History Stack Exchange is a question and answer site for historians and history buffs. It's 100% free, no registration required.

Sign up
Here's how it works:
  1. Anybody can ask a question
  2. Anybody can answer
  3. The best answers are voted up and rise to the top

As per the history Hinduisam is Oldest and ancient on the earth...

As per my research... Hinduthvam is from Aryan Race and their Language was Sanskrit and Pakrit... Dravidians are different Race.. As Per the Records Dravidian language ancient where we can have evidence upto 400BCE ..

     And most of the Hinduthva books have wrote in Sanskrit. 

My question is Dravidians influenced by aryans ? if So . Dravidains should follow one religion or may be they should worship some .. ?

And Dravidian Race is How ancient is Dravidian race.. Which one is ancient ? If Dravidian Race ancient which religion they followed ?

share|improve this question

closed as unclear what you're asking by Mark C. Wallace, American Luke, Kobunite, Noldorin, Rajib Apr 23 '14 at 5:01

Please clarify your specific problem or add additional details to highlight exactly what you need. As it's currently written, it’s hard to tell exactly what you're asking. See the How to Ask page for help clarifying this question.If this question can be reworded to fit the rules in the help center, please edit the question.

Have you done any preliminary research? – Mark C. Wallace Apr 21 '14 at 8:40
This question is terribly ill-informed. It must be closed in its current state. – Noldorin Apr 23 '14 at 1:59

The premise of the question is incorrect. Hinduism is most certainly and very much prevalent in South India, along with Islam, Christianity, and many other religions. There is no such thing as Dravidianism. If there was such a thing in ancient times, it is a highly debated and contentious issue. Genetics and many other modern tools seem to suggest that these are constructs - just like race. So if the question is with reference to religion- there is no religion called Dravidianism. If it is a racial question- I propose that it is an incorrect premise to construct racial identities.

EDIT: (Addition)

Many of the greatest "revivalists" and thinkers of Hinduism (although the term Hinduism is very broad- i use it here in the conventional sense) have come from South India (South India- again in conventional sense). Three of the most well known scholars/thinkers were Shankaracharya, Ramanuja and Madhavacharya.

Epics such as the Ramayana have been re-interpreted and re-told in South Indian Languages such as Kamban's version of Ramayana. Also, Shaivism and other forms of Hinduism has had rich literary inputs from all languages. To see Tamil literature check this. The other (primary) languages in south India are Kannada, Malayalam, and Telugu. A search will throw up many results, but it is too vast to cover in an SE answer.

share|improve this answer
The only thing i know of that has Dravid- as a word stem are Dravidian languages. Usually where there is a language, there is a cultural identity tied to it. Sometimes where there is a cultural identity, there is a people, and where there is a people there might be common genetic traits, or some similar migrational background to arbitrarily group these people together for the purpose of discussion. But this is just conjecture...As i'm not well informed about this, i might just be ignorant of any other stuff "dravidian" might refer to. – Matthaeus Jul 20 '14 at 21:18

As mentioned in Rajib's, the question is not entirely correct. In addition, there are theories that say that the Aryan-Dravidian distinction is not true, and that all are of the same race. But, to answer the question, some of the best songs of Indian classical music were composed in the South Indian language Telugu (by native speakers of course), and all the songs are hymns to some god. The revivals of Hinduism, in the face of opposition from Buddhism and Jainism, was carried by mainly south Indians (Adi Shankaracharya). They also established many "peethams" - so its not like South India didn't influence Hinduism, either. There are translations of Ramayanam, Mahabharatm and Bhagvat Gita in Telugu. Then, again there are the large number of temples in Tamil Nadu. And most importantly, almost since the rule of ChandraGutpa Maurya, the vast bulk of India was under one control. So, to say that "South Indians are not Hindu" is not correct.

share|improve this answer

It might be worth mentioning that “Hinduism” is an invention of British writers of the 19th century. Before the colonial period people in India defined themselves by caste (Brahmans etc.) or as devotees of a particular god (Shaiva, Vaishnava etc.). There was no concept of “Hindus” as a group in contrast to Buddhists, Jain, Muslims etc.

share|improve this answer
I agree to the point that Hinduism is a term coined by British writers. But, I would contradict in terms of your point in about the concept of Hindus. Well before British, the peoples of India followed a way of living known as "Sanathana Dharma". Under this big umbrella there where various sects of peoples with various beliefs and follow different God's. So, I would like to reiterate that Hindu are prevailing for a long time but with a different name. – Karthick Apr 23 '14 at 3:04
@Karthick Can you point to some reference that says "Sanathana Dharma", and that it includes Shaivas, Vaishnavs, and the innumerable other sects? – Rajib Jul 21 '14 at 13:53
@Rajib: Sanathana Dharma is a way of living. Stephan Knapps has written a beautiful artical in his website. Hope this would help you understand the Sanathana dharma and also, the fact that Dharam always refer to God Almighty as universal power and not as Shivites, vaishnavites, ets.. Its we who factorin the dharma into our own practices and name it as Shivites or vaishavites. But, the dharma is universal. Furhter Reading: stephen-knapp.com/sanatana_dharma.htm – Karthick Jul 23 '14 at 1:58
@Karthick A way of living can be defined by anyone. This is not historical fact and has no place in a history discussion unless you can show literature or reference from history that clearly states that such a notion / belief existed. A Post independence attempt to create a pan-Indian credo is politics, not history. – Rajib Jul 23 '14 at 7:36
@Rajib: sanskritweb.net/rigveda/griffith.pdf whis is based on sanathan dharma is ofcouse history. Any written evidence about the past is considered as artifact of history. Tholkappiyam which was dated as 500 BC which says about lord Shiva is history... வட வேங்கடம் தென் குமரி ஆயிடைத் தமிழ் கூறும் நல் உலகத்து வழக்கும் செய்யுளும் ஆயிரு முதலின் எழுத்தும் சொல்லும் பொருளும் நாடிச் 5 செந்தமிழ் இயற்கை சிவணிய நிலத்தொடு முந்து நூல் கண்டு முறைப்பட எண்ணிப் புலம் தொகுத்தோனே போக்கு அறு பனுவல் நிலம் தரு திருவின் பாண்டியன் அவையத்து அறம் கரை நாவின் நான்மறை முற்றிய – Karthick Jul 24 '14 at 2:52

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.