Section - B: The Invalidity of the ARYAN INVASION THEORY

Geographic mentions in the Rig Veda - the first among the surviving Vedas - refer to almost the same regions of the Sarasvati-Sindhu belt as the archaeological sites. However, the gods and the primary economic mode differ starkly.

The Aryan Invasion Theory was reinforced at the time of the discovery of the site as the reason responsible for the ‘sudden death' of the civilization. This has been largely ruled out now as many things do not fall in place, among the foremost being that there are evidences that the civilization did not die out suddenly but declined over several hundreds of years (the link I have provided here provides anthropological evidence of there being no sudden or large scale genetic changes in the region).

There are also many other reasons that the author wishes to present here.

• 1. The pastoral immigrants who arrived (possibly) from Central and/or West Asia and/or East Europe, did not value land as asset as they were nomadic. They merely moved their herds to greener pastures. They did not conform to the urban culture.

• 2. They did not have a developed money economy and did not value precious commodity that were possessed or traded by the inhabitants of the Sarasvati-Sindhu civilization. Therefore, it seems presumptive that they had a reason to destroy an urban settlement that apparently posed no threat to them.

• 3. Until very recently, nomadic tribes of India have successfully led lives of cultural isolation. It seems highly probable that the immigrants simply moved around the cities and villages and were culturally isolated from the civilized world until some of them gradually settled down and learnt agriculture and other advanced sciences from the hosts while assimilating and integrating the culture, language and philosophy of the two.

• 4. The idea of the rich and the servile¹ was present prior to the arrival of the immigrants. The archaeological sites show distinct settlements for different classes of people. This, very obviously, continued even after the immigrants began a settled life. The ‘Aryans' and ‘Dasus' referred to in the literary texts simply mean the ‘noble one' or ‘Master' and ‘servant' respectively.

• 5. Reference to ‘Dravida' is clearly not racial. One explanation often quoted is that it could be linguistic that is presently South Indian. However, one senses that it could refer to a learned class as in ‘Druid' of Europe. Here is the explanation in detail:

It has been hitherto argued that Dravida is the root to the word ‘Thamizha' and explained as Dravida --> Dramila --> Thamila --> Thamizha. [One has this urge to provide the simile of the letter-change word-change that is often part of aptitude tests: ship-->slip-->slap-->clap-->clan but would ‘ship' therefore be the same as ‘clan' by the previous derivation?] One sees not even a single common letter between Dravida and Thamizha (when written in Tamil).

On the other hand, see the proximity of Dravida and Druid.

The reasoning is clear: The geographical connectivity of the regions to the South, the West and the North-West of the Himalayas makes it highly probable for peoples, cultures and languages to coalesce. Within this area, it seems very unlikely that the stark similarity in the names of two peoples is simple coincidence.

• 6. Going by the above two points, Dravida was the learned class (not necessarily lineage based initially).

They comprised of (or later split into) two streams - the ascetic Sramanas (the Shamans) and the settled teacher-priest Brahmana (children of Brahma, of creation and learning; Abraham in the Middle East).

As well known, the Brahmanas were held in reverence for their knowledge and intellect. Often holding the advisory posts to the rulers, they wielded great amounts of power and privilege and this made them a feared people. The Druids were just as powerful in the Western world.

The Sramanas - the ones that exerted themselves to great extents - were held in high reverence and were the wandering teachers. Most of the great philosophies were crystallised by the Sramanas. They were the healers of body-mind-soul and lived a life of extreme self-deprivation. The similarity between Sramanas and the Shamans cannot be ignored.

The proximity in the roles of the Brahmana (Dravida) and the Sramana and correspondingly the roles of the Druid and the Shaman are highlighted and compared.

One does not know where any of these originated, but it was a pan South Asia-South-East Asia-Europe establishment but which Europe and South-East Asia lost consequent to the Christian and other subsequent persecutions.

Aryan was the rich warrior/trading class.

