Why Wasn't India United Before?

Oct 2018
52
Bangalore,India
You are only guessing about the language bit here. Just FYI, Loulan has yielded many copies of Vedic content but none related to Avesta. That should inform us directly that Sanskrit was known much better than Iranic dialects by Tarim Basin people
I did Google it. And got exactly the same thing I was saying about Khotan. Those are related to Khotan kingdom and not the mummies. Both are a distinct people and eras.
The Rāma Story and Sanskrit in Ancient Xinjiang – Subhash Kak – Medium
Even Sogdia had Hindu elements. Sogdian is an Iranian language though and so is Saka.
Here is a sample of Khotanese Saka.
 
Jul 2017
510
Sydney
Kushan mostly comes from the word Kuchen. Kuchen is an another word for Tocharian B language. Here it is.
Kushan is not at all the central word in this enquiry, it is the tribal designation of Kanishka which is far more important

So, Kanishka's tribal designation is alternatively given as Rouzhi or Yuezhi

These Rouzhi are especially tied to the Roruka (Indus valley) to Tarim Basin movement as per Luders and Stein

Thus, even if surrounding population had a different base, the superstrate was from the subcontinent
 
Oct 2018
52
Bangalore,India
Kushan is not at all the central word in this enquiry, it is the tribal designation of Kanishka which is far more important

So, Kanishka's tribal designation is alternatively given as Rouzhi or Yuezhi

These Rouzhi are especially tied to the Roruka (Indus valley) to Tarim Basin movement as per Luders and Stein

Thus, even if surrounding population had a different base, the superstrate was from the subcontinent
Hmm.. Very less is known about the proper origins of the Kushans since they were mostly a Nomadic confederation which would contain multiple ethnicities. Example is Huns. I would say a large segment of the population rather than base. And this is limited to Khotan,a kingdom on the South Tarim Basin. The north Tarim Basin had city states called Agne,Kuche,Turfan, Kashghar which were completely Tocharian city states till the Uyghur invasion.
Also these Indo-Aryan people from the subcontinent were mostly from Kashmir mountains or Afghanistan and the Gandharvas too would be more like today's Dardic,Nuristani(non Indo-Aryan but very,very close) or such peoples.
 
Jul 2017
510
Sydney
Hmm.
Also these Indo-Aryan people from the subcontinent were mostly from Kashmir mountains or Afghanistan and the Gandharvas too would be more like today's Dardic,Nuristani(non Indo-Aryan but very,very close) or such peoples.
We can't discuss genetics on this forum but I have some interesting data points to show that Haryana tribes have far more Indo-Aryan affinity than present day Kashmiris and Dards, which is to be expected I'd say after taking into account the history we know from Rigveda and Mahabharata
 
Oct 2018
52
Bangalore,India
We can't discuss genetics on this forum but I have some interesting data points to show that Haryana tribes have far more Indo-Aryan affinity than present day Kashmiris and Dards
No. The Khotanese used Gandhara language with the base/large segment of the population and hence would be mostly Gandharvas. Gandharvas are mostly a kingdom/confederation in today's Afghanistan and interior Kashmir probably closely related to the Dardas(Dardic) and the Kambhoja (probably Nuristani or Iranian). So that's a most probable possibility.
 
Jul 2017
510
Sydney
No. The Khotanese used Gandhara language with the base/large segment of the population and hence would be mostly Gandharvas. Gandharvas are mostly a kingdom/confederation in today's Afghanistan and interior Kashmir probably closely related to the Dardas(Dardic) and the Kambhoja (probably Nuristani or Iranian). So that's a most probable possibility.
Sure, then let's consider the book 'An enquiry into the ethnography of Afghanistan'

The author Bellew mentions on numerous occasions that various Pathan designations are either related to one Indian tribe or the other

Interestingly, his thesis agrees with other historical observations such as the Hindu Shahis of Kabul trying to work up a truce or agreement with Mahmud Ghazni to ask him not to invade Thanesar in Haryana. On a more ancient scale, Kuru prince Dhritrashtra married Gandhar princess Gandhari

So, whichever way we look at it, the original Gandharan language would contain influence from Sanskrit as does OLD Persian as well

I'd say the direction would be Kuru or Rigvedic Sanskrit to Gandharan to Old Persian
 
Likes: Aatreya
Apr 2018
1,356
Mythical land.
Maratha Empire was mostly a response that occured due to an Invaders. That's what was the strongest motivation. So that would not qualify to our challenge. Kushans and Indo-Greeks were 'invaders' or immigrants who created large empires. Kushans created a large empire but they were a Nomadic empire mostly. So the administration would still be local town/village. If they did create a settled empire like Rome,India might have looked different. Indo-Greeks were invaded by Scythians and Kushans but if not they were also a good candidate. Mauryas also I think were decentralised mostly like other locally made empires.
Strongest influence of marathas was establishment of hindu pad padshahi during the expansion phase under balaji rao 1 and establishment of hindawi swarajya under shivaji both of which influenced partly by invasion.

and you forgot the greatest empire of classical india, the guptas. Also mauryans were pretty centralized even if not on the level of romans,the consistency of ashoka's edicts is quite solid evidence for that.
And vijayanagara too were centralized, so were rajput states and the gajapatis, heck as far as military goes mughals seem to be least effective with its mansabdar system.
 
May 2013
1,607
The abode of the lord of the north
Strongest influence of marathas was establishment of hindu pad padshahi during the expansion phase under balaji rao 1 and establishment of hindawi swarajya under shivaji both of which influenced partly by invasion.

and you forgot the greatest empire of classical india, the guptas. Also mauryans were pretty centralized even if not on the level of romans,the consistency of ashoka's edicts is quite solid evidence for that.
And vijayanagara too were centralized, so were rajput states and the gajapatis, heck as far as military goes mughals seem to be least effective with its mansabdar system.
Guptas had a formidable military strength too. During its peak time, imho it must've been the biggest in the world. We just need to look at the number of foes they've fought off. They etched history in conquests, fought off Sakas, Western kshatraps and Huns and heck, if their edicts are to be believed, then even Indo-sassanids.
 
Likes: Zanis