Tides of History
art19.comNew episodes come out Thursdays for free, with 1-week early access for Wondery+ subscribers.
Everywhere around us are echoes of the past. Those echoes define the boundaries of states and countries, how we pray and how we fight. They determine what money we spend and how we earn it at work, what language we speak and how we raise our children. From Wondery, host Patrick Wyman, PhD (“Fall Of Rome”) helps us understand our world and how it got to be the way it is.
This podcast describes what we can infer about the “Indo-Aryans” who moved into South Asia around ~1700 BCE. Lets discuss!
To start, the historian-narrator has a preface about how he does not want to discuss the modern political interpretations of “Aryans” – whether that is neo-Nazi or Indian nationalist. Do you think this is generally a good rule – that people living 3000 years ago are not relevant to modern politics and identity? Or should we consciously look to these ancient people to provide a foundation for modern identities?
You must log in or register to comment.
Posts must present a serious debate topic
For general discussion see: !politics@lemmy.ml
- 0 users online
- 1 user / day
- 1 user / week
- 1 user / month
- 1 user / 6 months
- 41 subscribers
- 13 Posts
- 133 Comments
- Modlog
- mods:
I think the reality of the historical aryans is a good data point to debunk the 1938 German narrative.
In the current climate it might be considered something that doesn’t need to be debunked, but leaving dark spots in ones vision is a good way to be blindsided. One look at these historical Aryans compared to the ideological Aryans is a telling comparison.
Real history can have a bearing on current times which is one reason why it’s important to learn history and to learn from history, but not when that history is revised into fantasy.
As for whether ancient people should provide a foundation for identity, I’d say yes but no. Yes if they are a direct predecessor to a modern culture, but no since even 1000 years ago culture and language were so different you can’t directly take from that without an immediate slide into barbarism – a lot of acceptable things back then are the greatest crimes against humanity today, you can’t directly draw from that barrel without careful distillation and refinement.
Another point is that history isn’t written by the winners – it’s written by the people who write history down. This distinction is important because you don’t know what or who is flavoring the culture of 3000 years ago. You hope the truth is what’s written, but there’s no guarantee.