lpetrich

OK, some quotes:
http://www.harappa.com/script/parpola6.html

Moreover, it is abundantly clear that the early Aryans were nomads and that the horse played a dominent role in their culture, as it did in the culture of their Proto-Indo-European-speaking ancestors. The horse is conspicuously absent from the many realistic representations of animals in the art of the Indus civilisation. Comprehensive recent bone analyses have yielded the conclusion that the horse was introduced to the subcontinent around the beginning of the second millennium B.C.
http://www.harappa.com/script/maha3.html

It has often been pointed out that the complete absence of the horse among the animals so prominently featured on the Indus seals is good evidence for the Non-Aryan character of the Indus Civilization. Parpola quotes from a fairly uptodate and authoritative report by Richard Meadow that there is as yet no convincing evidence for horse remains from archaeological sites in South Asia before the end of the second millennium BC. Many claims have been made, but few have been documented for independent verification. The wild relatives of the horse and donkey are not native to South Asia, and the domesticated animals were brought into the region from the west and north.

Parpola points out why the 'horse argument' is so central to the issue. The Proto-Aryan words for the horse and the various technical terms associated with the war chariot can all be solidly reconstructed to Proto-Indo-European. This is good linguistic evidence that the Vedic horse and chariotry are firmly rooted in the Proto-Indo-European heritage. The evidence strongly suggests that the Indus culture was non-Aryan.
http://www.harappa.com/script/dani0.html

Q: Do you think that the Indus Valley people could have been Aryans before the Rgvedic Aryans, another group of Aryans who had come down much earlier and created their own civilization?

"Whatever we know of the Aryans, from the literary records, in the Rgveda, the earliest book or the first nine books of the Rgveda, do not speak at all of any urban life. They speak of only rural life, villages, and as the Indus Civilization is an urban civilization, therefore to talk of any Aryan association with the urban life seems to me rather unthinkable.

If you read the entire book of the Rgveda and you will find it is totally rural life, not nomadic, they were agricultural no doubt, living in small villages. At the same time, they had no concept of irrigation, they had no use of dams on the rivers; in fact their god Indra is the destroyer of the dams. Hence the type of agriculture and the type of urban life the Indus Civilization people built up was beyond the conception of the Aryans or even the earlier Aryans."

LP:
I think that Mahadevan had made an error about when horses had been introduced to the Indian subcontinent; he had inadvertently mixed up "second millennium" and 2000 BCE. For a critical look at some anti-AIT views, check out
http://www.dalitstan.org/holocaust/n.../horsplay.html

Although that article is reasonably written, it is introduced with a claim that it smashes "Brahman supremacist" views.

HindooHeathen

LP :Whose argument is that? I've never seen that. It's reverence for HORSES that is "Aryan"

Boshko:a lot of the hindu religion (I believe) has roots in nomadic religion. For example the fixation with cows can probably be traced back to the imporatance to cows in herding cultures. (in the first page of this thread)

HH :What do you mean by reverence here? Horse is in no way more venerated than
the bull. Indra the chief Vedic deity is often compared with Bull,hound,hawk
while Sun is often associated with horses.Soma is central to the Vedic culture
which is also closely associated with Indra. It is through the sacrificial Soma offering that Indra gains his power to smite the serpent/dragon enemy.It is this Soma cult central to the Indra's existence not just "some rites associated with Indra", central to the Vedic lore and ritual, that Asko Porpola says is shared by Harappans and Vedic Aryans. Interestingly even in the vast
Sanskrit literature of later days it is elephant that is associated with Indra
not horse; goat is associated with Agni not horse; With Skanda the God of war,
peacock is associated not horse; with Shiva bull is associated not horse; with Vishnu hawk not horse. With Kal -the God of Death buffaloe not horse; with Kal Bhairav, dog not horse. With mother Goddess Sarasvathi swan not horse;with Durga lion and at times tiger, not horse.
(However in the interior South India you have folk deities called "Kaval Devatas" (town sentinels) who are non-Brahminical deities mounted on horses )

Fire worship (central to Vedas) is shared by Vedic Aryans and Harappans; Worship of mother Goddess is common to Vedic Aryans and Harappans; Harappans and Aryans also share the Soma ritual;
Harappan society had separate classes of priests and warriors like the Brahmins and Kshatriyas; But Vedic Aryans and Harappans are distinct. How logical and scientific! (Horses are prized possesions in Vedic lore... shall I say precisely because they are rare ...as rare as their presence in Harappa.Hi! That's in a lighter vain!)

