(1) The YAMNAYA people have a very strong distinct culture and way of life. Non of the Yamnaya culture or way of life exists in Indian culture, society or in the ancient hymns and texts such as Rig Vedas, Upanishads etc etc (2) In an attempt to discount Sanskrit as a mother language to European languages, something called a lost PROTO language has been MANUFACTURED/INVENTED. The thing is there is 0% EVIDENCE for a PROTO language Infact the closest thing to a PROTO language is SANSKRIT. Further, to plug the linguistic gaps in the history of European languages, Sanskrit was used to plug those gaps. (3) Prior to the spread of the Roman Empire and Christianity in Europe, there existed DRUIDS. It took 20years to be a Druid and they had vast experience and knowledge in which ever area they studied. In SANSKRIT, DRU means IMMENSE and VID means KNOWLEDGE. So a Druid was a person with immense knowledge. It takes approx 12 years to be a Brahmin Druids also had various spiritual fire rituals and practices, which Brahmins have too. (4) Ireland is one of a few places of Celtic world that was not conquered by Romans, (thus not influenced by Latin until Christianity in the 5th Century CE). The Celts were once dominant throughout Europe, but both Romans and Christianity did away with their way if life, except in Ireland. This meant that the ANCIENT CELTIC IRISH CUSTOMS & ANCIENT LANGUAGE, remain intact, or were not destroyed in Ireland. If you follow the research into ANCIENT CELTIC SOCIETY, CUSTOMS, CULTURE, PRACTICES, MYTHOLOGY, POEMS, KNOWLEDGE, TECHNOLOGY, ASTROLOGY, the actual OLD IRISH VOCABULARY & WORDS.....there are very interesting and compelling parallels between ancient Irish culture and Hinduism. **** SEE THE BELOW 2 WEBSITES FOR A LOT OF GLARING SIMILARITIES BETWEEN CELTIC CULTURE, HISTORY & LANGUAGE WITH THAT OF SANATAN DHARMA & SANSKRIT *** www.sanskritimagazine.com/indian-religions/hinduism/the-celtic-vedic-connection/?amp=1 www.hinduismtoday.com/magazine/may-1994/1994-05-the-celts/ (5) Read the below for further similarities between CELTIC CULTURE & SANATAN DHARMA .......how can European river names & Gods have similarities to Indian rivers & Gods ?? www.hinduismtoday.com/magazine/february-2000/2000-02-our-druid-cousins/ Among the ancient Celts, Danu was regarded as the "Mother Goddess." The Irish Gods and Goddesses were the Tuatha De Danaan ("Children of Danu"). Danu was the "divine waters" falling from heaven ............Many European rivers bear the name of Danu-the Rhône (ro-Dhanu, "Great Danu") and several rivers called Don. Rivers were sacred in the Celtic world, and places where votive offerings were deposited and burials often conducted. The Thames, which flows through London, still bears its Celtic name, from Tamesis, the dark river, which is the same name as Tamesa, a tributary of the Ganges Not only is the story of Danu and the Danube a parallel to that of Ganga and the Ganges but a Hindu Danu appears in the Vedic story "The Churning of the Oceans," a story with parallels in Irish and Welsh mytholgy. Danu in Sanskrit also means "divine waters" (6) Have you heard of the Historian Peter Berresford Ellis ? He is a leading expert on the CELTS & DRUIDS in Europe. He recognises and documents the associations between Druids and Brahmins. druidry.org/druid-way/other-paths/druidry-dharma (7) Look up the work of Raj Vedam . He explains mandmy areas, such as ancient Indian astrology. Vedam demonstrates the genetic evidence and analyses that so called Western Historians rely upon, is flawed. Specifically look at how genes become less concentrated and diverse, the further those genes spread. Then see which region has a higher concentration & diversity of common genes Gradually a lot more indisputable evidence is being revealed......I suggest you follow the LATEST RESEARCH
@@anika_h How can that be possible? Even if we consider Indo-European migration, the influx of Steppe people is meagre not substantial. So no en massr migration.Also the settlements in India where most are associated with multiple river system, major being the Sapta-Sindu river system. The association of Indian people with these rivers far predates any European civilization. So it is highky unlikely that Europeans names were given to Indian rivers.
@@anika_h Which paper states that migration was large scale? All Papers related to Aryan migration talk about a small scale influx of steppe pastorialists. Can you cite your reference paper? Also you forgot the fact that actual full scale invasions happened in India History way after the supposed Migration of Aryans. The invasion of Huns, Scythians etc. The latter seems to be a more befitting reason for such large Steppe ancestry in Indians because most of these invasion were indeed from people of central asian descendant.Also another issue with AMT is the large mutation of Of R1a1 in Indians which is thrice /quadruple of that seen in europeans. How do you reconcile with this? Because greater mutation correlates to origin of gene in that geography
@@buddha9715 where you found r1a1 in europe 😂😂😂😂 r1a1 mostly found in Turkmenistan Uzbekistan and kazakistan which dna study prove that step people are Aryan and how
The thing I understood from this is that every one want a piece of Indian history and culture but they don’t want to admit that it came from india. The only question I ask this lady or the so called linguist , if everything was brought from outside, find me another culture that follows Vedic rituals from outside Indian subcontinent.
Thanks for not letting me ask the question. As fantastic as the stories of male "pre Sanskrit" speaking men coming in seems. They are far from what the latest evidence has to tell. Narasimhan et al 2019, though again an AMT paper, show two major discoveries. 1. 90+ ancient DNA samples from South Asia, dated 1200-800 BC, shows scarcity of male steppe ancestry. 2. ~70 ancient DNA samples from bronze age BMAC main population lacks steppe ancestry. So far the genetic findings do not have much to show for in terms of AMT hypothesis. These came as big shockers, the reason for first is obvious, but the BMAC was hypothesized as Indo-Iranian site which was supposed to Aryanised before the IIr split three way into Syria, Iran and India. Infact the paper finds that Harappans were migrating out of India, into Iran and Central Asia. Bronze age main BMAC population, while lacking steppe DNA ancestry, had deeply rooted Indian ancestry in them. On the Iranian site of Shahir-e-Sokhta, we have ~50% of the DNA samples actually Harappans, dated 3200-2000 BC, over a period of 1200 years. and the local Shahir-e-Sokhta people also derive 20% of their ancestry from the Harappans. I don't think I need to mention it, but the archaeologists, including western, knows and have published that there absolutely NO evidence of any massive migration from steppe region into India in 2nd millennium BCE. I can keep going but I think I have made my point clear.
Rahul, glad to know you were engaged with this discussion. Your question was noted, and the moderator invited you to join the panel, but you declined. If you are uncomfortable joining in video, you are welcome to join as audio-only. It would have been interesting to get your counterpoints in the discussion. We have in fact invited Vagheesh Narasimhan to shed light on the findings from genetic studies in this area in recent years. We hope to have your participation in that session and others. Critical questioning and counter arguments enrich the conversation for all involved. Thank you.
@@argumentativeindians I did not get any invitation from your moderator to be honest. I had also added my question in the comment section which could have also been picked up. However romatic that she tried to create those stories, they were far from the truth and counter evidence.
@@rahulchawla9040 You would have a little notification pop-up with the invite to join. Perhaps you just closed the pop-up and hence the “declined” message on our end. There is no reason to not invite you as counter questions make these sessions interesting, so are always welcome. On a separate note, Ms Mohan has addressed your question in extensive detail in her book Kings,Wanderers, Merchants… essentially it was on the female side no steppe DNA was found, but on the male side there was a significant proportion. On the basis of this she argues that only males migrated in multiple waves. She doesn’t think there was an invasion, as these males themselves belonged to different tribes, but she believes the interactions with native men very quickly became hostile (in contest for resources and women). As a linguist she finds evidence for this in the way the languages of South Asia have evolved. She talked about the mother’s side and father’s side in a language. She differs from many other prominent academics on their view that after arrival of Steppe people the Dravidian people of Harappa were pushed down towards South India. Her view is that while a small proportion may have migrated, the vast majority continued to live alongside the new entrants. It was much later that the various Steppe tribes got united, and social hierarchies became well defined where the previous natives were demoted to a lower social rank.
@@argumentativeindians Thanks for long response. Let me quote the Narasimhan et al paper here. Supplementary report page 306, "the admixture into the SPGT was definitively female-biased." the Steppe Cline is not included within the Modern Indian Cline. Instead, the Modern Indian Cline is a mixture between a point on the Indus Periphery Cline (the ASI) and a ghost population that once existed on the Steppe Cline, which we haven’t directly sampled but which we hypothesize existed in the Late Bronze Age and Iron Age in northwestern South Asia (but not in the Swat Valley which is the only place that we have extensively sampled)."
@@argumentativeindians I typed a long response but the comment didn't go through for some reason. Anyways, there is no point in me typing all that again in this meaningless conversation. All I want to say is, Romanticising fairly tales and Science are too very different fields. Science works with evidence. Linguistics, even James Mallory himself say that Linguists have failed to explained the case of language replacement in South Asia, Iran etc. we all know that modern data shows failure of Steppe theory among Tocharian speakers, Indians, Iranians, ancient Greeks, and Anatolians. David Reich himself now vouches for Iranian origin of PIE. Genetics (90 south asian ancient DNA samples) and Archaeology have all yielded result against any arrival of foreign people into bronze age India. On the other side, the archaeology of IVC including Saraswati river, all ties well with the Rigveda. I say do Science not fairy tales. Thanks Good bye.
Rakhigiri specimen shed some light on out of india theory and also sinauli chariot tell us the same story . Most probably it was an out of india theory . India brought civilization to the west .. now they are teaching us newsest technologies for better civilizations.
1:03:52 Thank you so much professor, for addressing my quarry.. ❤️ 1:06:00 😊😊 Mam, you may like this too, Amartya Sen while talking about Bengali calendar th-cam.com/video/6812VD-jdh8/w-d-xo.html 1:14:00
I am computer scientist but also a genetics hobbyist. There seems to be a bit of cherry picking here by Dr Mohan. She claims nonrecombinant portion of y-chromosome was not considered before mitochondrial DNA. Fact is that both techniques are fairly old and known in genetics. Naturally, much before mt-dna study of 2008, y-chromosome study on Aryan invasion question was made in 2001. Dr Mohan makes the same elementary mistake which Tony Joseph made in his article in the Hindu. It’s hard to dismiss this as mere coincidence. Another coincidence is that both claim r1a haplogroup coming into India is a settled question; unbiased and real scientific study shows otherwise!
Lol unbiased and real scientifc studies ?? which are those studies can you point them out. The last i checked majority consensus is the opposite of what you are suggesting only few papers in not so reputable journals and sometimes with limited number of samples spew out of indian theory
So indo aryans even changed the name of major rivers in India and locals peoples of India accepted it 😑😑 But they failed to replace the names of major European rivers and major European rivers has many names in different languages. In one research paper from European genetic shows that no gene flow from eastern Europe to west asia and south asia from mid holocene era. So Indian and European didn't get their R1a1a from same ancestry.
