Sinauli Excavations

Indo-Aryan

Regular Member
Joined
Jun 6, 2018
Messages
676
Likes
696
Country flag
Let's try to understand what has been found.

We have found a Vehicle which one party claims to be a cart and other calling it a chariot.

Now this is what Asko Parapola says:


ROYAL “CHARIOT” BURIALS OF SANAULI NEAR DELHI AND ARCHAEOLOGICAL CORRELATES OF PREHISTORIC INDO-IRANIAN LANGUAGES


The article describes the royal cart burials excavated at the Late Harappan site of Sanauli near Delhi in the spring of 2018 on the basis of the available reports and photographs. The author then comments on these finds, dated to about 1900 bce, with the Sanauli cart burials being the first of their kind in Bronze Age India. In his opinion, several indications suggest that the Sanauli “chariots” are actually carts yoked to bulls, as in the copper sculpture of a bull-cart from the Late Harappan site of Daimabad in Maharashtra.The antennae-hilted swords associated with the burials suggest that these bull-carts are likely to have come from the BMAC or the Bactria and Margiana Archaeological Complex (c.2300–1500 bce) of southern Central Asia, from where there is iconographic evidence of bull-carts. The ultimate source of the Sanauli/BMAC bull-carts may be the early phase of the Sintashta culture in the Trans-Urals, where the chariot (defined as a horse-drawn light vehicle with two spoked wheels) was most probably invented around the late twenty-first century bce. The invention presupposes an earlier experimental phase, which started with solid-wheeled carts that could only be pulled by bulls. An intermediate phase in the development is the “proto-chariot” with cross-bar wheels, attested in a BMAC-related cylinder seal from Tepe Hissar III B in northern Iran (c.2000–1900 bce). The wooden coffins of the Sanauli royal burials provide another pointer to a possible Sintashta origin. The Sanauli finds are considered in the context of the author’s archaeological model for the prehistory of the Indo-Iranian languages, which is adjusted to meet recent justified criticism.


O Boy! So that's the claim now.

01 Its not a Harappan artefact.
02 Its from BMAC.
03 With source of techno in Sinthasta
04 Proto-Chariot
05 Indo-Iranian people from BMAC
 

Vamsi

Regular Member
Joined
Jun 27, 2020
Messages
622
Likes
3,094
Country flag
Let's try to understand what has been found.

We have found a Vehicle which one party claims to be a cart and other calling it a chariot.

Now this is what Asko Parapola says:


ROYAL “CHARIOT” BURIALS OF SANAULI NEAR DELHI AND ARCHAEOLOGICAL CORRELATES OF PREHISTORIC INDO-IRANIAN LANGUAGES


The article describes the royal cart burials excavated at the Late Harappan site of Sanauli near Delhi in the spring of 2018 on the basis of the available reports and photographs. The author then comments on these finds, dated to about 1900 bce, with the Sanauli cart burials being the first of their kind in Bronze Age India. In his opinion, several indications suggest that the Sanauli “chariots” are actually carts yoked to bulls, as in the copper sculpture of a bull-cart from the Late Harappan site of Daimabad in Maharashtra.The antennae-hilted swords associated with the burials suggest that these bull-carts are likely to have come from the BMAC or the Bactria and Margiana Archaeological Complex (c.2300–1500 bce) of southern Central Asia, from where there is iconographic evidence of bull-carts. The ultimate source of the Sanauli/BMAC bull-carts may be the early phase of the Sintashta culture in the Trans-Urals, where the chariot (defined as a horse-drawn light vehicle with two spoked wheels) was most probably invented around the late twenty-first century bce. The invention presupposes an earlier experimental phase, which started with solid-wheeled carts that could only be pulled by bulls. An intermediate phase in the development is the “proto-chariot” with cross-bar wheels, attested in a BMAC-related cylinder seal from Tepe Hissar III B in northern Iran (c.2000–1900 bce). The wooden coffins of the Sanauli royal burials provide another pointer to a possible Sintashta origin. The Sanauli finds are considered in the context of the author’s archaeological model for the prehistory of the Indo-Iranian languages, which is adjusted to meet recent justified criticism.


