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 March 31st, 2013, 04:22 PM   #51
Academician
 
Joined: Nov 2011
From: USA
Posts: 81

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dreamhunter View Post
I believe both genetics and nutrition play important roles. One's genes decide what maximum height one could reach, say 6 ft. But whether one actually reaches that genetic potential (i.e. 6 ft) or not would depend on one's nutrition, not only from birth, but actually all the way from conception. Because a mother's diet could affect her child's birth weight and size.

The implications of nutrition could then continue to the next generation, then on and on. If that guy with genetic 6 ft potential actually reaches 6 ft, he would marry a woman around at least 5 ft 8 in., say. So their children would then pick up both their parents' genes for reasonable height.

But if that guy with genetic 6 ft potential only reached 5 ft. 6 in. - due to severely inadequate nutrition from childhood - he would likely marry a woman around 5 ft. 2 in., say (either one who actually had genetic 5 ft. 2 in potential - which would mean short genes - or one who was also stunted due to deficient nutrition). So, their children would part-inherit the genes of a short mother, even if their father had tall genes originally.


Post WWII kids born in Europe to undernourished mothers also had low birth weight, which - combined with their own inadequate nutrition in later years - would have seriously affected their chances of reaching their own genetic height potential.
All good points. More here on height here. A Reporter at Large: The Height Gap : The New Yorker
abracadabra102 is offline  
Remove Ads
Old April 2nd, 2013, 12:57 AM   #52
Suspended indefinitely
 
Joined: Mar 2013
From: noida
Posts: 199

Quote:
2500 years ago during the time of Buddha Shakyamuni and Asvaghosha

so now Ashvaghosa who lived in 100-150 ad approximately is of 500 bc.

hey bhagavan, you are so great.
vikas is offline  
Old April 2nd, 2013, 01:01 AM   #53
Suspended indefinitely
 
Joined: Mar 2013
From: noida
Posts: 199

Quote:
About 1000 years later, the medieval saints like Kabir, Ravidas etc were again tackling with same superiority complex of the Indo-Aryans (Brahmins). Hell, even 1000 years later, the likes of Dr. Ambedkar,

Since Ashvaghosa is of 500 bc as per our great austroasiatic historian, 1000 years later means in 500 ad but one should know that Kabir was a 15th century "saint ".

And dr. ambedkar, lived in 20th century not in 2500 ad .

it seems you believe in timemachines.
vikas is offline  
Old April 2nd, 2013, 01:12 AM   #54
Suspended indefinitely
 
Joined: Mar 2013
From: noida
Posts: 199

@Rakshasa

danavraj, could you please tell us

1. a single large state in india that was speaking austroasiatic language in 300 ad, your candidates maybe Orissa and bengal but give me a link of any linguist that majority of speakers in Orissa and bengal were austroasiatic by 300 ad.

2. a single line of austroasiatic literature till 1000 ad ?

3. any monarch whose austroasiatic origins have been proven except some Assamese kings who were rather insignificant?

4. A single large state whose linguistic identity has seen revolution rather than evolution?

i mean 1500 years ago people in modern bangladesh spoke ardha magadhi which is direct ancestor of modern day oriya, bengali and assamese.


5. A single civilization whose linguistic identity is of such continuity?
your favourite chinese were still not In Yunnan and manchuria even in 650 ad a time when all parts of india spoke languages direct ancestral to modern day dialects so people in maharashtra spoke marathi prakrit, in karnataka , they spoke old kannada etc.

show me a single large state which spoke any non indo aryan non dravidian language in 600 ad.



if you fail to back up your claims , then waht you wrote is utter nonsense.
vikas is offline  
Old April 2nd, 2013, 10:16 AM   #55

Rakshasa's Avatar
Lecturer
 
Joined: Mar 2013
From: India
Posts: 410

Quote:
so now Ashvaghosa who lived in 100-150 ad approximately is of 500 bc.

hey bhagavan, you are so great.
I was giving approximate dates. Accuracy of the dates was not the point. The point was that 2500 years is enough to change the face of a region on Earth completely - but it still could not change the arrogance of the Indo-Aryans.