@@alani3992 You forgot about the countless Invasions which occurred much after such as the Huns, Scythians, Kushans etc. Most of them were from central Asia. So there is a possibility that steppe ancestry came through them.
I am a South Indian. Don't believe this .The conclusion is false/premature. According to her , after entering India , dental became dhantha(teeth). It is clear both Latin and English are IE. Notice English has 'th' in 'teeth' while Latin -dent has no h.one IE language has th while other loses h . This pattern of losing h and becoming back of tongue is common in European locality. Wherever there is h(or stress) you can observe this. Sthana -> Stan , Sthura - Strong , dhana-> donate , bandh -> bind. Kalkatha - th becomes t and pronounced as Calcutta .this is a pattern.
Come on please. This is the very epitome of the brown sahib still lingering in academia. Both the theories set-up in the premise has been thoroughly shown to be lacking rigour. Dr Shinde (on the genetics) and Shrikant Talegeri on Linguistics have done phenomenal work! The migration was Out of Bharat after the Battle of the Ten Kings not into. And no Arya is not an ethnic group/people! The migration has a clear direction in they way the scripts are written right to left denotes the westwards migration. A host of multi disciplinary experts Dr Raj Vedam, Nilesh Oak etc have also shown the same!
Dr mohan is very wrong in her assessment of the ydna data. The greatest variety and oldest haplogroup P, Q, and R examples are from the indian subcontinent according to FTDNA. They are by far the largest database of Ydna data and their research is years ahead of anything she has read
Fact once you define the language with etymology. THe symbols also show us Perhaps could be known as First Nations? In Astrology, the Age of Aries, the Ram is dubbed the Aryan age, ruled by Aryans The rulers have changed our real history the word Aryan WAS CHANGED TO = Proto-Indo-European but it took place before Europe was a state Iran means Land of Aryans Aryan was referring to the nobility and their languages
Hahahahaha. The Arya migrated as whole communities in horse driven chariots, bull driven wagons etc. Even females came, even children came. Watch bharat ek khoj serial of rhe 80s. This theory of invading men came and married(or r*ped) the native women totally wrong. Rig veda is predominantly an Arya philosophy. In a language that is ancestral to Sanskrit. If there had been simple marriage between Arya men and non Arya women, children would have spoken "mother" tounge that was proto tamizh? Why will they speak father tounge of Indo Iranian language or vedic language and just bring in the retroflex consonants into the vedic language? Nonsensical to say the least.
Were Mughals and British of Indian origin? This may be the case as per OIT (Out of India Theory). This is the ancient migration path of Vedic Hindus: Ahimsak civilized Vedic Hindu from India --> Central Asia (yamnaya, sintashta, Andronovo who were nomadic and violent) + Afghanistan + Iran --> Europe + England. This entire Vedic land was "Bharata". Then logic says these very same people came back and ruled India as Mughals and English! So Indians came back to rule themselves?🤔 Prithvi gol hai bhai, sab moh maya hai!
??? Invaders may be by groups of ONLY men, i.e., armies / soldiers. like the Greek and Turkic invaders. Migration would be by a larger population, so there would be women in a group of migrants. So the concept of migration of ONLY MEN sounds ridiculous. No view on how many migrated in, no mention of population of India, and the percentage of migrants to indigenous population. Population of 'Sindhu Saraswathi Sabhyatha' that spread over 1 million sq kms, is estimated to be upto 50 Lakhs. How many migrants does it take to dilute this population. No proof of migration of Aryans into India is presented, its just stated as if it is a fact. She said "My instinct tells me that the direction is into India and not outward" , there is no scope for instinct in science. Which words of Vedic language are Sanskrit and which are Harappan? No view on whether Vedas were composed outside India or in India.
Modern Indians have external DNA, not found in Harappans. & that external DNA is mostly male. Indus population had declined big time by then, the Aryans took over the remaining women.
@@alani3992 Harappan DNA ? Only one skeleton in Rakhigarhi yielded DNA. DNA could not be recovered from any of the other skeletons found, perhaps due to climate conditions, hot and humid. Modern Indian DNA will have external DNA, there have been many inward migrations throughout history. Modern European DNA too will have Indian DNA, since there were many migrations from India to Europe. "Indus population had declined big time by then, the Aryans took over the remaining women." Why did Indus / Saraswathi population decline? Was it due to drought? Why were there 'remaining women', did only male population decline. If existing population was declining, how could new immigrants prosper in the same region and develop Sanskrit and compose the Vedas. The similarity between the Vedas and the Saraswathi Sabhyatha is very clear, same logical and systematic way of doing things is evident. Vedic Sanskrit is very scientific, logical, rule based, etc. All the material culture found in the Saraswathi Sabhyatha spread over 1 million sq kms for about 1,000 years, such as the Weights and Measures, Bricks, Roads, Drainage, etc., indicate the same logical and systematic way of doing things. The Saraswathi Sabhyatha was the most prosperous civilization of the Bronze Age, larger in area and population than ALL other contemporary Bronze Age civilizations, Egyptian, Mesopotamian and Chinese put together. Saraswathi Sabhyatha perhaps accounted for over 50% of Global GDP. There is no such thing as 'Aryan'. No group of people any where in the world, at any point in time, before 19th Century CE, called themselves Aryans. This word was first coined by a French fiction writer, Gobineau. It was picked up by Max Muller and then by Germans. Rig Veda refers to the composers as Puru and Bharata. Names of all other groups in neighboring areas are given.
@@chandra_has People from India could have migrated west and carried Sanskrit with them, to Iran and Europe. Indian DNA is found in Europe, Ra1a is more in India than in Europe, so it may have gone from India to Europe.
@@chandra_has J Sai Deepak Destroying the Myth of Aryan Invasion theory | J Sai Deepak th-cam.com/video/evxU1BxNxr0/w-d-xo.html David Fraley The Myth of Aryan Invasion in India - Dr. David Frawley - India Inspires Talks th-cam.com/video/qych3WYNViA/w-d-xo.html Michael Danino Lecture-02-The Aryan Controversy- IIT Kanpur th-cam.com/video/FL6nxDn3cmE/w-d-xo.html th-cam.com/video/UgLXAQWf_EE/w-d-xo.html I Used To BELIEVE In The Aryan Invasion Myth | Abhijit Chavda indianinterest.com/history/the-aryan-invasion-myth-how-21st-century-science-debunks-19th-century-indology/ THE INDIAN INTEREST Understanding India The Aryan Invasion Myth: How 21st Century Science Debunks 19th Century Indology MAY 5, 2017 BY ABHIJIT CHAVDA HTTPS://WWW.TH-cam.COM/WATCH?V=SHNKU3K86MU&T=10S Dr. Niraj Rai: India's Genetic History, Aryan-Dravidian Myth Debunked | Abhijit Chavda Podcast 3 www.indiafacts.org.in/the-death-of-proto-indo-european-pie/ The Death of Proto-Indo-European - Indiafacts Subhash Kak July 16, 2018
@@chandra_has I omitted this video by oversight. संवाद # 20: Archaeologist & Prof. Vasant Shinde on how Rakhigarhi disproves Aryan Invasion theory th-cam.com/video/M3pvoYTHwt4/w-d-xo.html
One question that should be immediately asked is what were local men doing while these “foreign “ men came in and started marrying their local ladies and producing offsprings. What even made them local women go weak in the knees for the white dudes? Did they hypnotise the local men to allow them to stay and breed amongst the Also, With foreign people foreign cultural markers are to be expected besides just language. Extensive harappan excavations reveal none. I can go deeper but this is just the surface level questioning I can come up with just in a matter of minutes. The issue is way way more complex and mature than that even for a 1hr podcast. This is such an a oversimplified anthropologically impossible, laughable construct. Hope her book is not this amateurish.
@@alani3992 seriously. Sorry for a long reply but this deserves it. For one, Peggy was being dishonest and generalist of the genetic papers she was trying to quote. Nothing remotely conclusive has come out of David Reich, Narsimhan and such papers yet. Then, there's no consensus on what size of groups allegedly came in for effectiveness of these political advantages you speak of. They were supposed to be Hunter-Gatherer+pastoralist bands who allegedly 'civilized' the people of a full fledged civilization lol. Second, Harappa was already on the decline true, but from around 1900 BCE. Their people moved to the Ganga basin and down South, over centuries, some staying behind. So these "superior men" allegedly came in and settled in Harappan Ruins, ghost towns and what not, while marrying with leftover women? I mean Harappan men (conveniently) left behind generations of women so that these Aryan men would come and impregnate them in the future? Moreover, there's ZERO trace of Material culture from their lands. No burial practices/weapons/pottery systems resembling the Kurgans or the Yamnayas. Or anything from CA Steppe. No sudden increase in horse remains neither. Now don't give me that "Absense of evidence is not evidence of absence" argument. All kinds of material traces have been found from different millennia across Harappan sites, especially sanauli and NW frontiers. NOTHING referring to the 'Aryans'. Wonder why. These linguists and geneticists need to manage their Expectations😂from Harappans(none but Vedic People) and stop producing nonsense.
@@SK_ES519 A rapid decline in Harappan population, or a move to semi-nomadic, which could later evolve into the gypsy tradition of NW India. The outsiders were probably already in contact with IVC as traders/merchants with the trade between IVC & BMAC well established. IVC decline leading to the vacuum for further migrants/men to step in. Combining their patriarchal culture with the indigenous culture (shaman, yogic, tantric) to form Vedic culture.
@@alani3992 these migrants from where? Again we have absolutely nothing from CA steppe or Eastern Europe, from where R1a1 markers are present in a section of Indian male population. Moreover, while the Rigvedic people seemed to worship and hold deep reverence for the land and ecology they were in, no mentions of any foreign lands. You just can’t hurry up such a meticulous literary and theological cultural production, where wietzel says the entire corpus of Rigveda was composed within 5-6gen. Vedic people were very strong adherents to their material and non material cultures(at least as asserted by that AIM camp). Their burial and crematorial practices match nothing of European regions but on the other hand show some affinity with IVC remains. To even begin with, nothing yamnaya or Sintashta matches anything of the Vedic culture as expected. Too much fixation on horses and possible pastoralist nature of the Vedic tribes, but neglect yogic, fire worshipping, and mythological similarities that IVC holds with Vedic literature.