O Boy! So that's the claim now.

01 Its not a Harappan artefact.
02 Its from BMAC.
03 With source of techno in Sinthasta
04 Proto-Chariot
05 Indo-Iranian people from BMAC
This is absolutely BS. These AIT propagandists twist everything to suit their AIT narrative. Shameless creatures.
 

Indo-Aryan

Regular Member
Joined
Jun 6, 2018
Messages
676
Likes
696
Country flag
Harappans were trading with Mesopotamia.
A trade across 3000 kms through land and sea routes. Obviously land route involved some kind of vehicle.

Yet Asko claims that the first of its kind Vehicle remains aren't of Harappan origin.
 

Indo-Aryan

Regular Member
Joined
Jun 6, 2018
Messages
676
Likes
696
Country flag
When we look at geography which is full of mountain routes how feasible is the claim that they came through such tough terrain on bullocks.

Who in their right mind would travel in such a small vehicle from one end of Himalayas to the other with maximum 2 additional people along with the food and other stuff.
 

Indo-Aryan

Regular Member
Joined
Jun 6, 2018
Messages
676
Likes
696
Country flag
O Boy! This is even more laughable:

We should now consider […] the continuity he sees between the Indus civilization and post-Vedic Hinduism. First is the question by what mechanism Harappan concepts and practices could have been transferred to the Indo-Aryans, since the Indus civilization essentially ended in the very early second millennium bce. It is a major conceptual leap from the undeniable statement that classical Hinduism differs in major ways from Vedic religion to the claim that much of what is non-Vedic in classical Hinduism should be attributed to the Indus civilization, whose flowering essentially ended at least 1500 years (approx. 1900 bce [p. 22 and passim]) before “classical Hinduism” began (dated by Parpola to 400–200 bce [p. 4 and passim]) and which inhabited a different geographical area from the core areas of post-Vedic Hinduism. This is, of course, the beauty of Parpola’s (more or less invisible) first wave of Indo-Aryans, who arrived early enough to run across the last of Harappan culture, scoop up what they wanted, and carry it further into the subcontinent. It almost seems that the posited first wave exists in this schema primarily to be the conduit of Harappan materials into the later world of Hinduism. (Jamison 2020: 243)
 

Indo-Aryan

Regular Member
Joined
Jun 6, 2018
Messages
676
Likes
696
Country flag
Dramatic archaeological discoveries made after the appearance of my book – in the spring of 2018 – have now provided strong evidence for the arrival of the first wave of Aryan (Indo-Iranian) speakers to the Ganga-Yamuna doab by about 1900 bce and for their forming then the ruling elite of a major Late Harappan settlement. I refer to the royal “chariot” burials excavated at the Late Harappan graveyard of Sanauli (also called Sinauli), District Baghpat, western Uttar Pradesh, just 60–70 km from Delhi. After these excavations, in July 2018, S.K. Manjul, the director of the Sanauli excavations, delivered in Delhi a lecture entitled “Mahābhārata and archaeology: PGW [Painted Grey Ware] vis-à-vis OCP [Ochre-Coloured Pottery]/Copper Hoard Culture”, connecting the latter culture with the epic, while B.B. Lal has long argued for the Mahābhārata’s connection with the PGW. (Agha 2018, which report also contains Agha’s interview with B.B. Lal on Manjul’s hypothesis; on the PGW and the Mahābhārata, see also Parpola 2015a: 145–149.) In the ensuing discussion (summarized by Agha 2018 and Benedetti 2020), Indian scholars have continued the debate about the finds’ connection with the Mahābhārata war. Benedetti (2020: 258) notes:


In fact, the new discoveries from Sanauli show us a warrior culture with swords and chariots, but this culture is not only typical of the Mahābhārata: also the gveda mentions battles, warriors, chariots (ratha) and spears (i). If the age of the Sanauli chariots is 1900–1800 bc it would correspond to the age of the early gveda according to our chronology. At last, we would have the concrete representation of the rathas of those ancient hymns.
 

