The Myth of the

Aryan Invasion
Theory

Anupam Manur
2/16/2009
 I
1. INTRODUCTION
“The Aryans came down from central Asia and invaded India in 1500 BC, after
destroying the Harappan civilization and they brought with them the rich Vedas” –
That’s exactly how my 9th standard History text book reads. Shocking, now, not
then. I have to admit that I was quite disappointed that the one greatest wealth
(Vedas) that India has was given to us by outsiders.

However, something was fishy in the whole scheme of things. Something didn’t add
up. Acting upon this hunch, I decided to do a bit of investigation and found out that
many scholars had already been in this place and had disproved every inch of the
theory.

1.1 BRIEF BACKGROUND TO THE AIT:

In the beginning of the 18th century, Germany, France and England started taking a
very special interest towards the study of Asian cultures and Indian society in
particular in the context of British India. This gave birth to Indology as an academic
discipline in the 19th century with pioneers such as William Jones, Colin Mackenzie,
Henry Thomas Colebrooke, Max Müller, etc, largely affected by the romantic
Orientalism at that time (see my post on Orientalism). Indology mainly involved
studying the ancient scriptures of the Hindus (Vedas, Puranas, etc), which was
facilitated by new volumes of Sanskrit-English and Sanskrit-German dictionaries
that were being published. One of the most important breakthroughs was Max
Müller’s edition of the Rigveda, which appeared in 1849-75. The main objective of
the Indologists was to rediscover India’s glorious past and give it to the Indians.
Noble indeed! Needless to say, things were not quite as it seems, as I shall try to
uncover the hidden agenda.

1.2 THE THEORY ITSELF:

In the late 19th century and early 20th century, many seals were found in the
Harappan region (now in Pakistan). This led to a fervent excavation campaign and
the result of which was the discovery of the ancient civilization of the Harappans.

The fact is that the people inhabiting this area seemed to have moved out and the
civilization had perished. Then, the task of the archaeologists and Indologists of the
time was to try to explain this mysterious phenomenon as to why such a great
civilization had perished. That it was great, there was no doubt because it was one
of the most ancient urban settlements which displayed ingenious city planning,
advanced knowledge of science and astronomy, efficient municipal governments
which placed a high priority on hygiene, sewage and drainage systems, public
baths, granaries, etc.

The moment was opportune and it was seized by the scholars and archaeologists
who tried to explain this by propounding the Aryan Invasion Theory (AIT), which I
shall briefly restate in the following passages after dealing a bit about the
theoretical background...

It has to be remembered that, at that time, there were no Indian scholars who were
writing about Indian history but there was an abundance of literature from the West,
as mentioned earlier, owing to the birth of Oriental Studies and Indology. Abbé
Dubois is perhaps one of the first such western historians who has tried to explain
the origin of the Indian population and their presence in India. He stayed in India for
nearly 30 years, in which he collected a large volume of data pertaining to the
Hindu traditions and customs. A thorough missionary agenda in mind, his aim was
to present the Hindus as barbaric and superstitious and not possessing any inherent
greatness. His manuscript was bought by the British East India Company and
appeared in an English translation under the title Hindu Manners, Customs and
Ceremonies in 1897 with a Prefatory Note by the Right Hon. F. Max Müller.

“It is practically admitted that India was inhabited very soon after the Deluge, which
made a desert of the whole world. The fact that it was so close to the plains of
Sennaar, where Noah's descendants remained stationary so long, as well as its good
climate and the fertility of the country, soon led to its settlement.” (Dubois, 1897)

He explains: 'According to my theory they reached India from the north, and I
should place the first abode of their ancestors in the neighbourhood of the
Caucasus.' The reasons he provides to substantiate his theory are utterly
unconvincing-but he goes on to build the rest of his migration theory (not yet an
'Aryan' migration theory) on this shaky foundation.

It was Max Müller, the German scholar (who was, supposedly, an authority on the
Vedas), who first or the most notable to propound the Aryan Invasion Theory.
According to him, the only reason to explain the disappearance of the Harappans
was due to an external invasion of their cities. To firmly establish the link between
Europe and India (through the concept of the Aryans), Müller and others suggested
that the Aryans were a nomadic tribe who were allocated a place that was halfway
between Europe and India. They chose the mystical and elusive place called
“Central Asia” (how precise!) from where they moved down towards India and
entered India from the North, though they do not take the trouble of explaining
which passes they traversed or any other geographical details. They then went on
to destroy the cities of Harappa and Mohenjo-Daro with the help of their Vedic God
Indra and that the dark-skinned indigenous people (Dravidians) were the ones on
whom they imposed their religion and their caste system. The Aryans supposedly
enslaved the native Dravidians and wiped them out from the Indus valley civilization
(this idea stemmed from the fact that a few skeletons and bones were found in
these sites). The entire Harappan civilization was supposed to have been massacred
by the invading Aryans. The Dravidians, in fear of the onslaught fled from their
thriving civilization and migrated to the south of the Indian subcontinent. However,
they could not help but accept the superior culture of the Aryans and thus, though
belonging to different races, the North and South followed an almost identical Hindu
culture.

The chronology of these events becomes all too important, as we shall see later on.
Max Müller, a firm believer of the Biblical chronology, tried to establish the periods
of these events using the same. According to the Bible, humankind originated from
one pair of humans– Adam and Eve, who were created around 4005BC. The great
flood took place in 2500 BC, the only one to survive the flood was Noah, and thus all
humans are descendents of the sons of Noah. If this was the case, then logically,
the Aryan invasion could have occurred only after 2500 BC. Based purely on
conjecture, Müller gave about 500 years for the regeneration of human kind and
another generous 500 years where the Harappan civilization thrived. Thus, he
arrived at the conclusion that the Aryan invasion would have occurred in 1500 BC.

Since the Aryans were the superior race who were capable of having literary culture
(though they were nomadic), they are the ones who imposed the Vedas on India.
Thus, we have to remember that the dating of the Vedas also becomes extremely
important in order to prove or disprove the Aryan Invasion theory (the Hindus,
however, believe that the Vedas are Anadhi, having no beginning or end, which is
also the belief of the author, but for the sake of academic interest in the invasion
theory, we shall consider the first written records of the Vedas). Western scholars
decided to apply their own methodologies and, in the absence of reliable evidence,
postulated a timeframe for Indian history based on conjectures. Considering the
traditional dates for the life of Gautama, the Buddha, as fairly well established in the
sixth century BCE, supposedly pre-Buddhist Indian records were placed in a
sequence that seemed plausible to philologists. Accepting on linguistic grounds the
traditional claims that the Rigveda was the oldest Indian literary document, Max
Müller allowing a time-span of two hundred years each for the formation of every
class of Vedic literature, and assuming that the Vedic period had come to an end by
the time of the Buddha, established the following sequence that was widely
accepted:

Rigveda c. 1200 BCE Yajurveda, Samaveda, Atharvaveda, c. 1000BCE Brahmanas, c.

