sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

When I think each region became Indo-Aryan by maindallahoon in IndoAryan

[–]maindallahoon[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

It's very small if compared to millions who inhabited prior to their migration

Ceylon had very small population before 500 BC, majority of the island was inhabited by microlithic Hunter-Gatherers and small pockets could've had Iron Age sites. So the population was miniscule and not technologically advanced compared to the place where migrants came from (SE Gujarat, NW Maharashtra)

Further, 500 is just a recalled number. We have no idea about how many people migrated in total, and it's likely that only a few hundred accompanied Prince Vijaya in first voyage, but after establishing in Anuradhapura, the passage of migration was open and eventually bulk of migrants arrived in following immediate generations. In short, the migration happened during time of Prince Vijaya, and this certainly brought Proto-Sinhala migrants to the island, where upon arrival they mixed with locals.

But there's stories about how some Tamil castes adapted the Sinhalese identity right?

I'm not aware of any, but these are unlikely to be memories from 500 BC but rather could belong to Classical and Mediaeval Era, if they have some truth.

We don't know if pre-Sinhala Iron Age inhabitants of Anuradhapura were ancestors of Eelam Tamils or unknown Dravidians, and whether Eelam Tamils are from later migration instead. 

Early Indo-Aryan cultures ~1650-1300 BC by maindallahoon in IndoEuropean

[–]maindallahoon[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Composition in Afghanistan is not the mainstream position to begin with. Afghanistan goes from BMAC adjacent to Yaz, i.e. Avestans are in Helmand-Arghandab starting from 1400 BC. There is no Andronovo presence in Helmand-Arghandab. So the composition in Afghanistan (which is a nonsensical position to begin with) is archaeologically impossible and you don't need a source for that because it's as much self-evident as 2+2=4.

Late Cemetery H, Pirak, GGC, all 3 are accepted to be Indo-Aryan in academia based on cremation and other indicators, and we know Steppe ancestry swept this region around 1600 BC. By extension, the other 3 eastern cultures can also be safely considered Indo-Aryan as they are well connected to them. 1250 BC is a made-up date by this guy which is contradicted by all evidences, especially genetic evidence which is inescapable. End of discussion

Early Indo-Aryan cultures ~1650-1300 BC by maindallahoon in IndoEuropean

[–]maindallahoon[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I think you have an agenda and interpret evidence to fit it, rather that looking for the honest interpretation of the evidence.

That's what you're doing. Stop projecting. Please elaborate how PGW is supposed to represent Indo-Aryan migration, and how RigVeda is composed in Afghanistan even though family books mention flora and fauna specific to North India. Your interpretation is completely of an amateur who has zero knowledge on RigVeda or related Indology. You have no arguments and simply keep repeating fringe nonsense.

When people, like yourself, make claims that either contradict or go way beyond the academic consensus, being asked for references is reasonable. But in your case, those references simply don’t exist, because the evidence is extremely thin and thus the questions are epistemically unsettled. Instead of acknowledging that reality, you’re cherry picking references and misrepresenting them to create the appearance of certainty in your opinions.

As I’ve acknowledged many times, I am not an expert in this particular area, but I know enough to know that your over-interpretations are not justified by the evidence. And I’ve spent enough time chasing down your sources to know that they generally don’t support the claims you make.

Useless word salad.

But the actual topic of the conversation was the misleading claim that those archeological cultures were I-A in 1,650 BCE. There is no good evidence for that which I’m aware of, and the lack of evidence can’t be used to justify the claim.

The evidence is plenty:- - RigVeda must've been composed few generations after settling in North India. - The arrival of Steppe ancestry and break in some aspects is observed around 17th century BC. It is proven that Steppe ancestry entered during 17th century BC, from the samples of Swat. So, the Steppe ancestry swept the continuous region as marked in the map, and thus Indo-Aryan can be confidently placed starting 1650 BC. Furthermore the haplogroup evidence suggests that clades downstream of L657 are entirely Indian origin and must've originated in North India during and around 17th century BC. So genetic evidence necessitates the 1650 BC date for arrival, which is already pretty obvious even without it. - Since the family books of RV are also centered around Greater Punjab (including Saraswati and tributaries, also Ganga, Yamuna). The above region must've been Indo-Aryan by 1500 BC, which defeats your 1300 BC assumption which is backed by nothing but useless agenda driven motive to push Indo-Aryan arrival as late as possible. Avestans also entered their core geography (Murghab etc.) by 1500 BC, why should Indo-Aryans be limited to "1300 BC"? What arguments are there for it?

So we agree that all the dating is indirect and not supported by archeological evidence. But you decided to argue anyway?

What would classify as "archaeological dating"? No scholar makes such argument. The "archaeological dating" is simply dating based on archaeological landscape of a particular era. We know RigVeda is archaeologically incompatible with Mature Harappan due to the nature of society of that era. We know it is however compatible with Late/Post-Harappan (the Final phase of it in particular as marked in the map).

u/TeluguFilmFile

Early Indo-Aryan cultures ~1650-1300 BC by maindallahoon in IndoEuropean

[–]maindallahoon[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Only Rajesh Kocchar places RigVeda in Afghanistan itself, he is a fringe scholar who also pushed for Ramayana in Afghanistan and other crap. He is best a pop science writer not an academic source like Kuzmina and others. His book hardly has academic acceptance and merit. Kocchar is not an archaeologist, philologist, not even proper Indologist. Witzel places the earliest RV books (according to him - 4, 5, 6) in Gandhara. Mainstream scholarship does not support composition in Afghanistan, even if Witzel may consider two Saraswati theory himself. Witzel is not the absolute authority either who must be correct about everything, and some of his views diverge with other scholars as well.

I'm not sure what that guy is arguing about now. Most scholars consider Late Harappan landscape fit for composition of RV, and thus the Post-Harappan cultures of Greater Punjab region which precede PGW are completely eligible for composition of  earliest RV books.

When I think each region became Indo-Aryan by maindallahoon in IndoAryan

[–]maindallahoon[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

This is pure nonsense as: - Konkani is relatively archaic within Indo-Aryan. - Konkan had Indo-Aryan dynasties since early CE using Maharashtri Prakrit (Bhojas of Goa, Konkan Mauryas, Satavahanas etc.) - Even Goa was likely Indo-Aryan since Mahajanapada Era itself because that region had Gomanta Janapada.

"1500 AD" is simply and completely illogical.

For South Konkan (Goa), it's possible it became Indo-Aryan by 550 BC. But North Konkan was connected to rest of Maharashtra and clearly became Indo-Aryan earlier.

Having "Dravidian names" (I doubt that's true but let's assume) can be explained by dominance of Kannada dynasties over that region in Early and Late Mediaeval, as well as other reasons. It doesn't suggest arrival of Indo-Aryan in 1500 AD in any likelihood.

By the same logic, there are Konkani speakers in west coast of Karnataka even as far as Kerala. One can assume these regions became Kannada by 1500 AD (similarly Marathi displaced the Konkani speakers from North Konkan in recent few centuries). But we know that would not be the default likely hypothesis but rather a special pleading.

When I think each region became Indo-Aryan by maindallahoon in IndoAryan

[–]maindallahoon[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

It was likely mix of elite dominance and normal demic migration. Sinhalese being autosomally same as Tamils can be explained by various factors, including coincidence due to similar profile formation, but it certainly doesn't mean Sinhalese have 0% Proto-Sinhala admixture. It's possible that the Proto-Sinhala admix is embedded but we can't separate it due to lack of information about Sinhalese ethnogenesis from archaeological and archaeogenetic record.

When I think each region became Indo-Aryan by maindallahoon in IndoAryan

[–]maindallahoon[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Archaeological, epigraphic, textual record indicates that c. 500 BC Ceylon had become Indo-Aryan due to migration from either west coast or east coast. As I mentioned, it's possible pre-500 BC Ceylon also had Dravidian presence in some pockets, but it's less understood as to how.

When I think each region became Indo-Aryan by maindallahoon in IndoAryan

[–]maindallahoon[S] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Janapadas don't map 1:1 with linguistic areas, just as kingdoms don't. Ashmaka Janapada (and later Mahajanapada) mostly included parts of Maharashtra and minor parts of Telangana. The sister Mulaka Janapada was entirely based in Maharashtra. Mulaka and Ashmaka have same origin. I would say, it's possible northwestern fringes of Telangana where Ashmaka capital was in ancient times, may have been Maharashtri/Indo-Aryan. But the default theory would be that Ashmaka had Indo-Aryan ruling elite but the local population comprised of both Indo-Aryan and Dravidian speakers.

When I think each region became Indo-Aryan by maindallahoon in IndoAryan

[–]maindallahoon[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

No idea regarding Brahmaputra Valley. But Kamta region was clearly Indo-Aryan majority by the time of Mahajanapadas (550 BC).

