Re: Aryan invasion theory and race

--- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, "Francesco Brighenti" <frabrig@...> wrote:

>
> --- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, "shivkhokra" <shivkhokra@> wrote:
>
> > Francesco quoted Hindu mythology texts to support his thesis of
> > foreigners marrying with Indians.
>
> No, you're again misrepresenting me. I did not quote "Hindu mythology" texts in support of my thesis. <..>
>

<lots of speculations of the kind this or that could have happened snipped>

Well some call Mbh a mythology text. Regarding Manu Smriti you are again reading it with an assumption that yavans mentioned their are Greeks. As has been shown from the MbH thread on this list yavans were just not Greeks. This term was used for Indic people from the north east in MbH. Manu is also using it in similar lists as given in MbH.

>
> It is true that there appears to be very few epigraphical sources testifying to intermarriage between Yavanas, Sakas, Hunas and Hindu women. The ones I have traced so far relate to the Western Satrap Rudradaman (c. 150 CE), a Hinduized Saka king who claims in his Junagarh rock insctiption to have "wreathed with many garlands at the svayamvaras [a special form of marriage confined to royal
> families -- FB] of kings' daughters", and who "established matrimonial relations with a number of Hindu ruling houses, specially the Satavahanas, the Ikshvakus and probably also the Lichchhavis" (see at http://tinyurl.com/lzseb7). Therefore, after a couple of centuries of acculturation in India the Sakas (at least their rulers), defined "degraded kshatriyas" in the previous epoch, could finally marry Hindu kshatriya princesses? This seems likely, according to the historians.
>

It may sound rehashing to all but can you explain what Hinduisation of Saka stands for? I have asked you this before (Who, when, how?). And just for the record Siddharta who later became Buddha also belonged to a group called Shakyas and they were Hindus.

>
> What I wrote, and this is the last time I repeat it to you, is that genomic research *evidently* still hasn't the proper instruments to detect traces of "foreign blood" in Hindu caste populations. The resolution of these genetic studies is still too low. And you have still to reply to my big question:
>

Why evidently Francesco? Which evidence are you talking about?
No inscriptional or textual evidence. No evidence in the genes either. Is'nt it time to ditch this theory?

> What was the fate of the descendants of the Yavana, Saka, Pahlava, Kushana, Huna etc. invaders of India, if they never intermarried with Hindu caste populations as per your hypothesis? Where they estinguished, exterminated, exiled by the "pure Hindu race", or did all of them become sterile so that they left no progeny, or what else?
>

Each group most likely did some of the following:
a) If these groups were able to establish themselves in a geography, soon enough they got their women to join them, if they were not already travelling with them. For example we know that Selucus offered his greek daughter in marriage to the magadha king.

b) Local women were captured. (It would perhaps surprise you that for most non-Hindu kings, sons of concubines, could ascend the throne as legal heirs).

Regards,
Shivraj