The Real History of India – Part 6: Aryan Invasion Theory

Prolog:

Now that we have established the religion that was followed in the IVC, we will take a look at the Aryan Invasion Theory debate. The words “Aryan Invasion” seem to suggest that there was a sudden death for the Dravidians, the words “Aryan Infusion” seem to suggest a benign and gentle influence, the words “Indigenous Aryans” seem to suggest that the IVC was Aryan and they were always indigenous. I believe none of this to be true. We will see why, shortly. I would like to use the term “Aryanization”. It is the only one that explains the modern day Hinduism, which is a clever amalgamation of the Dravidian religion, Jainism and Buddhism, created using a combination of violent incursions/violence, proselytizations, influence and other techniques as appropriate . As a note of caution, the terms Aryans and Dravidians are being used in the historical context. At present, the Indians of India, excluding some racially pure tribals and the people of the North East, are a mix of both the Aryan and Dravidian peoples as well as other peoples like Scythians, Huns, Moghuls, Europeans and others, who had made India their home during the course of history.

The Principle of Concordance

When you want to analyze a book, a linguistic technique called Concordance is very helpful. The Concordance of a book is nothing but a compilation of the frequently used words within the book and their associated frequencies.

For example, take a look at the Concordance for Dan Brown’s Da Vinci Code .You will notice that the top most frequently used words (occurrences) are Langdon (1516), Sophie (1103), Teabing (594) and Fache (397) – the most important names in the book. If you look further you will notice that Grail (286), Church (234), Silas (266), Grandfather(222), Collet(176) and Keystone(160) round out the Top 10. If you have read the book, you will know how beautifully the concordance captures the most important elements of the story.

Rig Vedic Concordance

I decided to apply the same principle to the Rig Veda (RV), the holiest of holy Vedic texts. Fortunately, I found the Concordance for the Rig Veda . It uses Griffith’s translation of the Rig Veda Samhita as its base. Griffith’s translation of the RV has come under attack. Since i am only using the concordances of the RV, his supposed translation errors will not affect it. Of course, if someone has the time and has access to a better Concordance Set, we can compare notes and make sure we are on the right track.

Then i went through the RV concordance and noted down the base set of concordances – important words and their frequencies in descending order. Then I derived some concordances by adding concordances of related terms together. For example, i added the frequency for Steeds and Horses together to get the concordance for Steeds. The resultant file is a pdf- Rig Veda Concordance .

The Top 10, in descending order of concordances are – Indra(2819), Agni(1921), Soma(1525), Prithvi(799), Chariot(775), Horses(761), Maruts(714), Asvins(588), Varuna(574) and Mitra(416).

In the previous post, we analyzed the IVC Religion and from that we know that the Sun, the Moon and the Mother Goddess (Earth) were the key gods.  In the RV, the Sun God has 397 occurrences, Moon+Moons have a combined concordance of 29 putting them both way down in the pecking order. Siva is not to be found at all. Yeah, Rudra was mapped to Siva later, but Rudra/Rudras combo concordance is 151 again way down the hierarchy of Gods. Visnu with 107 is ranked even lower than Rudra. As for Brahma, it wasn’t mentioned at all. Someone has interpreted Precem to be Brahma and assuming we accept that interpretation, the keyword Precem has the glorious concordance of 2!

Therefore, Siva (after mapping to Rudra), Vishnu & Brahma, the Vedic trinity that we now worship, was not at all  important to the RV.  That  means  they were made important later  to amalgamate with the IVC’s Proto-Trinity. We also know that cows and bulls were very important to the IVC people, whereas the RV concordance shows that the Horses and Chariots were more important. Both horses and chariots are conspicously absent from the IVC.

Indra Destroys Dravidian Puras

The RV talks of Indra destroying  Puras of the Dasyus (RV term for Dravidians). Western historians committed a critical error by assuming that this term meant the IVC’s beautiful cities. It is an error because the evidence from the IVC city excavations show no evidence of any destruction. So what did Indra destroy, then? I think Puram/Pura is referring to the clay brick village settlements, the people, outside the IVC’s cities, lived in. If you remember the interpretation for Meluhha=Melagam, i had mentioned that Agam also meant inside. Puram in Tamil is the opposite of Agam, which means outside. You can think of melagam as the inner city and the puram as the outer suburbs. Even in today’s modern world, we use the same terminology – inner city and outer suburbs. These destructions, that the RV refers to, must have been the Violent Incursions that the Aryans used. There are also multiple references in the RV to Dasas who were collaborating with the Aryans and adopting their systems [Citation: Romila Thapar’s Early India]. Therefore, the Aryans must have used a combination of military power, influencing some powerful Dravidian chiefs with their new religion, to Aryanize the IVC people.

Why RV couldn’t be about a riverine civilization like the IVC?

1. In a riverine agriculture-based civilization, the river would have great significance, as we have seen with Egypt, where even the calendar was fixed according to Nile floodings and the Deities were carried in a Nile Boat (barque) during processions. Whereas in the RV, concordance for Sarasvati is 73 (compare that to 2819 for Indra) and Sindhu has 50.

2. Riverine people use boats extensively. We also know that the IVC people were seafarers. RV Concordance for Boats+Ships = 16. Very insignificant.

3. If the RV was written by/for agriculturists, you will find more mentions of Agricultural elements. That is not the case with the RV – Plough/Ploughs concordance = 4, sickle=2, sowing=2, till=12. Very insignificant. Interestingly, Visnu, the agricultural god ranks way below the other important gods. Compare Visnu=107 with Indra=2819 concordances.

Therefore, saying that the RV represents the IVC [or the Indus-Sarasvati Valley Civilization as the revisionist Hindutvavadis call the IVC] is delusional.

Outside India

At this point, I decided to look at the neighboring areas of the IVC. Thanks to Priya Raju, I became aware of the Avesta . Just going through the various sites referring to the Avesta and its similarities to RV blew my mind away. They had the same Soma/Haomo rituals, they had the same fire worship rituals etc. It is so similar that, today, linguists use Vedic Sanskrit to decipher the Gathan Avesta language! I have compiled the similarities between Avesta and Veda in this PDF with citations – Rig Veda and Avesta Comparison. The only inference you can draw from this is that the Avesta and RV were written by the same people.

But the reference to Daha/Dahyu (RV Dasa/Dasyu) in the Avesta bothered me. The Avestans never came to India and we know that the RV is referring to the IVC people as Dasas, then how come both are talking about the same enemies? I concluded that the Avestan/RV people when they were together must have encountered the same people as well whom they called Dasas/Dahas. When i started looking at the pre-Avestan cultures, i found the same Mother Goddess religion, thereby confirming my inference that the Dasas of RV/Dahas of Avesta were the Mother Goddess worshippers .  That inference started my quest, which eventually led me to the point where i  realized/proved that the entire Neolithic Plate, as I called it, was following the Mother Goddess Religion.

If that is the case, who are these Avestan/Vedic people? Horses and Chariots seem to be very important to them and of course Agni, Varuna, Soma etc.

Epilog:

1. Where are these horse/chariot people from? What is the big deal with horses/chariots?

2. What was happening in the rest of the Neolithic Plate when the Aryans came to the IVC?

3. What about genetic evidence? Is there any?


Comments

  1. Quote

    Sukumar, wonderful post ( I am glad that the frequency increased and suspense unraveling quite fast).

    Can we use Concordance as a basis for defining entire flow of events in the past? Could the name – Rudra (which sounds difficult) be later renamed as Siva (which is much easier to pronounce)? We see this happening to many cities in India(Mumbai as Bombay, Chennapatanam as Madras, Musulipatanam as Machilipattanam when British could not pronounce easily?)

    Your other reasons seem to be great. How come RV doesnt have any mention of river related stuff if it is a River Valley Civilization like that of Egyptian? Or could RV’s Subject be strictly spiritual without the inclusion of the materialistic issues like trade and day to day issues).

  2. Quote

    Very intresting stuff, Sukumar!
    Thanks for putting this up.
    Hopefully you will put up more of this in future.

  3. Quote
    Ashok chatterjee said February 24, 2008, 5:55 pm:

    Sukumar, Real History of India? You must realise there is no such thing as real history. You remember the fable which runs something like this. A king or whoever asked a few wise men to describe graphically what an elephant looks like after making an on the spot observation of what really a live elephant does look like. You know the rest:- each described the elephant from his/her angle of vision. Each was accurate within their finite and therefore restricted and limited angle of vision. But really what does an elephant look like? We don’t know and never will. Recognition & Identification? Yes, people the world over will recognise when they see an elephant (or a picture of it). Absolutely true. But does that address the real issue which is what does an elephant really look like, eternally, immutably and always accurately the same? I do not need to provide the answer which is always the same.

    Forget the the Aryan invasion ( who cares whether infusion is preferable to invasion or that Concordance of Rig Veda (Griffiths’) is something to go by)?
    History is “here and now”, what has happened just now and what is happening as we exist and visualise; but what we perceive or experience as it it happens and affects us is also falsifying at the ultimate analysis of things for future generations to see as real history. Remember the elephant fable.

    So, there is no real history of India, or any other country, or man’s progress through time and space. It is all a falsification of what really happened at a given moment of time, because what we have unearthed to date and what we shall unearth in future will always be at variance with each other; the known; and the lost;and discovered again in an enlarged and more informed way; are but “footprints in the sands of time” which are all the time being obliterated, and replaced by new footprints ( we forget those countless happenings in the past or even in the present which is always past really, which were never recorded; never became footprints on the sands of time; and yet were equally true, palpable facts of history which, unknown to the world, did shape and influence the course of history.

    Therefore history is now and here; it is no longer history when it passes the beaming focus of what happens now or never or always.

  4. Quote
    Sridhar N.K said February 24, 2008, 8:14 pm:

    Sukumar,

    Very interesting. The Avesta similarities is truly mind-blowing. I am not sure I agree with the Rudra – Siva comparison. In my mind, Rudra is not Siva. Please see Rudra’s description below.
    ———————-
    Book 2 – Hymn 33.5 – May I with praise-songs win that Rudra’s favour who is adored with gifts and invocations.
    Ne’er may the tawny God, fair-checked , and gracious, swifthearing, yield us to this evil purpose.

    Book 2 – Hymn 33.8 – To him the strong, great, tawny, fair-complexioned , I utter forth a mighty hymn of praises

    Book 1 – Hymn 43.5 – He shines in splendour like the Sun , refulgent as bright gold is he, The good, the best among the Gods
    ———————–
    Siva is always considered as dark skinned. How did you equate Siva to Rudra?

    Vamsi – If Rudra is difficult to pronounce, how come Indra is not difficult to pronounce. We still have Indra in existence! RV is spiritual for the most part. But if there’s herbs, cattles and animals covered, river is mentioning only in passing. In contrast, there’s an entire book (book 9) on how drinking “soma” keeps everyone’s eyes bright and they are able to “feel” better and healthy. If you can dedicate a book to Soma, I am sure you can write a few chapters on agriculture, unless it is not important for them.

  5. Quote

    NK – I don’t think Shiva is considered dark-skinned. Meenakshi, his consort, was a dark-skinned beauty – while Shiva had a radiant, light complexion & was said to be very handsome. This is in South India.

    In fact, what amazed me about the description of Rudra in the Rig Veda was their ambivalence to him. He’s described in various ways & rather inconsistently. They sort of were afraid of him – since he was the equivalent of Poseidon/Neptune.

  6. Quote

    Ashok,

    Do I sense a teensy whiff of a patronizing attitude in your comment? All this pontificating about how we need to “realize” something & your kind advise for us to “remember the elephant fable”.

    What we mean by “Real History” is this. There are many revisionists who are falsifying history by doctoring evidence. Instead, in this BLOG, we present what has been truly found so far.

    >> Forget the the Aryan invasion ( who cares whether infusion is preferable to invasion or that Concordance of Rig Veda (Griffiths’)
    >>is something to go by)?

    Well Ashok, obviously we do care. Which is why we write such posts in our group BLOG. You are not interested in history, and you have the right to have your opinion & tastes. We won’t ask you “who cares about philosophy”, just because we aren’t interested.

    And this BLOG is for people who are interested in learning more about the unknown, regardless of what field the unknown happens to be in.

    For the record, an interest in science & history is not antithetical to an interest in philosophy.

  7. Quote
    Sridhar N.K said February 24, 2008, 10:31 pm:

    Priya,

    I stand corrected. You are right. If he is referred to as the sun, the father, then he must be bright.

  8. Quote
    jayasree (subscribed) said February 24, 2008, 10:39 pm:
  9. Quote

    Jayashree – Before we click on a link & visit your BLOG, we’d like to know what the gist of your objections are. I’m assuming you are objecting, since your link is titled “Aryan Invasion Western Myth”.

    So please tell us succintly what your views are.

  10. Quote
    vamsi (subscribed) said February 25, 2008, 12:10 am:

    I have quickly-click-the-link syndrome and happened to visit Ms. Jayashree’s blog. Few posts like “Darbhai – the antenna to pick up pithrus!” etc made me fall off my chair. Why do this blog attract such crowd?? Is it wrong to define the truths. Who cares if Lord Macaulay wanted to create clerical class who needs to support British Agenda. If his Lordship has to survive, he has to propose such things or else he would be in Kashi in the next voyage.

    If (again I stress IF), there is enough evidence to accept Indo Saraswath civilization/ debunk AIT, I am sure Sukumar will not wait a second to state that in this fact. Unless such evidence is presented, I dont see any value in this rhetoic comments with links such as Ms Jayashrees.

  11. Quote
    Subba Muthurangan said February 25, 2008, 12:31 am:

    Sukumar – Great Post. I really like our journey of IVC and Indian history. I believe in history and our brain work like Newton’s third law, that is, how far you can go backward in thought process, the same you can go forward. History is the only tool to experiment it. I would say Aryan infusion or invasion is good for us as a country, we got so many different cultures in mix and we are very diversified in all areas. But at the same time, we can’t forget our early inventors and cultural pioneers for our society, which is, clearly IVC. My personal opinion is RV, Ramayana, and Mahabharata all are overshadowed IVC culture and just destroyed its originality. We have to give far share of credit to early people, who know how to carve a thing as perspective view, traded with far west, architecturally built marvelous cities and buildings.

    Who needs horse and chariots? Immigrates who want to conquer and explorer around the world to gain land as well as settle down for a better life. In this scenario, the way “immigrates” impose their language and try to “arynised” natives, there should be a forceful military power exists hence horses and chariots make more sense. If “immigrate” peacefully happened, then native’s language and culture should be preserved in same manner.

    Here is some evidence
    1. G.E. Dales from Berkeley University found lot of skeleton from Mohenjo Daro indicative of war.
    2. Prof. Kennedy from Cornell University who is an anthropologist, studied the skeleton from Mohenjo Daro concluded that this is clearly a “massacre”.

  12. Quote

    Sukumar,

    You have arrived at an interesting phase of Indian History – “Aryan Civilzation” or “Aryanization of India”. Based on what I know, I do have to believe that Indian Aryans were immigrants – perhaps from Persia, Afghanistan etc. who came in horses and either conquered or assimilated into the Harappan region.

    is a site that could perhaps illustrate where the horse/chariot people came from. Please refer to the section under Kassites.

    Regarding genetic evidence, I do have to believe that it has to exist – between Persians (Iran, Baluchistan NE74206, Account NETH

  13. Quote

    Sukumar,

    You have arrived at an interesting phase of Indian History that I am most interested in – “Aryan Civilzation” or “Aryanization of India”. Based on what I know, I do have to believe that Indian Aryans were immigrants – perhaps from Persia, Afghanistan etc. who came in horses and either conquered or assimilated into the Harappan region.

    is a site that could perhaps illustrate where the horse/chariot people came from. Please refer to the section under Kassites.

    Regarding genetic evidence, I do have to believe that it has to exist – between Persians/Iranians and Indians. This even seems to indicate that the Pallavas had Iranian lnkage!!

    Ganesh

  14. Quote

    Absolutely brillaint Sukumar. This must be the only post in the series that I understood completely. using concordances was brilliant. When you put it that way it looks irrefulatble.

    The list of common words in the two texts were mind blowing. Great work. Waiting with lot of anticipation for the next post.

  15. Quote

    Vamsi – Agree with you on Jayashree’s links.

    Do such people have a problem with the “Aryan” part or the “Invasion” part? Disagreeing with “Invasion” – doesn’t negate the fact that Central Asians entered India after the downfall of the IVC culture.

    And I find that people opposed to AIT primarily attack Max Muller & co, whose theories were crude & have been abandoned by all reputed historians. That’s because that’s an easy straw-man to demolish.

  16. Quote
    Ravindran Chellappa said February 25, 2008, 6:21 am:

    This was an interesting read Sukumar! Well, my takeaway from this, truth be told, is the concept of concordance :-$

  17. Quote
    Karthik PK said February 25, 2008, 6:47 am:

    A great Intro TO AIT Sukumar …..

    My take on this is as follows.

    Post IVC apart from Agrarian Economy the military economy should be taken into account .Army gains prominence hence horses and chariots replace cow and bulls…now the next question will be if its army then y was not weapons being depicted …I am not sure of this ..
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Domestication_of_the_horse
    But if we look at the History of Domestication ..Horses were first domesticated in Central Asian Steppes..So I guess if Horses found their entry into Indian civlization then it must be thro’ them….My arguments in favour of AIT is that …If all the successful hordes from Hun,Scythians,Mongols,Vandals etc succeeded in conquering various lands due to superior and sturdy horses..Infact till the advent of “Watt ‘ Machines cavalry has been the most effective Army weapon…Infact we can see the significance of
    Horses thro’ the statues of various Kings…I mean kings have ridden animals like Camels,elephants ,donkeys /Asses etc but y is this special treatment for horses ?

  18. Quote
    Sukumar (subscribed) said February 25, 2008, 7:32 am:

    Thanks Vamsi. The point about words you make in general applies to how loan words are created – usually a distorted form of a word from a foreign language. In the context of this series, we have seen how melagam became meluhha in Sumer and Mleccha in Sanskrit.

    However, Rudra Siva tie-up is a deliberate one to amalgamate the IVC’s proto-trinity with the Vedic trinity.

    You make a valid point that maybe the RV is only about spiritual stuff – it is possible, but then as NK pointed out, they decided to talk about so many things including one whole chapter on Soma. Clearly RV was intended to serve a broader purpose. If you look further into the Vedic corpus, you can see that the Yajur Veda is the one that focuses on rituals and Sama Veda is the one that focuses on ritualistic chants. So RV’s purpose can be seen as having to set the socio-religious context for the Vedic people. Both Yajur and Sama Vedas borrow the RV material extensively and then expand on it. The Brahmanas and Aranyakas which exist for each of the Vedas can be seen as the commentaries on the Vedas and the Upanishads as add-ons – even the prefix Upa means – add-on/adjunct.