800 BCE Aranyakas, Upanishads, c. 600 BCE

1.3 WHERE DO THE ARYANS COME FROM?

What is not so well known in India is that our footloose Aryans, not content with
overrunning the Indian subcontinent, invaded Europe too! And thereby hangs an
instructive tale. For Christian Europe, long uncomfortable with what it thought to be
a Hebrew ancestry, was eager, to find for itself an identity distinct from the Jewish;
the sudden appearance of the Aryan race out of the misty plateaus of Central Asia
was seen as a godsend, especially in the strong anti-Semitic atmosphere of the
nineteenth century. Thus was born one more myth, this time of the Aryan European,
Christian of course, and preferably Germanic. (Nahar, 1996) It had the added
advantage of confirming the “natural” supremacy of the white race.
Though there was hardly any sort of proof for such theories, it still widely gained
momentum in the rising fervour of European Nationalism. Year after year, raging
debates went on across borders to determine which European people was the true
descendent of the Aryan “master-race,” and therefore which nation could claim a
divine right to dominate others. Europe witnessed “the ridiculous and humiliating
spectacle of eminent scholars subordinating their interest in truth to the inflation of
racial and national pride.” The most vociferous were undoubtedly the pro-
Germanic. Germany seemed to have won the race in claiming descent from the
Aryan race. After the Franco-Prussian War of 1870-71, Aryanism became a
nationalist dogma in the newly unified German state. In fact, it came to be doubted
that the Aryans’ “original homeland” was not at all in Central Asia, and several
scholars sought to prove on “scientific grounds” that it really was Germany (Central
and Western Germany, to be precise!). When in 1924 Hitler wrote in his Mein
Kampf, “The Aryan alone can be considered as the founder of culture….a conqueror
who subjugated inferior races,” he was merely echoing and amplifying dozens of
nineteenth-century savants who had written as many thick tomes to buttress their
fantasy. A few years later, full-blown Nazism was no more than a monstrous – but in
a way perfectly logical-application of their race theories, with consequences we
know.

Swami Vivekananda who has long been refuting the Aryan Invasion Theory made
this comment: "Our archaeologists' dreams of India being full of dark-eyed
aborigines, and the bright Aryans came from - the Lord knows where. According to
some, they came from Central Tibet; others will have it that they came from Central
Asia. There are patriotic Englishmen who think that the Aryans were all red-haired.
Others, according to their idea, think that they were all black haired. If the writer
happens to be a black haired man, the Aryans were all black haired. Of late, there
was an attempt made to prove that the Aryans lived on the Swiss lake. I should not
be sorry if they had been all drowned there, theory and all. Some say now that they
lived at North Pole. Lord bless the Aryans and their habitations! As for the truth of
these theories, there is not one word in our scriptures, not one, to prove
that the Aryans came from anywhere outside of India, and in ancient India
was included Afghanistan. There it ends." (Vivekananda)

END OF PART I
 II
W H Y D O W E N E E D T O D I S P R OV E
T H E T H E O RY ?
What are the effects or consequences of such a theory? Why do we need to
disprove it? What did the British and other European scholars gain by doing so? Why
is it relevant today to talk about a theory that was constructed over a hundred years
ago about a particular phenomenon that occurred 3000-4000 years ago? All these
questions and answers diffuse into an overlapping schema of deconstructing
academic falsity, which has had an overbearing socio-political undertone to it.

“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. Consequently, the validity or
invalidity of this theory has an obvious and strong bearing on the contemporary
Indian political and social landscape as well as the future of Indian nationalism.” 1

1
Dr Dinesh Agarwal in his article “Demise of the Aryan Invasion Theory”.
Let’s look into some of the effects of the theory on Indian society today and the
motives behind the construction of such a theory.

2.1 HISTORICAL EFFECTS

2.1.1 RATIONALISING COLONALIZATION:

Firstly, by constructing such a theory of Aryan invasion, the British received the
perfect justification for their own invasion of India. How? By proving that the present
population of India was never truly the original inhabitants, and that they had been
constantly invaded upon, they could justify saying that they are not really doing
anything different from those invasions of the past. The main argument was that
they are merely re-enacting what the Aryans had done a couple of thousand years
ago upon the native population. Since, the Aryans had invaded, plundered,
oppressed and pressed their culture on the native population, the Mughal rulers’
conquests and those of the British themselves were perfectly justified as an
extension of the previous invasion and meting out to the Indian Aryans what they
had done to the Dravidians. In effect, it gave the British a way to rationalize
their brutal exploitation and domination of India. It also seemed to lessen the
severity of the equally brutal Muslim invasions of India prior to the British arrival.
This is perhaps the most terrible use of AIT by the historians. India was described as
a land dominated by foreigners ever since its inception. Karl Marx even wrote that
the whole history of India was a series of invasions. By showing that the Hindus are
mere upstarts and squatters on the land (as they themselves are in America,
Australia and other places), they can set up their own claim. For then neither the
Hindus nor the Europeans are indigenous and as to who should possess this land,
becomes merely a matter of superior might.

While this kind of reasoning might seem far out and implausible to us today, it must
be mentioned that the British Empire would use any kind of argument to justify their
cruelty and injustice. I am not trying to say that they went into the entire exercise of
creating the myth just for justification purposes, as it is too small a motive if we
consider the magnanimity of the other astute and scheming motives.

2.1.2 CULTURAL TECHNOLOGIES OF RULE:

How does one conquer a nation? One way is by the sword, but that is outdated and
implies quite a heavy cost of operation, loss of men, etc. The other way is the one
that Nicholas Dirks and Cohn refer to as the “Cultural Technologies of Rule”, or what
is more commonly known as the “Divide and Rule policy”. The formula is quite
simple. Enter a land, divide the people on any possible lines, break their solidarity,
prove to them that they are not worthy masters of themselves, and evoke a need in
them to be ruled by a “superior” kind, which happens to be the British. This play
has been enacted over and again in many colonies of the British and it worked to
perfection here in India also.
So how did they divide India? On the basis of religion, i.e. Hindus and Muslims is
very easy to comprehend and is well known. That was the easier task of the British.
However, for some time, they were confounded as to how to break the Hindus. How
could they break into the fairly well unified and cohesive Hindu social structure?
How could they pit sections of the Hindu society against another? Well, by the
introduction of the Caste System, of course. I am not trying to credit the British with
the creation of the caste system but it was the British who objectified, reified and
transformed the existing social stratification system of the Hindus, with all its merits
and demerits into the sole and overarching social identity of the Hindus. They over-
emphasized the importance of caste as the only identity of the Hindu. That was the
first true politicization of caste. After assuming all importance to the caste, they
then used the same to divide the Indians (read Dirks for more). What does this have
to do with AIT? Simple, they proposed to the lower caste “Dravidian” castes that
they were the result of historic oppression from the “Aryan” upper castes namely
the Brahmins who were the sole authority on the Vedas. This was in continuation
with their theory that since the Aryans were the ones who gave the Vedas to India,
it is only legitimate that they should be the sole authority over it.

While creating animosity between the upper and lower castes using historical
arguments was much easier, the greater task still lay in trying to break the
Brahmins, who were firmly rooted in their culture and traditions. The moment that
they could win over the upper castes and make them adulate Western culture and
traditions, that was their true victory and could be rest assured of a long stay in
India.

Let me bring in a little bit of history...

Well before the 1857 uprising it was recognized that British rule in India could not
be sustained without a large number of Indian collaborators. Recognizing this
reality, influential men like Thomas Babbington Macaulay, who was Chairman of the
Education Board, sought to set up an educational system modelled along British
lines that would also serve to undermine the Hindu tradition. He believed that the
conversion of Hindus to Christianity held the answer to the problems of
administering India. His idea was to create an English educated elite that would
repudiate its tradition and become British collaborators.

The key point here is Macaulay's belief that 'knowledge and reflection' on the part of
the Hindus, especially the Brahmins, would cause them to give up their age-old
belief in favour of Christianity. In pursuit of this goal, he needed someone who would
translate and interpret Indian scriptures, especially the Vedas, in such a way that
the newly educated Indian elite would see the differences between them and the
Bible and choose the latter. Upon his return to England, after a good deal of effort
he found a talented but impoverished young German Vedic scholar by the name of
Friedrich Max Müller who was willing to undertake this arduous task. (Rajaram)

This was the genesis of the herculean task of translating and interpreting the Rig-
Veda and Max Müler’s commitment to the conversion process was always
persistent, exemplified by his letter to his wife: “It [the Rigveda] is the root of their
religion and to show them what the root is, I feel sure, is the only way of uprooting
all that has sprung from it during the last three thousand years.”

The main objective now, as stated earlier was to separate the Brahmins and their
Vedas. How could they achieve this task? By reducing the value of the Vedas in the
eyes of the Brahmins. The theory not only stole the antiquity of the Vedas but also,
in a single blow, was successful in invalidating most of the Hindu traditions
described in the Vedas. The post-dating of the Vedas has serious consequences. For
starters, by assigning the invading Aryans as the original authors, it made the Vedas
a borrowed tradition. Can you imagine being told one day that something you’ve
been practicing for over 3000 years is actually borrowed from outside and is not
really that old or great.

In addition, one has to remember that by 1500 BC, the Greek and Egyptian cultures
were already thriving, and by assigning a later date to the Vedas, it makes it
borrowed knowledge. The Vedas were made to be derived from the Middle Eastern
cultures, especially the Greek culture, which is an absolutely absurd proposition. It
allowed the science of India to be given a Greek basis, as any Vedic basis was
largely disqualified by the primitive nature of the Vedic culture: In fact, the opposite
is true.

If the theory of Aryan invasion and its proposed period were true, this discredited
not only the Vedas but the genealogies of the Puranas, and all the kings mentioned
in these scriptures including Lord Krishna, Rama, Buddha etc. would become as
fictional characters with no historical basis: Which simply means disowning and
discarding the very basis and raison d'être of the Hindu civilization (Agarwal, 1995).

In short, on the basis of this theory, the propaganda by these scholars was made
that there was nothing great in the Hindu culture and their ancestors and sages.
And most Hindus fell for this devious plan. It made Hindus feel ashamed of their
culture - that its basis was neither historical nor scientific. The Vedas were the work
of nomadic shepherds and not the divine revelations or eternal truth perceived by
the rishis during their spiritual journey, and hence there is nothing to feel proud
about India's past, nothing to be proud of being Hindu.

2.1.3 WHITE SUPREMACY:

When, in the eighteenth century, a few European thinkers began to try and fathom
India's philosophy and religion, they were so struck by the depth, the ancientness,
the richness they saw, that they soon declared India to have been the "cradle of the
human race" and the "birthplace of civilization" in the words of Dohm, a German
scholar, and the Hindus to be "the gentlest of people." The great Voltaire also held
this view: "We have shown how much we surpass the Indians in courage and
wickedness, and how inferior to them we are in wisdom. Our European nations have
mutually destroyed themselves in this land where we only go in search of money,
while the first Greeks travelled to the same land only to instruct themselves."

He concluded, "I am convinced that everything has come down to us from the banks
of the Ganges, astronomy, astrology, metempsychosis, etc." Many of the early
travellers to India of the time (the exceptions being found mostly among the
missionaries) tended to share this enthusiasm. "All history points to India as the
mother of science and art". William Macintosh wrote. "This country was anciently
so renowned for knowledge and wisdom that the philosophers of Greece did not
disdain to travel thither for their improvement." Pierre Sonnerat, a French
naturalist, concurred: "We find among the Indians the vestiges of the most remote
antiquity.... We know that all peoples came there to draw the elements of their
knowledge.... India, in her splendor, gave religions and laws to all the other peoples;
Egypt and Greece owed to her both their fables and their wisdom."

I admit that this is not the place to indulge in glorifying Indian culture but I am
trying to point out the dominant world-view at that particular period. For, during the
19th century, with the birth of fervid European nationalism and racial glorification, all
this drastically changed. The Europeans could not support acknowledging the fact
that the birth of civilization and everything it included like science, art,
mathematics, astronomy, architecture, etc could be pointed out to some remote
and dark corner of the World, especially with their firm belief that ‘if it is great, it
has to be white’ dogma. How could they possibly rob India of its greatness and
project the same onto themselves? The answer lay in proving that the knowledge
and wisdom existing there is not original and belongs to a race, of which they are a
part. This gave birth to one of the greatest academic blunders: the creation of the
myth of the Aryan Invasion.

However, this wouldn’t be enough. They also simultaneously proved that India had
plunged into darkness later by amassing large amounts of information on the
customs, traditions and religious practices of the native population (refer back to
Abbé Dubois), to only later dismiss them as being barbarous, dangerous, uncivilized,
outdated, etc. Juxtaposed with the justification argument, the British actually tried
to convince the world that it had arrived with the noble intention of rescuing India
from its darkness.

The British were anxious to clothe their greed in lofty ideals: the "white
man's burden" of civilizing (and, naturally, Christianizing) less enlightened
races, the "divinely ordained mission" of bringing to India the glory of
Europe's commercial and industrial civilization, and so forth. Articles,
pamphlets, speeches, thick volumes began pouring forth by the hundreds year after
year in praise of the "tremendous task of rescuing India" from the darkness into
which she had fallen. (Agarwal, 1995) Understandably, the recognition of India's far
more ancient and refined civilization made such noble motives untenable. Thus
began a systematic campaign to disparage not only this civilization, its culture and
society, but the very roots of Hinduism by falsifying History with AIT.

2.2 THE MODERN EFFECTS

 2.2.1 THE N-S DIVIDE:
While these are some academic and colonizing antecedents, we must equally
consider the modern effects of such a theory, else it would be an incomplete
picture. Nowhere in History has any single theory, singlehandedly, caused so much
havoc in so many domains of life. Moreover, it has to be firmly kept in mind that
such a theory is universally accepted and even taken for granted unquestioningly.

Post-independent India has witnessed some serious challenges to its national-

integrity and we can, in fact, shift part of the blame on the AIT. The continuous
struggle on part of the Tamil state to break away from India and establish a republic
can be attributed to their firm belief and acceptance of the AIT. Their claim is
straightforward: they rely on the AIT to prove that they are the original inhabitants
of the country and simultaneously, the antiquity of the Tamil language. Since, the
Dravidians were conquered and forced down to the south, the Tamilians readily
relate to this set of Dravidians and the supposed historic oppression by the
dominant Sanskritic Aryans. Thus, they are able to achieve a two-fold objective: of
being able to justify their claims for a separate nation and secondly to prove the
antiquity of the Tamil language and that it is the true original and oldest Indian
language which would then translate into being the oldest language in the world, as
against what is commonly believed to be Sanskrit. With the deconstruction of the
AIT, their claims would no longer become tenable.

Apart from this, it is also the general cause of tension and animosity between the
North and the South in India. The southerners (“Dravidians”) generally mistrust and
feel bitter about the Northerners (“Aryans”) due to the fictional historic oppression
and thus make claims for compensation, antiquity, etc in the same breath. This has
effectively created a North-South divide on racial lines grâce à imagination of a few
gifted and talented historians, which is readily used by the politicians for petty vote
bank politics. Thus, disproving the theory and more importantly, making it publicly
known through the rewriting of the text books becomes imperative in order to
achieve national integration.

In short, the communists used the Aryan Invasion theory as the basis for
their history of India, substituting the caste war of the Brahmin invaders
from Central Asia for the European class war model. Dravidian nationalists
used it to their advantage, claiming an older purer Dravidian culture that
was different from that of the Aryan invaders from the north. The Dalits
used it to identify themselves with the original inhabitants of the country
enslaved by the invading Brahmin dominated Aryans.

2.2.2 THE COMMUNIST AGENDA:

Yet, unfortunately, quite strangely and for no apparent reason, India possesses a
unique breed of Marxian and other pseudo intellectual Historians (Romilla Thapar
would prove to be an exemplary leader in this context) who are only too happy to
subscribe to these pejorative colonizing ideas. Even against concrete counter-
evidence against such a theory, our historians are rather determined in their stance
and refuse to correct the historical academic fallacy, leading to a continued life span
for outdated and dangerous ideas. Moreover, it is this unique group of leftist
historians who have managed to crawl their way to the governing bodies of
educational committees, who are responsible for framing the syllabus for fresh
unpolluted minds to read, digest and inculcate. As aforementioned, my ICSE (the
premier educational governing body) textbook carries an entire chapter dedicated
to the Aryan Invasion theory belting out one lie after another, with no consideration
to the kind of effects it could have on young minds especially in the realm of
national pride. Any attempt to correct this by great scholars (like Jha, BB Lal, etc)
will be branded as Hindu-fundamentalists attempting to distort history for the
glorification of Hinduism. I will leave this idea here and proceed to the next aspect,
as our famed Marxist historians need another voluminous article in praise of them.

We have to realize that by negating the antiquity of the Vedas, its spiritual and
scientific value and by, finally, claiming it to be borrowed, they are successful in
churning out a large army of young students who are no longer proud of their
culture or nation, juxtaposed with the simultaneous and incessant glorification of
the Western culture has lead to a pathetic vicious cycle of imitation of the latter and
discarding the former. How can one expect India to truly progress, economically and
morally; and how can one expect India to be truly united if such debasing theories
are allowed to float about unchallengedely?

END OF PART II
 III
D I S P R OV I N G T H E T H E O RY
Now that we have had a grasp over the intentions behind such a theory and the
multifarious effects it ensures, the task now lies in disproving the theory. I have to
admit, though, that compared to the previous two sections, this task is of relative
ease as there have been scores of scholars and archaeologists who have already
achieved this feat and my task is to just state these findings. Unfortunately,
however, these findings have been continuously discarded as ‘Hindutva agenda’ or
‘Saffron scholarship’. I shall present the facts, it is really upto you to decide whether
it is the coloured ramblings or plain unbiased facts.

Disproving the theory entails certain quintessential approaches/ methods. As

aforementioned, the dating of the Rig Veda is absolutely essential, for, if it can be
proved that the Rig-Veda dates earlier than the supposed date for the Aryan
Invasion, then it is clear that the Vedas was innate to the Harappans and thus,
Indians. Once having done this, we must find clues within the Rig-Veda itself to
falsify the theory and finally, we must also prove that there really was no invasion
as such based on archaeological findings and it becomes equally important to
provide an alternate and more credible version of the evacuation of the Harappan
sites.

3.1 DATING THE RIG-VEDA

The dating of the age in which the Vedic literature commenced and thrived has a
detrimental effect on the Aryan Invasion question. The oldest of the Vedas, the Rig-
Veda, is full of references to places and natural phenomena that occurred in what is
modern day Punjab and Haryana and must have unmistakably been written in that
part. The date at which it was composed is absolutely essential to the dating of the
Aryan Invasion (presuming that there was one), for whether they came from abroad
or they were natives, one thing will be sure: they were certainly completely Indians
without a trace of memory of their original home.

The dating of the Rig-Veda, as done by Max Muller is, as mentioned, 1200BC and
received considerable criticism even during his time on a number of grounds.
Maurice Winternitz, for example, based his estimate on purely philological
considerations: "We cannot explain the development of the whole of this great
literature if we assume as late a date as round about 1200 BC or 1500 BC as its
starting point." There is much sense in what he says. It is not possible to cram all
the philosophical, linguistic, cultural and scientific developments, which are evident
in the Vedas, into just a few centuries, for, we have to remember that the Vedic age
was over by the time of the Buddha, which is the 6th century. However, this will
remain as an argument of plausibility and is not sufficient enough to disprove the
older chronology. The most explicit chronology would be provided by astronomical
markers of time.

3.1.1 ANCIENT HINDU ASTRONOMY 2

In 1790, a Scottish mathematician, John Playfair demonstrated that the starting -
date of the astronomical observations recorded in the tables still in use among
Hindu astrologers had to be 4300 BC. Though this was ridiculed by some and called
absurd, it was not refuted by any scientist.

Basically, Playfair demonstrated that the Vedas contained observations of

astronomical events dating back to the 4000 odd BC. This was claimed as an
attempt by the Brahmins to falsely claim antiquity of their texts by providing
astronomical observations of the past as presented in their scriptures by back
calculation. In retaliation, Playfair showed that this kind of advanced back
calculation was in fact impossible.

