The First Battle in Indian History | The Battle of Ten Kings

The Battle of the Ten Kings was the first recorded battle in Indian History. It was a major political event in the Vedic world. In this video, I discuss the various details available for this battle.
Follow me on Twitter
/ jayvtweets
Follow me on Goodreads
/ jay-vardhan

[@JayVardhanSingh]

CORRECTION - At 2:41, the number is 6,666, not 66,666.

[@tomje-ll7dm]

rég= long time ago vót= was rég vót = it was a long time ago in hungarian magyar rég vót= rig veda rege in magyar=old story in song= raga barát= friend barátja= friend of, friendly

[@tomje-ll7dm]

in hungary one of my neighbour is called Bartha, and similar is Bartos family here

[@KaranKunwar-uu9kf]

Ohh so Ramayana is based on the Bharata tribe king Sudhas 😮😮😮😮😮😮😮😮😮😮😮😮😮😮😮

[@N-fu1rm]

​@@KaranKunwar-uu9kfNo. Bharata dynasty was established after Ramayana happened. Sudas was the descendent of Emperor Bharata.Puru and Bharatas were two major kingdoms at that time. This battle should had been taken place at the start of dwaparyug

[@char_us6906]

just found u today keep up this awesome content

[@ar2279]

Thanks for the video very accurate information. Also there is another battle of Indians mentioned in akkadian documents, which took place between an akkadian king and meluhhian troops around 2300BCE.

[@JayVardhanSingh]

Thank you. I don't know about the particular event which you're talking about. Can you provide some reference so that I can read about it. Any books or article will suffice.

[@ar2279]

@@JayVardhanSingh en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abalgamash Couldn't find any article but here this Wikipedia page contains detailed description of that battle. Abalgamash the king of Marhashi (a polity). fought with king rimush the king of akkadian empire. Meluhha participated in the battle too, they were on the side of Abalgamash. But rimush being the king of a powerful kingdom defeated Abalgamash. Battle was documented in a tablet which contained victories of king rimush.

[@JayVardhanSingh]

Thank you for the information.

[@koteswar009]

Yes. I heard about that battle in Abhijit Chavda video

[@ar2279]

@@koteswar009 accha aisa. Noi I didn't hear about it in his video. I first time came across this story when I was reading Wikipedia of Meluhha 🙂

[@mukundakhatiwara9981]

very well explained . keep going .you and your channel definately deserve a million subscribers

[@JayVardhanSingh]

Thank you 😀

[@anselmdanker9519]

Thank you for a very informative presentation.

[@JayVardhanSingh]

Glad it was helpful!

[@HarappanEnigma2024]

GREAT JOB. THANKS FOR THE WONDERFUL INFO.

[@subhoshrimukherjee9719]

Thankyou sir, this helped me a lot

[@JayVardhanSingh]

Glad to hear that

[@HiddenHistoryofBharat]

This is not the First Battle of Indian History. War of Ramayan, Battles of Lord Parshuram with Hahey Kshatriyas predates the Battle of Dasrajan

[@AryanSinghRana-zp7kf]

Ramayan is from different yug

[@hrushikeshtripathy3124]

Battle of Ramayana if real took place after 700 BCE and battles of Parshuram is a religious myth with no other backing

[@HiddenHistoryofBharat]

@@hrushikeshtripathy3124 You are a typical Western Slave. Evidence of Mahabharat is of 3000 BC and this ignorant fool is claiming that Ramayan happened after that..Just wake up and start vomiting shit, that's what these Wokes know. Ignorant fools

[@umbrellacorporation5723]

We are the decendence of Bharat clan. Our land name Bharat is named after Emperor Bharat.

[@Progamermove_2003]

Not exactly though. It's more accurate to say that we're the descendants of several Indo Aryan tribes and Bharat was the supreme overlord of many of them.

[@umbrellacorporation5723]

@@Progamermove_2003 what's Indo Aryan can u elaborate it ?

[@Progamermove_2003]

@@umbrellacorporation5723 Basically most of the North Indians.

[@umbrellacorporation5723]

@@Progamermove_2003 sources ? Trust me bro..!! There's nothing called Aryan Dravidian, these are nonsense , introduced by britishers to divide and rule, britishers can't digest the fact indian civilization and culture was so Rich and prospers, so they introduced Aryan invasion theory, that Aryan from Europe came and Civilized Indians , but they've not a single evidence.. Now we have evidence that it was out of india Migration that Civilized the west. We indians are decendence of Bharat clan, Bharat clan is one of Rig vedic Clans, Rig veda has mentioned several Clans. The decisive Victory was the Bharat clan ( in the battle of 10 kings ) leaded by king Sudhas. Whole India has same R1A happlo group Genetics, from North India to South India. and india has most of variants and concentration of R1A happlo group which means R1A happlo group Genetics was originated in India. More than 90% of Non African males around the world has indian R1A happlo group Genetics, which means it was out of india Migration that civilized the rest of the world. Genetics studies has shown there's no influx of Foregin Genetics into india. So we have hard-core evidence of out of india Migration and Rig vedic Clans. But u can't show me a single evidence of Aryan Dravidian nonsense theory.

[@venchingfu]

LOL, everyone ancestory in India is related to Indus valley civilization, aryans have successfully made dravidian/indian valley civilization women pregnant in the north, so people in north have more of aryan race ancestory. Bharat tribe is an Aryan tribe and its not relevant to south India at all. Also people who are Rajputs or Jats are basically foreign scythians or Sakas

[@gravewalker34]

It was civil war in todays words. Three or four battles happened between indo european, indo iranians. First i think under divodasa then sudas's 10 kings battle and last under his decendants. Zarathustra in avesta remembers a later battle fought during somakas time. In this battle Zarathustra desribes the enemies leader as humayaka. So, its somaka who is decendant of sudas. He describes one Puru king who sided with Anus naming manuschitra and in rig veda its chitraratha who sided with enemies of bharatas. So all these people are our people who r fighting among themselves for supremacy. No one is bad in this. At the most we can say Sudas was aggressor.

[@PlayWithProNoob-pu5vr]

can u gave me an explanation in hindi

[@extreme4642]

What do you mean by our people? They were North Indians and have nothing to do with y'all.

[@Theactualstoic]

@@extreme4642 maybe nothing to do with you, we have gotras who trace back to ancient rishis and we have written records of ancestors in haridwar and all places in hands of local pandits. Cope

[@extreme4642]

@@Theactualstoic Those 10 tribes were from North India not UP-Bihar. Sanaatan Dharma is a North Indian religion.

[@happyyadav5915]

@@extreme4642 not up-bihar?? Real Vedic people are UP-bihar Bengal not North Indians they came later.

[@ishanchoreographyandlifest7577]

0:40 the book is written in form of manuscript in 1500bce but its not composed on 1500bce before manuscript it was used in orally.