HH :Not a single Horse seal? really? what do you make of the animal in the
top left corner of the URL: www.harappa.com/indus/32.html?



LP :What is enough?

HH :Of course I agree with LP on two counts that 34 ribs may be an individual variation or that the Vedic composers' lack of knowledge of horse anatomy. And it is also a logical assumption on the part of Dr. Kalyana Raman that equus sivalensis an indigenous variety could have had 34 ribs. (But I think it is highly unlikely given the fact that equus evolution has stablised long ago, as early as say 20 million years ago.)
But this is what Paul Kennai Manansala an expert archaeo-zoologist says "Deep in the specialized literature on horse classification, we can find that Indian and other horses extending to insular Southeast Asia were peculiar from other breed. All showed anatomical traces of admixture with the ancient equid known as Equus Sivalensis. …However, like that equid, the horse of southeastern Asia has peculiar zebra-like dentition. Also both were distinguished by a pre-orbital depression. The orbital region is important because it has been demonstrated as useful in classifying different species of equids. Finally, and most importantly in relation to the Vedic literature, the Indian horse has, like Equus Sivalensis, only 17 pairs of ribs.” (quoted by Dr.N.S.Rajaram in support of his Indigenous horse argument.

However given the short stature of many of the depicted horses throughout Indian history and the high demand for quality horse import from the Arabian lands, one can only conclude that the horses mentioned in Rig Veda should have been indic species. But what is "enough"? Here is an extract of the archaeological data
relating to the presence of horse.(all data is from Sarasvathi.simple.net.com)
A.K.Sharma, "The Harappan horse was buried under the dunes of...", in the Bulletin of the Indian Archaeological Society, No. 3,1992-93,pp. 30-34]: "At Surkotada the bones of the true horse (equus caballus Linn.)identified are from Period IA, IB and IC. (radiocarbon dates: 2315 B.C., 1940 B.C. and 1790 B.C respectively). With the correction factors, the dates fall between 2400 B.C. and 1700 B.C.The lower limit is atleast 200 years before the supposed aryan Invasion. The identification by Sharma has been endorsed by Prof. Sandor Bokonyi, Director of the Archaeological Institute, Budapest, Hungary (an archaeozoologist); he wrote in a letter dated 13 Dec. 1993 to the Director General of Archaeological Survey of India: 'Through a thorough study of the equid remains of the prehistoric settlement of Surkotada, Kutcha, excavated under the direction of Dr. J.P. Joshi, I can state the following: The occurrence of true horse (equus caballus L.) was evidenced by the enamel pattern of the upper and lower cheek and teeth and by the size and form of incisors and phalanges (toe bones). Since no wild horses lived in India in post-Pleistocene times, the domestic nature of the Surkotada horses is undoutbtful. This is also supported by an intermaxilla fragment whose incisor tooth shows clear signs of crib biting, a bad habit only existing among domestic horses which are not extensively used for war."
In 1938 Mackay (FEM, Vol. I, p. 289) had remarked on the discovery of a clay model of horse from Mohenjodaro. 'I personally take it to represent horse. I do not think we need be particularly surprised if it should be proved that the
horse existed thus early at Mohenjo-daro'. "Perhaps the most interesting of the model animals is one that I personally take to represent a horse.' (Mackay 1938, vol. I, p. 289; vol. II, pl. LXXVIII).Lothal has yielded a terracotta figure of a horse. It has an elongated body and a thick stumpy tail, mane is marked out over the neck with a low ridge. Faunal remains at Lothal yielded a second upper molar. Bhola Nath of the Zoological Survey of India and GV Sreenivasa Rao of the Archaeological Survey of India note (S.R.Rao, 1985, p. 641):
'The single tooth of the horse referred to above indicates the presence of the horse at Lothal during the Harappan period. The tooth from Lothal resembles closely with that of the modern horse and has pli-caballian (a minute fold near the base of the spur or protocone) which is well distinguishable character of the cheek teeth of the horse. '"However, the most startling discovery comes from the recent excavation at Nausharo, conducted by Jarrige et al. (in press). In the Harappan levels over here have been found clearly identifiable terracotta figurines of this animal." (Lal, 1998, opcit., p. 112).
[Complete data taken from Sarasvati.simplenet.com; a bit of edition with a few comments inserted by me.]