Backcalculation of planetary positions is a highly complex affair requiring knowledge

of a number of physical laws, universal constants and actual measurements of
densities, diameters and distances. Though Brahminical astronomy was remarkably
sophisticated for its time, it could only backcalculate planetary position of the
presumed Vedic age with an inaccuracy margin of at least several degrees of arc.
With our modern knowledge, it is easy to determine what the actual positions were,
and what the results of backcalculations with the Brahminical formulae would have
been (Elst, 1998), e.g.:

""Aldebaran was therefore 40' before the point of the vernal equinox, according
to the Indian astronomy, in the year 3102 before Christ. (...) [Modern astronomy]
gives the longitude of that star 13' from the vernal equinox, at the time of the
Calyougham, agreeing, within 53', with the determination of the Indian astronomy.
This agreement is the more remarkable, that the Brahmins, by their own rules for
computing the motion of the fixed stars, could not have assigned this place to
Aldebaran for the beginning of Calyougham, had they calculated it from a modern
observation. For as they make the motion of the fixed stars too great by more than
3'' annually, if they had calculated backward from 1491, they would have placed the
fixed stars less advanced by 4° or 5°, at their ancient epoch, than they have
actually done." (Playfair, 1790) Therefore, it turns out that the data given by the
Brahmins corresponded not with the results deduced from their formulae, but with
the actual positions, and this, according to Playfair, for nine different astronomical
parameters. This is a bit much to explain away as coincidence or sheer luck..

2
This section largely involves the work of Dr. Koenraad Elst, from his paper “Astronomical
data and the Aryan question” as I have little knowledge of astronomy myself.
Fabricating astronomical data going back thousands of years calls for knowledge of
Newton's Law of Gravitation and the ability to solve differential equations. Failing
this advanced knowledge, the data in the Brahminical tables must be based on
actual observation. So far we’ve seen that the astronomical events that are
recorded in the Rig-Veda could not have been back-calculations but the ancient
Hindu seers were actually present and recorded it based on observation, which
gives vital clues regarding the dating of the Vedas. The next task is to find the
events as such, if I could call them that, which could give us an idea of the exact
dates.

3.1.2 THE START OF THE KALI YUGA: 3

Hindu tradition makes mention of the conjunction of the "seven planets" (Saturn,
Jupiter, Mars, Venus, Mercury, sun and moon) and Ketu (southern lunar node, the
northern node/Rahu being by definition in the opposite location) near the fixed star
Revati (Zeta Piscium) on 18 February 3102 BC. This date, at which Krishna is
supposed to have breathed his last, is conventionally the start of the so-called Kali-
Yuga, the "age of strife", the low point in a declining sequence of four ages.

Bailly and Playfair had already shown that the position of the moon (the fastest
moving "planet", hence the hardest to backcalculate with precision) at the
beginning of KaliYuga, 18 February 3102, as given by Hindu tradition, was accurate
to 37'. Either the Brahmins had made an incredibly lucky guess, or they had
recorded an actual observation on Kali Yuga day itself.

3.1.3 THE PRECESSION 4 OF THE EQUINOX:

The truly strong evidence for a high chronology of the Vedas is the Vedic
information about the position of the equinox. The phenomenon of the "precession
of the equinoxes" takes the ecliptical constellations (also known as the sidereal
Zodiac, i.e. those constellations through which the sun passes) slowly past the
vernal equinox point, i.e. the intersection of ecliptic and equator, rising due East on
the horizon. The whole tour is made in about 25,791 years, the longest cycle
manageable for nakedeye observers. If data about the precession are properly
recorded, they provide the best and often the only clue to an absolute chronology
for ancient events.

3
The next few sections are a little tough to comprehend if one is not familiar with the Hindu
calendar and astronomy in general.
4
For the uninitiated, precession refers to the regular motion of a spinning body such as a
spinning top or a planet, in which the axis of rotation describes a cone.
If we can read the Vedic and post-Vedic indications properly, they mention
constellations on the equinox points which were there from 4,000 BC for the Rg-
Veda, through around 3100 BC for the Atharva Veda and the core Mahabharata
down to 2,300 BC for the Sutras and the Shatapatha Brahmana.

However, our dear Communist historian Romila Thapar, amongst others, still
believes that "planetary positions could have been observed in earlier times and
such observations been handed down as part of an oral tradition" (Thapar, 1992), so
that they "do not constitute proof of the chronology of the Vedic hymns". This is
perhaps one of the most illogical arguments that I have come across, for she is
implicitly acknowledging that accurate astronomical data were indeed made from
the 5th millennium onwards, and that they were preserved for more than two
thousand years, an unparalleled feat in oral traditions. If such a feat is not an
indication of literacy and of written records, at the least, it supposes a
mnemotechnical device capable of preserving information orally, and the one that
was available then was verse. So, some poems with the memory aiding devices of
verse, rhythm and tone must have been composed when the information was
available firsthand, i.e. close to the time of the actual observation, and those hymns
would of course be the Vedic hymns themselves.

There are scores of other astronomical references in the Rig-Veda, each of which
gives us the date for such an event occurring. These dates range from 3000 odd BC
uptil 5000-5500 BC (inferences drawn from the Saptharishi cycle, etc). Whichever
date we might choose as the earliest recorded astronomical observation, it is
definitely at least a couple of thousand years older than the date given by Max
Müller.

3.2 MAJOR FLAWS IN THE AIT

Presuming for an instant that the Vedas were given by the nomads, there are few
questions that are begging to be answered by the defenders of the theory. Most
importantly, how is it that the invaders who scripted the Vedas have not mentioned
a word about their original habitat? It is a peculiar phenomenon where rich
descriptive accounts regarding the flora, fauna, forests, rivers, mountains, etc of the
Indian subcontinent are found but not a single mention of their homeland.

There are constant references to India as their holy land. Why don’t they consider
their original home as their holy land? There is no mention of any location outside
the mainland of India in any of the Vedic texts! If Aryans came from Europe, then
why haven’t the so-called Aryans mentioned any of the European locations in any of
the Vedic or related texts? The farthest location away from India towards the west
mentioned in the Vedas is Kadhahar of present day Afghanistan, which was called
Gandhar in the Vedic texts and was said to be the kingdom of Shakuni.

Why haven’t any of the texts mentioned about their European locations? Why is
there no Vedic text that talks about migration from Europe? “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.” (Agarwal, 1995)

We are also aware that for all ancient civilizations, rivers were the mains source of
sustenance and each of these civilizations, in whatever capacity, adulate these
rivers and sing praise of them. In the Vedas, Saraswati, Yamuna, Sindhu, Ganga, etc
are all mentioned constantly but the question arises as to why the Aryans did not
mention any European or Central Asian river, which would have been their source of
life previously?

The range of questions does not end here. Further, if the Aryans did come from
outside and destroyed its inhabitants and their civilization, why is it that they did
not occupy it? The wandering tribe could not have asked for a better home. For, the
fact is that the excavations of these sites clearly reveal that these townships had
been abandoned. Was the Harappan town, with all its modern, urban facilities not
good enough for them? In addition, if, in fact, they did decide not to inhabit
Harappa, where did they settle?

