Who Created Harappan / Indus Valley Civilisation? | How Did It End? | Samvaad With Devdutt Pattanaik

[r3alist]

But these aren't local to India ffs. Majority of the deities in the Indian pantheon are offshoots of the deities that steppe migrants worshipped (such as yemos and his cognate yama).

How would you explain the divergences between hindu and zoroastrian myths (such as div beings in avestan and deva beings in vedic myths?)

The deities are just statues, this is an important distinction.

It could be an ornament.

 

[SABRE]

It was the British who basically discovered this entire civilization.

Not entirely true.

Harappa and Mo'an Jo Daro were discovered during the British Raj, but the two cities were first excavated by local archaeologists, DR Sahni and RD Baerji, respectively in 1921 and 1922. John Marshall gets credit because he was Director General Archaeological Survey of India, and therefore head of archaeological missions, and he was the one to announce the discoveries. Perhaps Marshall's biggest contribution was to identify the discoveries as "civilisations."

 

[r3alist]

Not entirely true.

Harappa and Mo'an Jo Daro were discovered during the British Raj, but the two cities were first excavated by local archaeologists, DR Sahni and RD Baerji, respectively in 1921 and 1922. John Marshall gets credit because he was Director General Archaeological Survey of India, and therefore head of archaeological missions, and he was the one to announce the discoveries. Perhaps Marshall's biggest contribution was to identify the discoveries as "civilisations."

Interesting footnote, it does not alter that hindus didn't know it existed

That's the thing, when your civilization has been ruled for a thousand years you don't know who you are, so want to be anything that might be good.

 

[SABRE]

Interesting footnote, it does not alter that hindus didn't know it existed

That's the thing, when your civilization has been ruled for a thousand years you don't know who you are, so want to be anything that might be good.

Nobody knew of their existence.

 

[r3alist]

Nobody knew of their existence.

That is exactly the point.



And now you have history becoming a communal cesspit with people a whole continent away deciding they would like to intrude

 

[vasanthm]

You are not, history and archaeology will.

Why will history or archeology decide what religion or practise we accept locally?

You are not, history and archaeology will.

Never you mind, you are a continent away, far far away.



As opposed to what? Trump worship?

You are more than welcome to do whatever you do....no one cares

Good, we will follow/implement practises that we want? Why does it irk your kind so much.. how does our past, history or origin even concern you.. yours doesn't concern us

 

[SABRE]

That is exactly the point.



And now you have history becoming a communal cesspit with people a whole continent away deciding they would like to intrude

The South Asian pre-history is flawed, and the medieval history is manipulated. The locals are largely responsible for the former, and the "people, a whole continent away" for the latter. It's a shame that those locals who began rewriting history in the past 100 years have done even more damage, and the pre- and post-partition populace has largely subscribed to the distorted versions.

 

[r3alist]

Good, we will follow/implement practises that we want? Why does it irk your kind so much.. how does our past, history or origin even concern you.. yours doesn't concern us

That's how it should be, except you guys cannot get over your Islamic history, your NSA what did he just say?

And what does the IVC really have to do with most of current India?

On that basis, this discussion should not become an extension of a communal cesspit. In your head you have how many thousands of years of history yet in that time the IVC was absent from your collective history.

If only you could pick and mix, without losing all coherence.

What would be good if you kept your incoherence and insecurities to yourself

 

[r3alist]

The South Asian pre-history is flawed, and the medieval history is manipulated. The locals are largely responsible for the former, and the "people, a whole continent away" for the latter. It's a shame that those locals who began rewriting history in the past 100 years have done even more damage, and the pre- and post-partition populace has largely subscribed to the distorted versions.

The prehistory was neglected, neglected to the point it was unknown.

This is just starting the journey of historical and archaeological discovery, as things are it's mostly a North Indian and Pakistani area.

Unfortunately, some people have a thousand year chip on their shoulder so have already tried to make this a communal issue.

 

[SABRE]

The prehistory was neglected, neglected to the point it was unknown.

This is just starting the journey of historical and archaeological discovery, as things are it's mostly a North Indian and Pakistani area.

