What is it about the indic peoples that's made them so easy to conquer, enslave and subjugate throughout history?
The peoples depicted on pic related have basically never ruled themselves, only for short periods of time did they have native rule. The majority of their history consists of being ruled by various groups, from the aryan iranians, to the turkics and finally the europeans.
Every conqueror that has ventured into india had but one thing to say, that the people were meek, weak, dirty and meant to be conquered/enslaved. Just look at what Babur has to say about india:
"Hindustan is a country of few charms. Its people have no good looks; of social intercourse, paying and receiving visits there is none; of genius and capacity none; of manners none; in handicraft and work there is no form or symmetry, method or quality; there are no good horses, no good dogs, no grapes, muskmelons or first-rate fruits, no ice or cold water, no good bread or cooked food in the bazaars, no hot-baths, no colleges, no candles, torches or candlesticks"
And we all know what india is like today (poo in loo). So what gives, what's kept them this way for their entire history?
They halted Alexander the guy who conquered Greece and the Persian Empire.
They halted the Arab Caliphate that basically took over much of Byzantium, Iberia, and swallowed the Persian empire. The barely made it passed the Indus River.
There was the Mamluke Dynasty and the Muhgal Dynasty, but they were mostly under self rule.
Robert Martinez
your definition of "indic peoples" and self-rule is nebulous, there is no India without the Aryans.
Nicholas Adams
>Indic people are Aryans. Not really, the only people that described themselves as aryans were Iranians.
They did not halt alexander, alexander's armies were against invading india since they had already dealt with the great persian empire.
Muslim dynasties ruled over india for 1000+ years so that's a moot point.
True, had the aryans not invaded from central asia into india, indians today would still resemble aboriginals or south indians.
Gavin Lopez
>Indic Aryan*
Kevin Hill
indians aren't aryan, stop this cringe shit t. indian
Camden Perry
the only people who described themselves as Aryans were people who wrote the Rigveda, who were not Iranians. >Muslim dynasties ruled over india for 1000+ years so that's a moot point. no they did not. the islamic conquest of India started with the defeat of a rajput king called prithviraj chauhan (1200 CE), and Mughal rule started declining after the death of aurangzeb and Maratha aggression, around 250 years before present.
Jace Brooks
>Not really, the only people that described themselves as aryans were Iranians. You wat mate? >In Sanskrit and related Indic languages, ārya means "one who does noble deeds; a noble one". Āryāvarta "abode of the āryas" is a common name for North India in Sanskrit literature. >Āryāvarta (Sanskrit: आर्यावर्त, lit. "abode of the Aryans", is the term mentioned as denoting the entirety of the Indian subcontinent >The title ārya was used with various modifications throughout the Indian Subcontinent >Various Indian religions, chiefly Hinduism, Jainism and Buddhism, use the term ārya as an epithet of honour; a similar usage is found in the name of Arya Samaj
>Muslim dynasties ruled over india for 1000+ years so that's a moot point. >Muslim converts somehow change their ethnicity magically And for the most part the Muslim dynasties only existed basically where modern-day Pakistan is. Which is why all of Iran is Muslim and most of India isn't.
Christian Price
Darius, king of Persia described himself as Aryan.
Liam Baker
indians are not aryan, the indians that were aryan were the "white" aryan invaders
you can't look at these people and think "aryan" lmao
He is saying the Indians who wrote the Rigveda considered themselves to be Aryans, and they were not ethnically Iranian.
Alexander Bell
regardless, they were closer to iranians than they were to indians
Nolan Miller
the people who brought hinduism to india, the people who wrote the vedas, these peoples are not in any way related to modern day indians
Elijah Lewis
do you expect them to look like the Nordic male models you fantasize about?
Mason Morales
1. India isn't a homogeneous country, there's countless ethnicities 2. Now that is a single country people from different regions can migrate to other cities for better opportunity, sort of how London is basically African and Arab 3. Southern Indians aren't Indo-Europeans 4. The Indo-Europeans mixed with the local people of the lands they conquered, which is why Indians, Persians, Swedes and Greeks look different from each other. North Indians are Caucasoid because they are descended from the Aryans, Southern Indians are Australoid because they are the native Dravidians.
Henry Kelly
99% of indians are not aryan, there are some aryan remnants in india however, another fragment of proof that the aryan invasions happened
Different people. Indo-Iranians didn't have a writing system. I think they wrote it down only some 300 BC in Dravidian script.
