The Kalash Tribe of Pakistan

[AzureNight**]

Originally Posted by prideisthebest

look the north indian people look different because its where the greeks came, the mongols and the iranians came.

so naturally there are fairer people there. that doesn;t mean that they were all european and the culture therefore came from europe.

of all the colonies of the british, india was called its prized jewel. there was a reason for it.

"Indeed, India’s share of world GDP then was about one-fourth – only marginally less than that of Europe, and about the same as China’s."

485 T.N.Ninan, An Indian century

'India to reclaim Mughal-age economic aura in next 50 yrs' - Express India

Economy of India - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Bla bla bla. Explain why the Harappan civilization fell circa mid 2nd millennium, and why we suddenly see examples of Indo-European language (Sanskrit) as well as a change in material culture in numerous areas of Northern India around that period in the archaeological record. Could it be...the arrival (not necessarily violent, could have been a simple migration) of an Indo-European speaking people?

There is no evidence for an "invasion" - ie. a violent takeover and a forcible change in culture. What is far more likely was a gradual settling by Indo-European peoples into the area.

[MicroBrew]

Quoted for the muthafreakin truth.

The fact that Hindu phiology (oral history put down in writting in the Rig Veda around 300bc), linguistic science and archaeological discoveries all point to the invasion/colonization of the Indian subcontinent and destruction of the IVC by Aryans and the imposition of the colour/race caste system is all dismissed out of hand by the Hindutvadis as a British conspiracy to rob the Aryans of their 'greatness' and divide Indians. Ofcourse the truth that culture, religion and thouht of the IVC and Pre Aryan India just carried over and got Aryanised is never acknowledged by the Hindutvadis.

You know, it was Swami Vivekananda or 1 of the other big name Swamis of decades ago actually boasted that Ancient Indians had trains and planes long before the Brits since it was all mentioned in the Vedas. Recently the Hindutvadis proclaimed that NASA satellite images showing a thin strip of land land linking S.India to Ceylon is proof of 'Lord' Rama building a bridge as stated in Hindu scriptures. Ofcourse the fact that NASA says its a natural formation is not important.

[Zankou]

One thing a lot of people don't realize upon seeing the horrible Islamic terrorist rampage in Mumbai --- the other side of the Indian fence, the Hindutva, is totally bonkers as well.

[DrSatanDracula]

But if I were to cast my lot into the Hindu side or the Moslem side, I'd pick me the Hindu.

In other words: The Hindu nationalists are at least moderately acceptable. Their vision of society is far more benign.

[adren@line]

Originally Posted by MicroBrew

Quoted for the muthafreakin truth.

The fact that Hindu phiology (oral history put down in writting in the Rig Veda around 300bc), linguistic science and archaeological discoveries all point to the invasion/colonization of the Indian subcontinent and destruction of the IVC by Aryans and the imposition of the colour/race caste system is all dismissed out of hand by the Hindutvadis as a British conspiracy to rob the Aryans of their 'greatness' and divide Indians. Ofcourse the truth that culture, religion and thouht of the IVC and Pre Aryan India just carried over and got Aryanised is never acknowledged by the Hindutvadis.

You know, it was Swami Vivekananda or 1 of the other big name Swamis of decades ago actually boasted that Ancient Indians had trains and planes long before the Brits since it was all mentioned in the Vedas. Recently the Hindutvadis proclaimed that NASA satellite images showing a thin strip of land land linking S.India to Ceylon is proof of 'Lord' Rama building a bridge as stated in Hindu scriptures. Ofcourse the fact that NASA says its a natural formation is not important.

That's laughable. There is absolutely no evidence of any invasion or colonization, and the vast majority of scholars, whether Indian, western, Hindu or not, reject the AIT and have so for a while.

Further, if IE languages were imported into India, then where the hell is the evidence of some IE language that predates Sanskrit? All IE languages are younger than Sanskrit sans Hittite.

[Zankou]

Originally Posted by DrSatanDracula

But if I were to cast my lot into the Hindu side or the Moslem side, I'd pick me the Hindu.

In other words: The Hindu nationalists are at least moderately acceptable. Their vision of society is far more benign.

To me, the more important distinction is that they are staying in India, and not running out amok everywhere to spread Hindutva.

[adren@line]

Hindu nationalism attracts the uneducated and the underclass in India, which is unlike Islamic extremism which attracts the educated and in some cases well-off. It is as much of a threat to the west as Maoism is to Switzerland.

[DrSatanDracula]

Zankou:

To me, the more important distinction is that they are staying in India, and not running out amok everywhere to spread Hindutva.

Yes, another point. Nationalists tend to confine themselves towards areas they deem to be nationally cohesive. As India represents the core of Hinduism and virtually nowhere else but segments of Nepal, Pakistan, and Sri Lanka, there is no danger of some crazy world wide jihad.

[MicroBrew]

Originally Posted by adren@line

That's laughable. There is absolutely no evidence of any invasion or colonization, and the vast majority of scholars, whether Indian, western, Hindu or not, reject the AIT and have so for a while.

Further, if IE languages were imported into India, then where the hell is the evidence of some IE language that predates Sanskrit? All IE languages are younger than Sanskrit sans Hittite.

Vast majority of respected scholars (aka western scholars) do not reject a colonization, they just reject a swift sudden invasion. I always thought the swift sudden invasion theory was silly since colonization is usually gradual, just like here in the Americas.

Sanskrit is not the oldest written IE inscriptions, Hittite is. The oldest still spoken IE language (i.e language closest to archaic IndoEuro) is Lithuanian.

Sanskrit has a substratum of Dravidian and Munda while other I.E. languages do NOT, including the near by and brother Indo Iranic Languages. If Sanskrit was the so called originator (long since abandoned theory) then Farsi, Pashto, Greek, Russian and countless other I.E. languages would have Dravidian and Munda substratum. In India while there are communtiies of Dravidian and Munda laguages on the periphery of I.E. dominated areas (in tribal and village communities) there are no I.E. tribal languages. Why is the highest % of R1a Haplogroup found in Eastern Europe around the Eurasian steppes (S.W. Russia/Ukraine) An anomaly being Krygistan which has a slighlty higher % amongst hill tribes but this is attributed to founder effect.

If Sanskrit was the oldest and I.E. originated in the Indian Subcontinent then does it make sense that the I.E. tribes would spread their languages far and wide but neglect to totally linguistically conquer the Indian Subcontinent first .

Why does the Rig Veda talk about tall light skinned Aryans descending on cities inhabited by dark snub nosed short dark skinned people who speak an alien tongue and worship the Lingam, with the Aryans gloriously boasting of destroying said people and civ and Indra bring fair and blonde. Why does the Rig talk of Aryan Brahmin priests having blonde hair in contrast to the natives who didn't, Aryans are also mentioned as having long black hair. Why does the Rig speak of Aryans arriving at Sapta Sindhu (land of the 7 rivers, aka the Punjab) if they originated from the Indian sub? Why is Brahui a Dravidian language still spoken in S.E. Iran and Balochi Pakistan ? Why is Oraon , another Dravidian language still spoken in Nepal and N.India in tribal communities? Why do the statues from Moehinjadaro not look Aryan?, i.e. NON Dolichephalic.

If you have seen the IE language tree, you will have seen that Sanskrit is but 1 brach, and not the progeninator.

[Sohei]

^^^^pwnt.