You don't need logicThe very logic of any "Aryan" invasion or migration for that matter is nonsense. For that to happen, there must have been people identifying themselves as Aryan. Of the 5 lunar tribes of the Rig veda, only a sub- tribe i.e. the Bharatas of the Puru tribe called themselves aryan. Later it did spread to the ancient Iranians but that was it. The solar tribes like the Ikshvakus were not even seen as people of the Rig veda, let alone as Aryan, kind of ironic when we have just celebrated a temple dedicated to the most famous of the Ikshvaku tribe.
Biggest problem is the horse argument.
Who brought horses to India.
Very based article.Origin of the Light Sivalensis type Horse from India by P. Priyadarshi
Linguistic, archaeological and DNA Evidence favouring origin of some breeds of the Domestic Horse “Equus caballus” from India “Equus sivalensis is the oldest true horse known, it has more highly sp…aryaninvasionmyth.wordpress.com
There is no horse problem.Biggest problem is the horse argument.
Who brought horses to India.
This makes sense.ashwamedha sacrifice does not make sense for a horse-plenty culture. Indeed, thats why there is no history ever of mongols, turks, shakas etc. ever doing horse sacrifice- why would sacrificing something that every tom,dick and harry has ( a horse in the steppes) be a status symbol of power ?
No, the horse sacrifice makes sense only to a horse-poor culture. For then it shows that one is so powerful that they can sacrifice something that is incredibly rare and expensive.
Cultures that are poor in a particular resource, tend to value it highly.
in ashwa medha yagna which translates to "horse sacrifice" in english is not a bali(sacrifice), isn't it?There is no horse problem.
The problem is the racist whites assuming that Aryans were a nomadic, horse-based culture, when there is absolutely no proof of that and plenty of proof of the opposite : cows are mentioned far more often in the rig veda than the horse and ashwamedha sacrifice does not make sense for a horse-plenty culture. Indeed, thats why there is no history ever of mongols, turks, shakas etc. ever doing horse sacrifice- why would sacrificing something that every tom,dick and harry has ( a horse in the steppes) be a status symbol of power ?
No, the horse sacrifice makes sense only to a horse-poor culture. For then it shows that one is so powerful that they can sacrifice something that is incredibly rare and expensive.
Cultures that are poor in a particular resource, tend to value it highly. This is why the greek and roman writings have several mention of ' omg elephants !! hathi hathi hathi!!! did you see the hathi of hannibal ? no ? what about the 300 hathis of seleucus?' and Indian authors mention matter of factly that there were several hundred or several thousand elephants present in xyz battle.
Because elephants are commonplace to us, to the greco-roman world, where they must be imported into, it was a stunning statement of power and wealth.
Assuming Mahabharat war happened prior to what is termed as early phase of IVC or SSVC i.e. 5300-4600 years ago; an argument can be made that a large population of horses and elephants reduced significantly since they were mainly used in the war, to the extent of becoming extinct. One of the consequences could be the rarity of horse or similar and elephant related seals from the ones found so far.Biggest problem is the horse argument.
Who brought horses to India.
In the shruti texts, its a bali. Now how many kings actually performed the bali, i do not know.in ashwa medha yagna which translates to "horse sacrifice" in english is not a bali(sacrifice), isn't it?
Thread starter | Similar threads | Forum | Replies | Date |
---|---|---|---|---|
N | lets talk about, Aryan invasion/Migrantion | History & Culture | 1 | |
Aryan Invasion Theory. Do you approve? | Subcontinent & Central Asia | 2 | ||
Indo-Aryans vs Iranians | History & Culture | 5 | ||
P | European Misappropriation of Sanskrit led to the Aryan Race Theory | History & Culture | 2 |