In one of the most scientific anthropological research ever to identify the origins of the Indian population, researchers in Harvard Medical School and Centre for Cellular and Molecular Biology Hyderabad have proved that Indian people always lived here since pre history and all the developments and wisdom - scientific, scholarly, linguistic, religious and social are indigenous and a tribute to the genius of our ancestors.
This has again blown a hole big to sink the already floundering and rejected Aryan Invasion Theory (AIT) first concocted by arm chair history theorist Friedrich Max Muller between 1846 and 1860 CE in his search for a glue to bind German nationalism by using shallow linguistic similarities as proof. This theory was readily accepted and propagated by the British to justify their rule in India as the second coming of the Aryans. The rejection and mocking of this particular theory is beautifully portrayed in the 1982 Richard Attenborough movie 'Gandhi'. The Mahatma ridicules it by not meriting it with a reply and gives a cold stare to the speaker during the Quit India movement negotiations. This incident goes to prove that the AIT was always flawed with great thinkers like Swami Vivekananda and Philosopher like Shri Aurobindo rejecting the theory outright. More recently it has been under critical review from researchers world wide by historians, researchers and scientists such as Koenraad Elst, David Frawley, Subhash Kak, Navratan Rajaram to name a few.
Incidentally Max Muller himself accepted the flaws in his theory and worked to make amends in his letters and later books but by then it was too late. The seeds of AIT was sown world wide and till now vested interest groups like the leftist Congress, the Communist party and the DMK in India have continued to use this theory for their own brand of divide and rule politics.
http://www.dnaindia.com/scitech/report_who-came-first-indians-or-europeans_1294860
http://www.indianexpress.com/storyOld.php?storyId=70297
To bust a few myths allow me to state the meaning of the much maligned word 'Dravida'. A word introduced by the British with little understanding which has gone on to become a divisive word. Dravida or 'Thravida' in Sanskrit means 'land bounded by three seas'. Its a word coined by Jagat Guru Adi Shankaracharya and his disciple Mandana Mishra to refer to themselves as Thravida Shishu or 'children of the lands bounded by the three seas' as they traveled the length and breadth of the country in their single minded pursuit of Sanatana Dharma revival and espousal of Advaita philosophy. With wicked intentions and half baked understanding of the Vedas, the British missionaries and educationists took it and used it as a race type to delineate south Indians from the rest of the country who by another flaw were called Aryans.
Today political parties like DMK and marxist scholars use this word to define all non Brahmins in the south. Its a irony that it was a Brahmin who coined it to refer to himself.
Another important element which shakes the very foundation of AIT is the the works of the Megasthenes the Ambassador of Alexander in the court of Emperor Chandragupta between 250 and 298 BC. I am surprised this book has not found mention or has not been used as a very valid hard hitting evidence against the AIT. At any rate, Megasthenes was a traveler and geographer who recorded his memoirs in his book called Indika. A book which went on to become a reference guide to great Greek historians and philosopher such as Arrian and Strabo. In later centuries a travelers guide, equivalent to today Lonely Planet.
In his book Indika Megasthenese minutely describes the people, customs, traditions, festivals, hair do, jewelery, attire, food, religion, laws, geography, fauna, flora and all other possible details which he encounters from the moment he entered India via Pentapotamia (five rivers) and traveled into the land of Magadha (Ayodhya and Bihar) from whence he traveled south as far as Madurai and Serendib (Lanka) and back up the western ghats to his embassy in Patliputra.
In his description of the people of India he clearly states that the people of India across its length and breadth are tall but light on their feet which means they are no bulky, dark skinned with long black hair which they tie in a bun on the top. All men have beards and shaving is not popular. Men and woman love jewelery of which there is abundance of all types which adorns hair, arms, wrists and ankles.
Now, if we look at the AIT theory it states that the so called large bodied, light eyed, blonde haired Aryans invaded India from the western passes via Afghanistan and settled mainly in the five river region and then slowly spread east and south controlling the lands and the people therein establishing a discriminatory rule. But if we analyse the description of Megasthenese it becomes evident that there is no evidence of such fair skinned, light eyed, blonde haired, size XL people. Given that in the intervening 1250 years since the arrival of the Aryans and Megasthenese's travel there was some racial intermingling causing some of these attributes to be diluted but even this defense is not justifiable because as new entrants the level of discrimination would be high and would not allow much intermingling. Secondly if these people were present even in some numbers lording over the dark skinned Indians then Megasthenese would not have failed to notice it and would have subjected it to much scrutiny and description even comparing their skin tone to his. But no such description was given in his entire travelogue.
From the above additional deduction that I have added to the thousands of others already existing that have torpedoed the AIT, its fair to assume (pun intended) that the AIT was nothing but figment of imagination of half baked British imperialist scholars. But then it leaves us with another puzzling question. Who are the fair skinned people residing in north west India, Pakistan and Afghanistan in current times.
To answer this we have to turn to Roman history and their conquest in Asia minor after 50 AD (i.e. Caspian Sea and middle east and present day Turkey region) and the advent of the Huns in 370 AD in central Asia and eastern Europe. Routed by the Romans, various tribes like Sarmatians, Bactrians, Scythians known as Shakas in India, Kushans and other lesser tribes hurtled headlong eastwards. While many dispersed and settled along the way many still arrived in India. Being animist or shamanic and probably having lesser developed customs and religious beliefs adopted Hinduism or Buddhism as the case was with Kanishka a Kushan King around 120 AD. Further still the Hunnic invasion of central Asia and eastern Europe in 370 AD set up a domino effect of tribal migration with a few tribes or remnants funneling into India. In fact medieval India called these fair skinned immigrants as 'Shweta Hunna' or white Huns. At any rate the current people residing in the north western part of the subcontinent are a recent addition, somewhere between AD 200 to AD 1400 or even later, arriving from their central Asian homelands as refugees and adopting Hindu religion, customs and belief systems. This explains the presence of fair skinned people in the north west of India than what the AIT purports. The mix was further complicated by the arrival of another wave of people the Arabs, Turks and the Mongols (Mughals).
And from this mix of population and with foggy ideas the half baked British and European scholars and missionaries schemed the Aryan Invasion Theory. Add to this the leftist Congress and Marxist scholars who use it to divide our people based on race, religion and region.
Thus the idea of AIT is as dead and dumb as a Dodo and now lets all get over this Aryan race theory. Because there was never a Aryan race and if someone is telling you this, then he has ulterior motives.
I will really appriciate if readers would leave their comments
Reference Material:
You can download the Indika by Megasthenes from the following link
http://2020ok.com/books/36/ancient-india-as-described-by-megasthenes-and-arrian-44836.htm
Also follow the following titles
In Search of the Cradle of Civilisation by David Frawley, Georg Feuerstein and Subhash Kak,
http://books.google.be/books?id=Ermk_FmwcS4C&lpg=PP1&ots=jKbzZPv3yP&dq=in%20search%20of%20the%20cradle%20of%20civilization&hl=en&pg=PA36#v=onepage&q=&f=false
Sarasvati River and the Vedic Civilization by NS Rajaram
This has again blown a hole big to sink the already floundering and rejected Aryan Invasion Theory (AIT) first concocted by arm chair history theorist Friedrich Max Muller between 1846 and 1860 CE in his search for a glue to bind German nationalism by using shallow linguistic similarities as proof. This theory was readily accepted and propagated by the British to justify their rule in India as the second coming of the Aryans. The rejection and mocking of this particular theory is beautifully portrayed in the 1982 Richard Attenborough movie 'Gandhi'. The Mahatma ridicules it by not meriting it with a reply and gives a cold stare to the speaker during the Quit India movement negotiations. This incident goes to prove that the AIT was always flawed with great thinkers like Swami Vivekananda and Philosopher like Shri Aurobindo rejecting the theory outright. More recently it has been under critical review from researchers world wide by historians, researchers and scientists such as Koenraad Elst, David Frawley, Subhash Kak, Navratan Rajaram to name a few.
Incidentally Max Muller himself accepted the flaws in his theory and worked to make amends in his letters and later books but by then it was too late. The seeds of AIT was sown world wide and till now vested interest groups like the leftist Congress, the Communist party and the DMK in India have continued to use this theory for their own brand of divide and rule politics.
http://www.dnaindia.com/scitech/report_who-came-first-indians-or-europeans_1294860
http://www.indianexpress.com/storyOld.php?storyId=70297
To bust a few myths allow me to state the meaning of the much maligned word 'Dravida'. A word introduced by the British with little understanding which has gone on to become a divisive word. Dravida or 'Thravida' in Sanskrit means 'land bounded by three seas'. Its a word coined by Jagat Guru Adi Shankaracharya and his disciple Mandana Mishra to refer to themselves as Thravida Shishu or 'children of the lands bounded by the three seas' as they traveled the length and breadth of the country in their single minded pursuit of Sanatana Dharma revival and espousal of Advaita philosophy. With wicked intentions and half baked understanding of the Vedas, the British missionaries and educationists took it and used it as a race type to delineate south Indians from the rest of the country who by another flaw were called Aryans.
Today political parties like DMK and marxist scholars use this word to define all non Brahmins in the south. Its a irony that it was a Brahmin who coined it to refer to himself.
Another important element which shakes the very foundation of AIT is the the works of the Megasthenes the Ambassador of Alexander in the court of Emperor Chandragupta between 250 and 298 BC. I am surprised this book has not found mention or has not been used as a very valid hard hitting evidence against the AIT. At any rate, Megasthenes was a traveler and geographer who recorded his memoirs in his book called Indika. A book which went on to become a reference guide to great Greek historians and philosopher such as Arrian and Strabo. In later centuries a travelers guide, equivalent to today Lonely Planet.
In his book Indika Megasthenese minutely describes the people, customs, traditions, festivals, hair do, jewelery, attire, food, religion, laws, geography, fauna, flora and all other possible details which he encounters from the moment he entered India via Pentapotamia (five rivers) and traveled into the land of Magadha (Ayodhya and Bihar) from whence he traveled south as far as Madurai and Serendib (Lanka) and back up the western ghats to his embassy in Patliputra.
In his description of the people of India he clearly states that the people of India across its length and breadth are tall but light on their feet which means they are no bulky, dark skinned with long black hair which they tie in a bun on the top. All men have beards and shaving is not popular. Men and woman love jewelery of which there is abundance of all types which adorns hair, arms, wrists and ankles.
Now, if we look at the AIT theory it states that the so called large bodied, light eyed, blonde haired Aryans invaded India from the western passes via Afghanistan and settled mainly in the five river region and then slowly spread east and south controlling the lands and the people therein establishing a discriminatory rule. But if we analyse the description of Megasthenese it becomes evident that there is no evidence of such fair skinned, light eyed, blonde haired, size XL people. Given that in the intervening 1250 years since the arrival of the Aryans and Megasthenese's travel there was some racial intermingling causing some of these attributes to be diluted but even this defense is not justifiable because as new entrants the level of discrimination would be high and would not allow much intermingling. Secondly if these people were present even in some numbers lording over the dark skinned Indians then Megasthenese would not have failed to notice it and would have subjected it to much scrutiny and description even comparing their skin tone to his. But no such description was given in his entire travelogue.
From the above additional deduction that I have added to the thousands of others already existing that have torpedoed the AIT, its fair to assume (pun intended) that the AIT was nothing but figment of imagination of half baked British imperialist scholars. But then it leaves us with another puzzling question. Who are the fair skinned people residing in north west India, Pakistan and Afghanistan in current times.
To answer this we have to turn to Roman history and their conquest in Asia minor after 50 AD (i.e. Caspian Sea and middle east and present day Turkey region) and the advent of the Huns in 370 AD in central Asia and eastern Europe. Routed by the Romans, various tribes like Sarmatians, Bactrians, Scythians known as Shakas in India, Kushans and other lesser tribes hurtled headlong eastwards. While many dispersed and settled along the way many still arrived in India. Being animist or shamanic and probably having lesser developed customs and religious beliefs adopted Hinduism or Buddhism as the case was with Kanishka a Kushan King around 120 AD. Further still the Hunnic invasion of central Asia and eastern Europe in 370 AD set up a domino effect of tribal migration with a few tribes or remnants funneling into India. In fact medieval India called these fair skinned immigrants as 'Shweta Hunna' or white Huns. At any rate the current people residing in the north western part of the subcontinent are a recent addition, somewhere between AD 200 to AD 1400 or even later, arriving from their central Asian homelands as refugees and adopting Hindu religion, customs and belief systems. This explains the presence of fair skinned people in the north west of India than what the AIT purports. The mix was further complicated by the arrival of another wave of people the Arabs, Turks and the Mongols (Mughals).
And from this mix of population and with foggy ideas the half baked British and European scholars and missionaries schemed the Aryan Invasion Theory. Add to this the leftist Congress and Marxist scholars who use it to divide our people based on race, religion and region.
Thus the idea of AIT is as dead and dumb as a Dodo and now lets all get over this Aryan race theory. Because there was never a Aryan race and if someone is telling you this, then he has ulterior motives.
I will really appriciate if readers would leave their comments
Reference Material:
You can download the Indika by Megasthenes from the following link
http://2020ok.com/books/36/ancient-india-as-described-by-megasthenes-and-arrian-44836.htm
Also follow the following titles
In Search of the Cradle of Civilisation by David Frawley, Georg Feuerstein and Subhash Kak,
http://books.google.be/books?id=Ermk_FmwcS4C&lpg=PP1&ots=jKbzZPv3yP&dq=in%20search%20of%20the%20cradle%20of%20civilization&hl=en&pg=PA36#v=onepage&q=&f=false
Sarasvati River and the Vedic Civilization by NS Rajaram
Excellent article. I was never convinced by the Aryan invasion theory as otherwise there would definitely have been some light eyed descendants. Just look at Goa and Mangalore where the Portugese lived starting 500-600 yrs ago. We have light eyed descendants prevalent today in large numbers. By the way another contributor to the relatively fair skinned folk in the north west was Alexander. A number of his army stayed back tired of the long campaign after he turned back from India. Greeks were also brown eyed and dark haired hence while there is fair skin there are no light eyed or light haired people in the north. Also a fair number of these folk are indegenous. It is the colder climate that makes people in those areas relatively fairer. Just look at the folk from Himachal and Garwhal who are naturally fairer skinned with high cheekbones.
ReplyDeleteRajit Anand
Good Article & Well Researched. It does connect all the dots NEATLY. Do spread the word far and wide.
ReplyDeleteAmbedkar comprehensively refuted the AIT as did Aurobindo Ghose in 1920s on purely linguistic grounds in the 1920s
ReplyDelete