Dasu was the poor servile class.

Later these crystallised into Brahmana (Dravida), Kshatriya and Vaishya (Aryan) and Shudra (Dasu).

In short, these were all mere class/professional caste distinctions.

• 7. Arya means ‘Noble one' in Sanskrit. Ayya means the same in the South Indian languages and is used commonly in names by even those that have no exposure to any language outside their own. Why would one (lovingly) call a ‘Dravidian' an ‘Aryan' if Dravida and Arya were (antagonistic) race mentions?

The above points along with evidences that there was no abrupt decline of the civilization point to the fact that there was no ‘Aryan Invasion' of any kind and the immigrants did not discriminate against the earlier inhabitants. Rather, the two integrated successfully into a megaculture.

References:

1 Harappan Civilization, Prabhat Kumar Basant (Ancient India - A Source book for Civil Services Examination - Publications Division, March 1995)

TrackBack URI for this entry

Comments (22)

Subscribe to this comment's feed

The Migration History of Humans
written by Raju, 2008-07-21 16:19:53

Dear Partha,

I was referring to partition in 1947.

For bigger picture one may want to see following.

1) JOURNEY OF MANKIND - The Peopling of the World
http://www.bradshawfoundation.com/journey/

2) The Migration History of Humans: DNA Study Traces Human Origins Across the Continents

http://www.sciam.com/article.cfm?id=the-migration-history-of-humans
http://www.sciam.com/article.cfm?id=whole-genome-results
http://www.sciam.com/article.cfm?id=tracking-y-chromosomes-through-time

I think I will stop here. I may be moving away from topic.

Regards,
Rajput

• 
• +0
• 
• 

keyboard assisted
written by P. Desikan, 2008-07-21 11:29:56

Dear Raju,
i know I am capable of a few typos as well as the next person, but it appears my keyboard helps out as well.
In my reply to you, 'genetic' must have become 'getic' courtesy the kb.
'seekers' became 'speakers' by my own carelessness.
Regards. Partha

• 
• +0
• 
• 

Agree.
written by P. Desikan, 2008-07-21 10:41:32

Dear Raju,
I agree with your opinion
'Indian population is the result of multiple waves of human migrations over thousands of years and it is difficult to piece together the social, cultural, and migratory history of Indian people. (Only settled issue is that Vedas were revealed to Indians in pre-partitioned India.)
The desire to give caste a biological foundation is usually political.'
I have no doubt that with our gates wide open and having been one of the most desirable places to live in in the past, we should have had everybody from everywhere crossing and selectively also settling. To give getic markings to castes is truly foolish apart from being political.
Your statement in parenthesis too appears true to me. I too believe in some knowledge always being 'revealed to speakers. I do not know which partition you are referring too, but the vagueness reinforces the truth. before can include long long ago to just before.
Warm regards. Partha.

• 
• +0
• 
• 

Caste and Race
written by Raju, 2008-07-21 09:56:46

Caste and Race

Indian population is the result of multiple waves of human migrations over thousands of years and it is difficult to piece together the social, cultural, and migratory history of Indian people. (Only settled issue is that Vedas were revealed to Indians in pre-partitioned India.)

The desire to give caste a biological foundation is usually political. Lower caste will use such results to unite against higher castes while higher caste may justify their belief of inherent superiority to legitimize caste. It is for this reason it is always important to examine closely various caste and genetics studies. It is important to know hypothesis, scope, sample size, research methodology of such studies.

Here are two interesting studies on this subject.

