Historum - History Forums  

Go Back   Historum - History Forums > World History Forum > Asian History
Register Forums Blogs Social Groups Mark Forums Read

Asian History Asian History Forum - China, Japan, Korea, India, Australia, New Zealand, and the Asia-Pacific Region


Closed Thread
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
Old April 10th, 2013, 11:52 AM   #91

Bharata's Avatar
Lecturer
 
Joined: Nov 2012
From: Forum
Posts: 282

Intresting Thread......
Bharata is offline  
Remove Ads
Old April 11th, 2013, 04:41 AM   #92
Just me
 
Joined: Jul 2008
From: --
Posts: 6,242
Blog Entries: 1

Quote:
Originally Posted by Rakshasa View Post
You are a moron amongst morons. Indo-Aryans were the ones who were semi-nomadic who mostly relied on hunting to get food when they came to India. Read Sharma's "who were the Shudras?", it shows that the Indo-Aryans were in fact less civilized compared to Rakshasas who used to dwell in urban settlements and were much more civilized.

I have no shown anything. But where have you shown that most of the Indians are Caucasoids? Today most of the Caucasoids of India have descended from Indo-Scythians, Hunas (Central Asians), pre-Islamic Afghans, Indo-Greeks, Croats of Georgia etc - but all of them migrated after the decline of the Guptas. The few Caucasoids of India before them were mostly Indo-Aryans, but even they were miniscule compared to the vast Australoid population of India.



You have not shown anything dumbass.


...
Rakshasa, this rude behaviour needs to stop. Make your point in a civil manner or don't make it.

@everybody. Going forward back up all your claims and counter-claims with proper sources. Or this thread will be promptly locked.

Thank you.
Rosi is offline  
Old April 11th, 2013, 06:10 AM   #93

Dreamhunter's Avatar
Historian
 
Joined: Jun 2012
From: Malaysia
Posts: 4,653
Blog Entries: 1

Just my two cents' worth here:

Somehow I don't feel that being semi-nomadic - or even fully nomadic for that matter - should be used as a measure of civilisational attainment. AFAIK, nomadism arose from necessity, not choice. The nomads, or semi-nomads, came from the steppes. It was imposible for them to live by pastoralism in those places, the land just could not support it. So those guys had no choice, they had to hunt and gather to live.

But that doesn't mean they had an inferior civilisation. Leaner and meaner, perhaps, but certainly not lesser. And they possessed logistical and leadership skills to match those of any agrarian society. Isn't that the reason that their kind managed to defeat and conquer, then lead quite competently, many formerly sedentary agrarian kingdoms to great heights of glory?
Dreamhunter is offline  
Old April 15th, 2013, 02:49 AM   #94
Suspended indefinitely
 
Joined: Mar 2013
From: noida
Posts: 199

Quote:
You have not shown anything dumbass. Kumarajiva was half Persian and half India. Vasubandhu and Asanga were from Pakistan (one brother was claimed to be Brahmin and another Kshatriya in Buddhist sources - an impossibility according to Brahmanism).

The thing is that they were not austroasiatics and they were brahmins or kshatriyas and certainly caucasoids.

there is not a single line of austroasiatic literature in till 1500 ad when the same caucasoids taught them everything.


BTW, what you have shown foul mouthed fool is that buddhists were caucasoids opposed to brahmanism.
vikas is offline  
Old April 15th, 2013, 02:53 AM   #95
Suspended indefinitely
 
Joined: Mar 2013
From: noida
Posts: 199

Quote:
@everybody. Going forward back up all your claims and counter-claims with proper sources. Or this thread will be promptly locked.

Thank you.
I have done so.

Wiki tells us that all buddhists were born in kshatriya or brahmin families which takes away the foundation of these pro buddhist racist posters.

all articles were backed up by scholars of world wide repute.
vikas is offline  
Old April 15th, 2013, 03:08 AM   #96
Suspended indefinitely
 
Joined: Mar 2013
From: noida
Posts: 199

Quote:
You have not shown anything dumbass.

some time people describe themselves better. this suits you completely.


show me


1. Any city with austroasiatic connection and language with some scholarly links.


2. A single line of austroasiatic literature


3. that buddhism was founded by austroloids.


4. austroasiatics wherever did not come into contact with indo aryans were not hunter gatherers.
vikas is offline  
Old April 15th, 2013, 08:07 AM   #97
Just me
 
Joined: Jul 2008
From: --
Posts: 6,242
Blog Entries: 1

Thread under review.

EDIT -- In view of the multiple rule violations and a continuing nasty tone this thread is now locked and will remain so. Another thread on the same topic, as a means to circumvent this closure, may NOT be opened. Thank you.
Rosi is offline  
Closed Thread

  Historum > World History Forum > Asian History

Tags
caucasoids, india, indoaryans



Search tags for this page
Thread Tools
Display Modes


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Who are the Aryans? Mohammed the Persian General History 66 January 1st, 2017 06:28 PM
Indo-Aryans and Semites Disciple Middle Eastern and African History 30 February 15th, 2014 05:06 PM
The First Indo-China War The Amyclae Asian History 13 December 24th, 2012 09:59 PM

Copyright © 2006-2013 Historum. All rights reserved.