Folk Songs at a Punjabi Wedding

That a Punjabi wedding is a music and dance riot is hardly news. Apparently, wherever you turn in a Punjabi wedding, there is music and dance to be had. 

But over a period of time, I became aware that much of the diversity of this unique cultural heritage is vanishing. 

So, it is time to record the various types of folk songs that make up the cultural extravaganza that is a Punjabi wedding. 

There are apparently special songs for Roka and Mangni. 

How Weddings Got Fixed 

Traditionally, the father of the groom seeks the girl's hand for his son from the father of the bride. The father of the bride never does the opposite - of requesting an alliance directly from the father of the groom. 

But in practice, usually, it was the nais (नाई )  barbers, or Pundits, who kept an eye out for young girls and boys of marriageable age. They suggested these rishtas (relationships) to the parents or grandparents of the young people. 

Also, until the 1940s, young people did not see each other until after the marriage, so the Munh Dikhai - the time when the groom's family sees the girl's face for the first time, was a very big deal. 

To the Songs.. 

Maiyaan / माइयाँ पाना - Maiyaan de geet 

ये रस्म शादी से ४-६ दिन पहले की जाती थी। इस के बाद दूल्हा-दुल्हन अपने घर से निकल नहीं सकते थे। इस समय, उन से कोई काम नहीं कराया जाता था। उन्हें पुराने कपड़े पहन कर घर पर बैठना पड़ता था। 

इस से दोनों को आराम करने का समय मिलता था। शादी के बाद अमूमन बहुत थकान हो जाती है। 

पुराने कपड़े पहनने से नज़र नहीं लगती, और घर के अंदर रहने से सुरक्षा बनी रहती है। 

Maiyaan paana is the first tradition related to a wedding. 

On this day, the bride and groom wear old clothes and are, from this point on, not allowed to do any work or leave the house. 

This typically happens 4-6 days before a wedding. 

Maiyaan de geet are songs sung at this time. 

Here are some Maiyaan songs: 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dNPOqcVBxPg

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HHwGUkTbzmM

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=afTT7RL4jPU

Jaago 

After this, every morning, Jaago go around the village, with a lantern, waking people up. Jaago is the song sung by these Jaagos. Usually, they are village women. Jaagna means to wake up. 

Jaago: 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9z_ue-bHAzQ

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RYypgXpmbhg

This is a Jaago by Surinder Kaur ji: 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k-6gUvEKO84

This is the Jaago being done by a family: 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZUoZyiutNw4

This is a Jaago song from a 2013 song: 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1Dlcb6-R9wY

Malkit Singh's Jaago: 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RYypgXpmbhg

A rare Jaago from the boy's house: (its from a film) 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NTL0HntazJk

Sithniyaan te Swaang 

Usually, in the evening, it would be time for some gup shup and music. 

Swaang - is a kind of folk theater in which a relative dresses up and acts as a funny character. In the one that I have seen, it was a relative who has come to the wedding from the village and brought "things" for the bride and groom. She gave handkerchiefs as "suit pieces" etc. Swaang is done by both men and women and leads to much laughter. 

Sithniyaan, on the other hand, is a very specific type of folk song. 

At the wedding, the nanke (mother's side) and dadke (father's side) of the groom/bride meet and there is a competition on who is more enthusiastic about the wedding. Also, general insults are thrown at the other side about their mannerisms, actions etc. These gaalis between the Nanke and Dadke are called Sithniyaan. They get super creative and super funny. 

Sithniyaan and other boliyaan of Sangeet: 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ajX4AkW4Bc8 - from a Toronto wedding 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yBgRfPUvsRE - 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9qABiFUYSMI

This is your dance challenge

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AT7C2mVIzTU

Malkit Singh's version is my favourite. 

Sangeet Ceremony: Boliyaan, Tappe, Gidda 

Boliyaan, Tappe, Gidda, and Bhangra were the songs (Boliyaan, Tappe), and dances (Gidda, Bhangra) performed on the Sangeet ceremony. 

One special type of bolis are the kind where each relative is called by turns. Here is an example: 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HcKGUZKBhY0

And another: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yBhdN2gKPvk

This song is usually a part of the Sangeet at the boy's side: 

Madho Rama Penchan: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ArHtJkgqeSU

Sangeet Songs: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0cG1pibBRH0

More Bolis: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LZRNj4vqNxY

Suhaag , Ghodi 

Suhaag is the wedding song for girl's side. Ghodi is a wedding song for the groom's side. 5 suhaag and 5 ghodis started off the sangeet ceremony. The dancing started after the Suhaags, Ghodis, and other songs. 

Suhaag and Ghodi are not accompanied by any dancing. 

Some of the famous Suhaags and Ghodis are: 

Suhaags typically talk about the life of the girl after marriage - largely sad. Ghodis are happy songs because they talk about the new member joining the family. 

Suhaags: 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1wGJtuFAv6k

Madhaniyaan: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jhWsUkPxMps

Bibi Chandan de ole ole: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FRqLtWa0Hos

Fullaan di bahaar: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6GKTdSI3ZKU

Chitta Kukkad Banere te: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EiRDDGt4Fu0

Ajj di dihari rakh Doli: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9l-2RJh8-fk

Niki niki boond: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Noyo6ELBeUo

Aaya Ladiye ni tera Sehrayaan vala: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ceyvjobiU1g

Ghodiyaan: 

By far the MOST popular Ghodi in Punjab is: 

Matthe te chamkan vaal mere Bande de: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a7AofNXdKxk

Jado lagiyaan veera tainu maiyaan: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bdyTMauKVOs

Another version: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2J5yAHJ_utk

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qHn0g7vsIOM

Surjana: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Pw1DONgJE6g

Veda Bharya Shagnaan da: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4I9BMaHdnFw

Gaun 

Gauns are just songs that are sung at weddings. 

Kala Doria: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t1w4vU-BmOs

This one was my grandma's favourite song:  

Sadke Sadke jaande mutiyaare ni: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YQaKoITbxCs

Jutti kasuri: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PY3HNYhK5Oc

Harshdeep Kaur version: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WhrRxtJaJsM

Latthe di chadar: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tFMxhu-n0sA

Baajre da sitta: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Oy-cNCWOXgw

Nai jaana: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nE0vCcnk1H0 (these are Tappe) 

Ghadoli 

These are songs sung when the bhabhi goes to the well neaby to get water. 

Though after the original Ghadoli, regular bolis and tappe take over and people just dance. 

This water is then used to bathe the bride/groom. After this the singaar for the wedding begins for both sides.  

