Where did the Aryans come from?

Originally posted by katulakatula There r other forums related to 'Aryans' n I've posted my views on them.Aryan race theory,Aryan Invasion Theory n all such mumbo-jumbo was invented by European colonizers who wanted to justify their rule over India.Hilter further abused it n justified the genocide n war on other nations on the basis of this theory. An 'Arya' in hindu scriptures is a person of noble conduct.Therefore Arya/Aryan is not a racial concept.It is a Cultural/Spiritual concept.

you right!

There are tens of Persian dialects and accents some of them are compeltely incomrehensible unless you see the words written down.  The same is true for Kurdish dialects, they are not mutually intelligible when spoken, but when the words are written it becomes drastically clearer.

Originally posted by Zagros Who wrote that? Hooked noses are unique to Turco-Azeris? I have a hooked nose! Does that mean I am Turco Azeri? Are you on crack?  Why are you so deperate to prove Persians are white? This thread is on the origins of Aryans, not what they may have looked like. You might want to look at Sassanid coins and Hakhamanesh reliefs, seems they had a few with hooked noses, they must therefore have been Turco-Azeris.  And you might want to note that Northern European features crop up randomly in light skinned Northern and Western populations. And why don't you read Xenophon's description of Cyrus the Great's features?  Might surprise you.

Cyrus the great was half Mede half Persian. Medes are dark skin and dark hair people. Many of these coins depict the natinalities in the Persian empire. See my  blog. Persians do not have hooked noses.

You're all wrong.
Aryans are Indian or himalayan.  Arya shares the same root as "ARI-stocracy" and means those of the royal blood line descended from Manu the first man and King after the flood -- so Wikipedia is right --- every Indian is a Manushya or Aryan descended from the first king of the world.  Manu is associated with the Vedas which is older than the Bible.

Persians don't have this descent from Manu.  The Germanics also have descent from Manno, thus the word "Man".  Sanskrit word is "manushya".

The Germanics were foreigners in Europe, literally considered barbarians.

However, the older Mitanni gives a better clue - the oldest Aryans were Indian and had Indian Gods.

Indo-Aryans ruled the then known world from Europe to east Asia.

According to sanskrit texts Aryans come from the highest mountains of the Himalayas, where Manu descended after the mythical flood. Manu himself was a southern Indian king.


Edited by Dharma

Originally posted by Scytho-Sarmatian Illinois.

If you didn't get the joke, go watch the movie THE BLUES BROTHERS.


Maybe I should have said Idaho, home of the "Aryan Nations."

what if we all say 'yes YES YES FINE we agree that you persians are BLONDE GERMANS'

can we then move on?

Edited by bang

Originally posted by Sharrukin Ancient Iranian texts show that they called themselves Aryans, so you are wrong.

If Manu is the first man then yes, EVERYONE is an Aryan which is what Indians say...so who cares about Persians?

And our sanskrit texts state that Manu came from South India and landed in the Himalayas.  Indian genes are the oldest, so the Indian texts hold more validity.

However, some were fallen and were considered no longer Aryan.

On the contrary, according to the oldest Iranian account, their kings were descendant of Manushchifra (medievel Manuschehr), son of Airiya.

Interesting -- however Manu was the first man, son of the Sun, Surya.  His full name is Vaivasvan Manu, born of the Sun.

So, despite the clear differences in the geography, language, and genetics of the Indians and Germans, it is their descent from "Man" which rightfully makes them kindred?

er, yes -- both were organized in "gotras" or "gau" communities.  Even today Indo-Aryans are organized in Gotra communities.Persians weren't.  Indo Aryans used to wander a lot, either with chariots or as spiritual seekers.  Indo Aryans are found as far as the Mitanni in the middle east and scholars agree their gods are similar to INDO Aryans NOT persians.

They weren't the only barbarians.  Virtually all other Europeans were considered barbarians except the Greeks and Romans.  Therefore all other Europeans including the Celts and Slavs must have also been foreigners in Europe.

and your point is?  However, the Germanics if you read their texts used to have hair of modern day INDO ARYANS and practiced many of the practices of the INDO aryans.

All this proves is that an Indo-Aryan group appeared in Mesopotamia where literate societies recorded their presence.  Nothing more, nothing less.

no, all this proves is that Indo-Aryan literature and gods are older than any of the Persian stuff.  And IndoAryan literature supports they came from himalayas.  No other spiritual text as old as the Indo-Aryans supports that Aryans came from anywhere else.

Indo-Aryans ruled the then known world from Europe to east Asia. Egyptians ruled Egypt.  Hittites ruled central Anatolia.  The Mitanni ruled northern Mesopotamia and Syria.  Kassites ruled Babylonia.  Elamites ruled Elam.  The Chinese ruled China.  Hmmm, am I missing something?

Actually, the Mitanni were intermarried with them.  Most of the nobility was intermarried with the Egyptians...and China calls men "min" in the Chinese language-- you are missing something.  The Chinese nobility were Aryans.

Hittites were a branch of indo-Aryans -- their warriors were known as "khatti" Indo Aryans called themselves"khattia".

According to avestan texts Aryans came from a place called Airyanem Vaejah, the "home of the Aryans" located "along the Vanguhi Daitya" which was the Oxus which point to a region to the south of the Aral Sea.

according to all indo-European texts, Persians were worshipping demons or Asuras -- not the Devas (divine shares the same root) -- and your records are woefully young and incomplete compared to historical records of the Vedic Aryans.

In other words while the rest of the "indo-Europeans" had the root "div" for their Gods and the divine, only the Persians were worshipping demons as gods.


Edited by Dharma

Originally posted by Dharma You're all wrong. Aryans are Indian or himalayan.  Arya shares the same root as "ARI-stocracy" and means those of the royal blood line descended from Manu the first man and King after the flood -- so Wikipedia is right --- every Indian is a Manushya or Aryan descended from the first king of the world.  Manu is associated with the Vedas which is older than the Bible. Persians don't have this descent from Manu.  The Germanics also have descent from Manno, thus the word "Man".  Sanskrit word is "manushya". The Germanics were foreigners in Europe, literally considered barbarians. However, the older Mitanni gives a better clue - the oldest Aryans were Indian and had Indian Gods. Indo-Aryans ruled the then known world from Europe to east Asia. According to sanskrit texts Aryans come from the highest mountains of the Himalayas, where Manu descended after the mythical flood. Manu himself was a southern Indian king.

Well actually there is no Aryan evidence in India before 1500 bc which is about 3500 BP we know this through archaeological evidence.... One is burial mounds ie typical Aryan burial mounds ahd, sadles, bridles etc in them, they cannot be found in India before 1500 BC

Harrapian culture also found in Modern day Pakistan, it seems Indians are trying to claim things with no evidence archaeologically with no archaeological evidence to support your arguement it cannot be true, where as there is more to suggest oppisite Inidan claim to Aryan origin in India..... Do not forget the Zoraosterian influence on Hindu religion, and buddism... it was the most dominate and tolerant relkigion in the world once. Also no Aryan weaponary found in Indian before 1500 BC = 3500 BP, if you are going to prove this wrong and say all archaeological evidence is a conspiracy by Persians and weterners then proved evidence, I do not believe in a mass conspiracy. However Iranian history is under played and tossed aside alot.

But in the old days of europe it was not so, even the time of the Shah, he had to fight it, this is all new world mentality. Aryan entered european imaginations in the 1600 AD, transl;ated from the Avesta, by a french man. laughted at by the English till it was proven. Look at the ruling class of India they are Parsi's

Dear friends, I have an article about Indus Civilisation, but it is in Turkish, I won't be able to send it to you but I will try to summarize it. It is written by Bergil. (Bergil, Mehmet Suat, 2000, "Indus ya da Eski Hint Uygarl��� (Indus or Ancient Hindu Civilisation)", Bilim ve �topya, No: 78, p.14-26).

• After neolitic revolution and first settlements of people, 4 important civilisations using written texts had appeared in history. The common characterestics of these 4 civilisations:  They appeared around 4 great rivers.
• Egyptians, ~4000 BC, around Nil River, they used writing
• Sumers, ~4000 BC,  in Mesopotamia, they used writing
• Chineeses, ~4000 BC, around Yellow River, they used a writing called "bone writing"
• Indians (Hindus),  ~4000 BC, around Indus River, they used writing.
• The Eurocentric historical aprochment have always talked about an "Aryan invasion theory" telling an invasion of Indoeuropeans to India ~2000 BC. This theory said that Rig Veda had been written between 2000-1500 BC.
• The origianal scripts of Indus civilisation, which had been thought to be belonged to Dravits, couldn't deciphered for many years. Natuar Jha and deciphered these scripts and wrote a book with N. S. Rajaram.
• The arceological findings and decodings of the clues and the Hindu historians clues show that the Hindu civilisation had originated from Indus civilisation since 4000 BC and some texts of Rig Veda had belonged to 2500 BC and the origin of Indian language was Indus language (It was proved after the deciphrement of Indus scripts)
•  The language of Indus civilisation (language deciphered from the scripts and seals of Indus) was the same language whic was used in Vedas and it was Sanskrit. So The "Aryan invasion theory" was wrong because the Sanskrit had been used around Indus since Indus civilisation. The  languege of scripts of Indus are mostly related with Veda literature
• "Ari/Arya" is a word first seen in Vedas. It was not used to name an ethnic group/a race. It means "gentile, well-charactirised, noble, honest person".  (Bergil, 2000: 14-26)

I summarised a little of the article. I found also a web about Jha's and Rajaram's book:

"The beautifully crafted 5,000-year-old Indus seals, discovered in 1921, long baffled scholars who attempted to decipher the script accompanying the images. The scholars failed largely because of the assumption under which they labored-- they uncritically assumed the inscriptions had to be pre-Vedic and Dravidian. These assumptions stemmed from the prevailing Eurocentric, colonial dogma that Sanskrit-speaking invaders came to India from the West and could not have composed the Vedas before 1200 B.C. This date was insisted upon by writers like Max Muller, who worked long and hard to deliberately distort the Vedas for their hidden agenda to persuade Hindus to convert to Christianity. Muller insisted on the very late date for the Rig Veda to fit into the Judeo-Christian time scale, which posited that the world itself had been created in 4004 B.C.!

The Aryan invasion theory is in tatters now. No Aryan journey to the east; instead, Sanskrit speakers migrated westwards into Kassite Iran, Hittite Anatolia, Greece, and much further. N.Rajaram and David Frawley, in their acclaimed book The Vedic Aryans and the Origins of Civilization: A Literary and ScientificAnalysis date the composition of the Rig Veda at 3750 B.C. They base this date, in part, on Subhash Kak's brilliant work on the astronomical code contained in the Rig Veda.

In the introductory chapter ofVedic Glossary on Indus Seals,  Jha discussed how the Indus civilization ended. He cited recent Indo-French LANDSAT satellite mappings of the shifting courses of the Sarasvati river over many centuries during the third millennium B.C. The final drying up of the Sarasvati occurred in 1900 B.C. because tectonic plate movements made the mighty river lose two of its tributaries, Yamuna and Sutlej. (Noting the centrality of the Sarasvati in the civilization of Sapta Sindhu or seven rivers, from 7500 B.C. to 1900 B.C., and the repeated homage this river receives in the Rig Veda, Subhash Kak has suggested that the Indus civilization be renamed as Sarasvati civilization and the script on the seals as Sarasvati script.)

In the second part of Vedic Glossary on Indus Seals, Jha claimed the Indus script as "the first and the oldest scientific script of the world, which later on crossed the national boundary and went to West Asia and Europe, where it developed as Semitic and Greek." Jha presented a convincing, stage-by-stage comparative study in the next 50 pages.

Some of the main features of Jha's decipherment are: the old-Brahmi script is written from left to right, although sometimes it is also written right to left like plough lines on soil ("halayudh lekhan paddhti"); there are 61 basic signs in total comprising 55 consonants, 1 Onkar, 3 Vowels, and 2 Ayogwah (combination of vowel and consonant); there are also 162 composite signs; Phoenician is a reduced subset of 22 signs from the old-Brahmi's 61 signs; some seals are inscribed with the swastika as well as a cross without arms; a few of the signs are pictographic, but most of them are alphabetic.

The Indus/Sarasvati script or old-Brahmi developed in two divergent directions in India: Devanagari and related North Indian regional variants; and Ashokan Brahmi from which derived Bhattiprolu Brahmi in South India.

Jha also charted the evolutionary stages of the five point numeral system, shown on the reverse side of several seals, into Greco-Roman numerals. Some of the seals carry mathematical formulas. One seal is carved with the formula for the circumference to diameter ratio or p from "paridhi vyas anupati"from which derived the term pi of the Greeks. Another seal shows the formula for the circumference of a circle as 2 times p times radius.

Jha cites the work of Navaratna Rajaram and A. Seidenberg, an eminent American historian of science, for establishing the source of both Egyptian and old Babylonian mathematics in the technical manuals for the construction of complex geometrical Vedic fire altars, Sulba-Sutras."

http://www.indiastar.com/wallia27.htm