[@Helloone996]

@JayVardhanSingh please increase the volume level and make a more detailed video about this sudas and bettle of ten kings

[@parmykumar8592]

The Nordern Sagas also mention the battle of the 10 King's & I believe it's the same battle because they also believed in Vedic deities!

[@DiatomAlgae]

Please give a reference to the 'Norden Sagas'

[@parmykumar8592]

​@Bhaskar M V Within the ancient Vedic language we have the foundation, not only of the glowing legends of the Hellas ( Greece ) but also of the dark and sombre mythology of Scandinavian and Teuton" ( Cox, Mythology of the Aryan Nations, I., 52, ) ~ The Kingdom of the Norse which includes "Norway" "Sweden" and "Denmark" are very much related to the Ancient Vedic culture of India as seen in their cosmology and as seen in their pantheon of gods of which the Supreme was "Odin" whose name seems to have its source in the Ancient Sanskrit language. ~ The Norse home of the gods is Asgard which seems to be Sanskrit and the King of Asgard is "Odin" a name which is from "Woden" the Old Saxon god of the wind. "Woden" is the Indo/euro root "Wa" meaning to "blow" its source being the Sanskrit "Va" meaning to "blow" as seen in the Vedic god of the wind "Vata" and "Vayu". ~ "Woden" was originally known as the German storm god "Wode" a simple evolution as the Sanskrit "V" becomes "W" and the Sanskrit "T" becomes "D" hence the Vedic god of the wind "Vata" becomes the German god of the wind "Wode" which then becomes the Old Saxon "Woden" immortalised as "Wednesday" the day of Woden and a name which seems to become "Odin" the god of the Norse and the King of Asgard. ~ "Frigg" is the wife of "Odin" the Queen of heaven and the goddess of love, her name meaning "beloved" "loving" "wife" its source being the Sanskrit "Priya" meaning "beloved" "loving" "wife" and just as "Woden" is immortalised as "Wednesday" the goddess "Frigg" becomes "Friday". ~ "P" becoming a European "F" is a common theme which is seen in the Sanskrit "Panca" becoming "five" the Sanskrit "Pluta" becoming "float" the Sanskrit "Pitr" becoming "father" and here we find the Sanskrit "Priya" becomes the Norse goddess "Frigg". ~ And so we have "Asgard" which is Sanskrit and we have "Odin" which is related to Sanskrit and we have his wife "Frigg" which is definitely Sanskrit, all of which reflects the Sanskrit and Vedic influence upon the Ancient civilisation of the Norse. ~ "The primitive West Europeans had called the god “Wodenaz” this later developed into Wuotan (Old High German) and Wodan (Old Saxon). It is generally believed that he was first thought of as a sky deity, perhaps a wind or storm god with great wisdom and with some sort of powers over life and death." Buckland's Book of Saxon Witchcraft - Raymond Buckland. ~ "This may be evidenced by the derivation of Wodenaz from an Indo-European word, parent also of the Sanskrit vata and the Latin ventus, both meaning 'wind'. He could be compared to the Hindu Lord of the Wind, Vata, and the German storm giant Wode." - Buckland's Book of Saxon Witchcraft - Raymond Buckland.

[@parmykumar8592]

​@Bhaskar M V did you get the messages because it's only showing one comment?

[@MorallyBankrupt21]

​@@parmykumar8592these are just far fetched speculation, a coincidence at most.

[@Hari_Om12]

Just curious to know what is that Latin script specifically called which represents Devnagri scripts with dots and a kind of tilde on the alphabet at times.

[@JayVardhanSingh]

These are diacritical marks and the transliteration scheme is called IAST (International Alphabet of Sanskrit Transliteration).

[@raginisingh2251]

Very well explain every topic

[@neildixit1256]

Can you make a video that gives primary evidence dating the text to around 1500 bc? The dating is extremely important in this case. Thanks in advance.

[@sudipkumarroy3790]

There is no primary evidence of any sort for 1500 bce date. It is completely an arbitrary one created by Max Muller which we unquestioningly believed for obvious reasons.

[@riturajdixit5]

Nice efforts to put historical events in a series. Couple of suggestions to make it more involving- 1. Please use some pictures and graphics as these things add charm to the stories. 2. Please display the reference materials when talking about any scripture, book etc in your video, For e.g. you mentioned about the source of this battle in Rig Veda. If you can include mandala #, Versa # etc, preferably with the script in the background, this will add more power to your series.

[@logkolkata3]

Informative

[@priteshpatel889]

Very informative. Would you have any book recommendations on this topic? Thanks.

[@JayVardhanSingh]

The Rig-Vedic and Post-Rig-Vedic Polity (1500 BCE-500 BCE) by R.U.S Prasad is a good book.

[@priteshpatel889]

@@JayVardhanSingh Many thanks.

[@princeroy1837]

Nice video. Keep going

[@JayVardhanSingh]

Thank you

[@ranvijaysinghkaliraman5476]

Need longer videos!

[@lanceabhishek6727]

Why was the guru replaced ? I’m trying to find that but not getting it

[@guharup]

probably he was charging too much

[@AnujSharma56262]

This is not 1500 BC as Historical datings as well as Historical Narratives are Subjective issue no objectivity in whole his-tory except Inscriptions & Archeology So 1500 Bc or putting a end line of Vedic era on 1500 Bc completely uncredible even, The So called Iron age 1200 Bc according to Western Narrative as they think West History is world History but iron age begins in 2200 BC in Tamil Nadu, there people was supposed to be living in Indus valley but it won't fit the narrative so they didn't dare to issue any paper or press as Indians and their past is irrelevant to them till it fits their narrative of supremacy so be aware of these So Called Historians and their narrative should not be a line of Stone, You must use your Thinking & Logic, Rationality is the new way to go even it is against our own personal issues, but for exams we have to write it, same as wrriten by historical narrative that is promoted by our own government till today we cannot leave these kind of doable questions. So Quote "Sir Max Muller & Sir Micheal Witzel" before writing.

[@witchilich]

You call this "western narrative" yet this 2200 BCE random date is the biggest nonsense I have heard. Lets just discredit all archaeological, linguistic and philological studies done for centuries and say "Iron Age on 1200 BCE is just a western narrative to suppress Indian history, it actually happened in 2200 BCE in Tamil Nadu". Unlike your 2200 BCE, the 1500 BCE is not a random date that was put down to fit a narrative. For example how similar Vedic Sanskrit and Avesta are. You probably don't even know about Andronovo culture (2000-1150 BCE) and its predecessor Sintashta culture (2200-1900 BCE) and the archaeological excavations related to them. Imagine thinking world history is just a "western conspiracy to undermine Indian history". You have not read the vedas that you are talking about. There are no Tamil excavations to your imaginary dates.

