Chronology of Indian History --Newer discussions

It is the finding of some of the archaeological studies that Merv town/city, and the region around it, of Central Asia was the common place of abode for the 'Aryans' as is also testified by the traditions recorded in Rigveda and the Avesta !

The comments of the readers are welcome.
 
Last edited:
To a layman like me in this field, kindly let me know the concrete result what is the implication of this study of Z-93 etc.. regarding the 'Aryans' stock of yore.
All males having R1a mutation share a common male ancestor between 18000-30000 year. Now there are many more mutation within R1a haplogroup so we can trace more recent common ancestor. Z-93 is a branch of R1a, it is called R1a1a1h. There are some sub-branches of R1a1a1h too.
These all haplogroups tell male ancestry, there are sub-haplogroups within haplogroup, for example R1 has two branches R1a and R1b.
here we go from R1 to R1a1a1h
R1 - R1a - R1a1 - R1a1a - R1a1a1 - R1a1a1h(mutation Z93)- R1a1a1h1- R1a1a1h1a

Regarding IE(Indo-European), nrao believes that Sanskrit has nothing to do with IE or there is no such thing as IE. I don't agree with him.

About R1a-Z93 mutation :
R1a-Z93 is the main Asian branch of R1a. It is found in South, Central and South-West Asia(including Ashkenazi Jews). It is thought to be marker of Indo-Aryans, Persians, Medes, Mittani(a branch of Vedic Aryans in middle east, some excavations are found), Tatar, and it pervaded genetic pool of Arabs and Jews.
 
Last edited:
All males having R1a mutation share a common male ancestor between 18000-30000 year. Now there are many more mutation within R1a haplogroup so we can trace more recent common ancestor. Z-93 is a branch of R1a, it is called R1a1a1h. There are some sub-branches of R1a1a1h too.
These all haplogroups tale male ancestry, there are sub-haplogroups within haplogroup, for example R1 has too branches R1a and R1b.
here we go from R1 to R1a1a1h
R1 - R1a - R1a1 - R1a1a - R1a1a1 - R1a1a1h(mutation Z93)- R1a1a1h1- R1a1a1h1a

Regarding IE(Indo-European), nrao believes that Sanskrit has nothing to do with IE or there is no such thing as IE. I don't agree with him.

About R1a-Z93 mutation :
R1a-Z93 is the main Asian branch of R1a. It is found in South, Central and South-West Asia(including Ashkenazi Jews). It is thought to be marker of Indo-Aryans, Persians, Medes, Mittani(a branch of Vedic Aryans in middle east, some excavations are found), Tatar, and it pervaded genetic pool of Arabs and Jews.

Thanks Friend for your prompt and to the point response.
 
None can deny the common words used in various languages used by Europeans, Indians and Iranians etc of the hoary past ! The common Aryan language using people lived at one place in Central Asia and due to various factors they moved in different directions from time to time.

Some were driven out from the Devaloka and made to retreat several times towards Iran and thence towards Europe. They came to be known as Indo-Iranians and Indo Europeans. In addition to Indian and Iranian traditions, the Mittani and other European evidences support this contention.

Coming to Indian scene, the references to Deva-Asura Wars make it explicitly clear that the Aryans moved from their original home from Central Asia not in one go but in different branches and times.

Some of them came to India in different waves starting first entry with Asuras who were driven out by the Devas from Central Asian abode. They were the first 'Aryan' settlers in India. They settled in the area known as Harrapan culture area and have been addressed as 'Hariyapu' in Rigveda. The famous battle between Sudas, the destroyer of 100's forts and cities clearly mentions this power struggle between Asura branch of the Indo Aryans and Deva branch of Indo Aryans.

They were followed by some more waves of the Vedic people/Aryans like Bharatas and Kurus and so on later on as is testified by various Vedic hymns and verses contained in the oldest Rigvedic mantras. Mbt, Puranas and other Indian old books contain a lot of information on the issue. The archaeological studies also support this view.

Therefore, the earliest Aryan home of the common ancestors of the Indian, Iranian and some of the European tribes known as 'Aryans' was Central Asia and that the original creators of the Harappan civilisation were also Aryans not Vedic but Asuras as is testified by the remains collected from various sites of the antiquity.
 
None can deny the common words used in various languages used by Europeans, Indians and Iranians etc of the hoary past ! The common Aryan language using people lived at one place in Central Asia and due to various factors they moved in different directions from time to time.

