--- In cybalist@..., george knysh <gknysh@...> wrote:
> ***GK: I gather that an alternative scenario would
> have the Indo-Aryan invasion(s) (or rather
> infiltration(s)) take place after the demise of the
> Harappan civilization, moving into a power vacuum so
> to speak.****
VA: That possibility has been proposed by some. However,
archaeological data continues to mount showing that while the urban
features of IVC declined drastically after 1900 BC -1700 BC, the
civilization continued to linger on as a rural one. Especially in the
region between Ganga and Beas rivers, one sees a clear overlap
between post-Mature Harappan and PGW and other later cultures, which
is archaeologically taken to mean a continutity of culture and
civilization with no significant intrusion of foreign traits.
The other problem is the age of the drying of river Sarasvati. A
study of settlement patterns has led some archaeologists/geologists
to propose that the river was on the verge of death by 1500 BC and
dried up soon after to its present status (excepting a few wetter
periods around 500 BC, then around the time of Christ and so on,
again attested archaeologically). This scenario is in conflict with
the descriptions of Saraswati not only in the RV but also in later
Sutra literature (where the Saraswati is still a perenniel stream
upto Vinashana). Moreover, Sanskrit literature clearly alludes to the
series of events leading to dessication of Saraswati and there is no
proof that this story could have been borrowed by incomming IA
speakers from pre-existing speakers of 'X', proto-Dravidian or
of 'Austric' languages.
Likewise, there is some archaeological evidence of migration of IVC
people towards Haryana, E. Punjab, Uttar Pradesh, Madhya Pradesh,
Rajasthan in the north, and towards Maharashtra and Karnataka in the
South. These areas happen to be predominatly IA speaking for as long
as we know and for as long as we have literary evidence.
It might be of your interest to know that archaeological data showing
the late survival of Harappan features, and absence of intrusive
elements (beyond Baluchistan highlands and NWFP in Pakistan) have
forced several Indologists to revise their theories. For instance,
Michael Witzel earlier postulated around 1700 BC-1500 BC as the date
of arrival of Aryans into India but has now been pushing the dates
closer to 1000 BC. In his latest publication (web article), he now
even advocates that Dravidian speakers also entered India along with
Aryans, and both displaced Austric speakers.
>
> ****GK: What is that evidence, and how can one be sure
> that it covers precisely this time frame?*****
VA: The time frame is fixed by comparing the human remains from
various archaeological levels genetically, from the phenotype
perspective and then comparing them with present day resident
populations of those areas. A good resource on this is
God-apes and fossil men : paleoanthropology of South Asia / Kenneth
A. R. Kennedy.
Published Ann Arbor : University of Michigan Press, c2000.
Description xvii, 480 p. : ill., maps ; 26 cm.
> *****GK: But there is the analogy of the Scythian
> Foundation Legend. Recorded by Herodotus in 450 BC, it
> gives the impression that the Scythians were
> autochtons. Yet their leading component, the Paralata
> (Pararya-ta) had arrived scarcely two centuries
> earlier.*****
VA: I will read the 'Histories' to understand what you are saying.
Herodotus cannot be trusted completely BTW for many of his
descriptions are fantastic. And there is a difference between a
random legend and a massive corpus of literature which is perhaps 6
times the length of the Bible.
> *****GK: I would have thought that pretty solid
> linguistic proof existed to indicate that the spread
> of Indo-European languages from an Indian heartland is
> not a tenable hypothesis. So a movement in the
> opposite direction must have occurred.*****
VA: I used the wrong words. I should have said that there is no proof
from non-linguistic quarters that IA speakers came to India and
eventually spread their language amongst 80% people of south Asia.
As I have said on this list earlier perhaps, I am quite open to the
notion that IA languages entered India from Central Asia. However, I
do believe that this happened perhaps in the early third millennium
or even earlier. The sum total of evidence from various areas like
archaeology etc. makes it very improbably that such a change happened
during or post IVC, except perhaps in areas south of Vindhyas (that
are now IA speaking).
> *****GK: On the other hand, what about a "better tank"
> model? Again there is analogy further north. Better
> bows, better military tactics etc. explain the
> victories of some groupings over others. Why could
> this not have happened in the south?******
VA: I am not aware of any archaeological evidence of better tanks,
better bows, better military tactics. In fact, the IVC area seems to
offer no evidence of any sustained or devastating invasion at all.
Some archaeologists have actually gone to the extent of calling the
IVC a peaceful realm, as the title of this recent book (a worth read
for anyone who wants to know more about IVC) shows -
McIntosh, Jane. A peaceful realm: the rise and fall of the Indus
civilization. Boulder: Westview Press, 2002.
Also, there is no evidence of a trail of chariots or of horses etc.
from Central Asia into India.
No literary evidence.
No genetic evidence.
Regards
Vishal