3 ms·

The Indus Valley Civilization was not "before civilization".

ashark 12y ago
Quite true and I didn't mean to imply otherwise, thank you for clarifying that. Indeed, the article seems to focus on their high degree of technological and social advancement rather than the speculative headline. Title aside, I think the book's main point is relevant to claims that any group of people in contact with other groups of people were, to any substantial extent, peaceful. I'm not saying it's "aliens built the pyramids" implausible—I don't want to overstate the case against it—but it's the sort of claim that ought to prompt disbelief by default. In particular I brought up that book since this civilization sits just on the other side of prehistory (do correct me if I'm wrong), which allows many of the same gaps in knowledge that historically produced this exact sort of speculation—the "god (peaceful, harmonious ancestors) of the gaps" that tjradcliffe mentioned. My guess is that, to the extent that it's true, it represents a kind of local "Pax Harappan", and that farther from their core territory they fought and killed at what would be, by modern standards, considered shockingly often, though it's possible they were less warlike than many of their contemporaries, which would be a worthwhile find on its own. A prolonged period of low-violence in their core territories could represent remarkable stability, certainly. The linked article doesn't provide much to go on, though, so it's hard to say without more extensive reading.
wozniacki 12y ago
A highly favorited comment on the io9 page says: Mainstream archaeology's inability to accept these are proto Hindu/vedic people is staggering. So much evidence, so much conjecture... of course a culture followed it - it's called "India". The colonial biases in Indology need to stop. The seals, the standard measurements, the maths, etc - all are now present in India today. Most of Indology was written by colonial brits and germans in the 1800s who had a vested interest in suppressing's India's knowledge and heritage. It has to stop.[1] Let me preface this by saying that I do not know the quality of comments on io9 nor am I familiar with the quality of the content and authorship, there. Having said that, let me ask the following: 1) Historically, have there been systemic pro-European biases in Indology research and scholarship? 2) Is this bias unique to Indology and not found in say Egyptology or Oriental studies or the study of other great civilizations of yester era? 3) Is there a generally well studied consensus among Indologists, about the origin of Indic peoples and the emergence of their society & culture? 4) I know Indo-European languages are generally well studied. So do linguists and phonologists generally agree on which proto-language(s) gave rise to the rest? 5) What is a good introductory text (or tome) that all students of Indology are assigned in universities across the world, the authority & veracity of which is generally uncontested? [1] http://io9.com/mainstream-archaeologys-inability-to-accept-these-are-p-1595649886 http://io9.com/mainstream-archaeologys-inability-to-accept-t...
- tokenadult 12y ago
  You are asking a factual question. One place to look for citations of facts on the issue is in the extensive footnotes of the book The Hindus: An Alternative History[1] by Sanskrit scholar Wendy Doniger. The book points out that the Harappan inscriptions depict several animals that are mentioned nowhere in the Vedas, while the Vedas in turn mention (in writing) several animals that appear nowhere in the Harappan inscriptions. In other words, the Vedas were composed in a region of Asia with different animals, because of different climate, from the region where the Indus Valley civilization arose. The Vedas also describe many aspects of an ancient lifestyle that was certainly not centered around cities in a river valley like the valley of the Indus. There are multiple lines of evidence to show that the Vedic culture and the Harappan culture were distinct and arose in different parts of south Asia. The historiography of India is a very complicated issue, in large part because of lack of written records in key phases of the development of civilization and religion in India, and also because historical claims about India are tightly bound up in political claims about current Indian politics. A Google search on "Indian historiography" (a search I just did) will disclose some of the competing claims. [1] http://www.amazon.com/Hindus-Alternative-History-Wendy-Doniger/dp/014311669X/ http://www.amazon.com/Hindus-Alternative-History-Wendy-Donig...
  - wozniacki 12y ago
    It is interesting that you bring up Ms. Doniger's book, The Hindus: An Alternative History, which has invited more than its fair share of controversy largely ignited by the lawsuit brought about by a Hindu nationalist group, which actually led the book to be yanked from shelves in India, by the publisher, Penguin Books.[1] I have to admit that I never actually got around to reading the book although I did follow the events surrounding its release in India, which brings me to the question at hand. The question of historiography of India. Is India's history and the study of that history, really so murky that it is uniquely mired in so much debate, that any form of consensus, at least among objective outsiders and non-stakeholders, cannot be arrived at? Surely the Indian subcontinent could not be the only place where scant archaeological evidence and written records remain. Historians do construct rudimentary historical narratives - albeit however poor and discontinuous - from similarly poor records, elsewhere. Don't they? This leads to the more troubling question of the state of historiography at large. Is the writing of history largely political, even in this day? Is it groomed by the prevailing norms, mores and sentiments of society? Is academia - whether in the West or elsewhere - still a forbidding place for contrarians and detractors ? If enough institutional power is brought to bear on the historical study of a certain region, people of that region and the culture of that region, could the history of that region be - for all intents and purposes - be whitewashed? I know historical revisionism and self-censorship - in some quarters of Western academia - has been in full vogue for quite some time. If a relatively secular and democratic India, poses these problems for scholars, I can easily imagine whole departments & institutes at prestigious academies of higher learning, engaged in the study of even more problematic places like the Middle East (for reasons of hurting Islamic sentiments), China (for reasons of risking bristling a rising economic power) and Africa (for reasons of regret, for the ravaging the continent has endured at the hands of Western powers), being persuaded to cast their findings in a more positive light - or at least in less negative light - should they want their research be continually well funded through grants and bequests, from benefactors both public and private. It greatly saddens and irks me at the same time, to ask this because I fear that my thoughts and suspicions, might actually be validated. Are we still living through the effects of a post-colonial interpretation of historiography ? In 2014 ? Really ? [1] Wendy Doniger's book is a tribute to Hinduism's complexity, not an insult http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2014/feb/12/wendy-doniger-book-hinduism-penguin-hindus http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2014/feb/12/wendy-d... India: Censorship by the Batra Brigade http://www.nybooks.com/articles/archives/2014/may/08/india-censorship-batra-brigade/ http://www.nybooks.com/articles/archives/2014/may/08/india-c... Wendy Doniger and the Hindus http://www.nybooks.com/articles/archives/2014/jul/10/wendy-doniger-and-hindus/ http://www.nybooks.com/articles/archives/2014/jul/10/wendy-d...