Some were driven out from the Devaloka and made to retreat several times towards Iran and thence towards Europe. They came to be known as Indo-Iranians and Indo Europeans. In addition to Indian and Iranian traditions, the Mittani and other European evidences support this contention.

Coming to Indian scene, the references to Deva-Asura Wars make it explicitly clear that the Aryans moved from their original home from Central Asia not in one go but in different branches and times.

Some of them came to India in different waves starting first entry with Asuras who were driven out by the Devas from Central Asian abode. They were the first 'Aryan' settlers in India. They settled in the area known as Harrapan culture area and have been addressed as 'Hariyapu' in Rigveda. The famous battle between Sudas, the destroyer of 100's forts and cities clearly mentions this power struggle between Asura branch of the Indo Aryans and Deva branch of Indo Aryans.

They were followed by some more waves of the Vedic people/Aryans like Bharatas and Kurus and so on later on as is testified by various Vedic hymns and verses contained in the oldest Rigvedic mantras. Mbt, Puranas and other Indian old books contain a lot of information on the issue. The archaeological studies also support this view.

Therefore, the earliest Aryan home of the common ancestors of the Indian, Iranian and some of the European tribes known as 'Aryans' was Central Asia and that the original creators of the Harappan civilisation were also Aryans not Vedic but Asuras as is testified by the remains collected from various sites of the antiquity.

Proof kab aayega.
 
All males having R1a mutation share a common male ancestor between 18000-30000 year. Now there are many more mutation within R1a haplogroup so we can trace more recent common ancestor. Z-93 is a branch of R1a, it is called R1a1a1h. There are some sub-branches of R1a1a1h too.
These all haplogroups tell male ancestry, there are sub-haplogroups within haplogroup, for example R1 has two branches R1a and R1b.
here we go from R1 to R1a1a1h
R1 - R1a - R1a1 - R1a1a - R1a1a1 - R1a1a1h(mutation Z93)- R1a1a1h1- R1a1a1h1a

Regarding IE(Indo-European), nrao believes that Sanskrit has nothing to do with IE or there is no such thing as IE. I don't agree with him.

About R1a-Z93 mutation :
R1a-Z93 is the main Asian branch of R1a. It is found in South, Central and South-West Asia(including Ashkenazi Jews). It is thought to be marker of Indo-Aryans, Persians, Medes, Mittani(a branch of Vedic Aryans in middle east, some excavations are found), Tatar, and it pervaded genetic pool of Arabs and Jews.

If R1a is already present in India 10000 years before present then how can it be brought into India in later times?
Earlier you wrote that R1a is the Aryan one, now you going to R1a-Z93 as 'thought to be'. Are you sure that is what you want to stick with now?

Is there any reference that talks about this variant and probably its age?
 
Last edited:
Friends,

We have seen so many quotes from Rigveda and recent researches on Saraswati to prove Indian Origin of the so called 'Aryans'.

But no satisfactory working conclusion could be arrived at on the issue as it did not take all other evidences in consideration.
Abhi tak aapne bhu garbh vaigyanikon ke tark ke viprit mein koi tathya nahi pesh kiya hai. Kya aap bataane ka kasht karenge ki kyon vaigyanikon ke pramaan ko aap nahi maan na chahate hain saraswati nadi aur Rigved ke vishay mein?

Kshama kijiyega aapki taraf se koi pramaan nahi milta hai bas quotation milti hai ki isne yeh kaha aur usne voh kaha.
 
Abhi tak aapne bhu garbh vaigyanikon ke tark ke viprit mein koi tathya nahi pesh kiya hai. Kya aap bataane ka kasht karenge ki kyon vaigyanikon ke pramaan ko aap nahi maan na chahate hain saraswati nadi aur Rigved ke vishay mein?

Kshama kijiyega aapki taraf se koi pramaan nahi milta hai bas quotation milti hai ki isne yeh kaha aur usne voh kaha.



Bhu garbh vaigyanikon [ aur NASA ke satellite chitron] se jamin ke andar hone wale privarton ke bare mein jankari milti hai; unhone kahin bhi yah nahin likha hai ki jamin ke uppar rahane wale log jadvaat ek sthan per rahate the aur woh desh-deshantar naahin jate the !

Vishva itihas padhne pe gyat hota hai ki migraation or immigration tabhi se jari hai jab se manava ka zamin pe avtaran hua hai.

Sansar bhar mein jo bhi sodh karya ho rahe hain, unmein diya gaya niskroshon ko quotation ke roop mein prastut karane ka sarva-manya niyam hai aur use praman mana Jata hai.

Vishesh: Hum Aryon ke baare mein Bharat ke Mool niwasi hone ke baare mein prachlit vichar per kafi charcha kar chuke hain aur 'Saarswati' nadi ko chhod kar koi anya praman is bare mein uplabadha nahin ho paya hai. Rigveda ke kuchh slokon ko bhi pramaan swaroop pesh kiya gaya hai.

Agar aab hum sab milkar 'Sarswati aur vedon mein diya gaye pramanon ko 'Madhya Asia-Aryaon Ka Mool Niwas' manane walon ki kashoti per janch-partal karwa lewen to merekhyal se kisi ko koi etraj nahin hona chahiya.

Bhai Romar : aaz ke Hindustan kee political boundaries aur pre-historic aur proto-historic 'Aryana' kee boundaries mein bahut antaar hai, charcha mein bhag lete samay is baat ka bhi humein notice lena chahiya.

Aryaon ke mool niwas ke baare mein daarzenon theory prachlit hain, abhi to do theories pe hi charcha hui hai.

Kya pata, charcha ke samapan pe Bhartiya mool niwas sthan sidh ho jaye ya koi anya sthan;

Isliye Main nhain manun attitude chhodkar khule manse tark-vitark amantrit hain.

Quotation kisi bhi vidwan ke vicharon se li jawen, swaagat hai.
 
http://www.gsbkerala.com/aryans.htm
Who were the Aryans and where did they come from?
migration.jpg
The word Aryan comes from the Sanskrit arya meaningnoble. Historians believe the original home of the Aryans was in the lands south of the Ural Mountains in what is now Kirghizstan. When life became tough, because food was scarce, drop in temperature and the pressure applied by the yellow-skinned tribes in the north, the Aryans began to move away in different directions. Some went to Greece, some to Iran, and some to Afghanistan. From the eastern front some groups moved to India. The whole process of migration took place between 2000 to 1500 BC. They entered India from the north west and initially settled in the land between the tributaries of the River Indus. There were more than 1200 such settlements of migrants.

Many of them settled along the banks of Saraswati river. They settled to an agrarian life, supplemented by cattle grazing. These settlers along the banks of Saraswati river came to be known as Saraswats.
 
Some scholars, such as Max Muller and Dr. Thapar, believe that originally, the Aryans seem to have lived somewhere in the area east of Alps, in the region known as Eurasia, the region of the Caspian Sea and the southern Russian steppes, and gradually dividing into a number of tribes migrated in search of pasture, to Greece and Asia Minor, to Iran and to India. By that time, they came to be known as Aryans. This is proved by some Aryan names mentioned in the Kassite inscriptions of 1600 BC and the Mitanniinscriptions of the fourteenth century BC, found in Iraq which suggest that from Iran a branch of the Aryans moved towards the west.

[TABLE="width: 400"]
<tbody>[TR]
[TH="class: centr, colspan: 2, align: center"]Original Home of Aryans[/TH]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]Region[/TD]
[TD]Theorist[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR="bgcolor: #E0E0E0"]
[TD="class: centr, colspan: 2, align: center"]Asia[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]Central Asia[/TD]
[TD]Max Muller[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]Tibet[/TD]
[TD]Dayanand Saraswati[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]Pamirs[/TD]
[TD]Mayor[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]Turkistan[/TD]
[TD]Hurz Feld[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]Bactria[/TD]
[TD]J.C. Rod[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]Steepes[/TD]
[TD]Brandstein[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR="bgcolor: #E0E0E0"]
[TD="class: centr, colspan: 2, align: center"]Europe[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]Germany[/TD]
[TD]Penka and Hert[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]Hungry[/TD]
[TD]Giles[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]Southern Russia[/TD]
[TD]Nehring[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]West Baltic[/TD]
[TD]Mach[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]Arctic Region[/TD]
[TD]B.G. Tilak[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]Russian Steppes[/TD]
[TD]Prof. Belfy[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR="bgcolor: #E0E0E0"]
[TD="class: centr, colspan: 2, align: center"]India[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]Central India[/TD]
[TD]Rajbali Pandey[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]Kashmir[/TD]
[TD]L.D. Kala[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]Sapta Sindhu[/TD]
[TD]A.C. Das[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]Himalayan Foothills[/TD]
[TD]Pt. Laxmidhar Shastri