Neither linguists alone or genetics alone can form the basis of validations migration of people. All branches of sciences and technical explorations are the main instruments and linguistic and genetics are only assistive. Scholars from linguistics are engaged in pseudo-scolarship spinning their own stories that suit their own fantasies. R1a1a was of two origins in India, one was autochtonous and even Chenchu tribals and Manipuris have it and the second was from Greeks, Kushans, Huns and Indians from Afghanistan Pakistan area and therefore it is predominant geographically in the north west non-brahmins. The Chaturvedi have only 11% contribution of R1a1. Think honestly Peggy, have you looked at the evidenc without bringing in emotion or fantasy.
seems like you have seen the videos of SHRIKANT TALAGERI JI AND NEERJ RAI JI great hw also mention some of the SO CALLED dravidian SCHEDULED tribes having high % dna OF foreign mixing THE ARYAN INVASION BECAME ARYAN MIGRARION VERY SOON IT WOULD BE ARYAN TOURISM THEORY☺️☺️
According to latest archeological findings Buddha was born in 1944 BC not 550 BC which British historians had set. 3 bunch of copper plates are found one copper plate indicates that saka epoch was established in 588 BC and other two clearly indicates that there were two Different eras one Saka era and on Sakanta era (established 78BC). This establishes the year of Buddha's birth in 1944 BCE. Even if I become too conservative to ignore all other evidences of Puranas and Astronomical evidences, geographical evidences and by looking at the progresses which were being made till Buddha, aryan migration have to happen around 1944 + 2500 = 4444 BC ( more than 1100 years before Yamnaya invasion in Europe) .
@@argumentativeindians You can watch it here, a presentation by a researcher Vedveer Arya who is a sanskrit scholar and historian. th-cam.com/video/9vw065jKZ-s/w-d-xo.html
The Aryans added their male (religious) practices, to the indigenous feminine (spiritual ) practices : "What most anthropologists are clear on is that the arrival of the male-dominated Aryan Vedics within the Indus Valley occurred when Tantra was already live and kicking, and marked the process of synthesis, whereby Tantra influenced those Vedas originating in India. The orthodox Vedics assimilated those practices that were conducive to their patriarchal traditions, and diluted, discarded, even oppressed more esoteric techniques including emphasis on the feminine."
The north Siberian lived Aryans slowly learnt the movement traders in the deep south. They came to know the fertile region Sindhus. Also about the highly developed and sophisticated living people. The cows , milk and milky products were their staple food. The enormously growing only vegetation was the reeds. They used fireside to warm from severe cold. Now they slowly moved and entered Sindus region. They were wonder struck with awe when saw the highly cultured urban Sindus people. Quite naturally the Aryan tribes were thugs grabbing everything, selfish,greedy and with inhumane in everything. Quite naturally the highly cultured Sindhus people were disturbed The peace loving people did not attack and drive them out. But decided to change their venue. They moved out towards their south homeland. Of course the movement caused many losses and troubles. On the way some people settled down in some preferred places. Others reached Poompuhar then prosperous port city
@@Joseph-yu4lx if sindhu people were not aryans then why sindhu civilization excavations found that fire pit to do homa and yajna? And the some symbol found in Ukraine was found in sindhu civilization? Yoga and spirituality was founded in this civilization. Arya means well manner, that savages like you are trying to interpret. Infact aryas are who respect elders, nice to women and chidren. But your version of arya are savages.
Some people say "Aryan and Dravidian race is a complete hoax", but the whole world knows that India have two distinct major linguistic group namely Indo-Aryan [Indo-European] and Dravidian Language group, namely Sanskrit and Tamil. Even though the word Dravidian coined only in later days, since it is used to represent a Unique Dravidian linguistic group. We say it as Aryan and Dravidian races namely Aryans and Ancient Tamils. NO ONE CAN DENY this fact, so "Aryan and Dravidian race is NOT a hoax" Iranians are the original Aryans who invaded India from the west, this what we call it as ARYAN INVASION. The country Name Iran itself means "Land of the Aryans" and Iranshahr. The very close relation between Iranian and Indo-Aryan groups has never been doubted. They share linguistic features to such a degree that Indo-Iranian is generally described as a distinct subgroup of Indo-European. The term Arya has been used by the Iranian people, as well as by the rulers and emperors of Iran, from the time of the Avesta. The well-attested Indo-Iranian languages are Vedic Sanskrit, Avestan and Old Persian. Sanskrit and Avestan are very closely related languages with exact grammatical principles and numerous cognates [Blood Relative]. You can find words which are exactly identical, like Sanskrit/Avestan naman (name), ushtra (camel) etc. Language, literature, epics & poems evolves every century. In Vedic/Hindu literature, Asuras (Ahuras) are bad guys while Devas are heroes. In Zoroastrian/Persian literature, Ahuras (Asuras) are heroes while Daevas are the villains. When the Vedic Aryans moved further, they arrived in the Indian subcontinent they were faced by the native Dravidians, Dravidians that got conquered were placed as low caste in Vedic Aryan society. The Vedic Aryans continued to call the enemy as “Asuras", but the description of the Asuras changed to Dravidians (i e. present day south-Indians) with dark skin, large facial hair etc. This itself is a proof that Rigveda evolved in Persia i.e. present day Iran and moved to Indian sub-continent. Initially Asuras (Ahuras) were referring to Zoroastrian/Persian and in later days Asuras were used to refer Dravidians. We have all the proofs for Aryan invasion in Rig Veda itself. Dasyus were the people who lived in India when the Aryans arrived here. They were having a dark-skin and flat noses. Battles depicted in the R̥gveda are directly referring to Aryans migrating into India which is native land of dark skinned people Dravidians. Rig Veda - Dasa: 54 hymns and 63 verses and Dasyus: 65 hymns, 80 verses. The accounts of conflict between the Aryans and the Dasas and Dasyus are acknowledged in Rig Veda. Rig Veda describes that Dasas and Dasyus were people who do not perform sacrifices. Aryans had to fight with these people for land. The Aryans defeated them and did not treat them well. The Aryan chief who overpowered Dasyus were called dasyuhatya (slaughter of the dasyus) this is repeatedly mentioned in the Rig Veda.
@@mohansatpute5948 Exactly opposite means what ..... In India they INVENTED Horse [Because Horses are NOT native to India] and then Indo-Aryans migrated to all across the world right. LOL .... Grow up man Horses are NOT native to India, and Aryan's Vedas are full of Horses, this itself is a proof that Indo-Aryans came outside of India which NO-ONE can deny
Aryan and Dravidian race theory is 100% true. Only thing is, its NOT Aryan Invasion rather it is just an Aryan migration. Aryan's are called as Devas Dravidian's are called Asuras Rig Veda has several references to blonde haired Indra destroying Dark skinned Asuras [Dravidian's]. If you read most of the Sanskrit puranas you can notice that its all about Fight between Aryans and Dravidians [Devas and Asuras] Aryan Gods - Lord Indra, Lord Varuna, Lord Vayu, Lord Rudra, Lord Brahma & Lord Ram Dravidian Gods - Shiva, Visnu, Krishna & Karthikeya In Rig Veda there is NO Mention about Lord Shiva. In Vedas they only worship Lord Indra, Lord Varuna, Lord Rudra & Lord Vayu. In Rig Veda they mention about Lord Rudra but he is NOT Lord Shiva. Fact of the matter is Shiv is a NON Aryan God, he was worshipped by the ancient Indians before the advent of the Aryans. Shiva is not a Vedic God. In Indus Valley Civilization - IVC archeologists found terracotta Pashupathi he is considered as Shiva this scientifically predates Sanskrit Vedas. Also Tamil literature says the First Tamil sangam was established by Lord Shiva. We have proofs that Ancient Indians worshipped Shiva before the arrival of Aryans. Vedas do not mention the Holy Trinity of Hinduism - Brahma, Vishnu and Shiva. Only the Puranas and other scriptures of later dates mention them. The word SHIVA does indeed appear many time in the VEDA but mostly as an adjective for Rudra. It is important NOT to confuse the word shiva (adjective) with Lord Shiva (proper noun) A god / deity by name Rudra appears in the Veda. The word Shiva/ shivam appears 13 times and is used as an adjective for Agni/ cattle/ dove/ wood-juice etc, it is NOT about Lord Shiva. It is a very common and well known fact that across the globe White people feel that they are superior and enslave black people. That is the case with Africa and America. Even in India even though we Indians had very old civilization then the British. The British people who came here for TRADE enslaved Indians. Same thing happened in Ancient India. Even though Dravidians had a OLDER Civilization, Aryans made them as Sudhras claiming white people are superior and black people are inferior. Aryan by Birth - Ram, Lakshman Dravidian by Birth - Ravan, Shiva, Visnu, Krishna & Karthikeya Aryan Language - Sanskrit Dravidian Language - Tamil Google - How a tiny skull bone challenges the idea of a Vedic Indus Valley DNA obtained from an Indus Valley site in Rakhigarhi LACKED the steppeland genes that are strongly associated with high-caste North Indian populations today Google - 4500 year old DNA from Rakhigarhi reveals evidence that will unsettle Hindutva nationalists Question - Were the people of the Harappan civilisation the original source of the Sanskritic language and culture of Vedic Hinduism? Answer - NO Question - Do their genes survive as a significant component in India's current population? Answer - Most definitely. Question - Were they closer to popular perceptions of 'Aryans' or of 'Dravidians'? Answer - Dravidians. This shows prior to Aryan Migrations its Dravidians who lived in Indian sub-continant. So Proto Tamil [Proto Dravidian] is more then 4,500 old. Both in Indus valley and in Keezhadi they did NOT found any Sanskrit inscriptions Aryan by Birth - Brahmin, Kshatriyas & Vaisyas Dravidian by Birth - Sudras & Paraiahs (Dalits) These people are basically Tamils - please note Tamils lived through out Indian Sub-continent in ancient days Etymology for the name Krishna [ கருதினன் -> கிருத்தினன் -> கிருஷ்ணா ] Karuthinan → Kirutinan → Krishna . Karuthinan means man of philosophy its a Title given to Krishna We all know that Krishna is Dark in Complexion and he is a Cow herder he is a Tamil. Krishna was born into the Yadava clan. He was the son of Vasudeva and Devaki. Every one knows who are Yadavas basically, they are cow herders - Sudras. Krishna was dark black in complexion. All dark black complexion people living across Indian subcontinent are basically Dravidian's [Sudra] only irrespective of their caste it is applicable to North Indians also. Language naturally evolves over 1000s of years it can NOT be invented by one single guy Agathiyar, Tamil language is NOT invented by Agathiyar as told by PERVERTED Sanskrit Myth, one has to Talk with scientific facts should NOT vomit PERVERTED Sanskrit Myths. Just like Tholkappiyar, Agathiyar also wrote grammar for Tamil in ancient times thats it. Vedic Sanskrit met its natural death. Modern Sanskrit was formed as a semi artificial literary dialect only to write and chant. It was never spoken by the common people. If it was a spoken language it would have definitely continued till date. Kindly think for a while how could a totally unspoken language [Sanskrit] can break in to several languages