Caste in the genes

A new genetic study of ethnic communities and population groups in India has debunked the theory that the caste system came with the Aryans. G.S. Mudur reports

Ref: http://www.telegraphindia.com/...203802.asp


Genetics of Castes and Tribes of India: Indian Population Milieu

By M. K. Bhasin
Department of Anthropology, University of Delhi, Delhi 110 007, India

ABSTRACT
South Asia, constituting mainly the Indian sub-continent, is a panorama of social diversities, racial differences and rich cultural heritage. However many facets of history, race and culture of this area are still relatively unexplored. Debates and doubts centering around the autochthonous status of the early settlers continue - it is very difficult to ascertain how human groups and settlements were formed in the pre-historic times, whether they were the original inhabitants or migrated from some other place and if they migrated, which route did they take. However, the infiltration and admixture of new racial and cultural elements, from time to time, have made the Indian population more diverse and heterogeneous.

Ref:
http://www.krepublishers.com/02-Journals/IJHG/IJHG-06-0-000-000-2006-Web/IJHG-06-3-177-280-2006-Abst-PDF/IJHG-06-3-233-274-2006-000-Bhasin-M-K/IJHG-6-3-233-274-2006-000-Bhasin-M-K-Text.PDF

Regards,
Rajendra Rajput

• 
• +0
• 
• 

...
written by dwai, 2008-07-20 13:16:55

I do agree that the discussion is very lively and I am enjoying the discussion. Just to add to the saffron color comment. As saffron may have been tainted by some political agenda, there are also political miscreants from saffron color (true from saffron color or any color or no color) who are adding to the mistrust.

Indeed. But that is not because they are "from saffron color" but they have hijacked/abused the color (and what it signifies). But we must be careful as to not throw out the baby with the bath-water. There are many political issues that the existence of these political entities highlight. We can go into this if the members of this forum are interested (although I think we should really be discussing the politics of things on the forum side of the house).

Even though in Medhajournal, all the Medhavis are discussing and interacting for purely intellectual pursuits with absolutely no political agenda, it could be an assumption by many as otherwise, just for the fact people have always been fed by political agenda of some sort, be in right, left, limbo kinds!!

Your fears are well justified, but for the reason I mentioned in my previous comment. Just because someone questions the established locus standii does not make them party to some hidden agenda. I've seen this time and again on the sulekha discussions (back in the day). Where Gentleman scholars such as Dr. Subhash Kak, Rajiv Malhotra have been accused of being saffronites simply because they tend to analyze and write with a pro-Indic leaning. So, by virtue (or lack of it thereof) of not toeing the "approved" line, these people automatically get painted as Saffronites! If people who read Medha Journal have any doubts in their minds about the political leanings of the community (which is and rightfully should be a personal predilection imho), they should voice their opinion. Let them put their thoughts across (without resorting to name-calling) and let the strength or weakness of their view-point decide the natural result of such debates.

I think we all would agree that TMJ exists to give voice to cogent debate and help get any earnest message across in the public realm.

• 
• +0
• 
• 

...
written by Sreeparna, 2008-07-20 11:39:10

Yet, I dont have a political agenda but am a normal person with opinions on issues. How's that? Thanks for removing the taint from the colour saffron. This colour - often the 'kaavi' shade is supposed to induce the mind to renunciation...now see how negatively it is seen...

I do agree that the discussion is very lively and I am enjoying the discussion. Just to add to the saffron color comment. As saffron may have been tainted by some political agenda, there are also political miscreants from saffron color (true from saffron color or any color or no color) who are adding to the mistrust.

Even though in Medhajournal, all the Medhavis are discussing and interacting for purely intellectual pursuits with absolutely no political agenda, it could be an assumption by many as otherwise, just for the fact people have always been fed by political agenda of some sort, be in right, left, limbo kinds!!

• 
• +0
• 
• 

Lively Discussion!
written by Riverine, 2008-07-19 18:52:50

Suparna, Dwai, Shri Desikan

This discussion is bringing forth a lot of material that seems to require clarification.

Suparna

There is a single conflicting idea in the link at Wikipedia. I pointed out to the link only to show that all the researches (except the one you quoted) have pointed to the fact that there was no invasion and there is no caste-based/region-based/language-based distinction in the mainstream population. The one you have quoted is the only one that strikes a discordant note: earlier on, with no scientific evidence, a lot was told about Aryan superiority etc. etc...when it comes to scientific proof, nothing is substantial.

