What is the original source and authority on any subject?
I encountered this issue when a comment for a Post mine stated that the Links/sources provided by me depend on each other and as such they commit the fallacy of Circular reasoning.
Hence they are unacceptable.
The comment also observed that I must provide a reliable source like Text Books(?) or a reputed authority.
What then is a source that is dependable?
You depend and take reference to the one that is in agreement with known facts that are available.
And these facts are to be borne out by physical evidence such as Archaeology an , in my opinion, Astronomy as one can not tamper with Astronomical events while one can with Archaeology.
And in addition one may have to depend on contemporary references of the relevant period where the events have occurred and the foreign sources which were contemporary in terms of Time that refer to these events.
This the procedure I follow in validating information.
But all these have to stop at one point where the trail ends.
If you star doubting the authenticity of this, then no knowledge is possible.
Science conveniently circumvents this by saying some fundamentals are self-evident,Axioms, and are not to be questioned.
But Arts and History does not have this privilege.
The first source has o be proved as in Philosophy.
Philosophy tries to answer questions that are unanswerable by Science.
So the talk about God Reality evokes a lot of arguments an denials.
These areas need perception combined with inference,and testimony.
If one were to deny Inference as it may be faulty because non availability of all the facts then Inference can not be used.
In that case many day-to-day activities might come to a standstill.
And on Testimony if one were to doubt every testimony , I can not even say who my parents are!
Indian philosophy accepts Inference and Testimony(Sabda) as sources of Knowledge, under certain conditions.
I shall be writing on the sources of Knowledge shortly.
Now to the subject on hand, that of where did all the races originate from?
If one were to check western sources, both historical and religious,they would simply state that it was there or it is from another place.
You check on Human migration to Europe,
Waves of people came in intervals in they state.
Then they add from Asia.
Please read my post on Human Migration.
The trail ends there.
But the source they quote, namely India,comes out with references then they are dismissed at Myths.
Bu the west’s statement that human migration just happened and it is from Asia people accept it.
I leave it at that.
Now when we find human races History the same pattern is observed.
This is what is Race about.
Groups of humans have always identified themselves as distinct from neighboring groups, but such differences have not always been understood to be natural, immutable and global. These features are the distinguishing features of how the concept of race is used today. In this way the idea of race as we understand it today came about during the historical process of exploration and conquest which brought Europeans into contact with groups from different continents, and of the ideology of classification and typology found in the natural sciences.
The European concept of “race,” along with many of the ideas now associated with the term, arose at the time of the scientific revolution, which introduced and privileged the study of natural kinds, and the age of European imperialism and colonizationwhich established political relations between Europeans and peoples with distinct cultural and political traditions. As Europeans encountered people from different parts of the world, they speculated about the physical, social, and cultural differences among various human groups. The rise of the Atlantic slave trade, which gradually displaced an earlier trade in slaves from throughout the world, created a further incentive to categorize human groups in order to justify the subordination of African slaves. Drawing on Classical sources and upon their own internal interactions — for example, the hostility between the English and Irish powerfully influenced early European thinking about the differences between people — Europeans began to sort themselves and others into groups based on physical appearance, and to attribute to individuals belonging to these groups behaviors and capacities which were claimed to be deeply ingrained. A set of folk beliefs took hold that linked inherited physical differences between groups to inherited intellectual, behavioral, and moral qualities. Similar ideas can be found in other cultures, for example in China, where a concept often translated as “race” was associated with supposed common descent from the Yellow Emperor, and used to stress the unity of ethnic groups in China. Brutal conflicts between ethnic groups have existed throughout history and across the world.
The 1775 treatise “The Natural Varieties of Mankind,” by Johann Friedrich Blumenbach proposed five major divisions: the Caucasoid race,Mongoloid race, Ethiopian race (later termed the Negroid race), American Indian race, and Malayan race, but he did not propose any hierarchy among the races. Blumenbach also noted the graded transition in appearances from one group to adjacent groups and suggested that “one variety of mankind does so sensibly pass into the other, that you cannot mark out the limits between them”.
From the 17th through the 19th centuries, the merging of folk beliefs about group differences with scientific explanations of those differences produced what one scholar has called an “ideology of race”. According to this ideology, races are primordial, natural, enduring and distinct. It was further argued that some groups may be the result of mixture between formerly distinct populations, but that careful study could distinguish the ancestral races that had combined to produce admixed groups. Subsequent influential classifications by Georges Buffon, Petrus Camper and Christoph Meiners all classified “Negros” as inferior to Europeans. In the United States the racial theories of Thomas Jefferson were influential. He saw Africans as inferior to Whites especially in regards to their intellect, and imbued with unnatural sexual appetites, but described Native Americansas equals to whites.
Where is the evidence here on Races?
Check the source provide here or check any other source.
The same information under esoteric words with no shred of hard evidence and what is quoted in rare cases as an archaeological finds point out Indian connection and no body shall pursue it.
This blog does that ,Pursuing sources and the trail stops with the Puranas and Ithihasas.
And the facts mentioned by them are borne out by archaeology9Indain and Foreign) and Astronomy.
On the issue of races this is what the Puranas, Ramayana, Mahabharata and The Puranas have to say.
And my research shows most of them have been validated and I have published them.