    Hope that clarifies?

    Vijay, thanks for stopping by and for your kind words.

  19. Quote
    Sukumar (subscribed) said February 25, 2008, 7:41 am:

    Ashok,
    Thanks for stopping by and sharing your views. Priya has already given you a response that effectively conveys my position. Hope you will actually read my posts and give me valid critique so that we can all learn from it, instead of dismissing the entire field of History and Anthropology as an useless exercise. Of course, as Priya says, you have a right to your opinion.

    Sreedhar/Priya,
    You are both right in that if you read the description of Rudra in the Vedas and think about what Siva stood for in the IVC context, it is hard to tie them together. But the reality is the Vedic folks did succeed in tying both together. Even today my father chants the Rudram in honor of Siva. The way i think they did it is quite simple – it was a symological tie – Siva’s IVC symbol is a 3-horned crown with 2 bull horns and the central one being the phallic symbol. Now if you go and look Rudra’s weapon – it is a Trident – Greeks call Rudra – Poseidon. If you now look at the Trident with some imagination it is a perfect match with the 3-horned crown symbol of Siva. This is how they did “Athaanga Idhu” or “This is the same as that” and tied both together. This also meant that they had to make Siva the Destroyer when he was actually a God of Love for the IVC.

    Priya,
    Thanks for responding to Ashok.

  20. Quote
    Sukumar (subscribed) said February 25, 2008, 7:46 am:

    Jayasree,
    Thanks for stopping by. As a Indology researcher (still an amateur), we are well aware of the AIT debates and also which arguments of the AIT are valid and which ones are invalid. If you had chosen to read my post, you would have understood that. While I agree that Aryan Invasion per se may not be a valid description of what happened, i also believe and will prove to you that Aryans did come from outside the Indus Valley, if you choose to read with an open mind. Of course, you are welcome to poke holes in my hypotheses if you have valid data.

    Priya, thanks for your response to Jayasree.

    Vamsi/Priya, I agree this whole Darbha acting as Antennae for Pithrus post on Jayasree’s blog does throw one off.

  21. Quote
    Sukumar (subscribed) said February 25, 2008, 7:51 am:

    Subba,
    thanks. you are exactly right. We must understand the true nature of our history and give due credit to the appopriate people. This Hindutva view of things clouds our thinking by making everyone’s contribution to India as insignificant, except the Vedic people of course. And that too without understanding an iota about the IVC, the Gonds, the Islamists and Britisher’s true contribution. Yes, they all made blunders but it appears the Vedic people did take over the IVC people and Aryanized them using some methods eerily similar to what the British did. Will the VHP own up and issue an apology to the IVC people like the Australian Premier has done to the Aborigines recently?

    As for massacres in Mohenjadaro, I need citations – exact page numbers, article links etc so that i can ascertain how accurate those points are?

  22. Quote
    Sukumar (subscribed) said February 25, 2008, 7:53 am:

    Thanks Ganesh. Your link on Iranology is very interesting. I picked up a few pointers. As for Kassites, you need to do some more digging is all i will say at this point. You are absolutely right about the Pallavas – they are Iranians – Pahlavis – tamilized as Pallavas.

    Archana,
    thanks for your kind words. I know you have said you didn’t understand some of the other posts in this series. It will really be helpful if you tell me which pieces are difficult to understand, so that i can change my style.

  23. Quote
    Sukumar (subscribed) said February 25, 2008, 7:56 am:

    Ravindran,
    Thanks for your kind words. You say Concordance is the only take-away. Is it because the post runs counter to your ideas on Aryan Invasion?

    Karthik,
    That is brilliant man. That is exactly where i went next – looking at where in the world was the horse was first domesticated and started digging from there. I will cover this in the next post. Stay tuned.

  24. Quote
    senthil (subscribed) said February 25, 2008, 9:03 am:

    Just my few cents.. we have words like Rudra thandavam.. that denotes fierceful dance of shiva.. how come, shiva who resides in burial ground be bright & handsome :) .. i have some confusion with how priya meant the word handsome :)

    Some common questions on Aryan Invasion..

    1. It was mentioned that Aryans came through chariots & horses.. but, some historians say, its impossible to travel by chariots in that mountaineous regions..

    2. Arabia was most famous for horses.. there is probability that horses were tamed there..

    3. Aryans came and invaded IVC people.. But where from? and how? Are they militarily strong or only war tribes.

    4. When aryans could invade and impose their religion on IVC people, why there doest exist even a bit of evidence in their original home land.. the so claimed central asia.. as far as i know, there is not even a bit of evidences related to supposed Aryan religion in central asia, either in literature or in archeology..
    I think, this is most important point, for which there is no effective answer..

    5. There is no signs of war, at the IVC site.. for example, the vijayanagar empire today, has all signs of extreme destruction, even at the present rubbles.. But, it seems, there is no such evidences of invasion or destruction in IVC..

    6. In my last comment in the earlier post in this series, i have given a link, which gives around 325 generations of royal lineage as excel file.. i am giving that link below..
    http://www.newdharma.org/royal_chron.htm
    When we could refer dravidian gods, avesta, egypt, sumerian, i could not understand, why we could not consider this as one of the material for inference.

    7. I dont know even a bit about rig veda.. but many sites mention that saraswati river was mentioned in RV.. (i think around 60 times).. these sites also mentioned that the course of saraswati river is also referred in RV..
    As such, we have also cultural evidence of Triveni Sangamam.. the two rivers existing now, while the third river dried up..
    I think, this aspect is not discussed in this series..

  25. Quote
    senthil (subscribed) said February 25, 2008, 9:18 am:

    /** And that too without understanding an iota about the IVC, the Gonds, the Islamists and Britisher’s true contribution. Yes, they all made blunders but it appears the Vedic people did take over the IVC people and Aryanized them using some methods eerily similar to what the British did. Will the VHP own up and issue an apology to the IVC people like the Australian Premier has done to the Aborigines recently?
    **/

    Sukumar.. i found your other arguments strong.. i am wondering, why you had the weakest points in the above comments..
    since the above was something political & religious, and not related to this post, let me raise these in another forum..

    But, i would like to raise a point..

    Do you feel, the britishers, the marxists, and other western historians, are completely neutral, and fair?
    I just wanted to quote Maxmuller..
    In a letter to his wife in 1866, he wrote about his translation of the Rig-veda: “This edition of mine and the translation of the Veda, will hereafter tell to a great extent on the fate of India and on the growth of millions of souls in that country. It is the root of their religion and to show them what the root is, I feel sure, is the only way of uprooting all that has sprung from it during the last three thousand years.” (The Life and Letters of Right Honorable Friedrich Max Muller, Vol. I. p.346)

    Any proofs disclaiming above are welcome..

  26. Quote

    Senthil – Rudra of the Vedic people was the God of destruction. He was akin to Poseidon & Neptune, as I mentioned in my comment to NK Sridhar. Rudra was an angry God who needed constant appeasement, who was feared by the Aryans.

    Shiva of the IVC people was a fertility God. So, he was supposed to be radiantly handsome.

  27. Quote
    Ravindran Chellappa said February 25, 2008, 9:25 am:

    Sukumar: Nothing like the “post runs counter to your ideas on Aryan Invasion” I don’t hold too much ideas about things like Aryan Invasion and all that in the first place!
    Just that I happened to know of this concept called Concordance for the first time and it appealed to me and probably stuck with me much more!! :-)

  28. Quote

    Senthil,

    Let me answer a couple of your questions.

    >>6. In my last comment in the earlier post in this series, i have given a link, which gives around 325 generations of royal lineage as >>excel file.. i am giving that link below..

    We are aware that each Purana gives a slightly different kind of royal lineage – generally, when a dynasty went into decline, further kings were not mentioned. I’m not sure how that’s relevant to the post, though it gives a rough timeline for reference. For the earliest rungs, there’s no historic evidence at all – I mean, people claimed to have originated from Mercury, Sun & the Moon. If there’s any gap in the post vis-a-vis the XLS file, please mention it.

    >>When aryans could invade and impose their religion on IVC people, why there doest exist even a bit of evidence in their original >>home land.. the so claimed central asia.. as far as i know, there is not even a bit of evidences related to supposed Aryan religion >>in central asia, either in literature or in archeology..
    >>I think, this is most important point, for which there is no effective answer..

    Well, the Avesta clearly explains where the Indo-Europeans started from – Central Asia. There’s plenty of evidence of Indo-European occupation in the Andronovo region, where people started moving from. Surprisingly enough, the “Old Testament” mentions the move of the Indo-Europeans from their homeland in the “Myth of Nimrod”.

    Since these people did not have a script, there’s no literary treatise from them! And they were not into temple building. Wherever these Aryans went, they took their religion with them – as can be seen in Turkey, Greece, Rome etc. Vedas & Avesta are definitely more sophisticated & are an Indo-Iranian invention.

  29. Quote

    /** Surprisingly enough, the “Old Testament” mentions the move of the Indo-Europeans from their homeland in the “Myth of Nimrod” **/

    This is where the root of difference lies.. while the christian chronological references are used in support of AIT, Hindu chronology is completely ignored.. this is where, i feel, the root of the problem starts..
    also, can you please give some citations of where avesta explains about indo europeans?
    If they started from central asia, there should have atleast been some remains (both cultural & archealogical) of the aryans… Can the aryans, who are so strong enough to destroy IVC and impose their faith on them, would not have left enough evidences in their home land? Is there any cultural similarities of present central asian to the aryan religion?
    For example, the present iranian people, although become islamic, have preserved, lot of zorastrianic cultures & rituals.. any such left overs in the present central asia?

    While the IVC people were so advanced in civilizations, couldnt they have any means to protect themselves from enemies.. or wouldnt there be enough wars in those two thousand years of that civilization, for which no remains exist now.. (to my knowledge)..

  30. Quote

    Another drawback is that, having made RV people as the invading aryans, the argument went against its own.. ie, for example, the rig veda doenst mention anything about their roots.. Most of the sacred places mentioned in RV seems to be in Himalayas, and the sacred rivers only in current pakistan and india, with some areas covered in afghanistan too.. when the RV could consider triveni as holy, there should be atleast one references to any of central asian landmarks, if they had come from that place.. the absense of such thing, only increases the doubt over AIT..

  31. Quote

    I have often seen “reliance on scientific validity” .. ofcourse, science can be used to find truth.. but there are numerous occasions, where science is also used to mis-represent facts..
    The best example, from my knowledge is the heavy use of pesticides, and herbicides in England and america.. they were scientifically validated and authorised by government as safe, but on application, most of the people suffered the side effects..

    And we have the latest BUSH technique of using scientifically collected intelligence data, to attack Iraq…

    So, my view is before we rely on scientific proofs, we should also consider the motive of those who are presenting..

  32. Quote

    Senthil – Please do us a favor & read the Rig Veda. I’m tired of teaching you what’s in there. Nimrod is mentioned as Yima in the Rig Veda. Will you openly accept your error now?

    OMG. Haven’t I explained that Central Asia & the Middle East are strewn with historical evidence? The chariot being 1 of them – found in the Kazakh steppes. Sigh! And I mentioned that Avesta/Vedas are an Indo-Iranian invention. Zoroastrians are the Avestan people, Senthil. All other pagan religions were wiped out. Please try to understand what I say – its becoming tiresome, repeating the same points.

    IVC was not a war-like culture – that was a great mistake that they made. And they died down over a period of time. I don’t think an invasion a la Max Muller took place.

    Yes, the Rig Vedic people must have intentionally wiped out all references to Central Asia. The prevailing theory is this – India is very fertile & Central Asia very arid. They wanted to establish their right over the Gangetic plains. They could do this only by claiming to be natives. Please note that this is a theory.

    If you look at the Metadata of the Vedas, its clear that some parts are missing. Several redactions happened in the Vedas. But who told you that the rivers & mountains are in India?? Most of the Rig Vedic rivers & mountains are in Afghanistan.

    Now, why don’t you sweat this one out?

    What happened to the IVC script? Why was nothing written down for 1000 years nearly, if IVC was Vedic?

    When did Shiva, Vishnu & Brahma become gods? They are not in the Samhita!

    Why is Sanskrit Indo-European, while Tamil is Dravidian? Or, do you think Linguists are in on this “conspiracy”?

    Why did Soma suddenly become a mythical plant? When Rig Veda’s Samhita has 1 whole Mandala dedicated to it? Note that Haoma is still used by the Parsis! They get it from – Kerman, which is not in India.

    Why did – and this is becoming a pattern – Sarasvathi suddenly become a mythical river? And it is not at all mythical for Parsis? Sarsvathi, Naditama, Mother of all rivers – “dried up”? Became “mythical”?

    Why is there a Sarayu (Ramayan fame) in Afghanistan? And only a puny Sarju in UP?

    How is it that horses were never found in IVC seals, except a computer-“enhanced” seal from Messrs Rajaram & Jha? Horses are so important to Aryans.

    How is it that chariots were never used in IVC? Rathas are critical to the Aryans.

  33. Quote

    Here are my responses to your 7 points excepting point no. 6 which Priya has responded to aleady:
    /**1. It was mentioned that Aryans came through chariots & horses.. but, some historians say, its impossible to travel by chariots in that mountaineous regions..

    2. Arabia was most famous for horses.. there is probability that horses were tamed there..

    3. Aryans came and invaded IVC people.. But where from? and how? Are they militarily strong or only war tribes.

    4. When aryans could invade and impose their religion on IVC people, why there doest exist even a bit of evidence in their original home land.. the so claimed central asia.. as far as i know, there is not even a bit of evidences related to supposed Aryan religion in central asia, either in literature or in archeology..
    I think, this is most important point, for which there is no effective answer..

    5. There is no signs of war, at the IVC site.. for example, the vijayanagar empire today, has all signs of extreme destruction, even at the present rubbles.. But, it seems, there is no such evidences of invasion or destruction in IVC..

    6. In my last comment in the earlier post in this series, i have given a link, which gives around 325 generations of royal lineage as excel file.. i am giving that link below..
    http://www.newdharma.org/royal_chron.htm
    When we could refer dravidian gods, avesta, egypt, sumerian, i could not understand, why we could not consider this as one of the material for inference.

    7. I dont know even a bit about rig veda.. but many sites mention that saraswati river was mentioned in RV.. (i think around 60 times).. these sites also mentioned that the course of saraswati river is also referred in RV..
    As such, we have also cultural evidence of Triveni Sangamam.. the two rivers existing now, while the third river dried up..
    I think, this aspect is not discussed in this series..
    **/

    1. Who are these some historians. Khyber pass being the lowest and broadest would have been their likely route. [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Khyber_Pass].
    Aside from Chariots and Horses, the Aryans had another important innovation – a spoked wheel which makes the whole chariot much lighter and thereby swifter. The khyber pass is only 56 kilometers long and it is at a 1000m height. Even today camel caravans cross the Khyber. Additionally, go and read my first post. The gonds also came to India from elsewhere. Highly likely the IVC people also came from elsewhere, again the most likely route was the Khyber pass.

    2. True but what date? The horses were first tamed in the Pontic Steppes in 4000 BC. read PK Karthik’s wikipedia link above.

    3. Looks like you never read my post. I am saying it is a gradual Aryanization process which included violence as well.

    4. There is no evidence according to whom? The same gods are there all the way to Greece.

    5. It is true there is no sign of war at the IVC sites we have excavated. But if you have followed this series, you will know that Dravidians lived in neolithic clay brick villages throughout India participating in a trade network. Any destruction of a clay brick (sort of like mud brick) would be hard to detect archaelogically.

    7. Again, did you read my post. I have even given the concordance of Sarasvati as 73. So you don’t have to think. it is right there in the post, if you choose to read it.

    Overall, you keep repeating the same points without actually commenting on the subject matter of my post except for the title of my post.

  34. Quote

    I am responding to your 2nd comment. When did i say that the britishers, islamists etc were fair. I am just saying that we should acknowledge their contributions to India as well. If you say, you won’t give the benefit of doubt to them because they were invaders, in that case, you will have to deny any credit to the Vedic people because they came from elsewhere and inserted themselves on top of the Dravidians and subjugated them untill the islamists and britishers came and took over from them.

    As for Max Mueller, have you heard the term “quoting out of context” – Max Mueller actually had great things to say. Even in this supposed quote of yours, he actually doesn’t say anything negative.

    See the links below.

    http://v-s-gopal.sulekha.com/blog/post/2007/12/max-muller-the-man-with-maximum-love-for-india.htm

    http://aumsri.sulekha.com/blog/post/2007/08/independence-india-sharing-great-quotes-max-mueller.htm

  35. Quote

    Senthil,
    Another thing. The simple supporting evidence for alleged invasion is the RV itself. Again if you have really read my post above, you will have seen how the RV talks about Puras of the Dasyus being destroyed. If you hold the RV to be an authentic Vedic document, you got to believe what it says.

  36. Quote

    /** Yes, the Rig Vedic people must have intentionally wiped out all references to Central Asia. The prevailing theory is this – India is very fertile & Central Asia very arid. They wanted to establish their right over the Gangetic plains. They could do this only by claiming to be natives. Please note that this is a theory.
    **/

    So, the people who came and destroyed IVC, had gone back to destroy all evidences, so that after 4000 years, people like senthilraja, can support them, to be part of IVC.. You have a great imagination priya.. :)

    For other points (ridicules :) ) in your comment, i will better give room for others to comment..

  37. Quote

    Senthil,
    Aside from not reading the post before commenting, Looks like you need a lesson in how to read comments as well. Priya was talking about destroying evidences in the Rig Veda and not going back to Central Asia and destroying evidences there. If there is a joke of the millennium – your response to Priya’s comment above deserves that award.

  38. Quote

    Senthil – Ah, resorting to twsiting what I said? That doesn’t surprise me, you’ve consistently twisted what others say when you couldn’t digest the facts.

    Now, care to accept your mistake? Or, better still – care to READ what others say? I mean, you don’t have something obstructing your vision, right? Generally, a huge bias obstructs vision. You might want to check it out.

  39. Quote

    Thanks sukumar.. i have read your posts, and as such, i need to analyse what you have said, as of now.. i asked these questions, because, these i read long back, and hence posted it here..

    Regarding the links you quoted on maxmuller, i reserve my comments later. (after reading fully).. Interestingly, i came across the comments section in that link.. :) (sorry.. i just came across, with some counter points..)
    http://v-s-gopal.sulekha.com/blog/post/2007/12/max-muller-the-man-with-maximum-love-for-india/comments.htm

    Ok.. but, even in that link, max muller seems to have placed india, in greater position than that of greece & europe.. so, as of now, i could ascertain one thing.. probably, he might have been truly interested.. but, he might have succumbed to the british conspiracies, as he works under them..