Dwai

I love saffron :-) On my clothes, in my sweets, in my national flag...anywhich way I love it. Yet, I dont have a political agenda but am a normal person with opinions on issues. How's that? Thanks for removing the taint from the colour saffron. This colour - often the 'kaavi' shade is supposed to induce the mind to renunciation...now see how negatively it is seen...

Shri Desikan

As you say, there is no physical distinction based on caste. Only in the border areas we see the presence of physical distinctions and this is gradual. In the areas that have served as ports for long, we see genetic distinctions. Trade transcended goods :-)

Marked differences arise only in tribes that have remained culturally isolated from the rest of the society until recently when they are integrating into society. Any way that does not matter as they were isolated from all the social turmoils all these years...

• 
• +0
• 
• 

...
written by dwai, 2008-07-19 09:52:24

I wanted to bring out in the discussion that there were opposing representations in the wikipedia link. Also to add the opposing ideas in the wikipedia article.

These opposing ideas/views are actually quite lopsided in their balance of voice and power. The AIT/AMT theorists (with their associated neo-colonial baggage) have the advantage of adhering to a theory that has been carefully and methodically engineered to subjugate Indians over a period of 300 years (starting with the European Philologists such as Max Mueller). They naturally (by virtue of their blind acceptance in academia all over the world (including India)) have a larger mass of followers.

The people who are questioning this are very conveniently painted in the Hindutva/Saffronist brush (there is nothing wrong with saffron, except the media-fabricated image of it being an undesirable color, guilt by association with some fringe elements of Indian politics) -- read that Wikipedia article for instance. You must read our own Nitin Bhai's co-edited book "Invading the Sacred" (http://www.invadingthesacred.com for your edification.

• 
• +0
• 
• 

Clarification to Oh no
written by Sreeparna, 2008-07-19 09:39:04

My comment not to be mistaken,

No genetic markings are relevant to Indian castes, period.

. There was no ulterior indication in my comment, and so I said the article in wikipedia has opposing ideas.

I wanted to bring out in the discussion that there were opposing representations in the wikipedia link. Also to add the opposing ideas in the wikipedia article.

Political debate and implications

The debate over such a migration, and the accompanying influx of elements of Vedic religion from Central Asia is politically charged and hotly debated in India. Hindutva (Hindu nationalist) organizations, especially, mostly remain opposed to the concept. Outside India, the perceived political overtones of the theory are not pronounced, and it is discussed in the larger framework of Indo-Iranian and Indo-European expansion.

Even though it lies outside the mainstream academic consensus, an "Indian Urheimat" has its proponents, such as Elst (1999) and Kazanas (2001, 2002). "Out of India" scenarios locating the Indo-European homeland on the Indian subcontinent have had some currency in Hindu nationalism since the 2000s, but found no support in the academic community.[69][70]

• 
• +0
• 
• 

...
written by dwai, 2008-07-19 09:24:30

This quote indicates that there is an indication of possible Aryan invasion/immigration to India..

What do you have to say about this?

How does this exclude the possibility that there was a migration out from India to the middle-east and Europe?

Read Subhash Kak, Georg Fuerstein and David Frawley's excellent book called "In search of the cradle of civilization" for a cogent and convincing explanation on a lot of these matters...

• 
• +0
• 
• 

Oh No!
written by P. Desikan, 2008-07-19 08:57:02

Dear Riverine, I agree.
In any such investigation, a portion of the investigation can indicate contra to the average based on larger sampling. And remember,
most investigations ignore the porosity of the Indian landmass also on the southeastern and northeastern sides, by sea from Austarlia and by land from ancient China in prehistoric times.
Import from China is as Asian as indigenous material, after all! You would have noticed that neither colour nor facial features are unique to any caste in any state of India, though as in the rest of the world, fair skin has been treated with deference all the time!
No genetic markings are relevant to Indian castes, period.
Regards. Partha

• 
• +0
• 
• 

Aryan Invasion
written by Riverine, 2008-07-19 04:25:28

Sreeparna

Very clearly, you have taken the quote without the sections above or the ones below it.

