Fall of Mohenjo Daro

Sep 2014
773
Texas
#51
Rajputs have Gond Dravidian origin. Wiki says the following about the Rajput Chandelas. (Same could be said for Bhatis, Bundelas, and Rathors too, and more, regarding their central Indian tribal origins.)

"The British indologist V. A. Smith theorized that the Chandelas were of either Bhar or Gond origin. Some other scholars including R. C. Majumdar also supported this theory."

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chandela
I thought the Dravidians were original inhabitants of India while the Rajputs were descended from the Mittani. Well, my bad. Guess it's too late to make that correction with the Indigenous Horse Society of India and Marwari Horse Breeders. I even wrote a time line of the Indian horse that was used to raise funds for the Indian horse society in Great Britain. Funny I've never heard anyone from Castle Dunlod telling me that they were not descended from those great horse breeders of ancient times. Guess I need to tell them that according to Historium they are not descended from the Mittani.
 
Jul 2017
182
USA
#52
I thought the Dravidians were original inhabitants of India while the Rajputs were descended from the Mittani. Well, my bad. Guess it's too late to make that correction with the Indigenous Horse Society of India and Marwari Horse Breeders. I even wrote a time line of the Indian horse that was used to raise funds for the Indian horse society in Great Britain. Funny I've never heard anyone from Castle Dunlod telling me that they were not descended from those great horse breeders of ancient times. Guess I need to tell them that according to Historium they are not descended from the Mittani.
There is no connection between Rajputs and Mitanni. The two groups are separated by over 2500 years.
 

kandal

Ad Honorem
Aug 2015
2,531
USA
#53
I thought the Dravidians were original inhabitants of India while the Rajputs were descended from the Mittani. Well, my bad. Guess it's too late to make that correction with the Indigenous Horse Society of India and Marwari Horse Breeders. I even wrote a time line of the Indian horse that was used to raise funds for the Indian horse society in Great Britain. Funny I've never heard anyone from Castle Dunlod telling me that they were not descended from those great horse breeders of ancient times. Guess I need to tell them that according to Historium they are not descended from the Mittani.
Dravidians are not the original inhabitants of India, they are supposed to have come there during pre-historic times. There were indigenous peoples living in the subcontinent before the Dravidians. Marwari horse breed is bred in India, but at much later times, may be 1000 years ago.

Real origins of Rajputs are unknown, though there are various theories and speculations. Most likely they are Dravidian with some Indigenous, and a little Indo-Aryan - like most people in their region.
 
Last edited:

Aupmanyav

Ad Honorem
Jun 2014
5,117
New Delhi, India
#54
Original inhabitants: Going by thr African Origin theory, there are no 'original inhabitants' anywhere in the world except in Ethiopia, Tanzania and South Africa.
Guess I need to tell them that according to Historium they are not descended from the Mittani.
Mittani were not the only horse breeders in the world. There were Kambojas (Ashvakas, Assikenoi) too in this part of the world.
 
Last edited:
Jul 2014
1,834
Yes
#55
I also feel that Mohenjo Daro, Harappa in Pakistan are extentions of Near Eastern civilizations. There is evidence suggesting a west to east migration of ideas that took root on the banks of Indus in the Neolithic period.







The Near-Eastern Roots of the Neolithic in South Asia
Neolithic expansion only explains farming and pottery making. But has not much to do with IVC. If this was the case you would find more old civilisations like Egypt or Mesopotamia in or near the Middle East. Elamites in Iran for example didn't appear untill 2700 BC.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cradle_of_civilization
 
Jul 2014
1,834
Yes
#56
Indus Valley Civilisation
The Indus Valley civilisation (3,300-1,900 BCE), located in Northwestern Indian subcontinent, is often identified as having been Dravidian.[53] Cultural and linguistic similarities have been cited by researchers Henry Heras, Kamil Zvelebil, Asko Parpola and Iravatham Mahadevan as being strong evidence for a proto-Dravidian origin of the ancient Indus Valley civilisation.[54] [55] The discovery in Tamil Nadu of a late Neolithic (early 2nd millennium BCE, i.e. post-dating Harappan decline) stone celt allegedly marked with Indus signs has been considered by some to be significant for the Dravidian identification.[56] [57]
Yuri Knorozov surmised that the symbols represent a logosyllabic script and suggested, based on computer analysis, an underlying agglutinative Dravidian language as the most likely candidate for the underlying language.[58] Knorozov's suggestion was preceded by the work of Henry Heras, who suggested several readings of signs based on a proto-Dravidian assumption.[59]
Linguist Asko Parpola writes that the Indus script and Harappan language are "most likely to have belonged to the Dravidian family".[60] Parpola led a Finnish team in investigating the inscriptions using computer analysis. Based on a proto-Dravidian assumption, they proposed readings of many signs, some agreeing with the suggested readings of Heras and Knorozov (such as equating the "fish" sign with the Dravidian word for fish, "min") but disagreeing on several other readings. A comprehensive description of Parpola's work until 1994 is given in his book Deciphering the Indus Script.[61]
Indo-Aryan migrations and Sanskritization
 
Feb 2019
62
Ariaca
#57
What I don't understand is, if IVC died because lack of water supply, how sites in Haryana and Western Gujarat (sites that are not part of IVC valley) died in same time because both Gujarat and Haryana are independent from Indus river system.
 

Devdas

Ad Honorem
Apr 2015
4,150
India
#58
What I don't understand is, if IVC died because lack of water supply, how sites in Haryana and Western Gujarat (sites that are not part of IVC valley) died in same time because both Gujarat and Haryana are independent from Indus river system.
It didn't die but majority of the people abandoned the cities.
 

Aupmanyav

Ad Honorem
Jun 2014
5,117
New Delhi, India
#59
What I don't understand is, if IVC died because lack of water supply, how sites in Haryana and Western Gujarat (sites that are not part of IVC valley) died in same time because both Gujarat and Haryana are independent from Indus river system.
They are not so independent of each other. Indus and its delta channels brought water to Kutch. Due to climatic and/or tectonic reasons, the flow in Indus decreased (Tiuni and Yamuna water started flowing to Ganges valley), leading to desertification in Punjab and Sindh, and thereby changing the demography of the regions. Saraswati channels have dried up in Gujarat and Indus channels have moved west all the time during the historical period. My guess.