Fort Towson

• 
  An actual Indian
• 
  Ceremonial type (Featured image)
• 
  Traditional wedding clothing

• 
  A Hindu wedding ritual in progress. The bride and the groom are seated together, receiving instructions from the priest.
• 
  Indian people in Gwalior
• 
  Indian Kumbh Festival.

• 
  Dharmaraya Swamy Temple, Bangalore
• 
  Sri Ranganathaswamy Temple
• 
  Virupaksha temple, Gopuram Hampi Vijayanagar

• 
  India operates one of the world's largest constellation of remote sensing satellites with 17 satellites in operation as of 2017.
• 
  Mumbai, the financial centre of India
• 
  Hyderabad is a major IT services centre.

• 
  The Taj Mahal, the most famous building depicting the Mughal architecture in India
• 
  The Lakshmana Temple, Khajuraho, in the northern style of Hindu temple architecture, 10th century.
• 
  The Mahabodhi Temple dates to the Gupta era, 5th century CE. Marking the location where the Buddha is said to have attained enlightenment.

• 
  Panorama in Mudumalai National Park,Tamil Nadu
• 
  Himalayan panoramic landscape as seen from Kausani, Uttarakhand in north India
• 
  Leh-Ladakh Region, India. (nice for the contrast between various geographical features...)

• 
  Market in Chennai
• 
  Modern market in Kurla.
• 
  National Stock Exchange of India
• 
  Construction of Kudankulam nuclear plant
• 
  Mahindra XUV500, made in India
• 
  Visakhapatnam Port in the Bay of Bengal.

@Fowler&fowler: regarding your revert, I'll provide exact quotes, but the text in the article is not in line with what the sources say. Joshua Jonathan -Let's talk! 13:41, 25 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I didn't mean that you should provide new sources, only point out what is wrong with the text relative to the sources used, and on the talk page first. People spend weeks debating the addition of one word in the lead. You can't make major changes in the lead. Please read WP:OWN#Featured_articles. I will correct the page numbers and examine the sources again. This is a busy page. Drive-bys sometime change page numbers in good faith, but incorrectly. Fowler&fowler«Talk» 14:20, 25 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, I understand. I did check the sources. Joshua Jonathan -Let's talk! 15:37, 25 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Joshua Jonathan: You have disregarded the usual talk page guidelines that we have observed on this page for 13 years. As I said above, people have spent days discussing a change of just one word. You edited several sentences in the lead. After I reverted your edits, you opened a thread above. I replied (at 14:20 25 August 2020) that I will examine the edits. I am mostly on vacation (see my user page); moreover, what little time I have, I am spending at Kamala Harris and at Manilal Dwivedi, where I'm helping a new editor. You did not even give me 24 hours to reply. You opened a number of subsections, in most of which you have misinterpreted the citations. In some instances, you are complaining that the source cannot be viewed online. Why are you asking me to answer questions if you plan to answer them yourself? Anyway, in a section below I will re-post the sentences of the lead with their citations and quotes from July and August 2019. Some editors will be seeing them for a second, third, or fourth time—the silent majority, in MilborneOne's felicitous phrasing of a year ago. To them, I apologize for importuning them again, though I will not be pinging them this time. Fowler&fowler«Talk» 22:34, 26 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I've explained my edits at the talkpage, as you requested. If you think I misinterpreted the sources, you can explain why you think so. Take your time, make something good of the article on Kamala Harris, and enjoy your vacation; there's no hurry at all. Joshua Jonathan -Let's talk! 05:29, 27 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Oh my, you already did provide quotes, despite your vacation. Do you mind if I move them to the various subsection of this thread, to keep the discussion centralized? I'll respond here anyway. Thanks, Joshua Jonathan -Let's talk! 05:38, 27 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

No I'd rather you answer there in the discussion subsection section. Please also don't add the quotes in green, or any other color. Just tell us in words what your objections are and to what. I'm going to disregard the unfocused discussions below which for the most part are not responses to sources, only to personal opinions of what you have selected for them before I had a chance to tell you what the sources said. Note also, everywhere in the India page, we use only broad scale sources—mostly textbooks about India, or other broad topics, not journal papers, not even monographs, unless we have to. Best regards, Fowler&fowler«Talk» 12:49, 28 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Diversity

My first edit diff changed

Modern humans arrived on the Indian subcontinent from Africa no later than 55,000 years ago.[24] Their long occupation, initially in varying forms of isolation as hunter-gatherers, has made the region highly diverse, second only to Africa in human genetic diversity.^[23]

into

Modern humans arrived on the Indian subcontinent from Africa no later than 55,000 years ago.[24] Subsequent migrations have made the region highly diverse, second only to Africa in human genetic diversity.^[23]

Strictly speaking, the text says that the long occupation by the first modern humans has made the region highly diverse, whereas Dyson (2018) p.28 treats ANI and ASI as examples of this diversity:

...genetic research points to the existence of some very deep-seated lineages - lines of ancestry which show no mixing with external groups for literally tens of thousands of years [...] the results of genetic research can be seen as tentatively consistent with some of the conclusions from linguistic research [...] most of the suncontinents people appear to be characterized by various degrees of mixing of two major and genetically distinct populations (as well as other elements). These have been called the Ancestral North Indians (ANI) and Ancestral South Indians (ASI) respectively [...] the level of genetic diversity is extremely high. Indeed, only Africa's population is genetically more diverse.