    I will again re-read all your series, and then will come back to comment..

    Regarding britishers, one thing i am strong about.. Britain, US, and other european nations, are all selfish, and do what is good for them.. and this has been happening till now.. the railways, harbours, buildings etc are all constructed only to transfer (looted) goods to england.. and even during independence, they made sure, partition happened, and again some how made nehru (using his weakness :) over mountbatten’s wife) to refer kashmir to UN, and playing politics till now.. and they made sure, only incapable leaders like Nehru creep in power, thus sidelining patels.. they do whatever possible, to keep us from raising..
    Because, indians had extreme sense of gratitude, they successfully utilised this, to hide all their worst cruelties.. (through their proxies..) ..

    The same for US.. they do everything to ensure their well being & supremacy.. the secretive fed bank, now controls the whole economy..

    So, my question is that when they are doing things for their own self, what should we do? Because, we got the administrative buildings, railway networks, post offices from them, should we be ever sub-servient to them? Its really completely unfair, to compare britishers with IVC & RV..

    Although, i do not have even amateur knowledge of Vedas, i have read translations of many of the mantras, and slogas.. the thoughts expressed there are noble, and most of the vedic slogas, wish towards universal well being.. Take for example, the gayatri mantra, the root of all mantras.. or the sandhya vandanam, that a brahmin daily recites.. Arent these vedic slogas, aspire for betterment to every lives in this world, not just humans.. how about shanthi mantram.. the one which i most like “sahnavavathu.. sahanav bhunakthu..” .. where both the teacher and student pray for enlightenment..

    Even if RV people are supposed to come outside, can those people, who have given such noble thoughts, could have destroyed the IVC, or in your way, massacred the IVC people?
    I could not even think of such acts, by those people who gave such noble thoughts.. as you often quote “Attitude determines one’s elevation”, for those people, who could elevate to such higher level in their thoughts, is it possible, to stooge to lowest level and massacre people..

    This is where my instinct tells that AIT would be false..
    I dont know, if the puranas, are part of Vedas.. If not, then RV invasion or RV destruction of IVC is not possible..
    Let me desist from any conclusion now till i get more clarity on this..

    Ok.. let me come to your point on equating britishers and RV.. when britishers left india, india was struck poverty,backwardness, darkness.. whereas, the RV people, made india enlightened in all aspects.. india had beautiful cities like Mathura, and a powerful lineage of empires and dynasties.. and a vast amount of wealth, till british conquest..

    Am i making any sense here?

  40. Quote

    Priya & sukumar.. .. even if i accept your point, still my question remains unanswered.. is there any cultural remains in central asia, relating to aryan religion.. priya told all pagan religions are destroyed.. yes.. that’s true.. but, we have examples like Iran whose people still preserve zorastric rituals, even though all their temples has been destroyed.. or the mecca, whose kaaba rituals are adopted.. so, there should be atleast some evidences in the central asia, which may contain some aspects (bits & traces) of vedic religion? (atleast in documented history..)

  41. Quote

    Senthil,
    1. I think Max Mueller did make several errors in interpreting the Vedas. But if you want to assign malicious intent to him, you need more than a misquoted statement taken out of context.

    2. When did i advocate that we should be subservient to the British? Aside from learning to read posts and comments, make sure you are also awake when you read my posts and comments because it looks like you are dreaming.

    3. Did i ever say that RV is full of bullshit? I merely proved beyond a reasonable doubt that the RV has nothing to do with the IVC.

    4. If you want to understand what is truly glorious about RV, read the creation hymn – it will blow your mind away, atleast it did for me. Again nobody is questioning whether RV is a great document or not. Did i ever say that RV is bullshit? Again, looks like you are not awake and are dreaming. It may help to pinch yourself to know if you are awake or not.

    5. What has noble thoughts got anything to do with destruction? Again, read my posts and you will understand that the Vedic people came from outside and subjugated the Dravidians. I never said they massacred the Dravidians. Again, you are off to dreaming. Pinch yourself again.

    6. Puranas are not Vedas. Vedas are the ones that have been handed down relatively unmodified because there were several mnemonic rules to help memorize them. And since the Yajur and Sama vedas are a derivative of the RV, RV is the only authentic document we have. Puranas came much later.

    7. Well, after the RV people came, the IVC people lost their script which could have eventually developed into an alphabetic script as elsewhere. But thanks to the RV oral tradition, they lost that. The IVC was a rich place with fancy buildings, manhattan topology, covered sewer systems and the works. All these were lost for all time. We got the covered sewer only after the British came and even now many Indian cities don’t have covered sewer system. RV people also systematically modified the IVC religion and added their religion on top of it. The IVC people had an advanced solar calendar way ahead for its time. The RV people completely dismantled that and made the culture a far less advanced Lunar Calendar people. Thanks to the Tamils, Punjabis, Keralites and Bengalis, the solar calendar is still around. And here is the biggest problem introduced by the RV people – the IVC people gave equal respect to male and female and in some ways greater respect to females, whereas the RV people being a patriarchal people completely changed the system to make the woman subservient to men forever changing the lives of women in India. Now you tell me, which is worse – the India after the British or the India after the RV takeover?

  42. Quote

    there is ample evidence of the Aryan religion across the globe. you will see in the next post.

  43. Quote

    Senthil – Well, well. I see that you are only capable of asking questions! You can’t answer a single question I see.

    Not just that, your reading comprehension must be poor. I asked questions – didn’t ridicule anything.

    If you truly have a basis for believing that IVC is Vedic, you’ll have answers to my questions. Or, you’ll be curious to know my answers. If on the other hand, your opinion is not based on data, you won’t have any answers. Plus, you are not at all interested in the answers. And conveniently, you cop out that somebody else can answer my questions.

    Only people who don’t have data on their side attack the arguer – as you have done – by stating that my questions “ridicule” the opposite point of view. I had explained this in my previous post – as an “Ad Hominem” fallacy in logic. But its nothing but a cop-out.

    Perhaps you come to this site only to rant & rave and to twist what has been said. You don’t really come to ask constructive questions AND provide your sensible answers, do you?

    Any by some snazzy piece of deduction, your point of view is correct even though you can’t answer a single question of ours. Even though most of our questions are based on scriptures. Which according to you, we don’t read.

  44. Quote

    Sukumar,
    Ever since we started this journey, I keep on searching books related to IVC. The following book gives more inside about IVC, in this book chapter 9, page no 163, talks about “massacre” in IVC. But Dales and Kennedy both of them little skeptic about massacre but agreeing “something happened” to IVC people just before they started decline. Kennedy’s unbiased assessment may be true, but he also not sure about massacre but “something tragedy” happened in IVC.

    The Indus Civilization: A Contemporary Perspective
    By Gregory L. Possehl

    Subba

  45. Quote
    Sridhar N.K said February 25, 2008, 1:20 pm:

    Senthil,

    Let me see if I understand you right. Here’s what I understand from your comments above (drum rolls please, this is using a cinematic view)

    Para 1 – ” i have read your posts, and as such, i need to analyse what you have…” – I don’t have enough time to process the information you are giving me, so let me run my mouth off

    Para 2 – Max mueller – See para 1

    Para 3 – Max mueller is reasonable, but he is part of british conspiracy (Britishers came from Celtic UK and during their trade with IVC, they didn’t get their money’s worth for Tin. So, they’ve been fuming for a while and hence the conspiracy :-)

    Para 4 – See Para 1

    Para 5 – Celtic revenge again. Now this time, since the Celtic settled in US later and had invaded other nations in Europe, it’s a group conspiracy. All the infrastructure that was built involves conspiracy as well – you see for nearly 2000 years we lived with lack of infrastructure and that didn’t bother us. Nehru, who is related to Kaman in IVC and Indra in RV is in on the conspiracy as well :-)

    Para 6 – Celtic instigated US is on the conspiracy. They control monies.

    Para 7 – Entire nations are against us. The world is against us. Don’t believe anyone from any country writing anything about a country. Who are they to talk about us? Now, let me adjust my Tin Foil hat :-)

    Para 8 – I don’t know anything about Vedas, but I am going to authoritatively claim that many slokas come from Vedas, so there you have it. Rrrrrrsssss (blowing rasberries)

    Para 9 – I am going to let some logic seep into my thought process, Whoa! that was a strange feeling. Let me go back

    Para 10 – See Para 1

    Para 11 – I really liked the RV invasion, we were so happy. Now, the celtic conspiracy has killed it. Baahhh! Baaahh! Baahh! :-(

    Though I started this as fun exercise, there’s some truth to this. Senthil, you should read your comments sometimes to see if it is in relevance to the topic of discussion. Why bring US, UK, all European nations into the topic if it is irrelevant? You won’t be mistaken if you express your point of view without having to bring a boat load of irrelevant crap.

    You should use the approach that you’ve used in your earlier post. You did so well there initially – See questions below

    ————————-
    Some common questions on Aryan Invasion..
    1. It was mentioned that Aryans came through chariots & horses.. but, some historians say, its impossible to travel by chariots in that mountaineous regions..
    2. Arabia was most famous for horses.. there is probability that horses were tamed there..
    3. Aryans came and invaded IVC people.. But where from? and how? Are they militarily strong or only war tribes.
    ————————–

    You see, these are valid questions as they are open ended and provokes thought. It will help your case even further if you provide references to the historians or scholars that you are referring to. You will get answers for these. Even question #4 is partly successful – “When aryans could invade and impose their religion on IVC people, why there doest exist even a bit of evidence in their original home land.. the so claimed central asia.. as far as i know, there is not even a bit of evidences related to supposed Aryan religion in central asia, either in literature or in archeology.. I think, this is most important point, for which there is no effective answer..”

    You have prefaced it with “as far as I know” – Now, people can point you in the right direction.

    Again another question that seem open ended (which is good) – “In my last comment in the earlier post in this series, i have given a link, which gives around 325 generations of royal lineage as excel file.. i am giving that link below..
    http://www.newdharma.org/royal_chron.htm When we could refer dravidian gods, avesta, egypt, sumerian, i could not understand, why we could not consider this as one of the material for inference” – We can refer to the newdharma document you’ve presented, but the document and the excel file doesn’t provide any background or references for how the author came up with this idea, other than saying Indian civilization is the oldest and it is 9000 years old. Now, take that! Is that scientific, no. Heck, it won’t even pass if you try to run that by school kids.

    Your question on “I dont know even a bit about rig veda.. but many sites mention that saraswati river was mentioned in RV.. (i think around 60 times).. these sites also mentioned that the course of saraswati river is also referred in RV..
    As such, we have also cultural evidence of Triveni Sangamam.. the two rivers existing now, while the third river dried up..
    I think, this aspect is not discussed in this series..”. I’ll provide you with a site that has translation for Rig Veda. It will take you a week to read it. Please read it so you can form your own opinion instead of believing what others say http://www.sacred-texts.com/hin/rigveda/index.htm Yes, Saraswati is mentioned 73 times in Rig Veda. What does that prove, though! It is still a dispute as to where Saraswati was http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sarasvati_River – Whether it is in India or in Afghanistan, how are you trying to connect IVC to Vedic culture through Saraswati? Don’t get lost in the traffic deluge.

    When anyone brings up IVC, if your point of contention is that Vedic culture pre-dates it, but you have no proof for it as Rig Veda belongs to 1700BC ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rigveda ) and it has been word of mouth for many millennium before with no records, you’ll be immediately frowned upon.

    If your interest is to learn more, please ask open ended questions and try and understand others point of view. Then form an opinion, suggest what your opinion is and provide references for why you have that opinion.

    On the other hand, if you prefer the psuedo-science approach, ranting and raving approach or clouding opinions through non-verifiable references, even if you have a good point to make, you are not heard. Please help us understand you better by using the former and not the latter school.

  46. Quote

    Senthil – Asking questions is a good thing. As you can see, Karthik, Subba, Vamsi, Ganesh, NK, Archana, Maheswari etc – everyone has asked questions & raised doubts. Do you see how all of us give respect & get respect? Any question that you asked respectfully has been answered respectfully.

    What is a very bad thing is, coming in without any curiosity to learn/contribute – Instead, you bring in a militant attitude which was fostered solely on a diet of revisionist cheats calling themselves historians.

    You come with pre-conceived notions formed without sufficient data, you don’t even read the posts or the comments properly, repeatedly twist what people say (in a mis-guided attempt to argue), attempt to flood the authors with URLs in the hope that they’ll be scared (sadly you don’t seem to read your links yourself).

    You must also know at some subsconscious level that you have insufficient data on your side. So, you weasel out of answering questions & think its enough if you ask some question that stumps the other party. Its all about winning & losing to you. The quest for knowing for the sake of knowledge – do you think about it ever?

    You don’t have to agree with us. But if you only want to rant & rave, it seriously impacts your credibility as a human being. I’ve already tried (unsuccessfully) once to make you wary of sectarian forces. Looks like I’m losing that battle.

  47. Quote
    Karthik PK said February 25, 2008, 10:29 pm:

    I am not really able to provide evidence on the pagan worship in central asia.But following Orthodox Christian Traditions Russian,Armenian,Ukranian etc have rituals which definetly have pagan orgin…especially the worship of the Trinity and all the symbols….Please look at Links below
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eastern_Orthodox_Church
    http://lexicorient.com/e.o/arm_orth.htm

  48. Quote
    Karthik PK said February 25, 2008, 10:32 pm:

    One of more thing with resepct to Shiva and Rudra..

    Some versions say Rudra in sanskrit means the weeping one…but it meant the Red One in IVC.

    Some versions of Shiva say that it means the Red one and not the auspicious one ….

    This could be some a cause for linking Rudra and Shiva…this is my speculation….Interestingly one of most potent forms of Muruga in Tamil is Senthil which means the red one ….

  49. Quote
    Ganesh Vaideeswaran said February 26, 2008, 1:39 am:

    Sukumar,

    I have my questions/doubts on the Aryan Invasion Theory and violent incursion that you have stated based on information from a book that I trust, John Keay’s “India – A History”.

    In his book, the author talks about reference to “pur” in the vedas meaning rampart, fort or stronghold. Indra is referred to as the “destroyer of forts” or purandara. And a logical conclusion could be that these forts could be the Harappan citadels. The author then refers to American George F. Dales who established the Harappan Archaeological Project (HARP) and here is what George F. Dales had to say about AIT –

    “Nine years of extensive excavations at Mohenjo-Daro ( which seems to have been rapidly abandoned) have yielded a total of some 37 skeletons which can be attributed to the Indus period. None of these skeletons were found in the area of the fortified citadel, where reasonably the last defense of this city would have taken place.” He further states that “Despite extensive excavations at the largest Harappan sites, there is not a single bit of evidence that can be brought forth as unconditional proof of an armed conquest and destruction on the scale of the supposed Aryan invasion.”

    It is also doubted that the Aryan chariots and catapults could have made much of an impression on the 13 meters thick and tall Harappan walls. The Aryan migration theory is one that we can probably stand on. This makes further sense given that the Aryans were semi-nomadic folks, outdoorsy by nature that was exemplified by their worship of forces of nature such as agni, varuna, indra etc.

    John Keays indicates that they initially settled in the Punjab, long indo-pak border which is referred in the Vedas as “Sapta-Sindu” – Land of seven rivers. A snippet from the book that piqued my curiosity was that the Vedas had no mention of life in Central Asia. One reasonably plausible explanation that the author gives is the time lag between the migration of Aryans from central Asia to the time when the Vedas were compiled. Though I found this a bit hard to digest, I found this somewhat plausible.

    It sounds like there was a wave of migration by various tribes over centuries that led to Aryan incursion, but perhaps not a violent destructive one that destroyed the Harappans. Of these wave of migrations, the rig-vedic Indo Aryans could have been the last ones. So, it was not invasion but incursion and gradual mingling of local population with the nomadic migrators.

    Decline of IVC is attributed to climate changes and tectonic movements though IVC culture did not extinguish fully and remnants of it could be found in later civilizations.

    Ganesh

  50. Quote

    Sukumar
    Going through your post , I saw a pattern. And after Archana reminded me of Ayn Rand, I would call them ‘premises’. The premises on which your post is based on are

    1. That RV is a story narration (rather than a collection of verses in praise)
    2. All that is available now of RV is the complete RV
    3. That RV narrated the entire life of the so called Aryans
    4. That it was the so called Aryans who wrote the RV
    5. That the RV is a standalone taxt in the quartet of the Vedas
    6. The more number of times a God’s name is mentioned, the more they are revered
    7. That Indra was one among the so called Aryan
    8. That Indra killed the suburban populace and left the main citadels of walled cities

    First, before proceeding, as a practicing Hindu, let me register my protest. No mention of Gayatri, No mention of that famous mantra ‘ ekam sat, viprA bahuA vadanti ‘ and, most surprisingly, no mentions of the Rishis.

    1. To me the first images that come into my mind on the mention of Rigveda are the above.
    2. We have a legend and also a mention in Puranas that it was Vyasa who segregated the Vedas. Before that they were a seamless whole.
    3. May I humbly put it across that it was the seers who compiled the Vedas. Not a armed soldier. Not even the conspiring King waiting with blood thirst for the unarmed, peasant of the IVC ! It was the same seers that gave us the mantra pushpam, chanted till date, and the Gayatri. But for an eye trained to look for a predator in a Rishi, no proof will suffice.
    4. RV is not a documentary film on so called Aryans. In fact RV got segregated only after Vyasa , whose timeline is ….(well let me allow you the pleasure of another dig at Aryans)
    5. First , the construct of Aryans itself on shakier grounds. Only when it is proved we will move on to what they did. Sukumar, what did your concordance count for the word ‘Arya’ in RV ?
    And you think the most number of words are the conveyors of the theme in a work. Are you sure ? If a
    convict’s name is mentioned in a judgement more number of times, and the name justice is mentioned
    only once, what do you aver ? You are forgetting that , this is a scripture, meant for prayer. You don’t
    find clues to mass murder.
    6. The sixth premise of Indra was one among the Aryans- Hw about myself proceeding over this ? For Gayatri chanting, the pranayama mantra, the rishis are atri, brighu, kutsa, vashishta, gowthama, kashyapa, angiras
    chandas are gayatri , ushnik, anushtup, bruhati, pankti,trishtup, jagati
    devata are agni, vayu, arka, vageesa, varuna, Indra, visva deva

    I showed the above to point out that Indra is counted as Devata. If you had forgotten the Shanti mantra, look at it again
    svasti na indro vruddha sravA:- Let the ancient Indra do good to us.

    So , Indra was their God. Our God.

    7. One curious thing you have left unmentioned is that ISC people were unarmed. No arms worth their name were recovered. Why your deducting brain hasn’t come up with some deductions here too ?