[@thecomment9489]

LOL. Tamillans have not much history. They were mostly savages before they were introduced to civlisaiton.

[@jayrangani]

Well explained

[@JayVardhanSingh]

thank you

[@dotxh4]

A question. You are using the word 'tribe' for all the parties of the battle. Were they tribe as in the modern sense like having different customs, gods, rituals etc. or were they just a simple clan/family headed by a King following same religion, customs etc.?

[@JayVardhanSingh]

Here the word tribe is used to denote that all of the members of a particular tribe had kinship ties with each other. All of the tribes of the Vedic period practiced more or less the same custom and religion.

[@dotxh4]

@@JayVardhanSingh so more like a clan, right?

[@JayVardhanSingh]

No, the term tribe here is used in a sociological sense. The kings of this period weren't really kings they were leader who led a particular group and they didn't had the power to collect taxes. This group had different types of people from priest to chariot makers in it. So to lump all them in a Clan is not correct. So that is why we use the term tribe.

[@pranavvenugopal2609]

Tribe seems like a cheap name to be given. They are not forest dwellers lol.... typical western presumption syndrome of primitiveness i guess.

[@elonpurushottam5189]

@@JayVardhanSingh you said that Rigveda is written between 500 bce but that's complete false

[@TrinathNarayan07]

Battle of Hariyupiya of the Sixth mandala is older than dasarajna war?

[@anupsingh-xs4vc]

Sir what was happening at the same time in south and norteast India . As I don't find any book refering about it

[@thecomment9489]

It was inhabited by the savages who didn't know writing and documenting history.

[@kalpanachauhan355]

Nice explanation

[@JayVardhanSingh]

Thanks

[@pakshirajan8585]

Didn't Battle of Hariyupiya/Yavyavati happen before the Battle of 10 Kings? After all it was fought by Abhyavartin Chayamana of Anu and Shrinjaya of Puru Clan (Ancestor of Divodasa who in turn was ancestor of Sudasa) againt Varashika of Turvasha and Vrichivanta of Yadu Clans.

[@ayushyash6021]

Hi, I'm interested in reading about this. Can you pls link any article or something?

[@Lmao69]

What is the battle of yavyavati?

[@rao_1505]

Bro i want to read this topic Can you suggest me the book (about the battle of ten kings)

[@VeerbhadraArya]

Ashok k banker's book 10 kings or dashrajan is available in different languages you can read it from there🙂

[@raj_kumar0]

Thanks

[@JayVardhanSingh]

thank you!

[@puneetmaheshwari]

wow thankyou

[@PrashantParikh]

Appreciate the explanation. But I suggest using BCE instead of BC, and CE instead of AD, so as to not universalize Christianity :)

[@nightwing8525]

It doesn't matter...

[@monsieur1936]

Well BC and AD are more easily identifiable when you are hearing a narration as compared to CE and BCE. As both of them end with CE so the B can be missed by someone accidentally. Also universalising a particular religion doesn't matters because BCE / BC and CE / AD are used and differentiated in the same context.

[@shreyanodoyto5975]

But that's not even when Jesus was supposedly born it's just useless you can use other dating systems

[@unhingedninja8565]

@@shreyanodoyto5975 other system like what? Hijri or vikram samvant lol most ppl aren't familiar with those

[@garvpathak540]

​@@shreyanodoyto5975 Bhai kya hi frk pdhta hau

[@kunalmuley09]

Your channel is awesome. One question, why do historians treat Rig ved as historical text and not just religious text?

[@thecomment9489]

Because the Rigvedic text documents the history of India at that time when it was composed and much earlier history as well. It mentions the river Saraswati which was dried up by the year 1500 BCE when Rigveda was composed. Which means that prior to that it was transmitted orally and the river Saraswati was a mighty river when Rigvedic hymns were sung in the northern plains.

[@indicaedits8692]

Great Video as always. I would like to ask as other than Rigveda itself and it is a religious book,we don't have any evidence be it literary as well as archeological evidence for this battle. So,how can we say it is a historical event as you said in your earlier video that as many AIT Supporters scholars used Rigveda to say Invasion happened but it was challenged because Rigveda is Ultimately a religious book with data in it can't be taken as of historical value?

[@JayVardhanSingh]

Yes, you are right. But, historians have no option but to use Rig Veda for historical analysis. There's always an element of doubt regarding these events. That's the nature of history of Ancient India. What I think about the battle is that. When we read the Rig Veda it becomes clear, from the limited evidence which we have, that after this battle the Bharata tribe became dominant and that can be seen from the hymns that comes after the battle hymn. So, that's why we can say that this battle might have happened. But, there will always be an element of doubt.

[@PlayWithProNoob-pu5vr]

do Rigveda say invasion happened?

[@akkkkk813]

@@PlayWithProNoob-pu5vr no

[@defenso1242]

@@akkkkk813 It definitely mentions tribes moving in from Indo iranian regions and then multiple wars fought within. So that definitely isn't a clear cut "NO".

[@akkkkk813]

@@defenso1242 why don't you tell me the single reference which says that the Aryans have came from outside India or so called Iran and Europe in fact it is completely opposite even in this very own battle of ten kings there is reference that so called losing enemies went outside India I guess brother it will be very useful if you start using your brain

[@VinodKumar-xb5ud]

Kindly make a video on Ramayana and Mahabharata too... if rigveda is source of history then these texts too... isn't it ?

[@vg2812]

This particular topic intrigues me as it holds the answers to the migration of Indo-european language and culture. Srikant Talageri has done extensive work in this region. His analysis of the rig rig veda is something you should look into. The dates proposed by Talageri an Koenraad Elst is 3000BCE for the old damily books of the Rig Veda and the battle must have taken place somewhere around that time.

[@yj9032]

Is there any evidence for this outside the Vedas?

[@IXXILordFibonacciIXXI]

Yes. Zoroastrian accounts according to researchers.

[@sahilsingh6048]

Were kurus descendants of Purus and bharat tribe?

[@sadiqk2618]

Nice

[@JayVardhanSingh]

Thanks

[@dictator9007]

The Rigaveda was composed about 8000-10000BC , this is truth according to recent study of mention of Saraswati river in Rigaveda , and the archeological evidence of the river body , the mention in it is as a large river ,which was only 10000 YEARS AGO

[@xmysteriousx3548]

which logically debunk the ARYAN INVASION THEORY

[@anantbijolia8415]

The ghaggar hakra water system today is what is believed to be the Saraswati river. It has the most amount of Harappan civilization settlements around it, even more than the Indus river itself. The Harappans existed somewhere around 3300 BCE - 1300 BCE. So the river must've been atleast that old not 10000 BCE.

[@apoorvaditya3048]

Bhai that time settlement was changing to culture in fertile crescent where did you find 8000-10000 years ago

[@apoorvaditya3048]

@@xmysteriousx3548 there has been Aryan migration , which is authentic certified by our DNA which you won't understand. You can remain happy in your dreamland .

[@xmysteriousx3548]

@@apoorvaditya3048 plz read the latest study on yamnaya invasion and haplogroup F and plz do some research

[@shivmalik9405]

At 2:18 please edit the map. It is Tibet , which has traditionally been free and independent NOT China.

[@AnupamSurey]

The bharata purus were fighting other puru tribes and their confedeation, after the battle Bharat purus became dominant, it also pushed the frontiers of other tribes to west.

[@brijeshchandrakar]

"The text which describes this battle was composed around 1500 BCE". Couldn't have been more wrong on this. Its at least older than 5500 BCE if not more. Almost certainly not 1500 BCE as given by the western historians.

[@nateshunga962]

correct.

[@lakshyasingh4114]

They gave 1500 BCE because if they would have given real dates Their western religion would have not been shown as superior

[@lakshyasingh4114]

old Christina historian were religious and bible says earth in 600yrs old if they gave the real dates Then Christianity would have been proven wrongs They were biased

[@kashutosh9132]

​​@@lakshyasingh4114Their religion started in 1 AD,isn't this means this events happened before their religion orginated. Also they say horses were not indigenous to India and were only domesticated in 3500 BC in modern Ukraine region. How did we then go about our theories

[@HarappanEnigma2024]

RIGHT ; BECAUSE SARASWATI HAS DRIED BY 3000 BCE

[@kasipatnamsathyakumar1848]

Are you sure about bracketing the Rig vedhic period at around 1500 BCE?

[@KumarHarshRaj]

Yes it is already proven.

[@napoleonrabbit]

Keep up the good work. Ban ideologues and fanatics from any channel.

[@manabendrap9019]

I suppose they are not to be called tribes. They were all different political powers representing certain geographical boundaries or kingdoms. The king Bharata was the son of shakuntala or the grandson of vishwamitra. His name also didn't represent a tribe instead this country was named after him

[@lakshay7901]

Ramayana says that Sage Vasishtha was the family priest (Purohita) of the Raghu Kula. So does it mean that Dasaratha (father of Rama) could've been the contemporary of the King Sudas ?

[@KumarHarshRaj]

I think this is case. Sudas might be the later king from the raghukul and the rule is the rishi in there sabha should be from the kul of vishwamitra but sudas fired him and hired guru vashishtha Or someone from his kul.

[@thelogicless9040]

This battle seems like the origin of Mahabharata

[@ishaanrohmetra3447]

are they same vishwamitra and vashishtha which were mentioned in epic ramayna? what are your views on ramayana and mahabharta? are they complete mythology, epic , history or anything else? please make a dedicated video on it. thank you harsha .

[@HarappanEnigma2024]

Ramayana EVENT ( not text) 5100 BCE Mahabharat EVENT ( not text) 1000 BCE

[@HarappanEnigma2024]

These both are CONTINUING TRADITIONS same as DATTATREYA & PARSHURAM JEE gaddi traditions.

[@ishaanrohmetra3447]

@@HarappanEnigma2024 its not possible Because if u give this date for ramayan event, then the theory of yugas will be proved false because bw two yugas there is more than million years . Latest event is mahabharat war nearly around 5000 bce .

[@HarappanEnigma2024]

@@ishaanrohmetra3447 Please note that as per YUKTESHWAR GIRI book "Holy science USA" the four Yugas sat-treta-dwapar - Kali descending cycle was from 11,500 BCE to 500 AD (total 12,000 years); the ascending Kali Yuga is from 500 AD to 1700 AD. PRESENTLY IS ASCENDING DWAPAR YUGA FROM 1700 TO 3100 AD (2400 years). See HOLY SCIENCE.

[@Lkdahiya-fn4oy]

Arre bhai uspe video bana diya to jai shree Ram wale channel band karwa denge

[@rati54]

Date given by you flowing maxmuller. But the date changed after ariciyologic study. Please don't follow only text books. Upgrade your knowledge.

[@Chahaman_Harshit_00]

King Sudas🙏🙏💪🚩🚩

[@karanbhoir2441]

Web series ke liye kya sahi content he jaise Vikings me England aunordic countries unke tribes kaise kingdom bante he wo dikhaya gaya he socho Indian history pr web series starting from Indus valley UP me mile hue antina sword aur chariots aur uske baad nanda maurya Ashok satvahanas Mughal Marathas Britishers independent India lagbhag 20-25 seasons bn jayrnge

[@HinduPhoenix]

Mai banaunga kuch saalo baad

[@cinephileinsect7718]

Jab ten kings ki khani maine suni thi tabhi mere dimak mein yeh idea aya tha

[@kashutosh9132]

20-25 seasons Bhai 200-300 saal ki series bnaoge kyaa

[@sivaniam]

History is defined by the chronological (dates) of events and the subjects involved in them. The messages (verses) in the Rig itself is not dated (no chronology), so how to take that as history. They is much difference "in recorded chronology" and just written items without the intention to record them as "events". The Rig is just a book of praises of devas, and people - both of which cannot be substantiated.

[@AnujSharma56262]

It means history before its recording according to Georgia calendar is irrelevant

[@witchilich]

Just because rig veda does not mention chronology does not mean it can't be studies by indologists. Battle of Ten Kings has always been considered historical by indologists and is dated between 1500-1200 BCE. Why do you make up this arbitrary rule that the text in question has to mention chronological dated or its irrelevant? Or do you believe dates like 1500 BCE for Sanskrit are random guesses? Though I guess it would be too much to ask you to look up the archaeological, philological and linguistic that dated the vedas.

[@ChanneLOL]

What is proof of they are tribe?

[@truelovecreation4069]

🏹🏹🏹ridved

[@jakeharper6189]

How Shudas able to defeat 10 tribe alone?

[@JayVardhanSingh]

It is not entirely clear how the battle unfolded but from the Vedic hymns it appears that the other side was building a dam on the Parushni river which broke. The destruction which it caused was the primary factor which helped Sudas to defeat the Confederacy.

[@jakeharper6189]

@@JayVardhanSingh thanks

[@obiwan3375]

He used metallic weapons and chatriots while other were using bronze

[@harshthemonkranyal8713]

@@obiwan3375 no ..it was because of river and heavy rains

[@Lmao69]

@@harshthemonkranyal8713 rivas was also a factor but advance metal weapons had a major advantage over bronze

[@gravewalker34]

Witzels translation have alot of problems. He claims Bharatas came from west of Indus and 10 tribes like Parsua prithu Alina druhyu Bhrgu simyu were in east. Which is obviously so wrong. We know parsua is iranian clan and so was Paktha and Prithu. He was trying to portray persians parthians Alan sarmatian of Iranian clans as native dravidians lol.

