/ARYAN/

Modern day russians don't look like the first setllers of East Europe.
Most russians have at least a bit of tatar or finnish blood

>HEH WELL ACKCHYUALLY US PAJEETS ARE THE ARYANS DUE TO THIS TECHNICALITY

yeah they do. Tarter and finnish blood in Russians is a meme, those were small groups of nomads for most of history and even today.

Aryans came from the area of Russia around the Black Sea anyway, like Ukraine and Caucasus.

Tatars are not nomads. Most of them live in cities.

more like
>HEH WELL ACDHUALLY US PAJEEDS ARR DEE ARYANS DUE DHOO DHIS DECHNICALIDEE

Actually they did. Indians are made up of two major ethnic admixture ASI and ANI.

Indus Valley people = ASI + Iranian farmers
Aryans + Indus Valley = ANI
South Asian Hunter Gatherer = Pure ASI
Modern South Asians = x(ANI) + y(ASI). x usually decreases from north to south and y increases. But even Pashtuns have about 20-40% ASI DNA afaik.
>implying *historically* Pakistan was different from India
The Republic of India and the Islamic Republic of Pakistan are modern nation states that have arisen as post colonial artefacts.

The University of Taxila is located in Pakistan, but Chandragupta who was born in Pataliputra, in the heart of India went there to get his education before he staged a rebellion in 321BC. There was no Pakistan.

To become a true Aryan, you must learn Pashto and Farsi.

Chadragupta was Bihari proving that we are the masterrace of the subcontinent

No, they didn't.
IVC is nowhere near India.

Farsi is over 40% Arabic the fuck you talking about?

they were nomads at one point.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Indus_Valley_Civilisation_sites

In about 1500 they were. They settled down after that.

Finnish word for slave comes from the word aryan, which means tribesman. = Orja

Attached: 1500848954339.png (1001x633, 282K)

It was part of Bharat.

Got it, IVC is Paki as I said.

Bharat is a post colonial meme.

By that example, I wanted to imply that if you’re going to historically make a distinction between India and Pakistan, it would be very difficult, was Chandragupta Indian or Pakistani? Was Panini, the Sanskrit grammarian and scholar who was born in the Gandhara Mahajanapada, in modern day Pakistan Indian or Pakistani? The reason why we call it “Ancient India” and not “Ancient Pakistan is because in those times, Northern India and Pakistan were part of the same Vedic civilisation.
>IVC is nowhere near India
see map
Also
IVC were definitely not Aryan. Read the Vedas. The Aryans describe how the Aryan tribes burnt down Indus settlements and call upon Indra (the Aryan god) as “Puranandra” (Destroyer of cities).

So you can’t claim to be Aryan and IVC simultaneously.

Are you retarded?

No, you are if you think the INDUS valley civilization is Indian.

Attached: 626A0E76-FB6B-495B-A90E-54DF382D7EDD.png (1200x890, 1.9M)

>term written in vedas for subcontinent is post colonial meme
Ok, you are retard.

lmao

This is what I want to explain

Attached: 7A0533A2-5D0E-4A27-BB61-2D9699D04D3A.png (2172x1156, 2.34M)

finns were nomads? Nearly all of northwest Russia was populated by finnic tribes.

And I used the term tatar as a generic word to encompass all these asian minorities that still exist in Russia(like the chuvsh peeople), and were certainly much more common in the past

“Bridget Allchin and Raymond Allchin state that from the Vedas, it is evident that the Indo-Aryans were not the only inhabitants of the region they called Sapta-Sindhava or land of seven Indus rivers, nor their stay was entirely peaceful. We learn of Dasa or Dasyus (a word later meaning "slave") who were dark-complexioned, snub-nosed and worshipers of the phallus (śiśna deva). They had abundant cattle and lived in fortified settlements called puras. In addition, we also learn of the Panis who were wealthy in cattle and treasures. Although many hymns refer to conflicts between one Aryan tribe against another, there is an underlying sense of solidarity in conflict against the Dasas and Indra is called Purandara or "breaker of cities". Destruction of many cities by fire is mentioned as is a battle on the banks of Ravi at a place called Hariyūpiyā. Professor Burrow showed the unambiguous character of such references like, "Through fear of thee the dark-coloured inhabitants fled, not waiting for battle, when, O Agni (fire) burning brightly for Puru (an Aryan tribe), and destroying the cities, thou didst shine." (VII, 5, 3) They state he also recognized the importance of terms like arma, armaka, meaning ruin. The Rig Veda states, "Strike down, O Maghavan (Indra), the host of sorceresses in the ruined city of Vailashthānaka, in the ruined city of Mahāvailastha (Great Vailastha)" (I, 133, 3). By the end of Mature Vedic period, there were great ruin-mounds which Aryans associated with the earlier inhabitants of the area. A later Vedic text Taittiriya Brahmana states, "The people to whom these ruined sites belonged, lacking posts, these many settlements, widely distributed, they, O Agni, having been expelled by thee, have emigrated to another land." Not all contacts were violent however. the name of the father of Sudas was Divodasa, suggesting the tribal ruler himself belonged to the Dasa stock.”

Ram Sharan Sharma states that the Rig-Vedic society was primarily organized on basis of tribe, kin and lineage. The "Aryan" tribes mentioned by the Rig Veda therefore may not have been of the same ethnicity, but may have been united by a common language and way of life. He states that while it has been argued that Dasyu and Dasa were not non-Aryans, it is more true in the case of the latter. Further the Dasas are said to be organized into tribes called viś, a term used for Vedic people or tribes. The god Indra is said to be the conqueror of Dasas, who appear mostly human. There are more references to the destruction of Dasyus by Indra instead of Dasas. He is said to have protected the Aryan varna by killing them.[40] The Aryans also fought between themselves. The god Manyu (deity) is invoked to overcome both Aryans and Dasyus. Indra is asked to fight against the godless Dasyus and Aryans, who are the enemies of his followers. (X, 88, 3 & XX, 36, 10). The fight between Aryans and their enemies consisted mostly of fortresses and walled settlements of the latter. Both Dasas and Dasyus were in the possession of them. Sharma states that this reminds us of the later discovery of fortifications of Harappan settlements, though there is no clear archaeological evidence of mass-scale confrontation between Aryans and Harappans. He adds that the Aryans seemed to be attracted to their wealth over which a regular warfare took place. The worshiper in the Rig Veda expects that those who offered no oblation should be killed and their wealth be divided (I, 176, 4). However, it was the cattle which held the most importance to Aryans who were cattle-herders. For example, it is argued that Kikatas didn't need cows because they made no use of milk products in sacrifice.

>aryans drove out IVC culture
not sure this is the case, isn't it the case that there is no evidence of violence at any IVC cities.

also the stuff about wars in the Rig Vedas is based on Max Muller's translation iirc. In more traditional interpretations fighting against asuras, cow-thieving serpants etc are taken to be more allegorical references to natural phenomena (eg Indra as god of thunder defeating the serpent of drought).

also the strict divison between Indo-Aryan cultures and Dravidian cultures is a bit simplified, since dravidians have a more some unadulterated aspect of classical indian culture (or even just were the origin of a lot of it with all the acharyas and what not) - and also chocked full of shuddh Sanskrit within their own languages (unlike modern indo-aryan languages which are in essence really deformed versions of sanskrit or whatever).

I don't need an explanation on how the INDUS valley civilization is not Indian and how Brazil isn't the Roman Empire. I know this already.

That area consists of many different phenotypes, many of which you would consider "aryan" are descendants of greek colonists in the macedonian era.

Pic related is a kid that is 100 percent iranian. He has blue eyes, which means that he has to have a european ancestor since that phenotype started in where is now ukraine.

Attached: iranian white boy.jpg (1684x2184, 612K)

They didn’t drive them out climate change did*, but if we could interpret the Vedas, they did encounter them. Had to be, I mean it was a huge civilisation, some of them definitely looked for greener pastures. They were explorers of their time and their artefacts and symbols are found in Mesopotamia as well.

* - whoi.edu/news-release/climate-change-likely-caused-migration--demise-of-ancient-indus-valley-civilization

True, it’s not Pakistani either. That would be like saying Ancient Mesoamerican civilisations were US American.

I'm reading the most recent western interpretation (from the most comprehensive translation of the Rig Veda to English to date).

It says that RV VII 5.2 - is a reference to Agni breaking up Darkness. again a naturalistic allegory, rather than muh light skin vs dark skin.

Link?

Asians came to Russia via Nomadism. there was less in the past, but more in the sense that Central Asia was part of Russia.

they are not part of pakistan's ethno genesis either, because that begins with the invasion of Sindh by that Qasim.

Whereas indian identity does acknowledge IVC as part of its history (even if it is incredibly removed).

It's Pakistani because it literally started in Pakistan.

its not openly online though you might find a link to buy or obtain it online.

wikipedia it

Pakistan never had an ethnogenesis because Pakistani is not an ethnic group. It is a nationality.

Nomadism after Christ, I should add.
this. Why people mix up State, nation and ethnicity? all are different.

and Diocletian was a Croat. (don't be stupid)

Yeah, but the basis for Pakistani identity is Islam. And Islam started in India with the Umayyad conquest of Sindh. Won’t you agree?

Well Muslims were in India before the conquests as well, just in much smaller numbers.

ethno means nation.

The idea of being Pakistani (ie South Asian muslim) goes along with the idea that people of this description started existing with Qasim invading Sindh, hence that is the earliest point anyone was anything resembling what would be configured into the idea of being Pakistani.

Being nomads is the problem. There are millions of turks living in current Russia. Keep in mind that the empire used to russify these peoples in the past

I guess the sort of political force of Islam in the subcontinent begins with Qasim.

Hm, true. We did trade with the Arabs and some of them might’ve settled here way back.

On a similar note, what history is covered in Pakistani schools, if you can answer? Is it Indus Valley —> Islamic history or are you taught history of the Mauryans, Guptas etc.?

Ethnicity and nation are not as direct as that. For example a Pakistani might be of many different ethnic groups. For example: Sindhi or Punjabi. Those are two different ethnic groups. The nation is still Pakistani but that is a larger grouping.

History of the subcontinent + History of Islam is most of it.

thoughts?

Attached: Screenshot_40.png (867x537, 41K)

The country is Pakistan, nation and ethnicity are the same thing

yes I know this, but the whole idea of Muhajirs (ie muslims from anywhere in South Asia who end up living in Pakistan) means that Pakistani identity is not tied up with its territory.

Hence why Pakistani identity does not particularly celebrate Sindhi or Punjabi Hinduism (including the fact that the Vedas pretty much come from what is now modern day Pakistan) or Sikhism or ancient Buddhism. So Pakistani identity is not based purely on tis constituent territory, but instead on religion.

There is a clinch to this argument which is that Pakistan is also defined in relation to India, in that the identity in practice is Indian Subcontinental muslims - (ie it is not really supposed to include uyghurs or iranians in it). That is a bit tricky because the Durand line means that the strictness of that definition is blurred by the fact that territorially half of the country is basically afghanistan.

Good

only 700 terrorist deaths this year, progress!

Yeah sort of why Pakistan was able to homogenise its language since Urdu has been linked with Islam in the subcontinent through politics. If the Pakistani user can confirm this, I think the language of most official work in Pakistan is Urdu, native to only 8% of the population but most of the Pakistani population knows Urdu as L2 and regional languages like Punjabi and Sindhi are not used except in speech, for the most part. Is this true? I remember reading an article on Dawn where children in a school were instructed to not speak in Punjabi but in Urdu. Contrasting this to India where we had a protests and people killing themselves in protests when we tried to nationalise Hindi as the official language. States in India still use their official language as their own. Only the union government uses English and Hindi for paperwork. And the Hindi states, obv.

pakistan is even more ethnically diverse than brazil is....

