Motivations behind selecting the name 'India' in 1947

[Neo]

You mean this.

'Wet fantasies if Islamic glory'...how does that sound?

Actually I was referring to RR's post nr 54 and 55, the report by a Harvard Professor...he's a neutral source.

 

[Flintlock]

Actually I was referring to RR's post nr 54 and 55, the report by a Harvard Professor...he's a neutral source.

One thing is clear, from what sources I have, there is a growing rift between the Indian researchers and western ones. There also seems to be a clear lack of communication, and both sides suspect each other of "propaganda". I hope this gets resolved quickly because things like this are very politically charged in India.

 

[Neo]

Bring it on...I'm eager to know what you found.

 

[Flintlock]

Bring it on...I'm eager to know what you found.

Well, here are a few updates:

*Aryan Invasion theory is no longer accepted, and the Indegenous Aryan Theory is widely believed to be propaganda. Rather the accepted theory is an Aryan Migration and syncretism over several centuries.

*The Sanskrit language appears to have several layers of "loanwords" from Urals, Central Asia (BMAC) and Balochistan, and later from Preexisting languages in the Northern India as per linguistic evidence.

*The core of the Rigveda is considered to be composed in the "Greater Punjab"
region or the area P.Punjab + I.Punjab + Haryana + Himachal Pradesh. However, the stories and rituals are borrowed from elsewhere. There seems to be a clear distinction between the "geographical center" and the "cultural center".

*There is a an apparent shifting of location as the earlier parts of the Rigveda are composed in the western part of this region and the later parts in the east.

*The Balochistan region seems to be where the horse, which is very important in rigvedic culture, first arrived in South Asia. The Horse is not an indegenous animal to South asia.

*Both Early Iranian religion and Vedism are highly influenced by the Proto-Indo-Iranian culture whose exact location is still highly speculative.


To Summarize: The language, rituals, gods, godesses and legends of the rigveda are a progressive mix of legends and beliefs all the way from central asia to northern India. The actual composition of the rigveda and standardization of its verses happens in the "greater punjab" region.


P.S. There is lots more coming.....I"ll give my sources later...but all this is the opinion of Dr. Witzell (Harvard), Dr. Steve Farmer and other western archaeologists.

Cheers.

 

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

Well, here are a few updates:

*Aryan Invasion theory is no longer accepted, and the Indegenous Aryan Theory is widely believed to be propaganda. Rather the accepted theory is an Aryan Migration and syncretism over several centuries.

*The Sanskrit language appears to have several layers of "loanwords" from Urals, Central Asia (BMAC) and Balochistan, and later from Preexisting languages in the Northern India as per linguistic evidence.

*The core of the Rigveda is considered to be composed in the "Greater Punjab
region or the area P.Punjab + I.Punjab + Haryana + Himachal Pradesh. However, the stories and rituals are borrowed from elsewhere. There seems to be a clear distinction between the "geographical center" and the "cultural center".

*There is a an apparent shifting of location as the earlier parts of the Rigveda are composed in the western part of this region and the later parts in the east.

*The Balochistan region seems to be where the horse, which is very important in rigvedic culture, first arrived in South Asia. The Horse is not an indegenous animal to South asia.

*Both Early Iranian religion and Vedism are highly influenced by the Proto-Indo-Iranian culture whose exact location is still highly speculative.


To Summarize: The language, rituals, gods, godesses and legends of the rigveda are a progressive mix of legends and beliefs all the way from central asia to northern India. The actual composition of the rigveda and standardization of its verses happens in the "greater punjab" region.


P.S. There is lots more coming.....I"ll give my sources later...but all this is the opinion of Dr. Witzell (Harvard), Dr. Steve Farmer and other western archaeologists.

Cheers.

All of that does seem to fit in with with the theory that the Vedic civilization was in NorthWest/West Pakistan?

Suggestions for the identity of the early Rigvedic Sarasvati River include the Helmand River in Afghanistan, separated from the watershed of the Indus by the Sanglakh Range. The Helmand historically besides Avestan Haetumant bore the name Haraxvaiti, which is the Avestan form corresponding to Sanskrit Sarasvati. The Old Persian form is Hara[h]uvati, in Achaemenid times the name of the Arghandab River, the chief tributary of the Helmand. This name was in turn Hellenized to Arachosia. The 1st century CE geographer Isidore of Charax referred to Arachosia, the land where the Arghandab (Sarasvati) and Helmand (Setumanta) flow, as White India.

