Horses in South India

[Guest guest]

Today's Leftist Historians tend to move away from the discussions of

Origins and chronology of Archaeological artifacts(The Penguin History

of Early India, RT,2002). Reason for distancing from such debates is,

the more the discussions go deeper, the more they are forced to refute

their own models.

 

Fr. Br., had to eat an unceremonious humble pie, in the latest

discussions on Ind-Arch group. He had to concede that he was wrong

in rejecting the well established fact that South

India did have presence of horse prior to 1500 bce.

 

It has been established as long as ago as 1992 that South India had

equid remains dating prior to 1500 bce (K.R. Alur's paper " Aryan

Invasion of India, Indo-Gangetic Valley Cultures " (in B.U. Nayak and

N.C. Ghosh,eds., _New Trends in Indian Art and Archaeology: S.R. Rao's

70th Birthday Felicitation Volume_, New Delhi, Aditya Prakashan, 1992,

vol. 2, pp. 561-62)). Further, the rock art at Karikkiyur (Tamil

Nadu),the largest rock art site in South India is dated to prior to

1500 bce, depicts horse riders. In fact, the inner limit is 2000 bce

for this rock art center.

 

This proves that the tamed horse was quite prevalent in South India in

pre 1500 bce times.

 

The law makers of India have granted exemption to South Indian

merchants from the prohibition on horse trading. This goes on to prove

that the horse population was quite heavy in South India and hence,

the law makers were under pressure to grant such an exemption.

 

In fact, the very word Aswa comes from the Sea, Aswat, the expanse.

Saindhava , another name for horse, is directly connected to sea

(sindhu)This again shows that horses owe their origin to south India.

 

The above archaeological and liturgical/linguistic proof goes onto

support my hypothesis that Mitannis have learned horse sciences from

South India. It was already an established fact that Mitannis were on

trading terms with Ceylone and hence, this again proves that they have

connections with South India also.

 

This will make the models of AIT (that ancient Indians were pushed to

South India from sindhu area by incoming Aryans) tupsy turvy, in the

sense, it is South Indians who moved to North India.

 

 

Kishore patnaik

[Guest guest]

, " Kishore patnaik "

<kishorepatnaik09 wrote:

>>

> Fr. Br., had to eat an unceremonious humble pie, in the latest

> discussions on Ind-Arch group. He had to concede that he was wrong

> in rejecting the well established fact that South

> India did have presence of horse prior to 1500 bce.

>

 

 

He never conceded this, on the contrary. And in case any legitimate

confusion existed about his position, he made it totally clear a few

days later:

 

http://tech.IndiaArchaeology/message/7462

 

Further, the language " eating humble pie " betrays a lack of scholarly

spirit. In a normal scholarly debate, there is nothing humiliating

about changing your view in response to new evidence. But remember

that in this case there was no occasion for him to do so.

 

 

>

> In fact, the very word Aswa comes from the Sea, Aswat, the expanse.

> Saindhava , another name for horse, is directly connected to sea

> (sindhu)This again shows that horses owe their origin to south

India.

>

 

Both etymologies are wrong. Ashwa is not from Aswat, and Saidhava,

while derived from Sindhu, does not mean horse. it means " the one

from Sindh " , which may in some cases be applied to a Sindhi type of

horses. An " Arab " is not a synonym or etymon of " horse " , but is a

Arabian type of horse.

 

Kind regards,

 

 

KE