Ruler of India was ancestor of ancient Finnish warrior queens

[jouni]

Your problem is that you are looking at India from your own limited prism... however India has existed for a much longer time and as a monolith.. If Indians are poor today its because they were looted and pummelled in to poverty. But that is changing again and one day in the not so distant future India will regain most of what it has been divested of.... my advice to you is stop looking at blips in the journey of a civilization that has always been at the top.


That headline is a big promise. But here it is: The economic history of the world going back to Year 1 showing the major powers' share of world GDP, from aresearch letter written by Michael Cembalest, chairman of market and investment strategy at JP Morgan.




I'm guessing that your first question, if you started scanning from the left, is:Wait, India was by far the biggest economy at the dawn of AD? Yup, India.


In Year 1, India and China were home to one-third and one-quarter of the world's population, respectively. It's hardly surprising, then, that they also commanded one-third and one-quarter of the world's economy, respectively.

Before the Industrial Revolution, there wasn't really any such thing as lasting income growth from productivity. In the thousands of years before the Industrial Revolution, civilization was stuck in the Malthusian Trap. If lots of people died, incomes tended to go up, as fewer workers benefited from a stable supply of crops. If lots of people were born, however, incomes would fall, which often led to more deaths. That explains the "trap," and it also explains why populations so closely approximated GDP around the world.


The industrial revolution(s) changed all that. Today, the U.S. accounts for 5% of the world population and 21% of its GDP. Asia (minus Japan) accounts for 60% of the world's population and 30% of its GDP.

So, one way to read the graph, very broadly speaking, is that everything to the left of 1800 is an approximation of population distribution around the world and everything to the right of 1800 is a demonstration of productivity divergences around the world -- the mastering of means of manufacturing, production and supply chains by steam, electricity, and ultimately software that concentrated, first in the West, and then spread to Japan, Russia, China, India, Brazil, and beyond.

http://www.theatlantic.com/business...he-last-2-000-years-in-1-little-graph/258676/

You cannot blame plummeting for the last 70 years of no relative growth....look at for example Germany how it grow from ashes after WWII...you had peace. 1914 Finland was one of the poorest countries in Europe...2014 one of the richest. As I understand you had schools, railroad,cenglish language etc after Brits left. Could you built on that like you should have? I do not think so.

 

[Rashna]

We had peace? When? Do listen to shashi tharoor's speech if you haven't to get a better understanding of what indians contributed to "so called" empires who fought the world wars. And the british left us divided with a rogue country as our neighbour and unsettled disputes which have led us to fight 3 wars and forced us in to spending heavily on defence. And the reason there is no comparison between us and european countries is also the reason why we will over take each one of you eventually and take our place at the top. And what do you mean by no relative growth? India is the fastest growing economy as on date. Where do you get all this from? Are you drinking too much grogg? Do listen to this.

You cannot blame plummeting for the last 70 years of no relative growth....look at for example Germany how it grow from ashes after WWII...you had peace. 1914 Finland was one of the poorest countries in Europe...2014 one of the richest. As I understand you had schools, railroad,cenglish language etc after Brits left. Could you built on that like you should have? I do not think so.

 

[Riddler_22]

You cannot blame plummeting for the last 70 years of no relative growth....look at for example Germany how it grow from ashes after WWII...you had peace. 1914 Finland was one of the poorest countries in Europe...2014 one of the richest. As I understand you had schools, railroad,cenglish language etc after Brits left. Could you built on that like you should have? I do not think so.

British left us as beggars with communal tensions at their peak and pakistan as a neighbor.It was a huge task managing all the states and uniting them for one single cause as each of one them is a country in itself with their unique culture and traditions.And then the wars with Pak and China left our economy crippled but still we managed to grow amidst all these crisis and now are among the fastest growing economies in the world.

 

[jouni]

We had peace? When? Do listen to shashi tharoor's speech if you haven't to get a better understanding of what indians contributed to "so called" empires who fought the world wars. And the british left us divided with a rogue country as our neighbour and unsettled disputes which have led us to fight 3 wars and forced us in to spending heavily on defence. And the reason there is no comparison between us and european countries is also the reason why we will over take each one of you eventually and take our place at the top. And what do you mean by no relative growth? India is the fastest growing economy as on date. Where do you get all this from? Are you drinking too much grogg? Do listen to this.