Indo-Aryan

Regular Member
Joined
Jun 6, 2018
Messages
676
Likes
696
Country flag
God these confused bunch of people.

Early Rig Vedic age 2000bce - Sanauli
Contradicts the 1500bce date of Horse riding Rig Vedic Aryans and 1200bce date of Rig Veda.

So if I am understanding properly then the new claim is Sinauli marks the beginning of Early Vedic Age.

😀😁😂
 

Indo-Aryan

Regular Member
Joined
Jun 6, 2018
Messages
676
Likes
696
Country flag
Also they claim Vedas is Aryan not Harappan.

Later Hinduism has Harappan elements to it which they absorbed from sanauli Indo-Iranian who absorbed it from the Harappans.

Oh! Boy, they are well prepared.

Idea of Majestic saraswati was absorbed from these sanauli Indo-Iranians.

😬😠
 

Indo-Aryan

Regular Member
Joined
Jun 6, 2018
Messages
676
Likes
696
Country flag
Identify your enemy boys 😠

This is plain outrageous !!!!! From Asko Parpola


FORMATION OF THE VEDIC AND AVESTAN RELIGIONS





Taking over the power in the BMAC around 1750 bce, over the course of centuries the presumably Indra-worshipping Fëdorovo Indo-Aryans absorbed the Petrovka Indo-Aryans, who had been ruling the BMAC before them. In this process Mitra and Varuṇa became members of the Fëdorovo pantheon as well. Both branches should have inherited the Aśvin cult from the Sintashta culture. As a result, the BMAC-derived Mitanni Indo-Aryans (c.1500–1300 bce) had Indra, the Aśvins, and Mitra and Varuṇa as their principal divinities, and they all are present also in the gveda, which was recorded after these Indo-Aryans coming from the “post-urban” phase of the BMAC eventually reached South Asia. When the Proto-Iranian speakers of the Roller Pottery cultures (Figure 26) came riding from the Pontic steppes to Central Asia around 1500 bce, they took over the area where the BMAC had existed: the BMAC was now succeeded by the Yaz I culture (c.1500–1000 bce). Over the course of centuries, the Proto-Iranian speakers absorbed the remaining Fëdorovo Indo-Aryans of southern Central Asia. This process led the Iranians to adopt the Fëdorovo *sauma cult, which explains the similarities between the Avesta and the gveda. On the other hand, the Yaz I period marks the beginning of the complete absence of archaeologically attested burials in southern Central Asia, which continued until Achaemenid times and implies the adoption of the exposure burial characteristic of Zoroastrianism.
 

Indo-Aryan

Regular Member
Joined
Jun 6, 2018
Messages
676
Likes
696
Country flag
THE SANAULI WOODEN COFFINS


One pointer to the Sintashta culture as the ultimate source of the Sanauli carts is the wooden coffins of the royal burials. A few burials in wooden coffins are known from graveyard R 37 from Harappa belonging to the last phase 3D of the Mature Harappan period (Wheeler 1947: 87–88, Burial 5; Meadow (ed.) 1991: 195 & 200, Fig. 13.11, Burial 147a; Prabhakar 2012: 209–211, 610–611). Besides Harappa and Sanauli, such burials in wooden coffins seem not to be known from other Mature or Late Harappan sites; at least from the relatively large Mature Harappan graveyards of Kalibangan (Lal et al. 2015: 8–9) and Farmana (Shinde 2011), and from the unusual cemetery at Dholavira (Bisht 2015: 628–663), no burials in wooden coffins have been reported. In the large graveyard of the BMAC capital Gonur, 2,853 graves had been excavated by 2007. No burials with wooden coffins have been identified, but the “chamber tombs” (1.9%) having brick walls and representing living houses – or, more exactly, their bedrooms – are thought to reflect Indo-Iranian traditions (Sarianidi 2007: 20–51).