    On the contrary, my ‘induction’ is that the ISC sites where the excavations were done were merely vilages or settlements of a larger entity. Why should a small city be armed to the teeth when the danger is not immediate and as long as it is in the heart land ? The enemy will attack the capital not the periphery. Why should Indra kill the peasants, leaving the soldiers who have dug in the citadel ? Makes sense ?

    And , you did not tell us the fate of the other 2,600 sites scattered across north India from Kashmir to Gujarat, some even in Baluchistan. The serial Killer Indra must have made a pattern of killing there in other sites too. Go on . Unearth.

    8. So, Indra was an Aryan ? What about the Indra Vizla celebrated in Poompuhar as mentioned in Silappadikaram ? What about the words ‘Indirane sAlun kari ‘ in ThirukkuraL ? When did the Aryans Tamilise Indra ?

    9. A little help at the end. As you searched for Brahma , you got the lowly 2 concordance count. Try PrajApati instead.

    Venkat

  51. Quote
    jayasree (subscribed) said February 26, 2008, 5:01 am:

    Thanks for the comments.

    I request you to read the already-published 15 parts of the series “No Aryan -Dravidian divide, It was one Arya vartha” in my blog.

    The write-ups on pithrus, is a mid-way break in the series,
    which I will be concluding in a few more posts.
    This series is necessary as I would be bringing out the commonality between the factors and issues involved in water oblations (such as darbhai, eclipses, the mantras etc) and also the rationale of TarpaNam, as found in what is now relegated as defunct or meaningless practices, with those found in ancient Tamil texts.

    My rationale is that if Dravidians had been chased down to the South,
    there must certainly be present some information of it in Tamil texts, some of which are dated as far as back to pre-Mahabharatha days.
    But there were absolutely none.
    Instead every Tamil text that was written 2000 years ago contained some information that this land mass of Bharatha was intact, was one with one culture and followed one Dharma.
    There was no sign of any dichotomy with those in the north of Vidhyas.

    You will find in my recent blog (Gods and worship…) that it was one Dharma throughout this earth.
    There is evidence from Valmiki Ramayana, that those who are regarded as Aryans and migrated, were indeed the ones chased and exiled by king Asita, 19th king in the lineage of Ikshvakus. (more on my blog post mentioned above).

    The dating of this would be taken up by me after finishing the One Aryavartha series.
    The dating has been already written by me and posted in a group a few years ago, and it concurs with the findings of Prof Vartak, whose dating of Rama remains unchallenged till today.

    The One Aryavartha series in my blog will continue after the present one pithrus,
    with the abundantly available inputs from ancient Tamil texts where we find information,
    that
    (1) the land mass called Bharatha varsha extended from Himalayas to the now sub-merged land of Kumari
    – in the south of Kanya kumari of today, until about 5000 years ago.

    (2) It was one culture, and Veads was common to all even among Tamils.

    (3) Krishna had visited the Pandyan kingdom in the now sub-merged land (i suggest a reading of my write-ups on ‘Nappinnai” where you will find the details of this as also the way the inner purport of Vedas – NiLa sookhtham – are related)

    (4)When Dwaraka was sub-merged, this extended land of Kumari also was submerged, forcing the survivors to migrate to the present day Madurai in Tamil nadu. Marine archaeologists have come up with evidence of this.

    (5)Sage Agasthya brought the surviving people of Dwaraka, (belonging to 3 different groups from Royals to peasants) and settled them in two places, one near Madurai, on the eastern side of western ghats
    and another near Kudremukh in present day Karnataka.
    There are enough inputs in Tamil texts openly mentioning these.
    These places came to be referred to as “dravida” (‘dra’ meaning to run and ‘vida’ meaning a place or land) by the people who left remained in the North who later became part of what we now call as Indus valley civilization.

    The final conclusion that emerges is that no one migrated and no one was dis-located.
    They (those in the North and in the South) co-existed as One people.

    Please read all the posts patiently in the order published.

  52. Quote
    jayasree (subscribed) said February 26, 2008, 6:25 am:

    For easy identification of the blog-series on One Arya vartha,
    click the following, to read the first part of the series and continue.

    http://jayasreesaranathan.blogspot.com/2008/01/no-aryan-dravidian-divide-it-was-one.html

    Although I want to refrain from commenting on your analysis, Mr Sukumar,
    I wish to make the following observation.

    Vedas are not meant for knowing what they say (meanings).
    They possess power which can be realized only while reciting.
    It is mentioned in Mahabharatha that when Narada met Vyasa in his ashram in the slopes of Himalayas,
    he was appalled at the silence there.
    He told that though meditation has to be done in calm surroundings,
    any place that does not reverberate the vibrations of Vedas can not contribute to spiritual awakening.
    He asked him to immediately summon his disciples and arrange for ‘Veda-gosham’ at all three times of the day.

    Vedas and the verses of Vedas are meant to create some ambiance or transform the atmosphere.
    The meanings do not matter.
    although the meanings are metaphorical or metaphysical only.

    (One such metaphorical allusion has been related to Nappinnai, the analysis of which can be found in my blog link given here.
    http://jayasreesaranathan.blogspot.com/2008/01/secrets-in-thiruppavai-secret-4_2717.htm

    That the purport of the mantras is more of physics, has come to be known from the scientific analysis of a homa, called Agnihothra, some details of which can be read in my blog link below.

    http://jayasreesaranathan.blogspot.com/2008/01/open-letter-to-chief-minister.html )

    Even acharyas like Adi Shankara and Ramanuja did not translate Vedas,
    nor did they interpret the meanings.
    They could have easily done that, as they had with whole lot of upanishads.
    They even refrained from quoting verses from Vedas while writing their commentaries on Brahma sutras.

    Only Europeans in their zeal translated vEdas and attributed their versions from what they had known.

    That contributed to vitiation of our past history.

  53. Quote
    vamsi (subscribed) said February 26, 2008, 8:44 am:

    Ms. Jayashree..what can I say..you almost are saying it is a sin to translate vedas. Why? Why should one take such position.
    I still do not understand why we cannot bring ‘evidence’ – whether it is scientific like using dating techniques, archaeological evidence or other means and prove/ disprove this theory.
    As a practicing Hindu, I dont mind anyone questioning anything in my religion. I would even go to the extent to say that if that kind of fact finding is not done, our religion cannot be great. Let us face it. Why cannot western standards be applied to our culture. Why do we fear or draw conspiracy theories about how westerners want to screw our ancient civilization. Did they do the same to Egyptian/ Mayan ‘s Why must they do to Indian?

  54. Quote

    Jayasree,
    Thanks for stopping by and leaving such detailed comments about your work. I would like to understand why want to refrain from commenting on my analysis? With all due respect, blogging is a democratic platform. If you want me to read yours and comment on it, i think it is reasonable for me to expect the same from you. Additionally, i want to point out to you that, it is you that has come to our blog and are requesting us to read yours. Therefore, here is my request to you, i have written only 6 posts so far. please read all of them and write your comments and then i will do the same. Deal?

  55. Quote

    Thanks Karthik. You are on the money on the Siva interpretation. You will see more about that in this series. I will go through the links you have provided later because it seems to cover the Christian period and I am still atleast 1500-2000 years before that. i do know that christianity has incorporated several pagan rituals/symbols already.

  56. Quote

    Subba,
    Thanks. I also don’t think any massacres happened but violence did take place because per RV Indra destroyed something. As i said above the Pura=fort interpretation may be inaccurate.

    Ganesh,
    Thanks for the detailed comment. Does it mean that you are disagreeing with my interpretation that Pura=outer suburbs? As i said above, I went through the RV and i couldn’t find any real description of the Pura – except some things like firm, made of metal etc. In fact, i found one extremely curious name for a Dasa – Kuyavan whose fort Indra destroys. I am sure you know that Kuyavan is a tamil word for Potter. This further adds to my view that they were talking about the clay brick settlements.

    So i don’t know on what basis Griffith, one of the original translators determined the Pura=Fort interpretation. Now if you go by the Pura=Fort interpretation and you don’t find any evidence in the IVC cities – there are 2 inferences you can make – one is that this whole Indra destroying Pura is a figment of imagination or you can infer that probably he destroyed something else. I have used the 2nd approach because I believe that the RV speaks the truth, sometimes exaggerated for poetic license, but it speaks the truth. It appears you want to infer those RV hymns that talk about Indra’s destruction of Puras as a figment of imagination.

    Now is it possible that there were waves of migrations? Most certainly yes. But waves of migrations doesn’t either deny or support the usage of violence. It is an independent concept.

    In my view, per my post above, it is clear to me that the RV people came from outside and per their own admission have used some violence. How much violence they used may be a matter of further investigation/excavations, but they used violence all the same.

    Hope that clarifies my position?

  57. Quote
    Sukumar (subscribed) said February 26, 2008, 9:31 am:

    Thanks Vamsi. I agree with you. I am sorry Jayasree. I don’t agree with you at all on this not-interpreting the Vedas. It makes no sense regardless of which angle you choose to look at the Vedas from.

  58. Quote
    Sridhar N.K said February 26, 2008, 9:34 am:

    Jayashree,

    Whatever medication you are on, please up the dosage. It’s not working… :-)

    “My rationale is that if Dravidians had been chased down to the South, there must certainly be present some information of it in Tamil texts, some of which are dated as far as back to pre-Mahabharatha days.” You must be kidding, right!

    Tholkappiyam, the oldest available tamil literature from the sangam period is dated between 4th Century and 1st Century BC. What in your opinion is mahabharatha days? There is no written records in tamil available prior to that. If you have found some, please enlighten us.

    You also say “Instead every Tamil text that was written 2000 years ago contained some information that this land mass of Bharatha was intact, was one with one culture and followed one Dharma. There was no sign of any dichotomy with those in the north of Vidhyas.”

    Now, isn’t that convenient. IVC whether you’ve been following or not, has been dated to 3500BC – 2300BC. 2000 years ago would leave us with 1BC. You don’t think anything happened in the 3000 years in between. The world was in a stand still. Bharatha before 1947 included Pakistan as well. So, are you saying it is intact today?

    I am going to ignore the dharbai, pithru, devasam trail. I am not sure where you are going with this or how it is relevant to IVC. Again, think about upping your dosage :-)

    You are asking us to read all your posts patiently and you wont even summarize what your posts contain or why it is relevant to IVC. You are suggesting that there are tamil texts date further than 6th century BC (when Mahabharatha was written as popularly accepted – http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mahabharata ) Why should we read any of your other posts?

    In your second comment you claim “Vedas are not meant for knowing what they say (meanings). They possess power which can be realized only while reciting… Vedas and the verses of Vedas are meant to create some ambiance or transform the atmosphere. The meanings do not matter.although the meanings are metaphorical or metaphysical only.” – You should seriously look at what you are writing. Please recite this after me. What you are about to say has special powers that can be unraveled only by reciting and not trying to understand it’s meaning “The world is flat, we have 3 logas and I am a deva. I’ll up my dosage tomorrow”

  59. Quote

    Jayashree – Read your comments. Here’s what I think.

    >>My rationale is that if Dravidians had been chased down to the South,
    >>there must certainly be present some information of it in Tamil texts, some of which are dated as far as back to pre-Mahabharatha
    >>days.

    Um, how come you don’t know that Tamil didn’t have any script till the 4th century BC? Or, do you think Mahabharata happened at 3rd century BC? Which Tamil text are you referring to anyway? If this is an indication of your historical knowledge, how can we take your opinions & dates seriously?

    You haven’t read any of the posts in this series, have you? You are just here, trying to generate some traffic to your BLOG. You came here to “suggest” a reading of your various posts! Girl, you need to be slicker than that!

    If you actually cared to read it, you’ll learn that we are talking about the “Indus Valley Civilization” & how the “Aryans” came into India. Most of what you say in your comment is about the past 2000 years. How do you expect to be taken seriously, when you don’t even care to check if your comments are relevant?

    >>Only Europeans in their zeal translated vEdas and attributed their versions from what they had known.
    >>That contributed to vitiation of our past history.

    Oooh, we are now really scared. How can we be so bad as to try & understand the Vedas? Let me sleep tonight with my lights on – the gods might blast me to the next millenium for smearing our culture!

    >>Vedas and the verses of Vedas are meant to create some ambiance or transform the atmosphere.
    >>The meanings do not matter.
    >>although the meanings are metaphorical or metaphysical only.

    Its gratifying to know from someone who thinks she is a real believer that the Vedas have no meaning. The most basic scripture of Hinduism has no meaning according to you. Amazing. Tell me, my dear: Have you read Griffith’s translation on the internet?

  60. Quote
    Sukumar (subscribed) said February 26, 2008, 9:55 am:

    Venkat,
    Thank you for actually reading atleast one of my posts before commenting. I welcome your inputs. I do sense a confrontational tone in your comment which I don’t appreciate. If you don’t like what I am saying you don’t need to read it.

    1. I am talking about the Concordance of the RV in this post. Concordance is an established technique as i said in my post. I certainly can’t claim credit for the technique.

    2. Given that i am talking about the Concordance how does it matter that i didn’t talk about specific mantras. FYI, i have chanted the Gayatri mantra 3 gazillion times. So i know what it is and where it is from.

    3. You wrote a long piece to say that perhaps RV is not the only document we should judge the Vedic people by. I am assuming that is what you intended to say? If yes, that is a valid question. As you know, Yajur veda and the Sama Veda are the other 2 main Vedas that we use even today. Both of them are derivative works of the RV – Yajur (both Krishna and Shukla) cover the rituals/sacrifices generally known as liturgies and Sama Veda covers the chants we must use during the rituals. It is also clear to everyone from the above, that RV was created first and RV is the one that sets the socio-religious context and the other 2 complete the corpus by providing additional material for us to conduct our religion. With that definition of the Vedas in place, I think RV is a good barometer of what was important to the RV people at the time they composed it. BTW, this definition of the Vedic corpus has been done by knowledgeable/respected historians after reading all the Vedas, Upanishads and Puranas.

    4. What is the concordance of Aryans? I don’t know why the concordance for that word is important. Considering that is what they called themselves – so it would qualify as a self-reference. Anyway, i looked up the concordance for your benefit, which of course, you could have done yourself from the link i provided above – 21 arya, 8 aryan, 1 aryanian, 5 aryarnan, 6 aryas = if we asssume these are related terms the total concordance is 41.

    5. Prajapati has a concordance of 6. Again you can check the concordance yourself from the link i provided.

    6. Why did the IVC excavations show no weapons? Good question. In my view that just is further proof that the IVC cities themselves were not destroyed by anybody. But that doesn’t prove that there were no weapons elsewhere. We have only dug up a few of their clay brick settlements, which is how we know the religion they followed. Again given the nature of their religion and the people, they were not war-like. That doesn’t say anything about the Aryans because they came from elsewhere. For your information, i had covered the Minoan culture in my earlier posts which had a similar culture and religion as IVC and we didn’t find any weapons there also. My view is that the entire Neolithic culture except for a few pockets like Egypt and volatile parts of Sumeria were non-warring community of people. Again this in no way reflects on the Aryans who came much later to the IVC.

    7. And Finally, just think about this for a moment if you can. It is the RV that is saying that Indra destroyed Dasa’s forts. I didn’t say that. I just said it need not have been a fort but it would have been the dravidian villages – clay brick settlements. Hope that point is clear to you.

  61. Quote
    Karthik PK said February 26, 2008, 10:39 am:

    Thanks Sukumar and sorry for bringing up the christian symbol….My intention was to convey it to Senthil on his query about Pagan worship in Central Asia….:)

  62. Quote
    Ganesh Vaideeswaran said February 26, 2008, 10:39 am:

    Sukumar,

    I am not denying RV’s documentation of Indra’s destruction – just that it was not the forts of Harappa. Why did I come to this conclusion – because there is no evidence of any detailed destruction, skeletons etc.

    Now, to your question of whom and what did Indra destroy? As I mentioned earlier, Aryanization of India involved a wave of migration and the RV people were one of the last ones to migrate and whom they fought against and destroyed were perhaps the earlier migrators.

    There are also words such as Ahuras and Daevas in Iran and old Iranian text depicts conflicts between the two – except in this case the Ahuras are the Gods and Daevas the evil ones.

    So, I am able to reconcile the Indra destruction with the non-destruction of Harappan civilization by the Aryans.

    One thing that I am not able to fully reconcile is the lack of mention of foreign elements in RV. This, as I mentioned earlier, is attributed to time lag between the migration and actual compilation of RV.

    Hope this clarifies some of the things that I had written about.

    Ganesh

  63. Quote

    No issues Karthik.

    Ganesh,
    Thanks. Even if we assume that the destructions were between one wave of immigrants and the next, there should be some evidence of that found, right? And by the way, as i mentioned above, one of the Dasas whose Pura was destroyed by Indra went by the name Kuyavan. Looks like the RV people didn’t even bother to find the real name of the person – Kuyavan as you know is a potter in Tamil. No one really bears that as a name. This is another example of the poor knowledge they had of the IVC people at the time they came in because they came with a version of RV, tweaked a few things which they were continuously doing slowly.

    Good point on the Avestan switch of the Deva/Ahura. Avestans also decried Nasatya as a god and made him into a demon. Interestingly other Indo-Europeans like Mitannis used the same gods as the RV people. So it appears that there was some parting of ways between the RV and the Avestans and the Avestans decide to switch somethings around to create a separate identity for themselves.

    Lack of foreign elements in the RV – i don’t think such a categorical statement can be made. RV mentions the saraswati which is actually in Afghanistan. It mentions camels – certainly no camels in the IVC. Avesta mentions about the homeland in central asia. Rajesh Kocchar has proved that the RV has been edited with some sections been left out. it is possible that the parts that were left out referred to their homeland etc.

    the time lag could also be an explanation.

    thanks again for clarifying.

  64. Quote
    Ganesh Vaideeswaran said February 26, 2008, 12:04 pm:

    Sukumar,

    Here is my point – I do not see any evidence based on current knowledge that Harappan civilization was destroyed by “Violent Incursions” of the Aryans.

    Now, you take a specific snippet from RV, about “Kuyavan” being destroyed by Indra and ask me to explain it. I typically refrain from answering about things I do not know. And so, I do not know who the Kuyavans were and if they were violently destroyed by Indra.

    Yes, I do agree with you that Kuyavan is certainly a tamil word and refers to a pot maker and clay was an important element in IVC.

    Here is my take – As part of Aryan immigration and eventual assimilation of Aryan and Harappan culture, there could have been incidents/skirmishes between the original local population and migrants.

