Page 2 of 5 FirstFirst 12345 LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 43

Thread: Human Migrations into India

  1. #11
    Join Date
    June 2011
    Location
    NJ, USA
    Age
    66
    Posts
    1,674
    Rep Power
    1694

    Re: Human Migrations into India

    Quote Originally Posted by bp789 View Post
    Do you guys have any more information about the first post - the genetic origin of Indians?
    Look to historical and comparative linguistics for more information. Sanskrit is an ancient descendant of Proto-Indo-Aryan, which in turn split off from Proto-Indoeuropean. Proto-Indo-Aryan further split into the proto languages that became Persian, Avestan, Pashto, Sanskrit, etc. In fact, the name Iran comes from Aryan. These people became known as the Aryans, who migrated into India, hence the "Aryan invasion", according to historical linguists.

    The Proto-Indoeuropeans were a small group presumed to live in the Black Sea area about 6,000-8,000 years ago. They began migrations southeast, west and northwest to populate south Asia and Europe. Hence the relationships between Sanskrit, Greek, the non-Dravidian languages of India and other Indoeuropean languages. Spoken (not Vedic) Sanskrit in turn evolved into Hindi/Urdi, Gujarati, Marathi, Bengali, etc.
    śivasya hridayam viṣṇur viṣṇoscha hridayam śivaḥ

  2. #12
    Join Date
    July 2010
    Location
    The Holy Land - Bharat
    Posts
    2,842
    Rep Power
    5499

    Re: Human Migrations into India

    Quote Originally Posted by Minotaur View Post
    These people became known as the Aryans, who migrated into India, hence the "Aryan invasion", according to historical linguists.
    http://www.hindunet.org/hindu_histor...n_frawley.html

  3. #13
    Join Date
    June 2011
    Location
    NJ, USA
    Age
    66
    Posts
    1,674
    Rep Power
    1694

    Re: Human Migrations into India

    ...India was invaded and conquered by nomadic light-skinned Indo-European tribes from Central Asia around 1500-100 BC, who overthrew an earlier and more advanced dark-skinned Dravidian civilization from which they took most of what later became Hindu culture.
    No, that I do not believe either. Invasion is the wrong word, hence my putting it in quotes. Migration is better. The usage of the phrase "Doric invasion" into Greece is also falling out of favor. Migration is also used in its place. Vedic Sanskrit is clearly Indoeuropean and not in the Dravidian language family.

    The Vedic culture was thus said to be that of primitive nomads who came out of Central Asia with their horse-drawn chariots and iron weapons and overthrew the cities of the more advanced Indus valley culture, with their superior battle tactics. It was pointed out that no horses, chariots or iron was discovered in Indus valley sites.
    Chariots are vehicles of war (yes the Hittites, an IE people with an empire had them), as are iron weapons which says to me it was a peaceful migration.

    No one yet knows what language was spoken by the people of the IVC. There are only some inscriptions that have yet to be deciphered. It could have been Indoeuropean. Some linguists are trying to connect it to Dravidian, probably only because a Dravidian language is spoke in Baluchistan. But who's to say some Dravidian speakers didn't flee north for any number of reasons?

    I can't see why the IVC wasn't early settlement of the migrants from central Asia into south Asia. Unless I misread the article, he's only refuting the concept of "invasion" and "conquering".
    śivasya hridayam viṣṇur viṣṇoscha hridayam śivaḥ

  4. #14
    Join Date
    September 2010
    Posts
    1,064
    Rep Power
    1014

    Re: Human Migrations into India

    http://www.hindudharmaforums.com/showthread.php?t=2954 - I was reading this thread some days ago, a little extense, I stopped on post 12. On post 6, Sarabangha comments briefly regarding the Aryan invasion and how it was probably just a trans-himalayan migration. I'd recommend reading the previous post since the thread is a continuous line of thought.

    What do you think?

  5. #15
    Join Date
    June 2011
    Location
    NJ, USA
    Age
    66
    Posts
    1,674
    Rep Power
    1694

    Re: Human Migrations into India

    Namaste Pietro

    Quote Originally Posted by Minotaur View Post
    No, that I do not believe either. Invasion is the wrong word, hence my putting it in quotes. Migration is better.
    ^ This.

    Quote Originally Posted by Pietro Impagliazzo View Post
    Sarabangha comments briefly regarding the Aryan invasion and how it was probably just a trans-himalayan migration. ...

    What do you think?
    I think it was a peaceful migration. Peoples have migrated for milennia and settled regions without conflicts, or even encountering other groups. I think the Aryan migration was part of the eastward and westward migration and expansion of the Proto-Indoeuropeans from central Asia. No "invasion" or conquering. Just setting out for new lands.
    śivasya hridayam viṣṇur viṣṇoscha hridayam śivaḥ

  6. #16
    Join Date
    October 2009
    Location
    South of the center line
    Posts
    245
    Rep Power
    607

    Re: Human Migrations into India

    Quote Originally Posted by Ramakrishna View Post




    Is it not correct that the Vedas were revealed to the ancient rishis, the Vedic civilization gradually developed and flourished, and during that time there were waves of migrations into India? So where does the caste system play into this? Another thing to note is that he said these weren't "Europeans" like we think of today, but rather "Eurasians" who came from no farther west than the Balkans.

    Namaste Ramakrishna,

    No there was no such thing as migration or gradual migration of vedic people into India. When we talk about theories, they involve assumptions or speculations. As long as speculations have any backing from baisc premises then one is within his rights to make assumptions, but when basic premises itself don't support any speculation then theories are just figment of imagination. In our case our whole theory revolves around migration of aryans or more specifically VEDIC people into india. Now first thing we have got to do is check for is hint of that from vedas itself. Veda itself completely refutes any theory that vedic people came from foreign land. There is mention of 91 RIVERS in vedas and all of those rivers are present in Indian sub-continent, i.e - from pakistan to bengal. None of the rivers described are rivers of russia, ukraine, urasia or even iran. All the aryaland described in vedas too come under boundaries of indian sub-continent, so logically there is no chance that vedic people came from outside india, as if that was case at-least some rivers of europe or west asia would have been described in vedas for sure.


