@Bharat Jhunjhunwala
@paarsurrey how did they greet each other?
(1) 3000 BCE and prior, specifically trade between Indian communinities and Ancient Egypt.
(2) 4.2ky event, and the movements of people around this time
(3) 1900 BCE when the migrations both into and out of, the Indus valley started
I don't know what the Aryans did, they ether merged or traded only.
What caused the Christian and Muslim invasions of India?
One is to ask the Dravidian as to what the Aryans did to them, right, please?
"Notably, the most ancient forms of the
Dravidian languages are found in southern India, which was not exposed to Sanskrit until the 5th century bce. This suggests that the south was populated by the speakers of the Dravidian languages
even before the entry of Aryans into India."
Dravidian languages, family of some 70 languages spoken primarily in South Asia. The Dravidian languages are spoken by more than 215 million people in India, Pakistan, and Sri Lanka. They are divided into South, South-Central, Central, and North groups; these groups are further organized into 24...
www.britannica.com
"
Dravidian peoples primarily speak one of more than 80 different Dravidian languages found mostly throughout South India and Sri Lanka, like Tamil. Indo-Aryans spoke one of the Indic languages, such as Sanskrit, and likely established linguistic dominance after the fall of the Indus Valley Civilization."
Regards
____________________
en.wikipedia.org
en.wikipedia.org
@paarsurrey @GoodAttention
Dravidian, Tamil, Sanskrit,
I finally found the letters for Aryan Merging.
Aryan Migration Theory (AMT)
The Out of India theory (OIT)
The Aryan Invasion Theory (AIT)
Unknown letters for trading only
This thread is: What caused the Christian and Muslim invasions of India?
The Hebrews left Mitsrayim to face a number of entrenched people such as Edomites. The Hebrews believed they had a special relationship with God above others. That brought resistance from others a counter violence from Hebrews.
@Bharat Jhunjhunwala What did the Edomites do? What did the Edomites believe in?
Ancient India had also suffered invasions from the Greek polytheists under Alexander as well as the Huns who were also considered to be polytheistic, as well as the animist Mongols . So it was not just Christian and Islamic invaders.
Essentially, the various kingdoms and kings in India fought for imperial status, and that is how famous Indian emperors like Chandragupta Maurya, Bindusara, Ashoka the Great, Samudragupta and Vikramaditya came up.
But such reigns by imperial emperors were not present at all times. As long as there was a strong imperial ruler , India was usually safe from foreign invasions.
With increasing time and vast periods of great prosperity and peace, complacency and a lackadaisical approach also came up, which resulted in lack of preparedness against foreign invasions.
Arrogance of the superiority of their traditional political and military systems also prevented the Indians from keeping abreast or informed of the military, sociological and political developments and best practices in other countries, and learning from them and updating their own systems.
For example, when the Mughal invader Babar came to India with cannons and guns, the Indian resistance was led by Rana Sanga armed with mere swords, javelins, bow and arrows and so on. The Indian cavalry came out superior in engagments but eventually the superior artillery of the adversary prevailed.
This was the case also with the western invasions using Indian mercenaries who were trained in modern warfare, and who were able to subjugate the Indian kingdoms.
The two world wars which originated in Europe and lead to heavy fighting between the European nations were factors which substantially weakened them and enabled the countries in Asia, Africa and South America to regain their independence again.
@ajay0 wrote
Ancient India had also suffered invasions from the Greek polytheists under Alexander as well as the Huns who were also considered to be polytheistic, as well as the animist Mongols . So it was not just Christian and Islamic invaders.
My responds, what was Alexander trying to accomplish? Instead I found this.
@Bharat Jhunjhunwala I found this about Alexander
About four Quora responds below.
And to my question was Alexander an Aryan
This person thinks Aryan in India and explains nothing to do with Hitler.
From Quora
Gouri Shanker's answer: Currently, usage of the term Aryan is not racial but linguistic. Indo-Aryans have nothing to do with that bloke, Hitler. Those ancient people who authored the world’s oldest religious texts in Sanskrit and Persian namely, the Rig Veda and Avesta, called themselves Aryans. ...
www.quora.com
Gouri Shanker wrote
Currently, usage of the term Aryan is not racial but linguistic. Indo-Aryans have nothing to do with that bloke, Hitler. Those ancient people who authored the world’s oldest religious texts in Sanskrit and Persian namely, the Rig Veda and Avesta, called themselves Aryans. Alexander was not even from ‘Aryavrata’, the ancient lands of Aryans, stretching from Indus Valley to Afghanistan and the eastern Iran. According to David W. Anthony (2010);
While originally meant simply as a neutral ethno-linguistic classification, from the late 19th century onwards the term Aryan race has been used by people who promoted ideas about racial hierarchy, like the Nazis, who thought that the Germanic peoples were, in comparison to other peoples in the world, predominately descended from an ancient master race, whom they called "Aryan." Aryanism developed as a racial ideology based on this idea. Excerpts from the book “The Horse, the Wheel, and Language: How Bronze-Age Riders from the Eurasian Steppes Shaped the Modern World”. Princeton University Press.