Thus, diversity due to subsequent migrations, and not due to genetic variation within those "deep-seated lineages" - who also mixed with IVC-people and Indo-Aryans, except for the Andamese Islands inhabitants. If necessary, Reich's Who We Are And How We Got Here, could be added too. Joshua Jonathan -Let's talk! 13:56, 26 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Re F&f quotes: my point is not the arrival of the first modern humans, but the reason of the genetic diversity. This diversity is due to subsequent migrations. Joshua Jonathan -Let's talk! 05:41, 27 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Social stratification

My second edit diff changed

By 400 BCE, stratification and exclusion by caste had emerged within Hinduism,^[1]

into

By 400 BCE, stratification and exclusion by caste had emerged within the Vedic culture of the Aryan people settling the Ganges basin,^[1]

Dyson (2018) p.16 does not refer to "Hinduism," but to the Aryan culture which spread to the Ganges plain. At 400 BCE, the Hindu synthesis had barely started. Joshua Jonathan -Let's talk! 13:56, 26 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

This is the oldest country FA on Wikipedia. It will celebrate its 16th year this fall. It receives 30K visitors per day. We have a duty of fluency and easy comprehension to our wider readership that trumps recondite nitpicking. Your edits are disruptive, and I don't have time for this. Fowler&fowler«Talk» 17:33, 26 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Oh please. We have a duty for correct representation of the sources. I've explained what the source says; that's not disruptive. Joshua Jonathan -Let's talk! 18:08, 26 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Joshua Jonathan is absolutely right. The source says "Arya settlements" only: "Hinduism" is not mentioned, so it has to go. Basic Wikipedia policy. पाटलिपुत्र Pat (talk) 18:19, 26 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Re F&f quotes:

• Stein: "by the later vedic times of 1000 to 500 bce, the structural elements of the caste system were in place" - Vedic times, not Hinduism.
• Doniger: "Society was already divided into four classes in the Rig Veda [...] a fourth class of servants, the defining ‘others’ who were disenfranchised, not Aryan, but still marginally Hindu.” - see Jamison, Stephanie; Witzel, Michael (1992). "Vedic Hinduism" (PDF). Harvard University. pp. 1–5, 47–52, 74–77.:

... to call this period Vedic Hinduism is a contradictio in terminis since Vedic religion is very different from what we generally call Hindu religion – at least as much as Old Hebrew religion is from medieval and modern Christian religion. However, Vedic religion is treatable as a predecessor of Hinduism.

Doniger is inexact in her usage of terminology.

My point is not about the timeframe of the social stratification, but the term "Hinduism." There was no "Hinduism" yet at that time; the social stratification contributed to the development of "Hinduism." The social stratification was part of the Brahmanical ideology, which attrected support from rulers; this support aided the synthesis of this Brahmanical ideology with local traditions, reinforcing the high social status Brahmins claimed for themselves. But take away "within Hinduism," and the problem is also solved. Joshua Jonathan -Let's talk! 06:24, 27 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Dawn

My third edit diff changed

By 1200 BCE, an archaic form of Sanskrit, an Indo-European language, had diffused into India from the northwest, unfolding as the language of the Rigveda, and recording the dawning of Hinduism in India.^[1]

into

By 1200 BCE, an archaic form of Sanskrit, an Indo-European language, had diffused into India from the northwest, unfolding as the language of the Rigveda, and recording the dawning of Vedic religion in India.^[1]

At 1200, there was no Hinduism, only nascent Vedic religion and other local traditions. It's the synthesis of the Brahmanic religion/ideology, having become a trans-local tradition, with those local traditions, which gave birth to "Hinduism." But that proces started at ca. 500 BCE, and so is not recorded in a text from 1200 BCE. It's the smriti that record the "dawn of Hinduism," not the shruti. I'll give more elaborate explanations later, but the essence is that polular misconceptions are referenced with sources that don't support those claims.
[additional explanation 26 august 2020]:

• Dyson p.15: "...the process whereby a dynamic new force gradually arose - a people with a distince ideology who eventually seem to have referred to themselves as 'Arya'"
• Robb (2011) p.46: link leads me to cover; no pagenumbers; can't check the page.
• Ludden (2013) p.19: no pageview; can't check the page.