Earlier, this bath used to end "Maiyaan" but now, the maiyaan ends before Haldi, which is usually just before the sangeet. 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EJhDBWtfreU

This is the Harshdeep kaur version: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OirACRebqZw

The bhabhi who brings the ghadoli and other bhabhis are all given gifts at this time. 

Sehrabandi

Sehrabandi - the tying of the Sehra, to the groom, is done the night before the wedding. The groom is then expected to keep the Sehra on all night and proceed to the wedding venue in the morning. 

This is an old song to be sung at the time of Sehra bandi: 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Na5QK1BDnpw

Milni 

These songs are sung at the time of the Milni (meeting) of the relatives of the two sides. 

Typically, they would only meet at the wedding. 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Lcr6RilJ7Lw

Sehra 

The Sehra is sung when the Baraat enters the venue. 

It is sung by a friend of the groom, his father, brother, sister, etc. 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TpWeJ2Zeu3U

Chhand 

The groom sings Chhand right after the pheras. 

Chhand is the same as Hindi छंद - a 4 line piece of poetry. 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PtMnUvJHUBA

After the pheras, the groom sings Chhand, the groom's mother gives kalicharis to the salis of the groom, and then the joote chhupai money is also given, and the groom's shoes are returned. 

Sikhya 

Sikhya was given to the girl by her family just after the pheras, before Doli.  

Sikhya was meant to teach the girl to adjust at her in laws place. 

It could be sung by the bride's mother, grandmother, sisters, or friends. 

I found one example of Sikhya from a recent film. 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tmCqUMLG0wk

This one is nice: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hkC5LERBbNs

Doli 

The best known Doli song is 

Sadda Chidiyaan da Chamba oye..

Here it is in the voice of Mussarat Nazir, one of the best known Punjabi folk singers: 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DdTIJf6fQF0

And by Runa Laila: 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4zrTStvStsE

The remarkable thing

is that all the 3 major religions of Punjab - Sikhism, Hinduism, and Islam, follow the exact same traditions. Only the main wedding ceremony varies by religion. 

By the way, did you count how many there were? 

16 different types of songs are sung in the Punjabi wedding! 

End note:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4yCBVLAE0OQ

This video has links to many traditional songs of Punjab. 

A phenomenal resource for Punjabi history

 https://www.wanjaranomad.com/rare-books?page=5

And one more: 

About me ‹ Claude Arpi

Why are there no checks and balances on the judiciary?

The Legal Review Power of the Supreme Court allows it to strike down any law passed by the democratically elected Legislature if it goes "against the Constitution." 

This power rests with both the Indian and US Supreme Courts. 

However, the converse is not true. 

If the Court gives a ruling that goes against the constitution, neither the Legislature nor the Executive have the power to overturn such a judgement. 

So, why does this reciprocal check and balance not exist? 

The immediate thought that came to mind was - Because the Constitution was made by lawyers! 

So, I checked who the members of our Drafting Committee were. 

And turns out, I was right! 

The members of the Drafting Committee of the Indian Constitution were overwhelmingly from the legal profession. Here they are: 

A. BR Ambedkar 

As we know, he was a lawyer and the Chairman of the Drafting Committee. 

B. Dewan Bahadur Sir Alladi Krishnaswani Ayyar

Advocate General of Madras State from 1929 to 1944. 

C. Dewan Bahadur Sir Narasimba Ayyangar Gopalaswami Ayyangar

Studied Law at the Law College, Madras 

D. Kanhaiyalal Maneklal Munshi or his pen name, Ghanshyam Vyas

Lawyer by profession 

E. Mohammad Saadulla 

To check 

F. BL Mitter

Was the Diwan of Baroda. Was later replaced by  Madhav Rao, a Legal Advisor of the Maharaja of Vadodara.

G. Debi Prasad Khaitan

Owner of Khaitan and Co - among the oldest working law firms of India. 

H. Govind Ballabh Pant 

Lawyer by education with a short stint as a lawyer. 

Understanding Colonisation

Chach Nama is the record of the first (?) Arab invasion of Sindh - 710 AD. 

I read this book with great interest and for a very personal reason. The book is written by the Arab chronicler, who was in the employ of Mohd. Bin Kasim. 

After reading the really long account of the victory of the Arabs against the mighty King Dahar, i shook my head in disbelief. Raja Dahar was so powerful that not only was he the Lord and Master of all he surveyed, he ruled all the way from Kashmir in the North to Makran in the West, Rajputana in the South - East. It was a massive kingdom that included all of the 5 rivers we proudly call Punj-ab. 

The land was fertile and wealthy. The military and technical prowess was great and at the start of the book, though it is written by the victor, the record of the Indian king is such that one believes that it is not possible for the Arabs to defeat this much power. Yet, a few months later, the mighty Raja Dahir is dead. Not just that, the dynasty is not even mentioned anywhere in Indian history. Sindh was a mighty land to the West of Hind, but it took an expert historian friend to recommend this book. Its not in the public discourse at all! (1)

So, how did the mighty Raja Dahir fall? 

The reason i put that book away in pure shock was the parallels. 

It was not just Raja Dahir who fell. No Hindu king could, subsequently, rule over those parts of India for at least a few centuries after that. 

The exact same thing happened to Kashmir. Once lost, it was never regained. 

The elements of colonisation 

The Islamic invasion and subsequent control of large parts of India and the world, was, in my view, the first wave of colonisation in recorded history. I call it the first wave of colonisation because: 

A. It was not localised. Large parts of the known world were systematically taken over. 

B. The power was political. 

C. The power was vested in people who were not the same as the people being ruled. In other words, the welfare of the ruled was not the primary concern of the ruling. OR, there was no self-rule.  

The subsequent colonisation 

There was a second colonisation. We know this one to be the main colonial movement. This one was led by trading companies originating in Europe. Almost as a pattern, trade relations or missionary movements were converted to political power. Once again, the 3 elements of colonisation make their appearance: 

A. Global 

B. Political Power 

C. The agenda of the rulers was not the welfare of the ruled. OR, there was no self-rule. 

So, this post has two parts. In the first part, I will try to present the common themes that emerge in the victory of the colonisers. 

The second part will compare the elements of the first two waves of colonisation with the third colonisation wave, that, I truly believe, is almost upon us. 

Why did the colonisers succeed? 

A. The Surprise Element 

In my study of riots, colonisation, and other forms of organised, group violence, information asymmetry is perhaps the MOST important element. It is this information asymmetry that leaves one side completely unprepared. 

In the times of Islamic colonisation, no one expected people to combine religion and political power. In the employ of Raja Dahir and indeed, every Hindu Raja in the subcontinent even in the modern ages, the armies were secular, the selection was based on merit and capability, and mercenaries were a recognised branch of fighters. 

