Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 1 2 3 LastLast
Results 21 to 40 of 43

Thread: Ancient Central Asian Tribes, Place, People, Dynasties that connect with Jat blood.

  1. #21

  2. #22
    Best artikel: A must read artikel.


  3. #23
    Quote Originally Posted by maddhan1979 View Post
    Best artikel: A must read artikel.
    http://www.royal.gov.uk/Historyofthe.../Overview.aspx



    Friend,

    Would you kindly make us understand the relevance of the ' Best article' with the topic of the thread i.e. how does it connect the Ancient Central .... the Jat Blood.

    http://www.jatland.com/forums/showth...965#post348965

    Thanks.
    History is best when created, better when re-constructed and worst when invented.

  4. #24
    Quote Originally Posted by DrRajpalSingh View Post
    http://www.royal.gov.uk/Historyofthe.../Overview.aspx



    Friend,

    Would you kindly make us understand the relevance of the ' Best article' with the topic of the thread i.e. how does it connect the Ancient Central .... the Jat Blood.

    http://www.jatland.com/forums/showth...965#post348965

    Thanks.
    If i am not wrong and do correct me if i am wrong. The matter written on this page clearly distinguishes "Saxons"/ " Anglo Saxons" from the nordic tribes.
    Rather this artikel clearly states that these tribes at some point were associated with Germanic language:

    " Ethelberht's law code was the first to be written in any Germanic language and included 90 laws. His influence extended both north and south of the river Humber: his nephew became king of the East Saxons and his daughter married king Edwin of Northumbria (died 633)."

    Saxons, were Scythians, if u read previous artikles.

    As per "Jats", there is a direct relevance of "Scythian blood". The area, in which they reside, their migration, etc.

    If u study languages, the entire concept of Indo European languages seems to be coming from these tribes. All of the area in central Europe speak same "root words" for e.g. word "Name" is "Name" in English, it becomes " Neemey" in German which is spelled as in Sanskrit, (in German "Alphabet" "E" is not spoken as same in "English" "E" is spoken as the Fruit "aam" vala "a", the word for "You" as in English is "Tu" in French" and "Du" in German, so it seems that the European languages have evolved for common root and then we can see a continuous tribal link konnekting indo-scythians )

  5. #25
    Quote Originally Posted by maddhan1979 View Post
    If i am not wrong and do correct me if i am wrong. The matter written on this page clearly distinguishes "Saxons"/ " Anglo Saxons" from the nordic tribes.
    Rather this artikel clearly states that these tribes at some point were associated with Germanic language:

    " Ethelberht's law code was the first to be written in any Germanic language and included 90 laws. His influence extended both north and south of the river Humber: his nephew became king of the East Saxons and his daughter married king Edwin of Northumbria (died 633)."

    Saxons, were Scythians, if u read previous artikles.

    As per "Jats", there is a direct relevance of "Scythian blood". The area, in which they reside, their migration, etc.

    If u study languages, the entire concept of Indo European languages seems to be coming from these tribes. All of the area in central Europe speak same "root words" for e.g. word "Name" is "Name" in English, it becomes " Neemey" in German which is spelled as in Sanskrit, (in German "Alphabet" "E" is not spoken as same in "English" "E" is spoken as the Fruit "aam" vala "a", the word for "You" as in English is "Tu" in French" and "Du" in German, so it seems that the European languages have evolved for common root and then we can see a continuous tribal link konnekting indo-scythians )
    Were the nordic tribes related with Saxons and Anglo Saxons is another matter of investigation.

  6. #26
    Quote Originally Posted by maddhan1979 View Post
    Were the nordic tribes related with Saxons and Anglo Saxons is another matter of investigation.
    There is a continuous continuity of people and language migration from central Asia and India. The last known migratory group being "Romas" as they are known in Europe, but many of them could be from "Scythian blood" as well because the place from where "Roma" migration took place was the exact place where ancient "Scythian" last known major migration occurred around 4th century.
    Another important point is India has been a land of diversity where some cultures always maintained their identity and some part of it mixed with other cultures living in the same land, and this is like in any country through out the world.

  7. #27
    Quote Originally Posted by maddhan1979 View Post
    If i am not wrong and do correct me if i am wrong. The matter written on this page clearly distinguishes "Saxons"/ " Anglo Saxons" from the nordic tribes.
    Rather this artikel clearly states that these tribes at some point were associated with Germanic language:

    " Ethelberht's law code was the first to be written in any Germanic language and included 90 laws. His influence extended both north and south of the river Humber: his nephew became king of the East Saxons and his daughter married king Edwin of Northumbria (died 633)."

    Saxons, were Scythians, if u read previous artikles.

    As per "Jats", there is a direct relevance of "Scythian blood". The area, in which they reside, their migration, etc.

    If u study languages, the entire concept of Indo European languages seems to be coming from these tribes. All of the area in central Europe speak same "root words" for e.g. word "Name" is "Name" in English, it becomes " Neemey" in German which is spelled as in Sanskrit, (in German "Alphabet" "E" is not spoken as same in "English" "E" is spoken as the Fruit "aam" vala "a", the word for "You" as in English is "Tu" in French" and "Du" in German, so it seems that the European languages have evolved for common root and then we can see a continuous tribal link konnekting indo-scythians )
    I think the major need at this hour is to know the Scythian language.