The Avesta extols the Helmand in similar terms to those used in the Rigveda with respect to the Sarasvati: "the bountiful, glorious Haetumant swelling its white waves rolling down its copious flood" (Yasht 10.67). Kocchar (1999) argues that the Helmand is identical to the early Rigvedic Sarasvati of suktas 2.41, 7.36 etc., and that the Nadistuti sukta (10.75) was composed centuries later, after an eastward migration of the bearers of the Rigvedic culture to the western Gangetic plain some 600 km to the east. The Sarasvati by this time had become a mythical "disappeared" river, and the name was transferred to the Ghaggar which disappeared in the desert, which under the influence of the early hymns was made into an invisible river joining the Ganga and Yamuna.

There are strong linguistic and cultural similarities between the Rigveda and the early Iranian Avesta, deriving from the Proto-Indo-Iranian times, often associated with the early Andronovo culture of ca. 2000 BC....

The Andronovo culture is actually a collection of similar local Bronze Age cultures that flourished ca. 2300–1000BCE in western Siberia and the west Asiatic steppe.

Since there are both linguistic and cultural and geographical ties to the Andronovo, it would be logical to conclude that the civilization existed in close proximity to them, which bolsters the argument that RR is making for their location.

I am confused about the purported migration to the Gangetic plains - why would that occur, if the Indus was in close proximity to the "Sarasvati of later years" that petered out? Would it not be logical to assume that the civilization simply moved a little West, to the fertile Indus plains, rather than several hundred KM east?

Perhaps the "migration" was one of beliefs, and culture, not of people?

 

[roadrunner]

'Wet fantasies if Islamic glory'...how does that sound?

You're welcome to open up a thread on the subject. Hindutva and Islamic extremists are basically the same types of people, different beliefs. The difference is the Hindutva extremists have much power in India to manipulate history, the Islamic extremists have been sidelined since Zia's time. Anyway, I'm not sure what Islamic history Pakistan is claiming it has aside from the ones known to have occurred? If you have an example, do quote it, else your quote makes little sense.

 

[Flintlock]

All of that does seem to fit in with with the theory that the Vedic civilization was in NorthWest/West Pakistan?

Am too am confused about this part actually. The Core of the rigveda verses seems to have been composed in "greater punjab" progressively from west to east.

However, the culture, stories, legends, and some critical loanwords indicate influences all the way from the Urals to pre-existing languages in Gangetic plains.

There is a lot of speculation going on actually, and the verdict is far from out.

Since there are both linguistic and cultural and geographical ties to the Andronovo, it would be logical to conclude that the civilization existed in close proximity to them, which bolsters the argument that RR is making for their location.

That is the whole confusing part.

the verses themselves are not watertight, but consist of several layers of influences.

I am confused about the purported migration to the Gangetic plains - why would that occur, if the Indus was in close proximity to the "Sarasvati of later years" that petered out? Would it not be logical to assume that the civilization simply moved a little West, to the fertile Indus plains, rather than several hundred KM east?

I have no idea actually. But that is what the archaeologists are saying based on linguistic/archaeological evidence.

Also, I am digressing, but the Indus Valley people seem to be Dravidians after all. They were apparently pushed back over several centuries, and also, some of them assimilated with the Aryans:


"It also is clear that the remnant agricultural people of the Indus
moved upstream (apparently for want of sufficient water in some areas
and as to exploit monsoon rains not found in the Indus area), to
Haryana/Delhi and eastwards to Saurastra and Gujarat. Indeed, we find
non-Aryan (prefixing, Para-Munda) river/place names concentrated in the
Haryana (Kuruksetra) area Witzel 1999), and Dravidian ones in Gujarat
(Southworth 2005), while most of the NW and then the western Gangetic
valley has been overlaid by IA names." (Dr. Witzell again)

Perhaps the "migration" was one of beliefs, and culture, not of people?

Its not that simple. Infact, its insanely complicated.

Apparently the Aryans did roam all around North India, both assimilating with the locals, and the same time pushing some of them them south.


Here is a nice quote from Dr. Witzell:

In sum. We have clear linguistic, religious/ritual data, some
archeological ones (horses, Gandhara Grave Culture), and incipient
genetic ones. They all point to a limited immigration into the
subcontinent. An immigration, however, that had great direct and
indirect impact on the rest of North India and later on in all of
S.Asia -- by osmosis/acculturation and acceptance of an ``elite kit``
(Ehret) by the various local elites.