Not in the Islamic colonisation. All the soldiers were Muslims. The glue holding them together was religion. Their motivation was religious conversion of the vanquished. No one expected this. No one expected large armies to seek and win political power on the basis of religion. Political battles were region to region. Sindh fought with Makran, Markan fought with Pashtoons, Sindh also fought with Rajputana, Rajputana fought with plateau kings and Central Indian kings, and so on. It was regional. Not religious. So, Raja Dahir prepared himself to fight the Afghani/ Arab army. Not a religious army. 

Likewise, in the 1600s , no one thought traders could ever want political power. They were profiteering idiots who would create their own facilities, warehouses, hold a small force to protect their wares, and pay taxes to make us rich. What will they do with power? That was the surprise element of the second colonisation. 

The surprise element of the third colonisation is that we view political power in terms of physical countries and their leadership. No one envisages countries that are virtual. No one imagines that political power is, at the end of the day, control over the minds of people, making them behave in a way that the ruler wants them to behave. This can be achieved by being the entity that makes laws. It can also be achieved by being the entity that decides WHO will make the laws, until we make laws ourselves (remember British India and their advisors to Indian rajahs) 

 B. Only one side had a strategy 

This is a corollary to the first cause. Because only one side knew that it was doing something for a very long-term impact, only one side had a strategy. The other side, after realising that it was being had (in case of Raja Dahir, after losing some key battles before the main battle in which he lost his life. In case of Native India, the rulers coming together to try to stop some of the powers of the trading companies. In case of China, countries trying to create some local manufacturing capability after realising that it cannot survive without China). 

C. A belief in invincibility and resulting complacence 

In all three cases, the existing political leadership displays a marked complacence that almost borders on insolence. 

D. An important missing piece 

In the Islamic colonisation, it was lack of unity. In the British colonisation, it was lack of latest warfare technology. In the most recent one, it is the lack of manufacturing capability and lack of new age citizen engagement features. There is usually an important missing piece - a vulnerability that the coloniser exploits. The vulnerability may not be important in itself, but when exploited by a coloniser, proves to be the Achilles' heel. 

So, what are we saying? 

What we are saying is very simple. We are looking at a third colonisation. It will come from China OR Big Tech. They are both ripe colonisers waiting to pounce. Or perhaps, both. The Dutch and the French and the British all ruled at the same time. The Turks and the Arabs and the Afghans, all ruled, though under the same major umbrella. In this case, one will rule on the premise of mind control thru tech, and the other will rule because they have created enough global infra now to pounce and seize. 

End of Post 

**************************** 

(1)One reason could be that for some reason, Burma, Sindh, Punjab, and Afghanistan have been completely left out of India's history, as if they were never a part of a single political entity. Nothing is further from the truth. Burma was an integral part of India and formed our Eastern border. A lot of the talent for the Hindi film industry actually came from Burma.  People travelled to and from Burma - Bengal - Assam rather effortlessly. Sindh, of course, was part of India all the way till 1947. 

For Afghanistan: 

https://www.sidmartinbio.org/when-was-afghanistan-separated-from-india/. 

Two things that did not exist..

 Just realised... in reading ancient texts (stories like Panchatantra, Hitopadesha, etc., or text books like Arthashastra, etc), two concepts are conspicuous by their absence:

A. There is no mention of a hospital. (a place where people have to go and stay while being unwell)

B. No mention of a lawyer.

Interesting, no?

* A friend mentions that the legal mediator is mentioned in the Arthashastra. As far as I have read so far, there is no concept of a mediator of any kind. But the book is still only partially read, and therefore, there may be surprises ahead. But in as much as I have read, lawyers, if they existed, were not part of every day life, and were not called up to mediate in most matters. in most matters, the person took his grievance directly to the panchayat or to the adhyaksh in urban centers.

*He also mentions that Sushruta used to keep people in his ashrama for a brief period for care. That may be true only for the time that one performed surgeries. But not in general. If I know the society at the time, care was largely provided at home.

Indian Warrior Queens in modern history

 6 Indian Queens Who Fought Colonialism | #IndianWomenInHistory (feminisminindia.com)

Brilliant article, this! 

Today's Conundrum: Why the Dwivachan?

 Actually, this conundrum is not new. It has been troubling me since i started learning Sanskrit. 

As far as I know, most languages in the world have 2 states -Singular, and Plural (Ekvachan- Bahuvachan)

Sanskrit is the only language where there are 3 states - 1, two, and more than 2 (Ekvachan, Dwivachan, Bahuvachan)

None of the derivative languages of Sanskrit have inherited this unique trait of Sanskrit, not even Hindi, which is grammatically closest to Sanskrit.

We have not found this (in as much as we know) in Prakrit or Pali either.

The Dwivachan is so important that for every word, every verb, there is a Dwivachan defined. - Akarant, Ikarant, Ukarant, Pulling, Stiling, Napunsakling, Dhatu Roop - everything.

That meant significant work for Panini and his team.

WHY was the count of 2 so important?

I think that the day we solve this puzzle, we will answer some very important questions about Indian history.

The Big Lie in our history

Here are the characteristics of a period in Indian history. Can you guess the period that is being described? 

1. The civilisation is, at its core, a strong mercantile civilisation, where money is the prime objective of existence, and other things, like fine things, houses in a good location, access to good civic facilities, the derivatives of that core objective. 

2. There is a mature political and civic structure. This was a civilisation that was not given to small, petty, internecine wars. They had the maturity to design and build political systems for scale - most likely, a loosely held federal system. 

3. Clearly, environment was not high on the political agenda. Nor were farmers given the pride of place in the political establishment, thinktank, or the decision table. 

4. The mature political structure ensured that small and large kingdoms reside in relative peace, with very little need for wars and weapons. What spies can do, the soldiers do not need to do. Much of the state's budget went towards civic work, administration of trade, capable ministers and a spy mechanism. Wars were rare and when they happened, decisive. 

5. Education was a priority in this civilisation. Education ensured the continuity of traditions and knowledge across many centuries and generations - largely unchanged. But the knowledge imparted in this educational system was not deadwood. This was active education that imparted the best lessons of the past and encouraged readers to develop those ideas more, and then share them with a larger world. 

6. Cities, esp capital cities, were well planned. 

You cannot guess. As this video shows, large kingdoms, or peaceful federal structures that provided stability and peace, were the norm rather than the exception in most of ancient India and as this article shows, in much of Asia. Even today, India is one of the most diverse countries held together by a single political system. This level of unity simply cannot be imagined in some of the other parts of the world.