    All in all India was always inhabited by vedic people, it is absolutely illogical to believe in any theory which makes assumptions without any backing. Also most of articles you see on internet are written from european point of view, some of those articles are sheer propaganda of max mullers and his followers. Aryavartha = India= bharat varsha
    When the light has risen, there is no day, no night, neither existence nor non-existence; Siva alone is there. That is the eternal, the adorable light of Savitri, - and the ancient wisdom proceeded thence (Svetasvatara Upanishad IV-18). :)

  7. #17
    Join Date
    June 2010
    Location
    Kolkata
    Posts
    834
    Rep Power
    490

    Re: Human Migrations into India

    I thought we had discussion on this in some other thread. Still I would request you to refer to http://www.scientificamerican.com/ar...tory-of-humans

    The digital version has to be subscribed. I take the print version. As per the research the earliest human movement into India was in South from Africa and that was around 100000 yrs back.
    There after a branch moved along the west coastline and another moved to Srilanka and Andaman. This was around 65000 yrs back. Saraswathi civilisation was established (in the Gujrat area) thereafter. After the river dried up there was movement towards Indus valley and then to Ganges.

    However another branch from Africa came along the Middle east coast line to India (aorund 40000 yrs back). One offshoot from Africa went to Europe. Thereafter from the present Iran - Afghanistan one branch moved north. The Europe one moved east. Slowly they spread in the Asian China and Russia.

    One branch crossed over to Alaska and moved south to the southern America.

    This is the flow of DNA.

    Now some common sense.

    Without much protections, where would one find humans - obviously near fresh water and tropical climate areas. So earlier people were more comfortable in moving and populating the middle east (nearer to the rivers) and then the comfortable place India.

    Being such a fertile place and climate suitable for rich vegetation, agriculture and living would have been very easy. The advantage of agriculture is that you sow once and enjoy for the whole year. You have no work further. So the time you get can be used for many things - knowledge is one of them. The knowledge of society, town planning, astronomy, herbal utilities, life, creation, fabrics, etc. These all are possible in a stable society.

    Remember that when India was known for the weath of knowledge and wealth, the most of Europe and northern Asia were Nomads. They lived by hunting and lived by days. They lived on horse back. Such a society, which is not stable, cannot be the light house of knowledge !!!

    If such a branch came to India, where is the original beacon of light. We do not find the same level knowledge elsewhere !!! So this is a myth.

    That is why we see taxila and nalanda as the first universities where people used to come from all over the world.

    This supremacy of knowledge was a big blow to the Christianity. So the missionaries influenced Max Mueller to distort the history of India based on the theories of Bible.

    He himself had admitted later that there are no Aryan and Dravidian divide. the discovery of Indus valley civilisation and the recent gulf of cambay sites, etc have demolised the theory.

    DNA study has reveled that there is hardly any difference in the Indian population across India which might point out to any sudden influx of outside people. Yes there has been gradual assimilation of outside people over 1000s of years.

    Love and best wishes

  8. #18
    Join Date
    September 2007
    Location
    Canada
    Age
    70
    Posts
    7,191
    Rep Power
    5038

    Re: Human Migrations into India

    Vannakkam: It seems to me historians make great conjectures based on not too much. But maybe I'm wrong. According to this
    http://www.physorg.com/news/2011-03-...ly-humans.html

    tools were in use around a million years ago. Still the article points to a migration. But what happened during the other 996 000 years? Civilisations could have easily come and gone I think.

    Aum Namasivaya

  9. #19
    Join Date
    June 2011
    Location
    NJ, USA
    Age
    66
    Posts
    1,674
    Rep Power
    1694

    Re: Human Migrations into India

    Quote Originally Posted by Eastern Mind View Post
    Civilisations could have easily come and gone I think.

    Aum Namasivaya
    True. Something I read said the IVC did not just disappear, for example. The people may have moved eastward due to drought, famine or some other climate change. Or, why would it be impossible that they simply abandoned city life and took to a pastoral life again? Look at how many times there have been "back to nature" movements.

    And then there's the theories that there were civilizations that pre-dated even the Egyptians. If they existed, they left no trace. The Earth has a remarkable way of burying the past.

    And at the end of the day... we weren't there to see what happened. I think it doesn't matter how we got here, but rather that we're here, we know of God and connect with Him, and what we do with our lives. That's really what's important, imo.
    śivasya hridayam viṣṇur viṣṇoscha hridayam śivaḥ

  10. #20
    Join Date
    January 2008
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    741
    Rep Power
    0

    Re: Human Migrations into India

    For a complete analysis of genetic compositions of Indians (south Asians), read this article: http://www.omilosmeleton.gr/pdf/en/i...yan_Debate.pdf

    For obvious reasons, I support the Out of India theory. However, if one were to look at the issue objectively, the answer is definitely along the lines of Sanatana Dharma and everything related to Hinduism was discovered in the subcontinent. Were there migrations of different groups over the millenia? Sure. However, those people were NOT "Aryans" or some nonsense these euro-centric quacks keep harping about.

    Ancient India consisted of eastern parts of present-day Iran, all of Afghanistan, Pakistan, Bangladesh, Nepal etc. So there may have been people migrating left and right (pun-intended) but the so-called Aryan Invasion Theory is absolute bunk.

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 2 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 2 guests)

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •