Topic suggested by Ekalavya Krishnan on Sat Jan 23 07:47:15 .
All times in EST +10:30 for IST.

I strongly feel that we should entirely reexamine whether Tamil had only 2 consonants or 4 as all other neighbourhood languages have. Or is it as suspected the beginning of European policy of "Divide and rule". Today it has been conclusively proved that Aryan Invasion theory is a myth created to show that Europeans were civilized and also to Divide India. Mahadevan has already done commendable work on this.

Tamil should therefore go back to 4 consonants and away from that "Italian's" grammar.

Responses:

• Old responses
  
• From: Ekalavya (@ 203.197.129.79) on: Wed Jan 27 04:18:02
  
  We can get to the conclusive proofs but give me some time as I am busy with my material pursuits right now ( a tight target to acheive before the March year ending) I have misplaced the book and need to get the details. Meanwhile please visit this site http://sarasvati.simplenet.com if I am not a bother. This gives an idea of the Sarasvati River civilization which no leftists historians dare to talk about.
  
  And for your information there was a seminar held recently in Bangalore (Nov 26-28)on "Vedic Aryans" where the myth of Aryan invasion was discussed in detail.
  
  Finally I would like to conclude this posting by saying history writing of the past 2000 years has been mainly "His" Story writing everything has to flow from the tenet of one book/one man concept.
  
  
  Krishnan
  
  
  
• From: kiru (@ surf0004.sybase.com) on: Thu Jan 28 00:44:46
  
  I have read David Frawleys writing before. I am not sure in just one article one can break the AIT. Personally, I think if it had not been an invasion it was just a migration of some people.
  Fine no migration/invasion now explain the dichotomy in Indian Culture/Indus Valley civilisation with what is portrayed in the Vedas. Also, the difference between the so-called 'dravidian' (i like to call it old-Indian) languages and sanskrit.
  
  Note Sanskrit is an Indian language it is just that it has Indo-European roots. I think our nationalistic parties are overreacting. I suspect they are trying to rewrite history/culture. This might lead to suppression of intellectual freedom of expression. We have to watch out for 'historians' promoted by the right-wing parties in India.
  
  Re: sarasvati.simplenet.com - I understand the passion of the researcher but I feel there is more feelings/emotion than objective logic/truth in the findings (I have read this also before thoroughly)
  
  
• From: chandra (@ viking.delta-air.com) on: Thu Jan 28 12:32:48
  
  Folks,
  Please do visit the http://www.harappa.com/script site that
  I menioned earlier where you should find
  4 must-reads related to purely academic articles
  no politicians or pseudo-academics.
  
  1.Paper by Asko Parpola
  2.Review of Parpola's work by I Mahadevan
  3. Interview with I Mahadevan
  4. Interview with Dani, a very old Pakistani archaeologist and linguist.
  5. The Indus "Dictionary".
  
  I would advise reading Mahadevan's review
  and Dani's interview first of you are pressed for
  time. You anyway get to learn about Parpola's findings in reading the review.
  They have their differences over whether the IVC was unamibiguously Dravidian or not.
  But they all agree on one thing very clearly:
  that it was *not* Aryan and that the Aryans
  came from outside India.
  Mahadevan agrees with Parpola that the IVC script
  is Dravidian and he disagrees with the spcecific
  mappings.
  Dani is not opposing completely the view that the script is exactly Dravidian but he is unequivocal in that the Aryan Invasion Theory is supported by
  evidences. One of the strategic evidences he cites
  is that Rg Veda depicts a very rural life whereas
  IVC was very urban with sophisticated economic, (ports, trade seals) architectural (nice well laid streets, multi-storied houses, granarys, baths) and engineering (dams etc) infrastructure
  that is simply not found in Rg Veda).
  Another important evidence is the lack of horses
  in the IVC sites so far.
  Asko Parpola states that portions of Rg Veda must have been composed even before the Aryans entered
  the Indus Valley area. They (Parpoal and IM) state that though IVC was not attacked at its most mature phase by Aryans, it was destroyed or subdued at its later phases. Environmental decline etc wer responsible for decline from its mature phase. But not for its obliteration.
  
