DR.

RAM MANOHAR LOHIYA

NATIONAL LAW UNIVERSITY,
LUCKNOW
ACADEMIC SESSION: 2019-20

HISTORY

TOPIC- ARYAN MIGRATION OR INDIGENOUS

ARYANS;A COMPARATIVE STUDY!

SUBMITTED TO SUBMITTED BY
Dr. Vandana Singh Abhinav Dixit
Associate Professor (History) 1st year (1st Semester)
RMLNLU, Lucknow. Roll no. 005/ Sec A

1
 ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
I would like to use this opportunity to extend my heartiest gratitude to all the people who
have helped me develop this project. First and foremost, I would thank my History
professor, Dr. Vandana Singh, who has been constantly supporting me, guiding me and
helping me with all my queries and difficulties regarding this project since its fledgling
stage. Without her enthusiasm, inspiration, and efforts to explain even the toughest of
jargons in the most lucid manner, the successful inception of this project would have been
a Herculean task.
Next, I would like thank the librarians of Dr. Madhu Limaye library for helping me find
the correct resources for my research and for helping me enrich my knowledge. Finally, I
would like to extend my gratitude to my batch mates and seniors for providing me some
unique ideas and insights which helped me make this project even better. I know that
despite my sincerest efforts some discrepancies might have crept in, I hope and believe
that I would be pardoned for the same.
Thanking You
Abhinav Dixit
Enrollment number:190101005

2
 DECLARATION
I, Abhinav Dixit, hereby declare that the project titled “Aryan Migration or Indigenous
Aryans;A Comparative Study!” made under the guidance of Dr. Vandana Singh, is an
original work. This project has been submitted as the mid-term project for the History for
First Year of B.A. LL.B. (Hons) course. All the information and data that has been
analysed and used from various sources has been duly cited and accredited.
Date:
Signature:
(Abhinav Dixit) 1st semester, 1st year

3
 TABLE OF CONTENTS
1. INTRODUCTION
2. THE TWO THEORIES
3. THE CONFLICT AND ITS IMPLICATIONS
4. THE THREE DISCOVERIES
5. RIGVEDA
6. HORSES
7. PASHUPATI SEAL
8. SARASVATI RIVER EVIDENCE
9. DNA
10. CONCLUSION
11. BIBLIOGRAPHY

4
INTRODUCTION
Who are Aryans? The source of the English word Aryan comes from the Sanskrit word ārya,
which is the self-designation used by the Vedic Indic people The original meaning of the term is
unknown and different meanings have been proposed, the most common being nobleman. During
the 19th century CE, it was proposed that this was not only the Indo-Iranian tribal self-designation
but also the self-designation used by the ancestors of all Indo-Europeans, which is a theory no
longer accepted. Aryan then came to be used as a synonym of Indo-European. Some time later it
was further proposed that the ancestors of the Indo-European people had their homeland located
in northern Europe, implying that Indo-Europeans were originally of a Nordic racial type.
Thus, Aryan developed yet another, purely racial meaning, probably one of the most familiar
meanings today.Presently , more than 70% of Indian population speaks a language that it
identifiable with the language of the Indo-Aryan group and is said to be a descendant of the
same.This includes languages such as Hindi(with its different dialects), Bangla, Asamiya,
Gujarati, Marathi and Punjabi. Encompassing within its sphere a vast majority of Indian
population, the discussion on not only how ‘these languages’ but also the culture, values and most
importantly, the identity that accompanied ‘the people’ who carried it becomes important.

In this draft ,the author would like to present the debate about the Aryan advent into India(read
Indus Valley Civilization) as it stands today, the reason as to why this clash among the various
theories has been gaining unprecedented support among the masses and the consequences of the
same, then move on to compare both the theories on the various grounds on which this debate
stands and provide as to which side substains its claims on a more logically and analytically
correct stand.

5
THE TWO THEORIES
● The Aryan Migration/Invasion Theory (Standard View)
In 1786 , Sir William Jones, in a lecture given before the Asiatic society ,said that six
ancient languages- Sanskrit, Latin, Greek, Gothic(ancestor of Germanic languages),
Celtic(ancestor of Irish and Welsh) and old Persian, are so similar that they must have
been descended from a common language. Jones interpreted the similarities seen in the
grammar and vocabulary of the six ancient languages in form of a common genealogy.
It was then theorized that Aryans were a noble race who brought to the primitive
residents of the subcontinent, a superior culture and a proper civilization.

