This blog is about what I believe about the AIT/AMT/OIT etc after reading through thousands of such discussions on such topics and other references on the net, books, my school history books, discussions with various people in my and other societies/communities, many old timers, both orthodox and liberal people, including many non Indians.
Why is AIT important and why am I bothered when most Indians don't care?
It's like asking why history is important. The future of a country depends on its past and what it has learnt from the past and how it plans to move forward. The same applies to the future of the world and the future of every individual, community or society. History gives these entities an identity and an association or affiliation with various social/political groups. Wrongly written and taught history is dangerous as it creates wrong affiliations, which can lead people and their society and country in the wrong direction. Hence my interest in AIT which has been the most important factor in deciding Indian history as it is about the origins of Indians.
Another reason for my interest in AIT is that I have been interested in this topic from school time as I always wanted to know my real origins since there is so much emphasis on origins, pedigree, lineage etc in our society.
To understand my view you will need to get the big picture of the whole process of how civilizations evolve along with the political, linguistic, cultural, social and other aspects of evolution of humans. Now lets get a few basics right.
If you dint know what AIT/AMT/OIT/Aryan/Dravidian etc.. is you can take a look at http://wikipedia.org and http://www.britannica.com/ or just Google the definitions for these words. Though I should warn you that individuals have different definitions for these. i.e., the very definition is a bit ambiguous, but definitely in the same context that a group of light/white skinned barbaric/advanced people from north Europe/central Asia/ Caucasus region/ Siberia/(fill-in the region in europe or north asia you like) came and invaded/migrated to northern west India (pak,punjab) and eastern Iran around 1500 -1000 BC and destroyed/relocated/merged with the aboriginals of India who already lived there. Some say these aboriginals were the Dravidians or the Mundas or ( fill-in any lower caste in india ).
Similarly you can look out for the words Aryan/Dravidian etc in the same sources. Again these have ambiguities. The word Aryan is considered as a race of light /white skinned people who lived in Europe/central asia/caucass……blah blah… , they have blue eyes, blonde hair, are tall, well build and handsome ( Has any one seen a single Indian with such features?) and they are always men ;) . They are said to speak the indo-European/indo-iranian/indo-aryan languages. The definitions of some people can get so crazy that some Indian Brahmins claim they originate from Germany and more crazy Germans wrote the Vedas. Blame it on Max Muller/Macauley and co, the Indian education system, Indians with caste superiority complex, Politicians and the leftist/communists who together created a religion called Hinduism (more on this topic in another blog).
The Dravidians are supposed to be black/dark skinned people, with curly hair, short, stout and ugly (again how many south Indians look like this? And surely many northies do). They speak Dravidian languages, mostly Tamil (claimed as the oldest language in the world). Some claim they are the oldest civilization in the world, they inhabited the harrappan cities and were very advanced urban people and were destroyed by the barbaric Aryans, and so they fled to south India (but forgot how to create cities after they came south?). Some people even say they originated from mid east or Africa or elamite before they came to India and created the harrappan cities. They used to be following Indic religions (I won’t use the word Hindu to avoid ambiguity) some vedic, vedantic and some pagan (the word I use for non vedic/vedantic Indian beliefs), but more recently thanks to the Portuguese, AIT, Dravidian movement in tamil nadu most of them are Christians or atheists (read anti god).
Going by the definitions above and in the dictionaries, encyclopedias, school history books etc, one can see that there are now 2 races in India, one claims to be Dravidian and other called Aryan. Aryans are very advanced as they wrote the Vedas (which is indeed very advanced even by today’s science) and ruled over India and they are the north Indians (and south Indian Brahmins who migrated from north). Though the north Indians were advanced as they have knowledge of Vedas, it was because they were of superior European white origin they could do such things (as implicitly described by the European indologists whose research had a racial undercurrent).