IMPOSSIBLE. You better ask your conscience to this question. If Sanskrit is the oldest language of India / World, then why can’t we find any manuscripts, inscriptions or any written thing in Sanskrit that goes backs to first century BCE ? Rig Veda has many many references to Saraswati River, but there is NO SUCH River in India. Prof Michael Witzel Professor of Sanskrit, Harvard University USA says the following Saraswati river mentioned in the Rig Vedic texts, is a stream still flowing in Afghanistan carrying the Romanised Persian name "Horaxwati" here Sa sound deforms to Ha. So, this proves that Sanskrit language originated OUTSIDE of India. Tamil is older then Sanskrit. Its actually Tamil root words which are there in Sanskrit, NOT the other way around. Recent [year 2020] excavation in Keezadi have written Tamil inscription which is older than 2,500 years. But on the other hand Sanskrit did not even had a script to write until 4 CE note it is CE not BCE, it adopted devanagari script in 4 CE and started writing puranas like Ramayana ... etc. Prior to this Sanskrit Vedas were transferred to next generation only orally, they said it is very sacred and only Brahmins have to recite it Google - Mayiladumparai Excavation in Tamil Nadu - Tamils knew use of iron 4,000 years ago, archaeological findings show Google - Porunai civilisation is 3,200 years old Tamils do not have Vedic culture roots, their roots are different. Vedic culture is a third rated culture. Sanskrit is full of third rated SEXUALLY PERVERTED mythological stories for Lord Shiva, Indra, Ayyappa and for lots of Rishis. You can not find one such sexually perverted literature in Tamil. Sanskrit is full of Racial Abuse and Racial discrimination based on birth like Manusimriti. You wont find any such discrimination in Tamil literature Thiruvalluvar in Thiru Kural says all Living Things are equal [Not just humans] (பிறப்பொக்கும் எல்லா உயிர்க்கும் சிறப்பொவ்வா செய்தொழில் வேற்றுமை யான் - திருக்குறள் 972). But in Sanskrit Manusmriti, manu discriminate people based on birth called Varna, Manusimriti is full of Racial Abuse and Racial discrimination based on birth. If you are a non Brahmin then read manusmriti once, you will start hating Sanskrit Hinduism, try once reading it. Tamils have the culture of worshiping there fore fathers that is how they are worshiping Siva, Thiru Maal [Vishnu] & Murugan [Subramanian]. Aryan Brahmins stolen Tamil's gods and and inserted FULLY SEXUALLY PERVERTED STORIES in later days for our gods like Vishnu Purana, Shiva Purana, Skanda Purana ... etc Now some idiots are even saying Lord Shiva don't understand Tamil and so we have to worship him only in Sanskrit. Lord Siva himself is a Tamil Tamil too have Sanskrit words its due to Sanskrit became sole authority for Hinduism and for Tamil Gods also. By stealing Tamils gods Sanskrit started influencing Tamil by way Varnasrama by saying Brahmins are great and they are born from Brahmas head. You have to respect Brahmin and you have to allow them to worship your gods in their language Sanskrit. Google - Tamil and Australian aboriginal languages மார் சுபிகள் Marsupial is a A word found in Australian Aboriginals language for Kangaroo kids. Marsupial in Tamil means Breast Suckers, Small Kangaroo kids will grow inside Mother Kangaroos waist bag by sucking milk from its mothers breast. English language derived this word from Australian Aborginals language, This word is more than 10,000 years old it's a pure Tamil word. Archaeological experts all over the world says that Indus valley civilization is a Dravidian civilization, but here in India Sanghis says its a vedic civilization but they do NOT Have any proof for their claim. If it is Vedic civilization then why they could NOT find any Hindu God Idols. Why they could NOT find any Sanskrit manuscripts, inscriptions or any written thing in Sanskrit ? Google - Ancient Stone Tools Found in Tamil Nadu Stone tools from Attirampakkam, a village located about 65 km west-northwest of Chennai, have shown how the Indian Palaeolithic emerged from the preceding Acheulean culture around 3,85,000 years ago. This proves that people lived in TAMIL NADU 3,85,000 years ago.
Aryan by Birth - Brahmin, Kshatriyas & Vaisyas Dravidian by Birth - Sudras & Paraiahs (Dalits) Truth is ALL upper caste North Indians are ALL ARYANS, and all lower caste Sudras & Paraiahs (Dalits) are all Dravidians. People living in Indian Sub continent who are ALL fair in complexion have mostly Steppeland genes in their DNA these people are basically Aryan. People living in Indian Sub continent who are Dark in complexion have mostly South Asian Hunter Gatherer genes in their DNA these people are Dravidian [Tamils] basically. Tamils means NOT the current day Tamil Nadu state people alone, they represent all Sudras & Praiahas [Dalit] lived across Indian sub - continent. Even today, you can see dark skinned and pale dark skinned people living in North, South, East & West of India, they were all Tamils only in ancient India. The ancient text Manusimriti designate the Shudra as Peasants and Artisans i.e. Farmers and All Craftsman, Shudra is NOT to mean slaves. Read the following facts about DNA Studies. Why R1A1 DNA originates in EUROPE, but not in india. why it is it not found or too less in percentage among South Indian people ? Why M haplogroups DNA is not found in Upper caste Aryans or North indians ? If found why so less ? If you have read Vedas there are lots of mention about a food made of Horse meat, then why HORSES are not native to INDIA ? Why copper hoard culture found only with Aryans, but not with Dravidians ? Why antenna swords found in Sinauli - India which belongs to BMAC - Bactria-Margiana Archaeological Complex ? Haplo M is found among 60% of modern day indians. It is in every person from south. But here’s the main catch ! It’s only found in depressed classes of northern and tribal peoples of northen india. But, almost to zero to 1-4% among Higher caste Aryans or North indians. Just like R1A1 not found in south in the same way south’s M groups are not found among R1A1 peoples of north. So, it is proved beyond doubt that "ALL upper caste North Indians are ALL ARYANS, and all lower caste Sudras & Paraiahs (Dalits) are all Dravidians"
You say aryan are fair in complexion then how was lord 'krishna' black and was 'lord rama' light brown in colour. The words Aryan and Darvidians don't represent any particular race. Literally Aryan means excellent and nobel person and word dravida means peninsula .The people living in the Peninsula are called Dravidians in context of geography. Gene study shows North indian people gene and South Indian people gene have not much difference. According to your 'AIT hypothesis' North indians,upper cast people must have more genetically close to Iranian people then South Indian people,dalit but in reality it is not truth. New 'rakhigadi' gene study shows that all Indian people gene and indus vally civilization people gene have significant similarity and they are ancestors of all Indian people. How it possible when you say North Indians, upper cast are invaders(invaders means North indians must haven't genetic similarity to harappan people). You are committing a crime by spreading fake conspiracy theory. Please face the truth.
@@bhanwarlal6090 Some people say "Aryan and Dravidian race is a complete hoax", but the whole world knows that India have two distinct major linguistic group namely Indo-Aryan [Indo-European] and Dravidian Language group, namely Sanskrit and Tamil. Even though the word Dravidian coined only in later days, since it is used to represent a Unique Dravidian linguistic group. We say it as Aryan and Dravidian races namely Aryans and Ancient Tamils. NO ONE CAN DENY this fact, so "Aryan and Dravidian race is NOT a hoax" Iranians are the original Aryans who invaded India from the west, this what we call it as ARYAN INVASION. The country Name Iran itself means "Land of the Aryans" and Iranshahr. The very close relation between Iranian and Indo-Aryan groups has never been doubted. They share linguistic features to such a degree that Indo-Iranian is generally described as a distinct subgroup of Indo-European. The term Arya has been used by the Iranian people, as well as by the rulers and emperors of Iran, from the time of the Avesta. The well-attested Indo-Iranian languages are Vedic Sanskrit, Avestan and Old Persian. Sanskrit and Avestan are very closely related languages with exact grammatical principles and numerous cognates [Blood Relative]. You can find words which are exactly identical, like Sanskrit/Avestan naman (name), ushtra (camel) etc. Language, literature, epics & poems evolves every century. In Vedic/Hindu literature, Asuras (Ahuras) are bad guys while Devas are heroes. In Zoroastrian/Persian literature, Ahuras (Asuras) are heroes while Daevas are the villains. When the Vedic Aryans moved further, they arrived in the Indian subcontinent they were faced by the native Dravidians, Dravidians that got conquered were placed as low caste in Vedic Aryan society. The Vedic Aryans continued to call the enemy as “Asuras", but the description of the Asuras changed to Dravidians (i e. present day south-Indians) with dark skin, large facial hair etc. This itself is a proof that Rigveda evolved in Persia i.e. present day Iran and moved to Indian sub-continent. Initially Asuras (Ahuras) were referring to Zoroastrian/Persian and in later days Asuras were used to refer Dravidians. We have all the proofs for Aryan invasion in Rig Veda itself. Dasyus were the people who lived in India when the Aryans arrived here. They were having a dark-skin and flat noses. Battles depicted in the R̥gveda are directly referring to Aryans migrating into India which is native land of dark skinned people Dravidians. Rig Veda - Dasa: 54 hymns and 63 verses and Dasyus: 65 hymns, 80 verses. The accounts of conflict between the Aryans and the Dasas and Dasyus are acknowledged in Rig Veda. Rig Veda describes that Dasas and Dasyus were people who do not perform sacrifices. Aryans had to fight with these people for land. The Aryans defeated them and did not treat them well. The Aryan chief who overpowered Dasyus were called dasyuhatya (slaughter of the dasyus) this is repeatedly mentioned in the Rig Veda.
(1) The YAMNAYA people have a very strong distinct culture and way of life. Non of the Yamnaya culture or way of life exists in Indian culture, society or in the ancient hymns and texts such as Rig Vedas, Upanishads etc etc
(2) In an attempt to discount Sanskrit as a mother language to European languages, something called a lost PROTO language has been MANUFACTURED/INVENTED. The thing is there is 0% EVIDENCE for a PROTO language
Infact the closest thing to a PROTO language is SANSKRIT. Further, to plug the linguistic gaps in the history of European languages, Sanskrit was used to plug those gaps.
(3) Prior to the spread of the Roman Empire and Christianity in Europe, there existed DRUIDS. It took 20years to be a Druid and they had vast experience and knowledge in which ever area they studied. In SANSKRIT, DRU means IMMENSE and VID means KNOWLEDGE. So a Druid was a person with immense knowledge. It takes approx 12 years to be a Brahmin
Druids also had various spiritual fire rituals and practices, which Brahmins have too.
(4) Ireland is one of a few places of Celtic world that was not conquered by Romans, (thus not influenced by Latin until Christianity in the 5th Century CE). The Celts were once dominant throughout Europe, but both Romans and Christianity did away with their way if life, except in Ireland.
This meant that the ANCIENT CELTIC IRISH CUSTOMS & ANCIENT LANGUAGE, remain intact, or were not destroyed in Ireland.
If you follow the research into ANCIENT CELTIC SOCIETY, CUSTOMS, CULTURE, PRACTICES, MYTHOLOGY, POEMS, KNOWLEDGE, TECHNOLOGY, ASTROLOGY, the actual OLD IRISH VOCABULARY & WORDS.....there are very interesting and compelling parallels between ancient Irish culture and Hinduism.