Also thank you for the Dalistan.org article. A notorious hate site whose heroes include Osama Bin Laden. A website which offers capital punishment to the home minister of India; The kind of politics that goes
with AIT can be gauged by the site. Apart from the pro-Christian fundamentalist and Muslim fundamentalist stand the website takes it conjures up a theory that Brahmins are responsible for all the evils of India.
A stand not much different from Nazi stand on Jews.In fact I was thinking of giving a link to this website to show that the kind of hate politics AIT triggers in India today. Thank you LP, for doing me this favour. The article itself is from an Indian magazine Frontline. Witzel's article is more an attack on Dr. Rajaram. As I have mentioned in my previous post over the same subject, I tell again that the only thing the so-called hoax has done is presenting a picture of the seal that is qualitatively inferior to the one presented in the Frontline.

But no touches have been given by Dr.N.S.Rajaram to make it look like a horse
regarding another foreign object, supposed to be inserted by Rajaram, it is pretty much nonsense. If it is an object like the stands before the Unicorn symbols then it would go against the Rajaram's thesis that the seal should have represented a horse, as such an object is strongly associated with unicorn
symbols. Further in the artist impression given of the full seal the so-called
object inserted by Dr. Rajaram does not appear. So it serves no real purpose.
Hence the theory that Dr. Rajaram manipulated the seal through computers
is malicious. Remember that the photo-copy of the seal was given by Sri.Jha. A Sanskrit scholar living in the suburbs of a West Bemngal town. Surely the quality of photo he gets should be inferior to the one got by a Harvard Academician. But that in no way repudiates the basic thesis of Dr. Rajaram.
As far as the artist's impression of the seal one is free to agree or disagree.
And it is my opinion that the high quality photoes in no way disprove what Dr. Rajaram and N.S.Jha have proposed.

I consider the so-called "Piltdown horse hoax" the worst case of name calling
and a result of non-academic perverted mindset, which panicks when its enshrined
theories are questioned by a newer generation.

After all, Dr. Rajaram knows one of the South Indian (so-called Dravidian) languages
as his mother tongue and also knows Sanskrit. And has more advantages than any
arm-chair academician parroting repeated theories and straight-jacketing facts to fit
what he may consider as the "pinnacle of the 19th century European intellect"!

So LP, given the volatile nature of the horse-seal/hoaxing the hoax controversy
less said will be better. In this connection let us also remember that the very same

Witzel has renounced the AIT in an internet forum for Indology. His exact words: "It seems clear now that the Vedas were entirely composed in India, not in Central Asia as sometimes conjectured. Vedicists now stress that the term "Aryans" in the Vedas referred not to a 'race' but to members of a
particular culture that was already indigenous in northwestern South Asia by
the time the earliest Vedic texts were composed" See the messages section of www.infinityfoundation.com

He is also notorious for fabricating evidence by mistranslating later day
Vedic verses to support his AMT theory.
See: http://sarasvati.simplenet.com/AMT.html


For a critical evaluation of Asko Porpola's hypothesis read Sethna, K.D. 'The Problem of Aryan Origins (from an Indian Point of View)
Delhi: Aditya Prakashan, 1992.
Edwin Bryant's comments: "This 1992 ed (as opposed to the 1980 one), has a 200 pg.
supplement which meticulously critiques Asko Parpola's speculations on the coming of
the Aryans into India. Sethna's book is generally well written and provocative. It is also free from Nationalistic undertones."

As regard to the so-called rural nature of Vedic society, the material aspects of culture presented in Vedas paint a different picture.Bhagavan Singh has presented a sizable list of all Rig Vedic words representing the material culture in his book The Vedic Harappans. New Delhi: Aditya Prakashan, 1995.
Rig Vedic refernces to thousand pillared houses, thousand doored houses,
pillars of copper covered with gold, purs made of stone (asanmaya), and of
plaster (dehya) which are prthvi, bahula and urvi are not exactly rural imagery leave alone pastoral musings.


Also there are many plausible explanations for the not-much abundance of horse seals
in ISV civilization.Seals mostly represnt rituals and official icons. A
Brahmin-Kshatriya conflict has always been recorded in early Indian history.
(Kshatriya harassment of Brahmins has been recorded even in MahaBharatha.
Anti-Brahminism can be read in Ramayan, MahaBharath and even Upanishads if
one reads it taht way.) While horses are prized possessions of Kshatriyas it
is the cattle which is always desired by the Brahmins.