Dravidians were the race once so great and advanced in Harappa but destroyed by Aryans and never became advanced again in the Aryan culture they were outcast and treated as slaves and untouchables. They somehow managed to secure their language tamil which is the oldest in the world, which is now being revived by the dravidian movement, thanks to their kind hearted british masters who with the help of their Christian missionaries made them think again and gave them what they call “self-respect”.
And India has only 2 races, northern Aryans and southern Dravidians. They are white and black respectively. So……blah blah. You get the idea how the hatred is created.. If you are an educated Indian you would know this by what you learnt in school, if you were not you wont read this but know that your uneducated acquaintances would have been brainwashed something like this by their political leaders giving them promised of better life, quarter adulterated alcohol, biryani and a lorry trip to their nearest city.
Does the above paragraph make sense to you? if you read between the lines, now we have a racist India similar to medieval (even now sometimes) Europe with black slaves and white masters, north/south divide, brahmin/non brahmin divide, anti vedic attitude, minority appeasement, continuity of caste system in the name of reservations, superiority of the westerners, anti-(hindu/hinduthva/hindu nationalism/Indian nationalism) attitude, mis-understanding of indian values, culture, systems (including caste system), destruction of ancient Indian science, knowledge and culture which was at least carried on by family tradition until English education was adopted by the Indian elite. even the name of our country is in greek. India. not bharat. our national language is Hindi an arabic/persian word, we are called hindu again arabic/persian. when will we get out of this colonial/slavish mindset?
OK. Now lets see what I believe was the pre-history of India before psychological barrier date of 1500 BC.
First of all I believe that the Vedic Indians (aka Aryans of AIT, I will not use the word Aryans, I’ll use the word vedics or vedic Indians) and the vedic civilization was located primarily on the banks of river sarasvati (rajasthan, gujarat area) and indus(Pak, punjab area) and its tributaries and the civilization extended till eastern to central iran(south east of Caspian sea) to Afghanistan and some central asian countries in the region of tajikistan,kyrgistan, some parts of uzbekistan and turkmenistan , parts of tibet, to the regions in the east of todays India where ganga might not have existed back then, but some smaller rivers did exist. i.e., the map of India included what is today northern India, Pakistan, parts of central and eastern iran, afghan, some central asian countries just above afghan and Kashmir etc. However this is a cultural map and not a political one. The region consisted of many kingdoms and may be bigger samrat dynasty, which controlled all these regions. However the heart of this civilization was in the sapta-sindu-sarasvathi region.
More over the vedic civilization had influence or links with the civilizations in the middle east, mesopotemia, Egypt, Greece many tribes northern central, northern asia, china etc, but these civilizations also would have had some influence on the vedics. i.e., some cultures were exported and some imported. The presence of Yavanas, Kambojas, Sakas (Scythians), Pahlavas, etc in the Shrutis and Smritis show this.
Though there used to be constant conquests from various groups they were clearly mentioned as outcasts and foreigners in vedic litereature like the Vedas. It is also evident from their presence that these people did not have any racial differences and would mix and mingle with each other when they settled down in the vedic region and adopted to vedic life and surely more with the non vedic pagan following tribes that might have existed in this region.
This vedic civilization existed for many thousand years before the so called 1500 BC as mentioned by proponents of the AIT/AMT. Moreover they were also the inhabitants of the sindu sarasvathi cities (indus valley civilization). There is no way this can be proved wrong and many proofs to support it.
==dig==
There are so many arguments which are pro and against AIT including one supporting it from BBC (for those colonial slaves who will not accept anything unless endorsed by some European).
Here is one more proof (I realized when I came across IVC Scales and measurements on wikipedia), I can add to support the fact that the vedics were the inhabitants of the Indus valley civilization is the use of decimal metrics in their scales and measurements. It is a well known fact that the vedic people developed the indian numerals which was the first positional base 10 numeral systems used while all other numeric systems like Chinese, roman etc were progressive and had short limitations. i.e., vedics developed the numeric system with both positive and negative natural numbers (with no zero back then) tending to infinity. this would not be possible without much research which gave them the knowledge of brahman(infinity). no other religion has the concept of brahman. and brahman was important to have this kind of numerical numerical system. remember zero was invented in India during/after the times of buddha/mahavira when the concept of sunyatha or null or zero came in and other mathematical advancements were made.
We can also see that the Indian numeric system spread around the world by the arabs much after the disintegration of the IVC in the first millineum AD. (Now I won’t be surprised if the AIT proponents tell me that the Aryans invaded the IVC people, got their numeric system so they can use in in the Vedas and then killed them.)
one more I found when looking at harappan artifacts.
look at this info http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dice#History and take a look at this http://www.harappa.com/indus5/page_420.html
another one I found,
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Triseal.jpg
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indus_Valley_Civilization#Decline.2C_collapse_and_legacy section of IVC writes about Indra being the destroyer of harappans without even noticing the pic next to it showing swastika as a symbol of IVC people. isnt swastika the symbol of sarasvati, in the rigveda? Is this how wikipedia wants to be nuteral?
Also take a look here.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_India#Indus_Valley_Civilization
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:IndusValleySeals.JPG
and here is another important archeological proof of the continuity of IVC culture in ganga-yamuna vedic culture, the Ochre_Coloured_Pottery culture , the Cemetery_H_culture and the Gandhara_Grave_culture. We can see that the culture of the region from central asia to the vindhya region is the same including the indus valley, sarasvati region. i.e., they were the same civilization, why the hell on earth would then the so called aryans invade and destroy their own culture or merge with them selves? cause they are lunatics like some of the indologists? I wonder if people who propose AIT have anything called common sense or are they rationalists like Mr.EVR .
no where in ancient indian texts(sruthis, smirithis, puranas etc...) or mythology is there a mention of migrating from a foreign land or references to eurasia. infact the migrant or invading groups like the yavanas, pahalvas, sakas etc were clearly identified as foreigners.
on the contraty,classic Tamil texts mention that the tamil people came from or used to live in ten-madurai in Kumari_Kandam . though this is a mythological place, it surely represents the early tamils had moved in from some foreign sunken island(after the last ice age, when sea levels started raising 8k years back?). So I guess the dravidian migration theory might be real as opposed to the AMT.
==dig==
OK, to continue, the vedic civilization was an evolving culture and the mother of many asian cultures, beliefs and religions. The first known group to split from this belief were the Zoroastrians. i.e, the indian, iranians, and central asians were the same civilization before Zoroastrianism came, whose heart was in the sindhu sarasvati region. i.e., there was one common proto-vedic-zoroastric belief (again I don’t use the word religion as it has a different meaning) which got split into two. I would believe this happened because the Iranian side was more influenced by the civilizations to the west like the Mesopotamian one or even the greeks.
Also the proto-vedic-zorastrian language aka proto-indo-iranian was one of the prakritic language which later got refined into Sanskrit.
The deva ashura ideology clash is the basis for this split. I had referred on a link which bases the difference in the ideology between the devas and ashuras was that of living a spiritual or worldly life. Hence their respective gods represent these aspects.
From then on the two civilizations forked off though many devas are said to live in iran and asuras Indian region, the majority moved to the respective regions.
This could have probably happened over a period of time when the sarasvati dried up and those who moved east and south were more continued with the original Vedas and those who moved west created Zoroastrianism (of course under the leader ship of zarathurstra) probably due to influence of other foreign ideologies from further west, especially the growth of the Mesopotamian civilization.
Later the vedics moved futher east and south influencing or accommodating the pagan and other tribal beliefs of the region. i.e., they tried to modify their original rig vedic beliefs and tried to accommodate pagan/tribal beliefs into the system. This is inorder to convert them into the main stream sanatana dharma.
In the evolution of this civilization many new concepts like caste system, science and advancement happened. This should have the peak of vedic civilization. As the culture expanded through out Indian region and accommodating many from the tribes within Indian region and outside many cultures, practices, idol worship and many other aspects got added in order for the core belief of sanathana dharma to spread.
Note that during the whole time, Sanskrit was used only as an academic language, especially by highly learned men. It was a custom of showing off sophistication. Hence Sanskrit was used as it was considered a perfect language.
Although Sanskrit was used to recite/write the Vedas, regional prakrithic languages were used also to spread this culture/dharma. So we find that regional languages like proto-tamil, Pali and some prakrits were refined and developed. So we can say that tamil and Sanskrit were sister languages in the north and south and complimented each other during their later development. While later Sanskrit words and practices got absorbed into the other languages to improve them and thus creating new dialects and new languages like kannada, telegu, singala, nepali, hindi etc evolved.
After many centuries/millennia of continuation of this, things went out of control due to the various reasons like accommodating too many cultures, invasions, the level of freedom(read anarchy) that existed and other ritualistic customs from various tribal beliefs and probably the raise of family based caste system and other un-orderliness, new forms of beliefs like Buddhism and Jainism arose in India and so in other parts of the world.
We know history reasonably well and accepted after this.
Ironically(with respect to AIT),
The Yavanas, Kambojas, Sakas (Scythians), Pahlavas, Chinas , Hunas , Paradas , Khashas , Kushans, etc..
1. were the people who invaded or tried to invade India from the said regions in euroasia and they were considered sudras and dasyus by the vedic Indians who called the upper castes as Arya as they considered themselves more refined noble and civilized.
2. they came into India and adopted the vedic way of life later, when some of them were elated to the status of kshatrya. remember Kanishka(chineese/turk kushans), indo-greeks, indo-Parthians, the huns etc were all hindus or buddhists but came from foreign origin during the medeival times.
3. The Vedic Indians were described by the ambassadors of the Greeks, Arabs, Chinese etc as people with dark to fair(not white) skin, curly to straight hair, slim, tall and agile. And the invading group of Yavanas, Kambojas, Sakas (Scythians), Pahlavas etc had the features of the so called Aryans of the AIT. Infact in the indica, Megasthenes/Arrian even compare the “north Indians” with Ethiopians but with straight hair.
There were also mutual conquests, by both the Vedic and ashuric kings on each other and they also lived in each others regions. This can be seen even in the later millennia, as several Iranian and central Asian groups like those listed above tried to invade India, but they were really successful only after arrival of Islam. Similarly vedic kings invaded or occupied parts of the Iranian-Mesopotamian areas as we have seen by the Mitanni and hittite and even in later millennia where the Mauryas, Guptas held eastern parts of Iran and had cultural influence over the greek seleucid dynasty.
Here is one which I agree with(partly, dont agree the language part)
http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2006/01/0110_060110_india_genes.html
India is a mix of various races from around eurasia. so depending on which group you do the DNA tests on the results can vary. The point in this topic is AIT is a myth and not that indians have _may also_ european DNA. I have spoken about the yavana,saka, intrutions into india many times. Even in the douth(so called dravidian) The andhras and the pallavas and hence cholas (the vellalar,reddy,vanniar etc.. castes of south india, the most adherent belivers of dravidian idea) are considered descendents of the Sakas and Pahalvas of persia.
The conspiracy theory in AIT is that it twisted history in such a way that we are divided as aryan/dravidian, a divide which doesnot exist. There was many invasions, there were many migrations from euroasia (and other parts probably,east-asia?) to india (obviously thru the northwest and probably the sea coast) at various points in time through out history. so were invasions and migrations through the south (by the seas and costal land routes) including the west europeans in the 2nd mil AD and also through the north-east(which is evident even today).
but none of them imposed their culture into india until the mohamadeans/modern europeans came. Instead, the invaders failed to conquer(though sometimes successful), and became slaves and dasyus in india and were considered sudhras. later they adopted the Indian(hindu/buddhist/jain and also Zoroastrianism) way of life and merged with the population.