**** SEE THE BELOW 2 WEBSITES FOR A LOT OF GLARING SIMILARITIES BETWEEN CELTIC CULTURE, HISTORY & LANGUAGE WITH THAT OF SANATAN DHARMA & SANSKRIT ***
www.sanskritimagazine.com/indian-religions/hinduism/the-celtic-vedic-connection/?amp=1
www.hinduismtoday.com/magazine/may-1994/1994-05-the-celts/
(5) Read the below for further similarities between CELTIC CULTURE & SANATAN DHARMA .......how can European river names & Gods have similarities to Indian rivers & Gods ??
www.hinduismtoday.com/magazine/february-2000/2000-02-our-druid-cousins/
Among the ancient Celts, Danu was regarded as the "Mother Goddess." The Irish Gods and Goddesses were the Tuatha De Danaan ("Children of Danu"). Danu was the "divine waters" falling from heaven ............Many European rivers bear the name of Danu-the Rhône (ro-Dhanu, "Great Danu") and several rivers called Don. Rivers were sacred in the Celtic world, and places where votive offerings were deposited and burials often conducted.
The Thames, which flows through London, still bears its Celtic name, from Tamesis, the dark river, which is the same name as Tamesa, a tributary of the Ganges
Not only is the story of Danu and the Danube a parallel to that of Ganga and the Ganges but a Hindu Danu appears in the Vedic story "The Churning of the Oceans," a story with parallels in Irish and Welsh mytholgy. Danu in Sanskrit also means "divine waters"
(6) Have you heard of the Historian
Peter Berresford Ellis ? He is a leading expert on the CELTS & DRUIDS in Europe. He recognises and documents the associations between Druids and Brahmins.
druidry.org/druid-way/other-paths/druidry-dharma
(7) Look up the work of Raj Vedam . He explains mandmy areas, such as ancient Indian astrology. Vedam demonstrates the genetic evidence and analyses that so called Western Historians rely upon, is flawed.
Specifically look at how genes become less concentrated and diverse, the further those genes spread. Then see which region has a higher concentration & diversity of common genes
Gradually a lot more indisputable evidence is being revealed......I suggest you follow the LATEST RESEARCH
Very true
@@anika_h How can that be possible? Even if we consider Indo-European migration, the influx of Steppe people is meagre not substantial. So no en massr migration.Also the settlements in India where most are associated with multiple river system, major being the Sapta-Sindu river system. The association of Indian people with these rivers far predates any European civilization. So it is highky unlikely that Europeans names were given to Indian rivers.
@@anika_h Which paper states that migration was large scale? All Papers related to Aryan migration talk about a small scale influx of steppe pastorialists. Can you cite your reference paper?
Also you forgot the fact that actual full scale invasions happened in India History way after the supposed Migration of Aryans. The invasion of Huns, Scythians etc. The latter seems to be a more befitting reason for such large Steppe ancestry in Indians because most of these invasion were indeed from people of central asian descendant.Also another issue with AMT is the large mutation of Of R1a1 in Indians which is thrice /quadruple of that seen in europeans. How do you reconcile with this? Because greater mutation correlates to origin of gene in that geography
@@buddha9715 where you found r1a1 in europe 😂😂😂😂 r1a1 mostly found in Turkmenistan Uzbekistan and kazakistan which dna study prove that step people are Aryan and how
@@anika_h The British Isles were sparsely populated in the Neolithic, they had a 90% male population replacement
I would suggest to invite Indian expert in genetic studies to shade the light on the recent developments.
The thing I understood from this is that every one want a piece of Indian history and culture but they don’t want to admit that it came from india. The only question I ask this lady or the so called linguist , if everything was brought from outside, find me another culture that follows Vedic rituals from outside Indian subcontinent.
Blown away! Thank you Dr Mohan.
What about dating of extinction of Saraswati river which is mentioned in Rigveda? This point has blown up you AIT/ AMT theory...😅
There's no such thing called sarasvati river
Fantastic conversation . So interesting , Thank You .
Thanks for not letting me ask the question. As fantastic as the stories of male "pre Sanskrit" speaking men coming in seems. They are far from what the latest evidence has to tell.
Narasimhan et al 2019, though again an AMT paper, show two major discoveries.
1. 90+ ancient DNA samples from South Asia, dated 1200-800 BC, shows scarcity of male steppe ancestry.
2. ~70 ancient DNA samples from bronze age BMAC main population lacks steppe ancestry.
So far the genetic findings do not have much to show for in terms of AMT hypothesis.
These came as big shockers, the reason for first is obvious, but the BMAC was hypothesized as Indo-Iranian site which was supposed to Aryanised before the IIr split three way into Syria, Iran and India.
Infact the paper finds that Harappans were migrating out of India, into Iran and Central Asia. Bronze age main BMAC population, while lacking steppe DNA ancestry, had deeply rooted Indian ancestry in them.
On the Iranian site of Shahir-e-Sokhta, we have ~50% of the DNA samples actually Harappans, dated 3200-2000 BC, over a period of 1200 years. and the local Shahir-e-Sokhta people also derive 20% of their ancestry from the Harappans.
I don't think I need to mention it, but the archaeologists, including western, knows and have published that there absolutely NO evidence of any massive migration from steppe region into India in 2nd millennium BCE.
I can keep going but I think I have made my point clear.
Rahul, glad to know you were engaged with this discussion. Your question was noted, and the moderator invited you to join the panel, but you declined. If you are uncomfortable joining in video, you are welcome to join as audio-only. It would have been interesting to get your counterpoints in the discussion.
We have in fact invited Vagheesh Narasimhan to shed light on the findings from genetic studies in this area in recent years. We hope to have your participation in that session and others. Critical questioning and counter arguments enrich the conversation for all involved. Thank you.
@@argumentativeindians I did not get any invitation from your moderator to be honest.
I had also added my question in the comment section which could have also been picked up.
However romatic that she tried to create those stories, they were far from the truth and counter evidence.
@@rahulchawla9040 You would have a little notification pop-up with the invite to join. Perhaps you just closed the pop-up and hence the “declined” message on our end. There is no reason to not invite you as counter questions make these sessions interesting, so are always welcome. On a separate note, Ms Mohan has addressed your question in extensive detail in her book Kings,Wanderers, Merchants… essentially it was on the female side no steppe DNA was found, but on the male side there was a significant proportion. On the basis of this she argues that only males migrated in multiple waves. She doesn’t think there was an invasion, as these males themselves belonged to different tribes, but she believes the interactions with native men very quickly became hostile (in contest for resources and women). As a linguist she finds evidence for this in the way the languages of South Asia have evolved. She talked about the mother’s side and father’s side in a language. She differs from many other prominent academics on their view that after arrival of Steppe people the Dravidian people of Harappa were pushed down towards South India. Her view is that while a small proportion may have migrated, the vast majority continued to live alongside the new entrants. It was much later that the various Steppe tribes got united, and social hierarchies became well defined where the previous natives were demoted to a lower social rank.
@@argumentativeindians Thanks for long response.
Let me quote the Narasimhan et al paper here.
Supplementary report page 306, "the admixture into the SPGT was definitively female-biased."
the Steppe Cline is not included within the Modern Indian Cline. Instead, the Modern Indian Cline is a mixture between a point on the Indus Periphery Cline (the ASI) and a ghost population that once existed on the Steppe Cline, which we haven’t directly sampled but which we hypothesize existed in the Late Bronze Age and Iron Age in northwestern South Asia (but not in the Swat Valley which is the only place that we have extensively sampled)."
@@argumentativeindians I typed a long response but the comment didn't go through for some reason.
Anyways, there is no point in me typing all that again in this meaningless conversation.
All I want to say is, Romanticising fairly tales and Science are too very different fields.
Science works with evidence.
Linguistics, even James Mallory himself say that Linguists have failed to explained the case of language replacement in South Asia, Iran etc.
we all know that modern data shows failure of Steppe theory among Tocharian speakers, Indians, Iranians, ancient Greeks, and Anatolians.
David Reich himself now vouches for Iranian origin of PIE.
Genetics (90 south asian ancient DNA samples) and Archaeology have all yielded result against any arrival of foreign people into bronze age India.
On the other side, the archaeology of IVC including Saraswati river, all ties well with the Rigveda.
I say do Science not fairy tales.
Thanks
Good bye.
what a cute story. so perfect for next bollywood movie lol
Rakhigiri specimen shed some light on out of india theory and also sinauli chariot tell us the same story . Most probably it was an out of india theory . India brought civilization to the west .. now they are teaching us newsest technologies for better civilizations.
1:03:52
Thank you so much professor, for addressing my quarry.. ❤️
1:06:00 😊😊
Mam, you may like this too, Amartya Sen while talking about Bengali calendar
th-cam.com/video/6812VD-jdh8/w-d-xo.html
1:14:00
People from eastern Europe , Slavic side, languages have similar words , like colour distribution, sky, fire, and more, like in Sanskrit 😊
Your color coding is wrong. Sinhala has more retroflex inflection than Tamil.
@@ensys1000 I’m assuming this is because “proper” Sinhala is a close kin to Pali.
Great session. Lots of new information. Please organise a follow on.
Sorry sister, but there was no aryan so called 'migration'.
I am computer scientist but also a genetics hobbyist. There seems to be a bit of cherry picking here by Dr Mohan. She claims nonrecombinant portion of y-chromosome was not considered before mitochondrial DNA. Fact is that both techniques are fairly old and known in genetics. Naturally, much before mt-dna study of 2008, y-chromosome study on Aryan invasion question was made in 2001. Dr Mohan makes the same elementary mistake which Tony Joseph made in his article in the Hindu. It’s hard to dismiss this as mere coincidence. Another coincidence is that both claim r1a haplogroup coming into India is a settled question; unbiased and real scientific study shows otherwise!
Lol unbiased and real scientifc studies ?? which are those studies can you point them out. The last i checked majority consensus is the opposite of what you are suggesting only few papers in not so reputable journals and sometimes with limited number of samples spew out of indian theory
Did SteppeN has IndiaN components?
Felt like why is Karan Johar discussing this ?
Fascinating!
So indo aryans even changed the name of major rivers in India and locals peoples of India accepted it 😑😑
But they failed to replace the names of major European rivers and major European rivers has many names in different languages.
In one research paper from European genetic shows that no gene flow from eastern Europe to west asia and south asia from mid holocene era. So Indian and European didn't get their R1a1a from same ancestry.
Harappans don't have the foreign genes that came in later into modern Indians.
@@alani3992 You forgot about the countless Invasions which occurred much after such as the Huns, Scythians, Kushans etc. Most of them were from central Asia. So there is a possibility that steppe ancestry came through them.
I am a South Indian. Don't believe this .The conclusion is false/premature. According to her , after entering India , dental became dhantha(teeth). It is clear both Latin and English are IE. Notice English has 'th' in 'teeth' while Latin -dent has no h.one IE language has th while other loses h . This pattern of losing h and becoming back of tongue is common in European locality. Wherever there is h(or stress) you can observe this. Sthana -> Stan , Sthura - Strong , dhana-> donate , bandh -> bind. Kalkatha - th becomes t and pronounced as Calcutta .this is a pattern.
