Pakistan, the IVC, and a Land of continuous migration and mixing

[Joe Shearer]

If you think ivc is for "claiming" rather than exploring that affirms what I have been saying

It's simply there in Pakistan and if that bothers you find another thread

No amount of weasel arguments can alter this, as much as you might try

Please stick to the topic.

 

[Joe Shearer]

You say i waffle then proceed to waffle yourself

I am saying something simple, if you want to preclude Pakistani ownership/involvement and Pakistanis from the ivc story, which is under their feet, then find another forum or thread


Your single thrust here is not contributing to the topic

Please stick to the topic.

 

[Joe Shearer]

From what I understand the entire population of the IVC wasn’t wiped out, with the Bronze Age collapse (1500-1100 BCE) : environmental disaster is the current hypothesis. The population declined and it was in that weakened state that the aryans moved in. There was mixing, upon mixing upon mixing, until the present day.

Very well-phrased answer, but the Bronze Age Collapse was a Mediterranean and western Asian phenomenon, and it is not yet very clear if the IVC may be included in that. There is some overlap, since the later stages of the IVC are thought to be around 1300 BC.

I would say that this very interesting observation needs significant additional research to be established one way or the other.

 

[Joe Shearer]

From what I understand the entire population of the IVC wasn’t wiped out, with the Bronze Age collapse (1500-1100 BCE) : environmental disaster is the current hypothesis. The population declined and it was in that weakened state that the aryans moved in. There was mixing, upon mixing upon mixing, until the present day.

The present ethnicities, especially the populations in present day Sindh and southern Punjab still have genetic links to those people from the IVC. More generic work and archeological work should be done to show this. Pakistan should be sending people to study Egyptology and build up the archeological department similarly.

I’m not saying a large part of the Indian population is not a descendant of this ancestry as well, but that the majority of the IVC territory falls in modern day Pakistan and modern day Pakistanis have a current culture that arouse in its unique and gradual way. Just like the Egyptians, they can claim their ancestors but also say they no longer follow most of that ancient Egyptian culture. Egyptians being mostly Muslim and Coptic Christian’s doesn’t make them any less Egyptian.

I cannot tell you what a relief it is to read your post. Thank you, and @Oscar, very, very much.

 

[Joe Shearer]

The ivc is just a part of the history of the land, that's it, why does it need to lead to current day culture , that's why it's history

The IVC is emphatically not part of the history of any part of the sub-continent, of any successor states to the Crown Colony of India.

Do look up history before making such imperious claims in its name.

 

[vasanthm]

These feelings are unique to you. Religion should be a unifying concept shared by all humans. The idea of God, often creator, should be the same for all humans if humans are truly equal.

Can you explain what the creator of Hindus thinks of Mexicans or some other people who've never heard of him?


Not true - plenty of people convert their religions willingly because they are able to recognize they don't agree with the beliefs they are born in to.

So, you actually believe there’s a man in the sky managing things for different religions—or just one? I see religion more as a cultural expression, deeply tied to the land and its history, created to suit specific times and circumstances in a particular region. It’s inherently local, shaped by the needs and experiences of close-knit human communities. Personally, I don’t believe in God or a sky magician as a fact, but I do see value in religion as a way to preserve and pass down cultural experiences and collective wisdom to future generations.

 

[Joe Shearer]

To conclude…Pakistan never disowned its IVC identity…not at any level(state level, state curriculum level, nor at the level of ppl as a whole). It’s just what u guys have cooked up in ur echo chambers based on a few anecdotal accounts…all in a coping attempt when it’s brought up that India tries to co opt IVC identity. Ur claim remains just that…a claim.

hat…a claim.

The trouble is that Pakistan as Pakistan, the regions that today form Pakistan, the people who today inhabit Pakistan, had no recollection of the IVC until it was handed to the sub-continent on a plate.

Neither did India as India, the nation-state, not the India of history, and the people who today inhabit India the nation-state have any recollection of the IVC until it was handed to the sub-continent on a plate.

That is essentially true of vast tracts of history - a reconstruction of the Dark Age of Indian history by people like Pargiter, the identification of Ashoka the Emperor, the deciphering of Brahmi and Kharosthi scripts, the discovery of the birth-place of Gautam Buddha and the collation of the history of Buddhism within India, the history of the Alexandrine sally into India, the history of the various invaders that followed, from the Indo-Greeks, to the Saka-Pahlava to the Kushana to the Huns, followed by the Turks, and then the Afghans and the Mughals, the saga of the Maratha Confederacy, the story of Haidar Ali and Tipu Sultan, every single bit of this first came to the attention of the people of the sub-continent through British effort, and until the rise of nationalist historians like Jadunath Sarkar and R. C. Majumdar, through British historians.