This “primitive Indians” theory suffered a major setback in the 1920s when a team led
by Daya Ram Sahni discovered the remnants of Harappan civilization in the
present-day Pakistan. Upon dating, the archaeologists found that the civilization
existed between 3300BCE-1300BCE with its high period between
2600BCE-1300BCE. The Rigveda(the oldest decipherable text) has been dated to
around 1500BCE. Thus, archaeologists came up with the theory that Aryans advent
into India happened somewhere around 1500BCE. They initially proposed a theory
which said that Aryans attacked the cities of the IVC and took over. This approach
helped explain why the IVC suddenly perished and it was held almost unanimously.

Further dating by advanced methods in a later stage of time point to IVC receding at
around 1800BC whereas the advent of Aryans was dated at 1500BCE. This difference
is time between terminating of IVC and advent of Aryans led to the rise of Aryan
Migration theory. Advocates of this theory propounded that Aryan Migration into India
across the Hindu Kush mountain was not accompanied by war. It is also theorized that
this migration didn’t happen all at once but took place over an extent of time.

Over the time, the support for Invasion theory has gradually decreased and there is
almost a consensus amongst the scholars supporting the “Outside Aryan” theory

6
 regarding the Migration theory.

● The Indigenous Aryan Theory (Alternative view)

During the colonial era, the narrative of superiority became an important element for
the British to curb the minds of the Indians. They began to propound and propagate the
theory of Aryan Invasion/Migration on a large scale. The narrative they propagated
was that during ancient times, the superior Aryan race(a race believed to be originated
in Northern Europe and with which the British identified themselves) migrated to India
and taught the largely primitive Indians, a proper civilization. Max Mueller, who
translated the Rigveda postulated the Aryans to be fair-complexioned Indo-European
speakers who conquered the dark-skinned dasas of India. The upper castes, particularly
the Brahmins, were thought to be of Aryan descent whereas the lower castes and Dalits
("untouchables") were thought to be the descendants of dasas

This lead to two major backdraws for the independence movement. Firstly, the
Brahmins, who had been largely out of the negotiating front and large deprived of the
privileges they used to enjoy in pre-Muslim rule, began to form a brotherly association
with the British to assert their superior identity. Secondly, this theory of British being a
superior race which had ruled them in past and whose advent made the entire “glorious
history and culture” of India possible served as a moral and intellectual confine to the
people who wanted to vehemently oppose the British rule and stand for the demand of
freedom.

Many nationalistic leaders, sensing this negative impact that the Aryan
Invasion/Migration theory was causing , began to propound a view which dealt with
Aryans being indigenous to land. This theory proposes that Aryans were originally a
resident of the land and the Harappan culture is the Aryan culture. This theory
basically relies on the fact that some common features seem to be there in Harappan
societies as described in Rigveda. Since evidence of religious practices in Harappan
civilization have been dated back to 5500BC (which is approximately the date for
Ramayana) according to religious scholars, the Indigenous Aryan theory uses the
references to Rigveda in Ramayana to pose that dating of Rigveda is actually much
older than what is been propagated by the westerly scholars, thereby disregarding the
standard view altogether.

7
THE CONFLICT AND ITS IMPLICATIONS
Whether the Aryans came from outside or were they native to the land? This is a question that has
gained immense importance over the years, especially after the discovery of Indus Valley
Civilization. This seemingly conflicting ideas are not only

The debate about Aryans and the historical backdrop about it has spilled out from scholarly circles
to be a conflict amongst the common masses. The reason behind it is the blatant politicization of
an issue that is much based on speculation and approximation than concrete proofs. The British
theory that Aryans as a superior race migrated to India and the remnants of the Aryan civilization
today are the “upper class” Brahmins, which was once a merit, has now began to show its
twin-edged nature. In an atmosphere of intense nationalization, where the older ethnic groups
claim the people from religions that were conceived outside India as “foreigners”, “aliens to the
land” and “invaders”, the Aryan Invasion/Migration theory serves as a sword hanging on head as
it recognizes even the Aryans(the language of whom is recognizable with around 70% of India’s
current population) as outsiders and not native to the land. The standard view therefore, can not
only create mass chaos but also moral dilemma to generations of these people who identify with
India as their motherland and hold it in a certain sacred regard.

