PDA

View Full Version : Decipherment of the Indus Valley Script



brahman
20 December 2011, 06:38 AM
http://images.sciencedaily.com/2009/04/090423142316-large.jpg






Very sincere attempt. Read >>> (http://www.indoeurohome.com/)

Mana
20 December 2011, 08:00 AM
Namaste brahman,

Quite extraordinary, thank you so much for posting.

praNAma

mana

Jainarayan
20 December 2011, 09:33 AM
Maybe apropos nothing, satellite images show what is probably the course of the ancient Saraswati River. Interesting to note the article mentions the Persians living in the region of the Harovaiti river. Considering the known and regular sound shift from Sanskrit s to Persian h, the Haro[h]vaiti could very easily be the Saras[v]ati.

Some theories I read suggest that the IVC was abandoned not because of any "invasion", but due to climate change which caused a drier climate, forcing the people of the IVC to move eastwards towards the Ganges.

For my money the IVC had to be proto-Indic and the language proto-Sanskrit, with the people arriving about 50,000 years BCE. I think the origins of the IVC and Indoeuropean languages including Sanskrit are far, far older than linguists and archaeologists believe.

TTCUSM
20 December 2011, 06:55 PM
Maybe apropos nothing, satellite images show what is probably the course of the ancient Saraswati River. Interesting to note the article mentions the Persians living in the region of the Harovaiti river. Considering the known and regular sound shift from Sanskrit s to Persian h, the Haro[h]vaiti could very easily be the Saras[v]ati.

Some theories I read suggest that the IVC was abandoned not because of any "invasion", but due to climate change which caused a drier climate, forcing the people of the IVC to move eastwards towards the Ganges.

For my money the IVC had to be proto-Indic and the language proto-Sanskrit, with the people arriving about 50,000 years BCE. I think the origins of the IVC and Indoeuropean languages including Sanskrit are far, far older than linguists and archaeologists believe.

TBTL,

The Vedas mention a conflict between Aryans (followers of the Vedic religion) and Dasas (enemies of the Aryans). Traditionally, it was believed that the Dasas were Dravidians who built the IVC and now inhabit South India.
However, there are no Dravidian tribes that refer to themselves as "Dasas". Instead, the term "Daha" refers to a Persian tribe. The conflict in the Vedas most likely describes the migration of Persians out of India rather than a migration of Aryans into India.

dhyandev
06 August 2012, 01:25 PM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kwYxHPXIaao

inquiringmind
13 March 2013, 12:17 AM
The conflict in the Vedas most likely describes the migration of Persians out of India rather than a migration of Aryans into India.

If that's true, is it at all possible that the Latvian (and other Eastern and Central European People) originated from the Indus Valley Civilization?