Quote:
1. a single large state in india that was speaking austroasiatic language in 300 ad, your candidates maybe Orissa and bengal but give me a link of any linguist that majority of speakers in Orissa and bengal were austroasiatic by 300 ad.
Most of the Magadhans were austroasiatics. There is even austroasiatic influence in Vedic Sanskrit. In fact, many of the so called "upper castes" today - who do not show any Caucasian influence - of the gangetic plains are austroasiatics, whether they believe it or not. Their influence was so great that today you can even see dark "Brahmins" and non-Caucasian Rajputs who descended from native tribes like Gonds.

Majority of the people of Orissa, Bengal, Chhattisgarh, Jharkhand, Madhya Pradesh, and South India are non-Caucasian natives (austroasiatic). They are not Aryans. Merely speaking an Indo-Aryan language doesn't make them direct descendants of the people who brough Vedas to India. Even the Sri Lankans speak Indo-Aryan language, but they are hardly Caucasians.
Quote:
2. a single line of austroasiatic literature till 1000 ad ?
Indians, including even the Indo-Aryans, did not have a written script even during the time of Buddha. Nevertheless, the inscriptions by Asoka on various stupas are written in a native script.
Quote:
3. any monarch whose austroasiatic origins have been proven except some Assamese kings who were rather insignificant?
Dude, "austroasiatic" doesn't simply mean the people who are listed as "Scheduled Tribes" under the Indian constitution. Majority of the Indians, including Scheduled castes, OBCs, Rajputs, marwadis, and even Brahmins have more austroasiatic blood than the Caucasian blood.

The most Caucasoid groups in India are the Irano-Aryan Parsees (who, along with later Persian Muslim invaders are more "Aryan" than Brahmins), the Huna Kashmiris, the Indo-Scythian Jats & Gujjars, the few pure Caucasian Indo-Aryan Brahmins, and many influences from Greek or even Turkic (pre-Islamic) origins - and most of them have migrated after the Guptas (except the Brahmins of course). Given that, it would be impossible for Caucasians to have been monarchs of India before the Guptas.

Quote:
show me a single large state which spoke any non indo aryan non dravidian language in 600 ad
Dravidian language speakers are not Caucasians. Technically, by race they are also Austroasiatics, just that they speak a language influenced by Indo-Aryan language. The theory that Dravidians are Caucasians is utter crap coming from Dravidian nationalists who want to "elevate" their ancestry by associating themselves with Caucasians.
Rakshasa is offline  
Old April 2nd, 2013, 10:25 AM   #56

Aberc's Avatar
Scholar
 
Joined: Feb 2013
Posts: 688

All you're examples of people you consider "Aryan" are light skinned peoples.

All caucasian/Caucasoid is, is a skull shape. Classifications made by colonial era Europeans.

Last edited by Aberc; April 2nd, 2013 at 10:33 AM.
Aberc is offline  
Old April 2nd, 2013, 10:32 AM   #57

Rakshasa's Avatar
Lecturer
 
Joined: Mar 2013
From: India
Posts: 410

Vikas,

There is a story from Bhuridatta Jataka which mentions a Brahmin who visits a Naga kingdom for the first time to convert them to "Brahmanism" and tries to impose caste system. But a Bodhisattva refutes and exposes the Brahmins and asks the Nagas to be wary of the caste system that Brahmin brings. Classic proof of the state of affairs during which time this Jataka was written - there did exist societies and kingdoms that were yet to be influenced by Brahmanism.


"These Veda studies are the wise man's toils,
The lure which tempts the victims whom he spoils;
A mirage formed to catch the careless eye,
But which the prudent passes safely by.
The Vedas have no hidden power to save
The traitor or the coward or the knave;
The fire, though tended well for long years past,
Leaves his base master without hope at last.
Though all earth's trees in one vast heap were piled
To satisfy the fire's insatiate child,
Still would it crave for more, insatiate still,
How could a Naga hope that maw to fill?
Milk ever changes, thus where milk has been
Butter and curds in natural course are seen;
And the same thirst for change pervades the fire,
Once stirred to life it mounts still higher and higher.
Fire bursts not forth in wood that's dry or new,
Fire needs an effort ere it leaps to view ;
If dry fresh timber of itself could burn,
Spontaneous would each forest blaze in turn.
If he wins merit who to feed the flame
Piles wood and straw, the merit is the same
When cooks light fires or blacksmiths at their trade
Or those who burn the corpses of the dead.
But none, however zealously he prays
Or heaps the fuel round to feed the blaze,
Gains any merit by his mummeries,
The fire for all its crest of smoke soon dies.
Were Fire the honored being that you think,
Would it thus dwell with refuse and with stink,
Feeding on carrion with a foul delight,
Where men in horror hasten from the sight?
Some worship as a god the crested flame,
Barbarians give to water that high name;
But both alike have wandered from their road:
Neither is worthy to be called a god.
To worship Fire, the common drudge of all,
Senseless and blind and deaf to every call,
And then one's self to live a life of sin,
How could one dream that this a heaven could win?
These Brahmans all a livelihood require,
And so they tell us Brahma worships fire;