Therefore, an issue as sensitive as this should be dealt and addressed with utmost care because
implications include a national segregation and identity dilution of a large chunk of population,

8
issues that have led to several major problems in the past.

THE THREE DISCOVERIES

The issue and the understanding of this conflict is mainly shaped by three discoveries, namely-
1) Discovery of the Indo-European language family(1786)
2) Discovery of the Dravidian language family(1816)
3) Discovery of the Indus Valley Civilisation(1924)

The debate is generally also shaped on other basis like religious basis, belief system, rhetorics of
the colonialization etc but those shall not be the major focus of this project since they do not
necessarily represent a logical stand.

Discovery of the Indo-European language family(1786)

The first published expression of what scholars today call the Indo-European language family was
made in Calcutta in 1786 by Sir William Jones, in a lecture given before the Asiatic society of
which he was the founder and president. In his view, he and come past six languages-sanskrit,
Latin and Greek, Gothic, Celtic and old Persian. What he proposed was that these languages are
so similar and structure and grammar that they may have descended from a common original
language which most probably does not exist anymore send this deposited a genealogical
relationship among the six languages and by implication, their modern descendants.there are two
branches of Indo European family of languages with useful to include in this statement Sachin's
biotic and slavonic languages including Russian ,armenian and albanian. Jones interpreted the
similarity in structure and grammar to be e factor of common different from an original
language.in doing so he created Sanskrit as a sister language to other languages and not as the
mother of all languages, a view that was widely accepted at that time.the discovery that languages
of India, Iran and Europe are related to one another, even the separated from one another by last of
territory in which Arabic and Turkish are not dominant languages was unexpected and Italy new
because it connected the ancient histories of India, Iran and Europe which has a large block of
territory between them speaking Arabic and Turkish.

9
Discovery of the Dravidian language family
The second discovery, that of the Dravidian language family, is usually credited to a missionary,
Bishop Robert Caldwell, who's classic work, a comparative grammar of the Dravidian or South
Indian languages, was published in 1856 and is still in print. This is not the oldest guide by the
way. In 1816 Francis White Ellis, collector of Madras, published and elegant proof of the
Dravidian language family.In showing that Tamil and Telugu have common stock of fruits and
forms of clamor that was different from those of Sanskrit, of finding He extended also to
Malayalam.Here too , the results were durable and productive, and are accepted today by the great
majority of linguist worldwide .

These two discoveries, made two centuries ago, have stood the test of time and remain accepted
by linguists today to be permanent additions to knowledge, so far as we can see. today to deny
truth of the Indo-European or the Dravidian discovery, one would be opposing the whole world
wide development of historical linguistics.Conversely, the success of that worldwide development
is reason to believe truth of the Indo-European and Dravidian findings.
In all these cases, historical relations among languages show the connection among people who
had not distinct historical memory of the connection .This is important because the absence of
historical memory of a distant homeland by the Aryans of the Veda is often used as evidence for
the belief that India is the homeland of the Aryans

Discovery of the Indus Valley Civilisation

The discoveries of Indo-European and Dravidian language families were momentous, and there
was an Aryan debate of sort even before it was for the complicated by the most momentous
discovery . the Indus Valley civilization .
in 1924, Sir John Marshall, then director general of the ASI, published the find of Harappan seals
in the Illustrated London News announcing the discovery of a new civilization and appealing for
assistance in determining the age of finds. within two weeks of its publication, letters from
specialist in Mesopotamian archaeology identified seals are similar to once recovered from
Mesopotamian sites of the third millennium BC, among them the cities of Susa and Ur. The Indus
civilization had been discovered, and acquired a place in world history.