[/TD]
[/TR]
</tbody>[/TABLE]

Source :http://www.facts-about-india.com/origin-of-aryans.php
 
http://www.gsbkerala.com/aryans.htm
Who were the Aryans and where did they come from?
migration.jpg
The word Aryan comes from the Sanskrit arya meaningnoble. Historians believe the original home of the Aryans was in the lands south of the Ural Mountains in what is now Kirghizstan. When life became tough, because food was scarce, drop in temperature and the pressure applied by the yellow-skinned tribes in the north, the Aryans began to move away in different directions. Some went to Greece, some to Iran, and some to Afghanistan. From the eastern front some groups moved to India. The whole process of migration took place between 2000 to 1500 BC. They entered India from the north west and initially settled in the land between the tributaries of the River Indus. There were more than 1200 such settlements of migrants.

Many of them settled along the banks of Saraswati river. They settled to an agrarian life, supplemented by cattle grazing. These settlers along the banks of Saraswati river came to be known as Saraswats.

Very interesting. Do you know if this is the official site of Gowda Saraswat Brahmins?

This link can never be taken as a proof since they do not cite anything except stating that "Historians believe the original home of the Aryans was in the lands south of the Ural Mountains in what is now Kirghizstan." Only a belief and no certainty.

This link also puts the time of 1500 BCE of the alleged Aryan migration as the lower limit, which we have agreed to disagree earlier.
 
Last edited:
Rajpal ji,

When you open this link, it states (in big and colorful fonts) "The Myth of Aryan Invasion of India". So it is really stating that the Invasion of Aryans was a "Myth".

Friend,

That is why, further research may be shared on the topic.

It may be a 'myth' or ' migration' because one group of Aryans known as 'Asuras' had already settled in the area which is known today as the region covered by 'Harappan' culture. or in 'reality' it might be a struggle between the people who believed in Vedic rites and others who opposed it and were designated as 'Asuras' 'Danavas' or 'Daityas' !

What about coming into picture of historical references about Nagvamsis/Taxakas, Bharatas, Kurus, Panchals etc. Were these all indigenous elements or came from outside, is an important factor which cannot be pushed under carpet on the pretext of changes in climatic conditions affecting flow of some rivers in Indian sub continent.
 
The hymns of the Rigveda will have now to be individually considered to solve the riddle of 'Aryan' advent on the scene of Indian history. First, kindly select battle hymns attributed to Indra, Cyavana, Srinjaya, Sushravas, Istashwa, Indrota, Emusha, Divodasa, Sudasa etc. and also note their composers simultaneously.

Then take the danastuti hymns and place them in the same order.

This will surely lead us towards reaching a convincing conclusion of not only chronology but also knowing the geographical locale of the ancient Aryans.

If the participants are ready to contribute in a fruitful discussion, this act has to be undertaken jointly by all of us !
 
Friend,

That is why, further research may be shared on the topic.

It may be a 'myth' or ' migration' because one group of Aryans known as 'Asuras' had already settled in the area which is known today as the region covered by 'Harappan' culture. or in 'reality' it might be a struggle between the people who believed in Vedic rites and others who opposed it and were designated as 'Asuras' 'Danavas' or 'Daityas' !

What about coming into picture of historical references about Nagvamsis/Taxakas, Bharatas, Kurus, Panchals etc. Were these all indigenous elements or came from outside, is an important factor which cannot be pushed under carpet on the pretext of changes in climatic conditions affecting flow of some rivers in Indian sub continent.

It seems that Daitya or Danav are not mentioned in Rig Ved, they have references in later texts.

Similarly, out of your list (Nagvamsis/Taxakas, Bharatas, Kurus, Panchals etc), this is my thinking:
* Nagavamsis/Taxakas - probably missing from RigVed, later texts include them,
* Bharatas - RigVedic tribal group identified as Aryans and belonging to Purus (another Aryan tribe). Seems that Bharatvarsh is named after them.
* Kuru - probably missing from RigVed, later texts include them. They succeeded Puru after many generations (likely 25 generations)
* Panchala - not RigVedic, later texts include them,

Here is a guess - Puru name probably survived as Porus and/or Por (later as Poriya, such as Hukum Singh Poriya), and/or even Puri.
 