Proof of this is the merging/conversion of the indo-greeks(yavanas) . So were various saka and pahalva (among others) kings who ruled parts india. And if I may include so were the early Pandyas who came from an unknown (is)land called kumarikandam. _Probably_ the only so called dravidian(sea-people/costal people) are the paravas(parayas?), Maravars and kuravars who are related to these early pandyas. Even they have mixed into the mainstream population and may not even have an exclusive DNA pattern today.
India is a mix of too many races and ethinic groups to be divided simply into two groups as Aryans and Dravidians and trust me so is the case in most other countries in the world. I heard in the the lonely planet travel show about central asia that there are atleast 200 known ethinic groups there. do the math for India if we had somany migrants from central asia alone.
One among them is the perception that north indians are fair and south indians are dark. but this is a myth. a myth again created by the brits in the victorian times. when there was not much communication and links between the north and south. Just look at it,
Even the north west indians and pakistanis(majority) look significantly different from the north Indians(UP,bihar,MP area) even today. but overall the mainstream population of india is of the Indian race, which is a sub class of the indo- european caucassians, and clearly distinct from the other caucasians in the west. there is a higher mix of western caucasians(like the greeks, iranians etc in the north-west due to their proximity to the west. and a higher mix of chineese in the north east and a higher mix of austro-asiatic or javaneese in the south, central and east(from TN to bihar/bengal). so today is it is impossible to say any one to clearly belong to a particular race. Ethinically we are of some kind of Indian ethinicity. now lets not get a fake Aryan invasion myth give us fake identities and divide us for a identities that doesnt even exist and let the west steal away our past glory. Indian history should be written from the indian point of view and the real truth and not what the west wants it to be.
So to conclude,
Are we Indians aryans and dravidians racially/ethinically?
the answer to this is, the question is irrelevant and meaningless.
aryan means civilised/noble its not a race and dravidian means sea-people or east costal people(correct me). anyway the meaning doesnt refer to a race or ethinicity.
Are north indian and south indians different?
not the mainstream. though each region has a higher %age of some tribes. if we see properly except for people living in the north-west India and Pakistan which form part of central-asia as per the UN most northindians, central indians, east and south indians look physically the same. i.e., they are never white, like some pakis or punjabis. they are always pale yellow/white to weathish, to brown to dark brown, depending on the exposure to sun and other geographical and social(food) factors. Though they migth look a little different due to their local culture and lifestyle, I don't see much physical differences. There are some mangoloid mix in the east, north east and some austro-asiatic mix out the south and east.
Racially do indians have eurasian mix?
yes. ancient greeks, ancient persians, central asians, some modern west europeans, mangols, arabs, ancient and medeival turks, chinese and more have mixed at various times into india. but their mixing is negligible and the same as every other country in the world has had. Indians are mainly of indian race.
Did we have others mix with Indian?
Yes. surely from china, far east, and last but not the least, the people of the mythical kumarikandam(supposed to be sunk parts of SEasia/australia) , who bought with them proto-tamil.
Did Indians mix with others?
Yes. the ancient Indians not just moved to various parts of asia and europe, but also had a great influence on the culture of eastern europe (western europe din't exist then), middle east, central asia, north asia, china, SEasia, and other parts of the world until the advent of abhrahamic religions in these parts of the world. Infact the pagan beliefs of the world and the pre-islamic, pre-christian and pre-jew religions of the world mostly resemble various hindu beliefs and some were clearly early vedic.
On the controrary we can say that all beliefs of the world were similar due to the nature of human beings of that age, but later were forcefully converted to the christianity or islam.
Are iranians and central asians a different race/ethinicity than Indians?
not until 3000 years back. later they mixed more with the western races, while we mixed more with the eastern/south eastern races.
yes. we are of the indian race/ethinicity.
