Rigveda on Conquest of India by Vedic Aryans.

Status
Closed
Mar 2019
1,535
KL
#21
i think that names which have been confirmed by the puranas and the inscriptions and the texts considered historical must be considered historical for instance the kikatas, who are mentioned continuously from rigveda to mahabharatha to puranas to the very end of the first mil AD. similarly the pundras, the andhras etc.

the mahajanapadas are considered historical btw, despite no inscription from 600 BC.

at some instance the scholars have preferred dating of a text like mahavamsa to date buddha and nandas late compared to hathigumpha inscription which dates nandas earlier.

regards
 

Aatreya

Ad Honorem
Dec 2014
3,544
USA
#22
Dear Rishi,

Happy to see your interest in history of Vedic Era. I believe that we need more people taking interest in the subject.

Firstly, in order to re-construct Vedic Era history , we need to read the whole of Rig Ved Samhita, not Book-3 alone. So please consider expanding your scope, after all you are trying to write about Vedic Era, not your lineage or gotra alone. Secondly, kshatriya lineages have been been preserved in genealogical sections of Puranas. These also need to be connected/integrated with contents of Rig Ved Samhita (RVS). In other words, you need to do a lot more work.

There are several secondary works by scholars on this subject: Talageri has done some intensive work on rishi & kshatriya lineages mentioned in RVS. Witzel also has one article co-authored with someone, if I remember correctly. Pargiter has written two excelllent books on genealogies contained in Puranas (Ancient Indian Historical Tradition, Dynasties of the Kali Age). All this material is available free on the web. Try to have a quick glance thru them.

Let us not call this Vedic Era re-construction as "History". It is better named as "Ancient Indian Historical Tradition" because modern scholars demand written evidence (clay tablets etc) from bygone eras to classify it as "history". Whereas we have only compositions passed from generation to generations via oral tradition

My views on Vishwamitras:

(i) Sage Vishwamitra (s/o Gadhi) lived in Generation-32.

(ii) King Bharat (s/o King Dushyanta) lived in Generation-44.

From him the Indian subcontinent has been named as "Bhaarat-varsha" and this word is mentioned in Mahabharata where hundreds of mountains, rivers, and ethnic group in Bhaarat-varsha are enumerated. All people who live in "Bharata-varsha" are not biological descendants of King Bharata

(iii) King Sudas (s/o King Divodas) lived in Generation-68. A Rishi of the Viswamitra gotra performed the Yagyas for him.

(iv) There is a specific hymn is Rig Ved Samhita which talks about movement of Bhaaratas into India. It was a migration and not an invasion.

Best wishes

Rajeev

You may like to see the chart, based on Pargiter, at: Was Battle of 10 kings a real battle at all ?

Awesome! Would you be kind enough to quote the hymn that talks about the "movement" of Bharatas "into" India?
 
Likes: ksk
May 2019
51
Earth
#24
Battle of the 10 kings has no mention of foreign people invading India. Aryan invasion was a colonial propaganda invented out of misleading interpretation of Battle of the 10 kings. The main colonial agenda was to make Indians accept British as a "second Aryan invaders" for second civilization and weaken Indian nationalism by inciting enmity between North Indians and South Indians and wipe out Hinduism from South India.
leaving your typical hindutwa nationalistic "its white men's fault" aside, frankly i dont know why are you blubbering about battle of 10 kings here, this campaign has nothing to do with battle of 10 kings.
 
May 2019
51
Earth
#25
View attachment 20259

where is the mention of sword and chariot here :lol:

kikata is always placed in Bihar btw, that is the scholarly consensus, placing them in Punjab is just like placing saraswati in afghanistan which has been embraced as gagar hakra river by all archaeologists.

regards
i have given source in my blog post that you said yesterday that you didn't read.

3.53.17.

you look into others work while i look into original source that my ancestors wrote and left for me.

kikata was in southern punjab region in early vedic age, most-likely my ancestor kicked it so hard it landed in eastern bihar lol.

image from my blog, this also proves that most of Indus valley people at those times either got absorbed into these tribes as Sudras or forced to migrate to eastern and southern india by Vedic tribes.

 
May 2019
51
Earth
#26
Dear Rishi,

Happy to see your interest in history of Vedic Era. I believe that we need more people taking interest in the subject.