  As for the political motivation, what has happended is that those who took pride in the european connection by way of the AIT found that they cannot have the cake and eat it too when it came to opposing the existence of Muslims in India who had to be portrayed as mrauding outsiders who detsroyed the Hindu civilization which put themselves in a spot since they were also outsiders. hence this change of tune. But they still want to have the cake and eat it too (isn't that the problem with those who are unreasonable?): forget about (and forgive) my past stretching back to a few thousand years but not so with your (Muslims) past going back to a thousand+ years.
  
  As for conspiracies, what about the deliberate destruction of
  ThEvAram right in side the Thillai (Chidhambaram) temple? We lost 80% of the songs composed by
  the Tamil Saiva Trinity (Appar, Sambandhra and Sundarar: the last two themselves anthaNars) and traditional burning of Tamil mansucripts in temple
  yagams, as portrayed poignantly by UVS Iyer in his autobiography?
  
  But this is good in one way.
  How...? It's like chasing a fugitive running all over the place and attempting to hide in one place after another. The fugitive himself helps the hunter in teaching all the good spots for hiding and lets the hunter learn more about the terrain eventually! As they say the situation we are talking about is:,
  "you can run but you can't hide".
  Of course, there is a big social cost to this chase: generations of people who were never told the truth or who never had the philosophical and moral guts to face the truth about their heritage
  which was never bad in the first place. They had to hide from the truth purely because they want to
  be one up.
  I say that we must never look down upon or hate
  any community or race thinking that we as known at the moment may be superior to the others. But in the course of time the truth might be different and may have to face the fact that the very community that one hated is related to us.
  
  This applies to thos who acted racist towards Blacks too: some genetic research is helping scientists assert that all humanity must have
  come from a copule in East Africa.
  Two things are needed: respect for all communities and guts to search for and to face the truth. Then
  there would be no problems.
  
  chandra
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
• From: chandra (@ viking.delta-air.com) on: Thu Jan 28 12:37:00
  
  When I said "this is good", I meant about the figurative chase that was stated in the para preceding the burning of Tamil masnucripts not to
  burning of Tamil books (I inserted later).
  
  chandra
  
  
• From: kiru (@ surf0004.sybase.com) on: Thu Jan 28 20:15:28
  
  Dani is wrong about Bull (nandi) not being sacred in SOuth India. He has some good points about the musical instruments.
  And I dont see Mahadevan doubting the Dravidian hypothesis. He is just contesting some specific points (IMO, rightfully).
  And none of these people have doubts about the concept of 'Dravidian' and 'Aryan'. So I think Krishnan has to reconcile the differences between the two even if the AIT is disproved. i.e. account for the dichotomy in culture/language in India.
  
  
• From: chandra (@ viking.delta-air.com) on: Thu Jan 28 20:34:21
  
  Kiruba,
  I also feel that Dani is neglecting quiet a few factors about south India. Actually the nandhi motif is apparently found only in South India and escpecially in Tamil Nadu. Also Im also mentions bull fight occuring in Tamil nadu only.
  In his interview there was a talk about Indra and Soma and the unicorn.
  Actually I was immediately reminded of Indran's vehicle IrAvatham having four tusks.
  
  I agree with you that this Dravidian/Aryan dichotoomy is not subject to debate at all. I also think that it is essential to understand clearly the scientific bases of the AIT-opponents. we have to first hear from
  those who contest the AIT what their position is on this Dravidian/Aryan dichotomy.
  
  Mahadevan's interview was very long but was equally informative. It was interesting to come to know that he started this career mainly after his retirment from the IAS!
  
  chandra
  
  

Want to post a response?