Is race really important?
Surely no. but this socialo-political dogma has dogged human beings after the europeans colonised various regions of the world. AIT is an brainchild of the racist european indologists.
what are the origins of indian race then?
The main stream indians are an early off shoot
We had migrations and invasions from various parts of asia including some european and unknown places in SEasia, but the core of the indian culture and society remained the same and its unique to Indian subcontinent.
Ancient india included what is now India, pakistan, bangladesh, nepal, eastern parts of iran and afghanistan and its cultural influences existed all over Asia. Though the region south of the Vindhyas was not part of the early vedic times, they have been culturally influenced and later merged with Indian culture atleast as early as 1500-2000 BC and all known south indian countries including the earliest pandyas have been influenced by vedic culture (we dont know who existed in south india before that) Albeit they had a unique linguistic identity(proto-tamil) Initially, they absorbed vedic values and languages thus making the modern southindian languages over many centuries.
Infact over all these years India has been a victim of cultural destruction from the west. The indo-iranians spilit off some 3000 years back. most probably due to the influence of western religions and beliefs, afghanistan spilt off later, we lost influence over the central asian culture and now pakistan(all 3 due to influence of islam) . We could have almost lost tamil nadu and kerel if the christian missionaries were successful(well they were partly and so AIT). let us not loose any more of India and its culture. its probably time to get back and show the mighty super power that india was in the ancient world. The oldest and the most influencial civilization of the world then.
So is AIT/AMT/OIT completely wrong?
If you had read the blog completely the answers are there. to make it clear, All these are conspiracy theories cleated by various interest group. ofcourse the AIT came first, AMT and OIT came later as a compromise or anti idea. They all have some truth, but they being taken at face value and being taught in schools and taken by academia as true facts is wrong. None of them have real proofs.
Moreover though migrations happened in pre-historic times after the last ice age(10k years back) there was surely no mass migration after humans settled in the indian sub continet at least by 4000-6000 B.C. AIT clearly is a conspiracy theory aimed at divide and rule by the imperialist british, who had multiple advantages of this theory.
the following are clealy wrong in the AIT.
- A large mass of people migrated "in waves" from Central Asia/eastern eutope into India.
- That they are called aryans(what an irony, barbaric invaders calling themselves noble?)
- That the invasion/migration happened around 1500 B.C
- They bought horses to india
- They are majority of the north indians today. (Again the twist is they refer to north-west and not north india. This is just like they say Alexander conquored north India, but it was actually only the north west. as far as the Indus not beyond. i.e., not even anywhere in todays India.)
- They are the brahmins of India today.
- They are the upper castes of India today.
- That the so called Dravidians inhabited north India and they are now the south indians as they were pushed south by the so called aryans.
- The (South Indians) Dravidans are a separate race, compared to the Aryans(north Indians).
- That they brought in the vedic culture from their homeland(IE homeland) to India.
- That the vedic religion was racist as they destroyed dark skinned people(so were rama, krishna, draupati all dravidians?).
- majority Indians originate from the indo-european group of people(but before we could differenciate as them as europeans, westasians, central asians etc. i.e., before 5000 B.C atleast)
- Indo-iranian were the common ancestors(as they were the same civilizations, which split off in phases between 3000-1000 B.c, until the advent of zoroastrianism)
- that north-west indians have a distinctively higher mix of modern caucasoids (as they are more prone to western attack and also the weather conditions, similar to north-east indians being more SEAsian like and deep south indians being more austro-asiatic)
- that humas migrated from the IE homeland(where ever it is, it could be north west India or iran too) to India
- but the first migrations happened at least before 4000 B.C into a virtually empty land and hardly any major groups already inhabiting the indian subcontinent, at this age most humans were nomadic and did not have homelands(one possibility).
- Another possibility is that the IE homeland is indeed india/iran as these would haev been the warmest places on earth after the last ice age. IE homeland being central asia or russian steppies has less possibility as these would have been so cold that it was impossible for people to live there.