This is embarrassing...the "great India" swallowing in self pity. Ever heard of bad loosers? Brits were just one caste above you...

I am sorry, but after WWII we swallowed our pride, accepted loss of land to Russia, rolled our sleeves and rose to greatness. We kept our head high.

 

[jouni]

British left us as beggars with communal tensions at their peak and pakistan as a neighbor.It was a huge task managing all the states and uniting them for one single cause as each of one them is a country in itself with their unique culture and traditions.And then the wars with Pak and China left our economy crippled but still we managed to grow amidst all these crisis and now are among the fastest growing economies in the world.

That is great, just build on that and do not look at the past. What has been, has been.

 

[thethinker]

This is embarrassing...the "great India" swallowing in self pity. Ever heard of bad loosers? Brits were just one caste above you...

I am sorry, but after WWII we swallowed our pride, accepted loss of land to Russia, rolled our sleeves and rose to greatness. We kept our head high.

This is embarrassing..the great Finn from highly educated Finland can't seem to distinguish between wallow and swallow and when to use them as per context.

It is supposed to be "wallowing in self pity" not swallowing in self pity. Take note.

I am sorry, but after WW2 you should have now learnt how to convey what you mean properly in an international language with commonly used phrases.

But, yes do keep your head high and your Finnish flag waving!. :biggrin2:

 

[Rashna]

Nobody is wallowing in anything. Doesn't mean the thieves should not be pointed out for who they are. Isn't that what the vikings were too pirates and plunderers.... lolz. No wonder you claim the brits have viking genes.
Russia might get you back one day, so don't count your chickens too fast...If not the Russians the Islamic invasion will turn you in to a medieval country...:biggrin2: You are caught between the devil and the deep frozen sea.

This is embarrassing...the "great India" swallowing in self pity. Ever heard of bad loosers? Brits were just one caste above you...

I am sorry, but after WWII we swallowed our pride, accepted loss of land to Russia, rolled our sleeves and rose to greatness. We kept our head high.

 

[jouni]

Looks to me that you Hindus are benevolent, conformist, just and pasifist philantropists. A rare qualities in todays world. Salute...

 

[Cadian]

Our friend @Cadian is from Rostov, which was also inhabited by Finno-Ugric people.

You are a bit incorrect.

First, I'm from Ryazan, not from Rostov. Ryazan is a 550 thousand city, only in 200km from Moscow.

Second, there are two cities called Rostov in Russia.

Rostov-on-Don is a major Black Sea port, located near Ukrainian border and has a population over 1 million people.

Rostov or Rostov-the-Great was one of the major centers of medieval Russia, although it is now only a small town with 30 thousand population. It has dozens of noteworthy architectural monuments of Middle Ages.

 

[anupamsurey]

since you have pointed it, it looks like the same towel which salman khan used for his towel dance

 

[jackprince]

...........,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,

 

[pmaitra]

You are a bit incorrect.

First, I'm from Ryazan, not from Rostov. Ryazan is a 550 thousand city, only in 200km from Moscow.

Second, there are two cities called Rostov in Russia.

Rostov-on-Don is a major Black Sea port, located near Ukrainian border and has a population over 1 million people.

Rostov or Rostov-the-Great was one of the major centers of medieval Russia, although it is now only a small town with 30 thousand population. It has dozens of noteworthy architectural monuments of Middle Ages.

Yes, you are from Ryazan. It has always been there on your profile. That is what I meant to say. I don't know why I wrote Rostov.

This is what Wiki says:

It is argued that the Ryazan kremlin was founded in 800, by Slavic settlers,[citation needed] as a part of their drive into territory previously populated by Finnic peoples.[citation needed]

Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ryazan

However, it also says "citation needed," so I could be wrong.

 

[jouni]

http://www.bbc.com/news/science-environment-25885519

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/technology/7159057.stm

FIRST EUROPEANS WERE FINNS


The team found that the early European was most closely geneticailly related to people in Sweden and Finland.

