[Image]
                Demise of Aryan Invasion/Race Theory-Part 1

                           Prof. Dinesh Agrawal
          Address: 156 Aberdeen lane, State College, PA 16801 USA
            Tel: (814)-234-3558 (Home), (814)-863-8034 (Office)

Aryan Race and Invasion Theory is not a subject of academic interest only,
rather it conditions our perception of India's historical evolution, the
sources of her ancient glorious heritage, and indigenous
socio-economic-political institutions which have been developed over the
millennia. Indian culture and nationalism have been evolved and fostered
over the millenia by India's ancient rishis who at the banks of holy rivers
of Saptasindhuand Saraswati had composed the Vedic literature - the very
foundation of Indian civilization, and realized the eternal truths about
the Creator, His creation, and means to preserve it. These pioneers of the
ancient Vedic culture were indigenous people of mother India, this fact is
mendaciously denied by the Aryan Invasion theory which professes their
foreign origin, and thereby challenges the very raison d'etre of Indian
culture and nationhood. In this article an attempt has been made to expose
the myth of Aryan Invasion Theory (AIT) by quoting scriptural, historical
and archaeological evidences, and presenting proper interpretation of Vedic
literature.

The Aryan issue is quite controversial and has been the focus of
historians, archaeologists, Indologists, and sociologists for over a
century. AIT is merely a proposed 'theory', and not a factual event. And
theories keep modifying, are discredited, nay even rejected with the
emergence of new knowledge and new data. Now with the emergence of new
information in last couple of decades, and an objective analysis of the
archaeological data and scriptures, the validity of AIT is seriously
challenged by scholars, and by many is outrightly discarded. The most weird
aspect of the AIT is that it has its origin not in any Indian records but
in European politics and German nationalism of 19th century. No where in
any of the ancient Indian scriptures or epics or Puranas, etc. is there any
mention of Aryan migration or invasion or Aryan race.

In the last couple of decades, the discovery of the lost track of the Rig
Vedic river Saraswati, the excavation of a chain of Harappan sites from
Ropar in the Punjab to Lothal and Dhaulavira in Gujarat all along this lost
track, the discovery of the archaeological remains of Vedis (alters) and
Yupas connected with Vedic Yajnas (sacrifices) at Harrapan sites like
Kalibangan, decipherment of the Harappan/Indus script by many scholars as a
language belonging to Vedic Sanskrit family, the view of the archaeologists
like Prof. Dales, Prof. Allchin etc. that the end of the Harappan
civilization came not because of the so called Aryan invasion but as a
result of a series of floods, the discovery of the lost Dwarka city beneath
the sea water near Gujarat coast and its similarity with Harappan
civilization, and an objective, accurate and contextual interpretation of
Vedas indicate convincingly towards the full identity of the Harappan/Indus
civilization with post Vedic civilization, and demand a re-examination of
the entire gamut of Aryan Race/Invasion Theories.

For thousands of years the Hindu society has looked upon the Vedas as the
fountain-head of all knowledge: spiritual and secular, and the mainstay of
Hindu culture, heritage and its existence. Never our historical or
religious records have questioned this fact. Even western and far eastern
travellers who have documented their experiences during their prolonged
stay and sojourn in India have testified the importance of Vedic literature
and its indigenous origin. And now, suddenly, in the last century or so,
these the so-called European scholars are telling that the Vedas do not
belong to Hindus, they were the creation of a barbaric horde of nomadic
tribes descended upon north India and destroyed an advanced indigenous
civilization. They even suggest that the Sanskrit language is of non-Indian
origin. This is all absurd, preposterous, and defies the commonsense. A
nomadic, barbaric horde of invaders cannot from any stretch of imagination
produce the kind of sublime wisdom, pure and pristine spiritual experiences
of the highest order, a universal philosophy of religious tolerance and
harmony for the entire mankind, one finds in the Vedic literature.
Major Flaws in Aryan Invasion Theory

A major flaw of the invasion theory was that it had no explanation for why
the Vedic literature that was assumed to go back into the second millennium
BC had no reference to any region outside of India. Also the astronomical
references in the Rig Veda allude to events in the third millennium BC and
even earlier, indicating origin of Vedic hymns earlier than 3000 BC. If it
is assumed that the so-called Aryans invaded the townships in the Harappa
valley and destroyed its habitants and their civilization, how come after
doing that they did not occupy these towns? The excavations of these sites
indicate that the townships were abandoned. And if the Harappan
civilization had a Dravidian origin, who were allegedly pushed down to the
south by Aryans, how come there is no Aryan - Dravidian divide in the
respective literatures and historical traditions. The North and South have
never been known to be culturally hostile to each other. Prior to the
descent of British on Indian scene, there was a continuous interaction and
cultural exchange between the two regions. The Sanskrit language, the
so-called Aryan language was the lingua-franca of the entire society for
thousands of years. The three greatest figures of later Hinduism -
Shankaracharya, Madhavacharya and Ramanujam were Southerners who are
universally respected in the North, and who have written commentaries on
Vedic scriptures in Sanskrit only for the benefit of the entire population.
Even in the ancient times some of the great Sutra authors like Baudhayana
and Apastamba were from South. Agastya, a celebrated Vedic rishi from North
India, is widely venerated in the South as the one who introduced Vedic
learning to the South India. And also was the South India un-inhabitated
prior to the pushing of the original population of Indus Valley? If not,
who were the original inhabitants of South India, who accepted the
newcomers from North without any hostility or fight?

There is enough positive evidence in support of the religious rites of the
Harappans being similar to those of the Vedic Aryans. Their religious
motifs, deities and sacrificial altars bespeak of Aryan faith, indicating
continuity and identity of Vedic culture with the Indus valley
civilization.

If the Aryan Hindus were outsiders, why don't they name places outside
India as their most holy places? Why should they sing paeans in the praise
of India's numerous rivers crisscrossing the entire peninsula, and
mountains - repositories of life giving water and natural resources, nay
even bestow them a status of goddesses and gods. If Aryans were outsiders
why should they consider this land as the 'holy land' and not their
original land as the 'holy land' or motherland? For the Muslims, their holy
place is Mecca. For the Catholics it is Rome or Jerusalem. For the Hindus,
their pilgrim centers range from Kailash in the North, to Rameshwaram in
the South; and from Hingalaj (Sindh) in the West to Parusuram Kund
(Arunchala Pradesh) in the East. The seven holy cities of Hinduism include
Kanchipurum in the south, Dwarka in the west and Ujjain in central India.
The twelve jyotirlings include Ramashwaram in Tamil Nadu, Srisailam in
Andhra Pradesh, Nashik in Maharashtra, Somnath in Gujarat and Kashi in
Uttar Pradesh. All these are located in greater India only. No Hindu from
any part of India has felt a stranger in any other part of India when on a
pilgrimage. The seven holy rivers in Hinduism, indeed, seem to chart out
the map of the holy land. The Sindhu and the Saraswati (now extinct)
originating from the Himalayas and move westward and southwards into the
western sea; the Ganga and the Yamuna also start in the Himalayas and move
eastward into the north-eastern sea; the Narmada starts in central India
and the Godavari starts in western India, while the Kaveri winds its way
through the south to move into the southern sea. More than a thousand years
ago, Adi Shankaracharya, who was born in Kerala, established several mathas
(religious and spiritual centers) including at Badrinath in the north
(Uttar Pradesh), Puri in the east (Orissa), Dwaraka in the west (Gujarat),
and at Shringeri and Kanchi in the south. That is ancient India, that is
modern Bharat, and that is Hinduism.

These are some of the obvious serious objections, inconsistencies, and
glaring anomalies to which the invasionists have no convincing or plausible
explanations which could reconcile the above facts with the Aryan invasion
theory and destruction of Indus Valley civilization.

Origin of Aryan Race Theory: Max Muller, a renowned Indologist from
Germany, is credited with the popularization of the Aryan racial theory in
the middle of 19th century. Though later on when Muller's reputation as a
Sanskrit scholar was getting damaged, and he was challenged by his peers,
since nowhere in the Sanskrit literature, the term Arya denoted a racial
people, he recanted and pronounced that Aryan meant only a linguistic
family and never applied to a race. But the damage was already done. The
German and French political and nationalist groups exploited this racial
phenomenon to propagate the supremacy of an assumed Aryan race of white
people, which Hitler used to its extreme absurdities for his political
hegemony and his barbaric crusade to terrorize Jews and other societies.
This culminated in the holocaust of millions of innocent people.

What, really, is Aryan Invasion Theory?: According to this theory, northern
India was invaded and conquered by nomadic, light-skinned race of a people
called 'aryans' who supposedly descended from central Asia (or some unknown
land ?) around 1500 BC, and destroyed an earlier more advanced civilization
of the people habitated in the Indus Valley, and then imposed upon them
their culture and language. These Indus Valley people were supposed to be
either Dravidian, or Austrics or now--days' Shudra class etc.

The main elements on which the entire structure of AIT has been built are:
Arya is a racial group, their invasion, they were nomadic, light-skinned,
their original home was outside India, their invasion occurred around 1500
BC, they destroyed an advanced civilization of Indus valley, etc. And the
evidences AIT advocates present in support of all these wild conjectures
can be sumarized as follows:

   * Evidence for Invasion: Mention of Conflicts in Vedic literature,
     findings of skeletons at the excavated sites of Mohanjodro and Harappa

   * Evidence for Aryans being Nomadic and Light-skinned: None whatsoever,
     Pure conjecture except some misinterpretated quotes from Vedas.

   * Evidence for Non-Aryan/Dravidian Nature of Indus civilization: Absence
     of horse, Siva worshippers, chariots, racial differences, etc.

   * Evidence for proposed date of invasion, 1500 BC: Arbitrary and
     speculative, in Mesopotamia and Iraq the presence of the people
     worshipping Vedic gods around 1700BC, Biblical chronology.
Now let us examine the facts about the so-called evidences in support of
AIT:

1. Real Meaning of the Word 'ARYA'

In 1853, Max Muller introduced the word 'Arya' into the English and
European usage as applying to a racial and linguistic group when
propounding the Aryan Racial theory. However, in 1888, he himself refuted
his own theory and wrote:

     I have declared again and again that if I say Aryas, I mean
     neither blood nor bones, nor hair, nor skull; I mean simply those
     who speak an Aryan language...to me an ethnologist who speaks of
     Aryan race, Aryan blood, Aryan eyes and hair, is as great a
     sinner as a linguist who speaks of a dolichocephalic dictionary
     or a brachycephalic grammar.

(Max Muller, Biographies of Words and the Home of the Aryas, 1888, pg 120)

In Vedic Literature, the word Arya is nowhere defined in connection with
either race or language. Instead it refers to: gentleman, good-natured,
righteous person, noble-man, and is often used like 'Sir' or 'Shree' before
the name of a person like Aryaputra, Aryakanya, etc.

In Ramayan (Valmiki), Rama is described as an Arya in the following words:
a;yR: sv;R-smWcewv: sdwv ip[y;dxRn (Aryah sarvasamashchaivah sadaiv
priyadarshan ) :Arya - who cared for the equality to all and was dear to
everyone.

Etymologically, according to Max Muller, the word Arya was derived from ar-
(ar-), "plough, to cultivate". Therefore, Arya means - "cultivator"
agriculturer (civilized sedentary, as opposed to nomads and
hunter-gatherers), landlord;

V.S. Apte's Sanskrit-English dictionary relates the word Arya to the root
r- (r-) to which a prefix a (a) has been appended to give a negating
meaning. And therefore the meaning of Arya is given as "excellent, best",
followed by "respectable" and as a noun, "master, lord, worthy, honorable,
excellent", upholder of Arya values, and further: teacher, employer,
master, father-in-law, friend, Buddha.

So nowhere either in the religious scriptures or by tradition the word Arya
denotes a race or a language. There are only four primary races, namely,
Caucasian, the Mangolian, the Australians and the Negroid. Both the Aryans
and Dravidians are related branches of the Caucasian race generally placed
in the same Mediterranean sub-branch. The difference between the so-called
Aryans of the north and the Dravidians of the south or other communities of
Indian subcontinent is not a racial type. Biologically all are the same
Caucasian type, only when closer to the equator the skin gets darker, and
under the influence of constant heat the bodily frame tends to get a little
smaller. And these differences can not be the basis of two altogether
different races. Similar differences one can observe even more distinctly
among the people of pure Caucasian white race of Europe. Caucasian can be
of any color ranging from pure white to almost pure black, with every shade
of brown in between. Similarly, the Mongolian race is not yellow. Many
Chinese have skin whiter than many so-called Caucasians.

Further, a recent landmark global study in population genetics by a team of
internationally reputed scientists over 50 years (The History and Geography
of Human Genes, by Luca Cavalli-Sforza, Paolo Menozzi and Alberto Piazza,
Princeton University Press) reveals that the people habitated in the Indian
subcontinent and nearby including Europe, all belong to one single race of
Caucasion type. According to this study, there is essentially, and has been
no difference racially between north Indians and the so-called Dravidian
South Indians. The racial composition has remained almost the same for
millennia. This study also confirms that there is no race called as an
Aryan race.
                                                             continued ...

References:

1. The Aryan Invasion Theory and Indian Nationalism (1993)
     By Shrikant G. Talageri (Voice of India)

2. Vedic Aryans and the Origins of Civilization (1995)
     By N.S. Rajaram and David Frawley (World Heritage Press)

3. Aryan Invasion of India: The Myth and the Truth
     By N.S. Rajaram (Voice of India Publication)

4. Indigenous Indians: Agastya to Ambedkar (1993)
     By Koenraad Elst