>tfw make a thread
>tfw there already is a thread
BASED

My christmas break officially started today bro's
fucking 2 weeks of shitposting

Attached: 1541944645936.gif (524x399, 46K)

Farsi is spoken by Aryans - fuck you talking about?

It is true.

Why does everyone here think that Aryans are white? Have any of you guys actually been to Peshawar? Kabul? Tehran? You do realise that most are brown, black haired people?

problem is in india that separate languages like rajasthani and bihari are called hindi.

fuck white people
we hate em

>make a thread called aryans, promoting white skin and coloured eyes

>hate white people

So why do people here want to be like them so bad?

It’s a carry over from European obsession with the orient. Well, you see, when the Europeans conquered India, they fought with us like humans vs humans, Mughals shot them down with their muskets and they shot the Mughals with their canons.

But fast forward a hundred years and we enter the late 1800s, Europe reaches its peak, Industrial revolution, radio, printing, cars, it’s the dawn of the modern world... for Europe.

Meanwhile, the Indian armies have been lost for over a hundred years, their past glories have been forgotten. The conflicts of the EIC with the Mughals and the Marathas are ancient history now. Indians are now backward savages who need Europeans to civilize them. Chinese too, the Qing army of 220k lay defeated in front of a European army of 19k. Many Indian texts are now translated from Sanskrit, Hindi, Persian, Arabic to English. There is apparently more to India and the East than just backwards savages who existed to be conquered. How do you reconcile this dilemma? Well, apparently some of the Indians look very similar to white people, their skull shape and their physical characteristics, and their texts talk of Aryans, and oh wait! It seems many words in their native languages also are similar to European languages. Maybe there’s a connection.

But as they went deeper into the texts, they saw the ones who wrote those texts called themselves “Arya” and “Aryan”, forget the part where it is seen as an ethno-linguistic identifier, often unclear, because we must focus on race. So yes, these “Aryans” must have written those texts, and native Indians are the descendants of these people — but they’re mixed! Mixed with “inferior” Dravidians. And that’s how it is. (Totally miss the part where majority of Indian history happens after mixture). Now, the purest of these Aryans are obviously the blue eyed blonde haired Nordic people (what is WHG admixture anyway?). And that’s how we explain the history of India.

Interesting answer. I note on many television programmes in the Aryan region where they bombard people with whitening cream advertisements.

Yeah, this is sort of why Indians deny the Aryan theory. Because the Aryan Invasion Theory was often thought of as blue eyed blonde haired white people in 2000 BCE coming to India and setting up the ancient Indian civilisation before mixing with them.

It was likely that Indo-Europeans weren’t a racial group as much as they were a cultural group. For instance Andronovo peoples are said to have been light haired and light eyed, but Yamnaya were dark haired, and dark eyed and swarthy. Both were Indo-European tribes.

The notion that Aryans built all of Indian culture is ridiculous, of course. It’s like saying Romans were responsible for British culture because Romans conquered lower half of Britain.

The notion arises such because India in its present state is still not seen as capable of higher civilisation, and in many cases rightly so. It’s hard for anyone to stomach that a nation where a large part of the population doesn’t have access to basic sanitation was once a civilizational powerhouse with contributions to mathematics, science and philosophy. So, for instance, when India lagged in economic growth post-independence till the 1990s, it was called the “stagnant Hindu rate of growth” — implying that the nature of Hinduism, which enforces a lot on delayed gratification, is the cause for the slow rate of growth — after economic liberalisation, the opinion changed and the rate of slow growth was blamed on socialist politics during the 60s and 70s. This is just an example of how notions arises to explain the current situation of something. So the explanation in many political circles even today on why Ancient India was glorious and modern India is not, is explained by saying a different race of people built ancient India who disappeared over time replaced by modern Indians. This, of course, ignores whatever actual history we have but no one cares about the specifics because agendapushing is usually common whenever this is implied or said.

sirs pls spek in simpul engliss am from village area, dont understand

Indus Valley civilization was before the Aryans. Learn to history

We want to breed them out of existence.

Aryans are losers that got conquered by TURKIC peoples anyway.

>or aryans are white meme

Cringe