Above it, there are the results of studies done on populations about 40-60 millennia old where the distinction of genes is found (this is a period of about 20,000 years).

Below it, several studies say that there is no great genetic distinction between the various castes - in fact some studies have shown similarity between geographical regions with some tribes of the South with no specific caste distinction. The section provides results of studies done by several people independent of each other and all the results (except the one you have quoted) prove the absence of any caste-based genetic distinction (although there are statements to prove that there were large migrations into the subcontinent).

I hope that is convincing.

• 
• +0
• 
• 

...
written by Sreeparna, 2008-07-19 01:29:16

Dear Riverine/Medhavis,

Thank you for the interesting read about negating Aryan Invasion theory. I went to the wikipedia reference mentioned by Riverine. As first read of the link, I felt it was very contradictory and confusing. I am not sure how other Medhavis perceive..

There were opposing ideas based on genetic mapping;

However, Bamshad et al. (2001) state:

For maternally inherited mtDNA, each caste is most similar to Asians. However, 20%-30% of Indian mtDNA haplotypes belong to West Eurasian haplogroups, and the frequency of these haplotypes is proportional to caste rank, the highest frequency of West Eurasian haplotypes being found in the upper castes. In contrast, for paternally inherited Y-chromosome variation each caste is more similar to Europeans than to Asians. Moreover, the affinity to Europeans is proportionate to caste rank, the upper castes being most similar to Europeans, particularly East Europeans. [...] Analysis of these data demonstrated that the upper castes have a higher affinity to Europeans than to Asians, and the upper castes are significantly more similar to Europeans than are the lower castes. Collectively, all five datasets show a trend toward upper castes being more similar to Europeans, whereas lower castes are more similar to Asians.[27]

This quote indicates that there is an indication of possible Aryan invasion/immigration to India..

What do you have to say about this?

• 
• +0
• 
• 

...
written by karigar, 2008-07-18 08:47:54

Enriching & enlivening discussions...

Regds evidence for Outbound, just remembered Subhash Kak writing a well researched piece on the Hitties & Mittani in the middle-east having comprehensive naming systems & language which obviously seem to be from the Indic area..

His implication seemed to be that the elite in these areas had Indic cultural backgrounds ( organic or adopted) which was different from the 'plebians' who had a more localized culture...

Am learning more & more about 'Tamizh' ( more accurate than 'Tamil' ? )...Thanks

• 
• +0
• 
• 

...
written by narensomu, 2008-07-17 23:03:28

Riverine
Interesting, neccessary or need of the hour article and discussions.
Tamizh ,I belive in its ancient form might have been a Sister to Sanskrit's ancient form [Veda Basha or is it Sandhas as the Kanchi Saint called it?].
The Pathanjali -Agastya-Shiva story seems very plausible to me.
I am reading Thiruvachagam and admiring the succinct lines .
But the Sanga Tamil is harder to understand.
A small bit of mainstream media news.
Last year Dina malar carried a para on what communist leader B Ramamurthy said abt the origin of languages.

"Sanskrit means "well made from " -it was made from existing regional languages and wily upper class people perfected it and used it!"

The paper also mentioned that he was a Brahmin.[ see, his commie view must be right abt Sanskrit]:-) line of thinking.

Avare sollitarupa-kind of acceptance.

As a person educated in the mainstream way, what knowledge would the leader have had in Sanskrit or Tamil? None.

But the TV watching, unthinking Tamilian would swallow this hook , line and sink-er.
Those who question are Aryans anyways.:-))
I grit my teeth-Dinamalar may have been trying to make amends -considering the change in the political climate.