    With your concordance theory, how much weightage do you give to this one element of Kuyavan destruction by Indra and extrapolating that to “violent incursions”? If your answer is not much, then I rest my case that we need to go with more tangible evidence (such as actual signs of major destruction etc.). If your answer is “to a large extent”, then I need to understand more about how often are these Kuyavans mentioned in RV, under what context etc.

    Ganesh

  65. Quote

    Vamsi

    /** Why do we fear or draw conspiracy theories about how westerners want to screw our ancient civilization. Did they do the same to Egyptian/ Mayan ’s Why must they do to Indian? **/

    This is one of the contentions that we are facing.. regarding your above question, my understanding would be that egyptians and mayans cultures are dead, while Hindu culture is the largest non-semitic living culture..

    If you need further explanation of why there is most probability of conspiracy, i feel, we should go to christianity, the old testaments, new testaments, and some of their texts, and their past histories, like inquisitions, cultural destruction of europe, branding native religions as satans etc…. we can have that discussion elsewhere, where i can provide enough reason, why there is conspiracy..

    /** Why cannot western standards be applied to our culture **/
    Why should we apply western standards to our culture. I hope, as a practicing hindu, you would be aware of enormous difference, culturally, historically & socially, that both the west and east have.. This is what i am strong about.. No mad following of western standards.. let’s have our own standard, that suits our own strength and weakness..

  66. Quote

    Ganesh,
    I think my position has been misunderstood. Did i ever say that the entire Harappan Civilization was destroyed by the Aryans? I merely said this “It is the only one that explains the modern day Hinduism, which is a clever amalgamation of the Dravidian religion, Jainism and Buddhism, created using a combination of violent incursions/violence, proselytizations, influence and other techniques as appropriate”.

    Now the fact that 1 kuyavan has been destroyed means that they used violence against 1 kuyavan. That is enough to prove my point that violence was also used. In reality the RV has atleast 20-30 instances of destruction. If you want i can produce the exact concordance.

    But on the other hand if i said “only violence was used”, you are right, by the concordance principle we would have to find a lot of Pura demolitions.

    To summarize, Aryans used violence against the IVC people by their own admission in the RV – yes it might have been minor skirmishes and a few small villages burnt down – but it is violence all the same.

    If you don’t think this is enough justification for me to claim that violence was also used as a technique, i am happy to edit that piece out.

    To me whether violence was used or not is not central to my point of view. Aryans came from the outside, amalgamated their religion with the IVC’s and acquired a dominant position making the IVC people subordinate to them. It is possible that you don’t agree with this position also. If you can provide evidence that even this didn’t happen, i am willing to concede my position.

    Thanks for the vigorous debate. It is quite enlightening instead of the flame wars which seem to be going on elsewhere on this blog.

  67. Quote

    The tamil scholars had referred three tamil sangams, where the first two got destroyed, and what we have is only the last.. as such, there are references about those earlier sangams, in existing tamil literature..

    /** Um, how come you don’t know that Tamil didn’t have any script till the 4th century BC? **/
    Priya.. the sangam literature is dated back to 100 BC, .. :) (you are wrong.. right)
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tamil_history_from_Sangam_literature

    Also, the three kingdoms of chera chola & pandya were mentioned in asoka’s inscriptions.
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chronology_of_Tamil_history

    the following link is also interesting..
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sources_of_ancient_Tamil_history

    In the above link, references to vedic practices were reported as far as 200 BC..

  68. Quote

    Senthil – A few small questions that i’m unable to sort out myself. :-)

    So, which western countries are involved in this conspiracy? Is Finland included in that list? What about the Czech Republic? Any thoughts on Belgium, Switzerland & France? Many famous Indologists come from these countries. Once I hear from you that these countries are in the “Axis of Evil” against India, I’ll ignore what their professors have to say. Please help me ;-)

    And, what would they gain by smearing Hinduism? Perhaps, spread Christianity here? Hey, that’s a thought!! And we all know, don’t we, that people with double doctorates have historically converted the most?! Please tell me, I got it right? Right? :D

    So, we won’t apply western standards to anything? What about .NET, CMM, Iterative Development Models, Java & BS-7799? Hey, let’s throw them away – they are western standards. And um, I thought we were a free country? Oh, we are free as long as we don’t have a choice? Ah, I understand finally :lol:

  69. Quote

    /** Aryans came from the outside, amalgamated their religion with the IVC’s and acquired a dominant position making the IVC people subordinate to them. **/

    Sukumar.. it would be interesting, if would have some analysis of who are RV people, and who are IVC people today :) ..

    My take would be.. Brahmins might be the so called RV aryans.. But, who are all IVC people.. how should we classify all kings, like Rama, krishna, maurya etc.. in case of chadragupta maurya, chanakya would be RV person, but what about maurya? he is said to be a vysa.. how should we classify him?

    In the same sense, how about Buddha, ashoka etc.. how about vishwamitrar, vashishtar.. how about cheras, cholas & pandyas, who were mentioned in ashoka’s inscriptions.. (pls refer my above comment.. i think its in moderation)

    My curiosity is extending further. but i will stop with this..

  70. Quote

    Senthil – How sweet. You tried to answer in a hurry as usual, without analysis & without thinking. Aww!!! How can I not take you seriously, my dear?

    Ashoka lived in the 3rd century BC. So, South Indian kings are mentioned in ASHOKA’s inscription. If you care to put your tin-foil hat on, please tell me why you think it indicates the Tamils had a script. I said they didn’t have a script. Not that they were all dead :D

    BC is counted backwards, my dear. 4th century BC comes 200 years before 100 BC. Is there some little point that you tried to make here?

    Yes, Vedic practices were here probably on 200 BC. Most interesting. What has that got to do with 2500 BC? Give me a hint. I’m sure hidden somewhere, there’s a reason – though, I can’t understand what it is.

  71. Quote

    How about this magada dynasties, which extends as far as 550 BCE.. (I think, i heard sridhar telling that we dont had infrastructures until britishers.. magadha was referred as one of the beautiful city, in many references..

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Magadha#History

  72. Quote

    Senthil,
    As usual you didn’t read my post, but you choose to comment. Here is my opening para in the prolog – i expect you to read atleast the prolog before commenting. Here is what i said
    “As a note of caution, the terms Aryans and Dravidians are being used in the historical context. At present, the Indians of India, excluding some racially pure tribals and the people of the North East, are a mix of both the Aryan and Dravidian peoples as well as other peoples like Scythians, Huns, Moghuls, Europeans and others, who had made India their home during the course of history.”

    Hope that solves your curiosity.

    And next time you get another of bout of “curiosity”, try reading my post for a change and maybe you will find your answer.

  73. Quote
    vamsi (subscribed) said February 26, 2008, 12:42 pm:

    /*Why should we apply western standards to our culture. I hope, as a practicing hindu, you would be aware of enormous difference, culturally, historically & socially, that both the west and east have.. This is what i am strong about.. No mad following of western standards.. let’s have our own standard, that suits our own strength and weakness..
    */

    As a practicing Hindu, I want answers for all questions and that includes *everything*. Western scientific analysis meets my values/idea of interpreting truth. If we are as great as we think we are, (like who measured the distance between earth and sun so accurately centuries back- We means IVC/ISC/RV/Aryans whoever contributed to such great discoveries), we should be analytical and evidence based rather than based on gut feel/political positions.

    I will feel proud if someone really understands and explains why materialistically my yagnopaveetam is important to be worn. If not, I dont want to wear it to make my grandfather happy. Not to hurt his sentiments. But to understand the reason scientifically. I respectfully threw it on a tree from my apartment building few years back. I dont take explanations like ‘accept it’ or ‘Adi Shankaracharya’ did not even question who are you to ask, No I dont accept. We are, after all, not like in other religions where Mullahs/ high priests decide how I should interpret the truth. Hope that explains why I concur mostly to what Sukumar is writing here. Though much of it is above my head, I could still understand bits and pieces. But the other attacks seem to be very less data based and more faith/ political based. We can be nationalistic and Hindu even after accepting AIT.

    I dont feel it anything wrong with that. If Lord Shiva is a destroyer or creator, it did not prevent later religious reformist movements from questioning truth. Luckily I belong to a section of Hindu’s called smartas. We go to Shiva, vishnu, Subramanya Swamys, Tirupathi, Kanaka Durga temples. Add to that a mosque and a church also (thanks to the convent education and many good Muslem friends).

  74. Quote

    Priya,

    Ashoka ruled from 273 BC to 232 BC. .. pls refer the following link.. (Gulp :) )
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ashoka_The_Great

  75. Quote

    Senthil – Gulp all you want, you seem to be choking on history. History doesn’t seem to agree with your health. 273 BC is called 3rd century BC, my dear. And you said your father sent you to a good school??

  76. Quote

    Sukumar,

    Thanks.. but let me quote your earlier comment..,

    /** in that case, you will have to deny any credit to the Vedic people because they came from elsewhere and inserted themselves on top of the Dravidians and subjugated them untill the islamists and britishers came and took over from them. **/

    If there is so much amalgamation happened, how come you came to conclusion that RV peopel subjugated dravidans, untile islamist or british conquest.. :)

    Having accepted that amalgamations happened, how do you classify the amalgamated people? either RV or IVC?

    Also, from when onwards do you feel, amalgamations started happening?
    Do you feel, epic kings like krishna, rama, and historic kings like ashoka, maurya etc are amalgamated people?

    In that case, the above quotes of yours become invalidated.. ie, RV people subjugated dravidians till britishers..

  77. Quote

    Priya.. I accept my mistake here :( .. 3rd century BC is 300 BC..

  78. Quote
    senthil (subscribed) said February 26, 2008, 1:01 pm:

    Thanks vamsi.. i agree with you on being analytical.. you tend to be materialistic, .. and i feel, its your right to choose that option..

    Still, i could not comprehend, that when much of our religion is spirituality based, how come the materialistic standards of west could be applied..

    I dont have much knowledge on agamas, or vedas or shashtras. but, as everyone, i did not understand the reason behind, many of the practices, until i came across archana’s symbolism.. probably, there might be some reasoning that we might have lost.. i feel, the same with your yagnopaveetam.. there might be some reason, which might have been lost. (Btw, is it the same as poonool?) ..

  79. Quote
    senthil (subscribed) said February 26, 2008, 4:14 pm:

    I came across this interesting (for me :) ) article of Iravatham Mahadevan, reviewing parpola’s interpretations..
    http://www.harappa.com/script/maha2.html

    His conclusion is as below..
    “So far as the Indus Civilization is concerned the main implication of the new theory seems to be that the Aryan-Dasa conflict recorded in the earliest portions of the Rigveda is the story of the hostilities and eventual fusion of two Aryan tribes, which took place before their entry into the Indian sub-continent and has thus no relevance to the demise of the mature phase of the Indus Civilization.”

    http://www.harappa.com/script/maha14.html

    “Since almost every household has yielded at least one seal, it is only reasonable to expect that the seal inscriptions would mention, besides names, the professions or callings of the seal-holders like those of scribes, city officials, tax colIectors, merchants, sailors or armed auards.”

    I think, we did not deal much on administrative structure of IVC people.. In this case, when there is administrative system, fortified walls, resembling a country, there should have been atleast some police force for tasks like maintaining law & order..

    Some other queries:

    Chariot has been one of the main archeological evidences quoted for Aryan invasion.. But india was famous for its elephant fleets, which is not present in central asia.. and there seems to be no reference in IVC site too.. any clues on where and how these elephant fleet could have developed.. (probably, we could get some clue on the history..).. it is to be noted, that this type of elephant fleets are unique to india and east asia..

  80. Quote
    senthil (subscribed) said February 26, 2008, 6:53 pm:

    Sukumar,

    In the following wikipedia link, dasyus are mentioned as hostile tribes.. not essentially dravidians.. some of vedic tribes were also mentioned as dasyus.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dasa#Dasa.2C_Dasyu_and_Arya

    The battle of ten kings.
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_the_Ten_Kings

    as you have already mentioned, varunan was god of zorastrians, and indra were god of vedic brahmins.. so as devas for vedic people and ahuras for persian people.. any mention of rigvedic conflict could be b/w persians and aryans, who share the common religion, but later fought with each other over differences.. (probably, over the god varunan vs indran).. (A conflict is different from invasion.. so the term aryan invasion itself could be wrongly interpreted..)

    it is to be noted, that dravidians in tamilnadu, misquoted this, by meaning asuras as southindias, and devas as north indians..

    Secondly, the vedic gods like indra etc are not worshipped by people today.. rather, IVC’s shiva & skanda cult, has been prevalent all over india.. even in pakistan, there were numerous shiva temple.. so, the aryan migration need not be violent.. rather, it might have been fusion, or to say, intermixing with IVC people..

    One aspect, why i think on this line is that as per evidences, IVC people people did farming, produced cotton, and traded with other civilizations, like mesapotamia.. so, they should have been established contacts with vedic (aryan) people also..

    Also, for a society to excel, there needs to be different sections of people.. like, workforce, labourers, intellectuals.. Since, IVC sites of Harappa & Mohenjadaro was well planned, while there are numerous supporting settlements outside, extending far greater the region, there might have been many sects of people, living in that region.. ie, IVC people may not be monolitic.

    But, there are some areas, i am not clear.. Shiva cult is found in seals of IVC.. (a male meditating with erect phallus..)

    link-1


    link-2

    We also, see, that many of priests in shiva temples are brahmins like shivacharis, battacharis, dikshithars, etc.. and the important point to be noted is that these priestly brahmins, were accorded extremely disciplined life, requiring utmost sacrifice..
    Why would aryans, alleged to have subjugated IVC people, accord themselves such hard life style, and be priests to IVC god..

    Its also to be noted, that many of goddess temples do not have brahminic priests..

    More over, if we look at Puranas, we have often seen that Indra would beg with shiva, for saving them from asuras .. :)

    So, can it be, like, IVC people are actually more powerful than aryans.. or, aryans would have sourced the help of IVC people, to counter ahuras of persia? there are possibilities, that IVC people might have contacts with vedic aryans long back..

  81. Quote
    senthil (subscribed) said February 26, 2008, 7:00 pm:

    More over, i find the kenoyer’s views more appaling, and somewhat pragmatic..

    http://www.harappa.com/bazaar/books/kenoyer.html

    Some quotes:

    “Unlike Wheeler and others, Kenoyer does not impose theoretical or religious biases on fuzzy evidence. Exciting work continues at Harappa, and at sites in India like Dholavira and Rakigarhi; both are near what may be the lost Sarasvati River, which once ran parallel to the Indus and may have been equally important. The largest known Indus culture site, Ganweriwala in Pakistan’s Cholistan desert, was only found in the late 1970s and has yet to be excavated. In short, there is so much more to discover for an intelligent archaeologist to risk having their conclusions soon made obsolete.”

    “The same weights and measures were used for over a thousand miles, an incredible feat in the Bronze Age. Indus traders set up flourishing colonies in the Gulf and Mesopotamia; no evidence of the reverse has yet been found. ”

    [[My inference: Can it be that the entire stretch of IVC be under single ruler or set of related rulers?]]

  82. Quote
    senthil (subscribed) said February 26, 2008, 7:08 pm:

    Another interesting observation i noticed from my own culture.. we have been traditional shaivites, but, my gula deivam is “Kaaliamman” the mother goddess.. and we also do worship murugan, the most .. so in this case, the three divisions of Hindu religious classficiation, mingle.. like, shaivam (shiva worship), sooktham (goddess worship) and koumaram (murugan worship) ..

    In such case, could it be that all the above three divisions be part of IVC culture? as there are evidences of murugan (saptha kanniyar seal, discussed in past series), shiva, & mother goddess worships in IVC..

  83. Quote
    Ganesh Vaideeswaran said February 26, 2008, 7:20 pm:

    Sukumar,

    Thanks for the clarification. I think we are on the same page ;). Yes, I do agree that Aryans migrated from outside, managed to assimilate themselves in a new place, borrowed from IVC/Harappan – not just religion, but also culture etc.

    At this point, I do not think Aryans wiped our Harappan civilization, but there was mingling/mixing of both cultures. Decline of IVC was not purely due to the Aryans, but was also due to climate impact etc. Do you agree with this?

    I also agree that modern day Hinduism is an amalgamation of various religions. Using the words “clever amalgamation” seems to indicate a sinister motive behind it, though that may not have been your intention.

    You also mention this – “Therefore, the Aryans must have used a combination of military power, influencing some powerful Dravidian chiefs with their new religion, to Aryanize the IVC people.” I am really curious to know the role that you think religion played in influencing Dravidian chiefs.

    I need to read-up and understand more about this – What were other factors that influenced IVC to become docile (would not use the word subjugated). Did they truly get dominated by the Aryans or were there other factors that led them to cohabitate with the Aryans?

    Ganesh

  84. Quote
    senthil (subscribed) said February 26, 2008, 7:23 pm:

    And the story of shiva marrying sati, the daughter of daksha.. daksha declines to marry off his daughter to shiva, as he belongs to outside vedas.. and later shiva destroys daksha..

    Also, there is no explanation on why the dominant Aryans have, over the centuries, abandoned their victorious god (Indra is practically not worshipped in any of the temples manned by Brahminical priests) in favour of the god of their defeated enemies.. (which is proposed by AIT supporters)

  85. Quote
    senthil (subscribed) said February 26, 2008, 7:34 pm:

    Also, aryan denotes only ethnicity, and only the interpretations of 19th century historians, gave it racial tone, which was later taken by Hitler vigorously.. (i think, based on max muller’s theory)..

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arya

    “O my Lord, a person who is chanting Your holy name, although born of a low family like that of a Candala, is situated on the highest platform of self-realization. Such a person must have performed all kinds of penances and sacrifices according to Vedic literatures many, many times after taking bath in all the holy places of pilgrimage. Such a person is considered to be the best of the Aryan family” (Śrīmad Bhāgavatam 3.33.7).

    In the above links, the various connotation of the word arya was given.. like, use of words like arya & anarya.. it was given that even sugriva and ravana called themselves as arya..

    I am quoting this example, as this gave another dimension to the aryan conflict.. when aryan itself is just an ethnic tribe, how come, we can impose racial dimension to this..

  86. Quote

    senthil – pls dont kill us with ur curiosity/baseless arguments/ not reading the write up, anymore!!!!

    Please take time and READ the post b4 u write a comment or raise a question! dont argue for the heck of arguing. this blog is quite informative, dont sway from the track and comment irrelevantly. there is no necessity that u will be knwoing whatever sukumar/whoever writes, and u MUST argue/defy that. there might be some new info in the blog, other than arguing baselessly, try out READING THE BLOG, this will help u comment better and to judge whether to argue baselessly or not. BTW, most of ur comments/questions have answers in the blog itself.

  87. Quote
    senthil (subscribed) said February 27, 2008, 3:58 am:

    Ok.. I am exiting from the discussion ..