Either the Indus people adapting to a new language,
or the elite creating/refining Sanskrit, so as to make it un-pronouncable to the locals.
Come on please. This is the very epitome of the brown sahib still lingering in academia. Both the theories set-up in the premise has been thoroughly shown to be lacking rigour. Dr Shinde (on the genetics) and Shrikant Talegeri on Linguistics have done phenomenal work! The migration was Out of Bharat after the Battle of the Ten Kings not into. And no Arya is not an ethnic group/people! The migration has a clear direction in they way the scripts are written right to left denotes the westwards migration. A host of multi disciplinary experts Dr Raj Vedam, Nilesh Oak etc have also shown the same!
So no one here ever watched podcast of Shrikant Talageri or read him ...India is doomed!!!
Enjoyed every minute of this discussion. Thank you to Dr Peggy Mohan.
Dr mohan is very wrong in her assessment of the ydna data. The greatest variety and oldest haplogroup P, Q, and R examples are from the indian subcontinent according to FTDNA. They are by far the largest database of Ydna data and their research is years ahead of anything she has read
Brilliant
Paternal is Sanskrit, Maternal is Tamil(it has all the retroflexion).
Tamil dont have steppe. Neither grammar allowed corruption,making it to survive forever.
Fact
once you define the language with etymology.
THe symbols also show us
Perhaps could be known as First Nations?
In Astrology, the Age of Aries, the Ram is dubbed the Aryan age, ruled by Aryans
The rulers have changed our real history
the word Aryan WAS CHANGED TO = Proto-Indo-European
but it took place before Europe was a state
Iran means Land of Aryans
Aryan was referring to the nobility and their languages
Thank you Dr Mohan for the enlightening session!
Thanks
my boi yajur is a handsome guy
Gay
Hahahahaha.
The Arya migrated as whole communities in horse driven chariots, bull driven wagons etc. Even females came, even children came. Watch bharat ek khoj serial of rhe 80s.
This theory of invading men came and married(or r*ped) the native women totally wrong.
Rig veda is predominantly an Arya philosophy. In a language that is ancestral to Sanskrit. If there had been simple marriage between Arya men and non Arya women, children would have spoken "mother" tounge that was proto tamizh? Why will they speak father tounge of Indo Iranian language or vedic language and just bring in the retroflex consonants into the vedic language?
Nonsensical to say the least.
Were Mughals and British of Indian origin? This may be the case as per OIT (Out of India Theory).
This is the ancient migration path of Vedic Hindus: Ahimsak civilized Vedic Hindu from India --> Central Asia (yamnaya, sintashta, Andronovo who were nomadic and violent) + Afghanistan + Iran --> Europe + England. This entire Vedic land was "Bharata".
Then logic says these very same people came back and ruled India as Mughals and English! So Indians came back to rule themselves?🤔
Prithvi gol hai bhai, sab moh maya hai!
30:1
??? Invaders may be by groups of ONLY men, i.e., armies / soldiers. like the Greek and Turkic invaders.
Migration would be by a larger population, so there would be women in a group of migrants.
So the concept of migration of ONLY MEN sounds ridiculous.
No view on how many migrated in, no mention of population of India, and the percentage of migrants to indigenous population.
Population of 'Sindhu Saraswathi Sabhyatha' that spread over 1 million sq kms, is estimated to be upto 50 Lakhs.
How many migrants does it take to dilute this population.
No proof of migration of Aryans into India is presented, its just stated as if it is a fact.
She said "My instinct tells me that the direction is into India and not outward" , there is no scope for instinct in science.
Which words of Vedic language are Sanskrit and which are Harappan?
No view on whether Vedas were composed outside India or in India.
Modern Indians have external DNA, not found in Harappans.
& that external DNA is mostly male.
Indus population had declined big time by then, the Aryans took over the remaining women.
@@alani3992
Harappan DNA ?
Only one skeleton in Rakhigarhi yielded DNA.
DNA could not be recovered from any of the other skeletons found,
perhaps due to climate conditions, hot and humid.
Modern Indian DNA will have external DNA,
there have been many inward migrations throughout history.
Modern European DNA too will have Indian DNA,
since there were many migrations from India to Europe.
"Indus population had declined big time by then, the Aryans took over the remaining women."
Why did Indus / Saraswathi population decline? Was it due to drought?
Why were there 'remaining women', did only male population decline.
If existing population was declining,
how could new immigrants prosper in the same region and develop Sanskrit and compose the Vedas.
The similarity between the Vedas and the Saraswathi Sabhyatha is very clear, same logical and systematic way of doing things is evident.
Vedic Sanskrit is very scientific, logical, rule based, etc.
All the material culture found in the Saraswathi Sabhyatha spread over 1 million sq kms for about 1,000 years, such as the Weights and Measures, Bricks, Roads, Drainage, etc., indicate the same logical and systematic way of doing things.
The Saraswathi Sabhyatha was the most prosperous civilization of the Bronze Age, larger in area and population than ALL other contemporary Bronze Age civilizations, Egyptian, Mesopotamian and Chinese put together.
Saraswathi Sabhyatha perhaps accounted for over 50% of Global GDP.
There is no such thing as 'Aryan'.
No group of people any where in the world, at any point in time, before 19th Century CE, called themselves Aryans.
This word was first coined by a French fiction writer, Gobineau.
It was picked up by Max Muller and then by Germans.
Rig Veda refers to the composers as Puru and Bharata.
Names of all other groups in neighboring areas are given.
@@chandra_has
People from India could have migrated west and carried Sanskrit with them, to Iran and Europe.
Indian DNA is found in Europe, Ra1a is more in India than in Europe, so it may have gone from India to Europe.
@@chandra_has
J Sai Deepak
Destroying the Myth of Aryan Invasion theory | J Sai Deepak
th-cam.com/video/evxU1BxNxr0/w-d-xo.html
David Fraley
The Myth of Aryan Invasion in India - Dr. David Frawley - India Inspires Talks
th-cam.com/video/qych3WYNViA/w-d-xo.html
Michael Danino
Lecture-02-The Aryan Controversy- IIT Kanpur
th-cam.com/video/FL6nxDn3cmE/w-d-xo.html
th-cam.com/video/UgLXAQWf_EE/w-d-xo.html
I Used To BELIEVE In The Aryan Invasion Myth | Abhijit Chavda
indianinterest.com/history/the-aryan-invasion-myth-how-21st-century-science-debunks-19th-century-indology/ THE INDIAN INTEREST
Understanding India
The Aryan Invasion Myth: How 21st Century Science Debunks 19th Century Indology
MAY 5, 2017 BY ABHIJIT CHAVDA
HTTPS://WWW.TH-cam.COM/WATCH?V=SHNKU3K86MU&T=10S
Dr. Niraj Rai: India's Genetic History, Aryan-Dravidian Myth Debunked | Abhijit Chavda Podcast 3
www.indiafacts.org.in/the-death-of-proto-indo-european-pie/
The Death of Proto-Indo-European - Indiafacts
Subhash Kak July 16, 2018
@@chandra_has
I omitted this video by oversight.
संवाद # 20: Archaeologist & Prof. Vasant Shinde on how Rakhigarhi disproves Aryan Invasion theory
th-cam.com/video/M3pvoYTHwt4/w-d-xo.html
i'm pretty sure she lives in US, canada , UK or some other white country
Correction => The places you listed are multi-racial and multi-cultural countries. And Dr Peggy Mohan is based in New Delhi, India.
@@intellectuallycurious6443 lol these are pretty much dominated by whites
One question that should be immediately asked is what were local men doing while these “foreign “ men came in and started marrying their local ladies and producing offsprings. What even made them local women go weak in the knees for the white dudes? Did they hypnotise the local men to allow them to stay and breed amongst the
Also, With foreign people foreign cultural markers are to be expected besides just language. Extensive harappan excavations reveal none. I can go deeper but this is just the surface level questioning I can come up with just in a matter of minutes.
The issue is way way more complex and mature than that even for a 1hr podcast.
This is such an a oversimplified anthropologically impossible, laughable construct. Hope her book is not this amateurish.
Harappa was already on decline, & the new men had socio/political/tech advantages, if not direct conflict with the native men.
@@alani3992 seriously. Sorry for a long reply but this deserves it. For one, Peggy was being dishonest and generalist of the genetic papers she was trying to quote. Nothing remotely conclusive has come out of David Reich, Narsimhan and such papers yet. Then, there's no consensus on what size of groups allegedly came in for effectiveness of these political advantages you speak of. They were supposed to be Hunter-Gatherer+pastoralist bands who allegedly 'civilized' the people of a full fledged civilization lol.
Second, Harappa was already on the decline true, but from around 1900 BCE. Their people moved to the Ganga basin and down South, over centuries, some staying behind. So these "superior men" allegedly came in and settled in Harappan Ruins, ghost towns and what not, while marrying with leftover women? I mean Harappan men (conveniently) left behind generations of women so that these Aryan men would come and impregnate them in the future? Moreover, there's ZERO trace of Material culture from their lands. No burial practices/weapons/pottery systems resembling the Kurgans or the Yamnayas. Or anything from CA Steppe. No sudden increase in horse remains neither. Now don't give me that "Absense of evidence is not evidence of absence" argument. All kinds of material traces have been found from different millennia across Harappan sites, especially sanauli and NW frontiers. NOTHING referring to the 'Aryans'. Wonder why. These linguists and geneticists need to manage their Expectations😂from Harappans(none but Vedic People) and stop producing nonsense.
@@SK_ES519 A rapid decline in Harappan population, or a move to semi-nomadic, which could later evolve into the gypsy tradition of NW India. The outsiders were probably already in contact with IVC as traders/merchants with the trade between IVC & BMAC well established. IVC decline leading to the vacuum for further migrants/men to step in. Combining their patriarchal culture with the indigenous culture (shaman, yogic, tantric) to form Vedic culture.
@@alani3992 these migrants from where? Again we have absolutely nothing from CA steppe or Eastern Europe, from where R1a1 markers are present in a section of Indian male population. Moreover, while the Rigvedic people seemed to worship and hold deep reverence for the land and ecology they were in, no mentions of any foreign lands. You just can’t hurry up such a meticulous literary and theological cultural production, where wietzel says the entire corpus of Rigveda was composed within 5-6gen. Vedic people were very strong adherents to their material and non material cultures(at least as asserted by that AIM camp). Their burial and crematorial practices match nothing of European regions but on the other hand show some affinity with IVC remains.
To even begin with, nothing yamnaya or Sintashta matches anything of the Vedic culture as expected. Too much fixation on horses and possible pastoralist nature of the Vedic tribes, but neglect yogic, fire worshipping, and mythological similarities that IVC holds with Vedic literature.
@@SK_ES519 the data suggests female mediated steppe ancestry in India.
