Відео

This video is important ❤

the Indus Valley Civilization (IVC) was not created by the Aryans. It was an advanced Bronze Age civilization that flourished from around 3300 BCE to 1300 BCE in the northwestern regions of South Asia, including parts of present-day India, Pakistan, and Afghanistan. The civilization predated the arrival of the Aryans by several centuries. Key Differences Between the Indus Valley Civilization and the Aryans: Timeline: Indus Valley Civilization: Existed from approximately 3300 BCE to 1300 BCE. Aryans: Believed to have migrated to the Indian subcontinent around 1500 BCE, after the decline of the IVC. Cultural Features: IVC: Known for its urban planning, advanced drainage systems, standardized weights and measures, and the undeciphered Indus script. Cities like Mohenjo-Daro and Harappa were highly organized. Aryans: Associated with the Vedic Age, their culture revolved around pastoralism, the Rigveda, and the use of Sanskrit. They had a more rural lifestyle compared to the urban sophistication of the IVC. Religious Practices: IVC: Evidence suggests worship of natural elements, animals, fertility symbols, and possibly a proto-Shiva figure (Pashupati seal). Aryans: Worshiped Vedic deities like Indra, Agni, and Varuna, with rituals centered on fire sacrifices (yajnas). Language: IVC: Used the undeciphered Indus script. Aryans: Spoke early Sanskrit, the language of the Vedas. Decline of the Indus Valley Civilization The decline of the IVC is attributed to a combination of factors, such as climate change, tectonic activity, and river course shifts (e.g., drying of the Saraswati River). There is no strong evidence of an Aryan invasion causing the decline, as was previously suggested by outdated "Aryan Invasion Theory." Modern scholars now favor the Aryan Migration Theory, which suggests a more gradual and complex interaction between the Aryans and the remnants of the IVC. In summary, the Indus Valley Civilization was an independent and distinct cultural and historical phenomenon that predates the Aryans and their subsequent contributions to South Asian history.

In Tibet, it's Mahankal not Avlokiteshwar

Check out a scholar named YAGNAVEDAM’s latest research on the IVC language and you will have your answers

Sick and tired of this debate Scientifically proven that no AI or AM happened In fact there is no Aryan race There is no word as Aryan in Sanskrit The word is Arya The language is Sanskrit The script is Brahmi

The indus civilization neither had any sanskrit script nor mentioned of horses, which aryans were good at. Hence it proved beyond doubt that aryans were.migrated from north to india in search of pastor and warm weather.

ఆర్య అంటే గురువు వంటి గౌరవనీయమైన పెద్ద వ్యక్తి, ఇది వ్యక్తుల సమూహం లేదా తెగ కాదు. ఆర్యన్ దండయాత్ర సిద్ధాంతం బ్రిటీస్ పాలకుల సమయంలో మాక్స్ ములార్ ద్వారా భారతదేశ చరిత్రలోకి చొప్పించిన సిద్ధాంతం.

Arya means respectable elder person like guru its not group of people or tribe. Aryan invasion theory is just thoery which injected into india history by max mular at the time of britis rulers. For max mular key point is word "Arya" from vedas. Based and that word he created story theory. Still some people from india supporting that for their selfgains.

This is right Don't copy western history Is fake, misleading

Shame only for narowal .for ahsan iqal.what is special in narowal worst form of corruption

Another AIT/AMT Supporter who haven't read talageri or Follow the latest genetical records

Are you Prav Yav, Nav, a commie, or a born again a$$hole? Why are you still presenting this misinformation? The Indus script has been deciphered. Therefore, your lies must come to an end.

"Aryan" is a concept that was born in Bactria (southern "Central Asia") 3700 years ago, when Andronovo Culture met and destroyed the Oxus Civilization, being then influenced. Indo-aryans were faithful to their european language (sanskrit) and polytheistic beliefs, source of hinduism. Indo-aryans migrated either to the west (Anatolia) or to the south-east (India). Some just stood there : ancestors of Kafirs, turned by the british in 1895 into "nuristanis". How do they look ? European. There was a clash between the indo-aryans and those who loved the local, oxian culture ... the iranians ... who invaded current Iran more than 500 years later (with their semitic-like religion : zoroastrianism) while the indo-aryan migration to India was already finished.