But what was its place in the history of India? The discovery of Bronze age civilization greatly
complicated the picture of India's beginning. As confirmed by the radiocarbon dating the age of

10
Harappan civilization was in the brackets of approximately 2600-1900 BC for the urban phase,
seen to be earlier than the veda. The language of the Veda, according to philologists, is closely
related to language of the Avesta, the oldest text of ancient Iranians which has been dated to 700
BC. Given the extreme similarity existing between the two,The Veda could not have been much
older than that, implying a limit of 1000 BC - 1200 BC. the Aryan advent into India must have
been there earlier to the composition of the Rigveda, but it could not be much earlier than about
1500 BC.
This difference and discovery of a entirely new civilization preceeding the Vedic civilization give
rise to problem in continuity as to which aspects passed on in this process of replenishing. Sir
John Marshall thought search continuities existed .He believed, for example, that the worship of
Shiva is indicated on a scene of the Indus civilization, and that Shiva worship was passed on and
absorbed into the Vedic religion that this entailed view that Hinduism is a fusion of Vedic and
pre-Vedic practices and belief. Contentions regarding the continuity also exist where a vast
amount of inconsistency in the excavations of IVC and literature mentioned in Rigveda is used as
a major point.

11
RIGVEDA
Difference in interpretations- The Rigveda is written in form of prose and talks about not only
Vedic Gods but also the social culture of the time. Due to this poetic form of writing, sometimes
problem arise in the due form of interpretation. The voluminous references to various wars and
conflicts in Rig veda are frequently cited as the proof of an invasion and wars between invading
‘white-skinned’ Aryans and ‘dark-skinned’ indigenous people. But they might also be conflicts
between the forces of nature. An example of such interpretation is made of the following verse of
Rig Veda, I.32.10-11:

“The body lay in the midst of waters that are neither still nor flowing. The waters press against the
secret opening of the Vrtra (the coverer) who lay in deep darkness whose enemy is Indra.
Mastered by the enemy, the waters held back like cattle restrained by a trader. Indra crushed the
vrtra and broke open the withholding outlet of the river.”

This verse is a beautiful poetic and metamorphical description of clouds as dark mountains where
the life-sustaining water to feed the rivers flowing in the Aryavarta is held by the hardened ice
caps (vrtra demon), and Indra, the rain god by allowing the sun to light its rays on the mountains
makes the ice caps break and hence release the water. The invasionists interpret this verse literally
on human plane, as the slaying of vrtra, the leader of dark skinned Dravidian people of Indus
valley by invading white-skinned Aryan king Indra. 

12
HORSES
Historians favoring the invasion theory have based many of their arguments on postulates
connecting the introduction of the horse and chariot in India to invading (or migrating) "Aryans".
They also point to the balladic character of some of the verses in the Rig Veda with references to
armed cattle raids and warriors on horse-driven chariots who appear to portray a race or a group of
clans of pastoral nomadic warriors. The imagery fits particularly well with artifacts found in
Babylon and Ancient Persia (and other regions near the Caspian Sea) that depict warriors riding
on horse-driven chariots. Other literary evidence from the Rig Veda also appears to connect the
authors of these Rig Veda verses to the "Aryan" identified civilization of ancient Persia.

Untill very recently , the propagants of the AMT contested the absence of horse bones in
Harappan sites and its inscription on seals as the absolute proof that horses did not exist in the
Harappan culture. However, in 2016, with bones of the original horse ferus caballus being found
in the Surkotada site of Gujarat, the propagants of Indigenous Aryan theory have got a hope to
cling on. The mere presence of horse in the Harappan culture proves that there was indeed greater
continuity in the region than we expect. What lied at the base of this contention was the fact that
horse is the most important animal according to the Rigveda. In fact, the presence of the horse in
the Rig Veda is so prominent that no other animal comes close. There are five hymns about the
horse in the Rig Veda, but only one about the bull, one about the goat and one about a bird. So
much so that two of the main gods, the Asvins, are horsemen. Two other deities, Ushas and Agni,
are described as riding horse-drawn chariots. While animals such as bull were not given profound
importance in Rigveda, a number of seals with insciptions of these animals have been found in the
excavations of the Harappan culture. This kind of disconnect was a thriving example of
discontinuity for AIT/AMT.

However, it’s not like the propagants of the standard view have conceded to the alternative view
on this point. They have, in fact, just broadened the scope of their contention. Tony Joseph in his
book Ancient Indians say –“Theoretically, even the physical presence of a horse or two in the
Harappan civilisation should not be surprising since there is historical record of the Harappans
exporting Indian animals such as the elephant, water buffalo and the peacock to Mesopotamia, and
13
importing a horse in return from there or elsewhere should raise no eyebrows. But that would not
change the overall picture of the serious disconnect between the role the horse plays in the Rig
Veda and the role it plays—or rather, does not play—in Harappan archaeological record and
imagery.”