But, who were the bullet points for? 

They were for the Saraswati or Indus Valley civilisation. (You can read the original bullet points below). But when I removed the specifics, I realised that they could apply just as easily to Ashoka, Maurya, Guptas, Nandas, Shungas, Satavahanas, Kushanas, Pratiharas, Harsha, Chalukyas, Rashtrakutas, Cholas, in short, every Indic empire. 

One of the most distinguishing features of the IVC has been city planning. But is city planning really unique to IVC and only IVC? Let's see. 

The cities have been well planned from Ayodhya (Ayudh - meaning, so secure that no war can take place there) to Ujjayani, our popular literature abounds in well planned, beautiful cities. Even Megasthenes and other travellers have written about the beautiful, vibrant cities of India and the fares sold in its markets. (Padma Priya adds:)  In the South, Madurai and Poompuhar in Sangam literature, and the story of Silapathikaram where Kannagi the protogonist burns the city down are very well known. Mamallapuram, Mahabalipuram - Pallava dynasty, Kumbakonam, , Thanjavur, Gangaikondachozhapuram - Chola period. 

Dwarka and Indraprastha in Mahabharata are both well-planned cities which were planned before they were inhabited - indicating the existence of town planning as a discipline and as a thought process. City Planning was and has been integral to administration all over India for all time!

Why is this important aspect of our history not understood better?  

I have slowly come to the view that a BIG lie that has been perpetrated about the Indus Valley civilisation is that the inhabitants of these places are now lost to us. Their genetic material, their language, their culture, and beliefs present no continuity.  This is simply not true. 

I think that the first thing we need to believe is that much of our civilisation is owed to the very intelligent people who lived in one of the most fertile river valleys of the world. The people whose cooking vessels look just like ours, whose toys are a lot like ours, and whose characteristics have not changed in the last 4000 years and counting. 

Read points 1 to 6 again. Other than education, which has been messed with by Macaulay and then our own Education ministers, which part is, even today, untrue about India? And even on Point 5, Indians continued that education inside the houses, so that the elements of our culture and civilisation are not lost. 

Here are the original bullet points: 

1. The civilisation is, at its core, a strong mercantile civilisation, where money is the prime objective of existence, and other things, like fine things, houses in a good location, access to good civic facilities, the derivatives of that core objective. 

2. There is a mature political and civic structure.  They had the maturity to design and build political and civic systems for scale - most likely, a loosely held federal system with enough money going into finding and sharing best practices - be it town planning, drainage, mercantile practices etc. 

3. The 700 year long drought proves that clearly, environment was not high on the political agenda. Nor were farmers given the pride of place in the political establishment, thinktank, or the decision table. A civilisation that had most things codified to a science, did nothing to understand the earth, and what it was trying to tell them. It was simply not important enough. 

4. The mature political structure ensured that small and large kingdoms reside in relative peace, with very little need for wars and weapons. What spies can do, the soldiers do not need to do. Much of the state's budget wen towards civic work, administration of trade, etc. 

5. Nalanda and Takshshila were universities built at a scale that was far ahead of their times. But a university is not something that sprouts. Centuries of a formal educational establishment provides the guidelines needed to set up and successfully run a university. The level of expertise that we observe in the IVC also proves that there was constant improvement and successful transmission of knowledge. The seals were codified yet universal. This can only mean that the knowledge of how to read the seals was at one time, universal. 

As I move to the later Indian texts - the Panchatantra and the Arthashastra, the universality of the thought processes becomes evident to me. 

The script is undecipherable - to most of us, yes. The Gonds claim that this is the same as their current script and the Gond hairstyles and garments being very similar to the ones we find at IVC lend credence to their claim. 

But, the Gonds are not inherently urban or mercantile. I think that they are a very important piece of the picture, but the overall picture is a rich tapestry that is still being lived out in every part of the country. 

We can understand the past much better after we understand its connection with the present. Once we acknowledge these similarities, it is a quantum leap in our understanding of that esoteric civilisation. 

But there is no archeological evidence for it. 

The DNA evidence of the Rakhigarhi skeletons conclusively proves that the DNA is the same as that of the current occupants of Rakhigarhi villages. The skeletons belong to the late Harappan period. So there is genetic continuity at least from there. 

Here's the thing: We get nothing absolute from archeological evidence. We always have to interpret the archeological evidence to create a narrative. In creating the narrative of what we have got from the later periods, we have ignored their similarity to the artifacts of the IVC. Therefore, a story of non-continuity has emerged. But if we view the 2 pieces together, we see that there is similarity - enough to indicate a continued tradition. 

 

Oh! The difference that a person makes!

What Chanakya did in 326 BC, Gandhi did in 1920 - converted resistance to a mass movement.

In both cases, the power was devoid of authority. It came from a moral source.

In both cases, the colonisers were completely removed from the land.

Can you imagine what would have happened if we had a Chanakya in 712 AD?

I have never been very respectful of Gandhi, but can also not disregard the massive difference his strategy made - of converting politics from a specialist subject to a mass movement.

More on Harappa Valley Civilisation

Remember my fascination for Harappa? Today, I finally had some time and went to my favourite page - Harappa.com. This site helps us stay in touch with archeological work being done in Pakistan. 
And guess what I found? This absolute treasure trove: https://www.harappa.com/content/published-archaeobotanical-data-indus-civilisation-south-asia-c-3200–1500-bc?fbclid=IwAR2nBCEgTkrP0swi-NxpOiffN2-LvrCya8YDlx2ncYl2-inM4CN1KquuyM8 All the content we know related to Harappan food! Also, at this site today, I read an article that corroborates my idea that the Harappan seals were mercantile branding instruments.

BUT coming back to the main thing. This is what I think (more thoughts on the IVC)

• The cooking and storage vessels I have seen so far indicate a narrow stove fire, not unlike the later Chulhas that we observe in the region.

• I also think that grains were the staple diet, cooked with some form of spiced gravy/sauce, since the cooking pots need the use of a ladle.

• Family units were probably from 4 to 12 ppl, with community cooking, while not the norm, was not unheard of either. Much like today's times.

• The other thing I deduce is that either men and women both donned terracotta bangles, or women did much of the household shopping. Because terracotta bangles are discretionary expenditure. They are neither precious enough to be saved for, nor important enough to be preserved specially. So the preponderance of terracotta bangle bits can only mean that they were bought and sold often. The same goes for terracotta children's toys. So I think that while they were an agricultural - mercantile civilisation, home commerce was in the hands of women and there was adequate financial freedom to do discretionary expenditure.