But while his eyes were blue, his genes reveal that his hair was black or brown and his skin was dark.

"This was a result that was unexpected," said Dr Lalueza-Fox.

Scientists had thought the first Europeans became fair soon after they left Africa and moved to the continent about 45,000 years ago.

http://locklip.com/weapons-of-giants-huge-bronze-axes-discovered-in-denmark/

Denmark area also was part of Finnish culture and language zone before 300 ac. Kalevan Pojat

Nordic religions and gods are based on old Finnish shamanistic and astronomical temple-culture.

Stone Henge is based on older Finnish stone temples and astronomical culture from Finland. Also oldest identical Menhir- fallic stones are in Finland.

Oldest temples in Finland are 5500 years old: nicknames now are ”Jatulinkirkko”, ”Jatulin church”, Jätinkirkko”, ”Church of giants” - about 25 archelogical ruins.

”Viking”-culture is only one string from vast ancient Finnish speaking culture. European genetical character blue eyes are directly from Finnish genetic line. Swedish language and culture is young and is based on Finnish genetic blue eyed line, only 1300 years old. Finnish culture and language is +10000 years old.

Still the blue eyed and light colored hair genetically dense population center is in Finland, not in Sweden.

Finnish tribes were red haired ja blue eyed.
Earliest true european genetic line is quite direct line for present blue eyed Finns, original "scandinavian" lina. Finnish language is oldest and original European language.

http://www.jstor.org/stable/2847025?seq=1#page_scan_tab_contents

 

[jouni]

http://www.redicecreations.com/article.php?id=33169


Better Identification of Viking Corpses Reveals: Half of the Warriors Were Female

 

[jackprince]

FIRST EUROPEANS WERE FINNS

No, Finns are off-springs of the hunter-gather people who might have arrived at Europe landmass before other people. Who were likely driven off to the northern part by the later arrivals. I say driven off, or how else the skeletons which had more genetic connection to the present people of northern Europe were found in southern Europe?

 

[jouni]

http://sciencenordic.com/scandinavians-are-earliest-europeans

Scandinavians are the earliest Europeans
It turns out that Scandinavians are more closely related to the Kostenki man than any other now-living population. This means that Scandinavians are the earliest Europeans.

However, the genome also indicates that many European traits, including those from the Middle East, were already present in the first Europeans.

So from a genetic point of view it makes no sense to categorise the Scandinavians as a separate people. "In those days people didn't respect our virtuous, well-ordered ideas of belonging to specific groups," comments Professor of Evolutionary Studies, Peter C. Kjærgaard, from Aarhus University

IIT IS PRETTY CLEAR THAN WHEN ANCIENT INDIANS RULED ASIA, ANCIENT FINNS RULED EUROPE

 

[jackprince]

http://sciencenordic.com/scandinavians-are-earliest-europeans

Scandinavians are the earliest Europeans
It turns out that Scandinavians are more closely related to the Kostenki man than any other now-living population. This means that Scandinavians are the earliest Europeans.

However, the genome also indicates that many European traits, including those from the Middle East, were already present in the first Europeans.

So from a genetic point of view it makes no sense to categorise the Scandinavians as a separate people. "In those days people didn't respect our virtuous, well-ordered ideas of belonging to specific groups," comments Professor of Evolutionary Studies, Peter C. Kjærgaard, from Aarhus University

IIT IS PRETTY CLEAR THAN WHEN ANCIENT INDIANS RULED ASIA, ANCIENT FINNS RULED EUROPE

Ancient Indians hardly ruled Asia. Yes, the group of people from whom we have descended was the people who lived in Asia, but I doubt that at that time a continent wide empire concept existed about 40000 years ago.

 

[Dreamhunter]

You cannot blame plummeting for the last 70 years of no relative growth....look at for example Germany how it grow from ashes after WWII...you had peace. 1914 Finland was one of the poorest countries in Europe...2014 one of the richest. As I understand you had schools, railroad,cenglish language etc after Brits left. Could you built on that like you should have? I do not think so.

It is interesting that India was one of the greatest civilizations during ancient and medieval period while Scandinavia was one of the most backward regions in the world during ancient period. And today its the exact opposite.