It is silly to read this bickering, given that all this, including the detailed historical narrative of the completely separate land of Bengal, was a gift to us from those who actually studied the events, the people, the processes and social development but were neither Pakistani nor Indian.

 

[Circadian Rhythm]

The IVC is emphatically not part of the history of any part of the sub-continent, of any successor states to the Crown Colony of India.

Do look up history before making such imperious claims in its name.

Sorry but Many people won't agree with you

The deep roots of Hinduism

A common belief is that Hinduism originated in Vedic times. But it is much older, and its probable story is non-linear, diffused, and complex, as the following attempts to show. Hinduism’s roots go far back...

timesofindia.indiatimes.com

 

[Joe Shearer]

Rich coming from a nation whose identity is built around a foreign identity(Indus…literally where the terms Hindu, Hinduism, India come from).

<Deleted. My post was an over-reaction and is regretted>

 

[Farhan23]

Grossly incorrect. Where do these flights of fancy come from?


They were apparently, from the best evidence available, largely through the efforts of archaeolinguistic experts, break-away people from the majority Iranian faith system, a break-away people represented by two movements, one to the west, that landed up in Anatolia as the Mitanni rulers of the Hittites, and the other to the east, that crossed the mountain ranges between contemporary Afghanistan and Pakistan, and over the next millennium, influenced society as far east as the Rajgir mountains, that is, most of the Ganga-Yamuna Doab.

Genetically, there are very small, very exclusive fragments to be found in South India, that number less than 2% of the local population. The south was relatively less influenced by the cultural practices that were being formed in the north, by an amalgamation of the practices of the migrants and the original inhabitants. Some experts date this adoption by the south to as late as 600 BC or even later, covering the Deccan; it is possible that what is referred to as Tamilakam was influenced even later.


There is no evidence of this. What form, shape or volumes the migrations took are all largely speculative.


This is totally indefensible. Pathan and Tajik profiles are quite distinact from Punjabi profiles or the general ANI profiles of northern India. Pathan genetic profiles are linked to the Iranian, and Tajik profiles are not merely linked to the Iranian, they ARE Iranian, being descendants of the eastern Iranian speaking people beyond the rule of the Achaemenid Empire, loosely described as Scythians in the west, and as Saka in the east.


What does one say about such wishful thinking?


Using Aryan to designate race is obsolete by nearly a 100 years by now. It is clearly understood in academic circles, and by experts on the subject, that Aryan can relate at best to the Indo-Aryan speech of the original migrants into north India, and to the endonym that the Persians used, an endonym that bears no sanctity within India due to the extensive mingling of populations.

Majority of these works are distorted for political reasons.

I had a graph showing the bloodlines clearly.... Plus geography is our best teacher when it comes to the movements of people and coupled with DNA you will know.

Aryan race started out in the heartland of Iran which is around the Farsi areas and they moved both east and west as far as Antonlia and as far north as Armenia, Georgia and Caucasian mountains..

Who is the closest to the original point geographically? That would be the Tajiks and Pashtuns followed by Punjabis and note Pashtuns and Punjabi lands border each other then you got the Zindhis also sitting pretty close to the original point.

Majority of the incursions came from the current day Pakistan and Afghanistan territories interexchangable and these people have never left because we are not talking about ancient history it was like 2000-3000 years ago.

If you also check the maps of the previous Persian empires pre-Islam majority of the time both Afghanistan and Pakistan were part of the Persian empires

 

[Joe Shearer]

Nowhere is it written this is Pashupati.

If you inherited Indus culture, why can't you read Indus script??

Isn't Sanskrit the oldest language? Why can't you read Indus Sanskrit??

Well said.

Why aren't you contributing more to this thread?

 

[Joe Shearer]

Egyptians don't live like ancient Egyptians. Greeks don't live like Mycenians. They can still claim the ancient civilization that existed on their land, but Pakistanis can't?

I object to this part of an otherwise deeply acceptable post. None of today's nation-states can claim cultural or historical descent from the IVC. There is evidence of genetic descent but that ramifies far and wide, not merely to the locations that constitute today's Pakistan.

Certainly, Pakistan, as custodian of this joint heritage, should enjoy a special position, but that is as custodian of the remains of the IVC, and nothing more.

 

[Joe Shearer]

Deeply connected is a nice way of saying stunted.

You are describing one of the amazing things about Islam. While Hinduism is limited to India - Islam spans several racial, genetic, geographic, cultural boundaries.

PLEASE don't convert this into a religious discussion.

 

[Maira La]

Well said.

Why aren't you contributing more to this thread?

I wish I could.. swamped by work the last few days.

 

[Joe Shearer]

Sorry but Many people won't agree with you

I post to clarify matters not to gain popular support.