Quite true and I didn't mean to imply otherwise, thank you for clarifying that. Indeed, the article seems to focus on their high degree of technological and social advancement rather than the speculative headline. Title aside, I think the book's main point is relevant to claims that any group of people in contact with other groups of people were, to any substantial extent, peaceful. I'm not saying it's "aliens built the pyramids" implausible—I don't want to overstate the case against it—but it's the sort of claim that ought to prompt disbelief by default. In particular I brought up that book since this civilization sits just on the other side of prehistory (do correct me if I'm wrong), which allows many of the same gaps in knowledge that historically produced this exact sort of speculation—the "god (peaceful, harmonious ancestors) of the gaps" that tjradcliffe mentioned. My guess is that, to the extent that it's true, it represents a kind of local "Pax Harappan", and that farther from their core territory they fought and killed at what would be, by modern standards, considered shockingly often, though it's possible they were less warlike than many of their contemporaries, which would be a worthwhile find on its own. A prolonged period of low-violence in their core territories could represent remarkable stability, certainly. The linked article doesn't provide much to go on, though, so it's hard to say without more extensive reading.

wozniacki 12y ago

A highly favorited comment on the io9 page says: Mainstream archaeology's inability to accept these are proto Hindu/vedic people is staggering. So much evidence, so much conjecture... of course a culture followed it - it's called "India". The colonial biases in Indology need to stop. The seals, the standard measurements, the maths, etc - all are now present in India today. Most of Indology was written by colonial brits and germans in the 1800s who had a vested interest in suppressing's India's knowledge and heritage. It has to stop.[1] Let me preface this by saying that I do not know the quality of comments on io9 nor am I familiar with the quality of the content and authorship, there. Having said that, let me ask the following: 1) Historically, have there been systemic pro-European biases in Indology research and scholarship? 2) Is this bias unique to Indology and not found in say Egyptology or Oriental studies or the study of other great civilizations of yester era? 3) Is there a generally well studied consensus among Indologists, about the origin of Indic peoples and the emergence of their society & culture? 4) I know Indo-European languages are generally well studied. So do linguists and phonologists generally agree on which proto-language(s) gave rise to the rest? 5) What is a good introductory text (or tome) that all students of Indology are assigned in universities across the world, the authority & veracity of which is generally uncontested? [1] http://io9.com/mainstream-archaeologys-inability-to-accept-these-are-p-1595649886 http://io9.com/mainstream-archaeologys-inability-to-accept-t...