Moreover, if the original inhabitants, the Dravidians, were indeed pushed down to
the south, how come there is no Aryan-Dravidian divide in the respective literatures
and historical traditions? We know that, prior to the arrival of the British, the North
and South were not culturally or politically hostile to each other. In fact, the contrary
is true. There was a continual intermingling and exchange of culture between the
two. The Sanskrit language, the so-called Aryan language was the lingua franca of
the entire society for thousands of years. For example, “the three great figures of
later Hinduism - Shankaracharya, Ramanujam and Madhavacharya 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, is
widely venerated in the South as the one who introduced Vedic learning to the
South India.” (Agarwal, 1995)

One of the most important practical and historical complication that arises out of
accepting the AIT is the logical wondering about who were the original inhabitants in
the south? Was South India uninhabited? Unlikely. Then, did the original inhabitants
welcome the Dravidians who were pushed down with wide, open arms? How is it
that the Dravidians were accepted without any hostility or at least a grudge? It just
does not make sense. The final truth is that there were neither Aryans nor
Dravidians.

3.2.1 THE REAL MEANING OF THE WORD ARYA

True, the Rig Veda and the other Vedas and Puranas have, at times, mentioned the
word Arya. It was dear old Max who is again credited with the introduction of the
word Arya into the English language as referring to a racial, linguistic category when
propounding the AIT. This is glaringly a false conception of the term, which, he
himself has admitted later on. Nonetheless, it was unquestioningly accepted.
The real meaning of the word Arya, however comes to mean ‘a 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), for
example, Rama is described as an Arya in the following words: Arya - who cared for
the equality to all and was dear to everyone. V.S. Apte's Sanskrit-English dictionary
relates the word Arya to the root r-,to which a prefix 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,
honourable, excellent", upholder of Arya values, and further: teacher, employer,
master, father-in-law, friend, Buddha.

Thus, we see that even in the myriad of meanings and connotations that the word
carries, relative to different interpretations, like all Sanskrit words, nowhere does it
mean a race or a linguistic group. This linguistically absurd idea was the result of a
complete misinterpretation and mistranslation of Sanskrit by Müller. Etymologically,
according to Max Müller, the word Arya was derived from ar-, "plough, to cultivate".
Therefore, Arya means - "cultivator" agriculturer (civilized sedentary, as opposed to
nomads and hunter-gatherers), landlord, etc.

In fact, scientific literature now confirms that there are primarily only four races in
the world. There are only four primary races, namely, Caucasian, the Mongolian, 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. Moreover, these differences cannot 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 colour
ranging from pure white to almost pure black, with every shade of brown in
between.

Further, a recent landmark global study in population genetics by a team of

internationally reputed scientists over 50 years reveals that the people habited in
the Indian subcontinent and nearby including Europe, all belong to one single race
of Caucasian type. According to this study, there is essentially, and have 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. (Luca Cavalli-Sforza).

3.2.2 WARS AND SKELETONS

The Rig-Veda contains references to wars that have occurred during its period. This
is used by the ‘invasionists’ to further their claims about the war between the dark
skinned Dravidians and the fair-skinned Aryans. This is a gross misinterpretation of
the Vedas and as we shall see, has no connection whatsoever to an invading tribe.
So what do these wars that are mentioned refer to? They can be studied under two
broad categories: (Agarwal, 1995)

• The Wars between forces of nature: Indra, the Thunder-God of the Rig Veda,
occupies a central position in the naturalistic aspects of the Rig Vedic religion,
since it is he who forces the clouds to part with their all-important wealth, the
rain. In this task he is pitted against all sorts of demons and spirits whose
main activity is the prevention of rainfall and sunshine. The clouds are
depicted in terms of their physical appearance: as mountains, as the black
abodes of the demons who retain the celestial waters of the heavens (i.e. the
rains), or as the black demons themselves. Thus, it is a conflict between the
rain(pure, white) and the clouds(dark, evil). This, in no way, is to be
construed as the war between white Aryans and black Dravidians. This is a
perverted interpretation from those who have not understood the meaning
and purport of the Vedic culture and philosophy. Most of the verses, which
mention the wars/conflicts, are composed using poetic imagery, and depict
the celestial battles of the natural forces, and often take greater and greater
recourse to terrestrial terminology and anthropomorphic depictions. The
descriptions acquire an increasing tendency to shift from naturalism to
mythology.

• Actual conflict between different groups: Iranians are known to have been
originally residing in Northern India, but had an ideological schism from the
Vedic Indians. Due to which, they moved out to the North West. However,
there were quite a few wars between the two groups. The Iranians not only
called their God Ahura (Vedic Asura) and their demons Daevas (Vedic Devas),
but they also called themselves Dahas and Dahyus (Vedic Dasas, and
Dasyus). The oldest Iranian texts moreover depict the conflicts between the
daeva-worshippers and the Dahyus on behalf of the Dahyus, as the Vedic
texts depict them on behalf of the Deva-worshippers. There also mentions of
the various conflicts between different indigenous tribal groups over natural
resources and various minor kingdoms to gain supremacy over the land and
its expansion.

There have been a few skeletons that were excavated from the Harappa and
Mohenjo daro sites, which is conveniently explained as the bodies of the warriors
who fought the battle against the invaders. However, consider the facts properly. A
city of 3 miles in circuit has given way to only 37 skeletons, which can be attributed
to the Indus Valley period! Does that represent a war? They were all found in the
area of the Lower Town - probably the residential district. Not a single body was
found within the area of the fortified citadel where one could reasonably expect the
final defence of this thriving capital city to have been made. (Dales, 1964)

Further, one can reasonably expect some sort of souvenirs from the war. The war
site can expect to have burned fortresses, arrowheads, weapons, pieces of armour,
smashed chariots and bodies of the invaders or defenders, etc. Nevertheless, the
extensive excavations at these sites provide not even a clue to such an invasion
having been taken place.

3.2.3 INDUS SCRIPT DECIPHERMENT

S. R Rao, a renowned Indian archaeologist, who worked in the ASI (Archaeological
Survey of India), has done extensive research on the Indus script. This work has
borne fruitful results, as he has been able to bridge the gap between the ancient
Indus script and the Brahmi script. The language that he deciphered belonged to
the Aryan language family after all. The people who resided at Harappa, Mohenjo-
Daro, and other sites were culturally Aryan is thus confirmed by the decipherment
of the Harappan script and its identity with Sanskrit family. The Harappa culture was
a part of a continuing evolution of the Vedic culture, which had developed on the
banks of Saraswati River.

