...
Post A Reply
my profile
|
directory
login
|
register
|
search
|
faq
|
forum home
»
EgyptSearch Forums
»
Deshret
»
If I had a $ dollar 5…..pay up!
» Post A Reply
Post A Reply
Login Name:
Password:
Message Icon:
Message:
HTML is not enabled.
UBB Code™ is enabled.
[QUOTE]Originally posted by Clyde Winters: [QB] Mindovermatter you have to understand that much of the research on ancient Indians is based on Hindutva nationalism. The Hindutva are radical Hindus who are anti-Dalit, Muslim, Dravidians and etc. Archaeological research makes it clear that the Indo-Aryan speaking Hindus of North India only arrived in India 1200 BC--they are using the diversity of M haplogroups among South Indians to make it appear that Indo-Aryan speakers were the first settlers of India. But as made clear among the papers in this book there is no support between the spread of AMH to India and the M haplogroup. Your theory is interesting but it fails to understand the history of India and the origin of the people of India. The North Indians and Dravidians have different origins. The North Indians are descendants of white Central Asians who mated with the Dravidians after the entered India around 1200 BC. Reich et al, Reconstructing Indian population history, Nature 461:489-494 claims that the Indian Cline divides Indians into two groups Ancestral North Indians (ANI) and Ancestral South Indians (ANS). [IMG]http://assets.cambridge.org/97811070/17856/cover/9781107017856.jpg[/IMG] [b]Southern Asia, Australia and the Search for Human Origins edited by Robin Dennell, Martin Porr[/b] http://books.google.com/books?hl=en&lr=&id=DuWfAgAAQBAJ&oi=fnd&pg=PA [b]Southern Asia, Australia and the Search for Human Origins edited by Robin Dennell, Martin Porr[/b] is an interesting book. Blinkhorn and Petraglia wrote Chapter 6: Assessing Models for the Dispersal of Modern Human to South Asia . This chapter is very interesting. We learn that there is little skeletal or archaeological evidence to support the spread of AMH to India between 50-65kya, probably due to changes in the sea level. These changes may have led to many early sites containing AMH remains--presently under water. The best evidence of AMH in India date back to 30kya. This evidence shows a relationship between Howiesons Poort (South African) and South Indian microlithic industries. This suggest a Khoisan migration into the area, since we see the expansion of Khoisan into western Eurasia around the same time, i.e. the Aurignacian culture. South Indian traditions claim a land mass formerly connected India to East Africa. The increased sea levels suggest that we may never know the actual history for the spread of AMH to India. Many archaeologist fail to recognize the actual history of AMH in India. They spend their time attempting to make Dravidians the original settlers of India. The original settlers of India are the Munda people. The Dravidians only came to India 4.5kya. If the Khoisan did settle India they probably introduced haplogroup N lineages R and U. This would explain the presence of mtDNA R among the Munda. The Munda people may not have took the coastal route to India. If you are interested in learning more about the Munda see: http://ispub.com/IJBA/4/2/5591 Since the Khoisan carried haplogroup R when they entered Europe, they would have been carriers of this haplogroup when they entered the caves. As a result, Proto Europeans would have carried R haplogroup when they exited the caves after 2000. The Iranian and other Southern “whites” (the name the Germans call Middle Easteren “whites”) have different origins. The white Europeans are descendants of the Cro-Magnon Blacks (Khoisan) who entered the caves during the last Ice Age and remained in the caves until around 2000 BC. The ancestors of the Turks and other Middle Eastern whites are the Gutians. These Gutians were hill people who were often engaged in wars with the Sumerians and Akkadians. The Hindutva has popularized the idea that the Aryan Invasion Theory (AIT), which maintains that nomadic Indo-Aryan speaking populations invaded India, is a lie ; and that Indo-Aryan people have always lived in India and were founders of the Indus Valley Civilization (IVC). To deny AIT, you have to prove that North India 1) was not originally occupied by non-Indo-Aryan speaking people; and 2) Indo-Aryan speaking people have always been settled in Northern India. This is impossible because we know that the original inhabitants of North India used the black-and red ware (BRW) ceramic tradition. Around the time Indo-Aryans, have been hypothesized as invading India (c. 800-1200 BC), we see the introduction of people using painted grey ware (PGW), and the disappearance of the users of BRW. Most Indo-Aryans entered India around 1000-800 BC. This would explain why almost all of the dependable PGW dates cluster around 800-350 BC. Because the first wave Aryans probably entered India peacefully , before 1000BC there probably existed vast bilingualism in North India and other areas where Dravidian speaking populations are found outside South India. 33 The Aryans adopted many cultural elements from the indigenous Indian people. This was especially true of Dravidian gods like Vishnu, Krishna and Shiva. Over time the Aryan invaders began to unite their own gods and those of the Dravidian speaking population. But they made sure to keep the Dravidian gods in a subservient role. For example, Krishna is often represented as driving the chariot of Arjuna. Although the Aryans took much of their civilization from the Dravidian speaking population, they continued to practice their own religion. This religion was reconstituted by the adoption of many of the Dravidian gods and religious practices. The Aryan invasion/elite dominance model explains the existence of the Hurrian-Mitanni religious and horsemenship terms in Hindu civilization. These terms became part of an interlanguage phenomena when the Hurrian-Mitanni and Iranian speakers met in Iran and created the Proto-Indo-Aryan speaking “populations”. Once the Aryan speakers crossed the Iranian Plateau and moved their way into India they came in contact with the Dravidian speaking population. At this time we probably had the Aryan population speaking a mixed language made up of Hurrian-Mitanni and Iranian dialects entering an area where Dravidian dialects were already being spoken. After hundreds of years of bilingualism there developed an interlanguage phenomena that became a permenant feature of the literate or elite segments of Northern India after the Aryans took control of the area. The Aryans adopted many native terms, but due to their elite 34 status they imposed their religion on the locals. We can define the institutionalization of an interlanguage as language recombination, i.e., the mixing of the vocabulary and structures of the substratum language (Dravidian) and the superstratum (Elamite-Iranian-Hurrian-Mitanni) language(s) to form a new mixed language: Indo-Aryan. The invention of an interlanguage in Northern India would account for the correspondence in grammar and vocabulary between Dravidian and Indo-Aryan, and Iranian and Hurrian-Mitanni on the other. In summary there was an Aryan invasion of India. The invaders came from from Iran. The invaders spoke Iranian dialects, Elamite and Hurrian-Mitanni. The Iranians and Hurrians fused their gods into one religion that became Hinduism. The Aryans made painted grey ware. They entered India in two waves. A peaceful wave between 1300-1000 BC and a violent wave of conquest between 1000- 350 BC. The Indo-Aryan language spoken in India is an interlanguage. This language includes vocabulary and grammar from Iranian dialects, Hurrian-Mitanni and the Dravidian languages. [/QB][/QUOTE]
Instant Graemlins
Instant UBB Code™
What is UBB Code™?
Options
Disable Graemlins in this post.
*** Click here to review this topic. ***
Contact Us
|
EgyptSearch!
(c) 2015 EgyptSearch.com
Powered by UBB.classic™ 6.7.3