Unfortunately, some people have a thousand year chip on their shoulder so have already tried to make this a communal issue.

The problem with the pre-history/pre-antiquity and antiquity history of South Asia is that whatever texts are available are so much mired in myths that even a semblance of factuality is rendered questionable. This is why the Mahabharata and the Ramayana are vastly considered epic tales, not historical works - even if the largely sample of the population in the Eastern neighbourhood disagrees. The "locals" also had a similar approach to Arab/Muslim conquest/rule in Sindh and across other parts of South Asia. For this reason, works on these medieval events by the Arab, Persian, or Muslim historians, who were rationalists, are considered reliable over local narratives.

 

[Vikramaditya1]

Not a pointless discussion at all. The DNA from Rakhigiri was representative of the IVC at the time, highly probable to be similar to the composition in Harappa itself (you're obfuscating AGAIN BTW by trying to now dissociate different parts of the IVC from one another). The point being made is simple - prior to the arrival of the Aryans as a mass migration (+/- aggressive invasion) into the subcontinent, their DNA was simply non-existent among IVC samples that we know of. Aryans were not somehow "representative" of the IVC - they usurped it. Every single way the genetic data is "cut", it proves externality of Aryans. I would argue it also proves their invasiveness, like a cancer - but you may well differ.

Just one DNA. Representative of Rakhigarhi. Is there any correlation with a similar DNA study in Harappa? No. All we have is just one DNA. It's not enough to corraborate what happened at Harappa which is around 400 KM away. 400 Km makes a whole lot of difference in those times. Besides there is no source for your hilarious oppression story not in recorded history or archeological evidence. You just made that shit up.

Not really "self contradictory" at all. There was an intermediary population living on the ruins of Harappa, regarded to be more agrarian than the city builders of the antecedent intact IVC. This itself likely constituted a combination of migrants from multiple origin points and also some of the original Iranics of the IVC itself. In fact, the Rakhigiri data in Shinde's paper CONFIRMS this, rather than refuting it. The Rakhigiri specimen is from 2500-2000 BCE, the mature phase of the IVC. Collapse of the IVC began in 1900 BCE. Just when exactly are you postulating that "Aryan DNA" sneaked into the genome of the IVC if it WAS NOT THERE 100 years before the collapse of the IVC? If you bother to read the paper, it is even speculated that the female specimen may have been fleeing from other IVC sites due to climate effects.

It is your own researcher Shinde who actually REFUTES "Out of India" theory comprehensively, the more you read the works in question! It is duly confirmed, to anyone reading the data without Saffronised spectacles on, that (a) the Aryans (and whatever they brought with them) were foreign, and (b) the IVC itself was Iranic origin, and (c) NO substantive Aryan genomic influence existed in populations inhabiting Harappa until after the collapse of the IVC.

Modern genetic compositions for reference:

This graph simply shows genetic composition of people living in India right now. Which is irrelevant to out of India theory. There is nothing to prove over a well established fact that Dharmic religions originated in India. They have steppe ancestry so what? That's why I used the Jatt example. Shakas and Kushan, the Huns. They all well integrated into the society of India. We are not hesitant of outside influence or an outsider observing our culture.
But opression story lost it's interest when nobody could find any evidence for it. Btw Rakhigarhi bones are 2800-2300 BCE so it's very early for opression story. Even radiocarbon dating of organic materials showed a result higher than 2300 to 2600. It's a 500 years gap. Yet no evidence for an invasion. All mainstream historians debunked an invasion theory.

Let me elaborate further on the IVC itself. The IVC is self-evidently similar to the civilisations of the westerly located fertile crescent, not some sudden transformation of the local subcontinental elephant riders of the time or even more bizarrely still (as south Indian heritage hunters have suddenly added their worthy opinion to the calculus), some dravidian offshoot from the southerly located tree swinging community.

You can honestly look me in the eye and tell me that by some stroke of magic, the AASI hordes who had been eating bananas and building straw huts suddenly built a city 5000 years ago and morphed into this advanced urban society? Give me a break. The IVC was clearly built by migrants from the west.