Regards, Joshua Jonathan -Let's talk! 15:37, 25 August 2020 (UTC) / update Joshua Jonathan -Let's talk! 14:30, 26 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I think dawn of Hinduism is the more accurate. If a vedic religion were dawning, then, since Hinduism is a (the? is there another vedic religion?) vedic religion, it too was "dawning". --RegentsPark (comment) 16:26, 25 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

No, Hinduism is not a "Vedic religion"; that term is reserved for the early version of the Historical Vedic religion. "Hinduism" is a synthesis of "Brahmanism" and local traditions. The formulation is ambigue, though:

By 1200 BCE, an archaic form of Sanskrit, an Indo-European language, had diffused into India from the northwest, unfolding as the language of the Rigveda, and recording the dawning of Hinduism in India.

Strictly speaking, the sentence is correct, as it says that Sanskrit is the language which recorded the dawning of Hinduism, that is, the language of the sruti and the smriti; yet, it suggests that the Vedas record the dawning of Hinduism; quite unlikely, since Hinduism dawned only 700 years later. If we add the word "subsequent," the sentence would be more correct, especially when "dawning of Hinduism" links to Hindu synthesis. Joshua Jonathan -Let's talk! 16:52, 25 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

"dawn of the Vedic religion" is the best. Johnbod (talk) 12:00, 26 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I agree, "dawn of the Vedic religion" is historically more accurate. पाटलिपुत्र Pat (talk) 12:18, 26 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Jeez, what the heck are you doing JoshuaJonathan. I'm replying but this sort of disruption (of an article that went through a major revision before it appeared in its last TFA in October 2019, watched by dozens of editors, including old India hands and administrators) nedds to be dealt by the noninvolved administrators (@Vanamonde93, MilborneOne, and SpacemanSpiff:
• Not sure I agree that it needs to be changed, but I certainly disagree with the above formulations. First, "dawning(s)" is not quite the same as dawn. Dawning has the figurative meaning of "act of taking shape." e.g. 1710? Newton: "I keep the subject constantly before me, and wait till the first dawnings open slowly, by little and little, into a full and clear light." 1781 E. Gibbon Decline & Fall III. liii. 314 In the ninth century, we trace the first dawnings of the restoration of science. 1843 W. H. Prescott Hist. Conquest Mexico I. i. iv. 92 The dawnings of a literary culture. 1856 B. Brodie Psychol. Inq. (ed. 3) I. v. 198 That principle of intelligence, the dawning of which we observe in the lower animals.

• Second, Dawnings of the same thing can happen in different places and times. I don't see a problem with "first/early dawnings."
• The full sentence makes a complex point, not entirely apparent unless you see the links: How about:

  By 1200 BCE, an [[Proto-language|archaic form]] of [[Sanskrit]], an [[Indo-European language]], had [[Trans-cultural diffusion|diffused]] into India from the northwest, [[Oral transmission|unfolding]] as the language of the ''[[Rigveda]]'', and recording the early dawnings of [[Hinduism]] in India.

  (I'm against mentioning (Historical) Vedic religion by name in the published lead; it is not a widely understood term, found more in WP than most other places. Hinduism is the religion associated with India worldwide. Brahma, Vishnu and Rudra make their first appearance in the RgVeda (not as a trinity, but they do appear). It is unimportant that Brahma is feeling neglected these days, that Vishnu was a minor deity then and Rudra, i.e. Shiva, Mahesh, has a slightly different reputation now. But the names were there. Please tell me which Hindu in India will say, "The Rg Veda is not our book, only the later books are?" Which Hindu will say that the Gayatri mantra is not a mantra of Hinduism, though most Hindus don't know the shloka in the RgVeda that follows the GM, or the one that precedes it.) The Vedic religion was a religious culture that shaped Hinduism, its dawnings are also the dawnings of Hinduism. I mean it could be changed to "the dawnings of a religious culture that shaped Hinduism." But that gets too complicated too early in an article. Wasting community time with fluff is disruption. Fowler&fowler«Talk» 17:23, 26 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• @Joshua Jonathan and Fowler&fowler: I agree that given the status and visibility of the article, firm consensus here is necessary before further changes are made. I do think JJ's point is not unreasonable though; my (admittedly limited) understanding of the literature about Hinduism is that in the absence of a single founder or center of authority, the coalescence of Hinduism into the religion as seen today was very gradual, and we need to take care not to imply otherwise. I think F&F also makes a reasonable point that going into the complex and disparate history of Hinduism isn't feasible in the lead. I have no opinions as to a precise formulation. Vanamonde (Talk) 17:30, 26 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Why do you call it disruption? I checked the sources, because the statements are not in accordance with basic knowledge on the origins of Hinduism; the sources do inxeed not support what the article says. That's not disruption. Joshua Jonathan -Let's talk! 18:18, 26 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

If there was a problem with page numbers, you should have asked me first. I will give you the page numbers and exact quotes. Fowler&fowler«Talk» 18:46, 26 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Quotes would be most welcome; thanks. Regards, Joshua Jonathan -Let's talk! 18:55, 26 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Re F&f quotes:

• Doniger: "Hindu texts began with the Rig Veda (Knowledge of Verses’)" - the Rig Veda is an Indo-Aryan text, which was preserved in Hinduism. Vedic religion is not Hinduism. See Jamison, Stephanie; Witzel, Michael (1992). "Vedic Hinduism" (PDF). Harvard University. pp. 1–5, 47–52, 74–77.:

... to call this period Vedic Hinduism is a contradictio in terminis since Vedic religion is very different from what we generally call Hindu religion – at least as much as Old Hebrew religion is from medieval and modern Christian religion. However, Vedic religion is treatable as a predecessor of Hinduism.