  8. #28
    Quote Originally Posted by maddhan1979 View Post
    If i am not wrong and do correct me if i am wrong. The matter written on this page clearly distinguishes "Saxons"/ " Anglo Saxons" from the nordic tribes.
    Rather this artikel clearly states that these tribes at some point were associated with Germanic language:

    " Ethelberht's law code was the first to be written in any Germanic language and included 90 laws. His influence extended both north and south of the river Humber: his nephew became king of the East Saxons and his daughter married king Edwin of Northumbria (died 633)."

    Saxons, were Scythians, if u read previous artikles.

    As per "Jats", there is a direct relevance of "Scythian blood". The area, in which they reside, their migration, etc.

    If u study languages, the entire concept of Indo European languages seems to be coming from these tribes. All of the area in central Europe speak same "root words" for e.g. word "Name" is "Name" in English, it becomes " Neemey" in German which is spelled as in Sanskrit, (in German "Alphabet" "E" is not spoken as same in "English" "E" is spoken as the Fruit "aam" vala "a", the word for "You" as in English is "Tu" in French" and "Du" in German, so it seems that the European languages have evolved for common root and then we can see a continuous tribal link konnekting indo-scythians )
    Another important point is the date of migration. In UK, Scythians are referred around 6th century AD and in India around 2nd to 4th AD, this means, Scythians were already migrating towards Europe from central Asia before 6th century AD. Harappan civilization declined around 1800 BC, so there is big gap in between, how and who was travelling where is another question.

    Before Christ remains of Scythains is another important time period that can konnekt lot of things.

  9. #29
    Quote Originally Posted by maddhan1979 View Post
    Another important point is the date of migration. In UK, Scythians are referred around 6th century AD and in India around 2nd to 4th AD, this means, Scythians were already migrating towards Europe from central Asia before 6th century AD. Harappan civilization declined around 1800 BC, so there is big gap in between, how and who was travelling where is another question.

    Before Christ remains of Scythains is another important time period that can konnekt lot of things.
    Saxons who migrated to UK were Germanic speaking or they were already speaking Germanic language from their ancient past?

  10. #30
    Quote Originally Posted by maddhan1979 View Post
    Saxons who migrated to UK were Germanic speaking or they were already speaking Germanic language from their ancient past?
    I must carry on with my main work, this is not my main work and being drawn in a conversation is not my goal at this point of time in my life. At later stage, when i have time, i will work more on this. Not now.

  11. #31
    Quote Originally Posted by maddhan1979 View Post
    I must carry on with my main work, this is not my main work and being drawn in a conversation is not my goal at this point of time in my life. At later stage, when i have time, i will work more on this. Not now.
    Friend,

    You understood right. Till something concrete is not evidenced by you, you must concentrate on finding more facts and then, not before you are satisfied with your findings,start posting on the site.

    Thanks and best wishes for success of your research efforts.
    History is best when created, better when re-constructed and worst when invented.

  12. #32
    Quote Originally Posted by DrRajpalSingh View Post
    Friend,

    You understood right. Till something concrete is not evidenced by you, you must concentrate on finding more facts and then, not before you are satisfied with your findings,start posting on the site.

    Thanks and best wishes for success of your research efforts.

    This is not my field of research at this point of time, maybe in my later years.
    I am a software engineer and i work on mobile platforms.
    I just write here and this is my side knowledge not the main knowledge and main working area.

  13. #33
    Quote Originally Posted by maddhan1979 View Post
    This is not my field of research at this point of time, maybe in my later years.
    I am a software engineer and i work on mobile platforms.
    I just write here and this is my side knowledge not the main knowledge and main working area.
    Friend,

    It is good to learn that in spite of being software engineer, you are interested to work for writing of correct history.


    You are welcome to continue to contribute information/links/sites on sources .

    Thanks
    Last edited by DrRajpalSingh; October 2nd, 2013 at 06:35 PM.
    History is best when created, better when re-constructed and worst when invented.

  14. #34
    Quote Originally Posted by DrRajpalSingh View Post
    Friend,

    It is good to learn that in spite of being software engineer, you are interested to work for writing of correct history.


    You are welcome to continue to contribute information/links/sites on sources .

    Thanks


    Thanks for your comments.
    Last edited by DrRajpalSingh; October 2nd, 2013 at 06:36 PM.

  15. #35
    Quote Originally Posted by maddhan1979 View Post
    If i am not wrong and do correct me if i am wrong. The matter written on this page clearly distinguishes "Saxons"/ " Anglo Saxons" from the nordic tribes.
    Rather this artikel clearly states that these tribes at some point were associated with Germanic language:

    " Ethelberht's law code was the first to be written in any Germanic language and included 90 laws. His influence extended both north and south of the river Humber: his nephew became king of the East Saxons and his daughter married king Edwin of Northumbria (died 633)."