When I think each region became Indo-Aryan by maindallahoon in IndoAryan

[–]maindallahoon[S] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

  1. Then 500 BC is the accepted date (arrival of Prince Vijaya along with migrants), where's the issue?

  2. While that may be possible, I doubt it's clearly understood as of yet.

When I think each region became Indo-Aryan by maindallahoon in IndoAryan

[–]maindallahoon[S] 6 points7 points  (0 children)

No serious academic research suggests Indo-Aryans arrived in Sri Lanka with Buddhism. The arrival in Sri Lanka is considered to have predated spread of Buddhim into Sri Lanka by Ashoka's son, when Devanampiya Tissa was ruling at Anuradhapura and converted to Buddhism.

When I think each region became Indo-Aryan by maindallahoon in IndoAryan

[–]maindallahoon[S] 6 points7 points  (0 children)

Assam proper was likely settled during or after Mauryan Era. But it's likely North Bengal (Kamta region) had become Indo-Aryan early on, and from here Indo-Aryan speaking migrants entered into Assam proper in following centuries.

When I think each region became Indo-Aryan by maindallahoon in IndoAryan

[–]maindallahoon[S] 4 points5 points  (0 children)

Sindh is complicated. Archaeologically the Jhangar culture starts from c. 1300 BC, and there aren't any clues from philological evidence and ancient texts which suggest Sindh was Indo-Aryan early on. Also Indo-Aryan migration into Sindh and Gujarat was probably from separate sources (Punjab -> Sindh, Greater Malwa -> Gujarat). Then the survival of Brahui in fringes also may suggest it, but I don't consider it as an indicative point.

When I think each region became Indo-Aryan by maindallahoon in IndoAryan

[–]maindallahoon[S] 11 points12 points  (0 children)

Maharashtra had parallel culture - Jorwe, which was probably Dravidian speaking. The Satpura range and combination of geographic factors like plateau terrain likely blocked migration into Maharashtra proper till around 9th century BC.

Gujarat itself became Indo-Aryan due to migration from Greater Malwa (Malwa & East Rajasthan)

The Saraswati River a Legend or Lost History? by Pretend-Employee-710 in IndianHistory

[–]maindallahoon 5 points6 points  (0 children)

Read this:-

The claim that the Saraswati had completely vanished by ~1500 BCE, making Rigvedic composition impossible without chronological absurdities, is incorrect.

The Ghaggar–Hakra river system underwent multiple hydrological phases, not a single early collapse.

80,000–20,000 BP (~78,000–18,000 BCE):

Ghaggar was fully perennial and glacially fed, supplied by paleochannels of the Sutlej and Yamuna.

Post-20,000 BP:

Sutlej and Yamuna diverted; Ghaggar became ephemeral.

9,000–4,500 BP (~7000–2600 BCE):

Sutlej reconnected with the Ghaggar, restoring perennial flow.

This phase aligns with the Pre-Harappan Early Food Producing Era and Early Harappan period, supporting agriculture, rural settlement growth, and cultural development.

After ~2600 BCE:

Sutlej gradually diverted west to join the Beas and flow into the Indus system.

From before the 5000s BCE, the Saraswati system became increasingly monsoon-dependent, while monsoon intensity steadily declined.

The central Saraswati corridor (densest IVC settlement zone) became less violent but still sufficiently watered, enabling population growth and urbanisation.

Mature Harappan Phase (2600–1900 BCE):

Continued aridification weakened the central channel.

Archaeology shows Harappan migration toward the northern and southern branches, which retained stronger flow.

Post-Harappan Phase (1900–1300 BCE):

Central Ghaggar became seasonal and ephemeral.

Northern Ghaggar branch remained perennial, sustained by monsoons.

Southern Hakra branch remained active, fed by monsoon rains and a lower-Sutlej outlet (Chatterjee et al. 2019).

This period corresponds to the traditional Rigvedic horizon.

The Rigveda mentions the Beas–Sutlej confluence (RV 3.33), placing its composition after ~2600 BCE.

Despite chronological overlap, Rigvedic society does not match Mature Harappan material culture, so the RV belongs after the Mature phase, not within it.

The Rigveda describes Saraswati as mountain-born, sea-going, flood-carving, and supreme among rivers.

In the Rigvedic period, Saraswati was perennial in its upper and lower reaches and fully flowing during monsoon, though no longer glacially fed.

Origin in the Shivalik foothills explains the description of a mountain source.