 

[roadrunner]

I am confused about the purported migration to the Gangetic plains - why would that occur, if the Indus was in close proximity to the "Sarasvati of later years" that petered out?

No migration occurred. One or two of the Vedic people migrated and tried to rule the Gangetic plains through manipulation and cunning. They succeeded, one of the products is the caste system you see today, initially a colour based, racial system that got transformed into a politically correct job-based system that retained the colour segmentation to this day. Basically the Vedics were quickly overthrown and the indiigenous Gangetic inhabitants took over the leadership metamorphizing the culture over centuries with successive Vedas and finally the Mahabharata. Sometime after this the present Hindu religion was created.

Would it not be logical to assume that the civilization simply moved a little West, to the fertile Indus plains, rather than several hundred KM east?

Why assume it moved anywhere in the first place? The Rig Vedic people had one homeland in all likelihood, Gandhara. No need to move to the Saraswati - there is no evidence for it (Based on the Kusmina article). None of the post-Harrapan cultures discovered in the Saraswati/Punjab area resemble Rig Vedic culture. One theory is that Harappa was invaded by the Rig Vedic people, corresponding to sometime in the Rig Veda. But even so, I doubt their homeland would have shifted.

Perhaps the "migration" was one of beliefs, and culture, not of people?

Precisely! Beliefs and culture did shift to the Gangetic plains, and then it morphed into Hinduism in the Ganges, which is why the Ganges is the most sacred river there. But people did not migrate this far.

 

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

Am too am confused about this part actually. The Core of the rigveda verses seems to have been composed in "greater punjab" progressively from west to east.

What do you mean by "composed in Greater Punjab"? If the Rig Veda bears strong linguistic ties to North Western Western Pakistan/Iran/Afghanistan, and the earlier parts of it indicate geographical features in Aghanistan (Helmand), then wouldn't the "composition" be in that region too?

Also, I am digressing, but the Indus Valley people seem to be Dravidians after all. They were apparently pushed back over several centuries, and also, some of them assimilated with the Aryans.

e.g.:
Words like "Indra" "Gandharva" etc which are very dear to the Rig Veda see their roots in the BMAC, which is south of the Urals.

There is a very strong argument against this, that the Dravidians were a neolithic culture (used stone etc) and it seems illogical that the IVC would devolve into a more primitive civilization, as they moved south, there would be some semblance of their culture in the south as well.

What did you come across that indicates a strong connection? The script itself has not been completely deciphered yet, and if there was a strong linkage, the connections would be obvious I would imagine.

In addition to Elamite, unsuccessful attempts have also been made to link the family with the Japonic languages, Basque, Korean, Sumerian, the Australian Aboriginal languages and the unknown language of the Indus Valley civilisation. The theory that the Dravidian languages display similarities with the Uralic language group, suggesting a prolonged period of contact in the past,[4] is popular amongst Dravidian linguists and has been supported by a number of scholars, including Robert Caldwell,[5] Thomas Burrow,[6] Kamil Zvelebil,[7] and Mikhail Andronov[8] This theory has, however, been rejected by specialists in Uralic languages,[9] and has in recent times also been criticised by other Dravidian linguists like Bhadriraju Krishnamurti.[10]

Dravidian languages - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

There are reference links to most of those statements. So even the Uralic link is strongly disputed.

Its not that simple. Infact, its insanely complicated.

Apparently the Aryans did roam all around North India, both assimilating with the locals, and the same time pushing some of them them south.


Here is a nice quote from Dr. Witzell:

In sum. We have clear linguistic, religious/ritual data, some
archeological ones (horses, Gandhara Grave Culture), and incipient
genetic ones. They all point to a limited immigration into the
subcontinent. An immigration, however, that had great direct and
indirect impact on the rest of North India and later on in all of
S.Asia -- by osmosis/acculturation and acceptance of an ``elite kit``
(Ehret) by the various local elites.

Actually, "limited immigration" would point to a diffusion of culture and beliefs rather than people. Similar to the Arabs into Pakistan - there wasn't a huge influx of Arab immigrants, but they left a permanent imprint on the areas they were in. So it could have been a similar situation.

 

[roadrunner]

Am too am confused about this part actually. The Core of the rigveda verses seems to have been composed in "greater punjab" progressively from west to east.