yajvan
13 March 2013, 09:01 PM
hariḥ oṁ
~~~~~~
namasté

I looked at the site offered and frankly I thought I was looking at 1,000 sticks thrown to the ground and it was up to me to build a story from it.
I am sure there must be something I am missing.

iti śivaṁ

kallol
14 March 2013, 01:27 AM
I have never heard that vedas have indicated the aryan and dravidians. These are invention of Max Muller under the influence of Christian Missionaries.

If you go by DNA trail (Scientific American) then the southern India had been populated around 120000 years back. The group gradually moved from south to north - swaraswati rivers to north west and east. There was another branch from africka from the middle east side around 40000 years ago.

That is why Gulf of Cambay discovery (done by NIOT in 2001-2) is dated at 13000+ BC. These cities are submerged in sea at 40 mtrs depth and have similar features as Harappa / Mohenjodero.

The base hinduism was most probably started in south and evolved to its best by the time it migrated to north.

Again if you see Tamil script, it is an incomplete script. Whereas all other Indian languages have 40 consonents, old tamil had 16-18 consonents. As the people moved from south to north, the script also evolved with more consonents and by the time sanskrit was evolved, it was a full blown language. Latter Tamil took some consonents from Sanskrit.

If Aryans were from any other parts of the world, it would have mentaions in the scriptures and also we would ahve seen the Mother group (with all the similar knowledges) somewhere in central asia. These theories were proposed anly to keep the supremacy of Christianity intact.

It would be better to explore more, analyse more with common sense.

shiv.somashekhar
14 March 2013, 05:00 PM
I have never heard that vedas have indicated the aryan and dravidians. These are invention of Max Muller under the influence of Christian Missionaries.

Wasn't there a discussion on the dark skinned enemies of the Aryas sometime ago? Dark skinned has been interpreted in various ways (people, demons, metaphors, etc). Do you have some evidence to show that Max Mueller invented them?


That is why Gulf of Cambay discovery (done by NIOT in 2001-2) is dated at 13000+ BC. These cities are submerged in sea at 40 mtrs depth and have similar features as Harappa / Mohenjodero.

Can you please post some evidence for the 13000 BC date? No part of IVC has been dated to such an early time.


Again if you see Tamil script, it is an incomplete script. Whereas all other Indian languages have 40 consonents, old tamil had 16-18 consonents. As the people moved from south to north, the script also evolved with more consonents and by the time sanskrit was evolved, it was a full blown language. Latter Tamil took some consonents from Sanskrit.

This assumes sanskrit evolved out of tamil. Any evidence to support that?


If Aryans were from any other parts of the world, it would have mentaions in the scriptures and also we would ahve seen the Mother group (with all the similar knowledges) somewhere in central asia.

I do not think anyone claims Aryans are from a different part of the world. Rather, they share common origins with ancient Greeks and ancient Persians owing to strikingly similar languages, etc. And due to this common background the Eurasian Steppe (which is a large area) was considered the likely origin. A conspiracy theory would have had this place of origin as Berlin or London or the Vatican, I would think.


These theories were proposed anly to keep the supremacy of Christianity intact.

This is without basis. When was the supremacy of Christianity under threat by Indians? How does claiming a Eurasian origin for Aryans work in favor of Christianity which originated somewhere else? Next thing you know, a set of patriotic Indians will create a conspiracy theory around "Out of Africa" and claim the first humans originated in India and then moved to Africa!


It would be better to explore more, analyse more with common sense.

Which (unfortunately) does not appear to be the case with most people on Hindu discussion forums. Rather than approach the topic without bias and consider a variety of sources, they prefer to rely on propoganda based internet artices - all with the predetermined mindset that India must be the origin of everything and anyone who differs is part of a grand conspiracy.

It is interesting that Al Beruni noticed a similar attitude when he visited India a 1000 years ago. Here is the relevant portion, though it will invite the wrath of many -

The Hindus believe, there is no country but theirs, no religion like theirs and no science like theirs. They are by nature niggardly in communicating their knowledge and they take the greatest possible care to withhold it from men of another caste among their own people and much more, from foreigners. If you tell them about scholars in Khurasan or Persia, they will think you are an ignoramus and a liar. if they traveled and mingled with people of other nations, they would quickly change their minds as their ancestors were not as narrow-minded (quotes Varaha-Mihira here as example where he acknowledged Greek contribution to Indian astronomy).

When I showed them some of the elements on which science rests, pointing out logical deduction and scientific methods, they flocked eagerly around me, asking me which Hindu master I had learnt this from!

A bigger extract is here -
http://shivsomashekhar.wordpress.com/category/history/

jignyAsu
14 March 2013, 07:45 PM