Among the many words yielded by Dr. Rao's decipherment are the numerals aeka,
tra, chatus, panta, happta/sapta, dasa, dvadasa and sata (1,3,4,5,7, 10,100) and
the names of Vedic personalities like Atri, Kasyapa, Gara, Manu, Sara, Trita, Daksa,
Druhu, Kasu, and many common Sanskrit words like, apa (water), gatha, tar
(savior), trika, da, dyau (heaven), dashada, anna (food), pa(protector), para
(supreme), maha, mahat, moksh, etc.

While the direct connection between the late Indus script (1600 BC) and the Brahmi
script could not be definitely established earlier, more and more inscriptions have
been found all over the country in the last few years, dating 1000 BC, 700 BC, and
so on, which have bridged the gap between the two. Now it is evident that the
Brahmi script evolved directly from the Indus script. (Rao, 1991)

3.2.3.1 HORSEPLAY AT HARAPPA

In 2000, N. Jha and N. S Rajaram published a book “The Deciphered Indus Script”.
The findings of this book are astounding. It simultaneously achieves a two fold
objective: It links the ancient Indus script to the Vedic culture and also proves that
the script on the Indus seals are perhaps the oldest available ‘writings’ by any
human civilization. “In the Indus seals, we have in all probability the mother of
alphabetic writing” is the conclusion drawn after Jha’s phenomenal work. Though
the seals were found in 1920s, it could not be appropriately deciphered previous to
Jha’s work because of the dogma of the AIT. It is impossible to decipher unless the
Indus script can be seen as a predecessor to the Brahmi script and its content
cannot be comprehended unless seen as part of the overall Vedic culture. This was
yet another blow to the Theory.

However, strangely, this phenomenal work by Jha and Rajaram was sidelined and
‘scholars’ such as Steve Farmer and Michael Witzel were more interested in horses.
They go on to label the book as ‘Hindutva propaganda’ (Michael Witzel, 2000). Their
main qualm with the book is that the authors have misrepresented a particular seal
where a bull is shown to look like a horse.
It is impossible not to question: ...why bother with one unimportant seal when
the book gives a complete methodology and one hundred tables of
deciphered readings covering over fifteen hundred Harappan seals? In a
book of nearly 300 pages, there are just two footnotes about the horse. (The article
by Witzel and Farmer occupies ten pages of small print followed by a two-page
article by ‘eminent historian’ Romila Thapar about horses.)

The point is that the defenders of the AIT have held that the Harappans did not
have horses and it was this point that made them weak and susceptible to the
Aryans who had a fairly good cavalry. By proving that horses were, in fact, known to
the Indus civilization before the supposed invasion of the Aryans, their entire theory
falls flat. Thus all of this horseplay is nothing but a desperate attempt on part of the
Western academicians, Indologists and the tribe of Thapars (communist Historians)
to save the theory from being completely discarded. “The Frontline article is part of
the campaign to somehow save the crumbling edifice of the Aryan invasion version
by creating diversions and raising the spectre of ‘Hindutva propaganda’. The real
agenda is clear: protect their discredited Aryan invasion/migration version and the
non-Indian origin of the Vedic civilization by labeling opponents as ‘Hindutva
propagandists’. The rest is diversion.” (Rajaram N. S., 2000)

“Men like Witzel are successors to these colonial-missionary scholars,

while Indians like Thapar and her tribe, are their camp followers. Our book
exposes this. So their tactic is to discredit the book by attacking us personally. This
is exactly what the ‘Secularists’ did to the distinguished archaeologist
B.B. Lal when he exposed their lies at Ayodhya. More things change, more
they remain the same.” (Rajaram N. S., 2000)

What reason do the duo give for their long article criticizing Jha’s and Rajaram’s
work? What importance is a horse seal from centuries old civilization to the German
and American scholars? Why, its the ‘White man’s burden’ card played all over
again. Can’t Indians think for themselves and decide the authenticity of the work?
Apparently not, which is why they feel they have to caution us. “We fear for India
and for objective scholarship.” (Michael Witzel, 2000) So Witzel and Farmer have to
save India and Indians from being corrupted by devilish ‘heathens’ and ‘natives’ like
Rajaram, Jha and Talageri!

But seriously, who are they trying to kid? Surely, there must be other reasons why
someone like Witzel should go to such length to attack two writers who he himself
dismisses as of no consequence. One reason is probably emotional. Witzel is a
German Romantic. His heroes still are nineteenth century German Indologists like
Bothlingk and especially Oldenberg. Therefore, it is natural that he should be
attached to nineteenth century German ideas like the ‘Aryan nation’ and the ‘Aryan
invasion’. But there is a more serious concern: fear of academic survival in the face
of ‘downsizing the humanities’ at American universities. The collapse of the Aryan
Invasion model of history, which the work records, and which is receiving wide
notice, could not have come at a worse time for the likes of Witzel. Their careers
and reputations are at stake. This is what one needs to understand. Harvard, like
many other universities, in America is not interested in funding research offices and
programs that are unproductive and which does not attract new students. Thus,
unless Witzel and his likes do not weave research papers regularly, off goes their
funding.

That apart, horses were really found in Harappa. Numerous excavated sites along
Indus valley and along the dried Saraswati river have produced bones of
domesticated horses. Dr. SR Rao informs us that horse bones have been found both
from the 'Mature Harappan' and 'Late Harappan' levels. In fact, as far back as 1928,
John Marshall, Director General of the Archaeological Survey of India had written
about Harappan sites: “Among the domesticated animals were— the humped long
horned Indian bull (Bos Indicus) (of which to judge by the frequency of the remains
large herds must have been maintained), the sheep, pig, dog, horse and the
elephant.” And he is quite specific about the horse: “The horse in the Indus Valley
was the small ‘equis cabalus’ near akin to the Indian country bred.”

3.3 DAVID FRAWLEY’S PARADOX

The Harappans of the Indus Valley have left profuse archaeological records over a
vast region - from the borders of Iran and beyond Afghanistan to eastern UP and
Tapti valley, and must have supported over 30 million people and believed to be
living an advanced civilization. And yet these people have left absolutely no literary
records. Sounds incredible! The Vedic Aryans and their successors on the other
hand have left us a literature that is probably the largest and most profound in the
world. But according to the AIT there is absolutely no archaeological record that
they ever existed. Either on the Indian soil or outside its boundaries. So we have
concrete history and archeology of a vast civilization of 'Dravidians' lasting
thousands of years that left no literature, and a huge literature by the Vedic Aryans
who left no history and no archaeological records. The situation gets more absurd
when we consider that there is profuse archaeological and literary records indicating
a substantial movement of Indian Aryans out of India into Iran and West Asia around
2000 BC. (Frawley, 1999)

Sanskrit is supposed to be the language of primitive invaders and yet it is, by the
opinion of many, one of the most refined languages in the world. It has been
regarded as the best language for computers because of its clarity. How can a
nomadic primitive tribe develop such a sophisticated language while a highly
advanced civilization with intense knowledge of maths and science has no literary
developments at all?