There's no archaeological evidence, or even textual evidence that the Rig Veda was composed anywhere in the Punjab. The Northwest of Pakistan for sure, plenty of evidence. Just because there are ambiguous references to the Saraswati (which as has been pointed out could be referring to the Helmand, and this is what the Avesta also points to), does not mean the Rig Veda was composed along the banks of the River Saraswati (which we don't even know for sure when or indeed if it existed). It's not evidence, it's very speculative that it was composed anywhere in the Punjab.

However, the culture, stories, legends, and some critical loanwords indicate influences all the way from the Urals to pre-existing languages in Gangetic plains.

Pre-exisiting languages in the Gangetic plains? There are NO COMMON critical loanwords between the pre-Indo European languages of the Gangetic plains, and the Urals. The only common loan words are because the language has a common origin, the Indo-European language. Again this is a spread of language rather than people. I don't know what cultures, stories and legends you're talking about.

Also, I am digressing, but the Indus Valley people seem to be Dravidians after all. They were apparently pushed back over several centuries, and also, some of them assimilated with the Aryans:


"It also is clear that the remnant agricultural people of the Indus
moved upstream (apparently for want of sufficient water in some areas
and as to exploit monsoon rains not found in the Indus area), to
Haryana/Delhi and eastwards to Saurastra and Gujarat. Indeed, we find
non-Aryan (prefixing, Para-Munda) river/place names concentrated in the
Haryana (Kuruksetra) area Witzel 1999), and Dravidian ones in Gujarat
(Southworth 2005), while most of the NW and then the western Gangetic
valley has been overlaid by IA names." (Dr. Witzell again)

What's the reference for this Witzel quote?

The people of the IVC were not Dravidian. Skull measurements have been performed and they resemble the current people of Pakistan.

Its not that simple. Infact, its insanely complicated.

Apparently the Aryans did roam all around North India, both assimilating with the locals, and the same time pushing some of them them south.


Here is a nice quote from Dr. Witzell:

In sum. We have clear linguistic, religious/ritual data, some
archeological ones (horses, Gandhara Grave Culture), and incipient
genetic ones. They all point to a limited immigration into the
subcontinent. An immigration, however, that had great direct and
indirect impact on the rest of North India and later on in all of
S.Asia -- by osmosis/acculturation and acceptance of an ``elite kit``
(Ehret) by the various local elites.

I don't disagree with this. There was an indirect spread of culture, not Vedic people into North India. Again where's the reference?

 

[Flintlock]

What do you mean by "composed in Greater Punjab"? If the Rig Veda bears strong linguistic ties to North Western Western Pakistan/Iran/Afghanistan, and the earlier parts of it indicate geographical features in Aghanistan (Helmand), then wouldn't the "composition" be in that region too?

By "composed" i mean all the legends and rituals were assimilated, localized, and placed into organized verses which were then transmitted through rote learning.

This process, according to Farmer and Witzell seems to have taken place in the "Greater Punjab" region.

There is a very strong argument against this, that the Dravidians were a neolithic culture (used stone etc) and it seems illogical that the IVC would devolve into a more primitive civilization, as they moved south, there would be some semblance of their culture in the south as well.

Its far more complicated than that. Apparently the Dravidian languages developed later as an indigenous innovation.

Also, there is a huge borrowing of sanskrit terms into classical tamil etc. although they are structurally different from Indo-Iranian languages.

What did you come across that indicates a strong connection? The script itself has not been completely deciphered yet, and if there was a strong linkage, the connections would be obvious I would imagine.

The script is a myth. Apparently the harappan "script" was just a loose pictorlal sign system that changed frequently depending upon the ruler, etc.

This is accoriding to Dr.Farmer's book, The Myth of the Harappan Script.

Actually, "limited immigration" would point to a diffusion of culture and beliefs rather than people. Similar to the Arabs into Pakistan - there wasn't a huge influx of Arab immigrants, but they left a permanent imprint on the areas they were in. So it could have been a similar situation.

The Limited migration means a migration of elites rather than a mass settlement.

Also, the limited migration from my quote refers to the subcontinent, not the gangetic plain, incase you misunderstood it.

However, over a period of time these elites seem to have mixed with the local populations to give a distinctly south asian genetic type.

 

[Flintlock]

There's no archaeological evidence, or even textual evidence that the Rig Veda was composed anywhere in the Punjab.

Well thats the opinion of Witzell and Farmer from the year 2007. Apparently they know something you don't.

Pre-exisiting languages in the Gangetic plains? There are NO COMMON critical loanwords between the pre-Indo European languages of the Gangetic plains, and the Urals. The only common loan words are because the language has a common origin, the Indo-European language. Again this is a spread of language rather than people. I don't know what cultures, stories and legends you're talking about.