Sun is very closely associated with horses in Vedas. Gayatri mantra is the
most important Vedic hymn associated with Sun. Interestingly the perceptor of this
hymn is a Kshatriya. So the sun-horse cult can be associated with Kshatriyas while Indra-bull-Soma cult can be associated with Brahmins.Surely there should have been Brahmins who should have accepted the Sun-horse cult and vice versa.The picture
is not one of absolutely divided cults on the lines of Yaheewah and his competitors!
(Remember that the relation between different groups is determined by the Vedic verse Ekam sat vibra pahutha vathanthi rather than "I alone am your God")

This is just a possible scenario but has more simplicity and validity than
AIT thesis for horse-seal rarity.Occum's razor!

The priestly superiority evidenced in ISV can account for the rarity of horse-seals
which is not the same as their absence which in turn is empirically wrong.


Due to some unavoidable circumstances, 11/Aug to 20/Aug I will not be able to make
any posts nor read them. I am creating a web page on how AIT academicians and
Frontline hoaxed a hoax called "Piltdown horse hoax". I will surely let you know when I upload it (mostly within 25-Aug).

[ August 10, 2001: Message edited by: HindooHeathen ]

lpetrich

LP:
First, I'd like to point out this excellent and careful article: http://www.people.fas.harvard.edu/~witzel/EJVS-7-3.htm

Witzel notes quite correctly that some nomadic tribes have simply not left a big archeological footprint; the Huns left no known footprint until a few Hun graves were found a few decades ago in Hungary. This would account for why some archeologists have claimed that there was no invasion -- the invaders may have had an archeological footprint as small as the Huns'.

Witzel also notes that many of the leading 19th-cy. Indo-Europeanists were Germans, who had little interest in supporting British imperialism. Their Aryan-invasion hypothesis was derived from analogies with Germanic and Hunnic invasions of the Roman Empire.

Witzel even notes that the 34 horse ribs in the Vedas may be some sort of numeric symbolism, with the number of ribs being the number of gods.

LP earlier:
Whose argument is that? I've never seen that. It's reverence for HORSES that is "Aryan"

HH:
Boshko: [...]

LP:
So what?

HH:
What do you mean by reverence here? Horse is in no way more venerated than the bull. ...

LP:
However, the anti-AIT folx acknowledge the significance of horses in the Vedas with their quest for evidence of Harappan horses.

HH:
(However in the interior South India you have folk deities called "Kaval Devatas" (town sentinels) who are non-Brahminical deities mounted on horses )

LP:
Horses have had a long time to spread since Vedic times. And "kaval" looks like it might be a borrowing from some Romance language, such as Portuguese (cavalo).

HH:
Harappan society had separate classes of priests and warriors like the Brahmins and Kshatriyas;

LP:
I've yet to see direct evidence of that.

HH:
(Horses are prized possesions in Vedic lore... shall I say precisely because they are rare ...as rare as their presence in Harappa.Hi! That's in a lighter vain!)

LP:
However, horses don't seem unusually rare in the Vedas.

HH:
Not a single Horse seal? really? ... [example of what HH thinks is a horse...]

LP:
Seems rather ambiguous. And why isn't anyone shown riding one of these?

HH:
Also thank you for the Dalistan.org article. A notorious hate site whose heroes include Osama Bin Laden. A website which offers capital punishment to the home minister of India; The kind of politics that goes
with AIT can be gauged by the site. ...

LP:
Politics I don't share and that Witzel certainly doesn't share.

HH:
[a lot of vacuous defense of Dr. Rajaram...]

I consider the so-called "Piltdown horse hoax" the worst case of name calling and a result of non-academic perverted mindset, which panicks when its enshrined theories are questioned by a newer generation.

LP:
Grow up.

HH:
Witzel has renounced the AIT in an internet forum for Indology. His exact words: "It seems clear now that the Vedas were entirely composed in India, not in Central Asia as sometimes conjectured. Vedicists now stress that the term "Aryans" in the Vedas referred not to a 'race' but to members of a particular culture that was already indigenous in northwestern South Asia by the time the earliest Vedic texts were composed"

LP:
So what if the Vedas had been composed in India instead of in central Asia?

HH:
Rig Vedic refernces to thousand pillared houses, thousand doored houses, pillars of copper covered with gold, purs made of stone (asanmaya), and of plaster (dehya) which are prthvi, bahula and urvi are not exactly rural imagery leave alone pastoral musings.