Which (unfortunately) does not appear to be the case with most people on Hindu discussion forums. Rather than approach the topic without bias and consider a variety of sources, they prefer to rely on propoganda based internet artices - all with the predetermined mindset that India must be the origin of everything and anyone who differs is part of a grand conspiracy.


But you please continue your "neutral research" basing yourself on how Madhvacharya considered the entire Valmiki Ramayana as a fake as in: http://www.hindudharmaforums.com/showthread.php?t=11155&page=8

and that the Vedas [with the absolute condition that itihAsAs and PurAnAs never be referred for God's knows why] has no significance whatsoever in lives of majority of Hindus as in: http://www.hindudharmaforums.com/showthread.php?t=11154

kallol
15 March 2013, 12:05 AM
Dear Shivsomashekar


If you consider yourself as the final authority, be happy with the same.

However if you have some distance to go till you achieve that vaunted position, I would suggest you to study as a apart of your research the following :

1. The books of David Frawley and others in respect to Aryan / Dravidian.

People in North India are normally lighter skinned than south India which is out of normal process of climate. It is a general phenomenon as one moves from equator to pole.

2. The DNA study on the flow of humans to this sub-continent. It debunks both - Aryan invasion and the percieved divide Aryan / Dravidian

3. As regarding Gulf of Cambay look for it in Google - you will find it. I was part of the Institute which carried out the study.

I hope the researcher in you will take interest in finding out these facts.

Added some sites of interest :

http://new.modernrationalist.com/2012/04/the-myth-of-the-aryan-invasion-of-india-prof-s-m-khodke/
http://www.archaeologyonline.net/artifacts/aryan-invasion-history.html
http://www.sabha.info/research/aif.html
http://archaeology.about.com/od/indusrivercivilizations/a/aryans.htm
http://clubs.ncsu.edu/hsc/hsc/Events/Entries/2007/2/21_Aryan_Invasion_Theory_-_Myth_or_reality_files/aryan_invasion_myth_hsc_debate_sibin_feb_21_2007.pdf
http://indiatoday.intoday.in/story/indians-are-not-descendants-of-aryans-study/1/163645.html
http://www.east-west-dichotomy.com/shengren-chapter-1-4-2-3-max-mueller/
http://www.stephen-knapp.com/solid_evidence_debunking_aryan_invasion.htm
http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=the-migration-history-of-humans
http://www.dnaindia.com/india/report_new-research-debunks-aryan-invasion-theory_1623744
http://home.iitk.ac.in/~amman/articles/DNAbased.html
http://www.archaeologyonline.net/artifacts/cambay.html
http://www.ancientworlds.net/aw/Article/1099190
http://www.grahamhancock.com/forum/BadrinaryanB1.php?p=1

shiv.somashekhar
20 March 2013, 01:42 PM
Dear Shivsomashekar

If you consider yourself as the final authority, be happy with the same.

The authority has to be a qualified source, as will be explained shortly.


1. The books of David Frawley and others in respect to Aryan / Dravidian. Frawley is an expert in Ayurveda and Chinese medicine. He has no background in history. Just like I would not go to my auditor for a back problem, I would not go to an Ayurveda expert to learn history (neither should you).

Else any T, D and H, regardless of his background can write all kinds of nonsense, pass it off as history and we will choose and reject based on how closely their writings match our own preconceived ideas - which is what you appear to be doing in this case by taking Frawley seriously and rejecting the work of qualified historians.


2. The DNA study on the flow of humans to this sub-continent. It debunks both - Aryan invasion and the percieved divide Aryan / Dravidian It is 2013 folks. Can we please move past this "Aryan Invasion" propoganda? No one is claiming an invasion. The theory is one of migration and unless you reject the "out of Africa" position, then you have admit that Indians came from *somewhere else* and were not magically created out of nothing.


3. As regarding Gulf of Cambay look for it in Google - you will find it. I was part of the Institute which carried out the study.Excellent. But the links I see are not pointing to the pre-iceage date of 13000 BC you provided. Instead, I see a piece of wood was dated to about 7000 BC and the finding was dismissed as inconclusive as there is no indication that this wood was shaped by humans. A coast line sinking is not an uncommon phenomenon (Mahabalipuram, etc) and has happened all over the world.

If you have a specific link, please point it out. The links I found are here and neither of them endorse your claim -
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marine_archaeology_in_the_Gulf_of_Cambay
http://theness.com/neurologicablog/index.php/the-sunken-city-of-cambay/


Added some sites of interest :

http://new.modernrationalist.com/2012/04/the-myth-of-the-aryan-invasion-of-india-prof-s-m-khodke/
http://www.archaeologyonline.net/artifacts/aryan-invasion-history.html
http://www.sabha.info/research/aif.html
http://archaeology.about.com/od/indusrivercivilizations/a/aryans.htm
http://clubs.ncsu.edu/hsc/hsc/Events/Entries/2007/2/21_Aryan_Invasion_Theory_-_Myth_or_reality_files/aryan_invasion_myth_hsc_debate_sibin_feb_21_2007.pdf
http://indiatoday.intoday.in/story/indians-are-not-descendants-of-aryans-study/1/163645.html
http://www.east-west-dichotomy.com/shengren-chapter-1-4-2-3-max-mueller/
http://www.stephen-knapp.com/solid_evidence_debunking_aryan_invasion.htm