Not the Urals!!! How could gangetic languages spread to the Urals??

The Indo European language, upon reaching the gangetic plains with Aryan migrants, borrowed some loanwords from the gangetic people's languages.

I"ll prove my sources when I have enough data to write a nice long post explaining the current views (2007) of western researchers.

I don't disagree with this. There was an indirect spread of culture, not Vedic people into North India. Again where's the reference?

Don't worry I'll get my references. Solid ones, not from websites but from books.

 

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

There is a very strong argument against this, that the Dravidians were a neolithic culture (used stone etc) and it seems illogical that the IVC would devolve into a more primitive civilization, as they moved south, there would be some semblance of their culture in the south as well.
Its far more complicated than that. Apparently the Dravidian languages developed later as an indigenous innovation.

Also, there is a huge borrowing of sanskrit terms into classical tamil etc. although they are structurally different from Indo-Iranian languages.

I am referring to the use of stone and more primitive building materials/techniques, vs the brick etc. used by the people of the IVC as being evidence of no migration to the south.

You can cut and paste this onto the IVC thread though, so the discussion can continue there.

 

[roadrunner]

Well thats the opinion of Witzell and Farmer from the year 2007. Apparently they know something you don't.

Dude, you saying that "The Core of the rigveda verses seems to have been composed in "greater punjab" progressively from west to east." does not mean that Wiztel agrees with it. I can assure you, there has been no shift in thinking that Gandhara is the homeland of the Rig Vedic people.

The UCL papers quotes the Rig Vedic burial rites having sites in common with Gandharan ones from the last couple of years. I await your links and evidence of this amazing find.

Not the Urals!!! How could gangetic languages spread to the Urals??

Out of India is a theory believed by many Indians, even though it's rubbish.

The Indo European language, upon reaching the gangetic plains with Aryan migrants, borrowed some loanwords from the gangetic people's languages.

Right, now I can agree with you here. What's your point? You did not say this before? "However, the culture, stories, legends, and some critical loanwords indicate influences all the way from the Urals to pre-existing languages in Gangetic plains."..in other words, you were quoting "out of India" theory while trying to act like you hadnt heard about it before

I"ll prove my sources when I have enough data to write a nice long post explaining the current views (2007) of western researchers.

Don't worry I'll get my references. Solid ones, not from websites but from books.

You do that. I can assure you that Witzel has not changed his mind on the site of he Rig Vedic homeland, even if you do quote statements of yourself, implying "Greater Punjabs" and the Rig Vedic homeland suddenly shifting or Dravidians occupying the IVC. Proof should come before the statement.

 

[Flintlock]

Dude, you saying that "The Core of the rigveda verses seems to have been composed in "greater punjab" progressively from west to east." does not mean that Wiztel agrees with it. I can assure you, there has been no shift in thinking that Gandhara is the homeland of the Rig Vedic people.

Well he did say so, so I"m assuming he agrees with it too. My quote is from 2006, so maybe you have some older data.

The UCL papers quotes the Rig Vedic burial rites having sites in common with Gandharan ones from the last couple of years. I await your links and evidence of this amazing find.

The UCL papers you quoted are about a presentation about the possible links between the Gandhara Grave culture and Vedic people.

By Vedic people it means people with Vedic culture, and not necessarily the "composition of the rigveda". We will need something more specific than that.

Right, now I can agree with you here. What's your point? You did not say this before? "However, the culture, stories, legends, and some critical loanwords indicate influences all the way from the Urals to pre-existing languages in Gangetic plains."..in other words, you were quoting "out of India" theory while trying to act like you hadnt heard about it before

Er no, by that quote I meant a progressive layering of influences starting from the oldest layers in the Urals to the newest layers in the gangetic plains, not the other way around.

You do that. I can assure you that Witzel has not changed his mind on the site of he Rig Vedic homeland, even if you do quote statements of yourself, implying the Rig Vedic homeland has shifted all of a sudden. Proof should come before the statement.

There is a difference between the "Vedic Homeland" and the "formalization of the Rigveda" this is something I just learnt about today.

Definitely Aryan migrants entered the Subcontinent and settled at Gandhara.
But did they compose the verses then? They definitely had most of the traits that the rigveda indicates, meaning that they were the same people.

However, the composition of the rigveda was done later, when the Aryan people had spread deeper into the Subcontinent.