Jawaharlal Nehru, first prime minister of India supported Aryan theory of pastoral nomads migrating from area which is now Rostov (Russia) and Luhansk (Ukraine) oblast into what is now considered Afghanistan. This group then separated into two branches, one which settled in area of Central Asia/Iran and other in area of Pakistan and Northern India.

>"The Aryans must have arrived in India some 5000 or 6000 years ago, perhaps earlier. Wave after wave, Family after Family must have come for centuries over the Mountains of the Northwest. The attack of the Aryan pastoralists on the peasant Agricultural settlements led to the development of the early Vedic society." - Nehru

This theory is these days disowned by both India and Iran, where Indians prefer two other concepts of Vedic civilization. One being conceived by Harappeans and second somewhat accepted concept is that of Iranians conquering area of modern Pakistan and imposing Vedic civilization on Harrapeans. Iranians also support 2nd concept where they claim Aryan identity of Iran came to be in region Parsa, without influence of nomads who cam from area of modern Afghanistan.

Indian government will not accept this theory or rather historical fact for two reasons. One it will then give fuel to the South Indian claim that not only did the Aryans invade the land, but then they imposed their religion, created a caste system and oppressed them for thousands of years. Which is the Dravida Nadu claim. Nehru tried to kill this issue via a program called national integration, when he extracted a few villages from Kerala and planted them Madhya Pradesh and vice versa. This didn't work, it was a failed experiment, he also tried to impose Hindi as a national language when the constitution guaranteed to protect the integrity of all regional languages. It is important to note that those who seek debunk this historical narrative are also the same people who are trying to impose the Hindutva narrative on the people.

>>17845864 (OP)
>>17845865
The temples and architecture in Southern India are built by white people.

The following people were white blue eyed and blonde haired NORDICS: Sushruta, Ramanujan, Panini, Bhaskara, Raman, Varamhira, Tulsidas, Kabir, Chandragupta, Chanakya, Gandhi, Nehru, Chattripati Shivaji, Guru Nanak, Aryabhatta, Seshadri, Brahmagupta, Basu, Chandrashekar, Kausambi, probably me if I do something note-worthy, Hemachandra, Kausambi, Halayudha, Brahmachari, Ashtekar, Shankar, Ramachandran, Chakrabarty

Pajeet is a white name, and derives from Paul John Heet, a Nordic Aryan man who arrived in India in 10,000 BCE.

Adding to this, In fact the Kamasutra is actually comes from Kikelslutra, a book written by a BLUE EYED BLONDE HAIRED WHITE MAN about how the kikes have brainwashed his Wife to race mix with Indian BLACK BULLS.

The Kikelslutra was the cause of race mixing the BLUE EYED BLONDE HAIRED TERRITORY OF INDIA.

Did you know, for example, the word YOGA comes from "YEEHAW" a WHITE slogan said when WHITES rejoice something?

Did you know the following words have WHITE origins:

OOGABOOGA - "OOh my GAwd, Bitches be Gawking!"
NAMASTE - NAMe MY TASTE - said by whites before asking each other for dinner in 3700 BCE right in the fucking Angkor Wat Temple, also know by the real name, Anglo Watts - a WHITE company in the Ancient era that inhabited South East Asia.

GANGA - Named after "Gangnam Style" - a song that WHITES enjoyed a lot while watching YOUTUBE in 10,000 BCE

TAJ MAHAL - Also known as "Tazmanen" - a tribute to the WHITE land of TASMANIA creating by a GERMANIC BLONDE HAIRED BLUE EYED NORDIC called Shaun John (Shah Jahan was shit skin name, which the kikes wrote in the history textbooks).

>>17845864 (OP)
you might find this interesting, during WW1 the US had a lot of noncitizens fight in its armed forces with the promise of being granted permanent residency and naturalization after an honorable discharge once the war was over. One of these soldiers, a Sikh named Thind was denied the benefit, as the US said naturalizing him would be contrary to laws that only allowed whites to become naturalized citizens. He sued the government, arguing that he was a descendant of Indo-Aryans and therefore quite literally a caucasian. The supreme court rejected this, saying that while what he was saying was certainly plausible, the court wasn't going to comment on the dim reaches of antiquity, and instead just stated that a person whose skin is the color of walnut cannot claim to be white.

He was later given special dispensation by an act of congress in 1935 that allowed for his naturalization.