In the Sintashta culture (c.2100–1800 bce) of the southern Trans-Urals, the dead were buried in large rectangular pits inside of which was a rectangular wooden burial chamber. Bodies were most often lying on the side in a slightly flexed position, or on their back with their legs bent at the knees. There are also secondary and multiple burials. Grave goods are often abundant, containing many vessels, tools, and weapons of arsenical bronze, grindstones and pestles, animals (horses, cows, sheep, dogs), and in elite graves spoke-wheeled chariots and bridle cheek-pieces. (Gening, Zdanovich & Gening 1992: 391–392 and passim.) In the earliest layers of the Bolshekaraganskij cemetery representing the Sintashta culture, the pottery had features from the earlier Abashevo (c.2300–1850 bce) and Poltavka/Late Yamnaya (c.2500–2100 bce) cultures, while in the late layers certain features point to the formation of the Srubnaya culture (c.1850–1450 bce) (Zdanovich (ed.) 2002: 207). The immediate successor of the Sintashta culture in the Trans-Urals and Kazakhstan is the Petrovka culture (c.2000–1800 bce), which soon diverged into the Alakul’ culture (c.2000–1700 bce) in the west and the Fëdorovo culture (c.1850–1450 bce) in the east.
All these branches of the Andronovo cultural community, which occupied the Asiatic steppes from the Urals to western Siberia between about 2000 and 1500 bce, had the horse-drawn chariot inherited from the Sintashta culture. (Kuz’mina 2007)
 

Indo-Aryan

Regular Member
Joined
Jun 6, 2018
Messages
676
Likes
696
Country flag
Early Proto-Indo-Iranians

Both the Andronovo and the Srubnaya cultures had from the beginning the horse-drawn chariot, which seems to have been invented in the “classical” phase of the Sintashta culture around late twenty-first century bce. People of the earlier related cultures – the Abashevo, Poltavka, Sintashta, and Potapovka – would then have spoken Early Proto-Indo-Iranian. Based on the faulty correlation of Proto-Iranian with the Catacomb Grave culture, in The Roots of Hinduism I proposed a Proto-Indo-Aryan correlation for the Abashevo culture and the associated Sejma-Turbino trading network. Of all the potentially Indo-Iranian cultures, the Abashevo culture was the first to arrive to the Kama and Belaya Valleys immediately west of the Ural Mountains, the most likely domicile of Proto-Uralic speakers. The Proto-Indo-Aryan correlation of the Abashevo culture made it difficult to explain where the Finno-Ugrian languages could have obtained some Aryan loanwords that clearly represent Early Proto-Indo-Iranian, like Proto-West-Uralic *kekrä, ‘circular thing, cycle’, against Late Proto-Indo-Iranian *cakra-, ‘wheel, cycle’ (Holopainen 2019: 118–119, 336). An Early Proto-Indo-Iranian correlation of the Abashevo culture dissolves this problem.
It must be noted that perhaps two centuries after the Abashevo culture came to the Kama-Belaya Valley, this area was reached also by a northward extension of the Alakul’Andronovo culture (mainly spread in the South Urals and Kazakhstan), descended from the Petrovka culture, while the Srubnaya culture arrived in these regions about the same time.
 

Indo-Aryan

Regular Member
Joined
Jun 6, 2018
Messages
676
Likes
696
Country flag
Hilarious 😂

The possible BMAC origin of the Gangetic copper hoards […] suggests that Indo-Aryan speakers moved to the middle Ganges Valley so early that they did not become part of the Vedic culture. Such early Indo-Aryan speakers of the “Atharvavedic” wave of immigration seem to be meant when Vedic texts refer to “easterners” as asura worshippers and speakers of a language resembling eastern Middle Indo-Aryan, the Māgadhī Prakrit […] In the Brāhmaṇa period, however, the Vedic culture expanded to the middle Ganges Valley, which led to an upsurge of ideas and practices in the Upaniṣads that were novel from the Vedic point of view but that had been developing for a longer time in eastern India, as is evident from the heterodox religions. (Parpola 2015a: 150)
 