Sanskrit is also a highly self-contained language developing organically out of

specific roots, quite unlike English, which is a mixture of various different languages
like old German, Danish and French, with an admixture of Greek and Latin, reflecting
a land that was invaded by many different peoples. This also goes to show that
Sanskrit was home to the Indus Valley Civilization.

3.4 THE REAL EXPLANATION

Though for many years now, renowned scholars and academicians have been
refuting the AIT on numerous grounds but, were not able to provide a firm
alternative explanation to the reason of the abandonment of the Harappan cities.
The final nail on the coffin of the AIT was delivered with the finding of the dried
course of the river Saraswati.

In the Rig-Veda, the honour of the greatest and holiest river was not bestowed upon
Ganga but upon the River Saraswati. a mighty flowing river all the way from the
Himalayas to the ocean across the Rajasthan desert. The Ganga is mentioned only
once while the Saraswati is mentioned at least 60 times.

In 1910, G E Pilgrim published a landmark paper in which he drew attention to an

alluvial deposit of great antiquity found stretching all the way from the Himalayan
foothills to the Sind gulf Pilgrims imagined the deposit to have been laid by a
primitive river. Recent satellite imagery by the NASA and ISRO have shown a dried
up river bed along this course. Geological excavations have also proven the same.

The River Saraswati seemed to have changed directions atleast four times in her
lifespan, each time shifting to a more westerly alignment according to geological
data. She seems to have been massive, up to five miles across in her heyday,
flowing through Hanumangarh in Rajasthan to Marot in Pakistan as divulged by
satellite photography. The Post Graduate Research Institute, Deccan College has
worked out the changing routes of the river in detail. About 4000 BC, Saraswati in
her original course emanating from the Himalayas lay in a south-west direction
passing through Mathura and Panchbhadra to the mouth of the Kutch. With the
climate turning drier, the flow shifted between Sirsa and Nohar through Bikaner.
The next shift occurred with the flow through Rangmahal, also in Rajasthan. In the
tertiary stage she wended her way through Jaikkal and Hanumangarh during the
Indus civilisation and in the fourth and final stage she flowed westward from
Samargarh to merge with the Indus, thereby losing her independent identity'. (Rao
V. G., 2000). And therefore, the river, finally, dried up by 3000 BC.

This has two serious implications. Firstly, as mentioned earlier, the Rig-Veda is full of
praise to this particular river. The river called Saraswati is the most important of the
rivers mentioned in the Rig Veda. The image of this 'great goddess stream'
dominates the text. It is not only the most sacred river but also the Goddess of
wisdom. She is said to be the Mother of the Veda.

A few Rig Vedic hymns, which mention Saraswati River, are presented below:

ambitame naditame devitame sarasvati (II.41.16)

(The best mother, the best river, the best Goddess, Saraswati)

maho arnah saraswati pra cetayati ketuna dhiyo visva virajati (I.3.12)
(Saraswati like a great ocean appears with her ray, she rules all inspirations)

surpassing all other rivers and waters: visva apo mahina sindhur anyah;
pure in her course from the mountains to the sea: sucir yati girbhya a samudrat
(VII.95.1-2)

If the river dried up by 3000 BC, then it must have been flowing in its full intensity
at least a 1000 years back when she would have deserved the praises accorded to
her in the Veda. This proves that the Rig-Veda belongs to a period of at least 4000
BC, much earlier than the supposed invasion.

The second important implication is that it proves that the Harappan civilization was
formed on the bed of the River, much like any ancient civilization. Numerous
archaeological sites have also been located along the course of this great
prehistoric river. A 350 km land survey conducted in 1985 by V S Wakankar from
Adibadri to Somnath has yielded over 160 more sites on the dried-up course of the
river. Thus, when the river did dry up in 3000 BC, the Harappans, who were
dependent on the mighty river, moved along with the river when she changed her
course. The ending of Indus Valley and the Saraswati civilization was due to the
constant floods and drought in the Indus area and the drying up of the Saraswati
River. There was no invasion or battle but merely an ecological change that made
the Harappans abandon their home and move towards other perennial rivers, which
could provide sustenance. This is the truth and there ends the matter!

CONCLUSION
We have seen that the AIT was the invention of a few parochial and nationalist
scholars, which is used till date for political ends. The far-reaching consequences of
this theory cannot be overstated and, as we have seen, never before in history has
any theory been so abused to subjugate a group of people.

The truth is clear: there was never an invasion but the city was deserted because of
ecological reasons. The Rig-Veda dates clearly earlier than 3700 BC and the Indus
script can be placed on a continuum of the evolution of the Sanskritic script.

Based on Vedic testimonies, Puranic references, archaeological evidences, and all

the accounts presented here above, the most realistic and accurate chronological
events of the pre-historic period of India should be fixed as follows:

• Vedic Age - 7000-4000 BC

• End of Rig Vedic Age - 3750 BC
• End of Ramayana - Mahabharat Period - 3000 BC
• Development of Saraswati-Indus Civilization - 3000-2000 BC
• Decline of Indus and Saraswati Civilization - 2200-1900 BC
• Period of Complete chaos and migration - 2000-1500 BC
• Period of evolution of syncretic Hindu culture - 1400 - 250 BC

Finally, we should remember that this was just another tool in the British armor in
their colonial expansion agenda, which is strangely supported by a blindly following
group of Indian historians and has, unfortunately, succeeded in permeating the
mindset of the Indian population.
Therefore, while acknowledging its falsity on the personal level is the first step,
much needs to be done with regards to exposing the myth in the eyes of the public.
This perhaps, entails sweeping out of irresponsible, dishonest and ideologically fixed
academicians from prominent posts, who decide what the young minds imbibe and
simultaneously endeavour to rewrite history based on facts and academic honesty!

WORKS CITED
Agarwal, D. (1995). Demise of the Aryan Invasion Theory.

Dales, G. F. (1964). The Mythical Massacre at Mohenjo-daro, Expedition Vol VI.

Dubois, A. (1897). Hindu Manners, Customs and Ceremonies.

Elst, K. (1998). Astronomical data and the Aryan question. Leuven .

Frawley, D. (1999). The Myth of the Aryan Invasion of India, In Search of the Cradle
of Civilization.

Luca Cavalli-Sforza, P. M. The History and Geography of Human Genes. Princeton

University Press.

Michael Witzel, S. F. (2000). Horseplay in Harappa. Frontline .

Nahar, M. D. (1996). The Invasion that never Was.

Playfair, J. (1790). Dharampal: Indian Science and Technology.

Rajaram, N. Aryan Invasion - History or Politics?

Rajaram, N. S. (2000). Harappan Horseplay: The real story.

Rao, S. R. (1991). Decipherment of the Indus Script, Dawn and Development of

Indus Civilization, Lothal and the Indus Civilization.

Rao, V. G. (2000, November 13). Saraswati: River Beyond the Myth. Times Of India .
Thapar, R. (1992). The Perennial Aryans.

Vivekananda. The Myth of Aryans and non-Aryans. Madras.