>>17845864 (OP)
These are the same old arguments and objections.
I'll just stick to the USP of the word "Dasa" and its etymological implications.
I should say right away that the origin of this interpretation that Dasa means "copper" comes mainly from a gentleman named Subhasn Kak, in the book "In Search of the Cradle of Civilization." Although this is already suspicious to some, I want to draw your attention to the fact that our Lord is not impartial in his statements, and his book is not historical, but purely progender and nationalistic. There are ahistorical claims in the book, distortions, and the use of confirmation bias and preconceived ideas. However, I'll leave you with this.
>For decades, schoolbooks have taught that Sumer was the cradle of civilization. Conventional scholarship has also held that Aryan civilization came to India by way of invasions from the north. But in this ground-breaking book, three renowned scholars show that there was no “Aryan invasion,” and that India, not Sumer, was the cradle of civilized humanity. “A scholarly masterpiece. – Deepak Chopra
1/2

>>17845964
You guys can see? We're dealing with material that's not impartial and clearly biased>>17845864 (OP)
Now, the gentleman cited above didn't bother to do etymological or linguistic analysis, only (mis)interpreting the verses of the RV. etymologically, the word "Dāsah" has its origins in the PIE *Dosos, which means "servant, enemy, slave."
undergoing a morphological change of Proto-Arayn *Dāsas, but without etymological changes


Since the Eneolithic, in the steppes, we've had significant intergroup conflicts. According to Lazaridis, when the PIE formed, they paid homage to the region, so it's not surprising that a word for enemy would be used, and generally, in the outcome of conflicts, the enemies become slaves.
In short, there is no serious reason to say that the word underwent a bizarre etymological change to mean "snake," and this is not explained in the OP source, which, as I said, merely interpreted the RV from a purely biased perspective without linguistic analysis. Conveniently, some of the verses that connote issues such as the use of fortifications or tribes are not explained

>>17845991
***Bonus***
This word is not limited to Indo-Aryan or Proto-Indo-European, as they are derived languages with common roots. It wouldn't be surprising if such a word existed in other branches, and it turns out that it does.
We have the Mycenaean Greek word doero, meaning "slave," and in Classical Greek "doúlos," meaning slave.
And again, if that weren't enough, we're not restricted to the beautiful waters of the Aegean with Minoan women with venerable breasts.
This word is not limited to Indo-Aryan or Proto-Indo-European, as they are derived languages with common roots. It wouldn't be surprising if such a word existed in other branches, and it turns out that it does.
We have the Mycenaean Greek word "doero," meaning "slave," and in Classical Greek "doúlos," meaning slave.
And again, if that weren't enough, we're not restricted to the beautiful waters of the Aegean with Minoan women with venerable breasts.
We have the Old Irish "Doír," meaning "unfree," slave. The story of Saint Patrick in Ireland makes it clear how, until recently, the island had slave practices. And this word derives from the reconstructed Proto-Celtic word *Dosos, and in the lenication (look up what it is, but basically weakening of consonant sounds), we have the word *Dohah > Doha > *Doh.

Therefore, the word is ultimately of PIE origin, and such a word, shared in distinct branches, has an interrupted etymological root ("slave," "not free"), just as the dāsah in the RV do. I bet you're that Brazilian.

>>17846037
an anon made a thread about this, is that you? your table could have been more robust and could have included the Greek and the sound changes

>>17846049
I know who he is. I grabbed some sources I didn't have from his thread, but no, I'm not him.
I just want to shut the OP up and make him realize that using sources based on pure Hindutva chauvinism with booklets isn't consistent. I wrote and showed some sources about who the Indo-Aryans could have been "archaeologically" in another thread, but I won't do it here again. Besides, I didn't even bother refuting the garbage.
>R1A was born in India.
Anons only focus on genetics and forget that at this point, Indians use jargon.
>Muh archaeology.
>Muh word Aryan.

>>17845964
>>17845991
>>17846037
t.

>>17846059
>R1A was born in India
Iran.

>The genetic divergence of R1a (M420) is estimated to have occurred 25,000 years ago, which is the time of the last glacial maximum. A 2014 study by Peter A. Underhill et al., using 16,244 individuals from over 126 populations from across Eurasia, concluded that there was "a compelling case for the Middle East, possibly near present-day Iran, as the geographic origin of hg R1a". The ancient DNA record has shown the first R1a during the Mesolithic in Eastern Hunter-Gatherers (from Eastern Europe, c. 13,000 years ago), and the earliest case of R* among Upper Paleolithic Ancient North Eurasians, from which the Eastern Hunter-Gatherers predominantly derive their ancestry. The genome of an individual belonging to the R1a5 subclade, dated to 10785–10626 BCE, from Peschanitsa, Arkhangelsk, Russia, and identified as a Western Russian Hunter-Gatherer, was published in January 2021

>According to Underhill et al. (2014), the downstream M417 (R1a1a1) subclade diversified into Z282 (R1a1a1b1a) and Z93 (R1a1a1b2) circa 5,800 years ago "in the vicinity of Iran and Eastern Turkey". Even though R1a occurs as a Y-chromosome haplogroup among speakers of various languages such as Slavic and Indo-Iranian, the question of the origins of R1a1a is relevant to the ongoing debate concerning the urheimat of the Proto-Indo-European people, and may also be relevant to the origins of the Indus Valley civilization. R1a shows a strong correlation with Indo-European languages of Southern and Western Asia, Central and Eastern Europe and to Scandinavia being most prevalent in Eastern Europe, Central Asia, and South Asia. In Europe, Z282 is prevalent particularly while in Asia Z93 dominates. The connection between Y-DNA R-M17 and the spread of Indo-European languages was first noted by T. Zerjal and colleagues in 1999