Yamanaya are not Aryans. No such race as aryans. Aryan word 1st time has been used in India more than 2500y ago as ariya. Ariya means noble and used as adjactive. Its not noun. Yamanay must have used this wor to hid among indigenous indian people at the time of islamic invasion. This theory first was written or suggested at the time of east india company.

Thank you for the upload...hopefully visitors will contribute to a dynamics of this historical discussion. Footage from Lithuania was shown documenting the continuation of the old religion of these indo europeans whose language have many words very similar to Sanskrit. To add further, Kamyana Mohila in Ukraine and other sites show burial customs and even temples of the Yamnaya culture. Of great interest is The Amazons of Adrienne Taylor documenting women of the steppes.

The Zend Avesta is Not the Rig Veda...Avestan is not Sanskrit, but somewhat similar.

There were no demons or magic or flying monkeys. Just writers imagination

Hi, Add citation or references to every slide that claims a fact or study.

This is really interesting. Thank you.

Indian civilization is more than 0,5 million years old. Aryan is not the race, it is not the language.

I really think these people must have come from Europe and some came from Egypt who believed same as what Indians are believing now these were culture of these people worshiping mood sun human etc Idonot think Indian went anywhere people came to India from other places

Sanctum sanctorum

Yes not wholly but nagaland and arkan

Simply speaking concept of dharma is similar to the concept of tao rather than religion Also its root word is dhr which means "dharan karna" or to "uphold" i.e to uphold the cosmic law

The absence of tigers, rhinos, elephants, and peacocks in the Rig Veda screams of an alien culture, disconnected from India’s soul. Instead, the Aryans exalted steppe creatures-wolves and horses-revealing their origins in the Central Asian grasslands. These omissions, coupled with their pastoral obsession, expose the Aryans as invaders, blind to the vibrant biodiversity of the land they entered. Their hymns are not of India but of the steppes, proving the Aryan Migration Theory with undeniable force.

1.05 French called the region which included besides Vietnam, Cambodia and Laos, the French Indochina from 1890's onwards not because it is closer to the Inddian Ocean, but because of the great presence of Hinduism and later of Buddhism in the region. Coedes was the great French historian who proved that the entire South East Asia is religiously and culturally an extension of India. Funnan and Champa were the two ancient Hindu kingdoms of Vietnam. A 2000 year old Sanskrit inscription is found in Vietnam. Chinese influence in the region has been more political and cultural than spiritual or religious.

There are 40 million aryans in India thats evident period.

Wow, terrific. I came to this video because I was specifically searching for Mittani kingdom, as I was trying to research a connection between Babylonian Akkadian language and the Sanskrit language (though I know they belong to distinctly different families), I came across Mittani Indo-Aryan family. That's how I stumbled across this video. Wow. Kudos to your work. You deserve WAYY more reach. Keep up with this work!

So there is an Aryan race?

The Yamnaya had 50% European Hunter Gatherers and 50% Iranian Neolithic. The Iranian Neolithic has been shown to be related to the DNA of inhabitants of the Indus Valley civilization. Northern India has been more densely populated than any of these other regions. Use your common sense to deduce the obvious conclusion.

My hunch is Aryans did come to India from outside The original inhabitants of India are Adivasi. Aryans and Adivasi could not have originated from the same economic system

Thank you. I believe this too. Mishra, an Indian linguist did some pioneering work in proving not just Mittani, but even Hittite observed Prakrit forms. This means the Sanskrit variants we are seeing appearing in West Asia in 2000BCE are at the Prakrit stage of linguistic chronology, which necessarily means that classical Sanskrit is before 2000BCE, most likely in 3000BCE. The realisation will also dawn then if the Prakrit period is in 2000BCE, then the Buddhist period must begin in 2000BCE. Consistent with our puranic dates of 1900BCE for the birth of Buddha. Again, Western historians have committed another fraud on Indian history by dating Buddha to 500-400BCE. Another myth we need to bust.