LP:
Mythological houses of the Gods. Who certainly would want big and fancy houses

HH:
Also there are many plausible explanations for the not-much abundance of horse seals in ISV civilization.Seals mostly represnt rituals and official icons. [theory that the owners of these seals were from some group that was opposed to a group of horse-lovers...]

LP:
Very ingenious.

HindooHeathen

As I said I will not be able to put in any post but I shall put in some brief comments
The large message of Witzel is a cut and paste job.
Remeber again that anti-AIT people do not hold that all aspects of Indian culture and Indian population is 100% Indic. India has always taken pride in our ability to assimilate, absorb, promote diversity and grow. What we have opposed is the attempt of colonial administrators and missionaries and so-called Indoogists to read racial aspects in Vedic lore. This is totally wrong, motivated and unscientific.


See Michael Witzel, Department of Sanskrit & Indian Studies, Harvard University:
at http://www.infinityfoundation.com/EC...okframeset.htm
Let me put his entire statement:
The Indus Valley civilization was the largest scale civilization among all ancient civilizations in the world, covering the whole northwest of the South Asia, including the plains of the Indus, its tributaries, and the surrounding areas (stretching from eastern Afghanistan to Delhi, from the Himalayas to the Indian ocean, and from Baluchistan to Gujarat). It was thus significantly larger than the civilizations west of it, and it also was significantly more advanced and technologically more skilled in many ways.

For instance, water management and other infrastructure in the cities was far ahead of other places;and fayence beads were more developed than anywhere. Such items are detailed in a recent comprehensive summary by one of the two project leaders excavating at Harappa. (Kenoyer, J. M. Ancient Cities of the Indus Valley Civilization. Oxford: Oxford University Press. 1998.)

The transition from hunting and gathering to agriculture in the Indus Valley is now dated about 7000/6500 BCE, based on excavations by the French scholar Jarrige. Agriculture developed more or less at the same time everywhere from Egypt, Palestine, Mesopotamia, Turkmenia, Afghanistan and the Indus. An interesting point is that the Vedic word for 'wheat', 'godhuuma', and the Dravidian 'godi' have West Asian relatives: 'gantuma', 'hant', 'kent' etc.

Scholars are now certain that Harappa was an indigenous civilization, and not one imported from anywhere else. Indigenous early writing at Harappa is now attested already at 3300 BCE, that is, at the same time that Egyptian and Mesopotamian writing developed. There was mutual influence and trade between the Indus and Greater Iran and Mesopotamia - distinct Indus seals have been found in ancient sites in Israel, Iraq, and the Persian Gulf.

Regarding the previous view that Aryans 'invaded' India, this is now challenged by recent findings in archaeology and textual studies. It would not be an authoritative claim that any such 'invasion' happened, even though the actual process of cultural development and/or transfer is still unclear. A more detailed study of South Asian genetic data will probably help. A new book in press by Edwin Bryant (currently at Harvard), takes the position that there was no invasion or immigration into India by foreign 'Aryans'. Enormous pioneering developments were made indigenously in the Indus area, which is not to exclude the possibility of outside influence, but the nature and magnitude of this influence was much smaller than previously believed.

It seems clear now that the Vedas were entirely composed in India, not in Central Asia as sometimes conjectured. Vedicists now stress that the term "Aryans" in the Vedas referred not to a 'race' but to members of a particular culture that was already indigenous in northwestern South Asia by the time the earliest Vedic texts were composed.

[That was Witzel not me!]

Was there at ISV Civilization, a startification of society based on work similar to or the same as caste system? Yes!
Any evidence?
At :http://www.harappa.com/seal/16.html

Accompanying note states:

The first sign (from the left), the most common in the Indus script (10% of all known signs), is read by him as denoting a jar or sacrificial vessel (Sanskrit equivalent Sata) and probably denotes the concept of a priest.

He understands the second as denoting a lance or spear (Sanskrit equivalent Salya) and suggests that as a terminal sign it designates a warrior at the end of names.
(In India caste names are always the end names.)

The center sign he thinks refers to a bearer (Sanskrit equivalent Vahana) as in office holder or functionary; he notes that in old Tamil ministers and senior officers are known literally as "yoke bearers" (kaviti).
(Which are all even today alive in India as
dominant castes)

The fourth sign, which the unicorn seal being discussed here ends with, is read by him as a compound of the first and third, jar and bearer (Sanskrit equivalent Sata­vahana), and probably denotes an officer with priestly duties.
My insertion here: Also are the caste called Pandaris who belong to priestly caste in many Indian states. In many Indian words there is strong association of this caste-name with jars.[/b]

The fifth sign is read as a compound of the second and third, lance and bearer (Sanskrit equivalent Salya­vahana), and probably denotes an officer with military duties.

