositions.
What i am getting at is its hard to debunk AIT within tropics as boundary (that means North is not that North enough for the propagandists and European agenda folks to take credit).
06-17-2007, 05:49 AM (This post was last modified: 06-17-2007, 05:52 AM by Husky.)
<!--QuoteBegin-saik+Jun 15 2007, 10:40 PM-->QUOTE(saik @ Jun 15 2007, 10:40 PM)<!--QuoteEBegin-->agreeing to a theory there exists two or more races[right][snapback]70147[/snapback][/right]<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->Though I get that you're talking about some 'races' in an Indian context, can you please prove the existence of races in the general context? Because scientists have been unable to prove there's any such thing (excluding the racists like those working for the Pioneer Fund who pretend they're scientists and work with 'race' as if it were a given). Outside of the US, no western country's government ever asks for one's 'race'. They always ask for one's ethnicity. American scientists also write about ethnic groups, not about races.
Hence my question. You're free to use the term, of course, but as it stands, you're introducing a word that has no scientific basis into the already assumption-laden AIT- and IE-equations. That means one more massive assumption: Assume race, assume IE family, assume PIE, assume IE people, assume AIT, assume Dravidians, assume.... Yikes.
(However ethnic groups do not in any way have the same meaning as race, so you can't replace the use of 'race' with 'ethnic group' in future and continue to talk about your ideas in the same manner. It is the <i>concept</i> of race that is not scientifically accepted anymore and from there it follows that scientists don't use the word race. The concept of ethnicity is wholly different. For instance there are way way way more ethnicities in the world - not even counting subethnicities - than there were ever races. And race categories and ethnic groups do not overlap.)
Better than race ,we can talk about phenotype.
Mongoloid phenotype,subsaharian phenotype,caucazoid phenotype and so on.
The climate adaptations like skin color,bones density,dimensions of nasal cavity,type of hair,raport betwin skin surface and height and so on..
There are so little genetic diference betwin people that we cant see them as separate races.
We can talk about races in case of cabalines(horse,donkey,zebra-races of the same species),cammels-lamas,lion-tiger,dog-wolf,neanderthal-homo sapiens.
Could be continental phenotype,ethnic phenotype,regional phenotype,even village phenotype,depending of scale we use.
But race is a more popular term and have less letters(economy of writing).
06-18-2007, 08:49 PM (This post was last modified: 06-18-2007, 09:38 PM by Husky.)
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->We can talk about races in case of cabalines(horse,donkey,zebra-races of the same species),cammels-lamas,lion-tiger,dog-wolf,neanderthal-homo sapiens.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->I thought neanderthals and homo sapiens were still regarded as separate species, even though there appear to be a few harbouring suspicions of interbreeding between the two. (Or perhaps they are subspecies?)
Correct me if I'm wrong but, for the rest, aren't they talking about 'varieties', rather? 'Variety' is definitely used in flora and fauna classification, from what I remember.
When it comes to horse 'races' they do not mean the same as when people use human 'races'. Human races were grouped by skin tone and other such simplistic schemes. And for a long time there were different racial categorisation schemes with some people putting Australian Aboriginals under the African heading, others saying that they were separate because of the occurrence of blonde hair; some dividing the Africans further into the Bushmen 'race' and a few other groups; and still others grouping Indians as Africans or otherwise as Australian Aboriginals. Makes one's head spin.
If it can be so arbitrary, Indians can be our own 'race'. Even so, that term makes no scientific sense.
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->Better than race ,we can talk about phenotype.
Mongoloid phenotype,subsaharian phenotype,caucazoid phenotype and so on.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->For me your definition does not hold simply because I know that even in my own family it does not hold: a few members will ruin the 'classification-scheme-according-to-phenotype' you have there. Because with a handful of individuals, where exceptional phenotypes cropped up, make it such that my family looks to straddle about 3 major Asian geographic regions (where 2 of these regions are classified as 'Mongoloid race'). And yet we're all historically Indian, all Tamil, all Hindu.
These things happen, though sporadically, in many parts of India.
The explanation is rather simple. It's the Indian gene pool. Very big. Very diverse.
This has had the side-effect of making it too hard for the 19th century anthropologists to categorise Indians: we defied their ready-and-labelled boxes. 'Race' - meaningless in the sciences - is an inadequate construct even in any informal sense.
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin--> Aryan and racist myth- an english inventionâ In fact this mad thinking that Germans are Aryans and so superior is not even German thinking. Remember even today the most hate publications in the world are produced by those so called middle america( so beloved of BBC) who wrongly called themselves Aryans and hate ,besides others, the real Aryans in america who are Immigrants from Indian subcontinent. (And these real Aryans from India are much highly educated and cultured than these plumber cum shopkeepers lot of ugly looking baptist america going by the name (euphemecally) middle america (who usually get visitations from u.f.o.).