Firstly, in order to re-construct Vedic Era history , we need to read the whole of Rig Ved Samhita, not Book-3 alone. So please consider expanding your scope, after all you are trying to write about Vedic Era, not your lineage or gotra alone. Secondly, kshatriya lineages have been been preserved in genealogical sections of Puranas. These also need to be connected/integrated with contents of Rig Ved Samhita (RVS). In other words, you need to do a lot more work.
thank you for your time rajeev, i wanted to know your opinion regarding my interpretation of Rigveda and book 3 bofore i post anything else here. and i agree that i need to expand my knowledge of rigveda by studying other books as well, and i have studied book 7 of vashistha family as well but only in birds eye view as they are listed as our rival family.

most of Kshatriyas are in fact original tribesmen or warriors of Vedic tribes that colonized India like Brahmins, huns,kushans, greeks, scythins etc came as tiny elite communities and might got absorbed into Kshatriya field but they were not able to impact kshatriya communities that much. are you a kshatriya ? if you dont mind can you tell me your tribe/gotra ? i might find something interesting about your bloodline that is even unknown to you. :)

There are several secondary works by scholars on this subject: Talageri has done some intensive work on rishi & kshatriya lineages mentioned in RVS. Witzel also has one article co-authored with someone, if I remember correctly. Pargiter has written two excelllent books on genealogies contained in Puranas (Ancient Indian Historical Tradition, Dynasties of the Kali Age). All this material is available free on the web. Try to have a quick glance thru them.
witzel is good and i have studied some of this meterial on Rigveda but i have to say that he tribes hard to solve puzzles but speculating instead of searching for concrete evidences, i will tell you more about him on battle of 10 kings thread that you linked here.

My views on Vishwamitras:

(i) Sage Vishwamitra (s/o Gadhi) lived in Generation-32.

(ii) King Bharat (s/o King Dushyanta) lived in Generation-44.

From him the Indian subcontinent has been named as "Bhaarat-varsha" and this word is mentioned in Mahabharata where hundreds of mountains, rivers, and ethnic group in Bhaarat-varsha are enumerated. All people who live in "Bharata-varsha" are not biological descendants of King Bharata

(iii) King Sudas (s/o King Divodas) lived in Generation-68. A Rishi of the Viswamitra gotra performed the Yagyas for him.

(iv) There is a specific hymn is Rig Ved Samhita which talks about movement of Bhaaratas into India. It was a migration and not an invasion.

Best wishes

Rajeev

You may like to see the chart, based on Pargiter, at: Was Battle of 10 kings a real battle at all ?
well sir i dont know much about generation to be honest but i can say that Vishwamitra was son of Gathin/Gathina not Gadhi, Gadhi is puranic invention like king bharat. you are right about Sudas but it wasnt anyother rishi of vishwamitra gotra as Vishwamitra himself was born as member of nobel family, his grand father kushik and father gathin were royal priests/Purohits of grandfather and father of King sudas as well so we have no doubt that it was OG vishwamitra who served to King Sudas.sons of OG Vishwamitra such as saint Madhuchannndan are also mentioned in the book.
 
Mar 2019
1,535
KL
#27
that is just your bogus fake pride/nationalism and nothing else

you have only ''assumed'' that since kikatas were mentioned in rigveda which you assume to have been geographically confined to the punjab NW indian region, but nothing in the hymm itself indicates anything like that

Kikatas were never in southern punjab, always in Bihar, as has been confirmed by atharvaveda, mahabharatha, puranas etc.from rigveda to puranas, kikatas have been declared following nastika school of philosophy and not vedic philosophy which was predominantly the case during the historic periods itself.

the Kikatas are only mentioned in one RV hymn an it never states that there was any armed struggle between kikatas and the vedic tribes who have written this hymm or kikatas migrated and settled in east india.

if we go with the migrationist POV then obviously all the rigvedic and other post rigvedic tribes and kingdoms had their base in arctic circle, which is nothing but an argument based on bogus assumptions and zero evidences.

regards
 
Last edited:
Jul 2014
1,602
world
#28
Yes book 3.53 is entire description of how they prepared for war by asking Indra to bless their weapons, chariots, themselves etc for war against kikatas as same tribe is listedright below area they conquered before, I assume they wone the battle as puranic sources say that kikatas were an East Indian tribe now not north Western anymore.

I have even read how they made they weapons, what kind of weapons they used aetc.
kikatas are magadhis and generally considered as indoaryans. Do you have anything else ?
 

Devdas

Ad Honorem
Apr 2015
4,716
India
#29
leaving your typical hindutwa nationalistic "its white men's fault" aside, frankly i dont know why are you blubbering about battle of 10 kings here, this campaign has nothing to do with battle of 10 kings.
LOL that's wasn't expected from you.
 
Status
Closed

Similar History Discussions