The whole problem of IVS archeology and Vedic literature is a complex one. And is separated from us by atleast 5000 years. But to read into such a problem scenarios which are their own cultural projections with motives not exactly academic has created enough bad blood in both academic and political milieus. In the ground reality of India missionaries have often much benefited. Today as old theories crumble down and serious scholars start seeng newer patterns it will be nice if we can see data for ourselves and judge rather than taking a BB attitude and asking others to grow.

A simple example of your faulty assumptions: Kaval is a very ancient Tamil word. But you see a Portugal/Roman connection
why not it be the other way round? Why should it always be that "Aryans" should always come from the West? Words should always come from the West? Clearly you don't even know the basic aspects of so-called Dravidian language nor Sanskrit. Though not a scholar I know both languages and also I come up in a cultural milieu that is more closely connected to whatever taht was ISV civilization than you! Do you realize that some arguments like fanciful Gods houses etc. are too simplitic to be considered seriously for an academic debate!So in Vedic lore any urban milieu depicted is fanatsy and rural milieus are realistic! The very word for man in Vedic language Purusha means urban dweller! So I can see with pain how the some of the so-called academics of your civilization see their own history in ours and how vested interests are always ready to cash in on the same(see Dalistan.org as the perfect example)

phaedrus

LP

That is certainly correct; writing was re-acquired in India, as it had been in Greece, and the Aryan invaders had had no writing. I think that you might want to try to understand this argument that the ancestral Indo-European speakers had not had writing:

If you choose to continue to use the words "invaders" and "invasion", could you try to substantiate it?

IE speakers didnt know how to write and how do you propose that they learnt to write?

Because primary sources are sometimes hard to find; I wish to thank hinduwoman for being so helpful here.

I am sure you have enough secondary sources which provide the verses in which the references which you claim are made?

phaedrus:
As Colin Renfrew very rightly pointed out, linguistic evidence in isolation doesnt do anyone any good.

LP:
So what?

Means no point harping about linguistic evidence in isolation. The whole issue is still up for garbs and future developments in the fields of archaeology and genetics and linguistics will "probably" throw more conclusive light on the issue. Till then everyone is shooting arrows in the dark.

Which means that having a word is not enough, I will concede. But the Vedas do not describe the horse as some exotic beast of some distant land; the Vedas describe horses as widely-used in the society that their creators had lived in.

I was referring to harappan script having a word for the horse. And regarding the vedas...again certain verses would be useful. FYI, even at BMAC, which was supposedly the staging area for successive migrations, we are yet to find horse remains

phaedrus:
Can you substantiate them knowing how to build chariots while they were in the mountains??

LP:
One can use chariots in valleys in mountainous areas.

I repeat my question, so while in the mountains they used to carry around the parts of the chariots and carry iron/metal all around with them? And once they reach the flat terrain they start assembling the parts??

Or they landed up in the flat terrain figured out how to make a chariot and then mined the iron ore required?

JP

lpetrich

Phaedrus:
IE speakers didnt know how to write and how do you propose that they learnt to write?

LP:
In nearly every case, writing systems were borrowed. Exceptions like ogham and runic were probably a case of stimulus diffusion.

Phaedrus:
Means no point harping about linguistic evidence in isolation. The whole issue is still up for garbs and future developments in the fields of archaeology and genetics and linguistics will "probably" throw more conclusive light on the issue. Till then everyone is shooting arrows in the dark.

LP:
So what? So why not stop carping about such questions as this and get down to business?

Phaedrus:
I was referring to harappan script having a word for the horse. And regarding the vedas...again certain verses would be useful. FYI, even at BMAC, which was supposedly the staging area for successive migrations, we are yet to find horse remains.

LP:
And there aren't any clear cases of Harappan horses either. One curious problem is that there is another equine species that might get confused with our familiar domestic horses if one is not careful: the Asiatic half-ass or hemione or onager.

Phaedrus:
I repeat my question, so while in the mountains they used to carry around the parts of the chariots and carry iron/metal all around with them? And once they reach the flat terrain they start assembling the parts??