When the German scientists (and some French) in employment of The Czarina Catherine the great were collecting (for St.Petersburg library) language (among other things) information in far-flung Russian empire, they stumbled across some Tchokhari language near . They found that some of the language resembled German. Later on they were told by French that similar language was the main language spoken in India-Sanskrit and all Sanskrit derived languages of whole India except in South India. Even in South India, the Brahmans spoke Sanskrit. That is how Germans came to know about Aryan language. In fact the shopkeeperâs race -english who already had been trader in India for 125 years, had no inkling about this similarity. Germans studied the Veda, Upanishads and what not and were very impressed by Indians achievement.
The English said that Sanskrit was a new artificial invention created by Indians after Europeans came to India. This is how these low peoples` mind works. Anyway undeterred, the Germans studied Sanskrit very well and wrote a lot about it. Then belatedly some English people started studying it to find not knowledge but common Hindu laws and also to find fault with Hindu religion and scriptures. So there was a fundamental difference between Germans (even Italian Jesuit priest and a Frenchman in 16 the century had studied) and the English. Germans studied because it was and is a beautiful language with literature no other in the world, while the english (who after Napoleonic war got real power in her history through default) studied to prove that Sanskrit was a fraud creation. Then even all evidence showed contrary to english view, the english first said that Veda was written soon after Alexander invasion. then the date Veda was pushed back to 55 BC. then 1000BC then (only after Al-Amarna tablet and Bogzhoiki tablet) was it pushed to 1500 years and then 1800 years. In other word ,malicious intention of English race has been to first deny. then malign and make Aryan literature not so old and it really is. This is from a shopkeepers race like English who never had real aristocracy but always talk of heritage and tradition. A tradition of pirate cum shopkeeper turned land grabber and then so called gentlemen with no culture and taste and talking of low life as pragmatism.
In fact the Germans said that the Hindus were the Aryan race and Germans were somehow related to them in language. Germans used Indo-Germans while rightly restricting the Aryan word to Hindus. (In all Hindu scriptures there is no word -Hindu; it is always ARYa to denote Hindu race and literature. ). Of course the English jumped into this naming process and said `me too`. That is how Indo-European word came into being.
Basic thing is that when before Alexander the Greek language was considered un barbaric by Indian grammarians (who knew everything about origin-roots of language). Even the Greeks called the old Persian -barbaric (in way of foreign) language. And that old Persians was akin to Sanskrit. IN Persipolis (which Herodotus did not know because as non-Aryan Greek would not be invited in Emperor Darayaush` or his descendents` ceremony )there still is a relief of how Medians (foremost among the Persian Aryans) looked like. WE know how Darayaush the Great and his descendents looked like. There is also coin of other Iranians and Indians in Gandhar region (which has always been populated by Indian descendents). Compare to the =medianâs coin( found archeologically) medians, coin profiles with Parsees (who fled Iran in 600 AD.) and with Many Sikhs, Bahamans, And a lot of North Indians-And you know what Aryans looked like. Indira Gandhi, Jubeen Mehta , and such are the typical Aryan faces. In profile, Aryans a have what In Sanskrit literature is called Eagle or Parrot like bent nose. Sides of the nostrils are arched and Eyes have a particular sharp angle with nasal bridge. Aryans are usually very hairy as well especially in Facial department.
Besides when the Babylonian scribe about Kassites invasions (who it has been proved were Indians-full stop) they wrote about coming from East. Just by saying that it was Afghanistan does not disprove anything-of course Indians (Kassites) had to cross Afghanistan to come to Babylonia; besides Afghanistan till 600 A.D. had always been in Indian sphere of influence -population wise, culture wise. In fact Aryans homeland was what is todayâs UP. and Northern Bihar regions of northern India
up to Narmada valley (Hahehya) in central India from whence they spread gradually to Punjab and then Afghanistan and then Iran. Even Medians called themselves coming from East and the real name of Persians was Persu-A Sanskrit word. Aryans regarded East as sacred and would never have said the region west and north of Afghanistan as derogatory sense if that had been their homeland. In Rig-Veda the 10 kings battle happened ain Punjab but historical background is given not in Rig Veda ( which is a sacred religion book) but in Brahmans (which explains Veda) .Those 10 kings had been fighting for more than 5 generations and it was a battle of kings from Varanasi and Pratishthan (from Narmada). Therefore before that Rig Veda was formed ,The Aryans had already been kings of Central-northern (Madhya Desh). Besides Aryans were not that great in material achievements as compared to their chief enemies (when they attacked Babylon) Asur.