Now-a-days the term is confined only to Indo-Iranian branch of the Indo-European language family. Hence, not all Indo-Europeans are Aryan.
What about this about Alexander
this person explain not a slav
Mark H. Swanson's answer: The Slavs didn’t begin migrating into the Eastern Roman Empire until the reign of Justinian (ruled 527–565 AD) during the early Middle Ages. So no, Alexander was not a Slav.
www.quora.com
Mark H Swanson wrote
The Slavs didn’t begin migrating into the Eastern Roman Empire until the reign of Justinian (ruled 527–565 AD) during the early Middle Ages.
So no, Alexander was not a Slav.
or this about Alexander
this person wrote another Alexander who's the III
Dimitrios Michmizos's answer: Alexander III, known as the Great, was a member of the 500 year Argead Royal Dynasty that originated from the Peloponnesean city of Argos (hence their name). He and his family were Greeks of the Dorian tribe, which makes them as Greek as they come. There is no reas...
www.quora.com
Alexander III, known as the Great, was a member of the 500 year Argead Royal Dynasty that originated from the Peloponnesean city of Argos (hence their name).
He and his family were Greeks of the Dorian tribe, which makes them as Greek as they come.
There is no reason to spin, soil or deny history - other than shortsighted (and even shorter lived) political shenanigans. And those who try to appropriate other people’s history will only end up with no history of their own.
or this on Alexander that Alexander was not European.
Steve Theodore's answer: Well sure… for a given value of ‘evidence’ There are two rival stories which share a lot in common. Alexander the Egyptian The first one circulated pretty widely in medieval Europe as part of the Alexander Romance, a collection of stories with a flimsy connection to Al...
www.quora.com
Is there evidence that
Alexander the Great was not European?
Well sure… for a given value of ‘evidence’
There are two rival stories which share a lot in common.
Alexander the Egyptian
The first one circulated pretty widely in medieval Europe as part of the Alexander Romance, a collection of stories with a flimsy connection to Alexander’s actual career. The Romance tells us that Nectanebo, the last Egyptian Pharoah, cast a spell on Queen Olympias of Macedon to convince her that she would be visited by the god Ammon. Then he dressed himself up in a fleece and a pair of rams horns and mated with the Queen, fathering Alexander while king Phillip was away.
The Egyptian Pharoah and magician Nectanebo, with rams horns at left, hooks up with Queen Olympias of Macedon Image: Getty Museum
Alexander always went out of his way to conciliate Egyptian sentiment: his famous visit to the oasis of Siwa was the place where he began transitioning from mortal warlord to living god, and his embrace of his “father” Zeus-Ammon is the historical basis for the embellishments of the later stories. Siwa was not just a famous Egyptian religious site — it had also been one of the strongholds of the real Nectanebo, who was driven out by the Persians when Alexander was a child. So this version reflects Alexander’s popularity among native Egyptians, who loved him for driving the hated Persians out of Egypt and avenging his “father,” the last native Pharaoh.
Alexander the Persian
A related story shows up in the Shahnameh, the great 10th century Persian epic. Here a fictional Persian king Darab (roughly, the historical Darius II) defeats an emperor of Rome (!) named Failakus (that is, Phillip of Macedon). As part of the peace treaty he demands Failakus’s daughter in marriage. However, the princess Nahid turns out to have terrible bad breath and is quickly sent packing — but not before Darab has gotten her with the child who will grow to be Sikandar (Alexander). After studying with the great sage Aristu (Aristotle) Sikander will return and will defeat his half-brother, a second Darab, to become king of Persia and then conqueror of the world.
Sikandar, in red, comforts his dying half-brother Darab II, in blue, after defeating him.
Not unlike the Egyptian version, this effort to weave Alexander into the Persian national history reflects a desire to claim the great conqueror for the home team. It’s particularly interesting in Persia because there are other strains in Persian literature — particularly in the Denkard, the Zoroastrian religious commentaries — where Alexander is regarded as the great national enemy. Presumably the Shahnameh version reflects the final victory of Alexander’s policy of trying to reconcile Greeks and Persians.
…etc
Defeat, as they say, is an orphan but victory — like Alexander, apparently — has many fathers. Alexander’s fame also earned him connections to Sumatran rajas and the Ethiopian Church as well as fictional exploits in languages from Irish to Mongolian. I would not hazard any money on these stories being verifiable by DNA testing — but they are certainly interesting examples of the strange afterlife of the Macedonian warlord.
And, given the standards of historical accuracy we seem to like in the 21st century, who are we to poke fun?
en.m.wikipedia.org