I also think that India and Pakistan should put their political differences aside and work together to unravel the mysteries of the civilisation and the genetic stock that they share. If the Indian side added to this database that is very nicely compiled and made publicly available, we would be able to draw a map with food habits and commonly used food substances. 

Humour as a profession in India

You might think that stand up comedy is a new career path in India. But that's not true. Humour has been a career path in India for a very long time. Not just that, there were categories of humourists in India.

India has a long and abiding history of humour as a profession. Here are some that I know of, and researched:

मसखरे: The maskharas were not professionals. They were people who went about cracking jokes just because it was in their nature. Some people rewarded them with food, but most rewarded them with laughter and some amount of disdain. The maskhara was not an aspirational social or economic status.
However, in Persia, they have been known to be a special group of people who danced in ecstasy and also gave the world the word "masquerade" as they dressed in animal costumes and the like. 
The Persian glory, by the time it reached India, had become a word that meant little more than a person who cracks jokes at the expense of others.

They were found all the way from Persia to UP and Bihar.

बेहरुपीये: The Behrupiyas have long been inspired awe and disdain. They used to go from village to village, performing as folk artists do in India, instinctively and sporadically, collecting whatever they could, and living on that. Like the नट, they were folk performers. The most famous narrative of a Behrupiya is in the discovery of Raja Birbal. Apparently, a Behrupiya was dressed like an ox. Everyone applauded the performance and left. When everyone had gone, a young lad picked up a small stone and hit the "ox" with it to observe its reaction. And then, the young man applauded. Intrigued, a noble approached the young boy and asked why he applauded after everyone. The young man replied, "When I threw the stone, it caught the performer unawares. But he shook his skin as a real ox would. That was splendid. So I applauded."
This young boy was Mahesh Das, and that day, he was discovered as Raja Birbal.

I found this nice writeup about Behrupiyas. 

But here is the thing abt Behrupiyas. They were also expressly used as spies. Unlike the others, who were all performers, the skill of the Behrupiyas was valuable to the espionage network.

The Behrupiyas are documented all over the country, at least upto the Vindhyas and Satpuras.

भांड:  Who doesn't know the Bhand? The custodian of all things humour, and the performer who fears none and is shy of nothing?
The Bhaand was a person who relied heavily on bawdy humour and used that to tickle the funny bones of the audience. The word भौंडा (Indecent) comes from भांड।
The Bhaands were less skilled than the Bahrupiya in the art of disguise, and did not have the folk tales to support them (except in Kashmir). They usually drew their humour from bawdy stories that they made up, or sometimes, like Maskharas, from their immediate environment.
The most famour Bhaand we know is Gopal Bhaand of Bengal.
Here is the Wiki article on Bhaands: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bhand

And here is a traditional  Bhaand performance from Punjab. 

स्वांग: Swaang literally means "Being what one is not" . As a performace art, it is famous all over North India, at least upto the Vindhyas.
Unlike the others, where the performer is important, in Swaang, the performance is important, and it requires very little training. In fact, at Punjabi weddings, teh Swaang is an essential ritual and it is usually done by a female relative during the Sangeet.

This is an academic paper on Swaang, but Swaang is essentially a people's art form with a lot of humour.

And here is Swaang in Haryana. 

जमूरा-उस्ताद: Unlike other forms, this one rarely travelled beyond the Hindoostan - the Doab region, where it was reported, and where it remained. The crowd laughs at the Jamoora, and the Ustad choreographs the humour sequence through actions, props, costumes, but most of all, through a well-modulated voice, and brief yet witty dialogues.

विदूषक: Many of you may have heard that the Vidooshak is the Court Jester. BUT the word Vidooshak comes from wisdom - Vidya. Vidooshak literally means the one who does vidya (the performer of wisdom). So the Vidooshak was not, strictly speaking, a jester. The Vidooshak was expected to be witty AND wise. Which are the two names that come to mind? Birbal and Tenalirama. Spot On.

This post is limited to the humour professionals found from the Punjab to the Doab, upto the Vindhyas. The humour professionals of the south are not included here, simply bcs i am not familiar with them. If you know of any more humour traditions from India, please mention them in the comments.

Colonising the Past and Kidnapping the Truth

Dear Learned People of the World (Especially the ones with an interest in history): 

People have always, throughout history, travelled, traded, intermarried, and migrated. Technological advancements have always gone from one place to another. Any human being who gets a genome test today will find that their ancestry comes from every continent on the planet and from all the 4 known races of humanity.

Get used to it. 

To stake a claim to the greatness of presumed ancestors is to take a very narrow and narrow minded view of the greatness that is the human past.

To squabble over perceived ancestry is even more petty - especially since one is uncertain of the ancestry and certain of the absence of a person's contribution towards that greatness - hell, you did not even contribute your genes to the creation of those geniuses. You assume you inherited those genes, and that is a hypothesis that I doubt very, very much.

But perhaps the worst thing about this is the colonisation of history. We are, essentially, cutting up the ancient world and staking claim to it - this was mine, this was yours. We are creating "Colonies" of ancestry with claimed ownership of each. The Sumerians were mine, The Egyptians were yours. The megaliths were mine, the Viscounts were yours. The Aryans? Wait, we are kind of fighting over who will get ownership of that one.
It does sound preposterous, doesn't it? IT IS.

To divide ancestors among the modern classes - The Sumerians Vs the Persians, the Egyptians Vs the Mesopotamians.. and closer home, the Aryan Invasion vs the Indic origin of Aryans.

Dear Egyptians: You may or may not have the same genetic stock. You definitely abandoned the cultural legacy and embraced other religions - the Roman, and now, Islam. You do not even remember the name of the religion practised by your ancestors. You cannot claim to have half the medical knowledge that your ancestors demonstrated. So what, exactly, is your claim to Egyptian empire fame?

Dear 'Aryans':  Whether the Aryans travelled East or West, is a question that should be investigated irrespective of where you live today - East, or West. The Aryan Invasion theory can not make the modern Caucasian proud of anything. Like I mentioned earlier - you don't know anything and you definitely didn't do anything to lead to that greatness. And Indians - The Indic origin of Aryans does not automatically make you Aryabhatta XIV.

Especially the modern Indians - Dear wise ones, from IVC to the British period, the measures of rural India, the cooking pots, and the cultural motifs remained UNCHANGED. Please accept our compliments for "developing" the rural Indian, "Educating" him/her, and insisting that they not use their native weights and measures. By doing this, you were able to annihilate the cultural knowledge embedded in the society for over 4 millenia. That takes some doing, and the genetic makeup of people doing that cannot be intelligent.

When you push an agenda rather than a search, when the results somehow contribute to your ego (HOW??), you are no longer a historian. You are a posturing Frigatebird. (The insult is absolutely intended for the human. The insult to the bird is unintended and cruel.)

Perhaps there was continuity from IVC to the Aryans. Perhaps there wasn't. Perhaps the Asuras were the Persian Ahuras. Perhaps they weren't.

Perhaps the Aryans grew here and then moved west. Perhaps they came from the West and settled here. Perhaps they started their lives as a homogenous race spread all the way from Europe to the Eastern Himalayas. As colonies grew, there was enough critical mass to create local customs and languages. As these local versions started, the distance between the various colonies grew more pronounced.

Either way, none of us had any part to play in that. The only thing we can do, and, imho, we should, is to stop colonising history (you do realise how preposterous that even sounds) and start looking for the truth. There is enough evidence both ways. There are reasons to take both ideas seriously. There are alternative theories that merit a serious discussion (Amish's theory in his Naga series is very plausible, as is the idea proposed by Ashutosh Gowarikar in Mohenjodaro).

So, dear people of the world: Let's stop staking a claim to the greatness of ancestors. We can safely say that in intermingling, trading, marrying, and migrating, and not squabbling over history, the ancients have proved that they were superior in more ways than one.

Credits: This piece is the result of a very enriching discussion with Sankalp Chawla. Thank you! 

The Butcher of Tarain - Muizuddin Mohd. Ghori

Son: So I have to read about Mohd. Ghori. Will you help me?

Mom (recollecting whatever little history i remember): Haan he was called The Butcher of Tarain na...

Son (shocked): NOOOO! That's not what they taught us at all!

Mom(now shocked): Arre! How can they completely erase the massacre of thousands of Indians from our own history books? That man slaughtered people for the sake of slaughtering them. He and his army kept killing even after they had won.

And today, I checked online. Apparently, other than my memory, nobody else remembers "The Butcher of Tarain."

Indus Valley Civilisation - More questions

This evening, one attended a very informative and thought inspiring lecture at the National Museum. (Cities of Indus Valley Civilisation). One of the questions asked after the talk was - 'How did the cities die?' The answer was rational and well balanced - different cities died in different ways and for different reasons. But most of those reasons had to do with the environment. Either the rivers dried up or they changed course.


That got me thinking. We know that in Rakhigarhi at least, DNA material has proved that there is continuation of the genetic stock from at least later Harappan period - 2500 BC. Which means that the skeletons received from the Harappan period were the direct ancestors of the current residents of Rakhigarhi.


What if...
What if, there was no vanishing? What if the citizens who remained, merely migrated? And took the civilisation with them?


When I discussed this with another person who was present at the talk, she said, "But the next urbanisation in India does not appear until 600 BCE. If the people did not perish, where were the city building skills for that whole time?"


So now we have the following statements:
1. There is continuity of genetic stock from at least 2500 BCE to present day.
2. There are many, many elements of cultural continuity - the shapes of cooking pots, the bangles and the adornments, the bullock cart designs and the images of the Gods.
3. Yet, the next urbanisation is not found until, as the lady suggests, 600 BCE.


So, where was town planning during this period?


On another note, the speaker did say some things that gladdened the heart:
1. They were largely a mercantile civilisation (I have maintained earlier that the inscriptions we have seen on the seals are positively mercantile in nature and since there are so many of them, mercantile activity had to be the economic backbone of the civilisation.)


2. While there was an astounding standardisation of weights and measures across vast geographical regions, the political leadership does not appear to be imperial or monarchical. I also feel that the earliest political establishment, and one that sustained, was of janapadas - republics, with ministers/ representatives of various citizen groups making it to seats of power so that all interests are safeguarded. (as indicated in the movie Mohenjodaro)


I think what happened then was very similar to what is happening now:


The janapadas were from various mercantile groups. They did not pay attention to the ecological price of their frenetic economic activity. They grew more and more prosperous and less and less sustainable.


Slowly, the inevitable happened. They had ravaged their ecological balance so completely that no U turn was possible.


So, as indicated, they migrated. And this is where it gets interesting. The migrating populations were not homogenous. Both, in their skills, and their ability to move, there were many classes. But broadly, I see at least 2 categories of people - the knowledge workers (the white collars) - the merchants, bankers, quality control state executives and the implementers of 'the system',  and the hand workers (blue collars) - the artisans, the bead makers, the farmers and the plain labour.


There was, therefore, no single, homogenous migration. As it would happen today, different people migrated to where they thought they could survive. The knowledge workers had the resources and the inclination to move to a place where they had contacts - the West. The hand workers, on the other hand, had no way to move to the West, and didn't know anything about whether they would be welcomed. They were more likely to choose the path towards the East - where there were denser jungles, more water and perhaps, lands to grow crops on and someone to use their pottery and jewelry.


Some classes definitely moved towards Central India, and perhaps the boat makers went further South.
Even if some people with knowledge of town planning did move to Eastern and other parts of India, they moved to agrarian or primary sector based economies. Primary sector/production based economies have neither the need nor the resources to invest in town/city planning. (As we also know in modern times).
Since it takes only 2 generations to lose a skill entirely, it is safe to assume that those sections who had knowledge of city planning did not retain this knowledge for more than 2 generations. A similar parallel would be people who migrated from Bengal and Punjab. Some skills were native to the lands they came from. In the new country, there was little opportunity to practice or bequeath those skills to the next generation. So now, even though we are descendants of the same people, we do not possess the entire skill set of our grandparents.





To sum up:
In short, the people migrated - short and long distances. So town planning may not have survived as a skill in this part. But the people did not just up and go. They are still here. There wasn't a vanishing act. There was, just like in a magic show, a change of place. We have to find out where all they went, and then, a lot of the things that appear disjointed today - the Dravid origins of IVC, the Gond script connection et al, will make a lot of sense.




Post notes:
1. There was, a 900 year long drought between 2450 to 1450 BCE, which was roughly the period when our civilisation died. This drought was apparently caused entirely by weather conditions. The study does not mention any human causes of this long drought. But maybe there were. Water is, after all, a cycle, and we, the people living today, know exactly what it means to lose sources of fresh water due to "weather disturbances."


2. Another hypothesis that we are familiar with, is that the saline content in the land grew because of the crop mix, and little was done to restore the alluvium of the soil. This led to gradual depletion of ground water.


3. The largely mercantile nature of a civilisation cannot be unique to the IVC. Why is the IVC among those that did not survive climate change?

Sanskrit Lokoti

आचार: कुलमाख्याति देशमाख्याति भाषणम् 
संभ्रम: स्नेहमाख्याति वपुराख्याति भोजनम्


ब्यक्ति के आचरन से उसके परिवार का, बोलने से उसके देश का, व्यवहार से उसके मन का, और शरीर से उसके भोजन का पता चल जाता है। 


From a person's conduct, we can tell their family
From their language, we can tell their native land,
From their behaviour, their intentions,
and from their body, their food habits.

Disilusioned? Ignore that cacophony!

From 1930 to 1947, a gradual, but definite radicalisation was done. This radicalisation took in its fold rational intellectuals like Allama Iqbal (who went from translating the Gayatri Mantra to insisting on offering namaaz at a converted cathedral) and Md. Ali Jinnah(who went from being staunchly anti Pakistan in 1936 to being the Qaid-e-azam of Pakistan) - people who had grown up in cosmopolitan surroundings, had friends from all faiths and nationalities.


Even they were converted to radicalism by this paranoia of "Muslims cannot co exist with Hindus without living in perpetual fear." As a result of this, not one but 2 separate and new countries were created, for Muslims to live in peace, without fear and with freedom to practice their religion.


It has now been 70 years. History has seen the result of the 2 theories - that Muslims will live in fear in a Hindu country, and that Muslims will live well in a country of their own.


Today, I see the replay of that paranoia. I hear the same cacophony that played from 1930 to 1947. So, as a survivor of 1947, here is my humble request to you:


If you feel that Muslims are not secure or free to live as they please in India, please understand that this is not a new or original thought. With exactly this fear in mind, Jinnah has created 2 countries for Muslims to live free and happy. All you need to do is, prepare your citizenship papers, then go to the country of your choice, and tell them, "My forefathers made a mistake when they decided to continue living in India. Jinnah was right. Muslims cannot live in a Hindu India without fearing for their life and belief. Please don't punish me for the wrong decision of my grandparents. I need to join the dream that Jinnah saw for us."


But please, do NOT poison the air that we breathe. Because when I turn off your cacophony and look around me, I see Muslim craftsmen making Jain marble temples. I see maids saying "Didi I wont come tomorrow, its my Eid, and the Hindu didi putting enough money to cover the Eidi of all the maid's children. I see a national Muslim body saying they will sing Saare Jahaan se accha instead of Vande Mataram, and no one batting an eyelid.


This poison is worse than you can imagine in your wildest dreams. It killed millions of people in a gory, bloody journey, displaced millions, created orphans and widows who didn't care about religion in the first place. Just honest men and women concerned with earning their daily bread. My family went through this and By God , I do not want to go through this again. So please, unless you can control the consequences of your short term power hunger(and you cannot): SHUT THE FUCK UP.

The contribution of the Congress Party to the Sikhs

The Indian National Congress has played a very important role in modern Sikh history. There are 3 landmarks that must be remembered:


1. 1947 : As Amardeep Singh says in his book , the rioters during the partition came with the slogan - Hindu ka zar aur sardaar ka sar (Loot the Hindu and kill the Sikh), the Sikhs suffered more fatalities. This was because the Sikhs were considered more capable of fighting back and needed to be killed.


2. The partition of Punjab: The Congress party prevented the Sikhs from creating a strong regional party by convincing Master Tara Singh that he had a seat at the table and that Sikh concerns will be heard and absorbed in the partition talks. Instead, the Punjabi sooba was most mercilessly partitioned with no consideration for the ethnic mix. Most sacred Sikh shrines were handed over to Pakistan, where they now rot and are written about by Amardeep Singh. Not only that, the Sikhs were largely land owning farmers. Their wealth was stripped off them and remained in Pakistan as they escaped with nothing but their lives.


3. Post independence, Punjab was the first state to be broken into smaller states - even though Punjabi was spoken all the way from Delhi to Jammu - the original extent of the Punjab state. First Himachal, and then Haryana were carved out of Punjab with exactly one objective - the weakening of the Punjab state.


4. Who can forget Bhindrawale? Just to ensure that the Akalis do not get power on the basis of their allegiance to the Sikh panth, she created a monster that plunged Punjab into a decade of pointless, violent and inhuman terrorism. She should have been tried for the worst crime against humanity. 


5. After that, the 1984 riots happened. 3000 people were killed in 3 days on the streets of the national capital of India. Their bodies were swept away and rewarded with 1000 rs by the aakas of the riots. Read H. S Phoolka's book to know more on the subject. It has now been 33 years, and we are still waiting for the Indian judicial system to do its constitutional duty. In spite of 1984, no Sikh ever retaliated with violence. Not in 33 years.


And that, ladies and gentlemen, is the contribution of the Congress to modern Sikh history. This video sums it up rather well:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O_Kp8gsdne0&feature=youtu.be

3 Gems from Indian Education Techniques

In trying to find ways to enrich education, one of the things I started doing, was reading more about the Indian system of education in the pre Mughal era. And am surprised to know that there is so little information available on the Indian methods of education.

 

We have been fortunate, however, to pick up 3 gems that we will share here.

1. It’s not a lesson. Its a conversation.

Bhaskaracharya wrote a book called “Leelavati Beej Ganit” . The format of the book is a dialogue between Lilavati and the author of the book.

 

Indian books and lessons rely heavily on the concept of Story telling. If a complete story telling is not possible, we convert it into a conversation between two people, to make it interesting. All of Panchatantra is narrated as a conversation. All of Mahabharata is recorded as a narration from a disciple of Rishi Veda Vyaas to the descendants of the Kuru clan. We use this technique extensively in our books too!

 

2. The teacher does not teach. The teacher asks questions.

 

A beautiful thing that we found in addition to the technique of Vartalaap was the technique of asking the right questions. When a teacher wanted the student to learn something profound, they did not give the lesson to the student. They asked the student difficult questions. The student would attempt to answer the Guru’s questions in a satisfactory manner and through this process, would arrive at the answer / gyaan.

 

The most famous example of this technique perhaps appears again in the Mahabharata, in the espisode where Guru Drona takes the princes to a spot, makes them take aim, and asks them, “What do you see?” All the princes, except Arjuna, respond that they see the tree, the bird, the branches etc. Only Arjuna replies that he can see nothing but the eye of the bird, that he is supposed to shoot. The lesson was that you must focus only on your endgoal and completely eliminate all distractions from your senses. It was not given. It was taken.

 

3. We do not merely memorise. To be called learned, we must analyse.

 

It is often assumed, erroneously, that the native Indian method of learning involves, basically, rote learning. Ergo, the oral transmission of the Vedas and the oral tradition of Indian classical music and dance. But that’s simply not true! In fact, nothing could be further from the truth.

We first learn enunciation. Then we learn the text. And THEN, the education begins.