Why should the creator who all things planned
Worship himself the creature of his hand?
Doctrines and rules of their own, absurd and vain,
Our sires imagined wealth and power to gain;
Brahmans he made for study, for command
He made the Khattiyas; Vessas plough the land;
Sudras he servants mode to obey the rest;
Thus from the first went forth his high behest.
We see those rules enforced before our eyes,
None but the Brahmans offer sacrifice,
None but the Khattiya exercises sway,
The Vessas plough, the Suddas must obey.
These greedy liars propagate deceit,
And fools believe the fictions they repeat;
He who has eyes can see the sickening sight;
Why does not Brahma set his creatures right?
If his wide power no limits can restrain,
Why is his hand so rarely spread to bless?
Why are his creatures all condemned to pain?
Why does he not to all give happiness?

The Bhuridatta Jataka

Then of course we have Vajrasuchi written by Asvaghosa which was refused to be translated by Brahmins of Varanasi when Rhys David approached them to translate the text, because it refutes their caste system.

Another proof that caste system was simply a wet dream of the Brahmin Indo-Aryans during that era and was not completely established in the society as it exists today.
Rakshasa is offline  
Old April 2nd, 2013, 10:37 AM   #58

Rakshasa's Avatar
Lecturer
 
Joined: Mar 2013
From: India
Posts: 410

Quote:
Originally Posted by Aberc View Post
All you're examples of people you consider "Aryan" are light skinned peoples.

All caucasian/Caucasoid is, is a skull shape.
I was not referring to color of the skin alone. The skull shape of most of the Indians is not of Caucasian type, that is what I am saying. And that includes many "upper caste" Hindus who consider themselves superior Aryans today.

Are these Caucasian skulls to you?

Click the image to open in full size.



Click the image to open in full size.
Rakshasa is offline  
Old April 2nd, 2013, 10:49 AM   #59

Aberc's Avatar
Scholar
 
Joined: Feb 2013
Posts: 688

Quote:
Originally Posted by Rakshasa View Post
I was not referring to color of the skin alone. The skull shape of most of the Indians is not of Caucasian type, that is what I am saying. And that includes many "upper caste" Hindus who consider themselves superior Aryans today.

Are these Caucasian skulls to you?

Click the image to open in full size.



Click the image to open in full size.
Yes, they are.

Their features are considered Caucasoid. But most people think of "caucasoid" as light skinned people.

Click the image to open in full size.
Click the image to open in full size.
Click the image to open in full size.
Click the image to open in full size.
Click the image to open in full size.


Indians are indeed a mix/hybridization of ANI(caucasoid) and ASI(pre-pre-pre-historical)

Even the people high on top of the caste will have tribal genes.

Even the archaic tribals who were Independent from empires from the Mauryas to the Mughals who stayed in forests and aren't a part of the caste system or society are mixed.

Last edited by Aberc; April 2nd, 2013 at 10:52 AM.
Aberc is offline  
Old April 2nd, 2013, 10:50 AM   #60

anmol's Avatar
Historian
 
Joined: Jun 2012
From: chandigarh
Posts: 1,757

Quote:
Originally Posted by Rakshasa View Post
I was not referring to color of the skin alone. The skull shape of most of the Indians is not of Caucasian type, that is what I am saying. And that includes many "upper caste" Hindus who consider themselves superior Aryans today.

Are these Caucasian skulls to you?

Click the image to open in full size.


Click the image to open in full size.
how can you tell that , most indians have long head and pointy nose even in south india including the guy in picture you showed
anmol 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.