[@benefactor4309]

Bro is Doing Phd from JNU

[@gravewalker34]

@@benefactor4309 im talking abt a nazi. David reich and michael witzel. One of them is nazi relative and other is a jew. Reich changed his stance to iran as origin of Indo-aryan and europeans but other guy has stance that white skin people invaded iran india central asia and china spreading languages.

[@benefactor4309]

@@gravewalker34 witzel doesn't accept his mistakes, he deliberately mistranslated . Bharata purus were from western UP and Haryana

[@gravewalker34]

@@benefactor4309 i know. Only a dumbass would thing parsua is dravidians. He says bharatas came from afghanistan and parsua prithu druhyu etc were native dravidians of east.

[@deependerkadian5524]

​@@benefactor4309ya you are right It's the people who can't accept that purus , bharta and kuru all from Haryana-west up region

[@the_moto_monk_ey]

Nice video. In Mahabharat, Ved Vyas mentions planetary positions for before some events and based on that we can say Mahabharat war was fought in 3102 BCE. If Kurus were descendants of Puru and Bharat it means Battle of ten kings and writing of Rig ved both were older than 3102 BCE

[@gurtr]

It took place around 1400 bc. Mahabharat prob took place around 1200-900bc

[@the_moto_monk_ey]

@@gurtr i think you didn't get my comment. Its proven that Mahabharat took place in 3102bce. Researchers studied the planetary events mentioned in it and came to that conclusion.

[@gurtr]

@अमेय तांबे there was no kuru kingdom, panchal, matsya, khabdar in 3100 bc. Kuru kingdom rose to power in 1200bc to 800 bc. There was historical kings mentioned in yajurveda like prikshit and janmejya who ruled 1200bc. Historical and archeological evidence placed the mahabharat to early to middle vedic age. Astronomical evidence os so unreliable because chances of error is too big to ignore.

[@the_moto_monk_ey]

@@gurtr good points.. But I think astronomical evidences are more accurate because the planetary movements can be calculated mathematically.. hence I said Mahabharat occurred in 3102BCE

[@venchingfu]

@@the_moto_monk_ey All of this is related to only north India, south india dont give a shit about bharat or kuru

[@aksworldinfo]

My message to all those whatsapp University or brainwash University, from north to south, its only one nation that is bharat. Those who are playing separatist politics, say north is different and south is different, this land of Bharat is not for you all.

[@ramanakanchibhatta4316]

King bharata was he not the son of shakuntala and Maharaja Dushyant?????

[@SouravPatil_Divinity]

Dashrajna War

[@my_father_sorry_i_am_lying_now]

No rig veda is at least 10 to 8 thousand years old because of mention of river of floods sarswati last time it was river of flood was at least 8 thousand years ago

[@venusarangi]

Proof ??????

[@KaranKunwar-uu9kf]

Ohh so Ramayana is based on the Bharata tribe king Sudhas 😮😮😮😮😮😮😮😮😮😮😮😮😮😮😮

[@oxy2986]

Mahabharat is based on that . Ramayan was long before that , there isn't much proof about it.

[@harshthemonkranyal8713]

one point to be noted is that these dates which we today describe eg-300bc and others are all shfitedcand adjusted according to the time of christ by western scholars during 19th century mostly..as they found many societies around the globe they went ..eg- bharat,persia, china to be far more advanced and ancient than they had thought ..soo they decreased the time lines accordingly..

[@shubhamsinghbaghel5092]

That's why only ramayan is true because some operation and name also match........ Ashvmegh yaksh which is change by lard rama

[@deependerkadian5524]

Puru clan Bharta dynasty Kuru empire All of them were in haryana-west up region The old haryana

[@rajeshupadhyay-wu6kv]

How can you say with great confidence that the battle was fought on 1500 Bc. If you are not able to configure the actual time framework of Bhartiy system. At first study the vedang then you will be able to understand the real meaning of vedas.

[@commodoregamming902]

Plz Hindi me bhi banaye

[@DiatomAlgae]

@JayVardhanSingh All issues must be presented in such videos, you have not discussed the possibility of Vedas being composed before and during the Harappan Civilization, i.e., from ~3,300 BCE onwards and of the Harappan being the Vedic Civilization. You also did not mention the possibility of Bharatas being indigenous to the Saptha Sindhu area and Westward migration of the 10 defeated Kings and groups. Please read Shrikant Talageri's analysis of the Rig Veda on his blog and videos on KZbin. The most likely date for the Dasarajanya is 3,102 BCE. The dispute between the Sudas of the Puru-Bharatas and the 10 kings may have been over the Vedas and related issues.

[@defenso1242]

Why should one suggest the possibility of Harappan civilization as being part of the Vedic civilization, as their Language is very different (Till to this date not decoded, which is not at all the case with Sanskrit), Their customs definitely showed Animism and Polytheistic value yet were very different to the Vedic fold (We haven't deciphered there idols, rituals and other daily civilizational aspects whereas we have exquisite detail about our ritual. So other than a denial of reality to sustain your Biases (For whatever Purpose).

[@DiatomAlgae]

@@defenso1242 On what basis can you say that the language of Harappans was 'different'. The script is NOT deciphered, so why can't it be Sanskrit? The Harappan civilization declined slowly, so the people would have migrated out. The language, culture, religion, etc., would have spread wherever they went. Today all the languages in the area of Harappan Civilization and neighboring areas. Haryana, Punjab, Sindh, Gujarat, Rajasthan, UP, etc., are all from the Sanskrit language family. What happened to the people in Rakhigarhi? The distance to Indraprastha on Yamuna is just 150 to 200 kms. abandoned

[@defenso1242]

@@DiatomAlgae Simply because Sanskrit is fully readable and if it were "Sanskrit" then one would've immediately known it or one of its "Prakrits". And this is not me saying but the leading experts on Etimology "World wide" Including Indians. So now you have to present a case where an totally undeciphered version of Sanskrit exist, which no one can Read. Sure sounds more than far fetched, almost fictional!

[@DiatomAlgae]

@@defenso1242 Sanskrit language is known. The Indus script has not been deciphered. There is no problem in this, language and script are different issues. If I write Sanskrit in a script you don't know can you read it? Any language can be written in any script, any script can be used to write any language. With a few issues of writing and speaking some letters and syllables, for e.g., ha is not used in Tamil, etc. In the case of European languages, from Ancient Greek onwards, scripts existed before language developed. In India Sanskrit was not used to write long sentences, paras, etc. until about 500 BCE. If Vedas were composed around 1500 BCE why were they not written down? Many scripts were available in India and worldwide at that time. If Vedas were composed starting around 3500 BCE, the reason for NOT writing it down is clear, not many scripts existed at that time. The developers of Sanskrit and composers of Vedas took a conscious decision NOT to use a script to write and this decision was followed even in the 'IVC' and after the end of 'IVC' up to 500 BCE. In Vedas the Purusha Suktam 10.60.5 says "Brahmins are born from the mouth', so the view was that they only speak the Vedas and will not write them down. In IVC only a few seals have been found, no copper plates, clay tablets, stones, etc., with long sentences have been found. IF 'IVC' was NOT Vedic why did they not use the script to write long sentences? Why would 2 different groups of people behave in the same manner? So the ONLY logical conclusion is that 'IVC' was the Vedic civilization. It appears that in 'IVC' only the businessmen / Vysyas used a script on seals, Brahmins and Kshatriyas did not use the script to write the Vedas, engineering and administrative matters.