Last edited:

Indo-Aryan

Regular Member
Joined
Jun 6, 2018
Messages
676
Likes
696
Country flag
RELIGION OF THE PETROVKA INDO-ARYANS





Archaeological evidence suggests that the two principal variants of the Andronovo culture successively took over the power in the BMAC of southern Central Asia: the Petrovka during the “urban” period (which ended c.1750 bce) and the Fëdorovo in the “post-urban” period (which ended c.1500). In The Roots of Hinduism, I have proposed that the invention of the horse-drawn chariot in the Sintashta culture created the cult of the ‘horses-possessing’ Aśvin twins as the divinized chariot team, who became the leading deities of the pantheon and reflected the new concept of dual kingship, where the king (the chariot warrior) shared the power with the high priest (the charioteer). During the “urban” period of the BMAC, the tin trade (Boroffka et al. 2002; Cierny, Stöllner & Weisgerber 2005) brought the BMAC elite into contact with the Assyrian traders of Anatolia (Trolle Larsen 2015). Assyrian ideas of kingship seem to have prompted the Aryan rulers of the BMAC to create new divinities representing social virtues, the Ādityas, who parallel such “attributes” of the divine king in Assyrian religion. The two foremost of these new divinities, Mitra and Varuṇa, then took over the dual kingship from the Aśvins, who retained their association with the chariot (Parpola 2015a: 107–116).
 

Indo-Aryan

Regular Member
Joined
Jun 6, 2018
Messages
676
Likes
696
Country flag
RELIGION OF THE FËDOROVO INDO-ARYANS





The eastern Fëdorovo branch of the Andronovo community descended early on from the Petrovka culture, and differentiated in western Siberia due to local influences (Molodin 2001: 89–91). Plastic arts, especially sculptures depicting horses (Kovtun 2013; Parpola 2015a: 64–65, Figs. 7.8–9), show that the Fëdorovo people were strongly influenced ideologically by the Sejma-Turbino metallurgists of south Siberia (Kuz’mina 2007: 177–181). High-class weapons and tools of tin-bronze were produced in southern Siberia and transported through the Sejma-Turbino trade network along the Irtysh and Ob rivers and along the border between the forest steppe and taiga to the west of the Urals (Turbino) and to the Mid-Volga (Sejma), to the area of the expanded Abashevo culture. The Abashevo culture was probably bilingual in Proto-Indo-Iranian and Proto-Uralic languages.

Without being affected by the religious innovations that took place in the Sintashta and BMAC cultures, the Proto-Indo-Iranian pantheon of the Abashevo culture was in all likelihood headed by the counterpart of the Greek high god Zeus and Roman Jupiter, that is, the god of the sky, day, and thundery weather (*Deiwo-s > *Daiva-s [> Vedic Deva-s], whence Finnish taivas, ‘sky’; Holopainen 2019: 270–271). The Proto-Finno-Ugrian name of the god of the sky and thundery weather (Ilmar-i of the Finnic folk epic Kalevala, Udmurt ilmer, inmar ‘god’) was *Ilma-ra (derived with the originally Aryan suffix -ra from Proto-Uralic *ilma, ‘air, atmosphere, weather’). Transmitted to the Fëdorovo Indo-Aryans – either directly from Abashevo in Bashkiria or through the Sejma-Turbino network in southern Siberia – this seems to be the ultimate source of Indra, the name of the chief deity of the gvedic pantheon, god of the sky and thundery weather (Parpola 2015a: 66; 2019b). The principal cult drink of Indra worship, *sauma, was a juice pressed out of the soaked twigs of a plant whose botanical identity has been much debated and continues to be so (Clark 2017). A very serious – and probably the most likely – candidate is the ephedra plant (Nyberg 1995; Houben (ed.) 2003).