Last edited:
Very interesting. Do you know if this is the official site of Gowda Saraswat Brahmins?

This link can never be taken as a proof since they do not cite anything except stating that "Historians believe the original home of the Aryans was in the lands south of the Ural Mountains in what is now Kirghizstan." Only a belief and no certainty.

This link also puts the time of 1500 BCE of the alleged Aryan migration as the lower limit, which we have agreed to disagree earlier.


Very good.

I totally agree that nothing but proof quoted with references preferably based on original sources must be quoted to argue in favour or against a particular statement. The internet links may or may not correct; hence their authenticity and relevance may be verified before agreeing to their conclusions.

I will try to stick to this criterion; others must also try it and I am sure, it will result in more serious discussion and ensure better result.
 
It seems that Daitya or Danav are not mentioned in Rig Ved, they have references in later texts.

Similarly, out of your list (Nagvamsis/Taxakas, Bharatas, Kurus, Panchals etc), this is my thinking:
* Nagavamsis/Taxakas - probably missing from RigVed, later texts include them,
* Bharatas - RigVedic tribal group identified as Aryans and belonging to Purus (another Aryan tribe). Seems that Bharatvarsh is named after them.
* Kuru - probably missing from RigVed, later texts include them. They succeeded Puru after many generations (likely 25 generations)
* Panchala - not RigVedic, later texts include them,

Here is a guess - Puru name probably survived as Porus and/or Por (later as Poriya, such as Hukum Singh Poriya), and/or even Puri.

According to this identification, in Rigveda only Bharata group identified as Aryans is identifiable/existed.

All other ancient Aryan groups emerged later on.

Then, what importance this clue provides to studies of ancient people of India and their chronology.

Could Puranas and Mhbt etc.[later texts?] be taken up to brighten the dark patches left in one text or the other.
 
Last edited:
It seems that Daitya or Danav are not mentioned in Rig Ved, they have references in later texts.

Similarly, out of your list (Nagvamsis/Taxakas, Bharatas, Kurus, Panchals etc), this is my thinking:
* Nagavamsis/Taxakas - probably missing from RigVed, later texts include them,
* Bharatas - RigVedic tribal group identified as Aryans and belonging to Purus (another Aryan tribe). Seems that Bharatvarsh is named after them.
* Kuru - probably missing from RigVed, later texts include them. They succeeded Puru after many generations (likely 25 generations)
* Panchala - not RigVedic, later texts include them,

Here is a guess - Puru name probably survived as Porus and/or Por (later as Poriya, such as Hukum Singh Poriya), and/or even Puri.

In the absence of universally acceptable chronology of the Vedic or later texts, we have to be very cautious while jumping to draw conclusions solely based on any one of them. Cumulative evidences/data drawn from traditions available in contemporary or near contemporary texts of the period, epigraphy, numismatics, anthropology, archaeology and other sources will have to be applied for reaching some convincing conclusion.

It is believed that some text of the MBT contains as plausible evidence as any other of the old texts as could be used to identify many an important events, their chronology and personages as any other text. Some of the Puranic data may also be used for comparison and contrast to study pre=history of India with profit.

Since, some very important Aryan groups/tribes find no mention in the Rigveda and have been elaborated in later day texts needs special attention while discussing ancient abode of the Aryans which could be identified in Indian boundaries of today or outside, who knows ?

Thanks
 
Asura senior thhe aur pehle raja bane yeh kaunse granth se liya gaya hai? Iska pramaan kya hai?........................


It seems that Daitya or Danav are not mentioned in Rig Ved, they have references in later texts. .................

Mahabharata clearly mentions that Daitya/Danava/Asura Branch was senior to Devayani borne branch of Aryan family and became rulers of the region possessed by their father. In due course of time, the two branches of the same family developed differences on several counts and the Devas tried to and succeeded in dislodging the senior branch from their ruling status in the ancient abode. This struggle for supreme power between the two groups is alluded to in several Indian and foreign traditions and texts which needs thorough analysis to understand the pre-history of not only India but of the Central Asia and to some extent some parts of Europe.

The places connected with Deva-Asura Yudhas including the event of SAGAR-Manthan needs due attention at the hands of scholars either to reject their occurrence on the basis of stronger evidence against them or to accept the evidences supplied by these texts as historical source.

Let us come forward to analyse them.

Thanks
 
Back
Top