[@defenso1242]

@@DiatomAlgae Sure you can write to me Sanskrit in an alien script but the structure of that alien Script will itself reveal how bad of a Sanskrit you wrote (Unless it's itself not Sanskrit derived). For eg in Latin script no matter how hard you try you won't be able to recreate all those compositions that otherwise you'd be able to do with Prakrits. and with chinese you'll be even more worse off. A totally alien script will be inherently unable to capture the other language which is fundamentally why it's "Not decoded". Secondly do you think etymologists haven't already tried analysing sanskrit words within IVS script? As to why would two groups will behave in similar manner is because of their habitat. But that doesn't mean they are the same civilization (The entire world is filled with two distinct civilization sharing same ecosphere and yet developing there own culture!!) And the "Only logical conclusion" that you're drawing out is not considering your Bias and wishful desire to desperately wanting IVS to be subset of Vedic civilization (When there has been no concrete evidence for it and quite few in the contrary)

[@bhuvaneswariharibabu5656]

Any material evedence like insripations and copper plates

[@JayVardhanSingh]

No, there is no material evidence. Only information about this battle comes from the Vedic hymns.

[@Lmao69]

Bhuvaneshwari, are you what an idiot? Or bigot

[@millennialmind9507]

Dashraj yadnya- The battle of 10 kings

[@debrajbaruah6317]

Jambuduipe bharata khande aryavarte bharatavarshi ❤️❤️❤️🙏🙏🙏.

[@HarappanEnigma2024]

THE RIGVED MENTIONS OF VERY FIRST ANCIENT INDIA CHAKARVARTI KING CALLED YAYATI (SEE RIGVED) . HE THEN DIVIDED ANCIENT INDIA KINGDOM BETWEEN HIS FIVE SONS . FIVE REGIONS OF ANCIENT INDIA WERE THUS NAMED AFTER THESE FIVE SONS. THESE FIVE WERE 1) ANU 2) DHRUYU 3) TRUYASHU 4) PURU 5) YADU. -YADU MUCH LATER DESCENDENTS SAY (5500 BCE TO 1000 BCE) GAVE RISE TO AVATAR KRISHNA AND YADAVS -PURU LATER DESCENDENTS FORM ALLIANCE WITH BHARAT TRIBE AFTER THEY LOST WAR OF TEN KINGS. - DHRHUYU LATER DESCENDENTS RULED GANDHAR REGION - TURVASHU DESCENDENTS THE EAST INDIA REGION

[@Varsh413]

Turvashu descendants were greeks as per Mahabharata

[@HarappanEnigma2024]

@@Varsh413 please mention verse

[@kashutosh9132]

​@@HarappanEnigma2024 is it possible that middle east,eastern Europe,Egypt,central asia people worshipped same gods and their ancestors were same

[@Hope_Editzzz]

​@@kashutosh9132Many people say that the battle of 10 kings, had the migration in other countries. Maybe true

[@pradeeppandey7228]

Please, you just say, first know battle of our history. I am pretty sure that there must have been countless battles before that.

[@KumarHarshRaj]

First recorded would be better

[@Hyper_Facts712]

Bro but they were not tribes they were well developed Civilized Dynastys

[@patsagreen]

what is the reason you are calling them as "Tribes" ?

[@JayVardhanSingh]

Because the Vedic Society especially the Rig Vedic Society was a tribal society. Here the meaning of Tribal is used in a sociological sense. It is not used to describe the Vedic society as primitive or backward.

[@patsagreen]

@@JayVardhanSingh What are your references ? Please do watch Nilesh Oak, Vedvir Arya, Raj Vedam & Adity Satsangi and various talks and review your videos.

[@JayVardhanSingh]

My reference are :- The History And Culture Of The Indian People - Volume 1 - The Vedic Age A History of Ancient and Early Medieval India: From the Stone Age to the 12th Century by Upinder Singh The Wonder that was India by A.L Basham

[@anirudh177]

Because during the Early Vedic age, there were Clans and Tribes who controlled areas, it was during the Later Vedic age that proper kingdoms and states emerged.

[@rajsekharkarajada9830]

​@@patsagreen vedic age is not urban civilization

[@arupsarkar3345]

After losing to Bharata Puru,s cannot shake hands and thus the kuru tribe emerged as a wrong deduction..it was decided and natural that the defeated tribe will lose control of their land and move away. Puru's move to present day Iran which was named Parasya in earlier times, by puru,s and the devotees of Sun god we now know as Zoroastrian.

[@playhard719]

We actually don't know the Rigveda was written in 1500 BCE, that's the video of the colonial eurocentric ID....... views

[@N-fu1rm]

The name Mahabharata describe the victory of Bharatas over ten kings

[@VlexOP]

No , Mahabharata means greter than war of Bhrata

[@N-fu1rm]

@@VlexOP Sudas paijavana was the king of Bharatas. His victory over the ten tribes is considered Mahabharata. That was the first reference. Later so many added

[@jaybharat1479]

Plz read book of Sanjay sonavani Origins of the Vedic religion and Indus ghaghar civilisation . This battle was not faught on Indian ground . Ravi is not apbhransh of parushni .the battlefield was in afganistan .

[@JayVardhanSingh]

You are wrong and these are my sources. This is a basic fact and If the author which you are sourcing your fact is wrong about this, then I seriously doubt the authenticity of the author. Reference :- 1. Page no. 187 of A history of Ancient and Early Medieval India by Upinder Singh 2. Page no. 35 of The Wonder that was India by A.L Basham 3. Page no. 56 of Exploring Early India by Ranabir Chakravarti. 4. Page no. 247 of The Vedic Age, The History and Culture of the Indian People Vol-1 5. Page no. 111 of Gem in the Lotus by Abraham Eraly. If you can not read this book. Read this article www.people.fas.harvard.edu/~witzel/w96jissa.pdf (page no.2 first line) If you can't even read this go to wikipedia or encyclopedia britannica.

[@jaybharat1479]

@@JayVardhanSingh thank you for your reply I can read your refrences .but sonvani is welknown historian from Maharashtra his books kept in white house library for refrences .