Neither linguists alone or genetics alone can form the basis of validations migration of people. All branches of sciences and technical explorations are the main instruments and linguistic and genetics are only assistive. Scholars from linguistics are engaged in pseudo-scolarship spinning their own stories that suit their own fantasies. R1a1a was of two origins in India, one was autochtonous and even Chenchu tribals and Manipuris have it and the second was from Greeks, Kushans, Huns and Indians from Afghanistan Pakistan area and therefore it is predominant geographically in the north west non-brahmins. The Chaturvedi have only 11% contribution of R1a1.
Think honestly Peggy, have you looked at the evidenc without bringing in emotion or fantasy.
seems like you have seen the videos of SHRIKANT TALAGERI JI AND NEERJ RAI JI great hw also mention some of the SO CALLED dravidian SCHEDULED tribes having high % dna OF foreign mixing
THE ARYAN INVASION BECAME ARYAN MIGRARION VERY SOON IT WOULD BE ARYAN TOURISM THEORY☺️☺️
He looks white lol I'm Indian
Probably he lives outside of India, skin colour changes
According to latest archeological findings Buddha was born in 1944 BC not 550 BC which British historians had set. 3 bunch of copper plates are found one copper plate indicates that saka epoch was established in 588 BC and other two clearly indicates that there were two Different eras one Saka era and on Sakanta era (established 78BC). This establishes the year of Buddha's birth in 1944 BCE. Even if I become too conservative to ignore all other evidences of Puranas and Astronomical evidences, geographical evidences and by looking at the progresses which were being made till Buddha, aryan migration have to happen around 1944 + 2500 = 4444 BC ( more than 1100 years before Yamnaya invasion in Europe) .
Thanks for this fascinating piece of information. Could you kindly share a link to the report or the press release about it?
@@argumentativeindians You can watch it here, a presentation by a researcher Vedveer Arya who is a sanskrit scholar and historian.
th-cam.com/video/9vw065jKZ-s/w-d-xo.html
Once you have watched the video I suggested, please let me know what do you think.
This is a more detail explanation about Buddha's date th-cam.com/video/Kt4GtfOWZWQ/w-d-xo.html
The Aryans added their male (religious) practices, to the indigenous feminine (spiritual ) practices : "What most anthropologists are clear on is that the arrival of the male-dominated Aryan Vedics within the Indus Valley occurred when Tantra was already live and kicking, and marked the process of synthesis, whereby Tantra influenced those Vedas originating in India. The orthodox Vedics assimilated those practices that were conducive to their patriarchal traditions, and diluted, discarded, even oppressed more esoteric techniques including emphasis on the feminine."
Vedic aryans were fish eating Brahmins who lived along saraswati rivers and composed vedas and conquered the harappan
The north Siberian lived Aryans slowly learnt the movement traders in the deep south. They came to know the fertile region Sindhus. Also about the highly developed and sophisticated living people.
The cows , milk and milky products were their staple food. The enormously growing only vegetation was the reeds. They used fireside to warm from severe cold.
Now they slowly moved and entered Sindus region. They were wonder struck with awe when saw the highly cultured urban Sindus people.
Quite naturally the Aryan tribes were thugs grabbing everything, selfish,greedy and with inhumane in everything.
Quite naturally the highly cultured Sindhus people were disturbed The peace loving people did not attack and drive them out. But decided to change their venue. They moved out towards their south homeland. Of course the movement caused many losses and troubles. On the way some people settled down in some preferred places. Others reached Poompuhar then prosperous port city
The Aryans are still in separable with born traits and habits. It is well known their attachment with cows, firesides, ( call yagnam) and reeds.
@@Joseph-yu4lx if sindhu people were not aryans then why sindhu civilization excavations found that fire pit to do homa and yajna? And the some symbol found in Ukraine was found in sindhu civilization? Yoga and spirituality was founded in this civilization. Arya means well manner, that savages like you are trying to interpret. Infact aryas are who respect elders, nice to women and chidren. But your version of arya are savages.
@@mikedesi5513 moron 😂
Some people say "Aryan and Dravidian race is a complete hoax", but the whole world knows that India have two distinct major linguistic group namely Indo-Aryan [Indo-European] and Dravidian Language group, namely Sanskrit and Tamil. Even though the word Dravidian coined only in later days, since it is used to represent a Unique Dravidian linguistic group. We say it as Aryan and Dravidian races namely Aryans and Ancient Tamils. NO ONE CAN DENY this fact, so "Aryan and Dravidian race is NOT a hoax"
Iranians are the original Aryans who invaded India from the west, this what we call it as ARYAN INVASION.
The country Name Iran itself means "Land of the Aryans" and Iranshahr. The very close relation between Iranian and Indo-Aryan groups has never been doubted. They share linguistic features to such a degree that Indo-Iranian is generally described as a distinct subgroup of Indo-European. The term Arya has been used by the Iranian people, as well as by the rulers and emperors of Iran, from the time of the Avesta.
The well-attested Indo-Iranian languages are Vedic Sanskrit, Avestan and Old Persian. Sanskrit and Avestan are very closely related languages with exact grammatical principles and numerous cognates [Blood Relative]. You can find words which are exactly identical, like Sanskrit/Avestan naman (name), ushtra (camel) etc.
Language, literature, epics & poems evolves every century. In Vedic/Hindu literature, Asuras (Ahuras) are bad guys while Devas are heroes. In Zoroastrian/Persian literature, Ahuras (Asuras) are heroes while Daevas are the villains.
When the Vedic Aryans moved further, they arrived in the Indian subcontinent they were faced by the native Dravidians, Dravidians that got conquered were placed as low caste in Vedic Aryan society. The Vedic Aryans continued to call the enemy as “Asuras", but the description of the Asuras changed to Dravidians (i e. present day south-Indians) with dark skin, large facial hair etc.
This itself is a proof that Rigveda evolved in Persia i.e. present day Iran and moved to Indian sub-continent. Initially Asuras (Ahuras) were referring to Zoroastrian/Persian and in later days Asuras were used to refer Dravidians.
We have all the proofs for Aryan invasion in Rig Veda itself. Dasyus were the people who lived in India when the Aryans arrived here. They were having a dark-skin and flat noses. Battles depicted in the R̥gveda are directly referring to Aryans migrating into India which is native land of dark skinned people Dravidians. Rig Veda - Dasa: 54 hymns and 63 verses and Dasyus: 65 hymns, 80 verses. The accounts of conflict between the Aryans and the Dasas and Dasyus are acknowledged in Rig Veda.
Rig Veda describes that Dasas and Dasyus were people who do not perform sacrifices. Aryans had to fight with these people for land. The Aryans defeated them and did not treat them well. The Aryan chief who overpowered Dasyus were called dasyuhatya (slaughter of the dasyus) this is repeatedly mentioned in the Rig Veda.
Thank you for sharing the highly informative comment.
This is simply wrong. It is exactly opposite.
@@mohansatpute5948 Exactly opposite means what ..... In India they INVENTED Horse [Because Horses are NOT native to India] and then Indo-Aryans migrated to all across the world right. LOL .... Grow up man
Horses are NOT native to India, and Aryan's Vedas are full of Horses, this itself is a proof that Indo-Aryans came outside of India which NO-ONE can deny
Vedic aryans were fish eating Brahmins who conquered India and colonized
Very selective,, propaganda possibly
No need to doubt on that.
yeah first they propagating invasion now migration, just goal post chsnge theory after these narrative are difused
Modern Indians have external DNA, not found in Harappans.
& that external DNA is mostly male.
Blueprint for invasion.
Aryan and Dravidian race theory is 100% true. Only thing is, its NOT Aryan Invasion rather it is just an Aryan migration.
Aryan's are called as Devas
Dravidian's are called Asuras
Rig Veda has several references to blonde haired Indra destroying Dark skinned Asuras [Dravidian's]. If you read most of the Sanskrit puranas you can notice that its all about Fight between Aryans and Dravidians [Devas and Asuras]
Aryan Gods - Lord Indra, Lord Varuna, Lord Vayu, Lord Rudra, Lord Brahma & Lord Ram
Dravidian Gods - Shiva, Visnu, Krishna & Karthikeya
In Rig Veda there is NO Mention about Lord Shiva. In Vedas they only worship Lord Indra, Lord Varuna, Lord Rudra & Lord Vayu. In Rig Veda they mention about Lord Rudra but he is NOT Lord Shiva. Fact of the matter is Shiv is a NON Aryan God, he was worshipped by the ancient Indians before the advent of the Aryans. Shiva is not a Vedic God. In Indus Valley Civilization - IVC archeologists found terracotta Pashupathi he is considered as Shiva this scientifically predates Sanskrit Vedas. Also Tamil literature says the First Tamil sangam was established by Lord Shiva.
We have proofs that Ancient Indians worshipped Shiva before the arrival of Aryans. Vedas do not mention the Holy Trinity of Hinduism - Brahma, Vishnu and Shiva. Only the Puranas and other scriptures of later dates mention them. The word SHIVA does indeed appear many time in the VEDA but mostly as an adjective for Rudra. It is important NOT to confuse the word shiva (adjective) with Lord Shiva (proper noun) A god / deity by name Rudra appears in the Veda. The word Shiva/ shivam appears 13 times and is used as an adjective for Agni/ cattle/ dove/ wood-juice etc, it is NOT about Lord Shiva.
It is a very common and well known fact that across the globe White people feel that they are superior and enslave black people. That is the case with Africa and America. Even in India even though we Indians had very old civilization then the British. The British people who came here for TRADE enslaved Indians. Same thing happened in Ancient India. Even though Dravidians had a OLDER Civilization, Aryans made them as Sudhras claiming white people are superior and black people are inferior.
Aryan by Birth - Ram, Lakshman
Dravidian by Birth - Ravan, Shiva, Visnu, Krishna & Karthikeya
Aryan Language - Sanskrit
Dravidian Language - Tamil
Google - How a tiny skull bone challenges the idea of a Vedic Indus Valley
DNA obtained from an Indus Valley site in Rakhigarhi LACKED the steppeland genes that are strongly associated with high-caste North Indian populations today
Google - 4500 year old DNA from Rakhigarhi reveals evidence that will unsettle Hindutva nationalists
Question - Were the people of the Harappan civilisation the original source of the Sanskritic language and culture of Vedic Hinduism? Answer - NO
Question - Do their genes survive as a significant component in India's current population? Answer - Most definitely.
Question - Were they closer to popular perceptions of 'Aryans' or of 'Dravidians'? Answer - Dravidians.
This shows prior to Aryan Migrations its Dravidians who lived in Indian sub-continant. So Proto Tamil [Proto Dravidian] is more then 4,500 old. Both in Indus valley and in Keezhadi they did NOT found any Sanskrit inscriptions
Aryan by Birth - Brahmin, Kshatriyas & Vaisyas
Dravidian by Birth - Sudras & Paraiahs (Dalits) These people are basically Tamils - please note Tamils lived through out Indian Sub-continent in ancient days
Etymology for the name Krishna [ கருதினன் -> கிருத்தினன் -> கிருஷ்ணா ] Karuthinan → Kirutinan → Krishna . Karuthinan means man of philosophy its a Title given to Krishna
We all know that Krishna is Dark in Complexion and he is a Cow herder he is a Tamil. Krishna was born into the Yadava clan. He was the son of Vasudeva and Devaki. Every one knows who are Yadavas basically, they are cow herders - Sudras. Krishna was dark black in complexion. All dark black complexion people living across Indian subcontinent are basically Dravidian's [Sudra] only irrespective of their caste it is applicable to North Indians also.
