4 ms·
> Wasn’t that a product of Aryan migrations from the north? I know this isn't a great answer, but "yes and no" -- it is certainly true that the Proto-Indo-Euro
by yowlingcat 5y ago
> Wasn’t that a product of Aryan migrations from the north?
I know this isn't a great answer, but "yes and no" -- it is certainly true that the Proto-Indo-Europeans brought with them Rigvedic religion. But that religion itself was syncretized with other beliefs across Central Asia and South Asia over quite a long period of time. While it is often dramatized as a "violent" invasion (no doubt reminiscent of later "violent" "Aryan" invasions), the truth is more bland, which is that the nomadic Indo-Aryans and their ancestors had a rich level of cultural exchange with more settled civilizations. Some of it by the sword, but some of it otherwise.
- throwaway894345 5y agoYeah, which I guess beckons my other question: what makes something indigenous considering how frequently changes are produced gradually by cultural exchange, gradual migrations, etc?
- yowlingcat 5y agoIt's a great question, and I'm inclined to ask the same one. My answer is that indigeneity is somewhat of a red herring. Empires have existed for as long as changes have been produced gradually by cultural exchange and gradual migrations as you point out, so the boundary between indigenous and not seems porous to me.