[@Lmao69]

@@jaybharat1479 sonvani is a historian, not the authority of history

[@jaybharat1479]

@@Lmao69 absolutely try to refute his claims

[@kshatrapavan]

Sonawani is a novel writer, a caste baiter and a not a historian. Ravi is the Apabhramsha of Iravati, which is another name for Parushni. This is not at all a disputed claim among historians and Sanskrit scholars. Sonawani happens to be neithet of those. The Nadistutisukta clearly enumerates all the major rivers from Ganga to Kabul, and Parushni falls right in the place where it should be.

[@Barlas511]

History is what is corroborated by other sources,like Persians or neighbouring kingdoms.

[@jakeharper6189]

Who were Yadus ?

[@JayVardhanSingh]

In the Rig Veda, the Yadus are mentioned as a tribe.

[@jakeharper6189]

@@JayVardhanSingh thanks

[@meerimeeri4659]

@@JayVardhanSingh WATCH THIS BROTHER kzbin.info/www/bejne/oGaQn2x5mbmqiLs

[@meerimeeri4659]

@@JayVardhanSingh WESTERN PEOPLE WERE CALLED MLECHHAS AS THEY DISOBEYED VEDAS AND STARTED WORSHIPING ASURAS LIKE ZOROASTIANS , ASSYRIANS AFTER SUMER , BUT THEY KEEP USING SWASTIKAS ETC BUT ARYAS KICKED THEM OUT OF ARYA VARTA AND ENTITLED THEM AS UNARYA OR MELICHHAS

[@vedant3008]

@@meerimeeri4659 who said you this?? Mlecchas means Muslims(more perfectly avedik) and aryans didn't kick them out they lived out of bharatavarsha.

[@bvk9686]

Not tribes but clans or kingdoms.

[@imurbegum7864]

Nope tribes...these are different tribes

[@Playerone1287]

Tribe ka naam kabhi aap भरत bol rhe ho kabhi भारत, asli naam kya hai?

[@dolachakravorty5190]

Yes I too have the same doubt. Somewhere it's mentioned bharat tribe somewhere it's said bharata and somewhere it's said bhaarat

[@anadianshumaanbhatnagar7332]

Nice effort But here are some corrections : According to Rig-Veda after the war a big supsr city was built on the Banks of River Paurushvi i.e. Ravi. Harrapa city is there on so battle is prior to that. Harrapa dates back to 3300 BCE as suggested by archeological evidence so there is a fair chance that battle was fought before 3300 BCE. Rig Vedic people were not tribal people as suggested. There are various archeological evidence of Indus valley people connected to Persian and mesopotamiya. Rig Vedic People were Indus Valley people as Harrapan language is both inclusive of Sanskrit and Tamil. Sanskrit and Tamil are both 8000 BCE old and ancient India was very developed. Dholivera sites in Gujrat even dates back to 7500 years with very advanced structures probably the outskirts of Dwarika which survived megatsunami of 7500 years. Vedic people being tribal is a mere guess not backed by evidence.

[@JayVardhanSingh]

Can you provide reference to all this?

[@KK-px4ey]

wtf ...who told you this shit

[@nightwing8525]

Nobody knows about the Harappan language and sanskrit was not used back then.

[@PlayWithProNoob-pu5vr]

@@nightwing8525 nobody knows the Harappan script... and Sanskrit used for noble usage i guess**

[@elonpurushottam5189]

@@JayVardhanSingh tell me if Rigveda is composed by aryans who where migrated from central Asia to india around 1500 bce .how come they mention the Saraswati river at its prime form as a mighty river which completely ended around 1900 bce

[@abhijitbose8487]

Don't quotes from harvaadi...

[@Theamanhanda]

आपकी वीडियो सामग्री अच्छी है कृपया इसे हिंदी में बनाएं

[@JayVardhanSingh]

haan bhai, hindi mein bhi channel shuru hoga kucch samay baad

[@anshulkashyap2158]

Is this the episode on which Mahabharata was written ?

[@JayVardhanSingh]

No

[@being5411]

@@JayVardhanSingh yes

[@REDDY-45]

​​​@@being5411 no we have proof in south india

[@REDDY-45]

​@@being5411 cheras participated in mahabharat

[@unmeshshah6863]

Good video but you need to get your dates right brother. The texts were written much before than you are claiming because 1) they need to be periodically replaced because old texts were written on degradable organic scrolls 2) The brainless butchers from Middle East who came to spread religion burned down Nalanda University which holded most of the records 3) the Rig Ved mentions Saraswati river on full peak which scientifically has been proven to be around 8500-10,000 BCE making the Vedas atleast 10,000 years old. Which also aligns with your hypothesis of the Kuru Vansh /Clan im Mahabhrat which is would have been post vedic event

[@being5411]

Nah man stop behaving like a child 💀

[@rbnjdd]

Date of creation is 4004 BC according to Christianity so never use British given time period

[@mintusaren895]

Avesta vs sanskrit and tamil ( dravidian) zend and pali.

[@KK-px4ey]

SCIENTISTS AND ARCHEOLOGISTS : Vedic civilization and Indus valley civilization are distinct . Random dude with his propaganda and conspiracy theories :NAH, They both are same .

[@YinYanUzumaki]

IVC had Pashupati seals . How are they different from Vedic civilisation?

[@debmalyasinha2887]

​Stop spreading nonsense .

[@my_father_sorry_i_am_lying_now]

Watch abhijit chavdas video vedas are ten thousand years old

[@witchilich]

The same guy who claims that a Kashmiri king conquered the world. All his videos are baseless claims to get views by manipulating people with lies. Worse, they are in English so its in full display to everyone.

[@my_father_sorry_i_am_lying_now]

@@witchilich don't cry and don't lie son

[@witchilich]

@@my_father_sorry_i_am_lying_now either you are a troll to mock legitimate muslims who became atheist. Or if you are real I expected to actually not paste fantasies in this channel's comment section. You accuse me of "lying". And yet you won't provide any proof of this conviniently changing supposed age of something.

[@YinYanUzumaki]

“All his videos are baseless claims “ Please put a counter to each of his videos and then claim it otherwise same can be said about you - all tour comments are baseless claims

[@my_father_sorry_i_am_lying_now]

@@YinYanUzumaki cope

[@japflex-riva8447]

my brotheren rigveda is actually 8000 years old to be minimum, please update it, although it is really helpful, thank you, jai bharat

[@maku8075]

There's no proof. Give authentic historical scientific proof then will accept your statement.

[@japflex-riva8447]

@@maku8075 i know that and i got the proof but it is really really inefficient for me to do that

[@maku8075]

@@japflex-riva8447 with no sciencetific reasonable proof you would just be another conspiracy theory guy. If you want the world to accept that you have to give proff.

[@japflex-riva8447]

@@maku8075 ok, so you think you are correct and i am not?

[@maku8075]

@@japflex-riva8447 oral tradition may be older but written Vedas are 2000-2500 years old. But I may be wrong if new scientific proof comes forward.