  88. Quote

    Vamsi,
    Thanks. you are right. In my view, the scientific approach of today belongs to all of humankind. This approach helps us find real answers to our questions. Calling the scientific approach as Western is misguided. I have tried to adopt the scientific approach as much as possible and it provides real answers. Yes it is hard for me to overcome my biases, prejudices, mental models to look at something with an open mind and learn. This has proven especially difficult because of the subject that we are tackling now. It has not been easy to overlook my Brahmin lineage and look at what the Aryans have done in an unbiased manner. But what i have done is a genuine attempt to get at the truth. I think many of the readers appreciate that and some have not take in it well, because it affects the core belief systems we all have been brought up with.

    Thanks again for speaking your mind.

  89. Quote

    Senthil,
    thanks for the kenoyer link. i have read the kenoyer material. The general tendency for IVC/AIT researchers is to pick Mueller, Wheeler, Jones, Marshall someone that is dead and gone, find holes in their theory and then use that to support their point of view.

    One example right in this comment section is Jayasree’s comment that Dravidians were forced to move down South because of Aryan Invasion. Now this is a view from early Indologists and has long been disproved. The answer to this question is simple and it is there in my series – India was fully populated by the Dravidians and Tribals who were still practicing their paleolithic culture. Aryans came to the Northwest and slowly Aryanized people first moving west to east and then north to south.

    So, when you want to understand who is trying to decipher the truth, avoid people who are picking some old obsolete theory about India.

  90. Quote

    Senthil,
    I am responding to this comment of yours

    http://www.sastwingees.org/2008/02/24/the-real-history-of-india-part-6-aryan-invasion-theory/#comment-2201

    Here is my general approach and philosophy in life – Egalitarian – i respect every single opinion and view regardless of who it comes from, what age/creed/religion/nationality/caste they belong to. I try to evaluate the opinion/idea and react to it.

    The problem i have with you is this – you seem to have concluded that all Britishers are evil, all Islamists are evil, All Christians are out to convert Hindus and all Islamists are out to convert Hindus.

    When i said Aryans subjugated Dravidians, i said that in reaction to what you said about other people. My point is simple – if you feel that Britishers subjugated India and they never did any good thing for India, i would like you to measure Aryans by the same yardstick. If you did that, what you will find will scare you.

    For me the problem is very simple. I don’t believe that any person or any peoples are wholly bad/evil or wholly good/angels. Everyone has done evil/bad things and everyone has done good as well. This is especially true when you look back through history (excepting a few despicable characters like Hitler, Stalin, Mussolini etc). So when i use that point of view, i can both understand the bad things that Aryans did as well as the good things they did and in the same way the good and bad things done by the British.

    You don’t seem to have such a belief system. For you the people that wrote the glorious Vedas can do no wrong, notwithstanding the fact that they pretty much claimed themselves in the RV that they destroyed a few Dravidian Puras.

    Hope that helps you understand my position.

  91. Quote

    Senthil,
    I am responding to this comment.
    http://www.sastwingees.org/2008/02/24/the-real-history-of-india-part-6-aryan-invasion-theory/#comment-2208

    Well what can i say. my whole post#5 was about the IVC religion and if you had read it, you would realize that is what i have said – the proto-trinity – Siva, Sakti and Murugan. I am glad you found evidence of this in your village. The names of the religions you quote though are Aryanized names of the original IVC trinity.

  92. Quote

    Ganesh,
    I never said that the IVC was destroyed by the Aryans. The only interpretation that the current evidence allows us that Aryans fused their religion/culture with the IVC people. I think it is also reasonable to conclude that IVC people took up the subordinate position. Whether the IVC people did this voluntarily? I don’t think so. Aryans used influence, their religion to proselytize and of course violence as well.

    Now evidence also shows that the IVC cities (not the suburbs) were abandoned around 1700 BC. Natural Calamities are being cited as a probable cause. I actually don’t believe that. You may find the answer to this in my next post.

    Well i never realized Clever could have negative connotations. I actually wanted to use the word Brilliant but i felt that may be disrespectful to people that follow Jainism and Buddhism. I also believe that Jainism and Buddhism are distinct religions from Hinduism. Buddha actually was opposed to Vedic Hinduism as well as the IVC religion i talked about in my previous post. That is another piece of evidence that the IVC religion was still alive and kicking during Buddha’s time. Remember he was from near-about Bihar. Aryanization had not yet been completed in North India by that time.

    What is the role of religion in the Aryan dominance? I am sure it played a key role. If you need an analogy, look for Christian converts in India during the time of St. Thomas in India (1century AD) much before the arrival of the European. Many people freely converted because they must have thought that Christianity was better. Only after Constantine’s accession to Christianity did it become proselytizing and after that they even used a lot of force to convert people.

    In the same way, i am sure many IVC people may have switched their allegiance to the Aryan religion. RV refers to some Dasyus who were worshipping the Aryan Gods. We also know that Aryans did use violent destructions to prove that they were more powerful. This is why i said a combination of techniques were used.

    Now to your last question – I need to ask you a return question – What is your understanding of how Indians became subordinate to the British? Were we totally dominated by the British or did we simply liked to cohabitate with them?

    Please don’t mistake me, i didn’t ask this to taunt you. I feel the answer you give yourself to the above question which you don’t need to reveal to me, will likely have a bearing on how you think about the Aryan-IVC equation.

    As for my position – there is ample evidence to show that the IVC people were subjugated (although as you say it is a harsh word to use), their Gods were modified and incorporated into the Aryan religion and were converted to the new religion. And I don’t see a big deal with what happened. This is how history has happened and it happened here also.

    If we dig deeper we will find that the IVC people were also another wave of immigrants from Africa who amalgamated with the previous paleolithic people in India and they are likely to have used the same techniques Aryans used later.

    This just seems to be the standard story anywhere you look in history.

    I will give you another example. Rajendra Chola and his father Raja Raja Chola were amongst the greatest kings of India (you don’t hear about them because history of India is North Indian dominated). Rajendra Chola conquered Indonesia and places on the way. In tamilnadu we speak of his conquests with great pride and that he treated the people he conquered fairly unlike other conquerors etc. Whereas textbooks in Singapore say that Rajendra Chola plundered and destroyed their culture and conquered them.

    Which version is correct?

    To me, again the answer is simple – there are very few wholly benevolent conquerors in the history of mankind. I know a few and we can discuss that later. So i am sure Rajendra Chola’s army would have definitely done some bad stuff. That just is the nature of war and conquests.

    Hope that answers some of your questions.

  93. Quote

    Senthil,
    I am responding to this comment – http://www.sastwingees.org/2008/02/24/the-real-history-of-india-part-6-aryan-invasion-theory/#comment-2206

    I think you first need to read some more on this subject and make up your mind. You were initially trying to argue that Aryans are indigenous. Now you are saying the enemies mentioned in the RV are another wave of immigrants like the Aryans and the fight was wih them and not the Dravidians.

    First make your mind what your position is after thinking it through and then we can discuss.

    And then in the next comment you talk about how come Aryan is a race. Racial theories of humans went out of fashion a long time ago. So again don’t take some archaic theory and start arguing on that basis. All i am saying is that Aryans were different people from the IVC people and I also believe that their genetic markers were different, in other words they were geneticaly different. So whether Aryan is a race or not is not a relevant question.

    i guess you are trying to prove that the Aryans and the Dravidians are the same people. They may have come from elsewhere but they are the same people.

    So what is the version you believe? Make up your mind.

    Vampire,
    thank you for commenting. I guess Senthil has taken your advice and quit the discussion!

  94. Quote

    Senthil,
    Another thing. When you get the time, please read this comment from Ganesh.
    http://www.sastwingees.org/2008/02/24/the-real-history-of-india-part-6-aryan-invasion-theory/#comment-2209

    Look how well he has questioned the fundamental premises of my post. The questions he asked made me go back and think about my entire set of positions on this subject. And he has done that without attacking the british, islamists, max mueller, nehru or whoever is your favorite whipping boy of the moment.

    When you ask questions in this manner the discussion advances and things become clearer.

    This is the same thing NK Sreedhar pointed out to you a few comments back. Please don’t think that asking any questions is bad. I actually welcome all sorts of questions. The only thing i expect is that you read what i have said and ask your questions or criticize the post. And i think that is a reasonable request.

    Hope you will rethink your approach to raising questions.

  95. Quote
    Ganesh Vaideeswaran said February 28, 2008, 12:48 am:

    Sukumar,

    /* I never said that the IVC was destroyed by the Aryans. The only interpretation that the current evidence allows us that Aryans fused their religion/culture with the IVC people. I think it is also reasonable to conclude that IVC people took up the subordinate position. Whether the IVC people did this voluntarily? I don’t think so. Aryans used influence, their religion to proselytize and of course violence as well. */

    Where can I find more information on proselytization by RV people? Does RV itself mention this or was that a latter phenomenon?

    I think we are a bit stuck on the violence used to subjugate IVC people. At this point, we do not know if the violence was a major kind that would make one set of population afraid of another or minor skirmishes or small villages burnt down. Yes, I agree that violence of any kind is bad and could be enough to scare anyone or any set of population, but that is a possibility without any concrete set of proof. Please correct me if I am wrong. Does RV have any information on this point or would it be foolish to expect this information to be present in there – since it is self incriminating!!

    /*Now evidence also shows that the IVC cities (not the suburbs) were abandoned around 1700 BC. Natural Calamities are being cited as a probable cause. I actually don’t believe that. You may find the answer to this in my next post. */

    Looking forward to this.

    /*Well i never realized Clever could have negative connotations. I actually wanted to use the word Brilliant but i felt that may be disrespectful to people that follow Jainism and Buddhism. I also believe that Jainism and Buddhism are distinct religions from Hinduism. Buddha actually was opposed to Vedic Hinduism as well as the IVC religion i talked about in my previous post. That is another piece of evidence that the IVC religion was still alive and kicking during Buddha’s time. Remember he was from near-about Bihar. Aryanization had not yet been completed in North India by that time. */

    Point taken about “clever”. There was no malintention on my part. It just seemed a little tongue-in-cheek for me, but looks like it was just me.

    /*What is the role of religion in the Aryan dominance? I am sure it played a key role. If you need an analogy, look for Christian converts in India during the time of St. Thomas in India (1century AD) much before the arrival of the European. Many people freely converted because they must have thought that Christianity was better. Only after Constantine’s accession to Christianity did it become proselytizing and after that they even used a lot of force to convert people. */

    With Christianity and conversion during the times of St. Thomas, did the religion of a whole region/civilization get wiped out? If not, that analogy does not seem to apply to IVC religion being wiped out or superseded by Hinduism.

    /*In the same way, i am sure many IVC people may have switched their allegiance to the Aryan religion. RV refers to some Dasyus who were worshipping the Aryan Gods. We also know that Aryans did use violent destructions to prove that they were more powerful. This is why i said a combination of techniques were used. */

    We have some contradiction/conflict with what Dasyus meant. As can be seen Dasyus could have possibly been Iranians rather than IVC people. I need to read up more on this.

    /*Now to your last question – I need to ask you a return question – What is your understanding of how Indians became subordinate to the British? Were we totally dominated by the British or did we simply liked to cohabitate with them?*/

    I accept this trick question and answer it this way ;). I truly think it was a combination of both and other things – Indian kings falling hook, line and sinker by Britain’s cunning divide and rule philosophy, then for Britain’s superior firepower etc. And yes, there were some set of population who just decided to coast along and simply chose (not like) to cohabitate.

    /*Please don’t mistake me, i didn’t ask this to taunt you. I feel the answer you give yourself to the above question which you don’t need to reveal to me, will likely have a bearing on how you think about the Aryan-IVC equation.*/

    No offense taken. Now that I answered the question about Britain and India, what bearing according to you does that have on my Aryan-IVC equation view?

    As I told you before, this is the part of Indian History that I am really anxious to understand more about and I am hoping to learn more from your posts. Some of the information on other posts such as mother goddess etc., was very new to me and a bit over my head (to borrow from Vamsi!!). I will wait to see what other relevance that post might have on any future blog on this chain.

    This chain of posts made me go back and read up on IVC again and it was very interesting to see that John Keay mention the Dilman, Meluhha and Magan triangle. Never gave it too much importance the first time. Thanks for piquing my interest on this era once again.

    Ganesh

  96. Quote

    1. How do we know the RV people proselytized? I think there is some evidence in the RV itself where they say there are some good Dasas who are worshipping their Gods. The more important evidence however is the fact that Hinduism has subsumed the IVC religion completely. I am not saying destroyed because that is not what happened. During the IVC days the incorporation of the IVC religion into the Vedic religion must have happened slowly and progressively.

    2. I never said violence was the major instrument being used. I merely said violence was also one of the instruments used. The evidence within the RV does give you the impression that the violence was definitely non-trivial – a Dasa named Sambara’s 99 puras were destroyed, someone else’s 100 puras were destroyed. Somewhere else it says 30,000 dasas were killed etc. Now there may also be some kind of poetic exaggeration here to glorify Indra. But it definitely points to the fact that there was violence which can’t be dismissed away. RV as i said before was a document that established the socio-religious context, the main ritual/chants documents are Yajur and Sama Vedas which were developed later based on the RV.

    3. Thanks for accepting my explanation on “clever”.

    4. I don’t know who gave you the impression that the IVC itself was wiped out. That is not what happened. The IVC people were converted to the Vedic religion and they became subordinate to the RV people. there is also another evidence for this in that the IVC script was abandoned and a literate society became illiterate because RV people were following an oral tradition. The only inference we can make is that IVC people morphed into the Vedic people by way of culture/religion and took subordinate roles. The reason i gave the early christian example is because those christians tie the thaali, wear saree and veshti during weddings, do their mass in a local language, prayers in local language etc. They even retained the caste system. Except for the fact they were worshipping Jesus everything else seems almost like Hinduism. In essence the region became christian but still used familiar Hindu symbols. I think this is somewhat like what happened with the IVC. their religion was absorbed into the Vedic religion including some of their rituals and some of their key gods.

    5. Yes, i think you need to read up more about Dasyus. Yes it is possible that it meant Iranians but highly unlikely. It is because Iranians are also pastoral people and they never lived in Puras. You could still argue that it is the Iranians after they got amalgamated with the local mother goddess people in Afghanistan, but i am sure Iranians would never have had the name Kuyavan. Not only is Kuyavan a Dasa, there is also a Kusavan which is a synonym of Kuyavan also another Dasa. There are also several names of Dasas mentioned which are unlikely to be Iranian names. It is not clear from what language these Dasa names come from because not all of them seem to be Tamil words. Kuyavan and Kusavan are dead giveaways but i couldn’t say that about the other ones. So more research is needed. But from what i have seen, i am 80% confident that Dasas meant the IVC people and additionally as i mentioned in the post, since the same word is seen in Avesta also, it is likely to be the generic name they gave to the Mother Goddess worshippers.

    6. That was not a trick question Ganesh. I was just trying to say that even the British conquest of India was through a combination of power, divide/rule policies and influence as well.

    7. Thanks. The bearing on the IVC-RV equation is that the situation was quite similar – here is a set of new people with superior military technology and a different religion and with a different language. If the final outcome is that the old people are following the new religion and the new language and their religion was absorbed into the new religion – isn’t that similar?

    8. Thanks. I don’t know why some of you found the IVC religion posts overhead? If it is something in my writing style, i can change that. Is it possible that we are more interested as a community on whether the Aryans Invaded or not? And thereby less interested in what the IVC people actually did? You can also observe this trend from the comment patterns. The AIT post has attracted a disproportionate amount of comments compared to the IVC religion and the supply chain posts.

    9. Thanks. I am glad your interest got piqued. I am actually hopeful that one day some real historians will agree with me that Magan=Minoa is an accurate find. Let us see.

    Thanks again for the great questions and debate. Your questions actually make me think a lot deeper about my own views.

  97. Quote

    Sukumar,
    Your writing style is excellent.
    My comment about some content going over my head is due to these reasons
    1) The whole subject is very contrarian in nature.
    2) This archeology based and symbology based analysis is very new to me
    3) Some words are totally new to me.
    4) Each post needs at least 2 hours of dedicated time for me to understand the basic concepts you are trying to put across.
    5) Never read RV in my life.
    6) My knowledge of puranas/ upanishads/ vedas is also very limited.

    BTW, if it takes me so much time to just read and digest, I wonder how much effort you must be putting into this.

  98. Quote
    Sridhar N.K said February 28, 2008, 11:50 am:

    Vamsi,

    Here’s my take. I was struggling up until Post 3 on IVC. Fortunately, for me, during that time my family was traveling and I had lot of time in the evening and night for myself. I spend nearly weeks reading up and now I feel it doesn’t take me a long time to go through the posts and form an opinion.

    Granted, it’s incremental knowledge that I am adding on top of existing one, but once you get over the initial hump, it’s much easier.

    I can’t wait for the discussion to get back to IVC symbols and script analysis (no offense Sukumar – I know RV analysis is necessary to understand what happened after IVC and why we lost some of the key aspects of it, but I’d rather come full circle in understand IVC fully).

  99. Quote
    Sukumar (subscribed) said February 28, 2008, 8:25 pm:

    Thanks Vamsi for the clarification. You are right to fully absorb what i write in each post 2 hours is a minimum. You are right, i think i have done quite a bit of groundwork on behalf of the readers – separating the wheat from the chaff, spotting the genuine errors in previous works, spotting the distortions to India’s history that is being done in the name of nationalism etc.

    So you can say, my posts are a distillation of existing material and evidences with some new interpretations that i have made which are yet to be vetted by real historians.

    Yes before i started i could have said “same here” to each of those 6 points you mentioned and my research truly started only with the first post on Gonds i did. So i really don’t have too much of a headstart.

    Sreedhar’s comments corroborates that because he is now caught up and in some ways ahead of me in the IVC Script Decipherment area.

    I feel if all of us can contribute our brainpower either by way of finding holes in what i have written or by finding new interpretations, we as a collective community should be able to make a serious dent in the IVC Script.

    The sad thing is, in the fight going on between AIT and Anti-AIT factions, no one really is trying to understand the IVC people. What i am finding more and more is that these people were way ahead of their times and if their accomplishments are showcased properly, IVC could truly rank amongst the greatest of human civilizations. Today it is just another old civilization with an undecipherable script.

    I hope our fellow Indians will leave the AIT/Non-AIT questions behind and focus all our energies on rediscovering the IVC.

    Sreedhar,
    Thanks for the support. I think in some ways you have gone ahead of me with the Script Analysis which is definitely a good thing.
    This weekend, my AIT related posts will be complete and i will be back to the IVC Script because like you that is where i want to focus on.

    Thanks Vamsi and Sreedhar for your support.