One apparently neglected argument in favour of ephedra is the Old Persian name Sak haumavarg for a branch of the Saka nomads; only the first part of the compound haumavarg has a generally agreed interpretation, that it refers to Avestan haoma = Vedic soma (Schmitt 2003). From a number of graves in Xinjiang (Ördek’s Necropolis, graves in the delta of Qum-darya), archaeologists have found bunches of ephedra twigs in pockets of the funeral clothing (Bergman 1939: 70–73, 86–88, 99, 134, 138–139), and in one case the headgear of the dead suggests Saka identity (Bergman 1939: 137). There is much evidence for the presence of Fëdorovo people in Xinjiang (Kuz’mina 2007: 251–266), and it seems possible to suppose that they adopted the cultic use of ephedra there.
 

Indo-Aryan

Regular Member
Joined
Jun 6, 2018
Messages
676
Likes
696
Country flag
I don't know what to say.
Laugh or Cry
Argue or be silent
..................

😂😭😧
 

asaffronladoftherisingsun

Dharma Dispatcher
Senior Member
Joined
Nov 10, 2020
Messages
6,210
Likes
34,878
Country flag
Identify your enemy boys 😠

This is plain outrageous !!!!! From Asko Parpola


FORMATION OF THE VEDIC AND AVESTAN RELIGIONS





Taking over the power in the BMAC around 1750 bce, over the course of centuries the presumably Indra-worshipping Fëdorovo Indo-Aryans absorbed the Petrovka Indo-Aryans, who had been ruling the BMAC before them. In this process Mitra and Varuṇa became members of the Fëdorovo pantheon as well. Both branches should have inherited the Aśvin cult from the Sintashta culture. As a result, the BMAC-derived Mitanni Indo-Aryans (c.1500–1300 bce) had Indra, the Aśvins, and Mitra and Varuṇa as their principal divinities, and they all are present also in the gveda, which was recorded after these Indo-Aryans coming from the “post-urban” phase of the BMAC eventually reached South Asia. When the Proto-Iranian speakers of the Roller Pottery cultures (Figure 26) came riding from the Pontic steppes to Central Asia around 1500 bce, they took over the area where the BMAC had existed: the BMAC was now succeeded by the Yaz I culture (c.1500–1000 bce). Over the course of centuries, the Proto-Iranian speakers absorbed the remaining Fëdorovo Indo-Aryans of southern Central Asia. This process led the Iranians to adopt the Fëdorovo *sauma cult, which explains the similarities between the Avesta and the gveda. On the other hand, the Yaz I period marks the beginning of the complete absence of archaeologically attested burials in southern Central Asia, which continued until Achaemenid times and implies the adoption of the exposure burial characteristic of Zoroastrianism.
RIGVEDA itself buttfucks poopola delusion.

DHARMA Triumphs Rigveda is BHARTIYA.jpg


Those nevertheless bmac people were not nomads and these characteristic features of the bmac never ever reached east of the SINDHU up to the upper GANGA-Yamuna doab – an area which was the homeland of the Rigvedic people, as is clear from the Nadi-stuti SHLOKAS (10.75.5 and 6) of the Rigveda itself.

Demolishedretardedpoopoplacuck.JPG
DHARMAAloneTriumphsBBLAL.JPG

DHARMAAloneTriumphsBBLAL51.JPG


As far as copper well its origin in BHARAT archaeology has long confirmed it. That chutiya poopola delusion that bmac people intro copper lmao what mentally retarded coomer seriously poopola is a joke on Indology. Coomer should have some water and take care of his heart poopola is counting days on earth anyways.


DHARMA BHARATA.JPG
 

Indo-Aryan

Regular Member
Joined
Jun 6, 2018
Messages
676
Likes
696
Country flag
It irritates me that such an enormous civilization didn't bother leaving extensive written records. Not one artefact of the grandeur of the Egyptians. Not one Stone slab filled with fables of that time.
 

Latest Replies

Global Defence

New threads

Articles

Top