Not only did learning involve a critique of the subject at hand, the best analyses were also published with the name of the author (A very rare thing in Ancient India). You might have heard of some books that are ‘Teekas” on a certain book. A Teeka improves upon an original work and adds new perspectives.

 

Another word that appears often, is “Shastrarth” - literally meaning - the meaning of the Shastras. Sanskrit being the magical language that it is, the same phrase could mean a lot of different things. The ONLY way you could be a scholar, was to interpret that text, and argue your interpretation with other scholars. If you could not do a Shastrarth, you were not a learned person at all.

 

And this has fuelled in us a hunger to understand more cultural learning aids from around the world. What did education mean before we universalised it to mean the 3 Rs all over the world? How was education imparted? If you know any resources that could help us understand, or if you remember education techniques from your own family, please do share.

Harappa Valley Civilisation and the Aryans: 4 new theories

These theories have been on my desktop for at least a year. The more I explore them, the more I believe in them.

For what they are worth, sharing them here.

Theory 1: The Vedic people were not ruthless attackers. They were colonisers rather than sudden attackers. They were nomads with a strong military knowhow, who came to the largely mercantile Harappan society and , much like the European model in the middle ages, explained the importance of security. They then took up the “job” of security – more likely in some parts more than the others, and went on, just like the British, to rule. The story of the frog king who hired a snake to fight off rival frog princes, and was eventually eaten up by the snake. Probably, the Harappans did gather some military resources and strategy lessons as time passed, but in the end, they were not victorious.

 

Theory 2: The Harappan script is not a literary script. The seals are again, mercantile rather than literary. A mercantile script is a method of codification – communicating the most information in the least possible symbols. So each line on the seal is important, but just like the modern Mumbai dabbavalaas, it is a code, and not a script by itself.

The seals were used to denote trade transactions and not literary content. It was not a method of writing stories. At the very least, this means that the script had:

1. Issued under the authority of
2. Nature of goods
3. Quality
4. Quantity/ weight/value/ other measurement.
5. Trading / manufacturing unit who uses that seal.

The fact that the seals were designed for multiple times use indicates very strongly that the Harappan people had, in fact, standardized SKUs( Stock Keeping Units) – a very advanced feature of trade economies which we believe was brought to India by the MNCs.

Theory 3: This builds upon my earlier work that the structure of the Harappan script is more native to India than any Western influence. But when we look at the structure of the script, we realize that it is not for a written script, but for a society where the accuracy of oral rendition is of utmost importance.  Not only are the vowels and consonants separated, but within that, the consonants are arranged by the parts of the mouth that are used. If a child learns this structure, they are very likely to be able to make no mistake in the language itself when they use it. Furthermore, to arrive at this scientific gradation requires in depth study of sounds and their physiological source, which is not possible without there being a formal program for research and a significant sponsorship for the adoption of this method. The hypothesis is that the Harappans used this structure to teach “language” to their children, and the Aryans, having found that this is a much better way to understand sounds than their own structure, adopted it gradually and then claimed it as their own. They probably gave written symbols to the structure already being used, but they did not create that phonetics based structure.

 
Theory 4: Were the Harappans the modern Tamils  or Dravidians?

I base my hypothesis on 2 things:

First, the geographical location of the Sindhu valley – as early as 4500 BC, the Sindhu valley did not have a known presence of the Negroid people. That region is more suited to the presence of a race more capable of withstanding the cold temperatures of the region. As part of the evolutionary process, any people living there, would have had to have light skin, to absorb more sunlight. The high melanin content, a trait of the Negroid race, would have been a significant evolutionary hurdle in that geographical location. Just as the Aryans and the Caucasians share the same ancestry, yet the Caucasian race calls the Aryans “brown”, the Aryans probably found the native people darker than their own skin, but that alone should not lead us to believe that these people had the pigmentation of the Negroid race.

Two, Assuming that there was a mass attack or a colonization. Now, if you were a mercantile civilization, with already established links, you were more likely to travel in a direction that you know, than in a direction that you do not know. Which means that the Harappan people, assuming that they had to move, would have been more likely to approach their mercantile contacts in the West, rather than move to the jungles on the East and travel through them all the way to the South. The chance of survival was greater where there is a trade and you know how to make money. The jungles, on the other hand, need survival skills that were not the strong area of the Harappans, though the Aryans would have been completely at ease with the idea of exploring virgin terrains.

So, I believe that the Harappans were connected, to a limited extent, with the other cultures of Hindoostan only to the extent that their river systems interacted and depended on each other. But they did not move through India to eventually settle at the edge of the peninsula.

More on the Sanskrit Script

Ever since I wrote that old post on the structure of the Sanskrit script, one question has been nagging me.

If you were creating the structure of the script, why would you make it phonetic? A script is for writing. I would group it by the shape of letters, or any other way that learning the writing is easier. Why make it phonetic? Phonetic is the opposite of Written - it focuses on listening.

And then it hit me: The Vedas are called "Shruti" because they were passed down orally - they were heard before they were written. They had to be committed to memory. To ensure that the meaning is also passed down accurately, the pronunciation and enunciation had to be near perfect.

THAT'S WHY ITS PHONETIC - because it was NOT the structure of an alphabet at all - it was the structure of a language - the writing came later - much, much later.

The language was scientifically structured long before people thought of even writing it. The script, when it appeared, was simply adapted to the spoken alphabet.

Why is that revolutionary? Because the alphabet of any language is the core of the script. Popular thinking says that we need the alphabet for writing. Dialects like Tulu, Magadhi etc have no alphabet. They are simply learnt by speaking.
Creating a structured set of sounds that are relevant, then breaking it down into vowels and consonants, separating the consonants further by their phonetic relevance, is the work of an extremely scientific community. One that required intelligence and ingenuity. They were people to whom, for some reason, it was important to ensure that all relevant sounds are codified and memorised exactly.
So why would such an intelligent civilisation not consider writing?

I can think of 2 possible reasons -

1., That in their circumstances, they were unable to procure writing material - papyrus or other paper material, quills, ink etc.

2. They were a nomadic civilisation. They needed to be on the move and could not have carried their vast and bulky knowledge resources with them. Therefore, knowledge was committed to memory and passed from generation to generation.

I have, in connection with the Indus Valley civilisation, come across a very interesting hypothesis that states that perhaps the Indian peninsula was the birth place of the Aryans, and they went everywhere from here. This would lend credence to that idea - but a nomadic civilisation that is running away from India is not likely to completely forget its alphabet.
This indicates that the structuring of language, the research and scientific work was done by the Aryans of India, presumably after the migration of the other Aryans.

Your thoughts?