  100. Quote
    Sridhar N.K said February 28, 2008, 11:40 pm:

    Sukumar,

    Though I would love to take the praise, I don’t think that I am ahead of you on the script. Still need your analysis on their food, clothing etc to have a complete picture before we start deciphering. I am glad I can be a spoke in your IVC wheel.

  101. Quote

    Sukumar,

    This would my last post on this topic, since I would also like to move on.

    1. I believe proselytization to mean conversion to another religion/faith. What you have mentioned is one religion/faith (Hinduism) absorbing principles/gods from another religion (IVC).

    2. I think #2 and $5 are related. It is about clarification of what Dasas/Dasyus meant in RV. All I am saying is that there is a possibility that Dasas could have meant the last wave of immigrants from Iran.

    4. I understand and did not claim that IVC was wiped out. If I did it was a mistake. My statement was that Harappan culture got subsumed in IVC and that IVC people might have been migrated away from Mohanja-daro and other places due to climactic changes and tectonic movements

    5. See #2. Will try and see what I can learn about Dasyus and Dasas. For this, I think I need to learn a lot about RV about which I know nothing about.

    7. With British India of India, Hinduism still thrived and still does to this day. So, I do not still see the analogy/comparison you are trying to make. With Aryan immigration into India, the IVC religion seems to have been wiped out and subsumed by Hinduism.

    8. About thread being OTH, it is certainly not your writing style, but my utter lack of knowledge on the areas that you had blogged about.

    All said and done, good discussion. I do want you to understand that my aim is not to glorify Hinduism or its precursor. I claim to be a Hindu Brahmin, though I accept that I fully do not know what it means to be Hindu. I do wear the poonal, though do not certainly the daily sandhya vandhanam. Now, you can ask me – as an educated man, why do I do things or follow a faith that I do not understand fully. There is no simple answer – except that I believe in the oneness of all Human beings that Hinduism preaches. That does not mean that I am against any other religion or that I will not enter a Church, Synagogue or Mosque. On the contrary, as I have mentioned before, I believe that all religions at their core lead the same end, just that the means is different.

    At the same time, I want to make sure that when a revised history from what I know is suggested, I question that and understand the reasoning behind the revisions.

    Ganesh

  102. Quote

    Sukumar,

    I absolutely agree with one of your main points – We need to look at Indus Valley Civilization independently for what it is. This glorious civilization should not corrupted by other discussions around AIT etc.

    Ganesh

  103. Quote

    Another good post Sukumar. Concordance research is very interesting, and I am hearing about it for the first time.

    I couldn’t understand why you say that Indra stopped at destroying the outer settlements, but not the inner cities. Was there any structural changes between the two?

    Also I found it odd that Avesta and RV uses the opposite words to refer to gods and demons. I think you had answered about this in a previous comment that in Avesta it must have been changed purposefully. Could you explain this better?

  104. Quote
    Sukumar (subscribed) said February 29, 2008, 8:47 am:

    Thanks Sreedhar.

    Ganesh, we are on the same page with respect to your last few lines. I treat our blogging community as an extremely smart peer group. If this group can vet the material and it passes muster then it can probably be submitted to real historians for review. So please feel free to poke holes. Your questions are outstanding. And my purpose isn’t denigrating hinduism. In fact Hinduism is probably the only religion that will permit an agnostic like me to be a part of it.

    1. Proselytization also involves amalgamation. If you look at christianity’s evolution they first had to incorporate the pagan religion- the mother goddess became Mary. They got the trinity also -father, son and holy spirit, the idol worship, the xmas tree, making christmas coincide with winter solstice pagan festivals, easter with spring festival etc. Once it got established it gave way to protestantism which is a strict interpretation of the Bible – no idols, no mary etc. So I believe a group of Dasyus were proselytized then thru a better understanding of their religion their symbols and gods were incorporated and then the next wave of conversion must have happened.

    2 and 5. Dasyus as Iranians is possible but not likely due to reasons I gave before.

    4. There seems to be a typo here. IVC includes both Harappa and Mohenjadaro.

    7. The British dominated us using a similar set of techniques. Instead of imposing a religion they imposed an education system which reduced the imprtance to hindu religious education which was a big part of our education system prior to the British system. This way they influenced our ability to propagate our religion to our people and made our citizens westernized. Inspite of that Hinduism thrived because it is more of a personal type religion compared to Christianity which is a more group-based religion – sunday mass, church action etc.
    So there are significant similarities anthropologically speaking.

    Hope that helps.

  105. Quote
    Sukumar (subscribed) said February 29, 2008, 8:59 am:

    Meenaks,
    Thanks.

    1. My guess is that the RV people wanted to make a point about their superior military power and hence they destroyed the clay-brick suburban settlements which are much easier to destroy. Archaeological evidence also shows that there is no destruction in the IVC cities.

    2. We don’t really don’t know why the Avestans switched the meanings of Asura and Devas. When we analyze the names of Gods the other Indo Europeans were using (including the RV people), they all used the same gods and there is ample evidence to support that. So the only explanation is that the Avestans had a disagreement with the RV people who crossed the Khyber to move to the IVC and continued with what must have been the Proto-Avestan-RV document. The Avestans went their way over to neighbouring Iran to the west and twisted the Gods around. Why would they do that? I guess to create their own identity. I guess they succeeded beyond their wildest dreams because no one realized that the Parsis who came later to India were the same Avestan people, who were originally the same as the RV people. Even now Indians don’t realize that Parsis and us share the same ancestral religion.

    Hope that helps.

  106. Quote
    Sukumar (subscribed) said February 29, 2008, 9:00 am:

    Thanks Ganesh for agreeing with me on the need to focus on the IVC.

  107. Quote

    Sukumar,

    Regarding #4, thanks for catching it. I meant Iran and not Mohanja-daro. Just that my enthusiasm got ahead of my fingers.

    Ganesh

  108. Quote

    Ok. that probably goes well with your interpretation that the Dasyus are Iranians. It is definitely possible. I will evaluate that possibility more seriously and see if i can find any evidence.

  109. Quote

    Hi,
    I am happen to stumble upon this blog due to the Phase “Aryan Invasion Theory” and investigation done + analysis done …however, I am trying to find out what is the theory abt it , its impact and why it assumes importance in the study of Vedic History …
    I could note usage of Concordance(assumption is that some old texts are available in electronic form), details of Gayathri mantra, various religious gods including reference to Indra as Devadata, usage / domestication of animals and usage of chariots + finer points

    However, if feasible, if answers are indicated for the questions raised it would be helpful for one group of audience – Indian Civil Services Aspirants . These aspirants have analysis for previous generations of SME only . However analysis of the present generations of SME namely Sukumar, Ganesh, Senthil, Jayashree, Venkat and Vamsi + others who participated in this discussion would be helpful since their interpretation will be well supported by Technology and practical experience.

    To start with, I hv got these references – History of India by Romila Thapar, another on Indian History by Bhasyam and finally Discovery of India by J Nehru . Among three, I find Romila Thapar presentation appropriate.

    May I request the participants to help in this discovery path by providing answers to the questions raised . (SME – subject matter experts)

  110. Quote

    AmV,
    Thanks for stopping by. I am not able to follow your comment. Which questions are you referring to? All the questions in the comments have been answered.

    I also don’t see how this post is relevant for Indian Civil Services aspirants. For that purpose, established history books like Romila Thapar and A.L. Basham should suffice.

    Hope that helps.

  111. Quote
    Ranjith (subscribed) said March 18, 2008, 11:03 am:


    “All i am saying is that Aryans were different people from the IVC people and I also believe that their genetic markers were different, in other words they were geneticaly different”

    According to the genetic studies below, there was no
    major genetic flow to India for the past 10000 years or so.

    http://www.pnas.org/cgi/content/abstract/103/4/843

    http://www.pubmedcentral.nih.gov/articlerender.fcgi?artid=1380230

    That would imply that IVC people (~2000+ BCE), and the and the
    Vedic people (lets assume around 1500 BCE ?) must have the same “gene”, right ?
    Otherwise how do you explain these genetic results ?

  112. Quote
    Sukumar (subscribed) said March 18, 2008, 7:56 pm:

    Ranjith,
    I am glad atleast a few of you are questioning my findings. Thank you so much for the research and the pubmed paper. I had not gone through this paper before. But I have gone through several other papers that attempt to look at India’s genetic makeup. All of them concluded that there is no real genetic difference between India’s castes.

    This pubmed paper you refer is saying that there is no infusion for the past 10,000 years or so.

    Here is my view, what mars all these papers is that they have not established reference popuations properly. Today’s India is completely mixed up across caste and linguistic boundaries and that is a good thing. But we need to identify reference populations for genetic studies. One way to do that will be identify those tribal groups who have maintained their racial purity and do a separate genetic profile of them first – I see Gonds, Santals, Irulas etc. in this category. In this paper that you point out Gonds seem to be conspicuously absent. Once you do that, you can establish what would be the reference genetic profile. As a second step, do a normal genetic profile study excluding all the tribal populations that were used in step1. Now if you compare the genetic profiles from step 1 and step 2, you will find what is new.

    I am yet to see a study of this type. I believe this is the methodology used by the National Geographic Project which i referred to.

    R1A1 haplogroup is thought to be the central asian marker by many experts and if you look at the pubmed paper’s findings it found 15.8% . If you see the wiki http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Haplogroup_R1a_(Y-DNA) you will understand why R1A1 is important for India. In this same wiki page you can see an entry in the Asia section that says r1a1 = 15.8 %- it doesn’t name the citation, but the sample sizes seem to match with the paper you found. Right below it another study says r1a1=27%. I have extracted the rows below for you reference.
    [India 728 0 15.8 8 ?
    India 325 0.3 27 12 ? ]

    It is hard to know which study to rely upon. But one thing we can say with certainty is that r1a1 is present in India.

    Now If you go further down the table, you can see these entries:
    [
    Kallar Dravidian 84 0 4 5 Wells et al. (2001)
    India Dravidian (Tribal) 180 – 2.78 8 ]

    These 2 entries show that for the Tribal populations the R1A1 is 4 and 2.78percent. It is not clear which population was used for the second study. Nevertheless, it is easy to infer that tribal populations which are generally racially pure because of their isolationist approach to life. Even in those populations R1A1 has penetrated to 2-4% based on the 2 studies above. It can also be inferred that other Indian populations have either 15.8% or 27% r1a1 depending on which study you believe. So where did this r1a1 come from? Genographers have done a great deal of research and continue to do so to identify genetic markers. It will be impossible to claim that genographers are in on the Aryan Invasion conspiracy.

    In sum, using the genetic studies so far to either prove or disprove anything may not be a wise thing to do. There are ample clues from the studies done to show that there has been infusions of people with different genetic markers over the years.

    Hope that helps. Thanks again for raising an interesting question.

    BTW Are you the Ranjith Nair from Satyam that i know?

  113. Quote
    Ranjith (subscribed) said March 19, 2008, 1:48 am:

    Many of this R1a1 issues have already been discussed.

    To quote from the PNAS paper:

    “Rather, the high incidence of R1* and R1a throughout Central Asian and East European populations (without R2 and R* in most cases) is more parsimoniously explained by gene flow in the opposite direction, possibly with an early founder effect in South or West Asia”

    The Sengupta et al paper also reaches similar conclusion of central asia as the “receptor” of R1a1 lineages.

    After all, what matters is the “genetic distance”. Of course there is a finite genetic distance between the Indian caste groups and the tribal groups. BUT, the genetic distance between indian caste groups and indian tribes is smaller when compared to other asians or europeans.

    Also note that, Sengupta et al say:

    “Associated microsatellite analyses of the high-frequency R1a1 haplogroup chromosomes indicate independent recent histories of the Indus Valley and the peninsular Indian region. Our data are also more consistent with a peninsular origin of Dravidian speakers than a source with proximity to the Indus and with significant genetic input resulting from demic diffusion associated with agriculture.”

    Hey, I am not Ranjith Nair. I don’t think we know each other!

  114. Quote
    Sukumar (subscribed) said March 19, 2008, 9:54 am:

    Ranjith,
    I merely asked if i knew you. I didn’t presume that.

    As for the paper, maybe i miscommunicated. I know what the paper talks about because i read it. The point i am making is very simple – just because the current day’s genetic distance is not that significant it does not mean 3500 years ago, the genetic distance was as insignificant.

    I disagreed with most of the Indian population genetic studies that i have read including the ones you referred because the reference population was not established properly. This is the same thing i mentioned in my previous response to you.

    If you can convince yourself that the present day genetic distances are enough to explain what happened 3500 years ago, you are welcome to have that view.

    I will ask you a simple question – we know that just in the past 1200 years are so we have had the moghuls, other muslim people, europeans (greeks, french, dutch, english, portugese), kushans, pallavas, indo-parthian kings, scythians, and so many others have come into India in significant numbers. How can we then say no significant infusion has occured in the past 10,000 years?

  115. Quote
    Ranjith (subscribed) said March 19, 2008, 11:19 am:



    we know that just in the past 1200 years are so we have had the moghuls, other muslim people, europeans…… How can we then say no significant infusion has occured in the past 10,000 years?”

    I guess that is why there is a “minor” genetic influence — but not major — as shown by the data. We very well know that Muslims, Europeans etc did not replace the whole pre-existing Indian gene pool. In fact there seem to be genetic studies indicating precisely this (e.g. Gutala et al 2006).


    “I disagreed with most of the Indian population genetic studies that i have read including the ones you referred because the reference population was not established properly.”

    I haven’t understood what you mean by this. I don’t see anything wrong with the methods of the current studies.

  116. Quote

    Ranjith,

    There are several studies that have been published, which contradict the study you’ve quoted. The “A” haplotype confers lactose tolerance. Studies done on Indian adults shows this distinct trend – Around 67% of South Indians & 27% of North Indians are intolerant.

    http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/7234720

    Other studies show even different numbers with 75% of South Indian adults being intolerant. Coincidentally, the nickname for brahmins in Tamil Nadu is “Thayir Sadham”. (Curd Rice). Many non-brahmin friends of ours use very little yoghurt. Whereas I can’t imagine even a single meal without several cups of milk or yoghurt.

    If people went from India to other countries, as the PNAS study seems to suggest, there would be a substratum influence in language, historical artifacts & in religion. Nothing of that nature has been found in the Central Asian cultures. Whereas, heavy substratum influences have been found in India. So, any conclusions on whether people came in or went out should be based on the entire anthropological framework.

    Various ethnic groups that came to India have mixed reasonably well. Any genetic study should list the most pre-ponderant genetic markers found by Region (such as the lactose study above) or Region AND Caste.

  117. Quote
    Ranjith (subscribed) said March 20, 2008, 7:35 am:

    Hello Priya Raju,

    I will comment on the paper you mentioned after reading it. But it is a 1981 paper and at that time even techniques like PCR were not available to do a detailed study comparing DNAs. So I have to see what they are talking about. However, note that the Sengupta et al paper i cited (also the other paper) critically examine all important previous papers and point out what are their limitations and why they are correct/incorrect.

    And i guess the lactose tolerance you mention is just one mutation. Given that there is a finite genetic distance between north-indian castes and south-indian castes, a few mutations are easily possible — the current models here do not prevent that. Note that these studies consider many many mutations (very high molecular resolution) with a very large sample size. That is why those studies are very important and scientifically sound.


    “If people went from India to other countries, as the PNAS study seems to suggest, there would be a substratum influence in language, historical artifacts & in religion. Nothing of that nature has been found in the Central Asian cultures”

    You have to note the time scales. If you read both the papers carefully, you will realize that this flow of gene towards central asia might have happened 10000+ (ten thousand+) years ago. So today we may not know much about the “cultural changes” that happened then. That flow answers the question, “So where did this r1a1 come from?”, that Sukumar asked. It didn’t “come”. But it probably “went”.
    And also note: Not even linguists, today, seriously believe that “Aryans” replaced indigenous populations in india on a massive scale.

    If you believe that north indian caste groups are “central-asians”, who migrated to north-India around 1500 BCE or so, you have to answer the following question: How do you explain the major absence of haplogroups like C3, DE, J*, I, G, N, and O, which cover almost half of the Central Asian Y chromosomes but majorly absent in north Indians ? How do you explain the presence of C*, F*, H, L, and R2 in indians, which are not seen in “central asians” ?

  118. Quote

    Ranjith,

    So, there is no proof that people went from India to Central Asia – that certainly doesn’t strengthen this point of view. Results should only fit available data. As I mentioned earlier, there is plenty of substratum influence of Central Asia in India.

    People pick up many haplogroups from passers-by. Haplogroup J for e.g., is not prevalent in Central Asia. It is found in the Near East & in the Balkan countries. J2 is a primary feature of Anatolian Neolithic people. In Ukraine, for e.g., there’s only a 7% penetration of J. Not what I could call prevalent. Whereas, it is found in Western – especially, South-Western India.

    J1 is prevalent in Arab countries – again, not prevalent in Central Asia. If you look at the areas where R1A lights up, its North India & the regions of the Andronovo culture. To understand the primary ethnic influence of a group of people, we should look at the most prevalent haplogroup(s).

    You mention that some haplogroups are absent in Central Asia, but present in India. If indeed there was a movement of people from India to Central Asia, why are these haplogroups absent there?

    Its too simplistic to suggest that North Indians are Central Asians or that Aryans “replaced” the Indus people. There were several groups living in that region & a fusion of cultures happened. People mix to create any nation’s unique culture. Which is why, as I said, pre-ponderance is what we can look at.

    Regarding the lactose tolerance test, since no one has systematically proved the test wrong, I’m sticking to it. In the event that new data becomes available, I’ll change my opinion. Stating that certain tests were not available then & hence the result could be wrong isn’t enough.

  119. Quote
    Ranjith (subscribed) said March 20, 2008, 9:47 am:


    “You mention that some haplogroups are absent in Central Asia, but present in India. If indeed there was a movement of people from India to Central Asia, why are these haplogroups absent there?”

    Good question. Again, please note the time scale. Out-of-India flow happened many many years (of the order of 10000+) ago. After they leaving india, according to this theory, there is ample time for India specific mutations to happen within India. On the other hand if there were any “recent”(say ~3500 years ago) migrations into india, that is too little a time, in the genetic time scale, for this many mutations to happen. That answers your question.

    Finally, it is suffice to say that the current best genetic models, published in reputed peer reviewed journals, agree that there was no major migrations into India for the past 10000+ years or so. If anyone has substantial counter arguments to disprove them, they may write it up and send it to any of those journals. From whatever i know, i do not see any flaw in the arguments presented in the papers i mentioned. It rather very nicely explains many of the important issues.