- The group which migrated were nomadic
- They were not aryans as aryan means civilized and these people were sure not so.
- vedic Indians just like other civilizations did move out of India for preaching, trade and imperialistic conquests in vedic times too.
- They surely had migrated to western iran, mesopotemia, central asia (probably greece and eastern europe too) in vedic times and to europe(gypsies) and SEasia(pallava/cholas) in medeival times.
- OIT has a higher possibility than AMT(AIT is impossible) as the IE homeland where earliest Indo-europeans originate coudl only be in the tropical zones of today. As these would have been the warmest places on earth after the last ice age. IE homeland being central asia or russian steppies has less possibility as these would have been so cold that it was impossible for people to live there.
In summary AIT/AMT/OIT/Aryan/Dravidian are all words which should not have existed in our dictionary or encyclopedias. It din't two centuries back and it needs to be deleted soon. They have been created and used by different interest groups to divide ignorant people and exploit them. This includes not just the imperialist British and westerners but also many Indians, scholarly/ fame hungry individuals, politicians, communists and even many good people who where either ignorant or just wanted to use this to end some evils in our society without realising the impact it has on our psyche and identity.
About the real history of India, we do not yet have complete information and the earlier we go we see that the racial, linguistic, social and cultural lines blur. i.e., the more modern we get, the more differences(time and technology should re-blur those lines again hopefully).
but try to get the big picture from the information above and you can create a considerable timeline map with some bits and pieces missing. but clearly debunking the AIT myth.
Further reading, references and bibilography
http://voiceofdharma.com/books/ait/
http://voi.org/books/rig/
http://www.archaeologyonline.net/artifacts/scientific-verif-vedas.html
http://www.hindubooks.org/david_frawley/myth_aryan_invasion/index.htm
http://voiceofdharma.org/books/rig/
http://voiceofdharma.com/books/ait/
http://www.sabha.info/research/aif.html
http://www.sacred-texts.com/hin/
http://www.orkut.com/CommMsgs.aspx?cmm=21177&tid=11500695&tim=1115263948&crt=5125086
http://sanandita.blogspot.com/2005/12/aryan-invasion.html
http://asiapacificuniverse.com/pkm/vedicindia.html
http://www.dharmicscriptures.org/scriptures.htm
http://www.dharmicscriptures.org/literature.htm
http://www.newdharma.org/royal_chron.htm
http://projectsouthasia.sdstate.edu/docs/history/primarydocs/Foreign_Views/GreekRoman/Megasthenes-Indika.htm
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Hindu_swastika.png
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Portal:Buddhism
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Portal:Hinduism
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Portal:Zoroastrianism
http://www.salagram.net/aryaninvasion-page.htm#preface
http://voi.org/indology/MacaulayistHistorians.htm
http://www.atributetohinduism.com/aryan_invasion_theory.htm
http://www.bbc.co.uk/religion/religions/hinduism/history/history5.shtml
http://www.hindunet.org/hindu_history/ancient/aryan/aryan_link.html
http://www.hindunet.org/hindu_history/ancient/aryan/aryan_toi.html
http://www.gosai.com/chaitanya/saranagati/html/vedic-upanisads/aryan-invasion.html
http://www.mantra.com/newsplus/aitmyth.html
http://www.stephen-knapp.com/death_of_the_aryan_invasion_theory.htm
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_India
http://www.tamilnation.org/heritage/saraswathi.htm
http://www.archaeologyonline.net/artifacts/aryan-invasion-history.html
http://micheldanino.voiceofdharma.com/tamilculture.html
http://www.archaeologyonline.net/
how the myth is spread and kept alive today today
http://www.dalitstan.org/books/bibai/bibai2.html
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Indo-Eurasian_research/files/
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pakistan#Ancient_History
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/India#History
Also school books of any state or central institute in india/California?
No comments:
Post a Comment