http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=the-migration-history-of-humans
http://www.dnaindia.com/india/report_new-research-debunks-aryan-invasion-theory_1623744
http://home.iitk.ac.in/~amman/articles/DNAbased.html
http://www.archaeologyonline.net/artifacts/cambay.html
http://www.ancientworlds.net/aw/Article/1099190
http://www.grahamhancock.com/forum/BadrinaryanB1.php?p=1Stephen Knapp is a Hare Krishna, Graham Hancock is a master of conspiracy theories (for those who do not know, he claimed the Great Pyramid was built by Atlanteans or space people(?) before the ice age). All your sources have one or both of these two things in common -

1. Lack of evidence to support their claims.
2. Ideological motivation.

Such dubious sources gain popularity for the sole reason that they pander to the crowd; providing fantasy and entertainment value in place of facts and logic. We have a section of Indians who will prefer the version of history provided by an Electrician or Ayurvedic or Radiologist over that of academic history, so long as the Electrician or Ayurvedic or Radiologist is willing to provide fantastically old dates for Indian scriptures and even better if he says the entire world civilization started in India.

If you will make extraordinary claims such as the existence of pre-iceage civilizations, evolution of tamil into sanskrit, etc., you should do better than this. Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence and so far you have not offered any.

Once again, no one is claiming an Aryan invasion. It is about finding a meaningful answer for the striking similarities in ancient Latin, Sanskrit, ancient Greek and ancient Persian. It is about explaining the differences between IVC, the Vedic culture and Hinduism. A meaningful answer has to be based on facts and logic and not on wishful thinking such as it must all have started in my home country. If we will reject academic history because it that does not suit our own personal views, then it is perhaps best to stay away from the topic?

I will look at the other links (non-Stephen Knapp, GH) and respond back.

Thanks

shiv.somashekhar
20 March 2013, 09:56 PM
Have you read the links you posted? Knowingly or unknowingly, you have posted one that actually supports the Aryan migration theory!

...This study also indicates that the upper castes of both North and South India have much closer affinities with central Asian populations. The lower castes seem to be earlier entrants and the upper castes later entrants into their regions. The upper castes of North India, however, seem to have come in much later than those of South India. The differences between castes is much more sharp in the south than in the north.

http://home.iitk.ac.in/~amman/articles/DNAbased.html

kallol
20 March 2013, 11:27 PM
Dear Shiv,

I am happy that you have won the debate.

I have no intention to change your mind.

However said, I, as a scientist, have also the right to have my judgement. It might be wrong however the position has been created by information, analysis, common sense, history, native scriptural knowledge, Hinduism vis a vis science, etc.

Wish you a happy journey of knowledge.

kallol
27 March 2013, 04:49 AM
I want to know more. I checked out some of your links.
I wrote a post there, but it was not approved by the moderators (when will I not require moderator approval for posting?)

Anyways, my question was, something like, what do you think of certain populations which are classified as 'Australoid'? I think they are found in Central India, like MP-Orissa-WB-Jharkhand area.

I also agree with certain points you have raised there. The classification of 'races' already implies competition, and isn't it natural for some people to cheat? :D

From whatever I have learnt, I can only provide partial answer and a pointer towards some possibilities.

1. There are certain questions unanswered in the evolution of human. If the evolution is a continuous process, then why do not we see the same evolution process in different stages right from the caves. Say if chimpanzee is our starting point, then we should see the next stage, and the next stage even now. It should be a continuous process. It should not be such that it has happened and stopped now. This means there are missing links. The missing links are possible mixture of two different mamals of same category.
2. This leads to the possibility that different species of human had been our starting point - we know one - Neanderthals. There may be few more (not sure). These species mixing at different locations gave rise to different lineages.
3. Again if we follow the DNA trail then we will find that the movement to Australia has been through India. So what is known today as Australoid should have some parts from India.
4. Another folly we do generally is limiting the human existence and their activities to whatever we have discovered. Though it seems the natural route but it has its limitations as most of the physical artifacts are perishable. Even then the the dynamics of discoveries change the history every other day. DNA analysis goes beyond that. The kinds of weapons or technologies the epic point towards have mesmerised the modern day scientists. With the advancement of science as we expand our knowledge domain, the more and more respect we develop for our scriptures as the science strengthens the knowledge of our scriptures. This is a pointer towards how advance the so call rishis (spiritual scientists ) have been.

There is lot we do not know so coming to any conclusion is absurdity