Mainstream archaeology's inability to accept these are proto
Hindu/vedic people is staggering. So much evidence, so much
conjecture... of course a culture followed it - it's called
"India". The colonial biases in Indology need to stop. The seals,
the standard measurements, the maths, etc - all are now present
in India today.
Most of Indology was written by colonial brits and germans in the
1800s who had a vested interest in suppressing's India's
knowledge and heritage. It has to stop.[1]
Having said that, let me ask the following:
1) Historically, have there been systemic pro-European biases in Indology research and scholarship?
2) Is this bias unique to Indology and not found in say Egyptology or Oriental studies or the study of other great civilizations of yester era?
3) Is there a generally well studied consensus among Indologists, about the origin of Indic peoples and the emergence of their society & culture?
4) I know Indo-European languages are generally well studied. So do linguists and phonologists generally agree on which proto-language(s) gave rise to the rest?
5) What is a good introductory text (or tome) that all students of Indology are assigned in universities across the world, the authority & veracity of which is generally uncontested?
[1] http://io9.com/mainstream-archaeologys-inability-to-accept-t...