Yes, the AASI marvelled upon the brilliance of these Iranic folk, and they mingled with them to create a new IVC stock lineage, but to suggest this magical transformation occurred within native tree swingers is a self serving delusion that is only marketable to sanghees and/or southies of similarly confused disposition.

Cool story bro. Lol! You short circuit whenever someone asks for evidence for the claims. Muh lineage muh ancestry.

we have discussed the genomics, religion, culture, and language - all of which have demonstrable non-subcontinental derivation. Of all of these, THE MOST EVIDENCE of foreign derivation lies with the language of Sanskrit. It is wholly classified as an "Indo-European" language, different from "Dravidian" languages that are preserved in South India. There is more commonality between Sanskrit and Gallic and Polish than between Sanskrit and Tamil. It is a longstanding joke in linguistic circles that a billion strong horde in the year 2026 actually believe Sanskrit evolved from local languages. Invaders from Eurasian Steppe brought its precursors with them and then moulded a locally applied derivative of this foreign precursor tongue - that derivative being what you know as Sanskrit.

Open a new thread specifically regarding the linguistic derivation of Sanskrit if desired and I will join you there to spam more on this topic.

Yeah long standing joke in linguistic circles. A bunch of nothingburger.

agree wholeheartedly that many uneducated and uncouth individuals have done plenty of harm to our pre-islamic history in Pakistan - that is mercifully changing now. But if you understood what I was trying to say, I was actually alluding to ANY foreign ideology to the subcontinent, which includes Islam by default. My point was that an overwhelming majority of Pakistanis must, by definition, be amenable and adaptable to a foreign ideology, i.e. rejection of an ideology is not automatic due to its foreign-ness. Rather, adoption of ideology is merit based, which holds true for any country i can think of, with one obvious exception.

Your last point is expanding on the Iranian perspective - I know Iranians who have studied this field and they are fully cognisant of the Aryan contribution to their national composition. But I don't wish to derail the thread further so we will simply have to differ on that, subjectively, unless an Iranian member himself wishes to comment further

After destroying almost everything out of existence and continues doing so. But we really don't care what you do in there at this point. India's history and culture has consolidated over the last seven decades there is nothing to study in your country afaik. Even here most of the history was unearthed and investigated. What's left is some new urban area find regarding IVC around Gujarat or Haryana if anyone wants to dig for more. If we're lucky we might find a DNA intact bone.

 

[fitpOsitive]

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

Accept third party cookies

Who Created Harappan / Indus Valley Civilisation?​

I seriously don't know.

Who will destroy Harappan / Indus Valley Civilisation?​

We, Pakistanis.

 

[Maarkhoor]

Who Created Harappan / Indus Valley Civilisation?​

I seriously don't know.

Who will destroy Harappan / Indus Valley Civilisation?​

We, Pakistanis.

?

Lost in crowd, no civilization can be destroyed but merge in superior civilizations.

 

[Vikramaditya1]

But these aren't local to India ffs. Majority of the deities in the Indian pantheon are offshoots of the deities that steppe migrants worshipped (such as yemos and his cognate yama).

How would you explain the divergences between hindu and zoroastrian myths (such as div beings in avestan and deva beings in vedic myths?)

Reconstructed Deities. You realise the Yama is first mentioned in Rig Veda. Yameos among others are at least a thousand years late to the addition.

Also, Zoroastrianism is again very young at least 500 - 800 years after RV. Such divergence of any began much later there is at least a few hundred years in between. But what are you trying to prove here anyway, that Iranians had connections in this subcontinent. Paint me surprised

 

[r3alist]

The problem with the pre-history/pre-antiquity and antiquity history of South Asia is that whatever texts are available are so much mired in myths that even a semblance of factuality is rendered questionable. This is why the Mahabharata and the Ramayana are vastly considered epic tales, not historical works - even if the largely sample of the population in the Eastern neighbourhood disagrees. The "locals" also had a similar approach to Arab/Muslim conquest/rule in Sindh and across other parts of South Asia. For this reason, works on these medieval events by the Arab, Persian, or Muslim historians, who were rationalists, are considered reliable over local narratives.

I don't see how those religious texts should be the starting point.

It's just plain old archaeology