> Dear all,
>
> Frankly one thing I can not understand is this-
>
> how the dating of Arayns as being conjectured today, fits into the
context
> of the world history?
>
> For eg, if the Arkaim Culture of 17th century and that of Mitannis have
> something in common, that is Influence of Indic Aryans. Arkaim is a
full
> blown civilization and so is that of Hurrians. In between how come
the Indic
> Aryans are not only uncivilized nomads inspite of having chariots
(they are
> not exactly chariots, they are rathas)? And more interestingly,
they have
> created a greater civilization of their own, highly distinct with
complex
> potry and rituals and identification (Gothras) not only so very fast,
> probably in the next 100 years or so but also, it is something fantastic
> that this Aryan culture became substratum for the indegenous
cultures of
> India, if any.
>
> Kishore patnaik
>
The contradictory proposals that IE were wandering nomads and yet were
held to have originated from a specific abode, and that they were
primitive tribesmen and yet were able to formulate and utilize a
language as intricate and complex as Indo European is a fallacy at
best. In India, they could rise to an Identification system that
very scientifically prohibits endogamy, proving that the population
available is quite large and does not indicate a small tribe. Kosambi
and others clearly derived that Gotra is pre varna. In other words,
the migrations if any should have left a large trial of
archaeological finds . What is more fantastic that in every case,
the IE was the substratum totally eradicating the ethnic culture
almost without a trace.
While the major branches of the main trunk of proto IE gathered
strength , looked healthy and spread far and wide, the latter , at
the same time, withered, shriveled and failed to show any indication
of life and vitality and disappeared from sight and was lost for ever
without leaving any trace or mark that might lead to its
identification, nor could any fossil remains of it be detected or
found out , so that it could be inferred that such a society in such a
stage of development existed at one time, on the surface of the earth.
The old Romantists have given rise to the racial theories as well as
the diffusion of Aryans from one specific area, other than India.
While the racial theories that have been developed from these old
beliefs were effectively refuted, since they do not fit into the
western beliefs- especially since hold these theories in terror , post
world wars, the linguistic theories giving rise to the AIT has been
kept alive.
The liturgical, archaeological or proof from the traditions do not
support such diffusion. The only proof that is there is the
linguistics. But how this is reliable>?
In fact, there is evidence to prove that the laws of linguistics tree
and borrowings were formulated mostly based on Rg Vedic geography.
The Europeans have believed that , post Indus valley, the Aryans have
migrated from West to East. Thus, the language in the books
pertaining to East is thought to be more modern than those involving
the Western area geography.(such as Punjab)
These beliefs are incorporated into linguistics- the language of the
books of west is archaic compared to that in the books of east.
Accordingly, the three laws of linguistics are framed and based on
this, the AIT is kept alive till today.
In other words, if Europeans believed that there was no AIT and the
diffusions of Aryans is from east to west, then the stratification
of RV books would have acquired an exact reverse order. Thus, the
laws of linguistics which have followed these beliefs would have
exactly the results opposite what they are giving today. There is
not one single proof or method which can condemn this statement and
can give an objective tree of linguistic follow up.
In any case, it is weird that the Europeans still blindly follow the
Biblical chronology and the philological remnants of Romantics.
Kishore patnaik