Language naturally evolves over 1000s of years it can NOT be invented by one single guy Agathiyar, Tamil language is NOT invented by Agathiyar as told by PERVERTED Sanskrit Myth, one has to Talk with scientific facts should NOT vomit PERVERTED Sanskrit Myths. Just like Tholkappiyar, Agathiyar also wrote grammar for Tamil in ancient times thats it. Vedic Sanskrit met its natural death. Modern Sanskrit was formed as a semi artificial literary dialect only to write and chant. It was never spoken by the common people. If it was a spoken language it would have definitely continued till date. Kindly think for a while how could a totally unspoken language [Sanskrit] can break in to several languages IMPOSSIBLE. You better ask your conscience to this question.
If Sanskrit is the oldest language of India / World, then why can’t we find any manuscripts, inscriptions or any written thing in Sanskrit that goes backs to first century BCE ? Rig Veda has many many references to Saraswati River, but there is NO SUCH River in India. Prof Michael Witzel Professor of Sanskrit, Harvard University USA says the following Saraswati river mentioned in the Rig Vedic texts, is a stream still flowing in Afghanistan carrying the Romanised Persian name "Horaxwati" here Sa sound deforms to Ha. So, this proves that Sanskrit language originated OUTSIDE of India.
Tamil is older then Sanskrit. Its actually Tamil root words which are there in Sanskrit, NOT the other way around. Recent [year 2020] excavation in Keezadi have written Tamil inscription which is older than 2,500 years. But on the other hand Sanskrit did not even had a script to write until 4 CE note it is CE not BCE, it adopted devanagari script in 4 CE and started writing puranas like Ramayana ... etc. Prior to this Sanskrit Vedas were transferred to next generation only orally, they said it is very sacred and only Brahmins have to recite it
Google - Mayiladumparai Excavation in Tamil Nadu - Tamils knew use of iron 4,000 years ago, archaeological findings show
Google - Porunai civilisation is 3,200 years old
Tamils do not have Vedic culture roots, their roots are different. Vedic culture is a third rated culture. Sanskrit is full of third rated SEXUALLY PERVERTED mythological stories for Lord Shiva, Indra, Ayyappa and for lots of Rishis. You can not find one such sexually perverted literature in Tamil. Sanskrit is full of Racial Abuse and Racial discrimination based on birth like Manusimriti. You wont find any such discrimination in Tamil literature
Thiruvalluvar in Thiru Kural says all Living Things are equal [Not just humans] (பிறப்பொக்கும் எல்லா உயிர்க்கும் சிறப்பொவ்வா செய்தொழில் வேற்றுமை யான் - திருக்குறள் 972). But in Sanskrit Manusmriti, manu discriminate people based on birth called Varna, Manusimriti is full of Racial Abuse and Racial discrimination based on birth. If you are a non Brahmin then read manusmriti once, you will start hating Sanskrit Hinduism, try once reading it.
Tamils have the culture of worshiping there fore fathers that is how they are worshiping Siva, Thiru Maal [Vishnu] & Murugan [Subramanian]. Aryan Brahmins stolen Tamil's gods and and inserted FULLY SEXUALLY PERVERTED STORIES in later days for our gods like Vishnu Purana, Shiva Purana, Skanda Purana ... etc Now some idiots are even saying Lord Shiva don't understand Tamil and so we have to worship him only in Sanskrit. Lord Siva himself is a Tamil
Tamil too have Sanskrit words its due to Sanskrit became sole authority for Hinduism and for Tamil Gods also. By stealing Tamils gods Sanskrit started influencing Tamil by way Varnasrama by saying Brahmins are great and they are born from Brahmas head. You have to respect Brahmin and you have to allow them to worship your gods in their language Sanskrit.
Google - Tamil and Australian aboriginal languages
மார் சுபிகள் Marsupial is a A word found in Australian Aboriginals language for Kangaroo kids. Marsupial in Tamil means Breast Suckers, Small Kangaroo kids will grow inside Mother Kangaroos waist bag by sucking milk from its mothers breast. English language derived this word from Australian Aborginals language, This word is more than 10,000 years old it's a pure Tamil word.
Archaeological experts all over the world says that Indus valley civilization is a Dravidian civilization, but here in India Sanghis says its a vedic civilization but they do NOT Have any proof for their claim. If it is Vedic civilization then why they could NOT find any Hindu God Idols. Why they could NOT find any Sanskrit manuscripts, inscriptions or any written thing in Sanskrit ?
Google - Ancient Stone Tools Found in Tamil Nadu
Stone tools from Attirampakkam, a village located about 65 km west-northwest of Chennai, have shown how the Indian Palaeolithic emerged from the preceding Acheulean culture around 3,85,000 years ago. This proves that people lived in TAMIL NADU 3,85,000 years ago.
Aryan by Birth - Brahmin, Kshatriyas & Vaisyas
Dravidian by Birth - Sudras & Paraiahs (Dalits)
Truth is ALL upper caste North Indians are ALL ARYANS, and all lower caste Sudras & Paraiahs (Dalits) are all Dravidians.
People living in Indian Sub continent who are ALL fair in complexion have mostly Steppeland genes in their DNA these people are basically Aryan. People living in Indian Sub continent who are Dark in complexion have mostly South Asian Hunter Gatherer genes in their DNA these people are Dravidian [Tamils] basically.
Tamils means NOT the current day Tamil Nadu state people alone, they represent all Sudras & Praiahas [Dalit] lived across Indian sub - continent. Even today, you can see dark skinned and pale dark skinned people living in North, South, East & West of India, they were all Tamils only in ancient India.
The ancient text Manusimriti designate the Shudra as Peasants and Artisans i.e. Farmers and All Craftsman, Shudra is NOT to mean slaves.
Read the following facts about DNA Studies.
Why R1A1 DNA originates in EUROPE, but not in india. why it is it not found or too less in percentage among South Indian people ?
Why M haplogroups DNA is not found in Upper caste Aryans or North indians ? If found why so less ?
If you have read Vedas there are lots of mention about a food made of Horse meat, then why HORSES are not native to INDIA ?
Why copper hoard culture found only with Aryans, but not with Dravidians ?
Why antenna swords found in Sinauli - India which belongs to BMAC - Bactria-Margiana Archaeological Complex ?
Haplo M is found among 60% of modern day indians. It is in every person from south. But here’s the main catch ! It’s only found in depressed classes of northern and tribal peoples of northen india. But, almost to zero to 1-4% among Higher caste Aryans or North indians.
Just like R1A1 not found in south in the same way south’s M groups are not found among R1A1 peoples of north.
So, it is proved beyond doubt that "ALL upper caste North Indians are ALL ARYANS, and all lower caste Sudras & Paraiahs (Dalits) are all Dravidians"
my reply gettin deleted
@@gauravagarwal9734 You might be using abusive words
You say aryan are fair in complexion then how was lord 'krishna' black and was 'lord rama' light brown in colour. The words Aryan and Darvidians don't represent any particular race. Literally Aryan means excellent and nobel person and word dravida means peninsula .The people living in the Peninsula are called Dravidians in context of geography. Gene study shows North indian people gene and South Indian people gene have not much difference. According to your 'AIT hypothesis' North indians,upper cast people must have more genetically close to Iranian people then South Indian people,dalit but in reality it is not truth. New 'rakhigadi' gene study shows that all Indian people gene and indus vally civilization people gene have significant similarity and they are ancestors of all Indian people. How it possible when you say North Indians, upper cast are invaders(invaders means North indians must haven't genetic similarity to harappan people). You are committing a crime by spreading fake conspiracy theory. Please face the truth.
@@bhanwarlal6090 Some people say "Aryan and Dravidian race is a complete hoax", but the whole world knows that India have two distinct major linguistic group namely Indo-Aryan [Indo-European] and Dravidian Language group, namely Sanskrit and Tamil. Even though the word Dravidian coined only in later days, since it is used to represent a Unique Dravidian linguistic group. We say it as Aryan and Dravidian races namely Aryans and Ancient Tamils. NO ONE CAN DENY this fact, so "Aryan and Dravidian race is NOT a hoax"
Iranians are the original Aryans who invaded India from the west, this what we call it as ARYAN INVASION.
The country Name Iran itself means "Land of the Aryans" and Iranshahr. The very close relation between Iranian and Indo-Aryan groups has never been doubted. They share linguistic features to such a degree that Indo-Iranian is generally described as a distinct subgroup of Indo-European. The term Arya has been used by the Iranian people, as well as by the rulers and emperors of Iran, from the time of the Avesta.
The well-attested Indo-Iranian languages are Vedic Sanskrit, Avestan and Old Persian. Sanskrit and Avestan are very closely related languages with exact grammatical principles and numerous cognates [Blood Relative]. You can find words which are exactly identical, like Sanskrit/Avestan naman (name), ushtra (camel) etc.
Language, literature, epics & poems evolves every century. In Vedic/Hindu literature, Asuras (Ahuras) are bad guys while Devas are heroes. In Zoroastrian/Persian literature, Ahuras (Asuras) are heroes while Daevas are the villains.
When the Vedic Aryans moved further, they arrived in the Indian subcontinent they were faced by the native Dravidians, Dravidians that got conquered were placed as low caste in Vedic Aryan society. The Vedic Aryans continued to call the enemy as “Asuras", but the description of the Asuras changed to Dravidians (i e. present day south-Indians) with dark skin, large facial hair etc.
This itself is a proof that Rigveda evolved in Persia i.e. present day Iran and moved to Indian sub-continent. Initially Asuras (Ahuras) were referring to Zoroastrian/Persian and in later days Asuras were used to refer Dravidians.
We have all the proofs for Aryan invasion in Rig Veda itself. Dasyus were the people who lived in India when the Aryans arrived here. They were having a dark-skin and flat noses. Battles depicted in the R̥gveda are directly referring to Aryans migrating into India which is native land of dark skinned people Dravidians. Rig Veda - Dasa: 54 hymns and 63 verses and Dasyus: 65 hymns, 80 verses. The accounts of conflict between the Aryans and the Dasas and Dasyus are acknowledged in Rig Veda.
Rig Veda describes that Dasas and Dasyus were people who do not perform sacrifices. Aryans had to fight with these people for land. The Aryans defeated them and did not treat them well. The Aryan chief who overpowered Dasyus were called dasyuhatya (slaughter of the dasyus) this is repeatedly mentioned in the Rig Veda.
There is no such thing like 'horse meet food' in vedas. Why are you lying.
Sanskrit language of the gods...
Yes it does not belong to humans !
Hindutva propaganda
Do you mean Aryan migration is hindutva propaganda?