• Robb: "The expansion of Aryan culture is supposed to have begun around 1500 BCE [...] It comprises a set of cultural ideas and practices, upheld by a Sanskrit-speaking elite, or Aryans. The features of this society are recorded in the Vedas." - Robb also refers to Aryan culture, not to Hinduism.
• "Texts that record Aryan culture are not precisely datable, but they seem to begin around 1200 BCE with four collections of Vedic hymns (Rg, Sama, Yajur, and Artharva)." - idem.

All three sources used in the article refer to "Aryan culture," not to Hinduism. Calling that Hinduism is an interpretation of the sources. My proposed sentence could be changed and expanded a little bit, in accordance with the sources:

By 1200 BCE, an archaic form of Sanskrit, an Indo-European language, had diffused into India from the northwest, unfolding as the language of the Rigveda, and recording the expansion in India of Indo-Aryan culture and it's Vedic religion,^[1] one of the predecessors of Hinduism.^[2]

Joshua Jonathan -Let's talk! 06:01, 27 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

First migrations, then Vedas

My fourth edit diff swapped two (parts of) sentences, namely

The Vedas, the oldest scriptures associated with Hinduism,^[1] were composed during this period,^[2] and historians have analysed these to posit a Vedic culture in the Punjab region and the upper Gangetic Plain.^[3] Most historians also consider this period to have encompassed several waves of Indo-Aryan migration into the subcontinent from the north-west.^[1]

into

Most historians consider this period to have encompassed several waves of Indo-Aryan migration into the subcontinent from the north-west.^[1] The Vedas, the sacred hymns of the Vedic religion, and the oldest scriptures associated with Hinduism,^[1] were composed and codified during this period.^[2] Historians have analysed these to posit a Vedic culture in the Punjab region and the upper Gangetic Plain.^[3]

First came the migrations, then the Vedas; the first version subtly conveys an indigenous Aryans position, whereas the second version is in line with mainstream scholarship. Joshua Jonathan -Let's talk! 14:36, 26 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Why are you wasting time? The second sentence is a summing up, a minor point (note there is an also). It is not a description of chronology. By changing it, you are making the migration more emphatic; not everyone is on board with the idea of a major physical migration. Fowler&fowler«Talk» 17:26, 26 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Fowler&fowler: I am afraid you are being quite unfair to Joshua Jonathan. He is quite an established user, not a vandal, and his points do make a lot of sense. First you bluntly revert all his edits, demanding that he explains everything on the Talk Page. Then, when he does the explaining, you are just insulting him with "Why are you wasting time?", "Jeez, what the heck are you doing", and "Wasting community time with fluff is disruption". That's not cool. Many of his comments above actually result from a closer reading of the sources. पाटलिपुत्र Pat (talk) 18:35, 26 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Both he and you should read WP:OWN#Featured_articles, again and again. Do you think we are idiots that we never edit the page before arriving at a consensus on talk, and have been doing it for 12 years? Fowler&fowler«Talk» 18:42, 26 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Fowler&fowler: I don't think you are an idiot, but I do think you tend to behave terribly when you are being challenged. Most of the points made by Joshua Jonathan here rely on a more accurate reading of the sources... as a mature and highly educated editor you should have the wisdom to recognize his points, and correct accordingly. Cheers पाटलिपुत्र Pat (talk) 18:54, 26 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with Fowler. These are arcana that really should not be in the lead. What's with all the images that have taken over the discussion?--RegentsPark (comment) 17:49, 26 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

It's only wasting time if you're not willing to consider the possibilty that this featured article is not fully accurate. NB: these sentences are not in the lead. Joshua Jonathan -Let's talk! 18:13, 26 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Please respond if you have to only in the discussion section at the end.

• Modern humans arrived on the Indian subcontinent from Africa no later than 55,000 years ago.

• Dyson, Tim (2018), A Population History of India: From the First Modern People to the Present Day, Oxford University Press, p. 1, ISBN 978-0-19-882905-8

• Quote: "Modern human beings—Homo sapiens—originated in Africa. Then, intermittently, sometime between 60,000 and 80,000 years ago, tiny groups of them began to enter the north-west of the Indian subcontinent. It seems likely that initially they came by way of the coast. ... it is virtually certain that there were Homo sapiens in the subcontinent 55,000 years ago, even though the earliest fossils that have been found of them date to only about 30,000 years before the present. (page 1)"

• Michael D. Petraglia; Bridget Allchin (22 May 2007). The Evolution and History of Human Populations in South Asia: Inter-disciplinary Studies in Archaeology, Biological Anthropology, Linguistics and Genetics. Springer Science & Business Media. p. 6. ISBN 978-1-4020-5562-1.

• Quote: "Y-Chromosome and Mt-DNA data support the colonization of South Asia by modern humans originating in Africa. ... Coalescence dates for most non-European populations average to between 73–55 ka."

• Fisher, Michael H. (2018), An Environmental History of India: From Earliest Times to the Twenty-First Century, Cambridge University Press, p. 23, ISBN 978-1-107-11162-2

• Quote: "Scholars estimate that the first successful expansion of the Homo sapiens range beyond Africa and across the Arabian Peninsula occurred from as early as 80,000 years ago to as late as 40,000 years ago, although there may have been prior unsuccessful emigrations. Some of their descendants extended the human range ever further in each generation, spreading into each habitable land they encountered. One human channel was along the warm and productive coastal lands of the Persian Gulf​ and northern Indian Ocean.​ Eventually, various bands entered India between 75,000 years ago and 35,000 years ago (page 23)"

• Their long occupation, initially in varying forms of isolation as hunter-gatherers, has made India second only to Africa in human genetic diversity.

• Dyson, Tim (2018), A Population History of India: From the First Modern People to the Present Day, Oxford University Press, p. 28, ISBN 978-0-19-882905-8

• Quote: "Genetic research has contributed to knowledge of the prehistory of the subcontinent’s people in other respects. In particular, the level of genetic diversity in the region is extremely high. Indeed, only Africa’s population is genetically more diverse.113 Related to this, there is strong evidence of ‘founder’ events in the subcontinent. By this is meant circumstances where a subgroup—such as a tribe—derives from a tiny number of ‘original’ individuals. Further, compared to most world regions, the subcontinent’s people are relatively distinct in having practised comparatively high levels of endogamy. That is, there is strong evidence of sexual interaction and breeding within rather than between groups—groups here being mainly tribes and castes. One consequence of this is that it leads to relatively high rates of recessive disease.114 Overall, the antiquity and variety of the subcontinent’s genetic landscape is broadly consistent with what has been gleaned from archaeological, linguistic, and other research.115 In particular, and beyond the major contrasts between ANI and ASI ancestry, and Indo-Aryan and Dravidian speakers, the exceptional genetic diversity of the region’s people corresponds to the fact that there are a multitude of different castes and tribes, and that many different languages are spoken. It also accords with what was discussed in Chapter 1 concerning the likely nature of the subcontinent’s hunter-gatherer prehistory. For many thousands of years many small groups seem to have existed in relative isolation from each other."

By 1200 BCE, an archaic form of Sanskrit, an Indo-European language, had diffused into India from the northwest, unfolding as the language of the Rigveda, and recording the dawning of Hinduism in India.

• Dyson, Tim (2018), A Population History of India: From the First Modern People to the Present Day, Oxford University Press, pp. 14–15, ISBN 978-0-19-882905-8

• Quote: "Although the collapse of the Indus valley civilization is no longer believed to have been due to an ‘Aryan invasion’ it is widely thought that, at roughly the same time, or perhaps a few centuries later, new Indo-Aryan-speaking people and influences began to enter the subcontinent from the north-west. Detailed evidence is lacking. Nevertheless, a predecessor of the language that would eventually be called Sanskrit was probably introduced into the north-west sometime between 3,900 and 3,000 years ago. This language was related to one then spoken in eastern Iran; and both of these languages belonged to the Indo-European language family. ... It seems likely that various small-scale migrations were involved in the gradual introduction of the predecessor language and associated cultural characteristics. However, there may not have been a tight relationship between movements of people on the one hand, and changes in language and culture on the other. Moreover, the process whereby a dynamic new force gradually arose—a people with a distinct ideology who eventually seem to have referred to themselves as ‘Arya’—was certainly two-way. That is, it involved a blending of new features which came from outside with other features—probably including some surviving Harappan influences—that were already present. Anyhow, it would be quite a few centuries before Sanskrit was written down. And the hymns and stories of the Arya people—especially the Vedas and the later Mahabharata and Ramayana epics—are poor guides as to historical events. Of course, the emerging Arya were to have a huge impact on the history of the subcontinent. Nevertheless, little is known about their early presence."

• Doniger, Wendy (2014). On Hinduism. Oxford University Press. p. 6. ISBN 978-0-19-936007-9.

• Quote: "In the earliest preserved text of Hinduism, the Rig Veda, the people who referred to themselves as ‘we’ defined themselves in contrast with the ‘aliens’ or ‘slaves’, who spoke non-Indo-European languages, had dark skin and blunt features, and had been in possession of the Indian subcontinent before the Indo-Europeans (the ‘Aryans’) entered it from, most probably, Central Asia. (p 6) ... Hindu texts began with the Rig Veda (Knowledge of Verses’), composed in northwest India around 1500 ce; the first of the three Vedas, it is the earliest extant text composed in Sanskrit, the language of ancient India. "

• Robb, Peter (2011), A History of India, Macmillan, pp. 46–, ISBN 978-0-230-34549-2

• Quote: "The expansion of Aryan culture is supposed to have begun around 1500 BCE. It should not be thought that this Aryan emergence (though it implies some migration) necessarily meant either a sudden invasion of new peoples, or a complete break with earlier traditions. It comprises a set of cultural ideas and practices, upheld by a Sanskrit-speaking elite, or Aryans. The features of this society are recorded in the Vedas. Firstly, they imply warrior-leaders, deified in the form of Indra - possibly marking the subjugation of the Dasas, meaning either separate tribes or lower social orders who resisted the Aryans. Secondly, the Vedas imply specialist priests (brahmans, those who pray), their role demanded above all by the fire-sacrifice (yajna), and reflected in a pantheon of gods, sun-worship and other rituals, especially those involving the hallucinogen, soma. Thirdly, the Vedas recognize traders, craftsmen and other workers. At some stage these roles ceased to be necessarily occupational but became hereditary."

• Ludden, David (2013), India and South Asia: A Short History, Oneworld Publications, p. 19, ISBN 978-1-78074-108-6

• Quote: " In Punjab, a dry region with grasslands watered by five rivers (hence ‘panch’ and ‘ab’) draining the western Himalayas, one prehistoric culture left no material remains, but some of its ritual texts were preserved orally over the millennia. The culture is called Aryan, and evidence in its texts indicates that it spread slowly south-east, following the course of the Yamuna and Ganga Rivers. Its elite called itself Arya (pure) and distinguished themselves sharply from others. Aryans led kin groups organized as nomadic horse-herding tribes. Their ritual texts are called Vedas, composed in Sanskrit. Vedic Sanskrit is recorded only in hymns that were part of Vedic rituals to Aryan gods. To be Aryan apparently meant to belong to the elite among pastoral tribes. Texts that record Aryan culture are not precisely datable, but they seem to begin around 1200 BCE with four collections of Vedic hymns (Rg, Sama, Yajur, and Artharva)."

• The Dravidian languages of India were supplanted in the north.

• Dyson, Tim (2018), A Population History of India: From the First Modern People to the Present Day, Oxford University Press, p. 25, ISBN 978-0-19-882905-8

• Quote: "There are more than 300 functioning languages in the Indian subcontinent today. However, the region’s linguistic geography is dominated by the division between Indo-Aryan languages, which are spoken throughout most of the north and the west, and Dravidian languages, which are spoken throughout parts of the east and most of the south. Indo-Aryan tongues constitute a branch of the Indo-European language group. They include Hindi, Punjabi, Urdu, Gujarati, Marathi, and Bengali. In large part, these languages evolved from a predecessor or early form of Sanskrit. Dravidian tongues include the four main southern languages, i.e. Kannada, Telugu, Malayalam, and Tamil. Dravidian languages were once spoken throughout much of the subcontinent. Indeed, Harappan symbols have been interpreted to suggest that the language of the Indus valley civilization may have been ‘proto-Dravidian’.95 This suggestion is hard to assess. But it is certainly conceivable that some of the communities associated with the Indus civilization spoke Dravidian tongues. Without doubt, Dravidian languages were once used in most of the west of the subcontinent—including Maharashtra and Gujarat, and stretching as far west as Sind.96 Indeed, even today the Dravidian language of Brahui is spoken in southern Baluchistan—although whether it is a ‘survival’ from an earlier time when Dravidian languages were very widely spoken, or has been carried there by the migration of a community north-westward out of Gujarat, remains unresolved. The distribution of Indo-Aryan languages almost certainly reflects the emergence of the Arya as a force in the north-west and the subsequent expansion of cognate influences throughout the Ganges basin and beyond. It seems likely that Indo-Aryan languages were being spoken throughout most of the area north of the Narmada River by 1 ce. The process whereby these new tongues supplanted those of the pre-existing peoples has been termed ‘language replacement’.97"

• Dyson, Tim (2018), A Population History of India: From the First Modern People to the Present Day, Oxford University Press, p. 16, ISBN 978-0-19-882905-8

• Quote: "In the next millennium, swathes of the upper Ganges river valley were deforested for agriculture, In any event, the settlement of the Ganges basin by Indo-Aryan speaking people was an extremely long and arduous process. The texts of the Vedas refer to Arya victories over dasas, their darker-skinned enemies. And the process of settlement well may well have involved driving communities out, appropriating women, and the enslavement of pre-existing peoples. Anyhow, the Arya used fire to help with forest clearance, and the later introduction of iron axes must also have helped."

• By 400 BCE, stratification and exclusion by caste had emerged within Hinduism,

• Dyson, Tim (2018), A Population History of India: From the First Modern People to the Present Day, Oxford University Press, p. 16, ISBN 978-0-19-882905-8

• Quote: "However, underpinned by a growing population, a widespread process of urbanization—sometimes referred to as a ‘second urbanization’—began to occur in the Ganges basin between about 600 and 400 BCE. Thus, by the latter date, there were a number of significant—mostly riverside—cities scattered throughout the basin. From west to east, they included Indraprastha (perhaps in the vicinity of what is now Delhi), Mathura, Kausambi, Ayodhya, Kashi (i.e. Varanasi or Benares), Vaisali, Pataliputra (i.e. Patna), Rajagriha (i.e. Rajgir), Champa, and the trading outlet of Tamralipti on the Bay of Bengal. While some of the Indus civilization’s more peripheral towns (e.g. in Gujarat) lingered on, these new cities in the Ganges basin were the first sizeable urban centres to have appeared for more than a thousand years. Most of the new cities were fortified. And, as one would expect, they became the centres for social, economic, political, and religious developments. They were also places of evident social differentiation. Thus, by 400 BCE, the essential structural features of the caste system already existed. 47 (Stein 2010)"

• Stein, History of India, 2010

• Quote: "Subjects of the raja of later vedic times and servants of the elite for whose protection he was selected, praja, were divided into ‘shudras’ and ‘dasas’. Dasas are described as unattractive and uncultured, with broad, flat noses and black skin, speaking a strange language and practising ‘crude magic’ in contrast to the prestigious vedic ritual of the Aryans. However, many dasas were said to have been captured in wars among Aryan clans as well as between Aryans and non-Aryans, so it may have been only defeat that set them apart in reality, and the negative descriptions are simply the victors’ insults. Dasas were set to working the lands and tending the herds of lower Aryan clansmen and other vis. Another designation for a people despised by Aryans was mleccha, a term meaning ‘one who speaks indistinctly’, in later times connoting a barbarian whose origins were not in the subcontinent. Those called vis adopted the title of vaishya, which at first designated the leading households of farmers, herdsmen or merchants. The heads of such households were called grihapati in some later vedic sources and gahapati in Buddhist texts; they were sources of tribute to Aryan rajas and fees to brahman priests. Thus by the later vedic times of 1000 to 500 bce, the structural ele ments of the caste system were in place, summarized as well as canonically accounted for in the ‘Hymn of the Primeval Man’: the four varnas (colours or castes) of brahmans, kshatriyas, vaishyas and shudras. the shudras; the term varna reinforced these ranked differences: brahmans were supposed to wear white, kshatriyas yellow, vaishyas red and shudras black. Another invidious distinction made manifest by Buddhist times was that between the three highest varnas, who were considered twice-born (dvija), and the shudras. The former participated in a ritual ‘second’ birth (upanayana, initiation) while the latter did not. In addition, there were groups ranked even lower than shudras; to them was attached the stigma of untouchability, supposedly because their occupa tions were deeply polluting. These included leather workers, who disposed of sacred cattle when they died. ... Intermarriage and eating together were determined by the smaller units into which all the varnas were divided; (pp 51-52)

• Doniger, Wendy (2014). On Hinduism. Oxford University Press. p. 6. ISBN 978-0-19-936007-9.

• Quote: " Society was already divided into four classes in the Rig Veda: the priests (Brahmins) who ruled the roost of the first class, the warrior-kings of the second class, the merchants and landowners who made up the third class, and a fourth class of servants, the defining ‘others’ who were disenfranchised, not Aryan, but still marginally Hindu.” Later, other groups below even the servants formed the ranks of the ‘not-us’ who were only questionably Hindu or not Hindu at all. The largest 'not-us’ group comprised the castes of people once called Untouchables, now called Dalits, whose deep-rooted pariah status was reinforced by their performing jobs, such as scavenging and sweeping cremation grounds, that higher-caste Hindus, ‘the twice-born’, did not do."

Discussion

I've added the original citations and quotes from August 2019, supplemented with two cites from Wendy Doniger and Burton Stein. Fowler&fowler«Talk» 23:49, 26 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your efforts, despite your vacation. I hope you're staying at a nice - and safe! - place. I have responded above, to keep the discussion cetralized. NB: the replacement of the Dravidian languages by Indo-Aryan languages is not in question. Regards, Joshua Jonathan -Let's talk! 06:30, 27 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

No, as I've stated above, please reply here, without quoting again, and in simple words what your objections are and to what. The above discussion with numerous sections was opened in less than 24 hours after your original post, i.e. before I had had a chance to respond in what is a reasonable time. I'd like to hear arguments, not see voting to rehashes of quotes. Fowler&fowler«Talk» 12:56, 28 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note also, everywhere in the India page, we use only broad scale sources—mostly textbooks about India, or other broad topics, not journal papers, not even monographs, unless we have to. It is the imperative of WP:DUE. Fowler&fowler«Talk» 13:02, 28 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