Loving this series, especially the audio quality of narration too.

Bhai ye Buddha or unke related Other monk hai...😂

Not Shiva . it's Mahayana sect bodhisatva avlokiteshwer.it means budha

can you make a video elobrating, veesara architecture there are many styles for example vijayanagara style,hoysala style,kakatiya style in warangal,rastrakuta style,chalukya style and also i am fascinated to know what kind of hindu architecture was there in sindh,punjab,kpk of present day pakistan and east afghanistan.like hindushahi style,gandhara style and also haryana temples in india.

historically brahmins have been in india, since the time of world re creation around 50,000 years back. as per srimad bhagavatahm, in south india, madurai, there was a pandya king along with brahmins, who was chosen by narayana to make the boat to overcome the deluge. apart from this so many historical evidence that brahmins are natives and share the same dna as the tribals of india

How was architecture in ancient India ua-cam.com/video/pfQRpgKtcPM/v-deo.htmlsi=N93c-yl1_KrhyGf7

How was ancient Indian architecture ua-cam.com/video/pfQRpgKtcPM/v-deo.htmlsi=N93c-yl1_KrhyGf7

Tere is nothing of hindu type architecture ,word hindu didn't fit to bhatarat . it's bhartiya janta not hindu janta.

Mixed or not balts polonia iran Tadjikistan north india paki kurds serbs romania etc. People of milk yogourt horses kozak .....

Were Kalabhra rulers atheists ?

the term "asian" geographically is absurdly incoherent and eurocentric as there's nothing that Middle East, South Asia, Central Asia, East Asia and South East Asia all have significantly in common that distinguishes them as a group. Europe is objectively a region in Asia. It's separation from the rest of the continent is purely eurocentric as it was based on factors such as religion, culture, language and phenitype that has nothing to do with geography. If we were to follow the same logic then all regions in Asia would be their own continents. Further more, the geographical definition of asian insinuates that europeans are asian too since they had asian descent during their migration out of Africa (as opposed to the definition of African as black african descent or relating to it's culture) Basically, you see how the term just means all of humanity except black africans which is absolutely incoherent as well as the eurocentric definition. The phenotypical usage of asian used by most english speaking countries as those of East and South East Asian descent makes much more sense since phenotype is science, it makes sense also due to the fact that East and South East asians are closely genetically related. I prefer base myself on science than being incoherent and eurocentric. Basically the options we have here if we're being objective and base ourselves on truth, logic and reality, we have 2 options. 1- consider the whole continent (including Europe) as asian 2- base ourselves on phenotype: Asian as east/south east asian ancestry Arab as Middle eastern ancestry Desi as Indian-Subcontinent (specifically in english refering to India, Pakistan, Bangladesh ancestry) White as european ancestry Black as black african ancestry Phenotype exist in nature, there's nothing wrong aknowledging it. But it doesn't mean racism is fine just like the existance of islam doesn't justify islamophobics. I want to add that there's nothing wrong with aknowledging that someone is a mix of phenotype or ethnicity. Black and asian are refered as blackasian. It's also why you can't distinguish a french from a german in terms of looks. Also now imagine an black african with 2 black african parents, being born in Europe. No one would say they are europeans. The separations you mentionned are landmarks. If they somewhat find certain parts of Middle East resembling them, it would've been a different landmark chosen to separate middle east from Europe.

Indians are actually African origin.Thats why you cannot be known as Asians.😊

That's good

I read a story from Cambodia and it said that the Chola Empire was helping the Khmer Empire fighting a war. I want to know more but not enough resource.

please also make video on how aryavart may have extended towards southern india

I can clearly see that you did some impressive research here... Bravo!

Didn't knew you also wrote about alternate history! Would be interested in buying your book