From: george knysh
Message: 43552
Date: 2006-02-23
> fact****GK:The Scythian example PROVES that absence of
> > > that the text of
> > > the Rig Veda does not provide any evidence of
> > > presummed "invasions"
> > > "migrations," "trickles" what ever one choses to
> > > call them.
> >
> > GK: Neither does the Scythian Foundation
> Legend
> > for the Scythians. So the absence of any such
> > reference in the Rig Veda does not prove that the
> > Indo-Aryans developed as an autochthonous group.
>
> The absence in Scythia foundation legend does not
> mean the
> "Indo-Aryans" were not an authchtonous group!
>*****GK: Presumably the locals who interacted with
> > We have to use other indicators. Those mentioned
> by Klejn
> > are pretty good (a combination of indubitable
> > archaeological and linguistic facts).
>
> Use astronomy, geology, and mathmatics for instance.
> The Rig Veda
> refers to the River Sarasvati which geologists say
> dried up around
> 1900 BCE long before the supposed invisble trickles.
>*****GK: This, whatever the "this" is, shows nothing
> >
> >
> > The Rig
> > > Veda and Vedic civilization is *perfectly
> > > compatible* with Indus
> > > Sarasvati Civilization i.e "Harrapa."
> >
> > GK: I don't think so. Where is the military
> > war-chariot Harappan aristocracy? Where are the
> > prototypes of latter-day temples for the worship
> of
> > Vedic deities?
> As for chariots Agarwal (2006),
>
> "Archaeologists B. K. Thapar and Rafique Mughal
> mention that a sherd
> depicting a canopied cart with spoked wheels was
> unearthed from
> pre-Harappan levels at Banawali. R.S. Bisht reports
> that at Banawali,
> a pot sherd depicting a canopied cart with spoked
> wheels was found at
> pre-Indus levels. Bisht is the excavator of the
> site. This shows that
> the Harappans apparently possessed the relevant
> technology to fashion
> light vehicles with spoked wheels.
> are not attested****GK: Could I and others be mistaken about the time
> in the archaeological record of the Indian
> subcontinent till about the
> middle of first millennium BCE,"
>****GK: The technology would have arrived along with
> If the chariots were brought in by the trickling
> "Indo-Aryans" then
> why are they not attested for a full 1000 years
> after their supposed
> arrival? In any case the introduction of a new
> technology does not
> mean sweeping linguistic and cultural changes.
>*****GK: The Indus script has not been deciphered, and
>
>
>
>
> Harappa was a brilliant "middle class
> > type" civilization, speaking and writing an
> unknown
> > language (pehaps Dravidian, perhaps Munda, perhaps
> X)
> > which imploded for a variety of reasons.
>
> That is correct. The language is *unknown*; and
> "unknown" includes
> Indo-Aryan! See Subhash Kak's work on the Indus
> script as cited by
> Bryant (2001)
>****GK: Yawn... Does anyone question this?****
>
>
> Its physical
> > heirs (the Late Harappans) were reorganized as a
> > "Vedic" society under the religious and political
> > influence of incoming Indo-Aryans. The notion of a
> > mass religious conversion (with political and
> > linguistic implications) seems quite
> plausible.
> Let us review the facts.
>
> 1. A very ancient text Rig Veda is in an
> "Indo-European" language.
>****GK: Which does not prove that its fundamentals
> 2. The text itself does not say its composers are
> foreign or were once
> foreign to their present locations.
>****GK: For which we are all most grateful.*****
> 3. The text has been preserved faithfuly for
> thousands of years like a
> tape recording by the people of the Indian
> Subcontinent.
>*****GK: Fine and dandy.*****
> 4. Every single flora and fauna mentioned in the
> text occur in the
> Indian subcontinent, all the rivers are still
> present except the
> Sarasvati which has dried up.
>*****GK: Good for him.******
> 5. The one and only ancient grammarian of any
> "Indo-European"
> language, the legendary Panini once lived in South
> Asia,
>*****GK: That is not true except in a trivial
> 6. There is no evidence of any other language ever
> been spoken in
> North Western South Asia except the "Indo-Aryan."
> There is a clear*****GK: Religious? Where is the proof the classical
> religious,
> region from very*****GK: The rest was truncated. But really, what is
> ancient times (Kenoyer, McIntosh, Lal, Schaffer,
> Litchentstein and a
> host of other archaeologist have repeatedly
> confirmed this.)
>
> May I ask, what then disqualifies the people of the
> INDIAN
>=== message truncated ===