LP:
Yes, that's what had sometimes been done with chariots -- lug them around in such a fashion. In fact, chariots had often had their wheels removed for storage.

lpetrich

HindooHeathen:
The large message of Witzel is a cut and paste job.

LP:
He is to be thanked for willing to answer the anti-AIT folx; many in academia think that debunking crackpottery is not worth their time, that doing so somehow dignifies it. And there is also the pragmatic argument that time and effort for debunking is time and effort that might be spent on some more worthwhile thing.

HH:
Remeber again that anti-AIT people do not hold that all aspects of Indian culture and Indian population is 100% Indic. India has always taken pride in our ability to assimilate, absorb, promote diversity and grow. What we have opposed is the attempt of colonial administrators and missionaries and so-called Indoogists to read racial aspects in Vedic lore. This is totally wrong, motivated and unscientific.

LP:
An evasive comment.

HH:
[Harappan achievements...]

LP:
Great achievements, yes, but that does not demonstrate that Sanskrit had not been introduced from outside.

HH:
It seems clear now that the Vedas were entirely composed in India, not in Central Asia as sometimes conjectured. Vedicists now stress that the term "Aryans" in the Vedas referred not to a 'race' but to members of a particular culture that was already indigenous in northwestern South Asia by the time the earliest Vedic texts were composed.

[That was Witzel not me!]

LP:
So what? You quote Witzel like a creationist quoting an evolutionary biologist; Witzel rejects anti-AIT views; he was noting that the Vedas were composed after the Aryans had resided a few centuries in India.

HH:
Was there at ISV Civilization, a startification of society based on work similar to or the same as caste system? Yes!
Any evidence?
At: http://www.harappa.com/seal/16.html

[quotes of Mahadevan's interpretations...]

LP:
However, those only indicate occupations, and not necessarily Hindu-style castes.

HH:
The whole problem of IVS archeology and Vedic literature is a complex one. And is separated from us by atleast 5000 years. But to read into such a problem scenarios which are their own cultural projections with motives not exactly academic has created enough bad blood in both academic and political milieus. In the ground reality of India missionaries have often much benefited. ...

LP:
Pure conspiracy-mongering.

HH:
A simple example of your faulty assumptions: Kaval is a very ancient Tamil word. But you see a Portugal/Roman connection why not it be the other way round? Why should it always be that ...

LP:
I don't think the other way is an absolute impossibility; I think in this case that it is very improbable. The Romance words for "horse" originated from Roman Empire Spoken Latin *caballus [reconstructed]; the origin of that word is obscure. And it's a long way between the Roman Empire and southern India.

So either the Dravidian word was borrowed, or if Dravidian "kaval" is older than Portuguese contacts, it is a coincidence.

HH:
... Do you realize that some arguments like fanciful Gods houses etc. are too simplitic to be considered seriously for an academic debate! So in Vedic lore any urban milieu depicted is fanatsy and rural milieus are realistic! ...

LP:
What do you call a house with a hundred pillars? Or a boat with a hundred oars? I'd put those in the same realm of fantasy that I put Indra's 1000 testicles.

phaedrus

LP

In nearly every case, writing systems were borrowed. Exceptions like ogham and runic were probably a case of stimulus diffusion.

Borrowed from whom? As per Kroeber who formulated the concept of stimulus diffusion - it is a concept in which the receiving culture adopts ideas and patterns from the outside source, gives them a new, native content and is thus propelled in directions it would not otherwise have taken. So how do you want to link this concept to writing in the sub-continent?

So what? So why not stop carping about such questions as this and get down to business?

What is the "business" ? Finding out truth in the best way possible instead of assuming things? Well if that is the business, dont propose a theory of invasion just based on linguistic evidence. It needs other important fields like archaeology and genetics to come out with some evidence which will throw light on the issue either way.

And there aren't any clear cases of Harappan horses either. One curious problem is that there is another equine species that might get confused with our familiar domestic horses if one is not careful: the Asiatic half-ass or hemione or onager.

So basically, the lack of horses in Harappan cant be used as any proof, just like the way the absence of them at BMAC cant be used right?

Now coming to your next point, do you think the ancients would have been able to make out the difference between a half-ass or hemione or onager and a horse (the beings which you suggest were brought in by the aryans??). What if the ancients of the indus valley thought those three categories you mention as "horses"? There was no well set framework of reference they had at that time to call the animal differently since it is not entirely a "horse" as per our modern perspecitve??