I shall continue to pursue what has not yet been covered.
The sons of Yadu are known by the name of the Yadavas: while those of Turvasu have come to be called the Yavanas. And the sons of Drahyu are the Bhojas, while those of Anu, the Mlechchhas. The progeny of Puru, however, are the Pauravas (1:85). Yadavas became strong in central India. The Pauravas (Kurus and Panchalas were branches of this race) became strong in northern India. The sons of Anu were also called Anavas, thought to be the Iranian tribes, who were all grouped as Mlechas. The Yavanas along with the Anavas established themselves in the far western regions.
It is not clear if the Bhojas mentioned here represents the Bhoja-Yadavas, a sub-sect of the Yadavas. However the epic mentions a king named Kunti-Bhoja (the king of Kunti and the foster-father of Pandava’s mother Kunti) and a city named Bhojakata in Vidarbha. There is a highly speculative possibility that the Druids of Ireland were the descendants of Drahyu.
Race from Kamadhenu.
When the sage Vasistha was attacked by king Viswamitra’s army, Vasistha’s cow, Kamadehnu, brought forth from her tail, an army of Palhavas, and from her udders, an army ofDravidas and Sakas; and from her womb, an army of Yavanas, and from her dung, an army of Savaras; and from her urine, an army of Kanchis; and from her sides, an army of Savaras. And from the froth of her mouth came out hosts of Paundras and Kiratas, Yavanas and Sinhalas, and the barbarous tribes of Khasas and Chivukas and Pulindas andChinas and Hunas with Keralas, and numerous other Mlechchhas.
This is also found in Ramayana:- the tribes like the Kambojas, Barbaras, Pahlavas, Yavanas, Sakas, Mlecchas, Haritas and Kiratas etc. had originated from the body parts of the divine cow, Kamadhenu of sage Vasistha, as hords of army men, to protect him from the attack of the king Viswamitra (Ramayana 1.55.2-3). The following passage from Mahabharata. At (12:35) is mentioned:- What duties should be performed by the Yavanas, the Kiratas, the Gandharvas, the Chinas, the Savaras, the Barbaras, the Sakas, theTusharas, the Kankas, the Pathavas, the Andhras, the Madrakas, the Paundras, the Pulindas, the Ramathas, the Kamvojas, the several castes that have sprung up fromBrahmanas and Kshatriyas, the Vaisyas, and the Sudras, that reside in the dominions of (Arya) kings?
They were later given the status of Sudras. The Mekalas, the Dravidas, the Lathas, the Paundras, the Konwasiras, the Saundikas, the Daradas, the Darvas, the Chauras, the Savaras, the Varvaras, the Kiratas, the Yavanas, and numerous other tribes of Kshatriyas, have become degraded into the status of Sudras through the wrath of Brahmanas. (13:35). It is in consequence of the absence of Brahmanas from among them that the Sakas, the Yavanas, the Kamvojas and other Kshatriya tribes have become fallen and degraded into the status of Sudras. The Dravidas, the Kalingas, the Pulandas, the Usinaras, the Kolisarpas, the Mahishakas and other Kshatriyas, have, in consequence of the absence of Brahmanas from among their midst, become degraded into Sudras (13:33).
Kamadhenu in this context has to be taken in its meaning of perennial.
It means that the Races originate from India perennially.
A passage in the Mahabharata, which is rendered as a futuristic prediction mentions thus:- The Andhra Kingdom, the Sakas, the Pulindas, the Yavanas, the Kamvojas, theBahlika Kingdom Valhikas and the Abhira Kingdom Abhiras, will then become possessed of bravery and the sovereignty of the earth (3:187).
- Yavana rulers might have spread throughout ancient India, who established their city-states or small kingdoms during the period of Mahabharata. Many ancient Indian warriors like Pandu, Arjuna, Nakula, Sahadeva, Karna and Vasudeva Krishna were mentioned as encountering Yavana kings.
Mention of Yavanas who fought with Arjuna and his father Pandu:- The king of the Yavanas himself whom the powerful Pandu even had failed to bring under subjection was brought by Arjuna under control (1:141). Mention of a Yavana stronghold in Mathura:- The Yavanas, the Kamvojas, and those that dwell around Mathura are well skilled in fighting with bare arms (12:100). Nakula the son of Pandu reduced to subjection the fierce Mlechchas residing on the sea coast, as also the wild tribes of the Palhavas, the Kiratas, the Yavanas, and the Sakas. And having subjugated various monarchs, and making all of them pay tributes, Nakula that foremost of the Kurus, full of resources, retraced his way towards his own city (2:31). Sahadeva, the son of Pandu, brought under his subjection and exacted tributes from the Paundrayas and the Dravidas along with theUdrakeralas and the Andhras and the Talavanas, the Kalingas and the Ushtrakarnikas, and also the delightful city of Atavi and that of the Yavanas (2:30). The Yavana city mentioned here seems to be a south Indian port city of the Yavanas during the ancient era.
Having come to the western regions, Karna made all the Yavana and Varvara kings pay tribute. The Suta’s son brought the Sasakas and the Yavanas under his sway.(3:252).Vasudeva Krishna slew the Yavana called Kalyavana (3:12). The Sakas, and the Yavanas with followers, were all vanquished by Krishna. (7:11).