Christian Turner
r1a in the subcontinent is a marker that you're a rape baby so I suppose you're right, but once again, that aryan dna is diluted as fuck which is why iranians and afghans have a higher frequency of aryan-like phenotypes than indians do
Dylan Hill
More like a mixture of locals and Aryans.
Julian Peterson
They were literally Indians. They weren't Dravidians, and their ancestors ended up banging some of them. But its like saying the Anglo-Saxons who took Britain weren't English, they were closer to Germans.
>ITT OP can't grasp the fact that Indians aren't a homogeneous ethnicity of even race, even though being told so countless times
Liam Hernandez
Go back to /int/
Levi Williams
Everyone is a rape baby.
Grayson Howard
I don't post there. Veeky Forums and Veeky Forums only bro
most indians look the same, and most indians share the same/common genetics
Levi Phillips
why do indians deny the aryan invasion?
Julian Gonzalez
only inferiority complexed pajeets who don't accept history do
Blake Hall
They don't.
John Ramirez
they do though, every indian on the internet denies it, it's quite amusing
Christian Hernandez
...
Grayson King
>>/pol/164097435
Isaiah Russell
third times the charm :^)
Caleb Phillips
>Undoubtedly ... we Hindus have been in undisputed and undisturbed possession of this land for over 8 or even 10 thousand years before the land was invaded by any foreign race. (Golwakar [1939] 1944)
Grayson Sanders
indians on Veeky Forums are trolls.
Tyler Foster
here's another example of a genetic remnant of the aryans in india
unfortunately the aryans eventually mixed with the poo in loos, otherwise the subcontinent could have been a beautiful place, filled with beautiful people
huh, I thought the accounts of the conquest were in the Vedas or something.
But still isn't like quoting a Japanese shinto scholar in 1930 who believed Japan was literally created by a god's spear. Versus most Japanese who know the Yayoi came from mainland Asia and invaded the island. Even though most Japanese will say they are native (because being somewhere for 2000 - 2500 years gives you a decent claim)
Thomas Russell
White people are descendents of Africans
Adam Baker
They probably arrived as a mixture of Indo-European mutts (EHG+CHG+EEF) and Iranians (from BMAC and similar cultures).
Joshua Cruz
indian culture would not be possible without input of dravidians
Michael Hughes
Most of Indian culture came from the North, the concepts of Hinduism, Buddhism, and Jainism was all from the north.
Adrian King
yeah just northern india. indian culture doesn't solely consists of hinduism (which itself was influenced by native people) but a variety of cultures. tamil is one of india's major languages, for example.
Parker Morris
Its clear to see the Indo-European's mark on India, all the texts that written in Pali and Sanskrit read and translated as far south as Ceylon. I don't think Tamil or any other Dravidian influence can be see in the south.
Jacob Roberts
*in the north
Connor Edwards
yeah that's why it's only in the north.
Dylan Morgan
>t. Dravidian
Daniel Diaz
>so easy turned away Alexander and the Mongols the south of india is notoriously hard to conquer as well.
Logan Campbell
lack of toilets
Jackson Foster
Hinduism, namely the Sramana traditions and much of non-Vedic philosophy, cults and gods, derive from Dravidian ideas. Buddhism is no different. The Dravidians were largely assimilated in the North, but it's quite clear that their culture didn't die - only their language and identity.
Samuel Taylor
>What is it about the indic peoples that's made them so easy to conquer, enslave and subjugate throughout history? It's more to do with the geography than the people. The Indo-Gangetic Plain is an enormous farming region cut by numerous rivers and surrounded by plateaus.
This provided for a densely urbanized population networking dozens of cities and villages, which in turn meant that while bureaucracy was very advanced it was very easy for regional powers to emerge as soon as centralized rule faltered just a little.
Normally this isn't a problem. Italy, the Rhineland, Northern China, and Mesopotamia are kind of similar in that regard. But like China and Mesopotamia, India neighbored the chaos of Central Asia. Nomadic migrations, confederations, and empires were constantly on the horizon. Even if these were not aimed at the region, or if there was a power struggle, India and the other regions could still see invasions by tribes who were trying to escape more powerful forces. They'd take over a border fort, and then a river valley, and soon enough entire kingdoms. Their numbers would swell constantly through rebellions by local governors and more exiles and adventurers coming to join the campaign.
Matthew Reyes
because the aryan put a caste system so estratified that werent able to fight unite against anyone who crossed the indus river diversity is our strenght they say.....