Yes, that's what had sometimes been done with chariots -- lug them around in such a fashion. In fact, chariots had often had their wheels removed for storage

Could you substantiate this statement?

lpetrich

[QUOTE]Originally posted by phaedrus:
[QB]LP

LP:
In nearly every case, writing systems were borrowed. Exceptions like ogham and runic were probably a case of stimulus diffusion.

Phaedrus:
Borrowed from whom? As per Kroeber who formulated the concept of stimulus diffusion - ...

LP:
That depends on the writing system. Our familiar system, the Roman or Latin alphabet, is a modification of the Greek alphabet, which is a modification of some Levantine-coast Semitic alphabet, thus making it a relative of the Hebrew and Arabic alphabets. Nearly all of the languages of Europe are written with the Roman alphabet, the main exceptions are Greek and some eastern European languages; the latter are written wtih another modification of the Greek alphabet: the Cyrillic alphabet.

Going eastward, we find that Farsi and Urdu are written with the Arabic alphabet and Hindi with Devanagari, a modification of the Brahmi alphabet, which is in turn likely to be some modification of some Semitic alphabet.

In ancient Turkey, Hittite had been written with the Mesopotamian cuneiform script; however, that script disappeared with the Hittite Empire in about 1200 BCE, a time of great disasters (Sea Peoples in Egypt, fall of Mycenaean palaces, etc.).

Phaedrus, you ought to try learning about the history of writing some time; it would save you a lot of trouble.

LP:
And there aren't any clear cases of Harappan horses either. One curious problem is that there is another equine species that might get confused with our familiar domestic horses if one is not careful: the Asiatic half-ass or hemione or onager.

Phaedrus:
So basically, the lack of horses in Harappan cant be used as any proof, just like the way the absence of them at BMAC cant be used right?

LP:
No, I'm mentioning this because some of the older literature has not been careful in distinguishing onagers and horses.

LP:
Yes, that's what had sometimes been done with chariots -- lug them around in such a fashion. In fact, chariots had often had their wheels removed for storage

Phaedrus:
Could you substantiate this statement?

LP:
One example is in the Mycenaean palace records; those palaces' bookkeepers had meticulously recorded chariots and wheels separately.

phaedrus

LP

and Hindi with Devanagari, a modification of the Brahmi alphabet, which is in turn likely to be some modification of some Semitic alphabet.

Why havent you talked about Sanskrit? And since you use the word "likely" above, can u substantiate devanagari being a modification of "some" semitic alphabet?

And given that harappan script was indigenous, would it mean the residents were much more advanced? And the nomads re-acquired writing since they killed all the locals or maybe the locals refused to let them in on the knowledge about the writing?

And if the aryans arrived with no knowledge of writing, how did the write durign the maurya period? How did it dawn on them?

Phaedrus, you ought to try learning about the history of writing some time; it would save you a lot of trouble.

Err...when did i suggest that i dont know, i said i am not an expert in the field of linguistics, that doesnt necessarily imply i dont know anything about the field. I am merely questioning you


No, I'm mentioning this because some of the older literature has not been careful in distinguishing onagers and horses.

By older literature, what are you referring to here?

And when i said So basically, the lack of horses in Harappan cant be used as any proof, just like the way the absence of them at BMAC cant be used right?, i meant that just like the absence at BMAC cant be used to say that aryans who passed that way didnt know about horses, one cant say that the abscence at harappa doesnt imply that they werent any horses.

One example is in the Mycenaean palace records; those palaces' bookkeepers had meticulously recorded chariots and wheels separately.

Err in your world, is this what called a substantiating a statement? I asked you can you substantiate the knowledge of chariots and when the IE speakers acquired it and if they managed to lug them around in the mountains to assemble them in the valleys, is there any direct proof? What was the metal used?

And can you provide a link or quote where it mentions about chariots being assembled and carried out separately in parts and being assembled later in a flat terrain for warfare?

And how come nomadic tribes have learnt how to build chariots { i wonder how a nomadic horde of barbarians wrote (or constructed verbally) books like the Vedas }? And if they had the knowledge, are there any other sites which fall in the "supposed path" they took to the subcontinent, which have the remains?

And how come there are no chariots or horse remains at harappa itself if they conquering hoards overcome the local population there?


And what happened to this???

And finally do you still perfer to use the words "invasion" and "invaders" as you did in your original post?? If so, state your reasons.

Edited to fix some text

[ August 14, 2001: Message edited by: phaedrus ]