Rigveda on Conquest of India by Vedic Aryans.

Status
Closed
Mar 2019
1,535
KL
#71
yes,

archaeologically the properties of indus valley civilization reappear in the second urbanisation. the pottery culture for instance painted grey ware, black northern polished ware, black and red ware are considered local and not imported foreign pottery culture.

it is argued that painted grey ware represent nomadic or agriculturalist or non urban migrant aryan culture but we do see this pottery in the early urban phase, we also see this pottey in the indus period as far back as 2000 BC

if it needs to be proven that there was any foreign intrusion, it would be justified using foreign material culture and not local culture.

the linguistics can only be proven using indus inscription which is still undeciphered.

but considering that, the previous notions of aryan intrusion using materia culture has been severely challenged based on new archaeological evidences for instance, previously it was consdiered that aryans brought iron working, but based on modern archaeological finds, iron working may have begun in the indus civilization period itself with mass scale production beginning in 1400 BC. Another notion is urbanization which is dated very late to 600 BC, but new evidences do indicate them to begin between 1200-1000 BC, NBPW which is a sign of urbanization has been now dated from 1200 BC.

the kikata evidence from the rigvedas also prove that aryans knew of the eastern territories so it was actually not confined to the indus area and these were other religions in india which were not aryan but not considered alien to the aryans or declared mlecchas/foreigners/strangers.

there are even some art depictions form the indus showing indra like figure, which match with the indra like statues from the mauryan periods. the coins obtained from Kausambi and dated to 9th century BC also shows remarkable continuity with the indus period seal symbolism and representations.

from mitanni texts alone we can see the elements of prakrit which is generally considered as an innovation which happened after old indo aryan/sanskrit appeared in india after a long time, presence of middle indo aryan characteristics already during the 'migration period'' itself debunks the migration notion, now there are also sanskrit texts found from Assam/kamarupa region which also shows this anamoly, although prakrit is not attested in kmarupa from the early 4th century AD period, its texts do indicate prakrit presence, due to the vernacular use of prakrit in that era, so it can be concluded that prakrit already existd during mitanni 1500 BC period as well which totally debunks migration period of 1500 BC.

some scholars such as BB Lal, Sanjay Manjul have dated copper plate inscription of an anthropomoprhic boar to 15th century BC as well or atleast end of second mil BC

regards
 
Last edited:
Likes: grammaticq
Jan 2019
198
Valencia
#72
Let me make something clear to you, and everyone else in this thread. I don't care who anyone is, or what they have been up to anywhere else on the internet. While here, you will all follow the rules of Historum. That means treating each other with respect, being civil and not posting insults or vulgarities. Violations of the rules will be met with suspensions. Is that clear to you all?

Furthermore, the moderators are NOT here to adjudicate on facts or the validity of your arguments. That is for you to do.

I don't much care for the conflicts between Indian castes, religions, regions, clans, tribes, or anything else. You will NOT bring these arguments to Historum. There will be no further warnings.
I am not referring to outside of Historum. He's a banned user with previous accounts on this site. You can find previous threads of his similar to this in content and language:

Story of Vishvamitra in Rigveda and Purana?

Solving the origin Mystery of Vishvamitra and Kaushika clans.

Kaushikas and Bhargavas, separate Indo-Aryan Clans from Vedics.

Literally the exact same topic pushing the same agenda with the same style from multiple banned accounts.
 
May 2019
51
Earth
#73
I am not referring to outside of Historum. He's a banned user with previous accounts on this site. You can find previous threads of his similar to this in content and language:

Story of Vishvamitra in Rigveda and Purana?

Solving the origin Mystery of Vishvamitra and Kaushika clans.

Kaushikas and Bhargavas, separate Indo-Aryan Clans from Vedics.

Literally the exact same topic pushing the same agenda with the same style from multiple banned accounts.
Challenging mods decision publicly I see..

It's a history forum of course people are gonna talk about Great historical people and wars of India.

Next thing you will say that I am rajeev as well considering he posts regularly on these kind of threads and he is the one who invited me to one of those threads yesterday.

Let's see what mods say, if I am not the same guy I request mods to take hard action against you for posting under tomarrajput, Ashoka maurya and this 3rd sock account.
 
Last edited:

Naomasa298

Forum Staff
Apr 2010
35,053
T'Republic of Yorkshire
#75
I am not referring to outside of Historum. He's a banned user with previous accounts on this site. You can find previous threads of his similar to this in content and language:

Story of Vishvamitra in Rigveda and Purana?

Solving the origin Mystery of Vishvamitra and Kaushika clans.

Kaushikas and Bhargavas, separate Indo-Aryan Clans from Vedics.

Literally the exact same topic pushing the same agenda with the same style from multiple banned accounts.
The next time you suspect a multi-account, you report it instead of making accusations in public.
 
Likes: Dewal
Oct 2015
1,133
India
#76
Dear Rajeev,

Your courtesy is worth emulating.

But the confidence with which you claimed that the RV Sukta 3.33 illustrates movement of Aryans into India is anything but astounding ignorance. Even based on that pedestrian translation you quoted, there is no such conclusion possible.

I will post the translation of the Sukta after some time.
Dear Aatreya,

Look forward to your translation and interpretation.

Regards

Rajeev
 

Aupmanyav

Ad Honorem
Jun 2014
5,655
New Delhi, India
#77
Sukta (Hymn) 3.33 is a late addition to RigVeda, when the Aryans were already settled in Sapta Sindhu. They were already indigenized. Bharatas were not in Sushoma/Suvastu/Gandhara region but close to Yamuna-Ganges region. IMHO, it refers to raids between Aryan kingdoms. It does not mention any war with indigenous people. The poet wants the floods as they enrich the fields, but prays for the floods to be mild when they come in Vipasa and Shutudri. Even today a Punjabi or Haryana farmer in that region would pray for just that and not for a deluge. I would date the hymn around 1,500-1,200 BCE, though it does refer to the old Aryan legends (Vritra killed by Indra).

"Bow lowly down; be easy to be traversed stay, Rivers, with your floods below our axles."
"So let your wave bear up the pins, and ye, O Waters, spare the thongs;"



Today a bus or car driver would say "let the flood not wet my vehicle above the wheels and spare the exhaust pipe". :D
 
Last edited:

Aatreya

Ad Honorem
Dec 2014
3,544
USA
#78
Sukta (Hymn) 3.33 is a late addition to RigVeda, when the Aryans were already settled in Sapta Sindhu. They were already indigenized. Bharatas were not in Sushoma/Suvastu/Gandhara region but close to Yamuna-Ganges region. IMHO, it refers to raids between Aryan kingdoms. It does not mention any war with indigenous people. The poet wants the floods as they enrich the fields, but prays for the floods to be mild when they come in Vipasa and Shutudri. Even today a Punjabi or Haryana farmer in that region would pray for just that and not for a deluge. I would date the hymn around 1,500-1,200 BCE, though it does refer to the old Aryan legends (Vritra killed by Indra).

"Bow lowly down; be easy to be traversed stay, Rivers, with your floods below our axles."
"So let your wave bear up the pins, and ye, O Waters, spare the thongs;"



Today a bus or car driver would say "let the flood not wet my vehicle above the wheels and spare the exhaust pipe". :D
Don't start throwing dates at the drop of your hat. It is not only unscientific, it is ridiculous.
 
Apr 2019
406
India
#80
You actually have a good eatr but it is leading you astray here. The root for Thor is proto-Germanic *thunra(z) which goes back to PIE *(s)tenh₂- . Indra is unrelated. The exact origin is contested. Traditionally we favour Indra < Indu (raindrop) which makes A LOT of sense thematically, but little linguistically. Various scholars have put forth either a Proto-Uralic borrowing (from something like Imra/Imar with a metathesis making since based on Aryan speech habits) or some unknown substrate (sometimes labelled BMAC substrate).

I really like the idea of it the name deriving from 'raindrop', but it has kinda hard to make linguistic sense.
I've heard one more explanation for the meaning of Indra. It was probably derived from root word 'Ind-' which means to 'increase' or to 'magnify'. Indra is named so to signify his strength and vivifying nature.
 
Status
Closed

Similar History Discussions