[@hussainyaghi1445]

im pakhta pakhtun

[@witchilich]

no. pakhtun speak an Iranian language. pakhta were a vedic tribe.

[@hussainyaghi1445]

@@witchilich No, Pashto is a Rigvid language And it is the language of Sangsarkat We do not agree with Iran Raja Jaipal was also a Pashtun Pashtuns were divided into two religions before Hinduism and Zoroastrianism Then with the coming of Islam, they became one religion and a powerful nation was formed from them This is why Iranians think that Pashtuns are Zoroastrian, so will they also be Iranians? But it is not so But Pashto is a Sanskrit language, all its vocabulary is taken from Sanskrit Jaipal is also a Pashto name Buddha's name is also in Pashto language We call Buddha an old man In the Pashto language, a big man is called Bada out of respect Buddha was also a Pashtun And Ragweed was also written in our country Jaipal is a man who loves his country very much Jai means place in Pashto language and Pal means lovers in Pashto language Jaipal means a lover of his country Pashtuns are very historical people who are famous in the world as Afghans and their language is Pashto There are 50 million Afghans living in Pakistan And about 25 million in Afghanistan

[@hunar354]

Yes pakhtuns are Pakhtas.

[@witchilich]

@@hunar354 no

[@ashutoshupadhyay8955]

Focus and do study on dating of these Vedas, Don't rely on wiki only

[@JayVardhanSingh]

I have done my research. These are my sources:- The History And Culture Of The Indian People - Volume 1 - The Vedic Age A History of Ancient and Early Medieval India: From the Stone Age to the 12th Century by Upinder Singh The Wonder that was India by A.L Basham.

[@neildixit1256]

@@JayVardhanSingh Appreciate it. However it would help indian historians in general to critically analyse conclusion s from books that are now considered authoritative - a lot of them make up stuff and base conclusions on flimsy evidence. I am yet to find solid evidence of the vedic period being around 1500 bc.

[@kikaa1884]

Battle of 10 kings taken place in 3900 BC is my opinion which happened before the Mahabharat epic actually.

[@kashutosh9132]

​​@@kikaa1884Did battle of kings happened without horses used in warfare? as historians are claiming we domesticated horses in 3500 bc in modern Ukraine region and horses were not indigenous to India What's the truth??

[@kikaa1884]

@@kashutosh9132 It happened bro it is historical battle and importing horses from central Asia is fine OK

[@user-if8ie5nu8m]

Were Bharatas invaders from outside.

[@KumarHarshRaj]

No.

[@praveencad1]

Ha ha ha ha without knowing date without knowing when...??? Don't distroy the history

[@JayVardhanSingh]

It seems likely that you don't have any idea of what you are talking about. I don't think you appreciate the fact that in History and particularly in the history of Ancient India, we do not have the exact date of most of the events. To give you an example, we do not know the exact date of Thiruvalluvar, when he was born and when he died. There are approximate dates, some scholars believe that he existed in the 5th Century BC and some believe he existed in the 5th Century AD. Because we do not know the precise date of Thiruvalluvar doesn't mean he didn't exist. So I would request you to read some history books. Thank you.

[@vedant3008]

Without knowing date? Leave about date historians are not confirm that a person known as Jesus even liver in history there is 0 proof of Jesus in history

[@schibber3726]

I think he mentioned the name of a Harvard professor please read work

[@anirudh177]

@@vedant3008 yeah, some think Jesus wasn't one person but a group.

[@kashutosh9132]

​@@anirudh177 What Jesus was a group? Like a band or some cult? Or they were identical people like bale character in prestige?

[@honestcat224]

If Rigveda was composed between 2000-1500 BCE, how come the battle took place around the same time ? Wouldn't it be older to be considered important enough to be recorded ? Also considering how the hyms literally are describing "ancient events (to them even) ? Secondly, literally every scholar accepts that Vedas were initially an oral tradition (still evident in Kerala), isn't there a difference between creation and compilation ? Shouldn't that push the dates of battle much beyond what you are proposing ? Lots of contradiction in your claims. Good try; doesn't fit in ofcourse.

[@JayVardhanSingh]

Here is the link of the verse. www.sacred-texts.com/hin/rigveda/rv07018.htm You can read it yourself, they are not describing a past event. The vedas are not Itihas. Even if you don't agree with the date which I have given, no scholars argue that this battle was an "ancient event" to use your terminology. The compilation of the Vedas happened much later. But in this video, I am not talking about compilation, I am talking about composition. We can disagree with the date of the composition of the Vedas, but I don't think there's a single scholar who believe that the battle took place before the composition of the Vedas. But still, if there's a book or an article that says otherwise, please let me know. Thank you.

[@apoorvchauhan6258]

@@JayVardhanSingh If Rig Veda is not describing past events. then its mention of river saraswati should be something contemporary to compilation of Rigveda (arguably 1500BCE). according to that logic, river saraswati should be the mightiest river in the region but Geological records show that Saraswati completely dried up by 1800BCE. this not only pushes the date of rigveda but also Ramayana and Mahabharat both of which gives detailed description of the river

[@apoorvchauhan6258]

@@JayVardhanSingh Vedas are not Itihas. ofcourse they were not written for the purpose that future historians are going to study them. the whole purpose of writting vedas were to compile "Brahmgyan". religious scriptures are outrightly rejected by historians and considered work of fiction but they fail to understand that the events recorded in them are in sync with lunar calendars and position of stars. they doesnt only contains hymns of gods by lineage of contemporary ruling dynasties. and vedas are no exception

[@maku8075]

@@apoorvchauhan6258 every religious text must be taken with a pinch of salt you can't based history based on religious text. If we do that for the Vedas then why not the Bible Qur'an Torah.

[@battlerushiromiya651]

@@maku8075 No scholar except for fundies take the Bible and Quran seriously as historical sources. Historians outright reject characters like Moses,David and Adam because there is no evidence. They accept Elijah and the descriptions of Cyrus,Babylonians,Judah and Israel because there is evidence for these outside tje Bible Similarly many stories about Jesus Jesus the disciples are not taken seriously though because some of the letter written by Paul are authentic, the existence of Paul, Peter, James and a historical jesus( not a mythical Jesus are accepted) Dating the rig veda is problematic as not all the verses were compared at the same time. Are we going to consider the date of compilation or the earliest date of composition of any verse as the starting point of the rig veda

[@sahilsingh6048]

So many andhbhakts commenting before knowing anything basics

[@Smileton]

Fr man because of these embarrassing idiots we all sane Hindus get vilified.

[@sahilsingh6048]

​@@SmiletonReally ,i feel really uncomfortable when these people spam comments like 'no saar we are 9009929 years old saar' comments in comment section who are discussing history on the basis of facts , i mean there is no wrong being one of the oldest , but the comments are really cringe.