tokenadult 12y ago
You are asking a factual question. One place to look for citations of facts on the issue is in the extensive footnotes of the book The Hindus: An Alternative History[1] by Sanskrit scholar Wendy Doniger. The book points out that the Harappan inscriptions depict several animals that are mentioned nowhere in the Vedas, while the Vedas in turn mention (in writing) several animals that appear nowhere in the Harappan inscriptions. In other words, the Vedas were composed in a region of Asia with different animals, because of different climate, from the region where the Indus Valley civilization arose. The Vedas also describe many aspects of an ancient lifestyle that was certainly not centered around cities in a river valley like the valley of the Indus. There are multiple lines of evidence to show that the Vedic culture and the Harappan culture were distinct and arose in different parts of south Asia. The historiography of India is a very complicated issue, in large part because of lack of written records in key phases of the development of civilization and religion in India, and also because historical claims about India are tightly bound up in political claims about current Indian politics. A Google search on "Indian historiography" (a search I just did) will disclose some of the competing claims. [1] http://www.amazon.com/Hindus-Alternative-History-Wendy-Doniger/dp/014311669X/ http://www.amazon.com/Hindus-Alternative-History-Wendy-Donig...
- wozniacki 12y ago
  It is interesting that you bring up Ms. Doniger's book, The Hindus: An Alternative History, which has invited more than its fair share of controversy largely ignited by the lawsuit brought about by a Hindu nationalist group, which actually led the book to be yanked from shelves in India, by the publisher, Penguin Books.[1] I have to admit that I never actually got around to reading the book although I did follow the events surrounding its release in India, which brings me to the question at hand. The question of historiography of India. Is India's history and the study of that history, really so murky that it is uniquely mired in so much debate, that any form of consensus, at least among objective outsiders and non-stakeholders, cannot be arrived at? Surely the Indian subcontinent could not be the only place where scant archaeological evidence and written records remain. Historians do construct rudimentary historical narratives - albeit however poor and discontinuous - from similarly poor records, elsewhere. Don't they? This leads to the more troubling question of the state of historiography at large. Is the writing of history largely political, even in this day? Is it groomed by the prevailing norms, mores and sentiments of society? Is academia - whether in the West or elsewhere - still a forbidding place for contrarians and detractors ? If enough institutional power is brought to bear on the historical study of a certain region, people of that region and the culture of that region, could the history of that region be - for all intents and purposes - be whitewashed? I know historical revisionism and self-censorship - in some quarters of Western academia - has been in full vogue for quite some time. If a relatively secular and democratic India, poses these problems for scholars, I can easily imagine whole departments & institutes at prestigious academies of higher learning, engaged in the study of even more problematic places like the Middle East (for reasons of hurting Islamic sentiments), China (for reasons of risking bristling a rising economic power) and Africa (for reasons of regret, for the ravaging the continent has endured at the hands of Western powers), being persuaded to cast their findings in a more positive light - or at least in less negative light - should they want their research be continually well funded through grants and bequests, from benefactors both public and private. It greatly saddens and irks me at the same time, to ask this because I fear that my thoughts and suspicions, might actually be validated. Are we still living through the effects of a post-colonial interpretation of historiography ? In 2014 ? Really ? [1] Wendy Doniger's book is a tribute to Hinduism's complexity, not an insult http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2014/feb/12/wendy-doniger-book-hinduism-penguin-hindus http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2014/feb/12/wendy-d... India: Censorship by the Batra Brigade http://www.nybooks.com/articles/archives/2014/may/08/india-censorship-batra-brigade/ http://www.nybooks.com/articles/archives/2014/may/08/india-c... Wendy Doniger and the Hindus http://www.nybooks.com/articles/archives/2014/jul/10/wendy-doniger-and-hindus/ http://www.nybooks.com/articles/archives/2014/jul/10/wendy-d...