>>17846099
Loser, I'm not this anon and I bet he's not Brazilian.
There's a guy pretending to be him, which is why he uses a tripcode.
>>17846103
Wrong. It's from late Mesolithic russia

Much is said here about the Cucktashta being grand Aryans of the steppes, but the truth is that they were a deprived population with many difficulties, so destitute that they literally became extinct in just a few millennia, due to their low demographics, and we have no evidence of them being highly stratified.
>Sintashta community structure is extremely difficult to discuss on the basis of present evidence.
>The fortified settlements themselves are extremely small and compact in comparative perspective.
>Prestige and ritual connected to warfare and feasting are abundantly represented in the Sintashta archaeological record, but agricultural prosperity, wealth differentiation, and strong demographic growth are no
>after a few hundred years at most, Sintashta regional polities, like Tripol'ye ones, disappeared from the landscape and regional populations probably declined considerably.
>Sintashta supra-local communities are no better known. If, as has been guessed, they included 2,000–3,000
>the remains of the Sintashta families do not suggest that those who were eventually buried with large amounts of goods (including weapons and chariots) enjoyed a particularly higher standard of living than anyone else
https://www.sociostudies.org/journal/articles/140616/
Cucktashta sisters? We wuz barbaric

>>17846642
For people on a cold and useless steppe, they did very well.
They didn't have good soil, large rivers, or a larger civilization complex; it was practically from scratch. Few managed that.
Furthermore, the settlements (if 'city' is a misnomer, as your article claims) were large for the time, especially considering they weren't people with written language like the Mycenaeans, Hittite, Egyptians, etc., with government structures. But 'barbarians' is a vulgar term here and very reductionist. They had advanced practices and trade
Besides, why are you talking about low demographics? We're talking about the Bronze Age, where populations outside the large urban centers of the Aegean and Egypt were small. The Nordic Bronze Age had even fewer people, so are you throwing shit at them based on modern populations with millions and millions of inhabitants? You don't look at history within modern contexts, faggot.
The period of Greek history from about 1600 BC to about 1100 BC is called Mycenaean in reference to Mycenae. At its peak in 1350 BC, the citadel and lower town had a population of 30,000.
With all the difficulties above, 3,000 people living in "useless and small" settlements seems like incredible progress to me! Especially in the steppe and not in the fertile climate of the Aegean.

>>17846653
Cope
Trypillia had many more people and real cities, not this round, ugly, and small garbage. It was so trashy that the residents of villages or gypsy wagons didn't unify around these "cities." If you read the article, you wouldn't be embarrassed.
We don't know if these settlements of grass and dry shit with wood were temporary, permanent, how they were rebuilt, if they were reused, etc., etc. We don't know anything.

>>17846666
>read the article
>see you are full of shit
>The populations of these villages ranged from as low as perhaps 100 up to a few hundred, a fairly normal size range for the agricultural village communities often found in chiefly polities elsewhere. Once the pattern of nucleated villages appeared, there was a lag of only about 250 years before some of these local communities grew substantially larger, forming the intermediate and upper tiers of the suggested settlement hierarchy. These larger communities were extremely large (as compared to chiefly central places around the world), and their growth was extremely rapid (again, as compared to chiefly central places around the world).
>The lack of lavishly furnished burials gives the cursory impression that social and economic differentiations in Tripol'ye society were minimal. The evidence from residential architecture, however, is impressive. With the great majority of houses in a very unexceptional size range for nuclear families, the 10 % that are four or five times larger stand out strongly. If this size difference is related straightforwardly to standards of living, then wealth differentiation in the household realm was much more marked in Tripol'ye society than it was in many ‘classic’ chiefdoms with lavishly furnished ‘elite’ burials.
>Overall, the archaeological record of Tripol'ye societies makes it easy to imagine prosperous farming families enjoying a rising standard of living (in the form of larger houses, differential access to raw materials, and in other ways that remain to be explored rigorously with the archaeological evidence).

>>17846642
>>17846666
You can seethe at Gora Kings all day every day

>>17846967
See here>>17846653

There's no way to respond to the guy, with dishonest arguments based solely on how much he's angry with them.
By the way, notice how he frequently cites demographic failure, but ignores what the Bronze Age pattern was like. According to Wikipedia, if the Mycenaeans had more than 40,000 people, it was a lot, and 3,000 people in a steppe with no natural resources other than metal from the Urals, which they used very well, is not synonymous with failure.

>>17846967
You didn't read about sintashta here
Just Trypillia, read everything lazy didn't even take me 20 minutes

>>17845864 (OP)
>Vedas
>muh battles with million horses and thousands of elephants
>archeology
>some shitty pottery here and there