What characterised Aryans was their Horse-chariot use. no martial heritage, human warfare, and human attitudes to other peoples. What they hated most was shopkeeper like attitude and people like Panis(Phoenicians0. The enlish race is direct descendant of those hateful Phoenicians-Pirate turned shopkeepers. In fact the Phoenicians had a colony in what is know northern Holland. The English race in form of anglo-saxons came from that very water logged poor region of Holland. The Greeks knew of Celtics and hardly about Germans. Celtics came from same branch as the Latinâs. the Romans were told by the Barbarians( Germans here) hat tribes they constituted of. In none of that is mention given of Angles and Jutes-the two class which made English race. as if even the barbarians were ashamed of these jutes and angles. But Lombardy, Franks were the main tribes. Because Goths were living near Black sea( Till Huns overran them) these Goths came in contact with some of the remnants of Aryan tribes and also probably some of Emperor Ashoke`s Buddhist missionary who were spreading Buddhist religion there (Buddha called his views simply as arya religion).
With that was early Christianity mixed and some early Goths adopted Aryan Christianity. That is the only and earliest relation of a German tribe with word denoting arya. As some one said, from German language it appears that German language is an Indo-European language adopted by non-Indo-European race. WELL THE ENGLISH RACE HAS RELATIONSHIP WITH NOT GERMAN RACE BUT WITH Holland. THOGH IT NEVER TALKS ABOUT IT BECAUSE IT WANTS TO ASSOCIATE ITSELF WITH MORE SUCCESFUL RACES. The only Aryan-derived race in Europe are Lithuanians. Irish also have got Aryan name in their country .in fact Irish, French and Latinâs all came from( evidenced by their earlier chronicles) from that what of Todayâs Turkey where Indian in fork=m of Mittanis and Kassites and Hittes had established empire. In fact ,due to mountainous region many of the Kurds (descendents of uratu) have been able to maintain their Aryans face and features. One thing more.
Many of the Rishis who composed holy of the holiest books of aryans-Ved were themselves labelled as dark-complexioned. and many of the Aryans kings-including ones in 10 kings battle in Veda have got Das surname (Name of non-Aryan slaves by western propagandists.). in fact if you look at world situation for last 500 years ,all these Aryan races have been enslaved by low grade
non-Aryan peoples. One thing more-there is no history of animosity between Aryans and Jews. The great Aryan king Kurush ( Cyrus ) freed Jews from Babylonian captivity. Jews have been well treated in only true Aryan country-India. What the Aryans hated was Panis (Phoenicians whose direct descendents (both mentally and racially) are the English race. In fact english are not an European race. They appropriate others` name Of course se but they are not. In Britannica encyclopaedia they write that Roman empire was nothing to do with Italy and Italians-it was world empire. Would they say british empire has nothing to do with English and britain?. They do not get tired of their 150 years empire but would not give the same credit to Italy.
In many Roman ruins in Britain, they would mention in writing that the Romans soldiers were nothing to do with Italians. next to this writing is a few pictures of Romans men and women who certainly look like todayâs Italians and certainly nothing like English anyway. Why do these bastards minimize others achievement. Because it gives them false sense of history and besides that is how they land up Hollywood role of Romans in americans film (And taking jobs from americans).Anyway, in 1900, one Griergson, surveyor -
general in India and a Sanskrit scholar wrote very revealing thing which has not been given as much importance. He said â todays(19oo) many Englishmen have suddenly started calling themselves as Aryan and nothing can be further from fact. only Indians are Aryans.â
German Sanskritologist said that even the blackest Indian is more Aryan than the fairest Scandinavian. Incidentally most of the Germans are not blondes rather red-haired just like supposedly Irish. Point about Griergson` is that these Phoenicians-derived English race had aggressively calling itself Aryan and using it as a kind of racial superiority while exploiting the real Aryans in India. This happened much before Hitler and that explains despicable shopkeepers cum plumber` white superiority jibes in England and america both before and (more) after 2WW.
In nutshell, these inferior people through media manipulation, spying and cheating crated 2ww. and caused so much misery with minimal loss of their life and interests. Those would believe such people usually get similar fate as later on it happened to Russia.
<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Reg migration theory, what I was thinking was why is it not possible that migration started (assumption: under the evolution theory that we got mutated to be humans from early apes to primitive man) at the time when man or humans were still more of an ape rather primitive man.
We see birds, animals, etc migrate and perhaps we should respect that theory as well. It could be a mixture of a theory, that migration happens for ever, lets say after a famine, or loss of a river(saraswati), war, etc.
<img src='http://www.hinduonnet.com/fline/images/20070629000206402.jpg' border='0' alt='user posted image' />
THE CENTAUR-LIKE IMAGE in white ochre at Karikkiyur, the largest rock art site in South India.
<img src='http://www.hinduonnet.com/fline/images/20070629000206406.jpg' border='0' alt='user posted image' />
THE MASTERPIECE OF Karikkiyur is a realistic depiction of bisons moving in a row, in red ochre.
<img src='http://www.hinduonnet.com/fline/images/20070629000206411.jpg' border='0' alt='user posted image' />
A battle scene at Karikkiyur, depicting men with bows and arrows and on horse back.
