Except Historians who solely belive in Hindu mythology no body else debunked Aryan migration theory. Just like how invasion theory was made by early western Historians to justify colonization, out of India theory is supported by some Indian historian to make indians look like single group of indigenous people and to feel superior but in reality lot of migration took place towards India and last happens to be Aryan migration. Only after that vedic period occurred
@@goddalehundibharathraj4374 So you're saying Sanatanism/Hinduism is Voodoo bs . . . *Rig Veda 10.23.4* "With him is this rains: Indra throws drops of moisture on his yellow beard" *Rig Veda 10.96.8* "At the swift draught, the Iron One with yellow beard and yellow hair" *Rig Veda 1.100.18* “Indra attacked the Dasyus and the Śimyus; won the land, sunlight, and water with his white-skinned friends” *Rig Veda 1.103.3* “Armed with the thunderbolt, he has gone on destroying the cities of the Dasyus, and augment the strength and glory of the Ārya.” *Rig Veda 1.130.8* “Indra defends his Ārya worshiper. He consumes the malignant; he tore off the b_______ skin; and him who delights in cruelty.” *Rig Veda. 2.20.6* "Indra, slayer of Vritra, scattered the Dasyu sprang from a b______ womb." *Rig Veda 2.20.7* “Indra, slayer of Vṛitra, destroyer of cities, scattered the b______-sprung servile.” *Rig Veda 3.34.9* "Indra gained possession of the Sun, Horses, Cow. He struck the Dasyus, and gave protection to the Ārya tribe." *Rig Veda 9.73.5* “They have roared in unison, burning up riteless men, Blowing away the b______ skin which Indra hates.”
@@realgangstalking4867 That shape which we in India call 'Swastika' is found in many places across the world. It's a symmetrical shape which can have independent roots in many civilizations. It's like saying all circles have origin from a particular country. I don't think we can take Migration of symbols across the world as a definite proof of how people have moved to different countries. You can find Swastika in Japan as well due to Buddhism, can we claim that Indians migrated to Japan or there is a Indian invasion in Japan. Just the idea of Buddhism traveled to Japan and some monks moved to Japan. Based on a symbol(that too, a relatively easy symbol) being found in Ukraine cannot prove that there was a huge migration, invasion happened in Indus Valley civilization and that people in Indus valley are all from Steppes. And apparently genetic evidence disprove Aryan migration theory( i have not read those papers, I just heard their podcasts and interviews). If people in Indus valley moved from Steppes to Indus valley in hordes, are there any civilizations or atleast settlements found in Steppes from that time?
Then you'd better slap on some more lightening cream . . . No, I'm just joking . . . *Rig Veda 1.100.18* “Indra attacked the Dasyu; and won the land with his white-skinned friends” *Rig Veda 1.103.3* “Armed with the thunderbolt, he has gone on destroying the cities of the Dasyus, and augment the strength and glory of the Ārya.” *Rig Veda 1.130.8* “Indra defends his Ārya worshiper. He consumes the malignant; he tore off the b_______ skin; and him who delights in cruelty.” *Rig Veda 3.34.9* "Indra gained possession of the Sun, Horses, Cow. He struck the Dasyus, and gave protection to the Ārya tribe."
@@user-k4d-e59mo28oc your quotes are correct but your vedic hymn numbers are wrong and also your interpretations. The hymn talks about brightness of Maruts metaphorically as white-skinned. Dasyus are a group of people related to the Aryans (maybe also related to Dahe of Persians and Dacians of Greeks).
@@daspov4709 bro you are most likely mixed .. with atleast 3 different ancient genetic groups. All indians are mixtures. Even Afghan pathan have ancient ancestral south indian ancestry ..
I heard the first wheel was invented in Yamnaya Culture areas five thousand years ago and they started moving east and west of Yamnaya using chariot, but you may be more accurate. The question is if they came directly from Russia or from Central Asia.