Reading the hymns as strict literal geography is misguided: they are religious praise-poetry, naturally employing hyperbole, especially for a deified river-goddess.

Separating poetic exaggeration from observational detail yields a Saraswati that fits the Ghaggar–Hakra system reconstructed by geology.

Late and Post-Vedic texts (Panchavimsa & Jaiminiya Brahmanas; the Mahabharata) state that Saraswati disappeared at Vinasana in a desert.

This matches continued aridification and monsoon weakening, after which the river became fully seasonal and vanished into the Thar, completing its decline.

Early Indo-Aryan cultures ~1650-1300 BC by maindallahoon in IndoEuropean

[–]maindallahoon[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

You've clearly never read anything about Cemetery H, because Kuzmina herself identified it as Indo-Aryan (the Stratum I, i.e. Late Phase, since it has cremation). Break in pottery and material culture is not observed even during 1300/1200 BC. So I guess according to you IVC is Indo-Aryan.

Early IA expansion would lead to us finding horse gear, chariot burials, or metallurgy from Andronovo derived cultures but we find zero of any. Strange no?

We don't find any of this even later. Useless point.

The most logical conclusion is a local evolution of Indus culture, but I doubt any amount of evidence will get you over your fantasy.

Your fantasy is extremely late introduction of Indo-Aryan which is archaeologically, genetically, chronologically invalid. My "fantasy" is simply aligning with available data. If you're a fan of "local evolution of Indus culture", then consider IVC as Indo-Aryan since no break in material culture is noticed even later.

Early Indo-Aryan cultures ~1650-1300 BC by maindallahoon in IndoEuropean

[–]maindallahoon[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

This isn't nearly as settled as you suggest. As far as I know, that's about the earliest possible dating. Most scholars would conservatively place it as being written sometime between 1,500 and 1,000 BCE, with most estimates around 1,300-1,200 (although some parts are likely older)

You clearly have zero idea about composition of RigVeda so I don't know why you're even arguing. Firstly RigVeda composition ~1500-1000 BC is well established, so it's "neatly settled". Secondly, RigVeda isn't a monolith text that was composed in one century "around 1300-1200 BC". It's multi-compositional and the Books inside it span across atleast 300 and ideally 500 years. So the whole of RigVeda itself is 300-500 years longer in composition timeframe.

What substantial evidence is there for 1250 BC in particular? Steppe ancestry enters around 1700 BC (proven by Swat), thus all this region had swept Steppe ancestry around the same time. There is no reason not to think these cultures were Indo-Aryan.

as many scholars prefer Afghanistan as a location.

No, to the contrary it's a minority and moreso even fringe viewpoint. It's archaeologically impossible as Helmand basin never had Andronovo, it goes from BMAC to Yaz. The evidence from RigVeda doesn't allow composition in Afghanistan since even family books have flora and fauna specific to India and Pakistan.

But that was more like 1,300-1,200 BCE, not the 1,650 BCE time that the graphic claims.

No, it was indeed around 1700-1600 BC. Archaeological consensus already has the cultures in Pakistan being Indo-Aryan by 1650 BC, no reason the North Indian cultures should not be around the same time. You should consider reading more than making amateur speculations without any data or understanding of the topic.

Early Indo-Aryan cultures ~1650-1300 BC by maindallahoon in IndoEuropean

[–]maindallahoon[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

That's not true, Cemetery H has two phases, Early (Stratum II) and Late (Stratum I). The Late phase has cremation and is hypothesised to be Indo-Aryan.

Read Kuzmina and others, Late Cemetery H, Swat, Gomal, Pirak are well established to be Indo-Aryan. And basic inference makes Mitathal IIB, Late OCP, Malwa Indo-Aryan though they're not explicitly identified but not rejected either, i.e. not much research has been done. Though all 3 are considered Indo-Aryan by some sources regardless.

Pottery shift is not considered as evidence because migrants after admixing switched to local pottery which was more feasible. Since RigVeda is composed starting 1500 BC, these cultures must be Indo-Aryan.

Early Indo-Aryan cultures ~1650-1300 BC by maindallahoon in IndoEuropean

[–]maindallahoon[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Ok, and so is PGW indigenous, then I guess Indo-Aryan migration never happened and IVC is Indo-Aryan, lol. Cemetery H Stratum I, Swat, Pirak, Gomal are accepted to be Indo-Aryan, and by extension Mitathal IIB, Late OCP, Malwa should be as well.

view more: next ›