PS Sorry, about the Dravidian languages quotes, I think it that discussion has taken place in another section above. Pinging @RegentsPark: for his attention if he needs the quotes. Fowler&fowler«Talk» 13:08, 28 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Response by JJ:

• Diversity: Dyson (2018) p.28 refers to ANI and ASI; the diversity is due to subsequent migrations, not to the long occupation of India by the first modern humans to arrive in India.
• Social stratification: Dyson (2018) p.16 does not refer to "Hinduism," but to the Aryan culture which spread to the Ganges plain. Stein refers to "Vedic times," not Hinduism. The body of the article says "The caste system [..] arose during this period." Remove "within Hinduism" from the lead, and the problem is solved.
• Dawn: All three sources used in the article refer to "Aryan culture," not to Hinduism. Calling Vedic culture/religion Hinduism is an interpretation of the sources. Vedic religion is not Hinduism. Jamison, Stephanie; Witzel, Michael (1992). "Vedic Hinduism" (PDF). Harvard University. p. 3.:

... to call this period Vedic Hinduism is a contradictio in terminis since Vedic religion is very different from what we generally call Hindu religion – at least as much as Old Hebrew religion is from medieval and modern Christian religion. However, Vedic religion is treatable as a predecessor of Hinduism.

Stephanie W. Jamison and Michael Witzel are reputable scholars. See Hindu synthesis for an extensive treatment of this topic. My proposal, in accordance with the sources:

By 1200 BCE, an archaic form of Sanskrit, an Indo-European language, had diffused into India from the northwest, unfolding as the language of the Rigveda, and recording the expansion of Indo-Aryan culture and it's Vedic religion,^[1] one of the predecessors of Hinduism.^[2]

It's up to you what you do with these suggestions to improve the article. But this is what the sources say. Regards, Joshua Jonathan -Let's talk! 14:28, 28 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

OK, @Joshua Jonathan: they are legitimate questions. I'll think about them and reply in a week or two, but here are a few quick replies.

• First, by "modern humans" we mean the behaviorally modern humans of the Upper paleolithic, not necessarily the first band of migrants who arrived on the subcontinent. For example, if we had said, "homo sapiens first arrived on the subcontinent in ... Their long occupation ..." we would not be talking about the first migrants, but the entire population. Second, the expression "genetic diversity" he is using (and perhaps that is not the best expression) is Human phenotypic diversity, for that is what is increased by Founder effect, genetic drift, and endogamy whether enforced by environmental isolation or by behavioral or ritual isolation as in Caste. I will need to think more about this.
• As for "dawning" (in the lead) we are talking in very general (broadly inclusive) terms. ( Btw, We use only broadscale sources (textbooks on India or another broad topic), not journal articles, not even monographs. I have of course been aware of Witzel's writings, even used them myself on WP, but he has never written anything broadscale about India. WP rules and regulations aside, there is an encyclopedic tradition here. Britannica's article on the Rg Veda says, "... the oldest of the sacred books of Hinduism," Its article on Hinduism says in its History of Hinduism section: "The history of Hinduism in India can be traced to about 1500 BCE." Its article on Vedic Religion sums it up: "It was one of the major traditions that shaped Hinduism.") "Dawning," as I've explained above, has the figurative meaning of the "act of taking shape;" and in this aspect, especially in the plural, it is a little different from "dawn." ( Think of it in the meanings of: 1710? Newton: "I keep the subject constantly before me, and wait till the first dawnings open slowly, by little and little, into a full and clear light." 1781 E. Gibbon Decline & Fall III. liii. 314 In the ninth century, we trace the first dawnings of the restoration of science. 1843 W. H. Prescott Hist. Conquest Mexico I. i. iv. 92 The dawnings of a literary culture. 1856 B. Brodie Psychol. Inq. (ed. 3) I. v. 198 That principle of intelligence, the dawning of which we observe in the lower animals.) Let me think about it some more, but I would agree to

  By 1200 BCE, an [[Proto-language|archaic form]] of [[Sanskrit]], an [[Indo-European language]], had [[Trans-cultural diffusion|diffused]] into India from the northwest, [[Oral transmission|unfolding]] as the language of the ''[[Rigveda]]'', and recording <s>dawning</s> early dawnings of [[Hinduism]] in India.

  That to me would be a perfect broadscale characterization. It is using dawnings to indicate the acts of taking shape, the first strands; we are not using the definite article, i.e. "the," but "early," so we are leaving open the possibility of similar (even earlier) dawnings having taken place in IVC, Central Asia, etc.
• I need to think more about "social stratification" some more.

Thanks for bringing these topics up. They are valid discussion questions. Best, Fowler&fowler«Talk» 18:25, 28 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]