    “Regarding the lactose tolerance test, since no one has systematically proved the test wrong, I’m sticking to it. “
    I am afraid, you have not understood what i said. I didn’t say the test is wrong. I said, within the current genetic model, it is possible to have such differences. Because there is a non-zero genetic distance between south-indian and north-indian caste groups even in the models of Sahoo et al and Sengupta et al.

  120. Quote
    Sukumar (subscribed) said March 20, 2008, 10:06 am:

    Ranjith,
    1. Here is the problem with the minor/major influence. On the surface of it, that seems right, because it is likely only a few 100,000 moghuls/muslims/scythians/greeks etc may have invaded with their armies. For us to truly understand the genetic influence, we need to do a sample in the areas where the maximum impact would have been. If you try to find the moghul markers across India, you will conclude that there is no moghul genetic influence and it would be wrong.

    2. In the same way, we need to do a genetic study that studies those areas which may have likely had the maximum Central Asian influence and still retains the same profile (that is no later people commingled in that area). Now this will be very hard to do.

    3. This is where the reference population suggestion is useful. We can find tribal populations across India who are relatively genetically more protected (for instance we know r1a1 in the tribals is very less etc). Then we find their predominant markers, measure the nature of genetic drift these people have had using mtDNA and Y chromosome analysis to arrive at the profile. We also know that most Indians share the M* haplogroup markers with the tribal population. Now we can measure the genetic drift of these haplogroups and compare. Since R1A1 is not present in tribals, we need to identify reference populations from outside India to get a drift profile. Overall i want to know how the genetic drift has occurred across various populations of India by geographic region over time.

    I am yet to see a study that does such a thing. Since you seem to be know so much about Genetics, maybe you can point me to a study.

    Now coming to the discussion between you and Priya Raju. It is an interesting discussion. You seem to be very convinced about the papers you have cited. Let us for the moment accept that the papers are 100% correct. Eventhough they prove that there is no genetic drift and there is no evidence of R1A1 coming from the outside, they have not proven that 10,000 years ago r1a1 went from India to Central Asia. Is it possible? Sure, but this does not show up in any genography research that I have seen so far. Again, since you seem to be very versed in this area, please point me to a paper that proves this.

    The central asian haplogroups that you talk about from Central Asia that are missing from India, do you know what are the timeframes on those? The current day central asian population is not the same population that existed 3500 years ago. Lots of other people moved into Central Asia later and it has collected several haplogroups over time like India. So you cannot compare today’s India’s genetic profile and today’s central asia’s genetic profile and say it does not match, so it is not possible for them to have come here.

    As for the lactose tolerance studies Priya Raju cites, which you say are dated. I agree with Priya, no one has disproved those studies yet. Do you know any competing study of lactose intolerance in India that has reached different conclusions?

  121. Quote

    Ranjith – I think the genography project is the most comprehensive attempt so far to map human migrations. Thus far, its in agreement with the author of this post.

    Is your theory then that most mutations happened within India & that people didn’t come from elsewhere? You have misunderstood my point. There have been frequent migrations of people to India since the original M* haplotype moved in 40,000 years back. When the Aryans came in, Indus valley already had multiple ethnic groups living in close proximity. 3,500 years back – Indo-Iranians came in. That’s what I said. We’ve been accumulating many kinds of “Y”.

    10,000 years is not enough time for so many mutations to accumulate in the Y chromosome: You mention so many different haplotypes. “Y” (& Mitochondria) changes very slowly, which is why it is invaluable in mapping human migrations.

    There is no historical proof of migrations from India. Historians & geologists say that most people who came to the fertile Indo-gangetic plains in the past 5000+ years stayed put. Because there’s no earthly reason to move back to arid Central Asia.

    I think that agrees very well with the findings of the Genography project & prevailing historical theories. Whereas the only issue we have with people getting into India is – figuring out if a significant number of people came in. In every other respect, we have more than substantial proof for people coming to India.

    How many people (strength) came to India is a good question. For which we can keep looking for answers. By itself that doesn’t invalidate all the other tangible proofs that we have.

  122. Quote
    Ranjith (subscribed) said March 21, 2008, 12:49 pm:

    @Sukumar

    Eventhough they prove that there is no genetic drift and there is no evidence of R1A1 coming from the outside, they have not proven that 10,000 years ago r1a1 went from India to Central Asia. Is it possible? Sure, but this does not show up in any genography research that I have seen so far.

    You haven’t seen anywhere else because no one had done such a detailed analysis of such a complete set of Y-DNA data before these two. No one had such high molecular resolution. No one had used such smart and detailed statistical analysis. That is why these papers appeared in highly reputed journals.

    The current day central asian population is not the same population that existed 3500 years ago. Lots of other people moved into Central Asia later and it has collected several haplogroups over time like India. So you cannot compare today’s India’s genetic profile and today’s central asia’s genetic profile and say it does not match, so it is not possible for them to have come here.

    Of course everyone know that today’s gene in a certain region may not be the same 3000 years ago. Even taking all these into account, I can see at least 5 different arguments to prove that “north indian caste groups” are not “recent” migrants. Whatever be the current central asian and north indian gene profile, the following argument itself disproves the migration. Consider the “spread” of R1a1 frequencies among the tribes, south indians and the so called “lower castes” as shown in the paper i mentioned. To have such a high variance, you need a *lot* of time and they estimate the time as 14000 years. That is, R1a1 is there among these groups at least 14KYA. Then only it can have such a large variance. Also see the clustering analysis. This in itself disprove the migration theories. Similarly one can calculate the spread of other genes as well.

  123. Quote
    Ranjith (subscribed) said March 21, 2008, 1:01 pm:

    One more thing:
    @ Sukumar, i also wanted to say, even though the genetic profile of today might be different from that of 3500 yeas ago, one can find out how old are the most common recent ancestors of north indians and central asians. What these papers are proving is that the most common recent ancestors of these people are at least 10000 years old.

    @Priya Raju
    Whereas the only issue we have with people getting into India is – figuring out if a significant number of people came in

    Everyone agree that there must have been a flow of a non-significant number of people at various times in the history — even in the recent past. What these papers proved is that those numbers were indeed insignificant as far as the change in genetic profile is concerned.

    Hey Sukumar and Priya, thanks for nice discussions.

  124. Quote
    Sukumar (subscribed) said March 21, 2008, 10:37 pm:

    Ranjith,
    I don’t see this discussion going anywhere and that is not because you are not agreeing with me. I originally thought that you were a genealogy researcher but it appears that you want to hang your hat on these 2 papers.

    I already talked about the methodological issues in these papers. And i also pointed out that even if assume this paper is completely correct, it can only goto the extent that people didn’t come here from anywhere. That is the conclusion they have reached and you seem to like that.

    Let me say this one last time, any conclusion this paper reaches, however accurate it may be, has to fit with genealogical, archaeological, linguistic, cultural, religious, historical evidences from India and neighboring areas. Either that, or it has to prove that people from India moved to Central Asia 10-14000 years ago. It is not enough for them to say “parsimoniously explained by people moving from India to Cental Asia”. that is what is called conjecture. Conjecture does not equal scientific proof.

    Additionally, the premise of this paper wrong. This is because you have to understand why Genographic Researchers say immigration from Central Asia happened. The reason being chromosomal variations in the r1a1 marker occurs the most in central asia and if you radiate outwards from there and goto places including India, the variation in R1A1 reduces. This is how Genography researchers prove that the original r1a1 homeland is central asia.

  125. Quote
    Ranjith (subscribed) said March 22, 2008, 3:10 am:

    Sukumar,
    It’s not a question of whether I or you like it or not — that is what the research says. Can you show me a paper disproving these studies ?

    I am afraid you haven’t understood why all the “original” R1a1 “radiating out of central asia” argument is inconsistent and wrong. It is not just these two papers, by the way. Even papers that appeared in 2008, with more data and more sample size, conclude the same. It’s there for you to read. Also these arguments perfectly agree with the mtDNA studies — both Y-DNA and mtDNA rule out any recent large-scale immigration. Now if you disagree with the “methodology”, you may write a paper proving the “methodology” is wrong. But experts in this field haven’t found anything wrong with these.

    Now about your “cultural” changes: I hope you realize that cultural changes can occur even without large-scale genetic changes.

    About “historians” and “linguists” : Historians and linguists have already changed their views many times. As new and new evidence keep coming, the theory keeps changing from “invasion” to “large-scale migration” to “small-scale migration” and so on. Anyways, in this case, it is suffice to say that cultural changes can occur without large-scale genetic changes.

  126. Quote
    Ranjith (subscribed) said March 22, 2008, 3:18 am:

    I wanted to say: both Y-DNA and mtDNA rule out any recent large-scale migration. (not immigration!, typo)

  127. Quote
    Sukumar (subscribed) said March 22, 2008, 10:34 pm:

    Ranjith,
    At last we seem to agree on something – that history is not a popularity contest based on likes and dislikes. Unfortunately, in India, it is a popularity contest. That Aryans didn’t come from the outside is a populist notion (anyway, you may have understood where i stand, if you had read my post, instead of picking one line from one of my comments!).

    Just a few weeks ago, someone has written a whole book on how the IVC people spoke a Vedic language. So because something is released in 2008 does not make it right.

    History is also a scientific pursuit, when new evidence comes in, views change. Physics, Chemistry any of the sciences, it is the same case. so the fact that historians have changed their view is not a proof of anything.

    Again for the last time, proving that large-scale migration (first of all no one is arguing large scale migration but you choose to use those words so that you can construct your argument) didn’t happen in India does not explain the presence of R1a1 in Central Asia. Someone needs to prove that Indians went to Central Asia sometime in the past 10-15000 years in large enough numbers to make this happen. Since you keep asking me to prove/disprove things, maybe you can take this “proof” of a 10000 year old Indian migration to Central Asia as a homework project and do it.

    As i said before, i don’t believe in the methodology used by these papers you cite. And just because i don’t agree does not mean i have to disprove it myself. There are plenty of genetic studies to cite which prove the argument that R1A1 marker came from outside India.

    It is up to you to decide which papers you want to support and which theories you believe in. You know where i stand because that is the subject matter of this entire series.

  128. Quote
    Ranjith (subscribed) said March 23, 2008, 4:21 am:

    “History is also a scientific pursuit, when new evidence comes in, views change. Physics, Chemistry any of the sciences, it is the same case”

    Unfortunately, it appears that, the history in the case of “Aryan invasion” was not a scientific pursuit and not at all like physics or chemistry! In physics and chemistry, a view itself is formed based on some scientific evidence. Here, the “view” that Aryans invaded was formed without any scientific evidence at all. That is why it had to be changed!

  129. Quote
    Sukumar (subscribed) said March 23, 2008, 4:56 am:

    Great. Another point we agree upon. I have pointed out several errors commited by historians over the years in this series. Aryan “Invasion” fell out of favor in the historian community a long time ago. But at the same time, no one will agree with the “indigenous” Aryan theory as well. The fact that an invasion did not occur does not mean they didn’t come from the outside. Most of the arguments against Aryan Invasion try to disprove that Invasion didn’t happen with the idea that thereby they can disprove Aryans coming from the outside as well. This is one of the oldest tricks in the scientific argument playbook – called “burying or destroying the strawman”. There are even people going around trying to disprove that Dravidians were not “pushed” down to the south. That idea that Dravidians were pushed down to the South by the invading Aryans is a very old theory and has been abandoned a long time ago. But for our populist historians, it is a great hunting ground for disproving Aryan Invasion. Go figure.

    If you actually read my post right in the prolog i say this “The words “Aryan Invasion” seem to suggest that there was a sudden death for the Dravidians, the words “Aryan Infusion” seem to suggest a benign and gentle influence, the words “Indigenous Aryans” seem to suggest that the IVC was Aryan and they were always indigenous. I believe none of this to be true. We will see why, shortly. I would like to use the term “Aryanization”. It is the only one that explains the modern day Hinduism, which is a clever amalgamation of the Dravidian religion, Jainism and Buddhism, created using a combination of violent incursions/violence, proselytizations, influence and other techniques as appropriate .”

    The above statement is what i believe happened – “Aryanization” of India.

  130. Quote
    Neville Ramdeholl (subscribed) said May 11, 2008, 3:25 pm:

    Hi, I have read with interest those who are making a case for an Aryan Indus. But

    excavations have a long way to go. So far the Indus have not shown the slightest

    evidence for having horse and chariots. In the case for horses, I can bet that if the

    Indus script is deciphered there will not be one mention of horses. I don’t know why

    the case is being drummed into our ears that the Indus is of Aryan origin. Aside

    from this, the theory that there was a migration of tribes from India to parts of

    Europe, then if this is so, wouldn’t the supposed Indus Aryans left their seals and

    scripts in those places? The one thing the Indus Aryanists cannot explain is the

    Mitanni documents where pure Sanskrit language is written and probably spoken. It

    destroys their out of India migration.The Aryans were superb horse breeders and the

    Mitanni documents has so far stumped the Indigenist Aryanists. The Rigvedas is

    replete with horses and for those who still maintain that the Indus civilization is

    Aryan, here are a few examples of Aryan knowledge of horse breeding in the

    RigVedas:

    BOOK HYMN TITLE VERSE DESCRIPTION are:

    2 1 Agni 5 givest noble steeds

    2 1 Agni 16 with kine and steeds

    2 2 Agni 10 valor with the steed

    2 2 Agni 13 kine and steeds

    2 10 Agni 2 dark steeds or ruddy

    2 11 Indra 6 two Bay steeds

    2 11 Indra 11 Indra, thy Bay steeds

    2 18 Indra 18 thy two Bay Coursers

    3 35 Indra 3 Tawny Horses

    3 36 Indra 9 Lord of the Tawny Coursers

    3 42 Indra 7 by thy Stallions

    3 43 Indra 4 let thy two Bay Stallions

    3 44 Indra 2&4 Lord of Tawny Steeds

    3 30 Indra 2 with thy Bay horses

    3 43 Indra 23 a sluggish steed

    5 53/64 Maruts 3&9 They came with winged steeds

    5 56 Maruts 6 the bright red mares

    5 59 Maruts 5 like steeds of ruddy color

    The Aryans were super horsebreeders and they knew it like the back of their hands

    and the categories of horses that they used for transport and war, there was the

    Bays, the Coursers, the mares, the stallions and the steeds chargers They also knew

    flying horses which connect them with their mythologic Greek cousins.

  131. Quote
    Sukumar (subscribed) said May 12, 2008, 9:32 am:

    Neville,
    Please read my post. I have counted up the concordances of horses/steeds and proved that horses/chariots were more important.

  132. Quote
    Neville Ramdeholl (subscribed) said October 13, 2008, 1:20 am:

    Hi, This is just a short note on the Aryan subject. I find it amusing that some people in India and abroad who do not believe in the genetic origins of the Indo-European as appearing in the white skinned upper caste Indians a mere couple thousand years ago. But they believe entirely in the African genetic origin of man’s makeup millions of years ago as a source of modern humans. Its preposterous and laughable.

  133. Quote
    senthil (subscribed) said April 29, 2011, 11:23 am:

    I came across this site recently, which gives a different picture of Saraswathi Civilization.. (referred as IVC here)..

    The utility value of elephants is far more than the horses, and india had developed a very advanced elephant fleet, which no other country could do so even till today..

    http://2ndlook.wordpress.com/2010/02/25/military-idiom-in-the-indus-saraswati-region/#comment-4384

    Horse was NOT central to saraswathi civilization, and the effectiveness of cavalry was nullified with a elephant fleet..

    Having so many elephant seals, in saraswathi civilization, its very clear, that elephant had been widely in use during that period.. So when horse was referred as a mark of cilivilization, we can very well take on taming of elpephant as a reference point of our civilization..

  134. Quote
    senthil (subscribed) said April 29, 2011, 11:44 am:

    How elephants were crucial factor in victory of many european battles? Pls read this link.. The Hannibals Elephants..

    http://2ndlook.wordpress.com/2008/08/07/hannibals-elephants/

    The Stanford University and british archeology did a project tracing hannibal’s alpine route with an indian elephant.. more interesting links and references on the above article..

    And Hannibals started his campaign against Rome with 37 elephants, but only one elephant survived when he reached there.. and this one elephant was a deciding factor in his victory against them.. the romans just shivered and uriniated at the very sight of this gigantic beast..

  135. Quote
    senthil (subscribed) said April 29, 2011, 11:55 am:

    And what did alexander took away from his Indian Expedition? 2 lakh indian zebu humped cattles, elephants, Macedonian National dress (the salwar) and the KISS ..

    http://2ndlook.wordpress.com/2009/02/17/what-happened-to-alexanders-loot-from-india/

    Elephants were a prized possession and rule changers in the war.. the cavalry unit failed miserably against war elephants.. The horses just could not stand before elephant’s trumpheting..

    So with a large elephant fleet, indian rulers did not consider horse as important constituent..

    This elephant factor has never been considered by any of the western historians? Why? Colonial Prejudice? or Colonial bias?

  136. Quote
    senthil (subscribed) said April 29, 2011, 4:23 pm:

    The western History on india is centered around the Alexander Conquest of India.. but if we look at the source of alexander history, we find these were written based on accounts, written some 200 years later.. so its almost a hearsay account, written at a very later period.. the western historian says this is a scientific proof, and indians accept this meekly..

    For a alternate perspective on alexander’s invasion, pls read the following article, which is full of reference..

    http://2ndlook.wordpress.com/2009/01/23/alexanders-conquest-of-india/

    Porus was just a small king at the frontiers of india, and western historians project as though alexander had worn the entire indian continent by this one war.. Yet no one here is ready to question that stand.. (the white people had said it and hence it should be true)

    the truth is very clear.. Alexander’s army were frightened by the elephant fleet of 100 deployed by porus.. and the fact that chandragupta army has 6000 elephants is what made the alexander army revolt against him..

    Now, having known that Horse was NOT a significant force by indian kings, and that elephants were reared for long, for which evidence is found as IVC seals, the entire junk on this AIT or AMT should be reviewed.. the so called scientific proof had been artificially constructed with narrow focus..

  137. Quote
    senthil (subscribed) said June 3, 2011, 1:49 pm:

    An 8000 year old civilization has been found along konkan coast.. the below DNA link has photos showing 24 km man made wall 3 metres below the sea level..

    http://www.dnaindia.com/mumbai/slideshow_photos-8000-year-old-advanced-civilisation-in-konkan-coast_1547920-1

    Similarly, the dwaraka submerged city, the poompukar submerged cities are not yet excavated.. It is pretty clear that the entire western history has to be thrown to the dustbin along with their dating.. we need to realise that western history is a colonial project to claim white superiority over the rest..

Leave a Comment

(required)

(required)

Formatting Your Comment

The following XHTML tags are available for use:

<a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>

URLs are automatically converted to hyperlinks.