    Saxons, were Scythians, if u read previous artikles.

    As per "Jats", there is a direct relevance of "Scythian blood". The area, in which they reside, their migration, etc.

    If u study languages, the entire concept of Indo European languages seems to be coming from these tribes. All of the area in central Europe speak same "root words" for e.g. word "Name" is "Name" in English, it becomes " Neemey" in German which is spelled as in Sanskrit, (in German "Alphabet" "E" is not spoken as same in "English" "E" is spoken as the Fruit "aam" vala "a", the word for "You" as in English is "Tu" in French" and "Du" in German, so it seems that the European languages have evolved for common root and then we can see a continuous tribal link konnekting indo-scythians )

    Interesting fact is the entire concept of "Sankrit" seems to have been hijacked by idol worship and brahmanical way of thought.
    Interesting fact is the family names of Indo European people are more closely related with north western Bharat tribes rather then any Brahmanical people. We can still find same family names in Europe as that of North Western People of Bharat.
    Interesting fact is most of the tribes have been warriors, agriculturists, herdsmen, cattle rearing people and mostly non priest people.
    It seems the Indo European people were more work oriented people rather then "Brahmanical" people.
    The work like craftsmanship, warriors, cattle rearing, etc.

  16. The Following User Says Thank You to maddhan1979 For This Useful Post:

    urmiladuhan (October 3rd, 2013)

  17. #36
    The Gupta period seems to be when brahminical ideas took deeper roots within the Hindu fold. Various iconography principles of idol carving and interpretation were written down during this time. Before the Gupta period, Jainism and Buddhism seem to be the popular religions in India. Buddha sculptures started appearing few hundred years after his death as it is believed that Buddha was against his idol worship. Even during the Mauryan times, Buddha is mainly shown in non human form i.e., as boddhi tree, as umbrella, as feet impression, as an empty throne, a rider less horse etc.

    As per the available evidence, Harappa script is undeciphered and language is yet unknown and therefore cannot be said with certainty to have been precursor of Sanskrit. The chalcolithic cultures on Indian soil, post Harappa have not yielded any script so far. So, Sanskrit cannot be ascribed to chalcolithic cultures as of now. The question that may arise is how and where did Sanskrit evolve? I guess that is where secondary evidences such as family name similarity etc come into the picture.

    Quote Originally Posted by maddhan1979 View Post
    Interesting fact is the entire concept of "Sankrit" seems to have been hijacked by idol worship and brahmanical way of thought.
    Interesting fact is the family names of Indo European people are more closely related with north western Bharat tribes rather then any Brahmanical people. We can still find same family names in Europe as that of North Western People of Bharat.
    Interesting fact is most of the tribes have been warriors, agriculturists, herdsmen, cattle rearing people and mostly non priest people.
    It seems the Indo European people were more work oriented people rather then "Brahmanical" people.
    The work like craftsmanship, warriors, cattle rearing, etc.
    Last edited by urmiladuhan; October 3rd, 2013 at 11:32 AM. Reason: Added undeciphered
    Attention seekers and attention getters are two different class of people.

  18. The Following User Says Thank You to urmiladuhan For This Useful Post:

    rajpaldular (October 3rd, 2013)

  19. #37

  20. #38
    Quote Originally Posted by maddhan1979 View Post
    Interesting fact is the entire concept of "Sankrit" seems to have been hijacked by idol worship and brahmanical way of thought.
    Interesting fact is the family names of Indo European people are more closely related with north western Bharat tribes rather then any Brahmanical people. We can still find same family names in Europe as that of North Western People of Bharat.
    Interesting fact is most of the tribes have been warriors, agriculturists, herdsmen, cattle rearing people and mostly non priest people.
    It seems the Indo European people were more work oriented people rather then "Brahmanical" people.
    The work like craftsmanship, warriors, cattle rearing, etc.

    When i say cattle rearing people, i do not mean to say, "Yadavas " or "Gujjars". The cattle rearing Scythians it seems were different Jat clans. Lot of Jat clans can trace their ancestry to herding and cattle rearing.

    Why i refute/ "yadavas and Gujars" is because yadavas were always more eastern in origin then Scythians, and Gujars extended way down mid India and Gujrat. Yadav and Gujars it seems come from a different tribes which were living close to ancient Jats.
    Scythians never went beyond "Mathura" and not too far east. They were more concentrated in and around area of present day Punjab and more west in present day Pakistan and Afghanistan.

    Therefore occupation or blood of these Scythians had no connection with Gujjars or Yadavas. Maybe there was some clan intermixing as it has always being happening in Indian society from ancient times.
    The core blood and area of Indian Scythians seems to be areas inhabited by Jats.
    Last edited by maddhan1979; October 9th, 2013 at 11:56 AM.

  21. #39

  22. #40
    Sakas, and Kushans were followed by permanent settlements of large
    areas of
    India by these people.

    Herodotus reveals that the Scythians as far back as the 5th century
    B.C. had political control over
    Central Asia and the northern
    subcontinent up to the river
    Ganges

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •