A A FreshFresh LookLook

atat the the AryanAryan ControversyControversy

An exhibition

d f FACTprepared for FACT

by Michel Danino

What the textbooks say …

We find in textbooks used in Indian schools varying versions of the Aryan invasionWe find in textbooks used in Indian schools varying versions of the Aryan invasion

theory. In Tamil Nadu especially, the following statement is bound to leave a

psychological scar on young minds:

“It is believed that the earliest inhabitants of India were the Dravidians whoIt is believed that the earliest inhabitants of India were the Dravidians, who

were ... the people who lived in Mohenjodaro and Harappa.... The Aryans

migrated from Central Asia and drove away the Dravidians after fierce battles….

The culture of the Aryans was entirely different from that of the Dravidians.”

(From a textbook used in Class 4 a few years ago. The most recent textbooks

perpetuate this scenario.)

Accompanied by purely imaginary depictions for greater effect (below), such

statements are misleading and based on no evidence.

The birth of the Aryan theory

To explain the kinship between Sanskrit and European languages, 19th-To explain the kinship between Sanskrit and European languages, 19

century European Indologists — in particular Max Müller, a German

Sanskritist who lived in Oxford and published the full text of the Rig Veda

for the first time — propounded that:

An “Aryan race” speaking a “proto-Indo-European language” (PIE) somewhere in

Central Asia, split into several groups: one migrated towards Europe, the other

towards Iran and finally India, which they entered around 1500 BCE.*y , y

They subjugated “indigenous tribals” (this was revised later to include

“Dravidians”), composed the Rig Veda soon after their conquest of northwest India,

and gradually spread Sanskrit, Vedic culture and the caste system throughout India.

India was thus composed of distinct “races,” languages, literatures, and cultures,

which turned the Aryan dogma into a political instrument of division between North

and South, upper (= Aryan) and lower (= non-Aryan) castes. The British colonial

l d th t th h d t b i b t “ i ” f th t Apowers also argued that they had come to bring about a “reunion” of the great Aryan

family; they were, after all, no more than a new wave of “Aryan” invaders of India!

The concept of an aggressive, conquering “Aryan race” was devoid of evidence, but

it suited the dominance of the white man in the colonial age Other “races” includingit suited the dominance of the white man in the colonial age. Other races , including

the Jews and the Blacks, were regarded as inferior and unsuited to lead humanity. It

was the same racial theory that Hitler later took over and used to assert that the

Aryans were the “master race” (Herrenvolk) and had the right to rule the world and

exterminate inferior races.

* BCE = “Before Common Era” (= Before Christ). CE = “Common Era” (= AD).

Four approaches

The Aryan Invasion Theory (AIT) remains an object of heated

Four approaches

The Aryan Invasion Theory (AIT) remains an object of heated

controversy in India, but is rarely debated on the basis of hard

evidence and rational inquiry. Let us examine it from several

angles:angles:

1. Literary & geographical

2 A h l i l & lt l2. Archaeological & cultural

3. Anthropological & genetic

4. Linguisticg

(Note: Other disciplines, such as archaeoastronomy or

archaeometallurgy , also have evidence to contribute; they are gy , ; y

not discussed here.)

1a. Literary Evidence

Th Ri V d i d t h b d b i di A B t it t iThe Rig Veda is supposed to have been composed by invading Aryans. But it contains no

reference whatsoever to a distant homeland or to an invasion / migration into India. Most

importantly, the “battles” with the Dasyus, described as dark beings, are clearly of a

mythological character, similar to the Pur nas’ battles between devas and asuras.y g ,

Swami Vivekananda: “There is not one word in our scriptures, not one, to prove that the

Aryan ever came from anywhere outside India. ... The whole of India is Aryan, nothing else.”

Sri Aurobindo: “There is no actual mention of such an invasion [in the Rig Veda]. ... There is

no reliable indication of any racial difference [between Aryans and Dasyus].”

George Erdosy, Canadian historian: “Even apparently clear indications [in the Rig Veda] of

historical struggles between dark aborigines and Arya conquerors turn out to be

misleading ”misleading.

B.R. Ambedkar: “The theory of invasion is an invention. ... There is no evidence in the Vedas

of any invasion of India by the Aryan race and its having conquered the Dasas and Dasyus

supposed to be the natives of India. ... [The Aryan race theory is] so absurd that it ought to

have been dead long ago.”

Ancient Tamil Sangam literature, from the 2nd century BCE remembers no migration from

the North and no conflict with “Aryans” or anyone else. Moreover Sangam literature, even

in its earliest anthologies often praises Vedic gods Indra Vishnu Agni etc It also showsin its earliest anthologies, often praises Vedic gods, Indra, Vishnu, Agni etc. It also shows

high regard for the Vedas, the chanting of Vedic hymns, Brahmins, the Himalayas, etc.

India’s oldest literatures, whether from the North or the South, are therefore silent on an

“Aryan invasion” and also on a North-South divide. It is irrational to expect that both the y p

Rig Veda and the Sangam literature should have forgotten everything about an event (the

Aryan invasion) that is said to have changed India’s cultural landscape radically.

1b. Geography:

Rivers & Oceans in the Rig-Veda

The Rig-Veda has numerous references to the ocean (samudra), India’s

“eastern and western seas” ships sailing storms waves etc all of whicheastern and western seas , ships, sailing, storms, waves, etc. — all of which

invaders from Central Asia would have been ignorant of.

The Rig-Veda often mentions the Saptasindhava (“seven sindhus” or rivers):

the Indus Sindhu its five tributaries and the Sarasvat That is the geographythe Indus, Sindhu, its five tributaries, and the Sarasvat . That is the geography

of the Northwest of the Indian subcontinent.

The Sarasvat * is described as a “mighty river” flowing “unbroken” “from the

mountain to the sea ” An important “hymn in praise of rivers” (10 75) locates itmountain to the sea. An important hymn in praise of rivers (10.75) locates it

between the Yamuna and the Sutlej. In the nineteenth century, British

surveyors, topographers and geologists identified it with the huge dry bed of

the Ghaggar–Hakra, which runs from Haryana to the Rann of Kachchh.

Archaeology shows that this river, which nurtured hundreds of Harappan

sites, started breaking up around 2700 BCE, and its central basin had dried up

from 2000 BCE. Aryans invading India around 1500 BCE could not have

hi d th d b d “ i ht i fl i f th t i t thworshipped the dry bed as a “mighty river flowing from the mountain to the

sea”. The composers of those hymns must have lived on the river’s banks

while it was in full flow—in the third or fourth millennium BCE.

* For a fuller treatment, see my separate

presentation, “Sarasvat , the Lost River”.

This geography of the Rig Veda (above)

coincides with that of the Indus or

Harappan civilization (right). Note the

hi h d it f H it l thhigh density of Harappan sites along the

Sarasvat .

But only one culture was found spread

over this whole region, not two: the

Harappan.** For a fuller treatment, see my separate presentation,

“Glimpses of the Indus-Sarasvat Civilization”.

2a. The verdict of archaeology: negative

Had the Aryans migrated into India, we should expect some evidence of

different tools, weapons, objects of daily use, pottery style, art forms, etc. The

opposite is the case: after more than a century of archaeologicalopposite is the case: after more than a century of archaeological

investigations, no physical evidence for the arrival in India of a new people in

the 2nd millennium BCE has come to light.

B B Lal Indian archaeologist: “The supporters of the Aryan invasion theoryB.B. Lal, Indian archaeologist: The supporters of the Aryan invasion theory

have not been able to cite even a single example where there is evidence of

‘invaders,’ represented either by weapons of warfare or even of cultural

remains left by them.”

J.M. Kenoyer, U.S. archaeologist: “There is no archaeological or biological

evidence for invasions or mass migrations into the Indus Valley between the

end of the Harappan Phase, about 1900 B.C. and the beginning of the Early

Historic period around 600 B C ”Historic period around 600 B.C.”

The Indus cities begin to collapse around 1900 BCE: even if Aryans had come

around 1500 BCE, they would have had nothing to do with their destruction.

Moreover there is no trace of man made destruction or warfare anywhere inMoreover, there is no trace of man-made destruction or warfare anywhere in

the Indus civilization. There is therefore no justification for the crude

misrepresentations found in textbooks depicting Aryans attacking Harappan

cities. That is why even those scholars who today continue to believe in they y

arrival of Aryans have downgraded it to a peaceful immigration.

2b. The verdict of archaeology: positive

Continuity between

Indus-Sarasvat civilization

and classical India

According to the Aryan invasion theory, the Indus civilization (3rd

millennium BCE) is “pre-Aryan” and “pre-Vedic,” while the later

Gangetic civilization (1st millennium BCE) supposedly created byGangetic civilization (1 millennium BCE), supposedly created by

the Aryans, is of Vedic culture.

This implies a complete cultural break between these two

i ili ticivilizations.

Let us examine the evidence.

Top: Kalibangan, 2800 BCE: a

field with perpendicular rows

of furrows, an ingenious

system of intercropping for

the winter season. Taller crops

(mustard, etc.) can be grown

in the north-south long

furrows, without their

shadows affecting shorter

crops (gram etc.) in the east-

west furrows.

Bottom: At Kalibangan, a field

ploughed in the 1960s, while p g ,

excavations were going on.

Peasants were still using the

4,800-year-old system!4,800 year old system!

There is continuity between Harappan

weights (right) and India’s traditional

weights, used till the 20th century, for

instance in medicinal preparations or

jewellery as this table shows:jewellery, as this table shows:

256 712

There is also continuity between y

Harappan units of length: Lothal’s

ivory scale points to a unit of 1.77

mm; Kaligangan’s terracotta scale

(right) to 1 75 cm This agrees with(right) to 1.75 cm. This agrees with

India’s traditional angula of 1.77 cm.

Left: A tablet from Mohenjo-daro depicting

a boat with raised sides and a central

cabin. Right: A traditional Mohana boat oncabin. Right: A traditional Mohana boat on

the Indus, with precisely the same shape.

Chess-like gamesmen from

Lothal (left) and dice from

Harappa (right) offer strongHarappa (right) offer strong

evidence of cultural

continuity.

Left: The “dancing girl,” bronze

t t tt f M h j d di lstatuette from Mohenjo-daro, displays

continuity in the wearing of bangles:

rural women in Rajasthan and Gujarat

often wear bangles over the whole leftoften wear bangles over the whole left

arm. The bronze-casting technique

(“lost wax technique”) is still used by

traditional craftsmen in India today

( th S i l i b t )(see the Swamimalai bronze casters).

Continuity of craft techniques,

cutting, drilling, bleaching, etc., of

semiprecious stones, metals and

shells and even designs has beenshells and even designs has been

demonstrated between Harappan

jewels (right) and those

manufactured till recently in the

Khambat (Cambay) region.

Several important Harappan symbols

i d i t hi t i l ti Thsurvived into historical times. The

“endless knot” is shown here on a

Mohenjo-daro copper plate (far left)

and on a Gujarat inscription of the 9thand on a Gujarat inscription of the 9

century CE (near left).

This Harappan symbol is

very frequent on tablets,

pottery etc It is clearly thepottery etc. It is clearly the

precursor of the Hindu,

Buddhist and Jain swastika.

This statuette from Nausharo, Baluchistan, 2800

BCE reveals the use of vermilion (sind r,

kumkum) at the parting of the hair just wherekumkum) at the parting of the hair, just where

married Hindu ladies apply it today.

Modest Harappan graves

show respect for the deadshow respect for the dead,

but unlike in ancient Egypt,

where the Pharaoh, high

priests or officials had

glorious tombs, here the

wealth was not buried with

the dead; it remained with

the living: death was notthe living: death was not

regarded as all-important.

This is a typical Indian

attitude.

Evidence of animal sacrifice

(carefully built sacrificial pit from(carefully built sacrificial pit from

Kalibangan)

Other elements of Harappan

freligion: ritual purification through

water (left) at Mohenjo-daro’s

“Great Bath”.

Bottom left: tree worship.Bottom left: tree worship.

Harappans used conch shells just

like today’s Hindus: with the mouth

cut open and used to pour libations

(b tt ) d ith th ti t ff f(bottom); and with the tip cut off for

trumpeting (bottom right).

Evidence of fire worship in Harappan religion

(Left) A fire altar, about 2.6 x 2.6 m in a street at Lothal; the pit was

found to be full of ash and terracotta cakes; the big jar must havefound to be full of ash and terracotta cakes; the big jar must have

been used to keep liquid offerings, perhaps oil or ghee. Such a

structure in a public place could only have been used for ritual

purposes. (Right) Fire temple at Banawali, Haryana, with the central

apsidal (semicircular) structure also found to be full of ash.

The Harappans worshipped a mother-

goddess left This terracotta figurinegoddess, left. This terracotta figurine

has two basket-like cups on either

side of the head, which were used as

oil lamps: traces of soot were found

in some of them.

Religion apart, the iconography

also shows continuities, left: a

Harappan mother-goddess;

i ht th dd f thright: a mother-goddess of the

3rd century BCE. Both sport a

headdress of large flowers,

huge ear-rings, a large necklace g g , g

and a pendant.

Evidence of linga worship (above left: Kalibangan) and of the trish la g p ( g )

(above right) is a strong argument for cultural continuity.

The ritual slaying of a

buffalo on this terracotta

t bl t k thtablet evokes the

Mahishamardini theme,

Durga’s slaying of the

buffalo-asura.

More possible

parallels betweenparallels between

Harappan and Vedic

cultures

Indus seals: (Top left) A Vedic bull? (Top centre) The Unicorn: the Rig Veda speaks

of a bull “with a sharpened horn”; Krishna in the Mah bh rata “In days of old I

cultures

of a bull with a sharpened horn ; Krishna in the Mah bh rata, In days of old ... I

was known by the name of Ekashringa [one-horned].” (Top right) Triple-headed

mythical creatures: in the Rig Veda, Agni is “three-headed”.

A three-faced god in yogic

posture, m labandh sana

expresses mastery over wildexpresses mastery over wild

animals: an early

representation of Shiva? Shiva

is the “Lord of Yoga” g

(Yogan th) and also the “Lord

of the Beasts”.

A note of caution: Since the Indus script remains undeciphered, Harappan culture seen through archaeology is a

folk culture, while the Rig Veda is a specialized text intended to invoke divine powers. Although bridges between

the two are visible, they cannot be simply equated, just as today’s Hinduism practised in rural India is a mix of

mainstream, folk and tribal deities and rituals.

Harappan figurines in sanas attest to some practice of yoga.

Left: The so-called

“priest-king” (from

Mohenjo-daro) in deepMohenjo-daro) in deep

meditation. Right: the

origin of India’s

“namaste” (a figurine

from Harappa).

The verdict of archaeology: positive

Between the Harappan and the Gangetic civilizations, we find numerous

continuities on the material level, in agriculture, technologies and crafts.

Harappan religion practises:

gy p

Harappan religion practises:

the ritual use of water

fire worship

Nature worship: trees and animals

Linga worship

Mother-goddess worship

animal sacrifice

religious processions

Yoga and meditation

All these are also characteristic features of Hinduism. Hence:

“The [Harappan] religion is so characteristically Indian as hardly to be

distinguished from still living Hinduism....” John Marshall, 1931

“Current studies of the transition between the two early urban civilizations

l i th t th i ifi t b k hi t ” J th M Kclaim that there was no significant break or hiatus.” Jonathan M. Kenoyer

“It is difficult to see what is particularly non-Aryan about the Indus Valley

civilization.” Colin Renfrew

“The cultural and religious traditions of the Harappans provide theThe cultural and religious traditions of the Harappans provide the

substratum for the latter-day Indian Civilisation.” D.P. Agrawal

3. Anthropology & Genetics

K.A.R. Kennedy, U.S. bioanthopologist, after studying hundreds of skeletons of

Harappan and later times: “Biological anthropologists remain unable to lend

support to any of the theories concerning an Aryan biological or demographicsupport to any of the theories concerning an Aryan biological or demographic

entity.... There is no evidence of demographic disruptions in the north-western

sector of the subcontinent during and immediately after the decline of the

Harappan culture.” In other words, no demographic disruption by “Aryans”.

S.P. Gupta: “There was neither an Aryan race nor a Dravidian race. The concept of

‘race’ itself is a myth.”

Today’s biologists and anthropologists no longer use the term of “race”, which isToday s biologists and anthropologists no longer use the term of race , which is

an unscientific concept: it is impossible to biologically define a “race”. Biologists

speak of human types, ethnic groups, or haplogroups, which reflect the great

complexity of our human genetic heritage.

Contrary to a widespread misconception, darkness of skin is not related to “race”

or to any ethnic grouping: it depends purely on the latitude. Melanin, a dark

pigment in our skin, acts as a barrier against the effects of the ultraviolet rays of

sunlight. The closer we move to the tropics and equator, the higher the content of

melanin. Central Africans are black while North Africans are not; Italians are

noticeably darker than Swedes. The darker skin tones of south Indians (with

exceptions) have no other meaning; inhabitants of northern Karnataka or Andhraexceptions) have no other meaning; inhabitants of northern Karnataka or Andhra

are already much fairer (though linguistically Dravidian).

Indian populations have great genetic

diversity. In a map of genetic distances

Recent genetic studies of Indian

populations have failed to detect y p g

(bottom left), the Chenchus, a Dravidian-

speaking tribe of Andhra Pradesh, are much

closer to Central Asia than Brahmins of the

Goan region or Punjabis

populations have failed to detect

the impact of an Aryan invasion

/ migration in the 2nd millennium

BCE on India’s gene pool. Goan region or Punjabis.

Y-DNA studies show that the “deep, common

ancestry” between India and Central Asia is

readily explained by northward migrations

BCE on India s gene pool.

readily explained by northward migrations

from India’s Northwest some 40,000 years ago

(Sanghamitra Sahoo et al, 2006).

“High castes share more than 80 per cent of g p

their maternal lineages [mtDNA] with the lower

castes and tribals.” (Kivisild et al, 2000)

Brahmins and the caste system are of

“autochthonous origin” (Sharma et al 2009)autochthonous origin (Sharma et al, 2009).

Geneticists have started speaking of a “caste-

tribe continuum”: the notion of div si has no

scientific validity.

India’s populations are linguistically and

ethnically very diverse, but share a

“fundamental genomic unity” traceable to the

i i l li f I di b i t foriginal peopling of India by migrants from

Africa some 50,000 years ago.

4. Linguistics

Problems with the linguistic scenario proposed by 19th century European linguists:Problems with the linguistic scenario proposed by 19th-century European linguists:

It is a fact that Sanskritic and European languages belong too the same family. But even

after two centuries, linguists remain unable to agree on the location of the “original Indo-

European [= Aryan] homeland ” Proposed homelands still today spread from NorthernEuropean [= Aryan] homeland. Proposed homelands still today spread from Northern

Europe to Southern Russia to the Caspian Sea or even Bactria.

Language need not spread through invasion / migration alone. For example, Sanskrit

spread through much of Asia in the first centuries CE but without any invasion by, or

migration of, Indians; its spread was a cultural, not a demographic, migration.

Beyond the “tree model”, with a hypothetical Proto-Indo-European language (PIE) as the

trunk of the tree, more complex models have been proposed to take “lateral influences”

into account. Linguists agree that PIE is a convenient model but probably was never a g g p y

ground reality.

One recent model (by Russell Gray & Quentin Atkinson) argues in favour of an early

dispersal of PIE from Anatolia, from 6000 or 7000 BCE onward. With such a time-frame,

dispersal from India is equally possible In fact another recent model (by U S linguistdispersal from India is equally possible. In fact, another recent model (by U.S. linguist

Johanna Nichols) takes Bactria to be the original homeland; Bactria (today’s northeast

Afghanistan) was part of India’s cultural sphere. Scholars Koenraad Elst and Nicholas

Kazanas argue that PIE migrated out of India.

Dravidian languages (the four south Indian languages and a few other dialects) are distinct

from the Indo-European family, but linguistics remains unable to pinpoint their origin.

However, language and culture are distinct and should not be confused (e.g., Switzerland

has three languages but one culture; English covers many different cultures.)

In the end, linguistics, though an important discipline, is soft evidence which can be bent

to various interpretations. It cannot clinch the issue.

The horse controversy

Proponents of the Aryan theory often claim that Harappans did not know the horse, while VedicProponents of the Aryan theory often claim that Harappans did not know the horse, while Vedic

people did. The argument has many flaws.

Top left: Figurine of a horse from Mohenjo-daro, identified as such by Mackay. Top centre:

Figurine from Lothal. Top right: Horse bones from Surkotada, Gujarat, among horse

remains from a dozen sites certified by the best experts The Harappans did know theremains from a dozen sites certified by the best experts. The Harappans did know the

horse, although it is true that they did not depict the animal on their seals.

If Aryans had introduced the horse into India around 1500 BCE, we should see an increase

of horse remains and depictions; there is none. The horse remains very rarely depicted in

India until the Mauryan age and many historical sites have no horse bonesIndia until the Mauryan age and many historical sites have no horse bones.

In the Rig Veda, the adversaries of the ryas (the dasyus and panis) also have “horses”

(ashva). The equation horse = Vedic is a crude oversimplification.

In Vedic hymns to the dawn, Ushas is praised as “gomati ashvavati ”— literally “full of

cows and horses”! A literal reading of the Veda can only lead to such absurdities; the true

meaning is “full of light (go) and speed/energy (asva)”. We need to look at the Veda afresh.

S & C l iSummary & Conclusions

• No sign of confrontation / man-made destruction anywhere in Harappan

cities during and after the Mature (urban) phase.

• No sign of the arrival of a new population in the 2nd millennium BCE: no g p p

archaeological or anthropological discontinuities of the kind an invasion

should have caused.

• Harappan culture has many similarities with later classical Indian culture: pp y

there is no cultural break of the kind imposed by the Aryan theory.

• The Vedic geography coincides with the Harappan civilization — but only

one culture has been found in India’s Northwest, not two.one culture has been found in India s Northwest, not two.

• There is no ground for the survival of divisive theories conceived in

colonial times and unsupported by any hard evidence.

Suggested Further Reading

Aurobindo, Sri, The Secret of the Veda, Sri Aurobindo Ashram, 1998

Bryant, Edwin, The Quest for the Origins of Vedic Culture: The Indo-Aryan Migration Debate,

Oxford University Press 2001Oxford University Press, 2001

Chakrabarti, Dilip K, Colonial Indology: Sociopolitics of the Ancient Indian Past, Munshiram

Manoharlal, 1997

Danino, Michel, The Lost River: On the Trail of the Sarasvati, Penguin Books India, 2010

D i Mi h l Th D f I di Ci ili ti d th El i A f th iDanino, Michel, The Dawn of Indian Civilization and the Elusive Aryans, forthcoming

Elst, Koenraad, Update on the Aryan Invasion Debate, Aditya Prakashan, 1999

Feuerstein, Georg, Kak, Subhash & Frawley, David, In Search of the Cradle of Civilization, Motilal

Banarsidass, 1999

Frawley, David, Gods, Sages and Kings: Vedic Secrets of Ancient Civilization, Motilal

Banarsidass, 1993

Kazanas, Nicholas, Indo-Aryan Origins and Other Vedic Issues, Aditya Prakashan, 2009

Lal B B The Sarasvati Flows On: The Continuity of Indian Culture Aryan Books International 2002Lal, B.B, The Sarasvati Flows On: The Continuity of Indian Culture, Aryan Books International, 2002

Lal, B.B, The Homeland of the Aryans: Evidence of Rigvedic Flora and Fauna, Aryan Books

International, 2005

Rajaram, N.S. & Frawley, David, Vedic Aryans and the Origins of Civilization: A Literary and

S i tifi P ti V i f I di 3 d d 2001Scientific Perspective, Voice of India, 3rd ed, 2001

Staal, Frits, Discovering the Vedas, Penguin Books, 2008

Talageri, Shrikant G, The Rigveda: A Historical Analysis, Aditya Prakashan, 2000

Trautmann, Thomas R, Aryans and British India, Vistaar, 1997y

Trautmann, Thomas R, ed., The Aryan Debate, Oxford University Press, 2005