4. The SS is a culmination of material culture...rather a pioneering effort in materialism. Precisely because of this, the West is interested in studying it...kind of distracting the Indians into looking at the 'minds' that preceded/created it in the first place. The very same minds used mud/wood/clay etc. to make things earlier, but how do such things matter to those wanting to believe that only iron and bricks make a civilization?

You said it. The West has a narrow way of looking at issues-what we need to do is look at issues from a fresh point of view.
I am reminded of those parna saalas Lakshman built for his Brother and Sister in law in the jungle. A people whose aspirations weren't building pukka structures but whose aim was to build up their Medhavi account would do with parna salaas .

Agree with Partha's lines-no one way ticket this-out bound migration would have happened too.
Regards
ns

• 
• +0
• 
• 

eons
written by Riverine, 2008-07-17 20:58:10

Yes, Shri Desikan, I too intuitively believe that Tamizh (in an ancient form)is older than Sanskrit and that Sanskrit is not a naturally evolved language but a purified and perfected language meant specifically for preserving knowledge which was developed by ancient seers. My arguments are as follows:

1. The letters (gutterals, palatals etc. etc.) of Tamil are repeated in Sanskrit with more phonetic specificity (aspirations). The sounds used in both the languages are the same beginning with the vowels and all the consonants. The very few different consonants are placed at the end of the aksharas. Although the writing of both the present form of the languages came in much later, the sounds and the akshara form was borrowed from Tamizh in its ancient form. Tamizh had no need for aspirated sounds and the same consonant was used with 2 different sounds based on its position in the word.

2. There were Siddhas and Yogis all over the subcontinent and even beyond. Kanchi Periyavar has told that Russia was earlier 'Rishiparva' -- the land where ancient sages used to assemble to hold knowledge-sharing conferences. I believe that is true. Possibly the ice-age about 10,000 years ago made it unfavourable for it to be continued to north of the Himalayas.

3. Himalayas were/are the originating point of knowledge just as cosmic centers like Thiruvannamalai/Podhigai and other spots are. These Cosmic Centers are highly intriguing. Even more so is how these seers identify these spots.

4. The SS is a culmination of material culture...rather a pioneering effort in materialism. Precisely because of this, the West is interested in studying it...kind of distracting the Indians into looking at the 'minds' that preceded/created it in the first place. The very same minds used mud/wood/clay etc. to make things earlier, but how do such things matter to those wanting to believe that only iron and bricks make a civilization?

• 
• +0
• 
• 

eons indeed
written by P. Desikan, 2008-07-17 20:06:40

How right you are, Riverine, about the greatness and comprehensive nature of vedic thought and the time it must have taken for it to have been revealed to the sages such as the ones that used to assemble at Naimisha! If you look at my crude scenario,I am not limiting this time at all. I really believe that
1)a language of a protodravidian kind developed among the people assembled in SS in the very distant past.
2) SS has been there very long and was fertile enough to attract people to it from North and South by the mountain and sea routes and accessible enough in both directions.
3) Such inward migration stopped only when desertification sent Saraswati away and beneath after a cataclysmic event.
4) The Vedic language was revealed along with vedic knowledge only in the Himalayas and I am not limiting the time frame. Our legends clearly mention the movement of sages from the Northern forests to different river-bed locations, but substantially to SS and Ganga, over several hundreds, thousands of years. The protodravidian in the Ganga would have taken a lot of time to become different prakrits.
The sages themselves would have then created Sanskrit on the Vedabhasha model and Prakritic vocabular content.
Not being directly affected by these interactions, the south got a clear SS based language and rather recently,finished Sanskrit in lieu of Vedabhasha.
Do I make sense?
Regards. Partha.