Appreciate the series! Is it the ultimate theory? No! But, definitely in the more logical direction. Here are some factors that need to be added and explored. * The dateline:Asko Parpola revised the beginning of aryan migration to 1300ad. * Reading Avesta sheds more light on the aryans per se. After all they're aryans too.When reading the history - not the myths - aryans are praise worthy. * Hence, we are compelled to read this as asura and deva cults. I personally am inclined to see the deva cult undesirable, despicable even. * From 1300 bc - war between asura and deva cults - banishing devas to east of sindu/hindhu river could have happened between 1000 bc - 800 bc. This timeline fits into the pantheon of Indian religions and philosophies. The Sankhya religion, it's spread throughout India, the goddess centric philosophy - prakruthi is nithyam and athma is anithyam - must have been a mighty slap on the deva cult, especially the vedhic brahmin. When we see among all the lands and their cultures, India still cherishes the godesses. And as a final note, seeing the victory of pandavas should be seen as the victory of matriarchy over patriarchy.
Whatever BS you typed,their traces were found in Rakhingarhi which was more than 8000 yrs old. For people like you,if white person will say,you are foreigners;you will accept it and when you will ask for citizenship from that country,they will tell you get lost. Why? Because they know about lie which they spread.
What stuff are you smoking up that you are able to conjure up so much of BS out of thin air ? Vedas are older to the Avesta. And in most Indo-European societies it was the Devas who were venerated. The Parsi Avestan people were an exception, a rebel group moving away from the main branch of Indo-European religion which was preserved in India. Pandavas were patriarchal not matriarchal. They were sons of Vedic deities like Indra, Surya, Ashwins, Vayu etc which are all masculine.
@@zzzzz653 My friend, I'm not an aryan. So, I see them and their culture objectively as a student of history. Asuras are the Persians aka Iranians. The founder of the first empire of the world. Ahura Mazda was the first in the line of 'One God' concept, 800 - 1000 bc. Herodotus, the author of first history book, chronicles their conquest. Please read. And other historical documents. Culturally their contributions to the world is rather significant. With this in the mind when you read Avesta and the way their depiction is indeed despicable. Now, as a neutral observer should we not take arguments from both sides? By the way, I'm an atheist and I've read Deviprasad's book Lokayata and further research into that. Lokayata is by far the oldest religion, if we call that, minimum 1000 bc. Turning to the deva side, the first book of vedas, it's mostly a collection of songs about a simple lifestyle and an excellent documentation of the vedic tribes.'If you stack 10,000 cows, you'll reach heaven!' Such was their cultural development. Read the verse by Varshitha about frogs. You'll get a picture. The second book, Yajur veda is a collection of 'magical' stuff. If anyone who can think rationally will discard it as primitive and would recommend banning those procedures. The third book, Sama veda is a rewrite of Rig veda, mostly, made suitable for singing. These three were called Veda Thrayi, three books. Atharva veda was added much later, which is written in grandha script, not Sanskrit or chandhas. Only praiseworthy are the Upanishads. I've read three of the oldest, Katha, Kena and Munndaka Upanishads in their original form with many bhashyams. They're marvellous. But compared to the Avaidic and atheistic Jain and Buddhist philosophes they rate as second. And chronologically they're later than these philosophes. A lot more can be discussed in this area. When an white man, an Indo aryan, who has taken who has adopted Jesus, middle eastern god, revers another aryan writings it's natural, isn't it? Hope, I have responded to your thoughts to your satisfaction, my friend! 🙏
great! Just one object can prove so many things! Marvellous, no need to study linguistics, genetics, anthropology and compare with other archeological sites. Wow! Why aren't you an archeologist I wonder?
@@pravyavnavis there really any evidence of language in Europe before 1500 bce ? We get many artefacts like Fire altars for rituals the chariots etc not to mention the Yogi stamp shiv lingams Godesses. Etc this is enough to say that the indus valley was culturally similar to India and also we don't get any archeological evidence of invasion by far not as much as we get in Europe. If you are going to reply do tell me the evidence of Indo European Language being present in steppe before India.
@@atharvakshirsagar8461 So far we have not find any inscriptional evidence in Steppe and so we understand it as oral language. But we have coroborative evidences through evolution of Indo-European languages with the R1a migration pattern. Yes, Indian culture has been a continous civilisation since Indus Valley Civilisation. But the shift in language needs further studies. We definitely do not find a clear migration outward that created other Indo-European cultures except Mittani elites. There are multiple strands to Indian culture, some existed since Indus Valley Civilisation, some came with Steppe people, and some came with Indo-Greeks, Saka, Pahlavas, Huna etc. There has been no 'invasion'. This video is part of a series. Watch the others to understand better.
Iran = Aryan Bramean = MAGI the priests of Zoroastrianism RIGVED = Zend Avesta SANSKRIT language = Avestan language from ancient Iran + Prakrit language from ancient India In Persian history, Parsis came to India in the 7th century but they did not follow Zoroastrianism after coming to India. If they had done so, it would have been recorded in history.
There are no evidences for this theory except the genetics, genetics can be intermingled due to trade routes as well. Linguistic similarities could be due to out of India movement. If Indo Aryans already had a language before coming to India why aren’t there any tablets, scripts or writings found like Indus people did centuries before them. Also if Indo Aryans brought the Vedic religion why there is not a single mention of this movement or any geographic hint outside of India? Why the Vedas mention only Himalayas to Kanyakumari as their homeland. Last but not the least if Indo Aryans came around 2000 to 1500 bce how can they possibly know about Saraswati river extensively. Whip dried long before that period. All false theory only assumptions.
This is a result of not just genetic evidence but also corroborative evidences based on linguistic studies. There is a clear well researched theory on how Proto-Indo-European languages broke up and evolved into many languages that we have today, which is also mentioned in this video. Indo-Aryans didn't have a writing system before arriving to India, hence no inscriptional evidence. Sanskrit and Vedic religion was developed in India after their migration. Hence, no memories of migration. Kankyakumari is not mentioned in Vedic texts, their only lived in Sapta Sindhu region. Please research before making an argument. Saraswati didn't completely dry up, a part of it was still there. Vedic people were descendants of both Indo-Aryans and late Harrapans, so memories of the land would have been transferred by their Harrapan ancestors. Akkadians migrated to Mesopotamia and changed the language of the land from Sumerian to Akkadian, but accepted Sumerian religion and culture. Something similar could have happened in North India.
I'm mot a expert on this toplc, but what i think is that becouse Sanskriet written in the vedas and all the indian holy books, is a proof that Sanskriet is defeloped and became mature in india and there for if India claim Sanskriet as its own, they have all right to do so. There is no nation in that area that have so many litrature written in Sanskriet like in India.
@@beinghuman852 The Aryan DNA is so mixed that it's found in minority in almost all Indian population. Brahmins are a diverse community and roughly only 20% have R1a DNA. Culturally, all Indians are Aryans.
My question is even southern languages actually use sanskrit dna and has more sanskrit words in it... but how are these not related to sanskrit but european languages are???
There are many Sanskrit loanwords in South Indian languages due to Hinduism and other Indian religions that originated in the north. In fact, I feel there are more Sanskrit in Kannada and Telugu than in Hindi due to Persian influence on Hindi. But loanwords are not language. Language has grammar, syntax, verbs, adjectives etc, and South Indian languages are a different group. Sankrit on the other hand has common grammatical origin with European languages. An example is mentioned in the first video of this series. Another example: Hinglish is speaking Hindi with lots of English words and phrases, but that does not mean Hindi comes from English. Even Malay, Indonesian, Khmer, and Thai has lots of Sanskrit words due to Hindu-Buddhist influence. But they didn't come from Sanskrit.
@@pravyavnav but there is also a theory that sanskrit is actually a language Tha came much later than even dravidian languages. Samaskrutham in south means a language that is mixed. There is also a possibility that sanskrit was created to bridge between Iranians, AASI and the Steppes. But I don't think 🤔 sanskrit originated outside India. If you are telling European languages have same origin why not that be loan words because we are forgetting we had trade with Europe for a long time it could also have influenced the local languages in Europe how exactly did we know they are common ancestor of one language family.
@@pravyavnav for example you cannot take korean and call it as a dravidian language today as infact even southern languages seem to have middle eastern root and east asia root.