• 
• +0
• 
• 

Looking for it
written by Riverine, 2008-07-17 19:32:01

Shri Desikan

What you say ought to have happened with many an unnamed Medhavi doing the job silently, efficiently in the ancient past. Yes, the criss-crossing of wandering Medhavis made the world of the time...However, the suggestion I would want you to consider is not keeping SS as the base for the time-frame. I feel things are far more ancient. The cryptic and efficiently encapsulated thoughts as great as those contained in the Vedas need eons of penance. And the SS is a mere 5000 years ago. Just imagine a yogi in a perfect posture captured at that time...doesn't look like a brand new idea and a few years of practise...the animals wander about freely around him - so powerful is he!

• 
• +0
• 
• 

Indian Emigration
written by Riverine, 2008-07-17 19:21:36

Karigar

Thanks for the suggestion...sure, while that was the background idea, I didnt't put it clearly in words while I was only dealing with the similarity between the 'us' and the 'them' created based on the SS.

IMO, SS was the end product of endevours pre-dating the concrete evidence by millennia. The strategic location of SS was conducive for the material culture to flourish there...even as it is evidenced that there were large numbers of in-migration all through recorded history, there is not much dealt with out-migration to the West of the subcontinent. Nomadic tribes were not considered seriously enough to be called 'migrants' The cultural and spiritual ambassadors -- singing Sramanas and teaching Dravidas -- were not in such huge numbers to be considered 'migrants'. However, it is the nomads and the Sramanas and Dravidas that created the ancient historic scenario of all of Europe and Asia and possibly farther (evidences of similarity of spiritual thoughts as far away as Native America and the Pacifics suggest this) until "RELIGION" came along...and it is said, "The West Lost the Vedas".

Clearly, Vedas here means "KNOWLEDGE" in anywhich way it is seen. THey live within what is called "Spotlight knowledge".

I feel, as an after thought, that this ought to be part of the paper body.

Thanks a lot.

• 
• +0
• 
• 

...
written by P. Desikan, 2008-07-17 16:09:55

• 
• +0
• 
• 

there is, if only you look for it
written by P. Desikan, 2008-07-17 15:38:48

Dear Karigar,
Agree with you. Wholeheartedly.
Dear Riverine, No right thinking person will assert that with the Bharatavarsha open to the rest of the world through mountain passes and the sea in those old times, that people would have only come in and not gone out.
There is however the irrefutable evidence of thick population even in old times, indicating more migration in than out.
Till very recently the industrial revolution and its results started converting Europe and its essentially white colonies into paradises on earth to which the lesser colonies could aspire to go.
But while more and more people travelled through the Himalayan passes and the shores west of the Western ghats to the Saraswati Sindhu paradise, cultural mores from there could travel both to elsewhere within the country and abroad, along with limited number of Indian wanderers and crisscrossing non Indians.
Let us have some Medhavis from SS going to the Himalayas and getting/creating the vedas and the vedic language.
Let some enterprising cultivators move through Gujarat to the south continuing to speak SS lingo.
Let some others move eastward to the Ganga basin and receive inputs from returning Medhavis modifying the SS lingo into Prakrits.
Let the Medhavis get together at various river camps and create a modified Vedic lingo related to the Ganga prakrits and call it Sanskrit. Meanwhile let the Prakrits flourish and evolve.
Let other Medhavis similarly civilise the SS lingo in the south to Tamil and other Dravidian tongues.
Let the criss crossing non Indians go back where they came from and coevolve Indo-this-ean and indo-that-ean languages. As for languages, so to for ideas, cultural mores, and whateverelse.
How do you like this very crude scenario?
If any of it was so, I had nothing to do with it.
Regards. Partha.

• 
• +0
• 
• 

Out Of India..??
written by karigar, 2008-07-17 14:09:58

Riverine,

Well encapsulated refutation of AXT(X=Invasion/Migration/Tourism)...but you left out one gaping possibility / ; that of the 'Out Of India' variety

There is at lease as much real/hard evidence for Indian Emigration as for Indian Immigration...how 'bout that??

• 
• +0
• 
• 

Name

Email

Website

Title

Comment

smaller | bigger

Subscribe via email (registered users only)

Add Comment Preview