THE PASHUPATI SEAL

Shiva worship is something that has been widely used by the propagants of the alternative view to
justify their stand . The finding of the Proto Shiva(Pashupati) seal in Mohen-jo-daro resembles a
culture where the Vedic God Shiva might have been worshipped.  The seal depicts a seated figure
that is possibly tricephalic (having three heads). It was once thought to be ithyphallic, an
interpretation that is now mostly discarded. The man has a horned headdress and is surrounded by
animals. He may represent a horned deity.
It is purported to be one of the earliest depictions of the Hindu god Shiva ("Pashupati", meaning
"lord of animals", is one of Shiva's epithets) or Rudra, who is associated with asceticism, yoga,
and linga; regarded as a lord of animals; and often depicted as having three heads. This depiction
of Shiva has quite a lot in common with the modern Hindu God Shiva. By virtue of this similarity,
the people favouring Indigenous Aryan theory continuously cite this is as an example of a far
greater continuity and religious adaptation from IVC to earlier-Vedic period.

The propagants of AIT/AMT, however, contend this assumption. It is said that Shiva (who as a
matter of fact is named as Rudra in Rigveda) differs in description with the Pashupati found in
IVC excavations. No where has rudra been mentioned in the Vedas as the god of three heads. Also
, a yogic posture does not necessarily justify him being a God. A god having animals in his
control is also not something that can be uniquely attributed because it is the most generic idea of
God throughout the civilizations in the world.

14
SARASWATI RIVER EVIDENCE
The Saraswati river evidence is one of the major constructs used by the people favouring the
theory of Indigenous Aryans. The Vedas and post Veda texts refer to a mighty river situated to the
east of the Indus in north-west India.. Earlier texts speak of a huge river. Later texts speak of a
river that dried up in the desert. The river is said to be the western border of a land called
Aryavarta with the Himalayas in the north, Vindhyas in the south and Haridwar in the east. These
are clearly Indian landmarks but there is almost no river today (only minor monsoon-fed streams
exist). However modern satellite imagery, riverbed-core drilling and paleo-climatological studies
have proven that there was a mighty river exactly in that area from 10,000 BCE but which started
drying up by 6000 BCE and was pretty much dry by 2000 BCE. The Ghaggar river system with a
dry-riverbed is what is contested to be the old Sarasvati. It so happens that the IVC/Harappan
remains lie along the site of this mighty river. Therefore , a view of the alternative theory is that
not any invasion/migration but drying up of this river forced the IVC further down south in search
of conducive conditions. Since Vedas describe this river as the one which is “mighty” and
therefore, this is used to describe Vedas’ original date to be predating 2000BCE , something was
discards the whole AIT/AMT.

The contentions however lie in technicality. In the book , The Vedic People, Their History and
Geography, author Rajesh Kocchar tries to answer this question of Vedic predating with references
to Avesta. He says "...the river names Sarayu and Sarasvati, that occur in both the Rgveda and
Avesta, refer to the rivers in Afghanistan. Sarayu is the same river, Hari-rud, in both cas es,
whereas the name Sarasvati applied to the Helmand in the Rgveda is transferred to its tributary,
the Arghandab, in the Avesta... The significance of the occurrence of the names Sarayu and
Sarasvati in both the texts needs to be fully appreciated... T he most natural explanation for the
commonality of these names is that they were given to the Afghan rivers by the Rgveda

15
composing branch of the Aryans. The Iranian branch which came to dominate the area later,
decided to retain the names. When the Rgve dic people moved eastwards, they carried these
names along and selectively reused them. The names that were not reused lost their geographical
identity and became literary terms. This would explain the curious fact that in spite of the
Rgveda's uninterru pted sanctity and the continuous Aryan presence in India, a large number of
the Rgvedic names of rivers, lakes and mountains are unrecognisable."

DNA
The most modern form of investigation that is being done to identify the homeland of Aryans is
the DNA analysis of the skeletons found in IVC remains. The DNA analysis over the years has
provided relief to people believing in the Indigenous aryan theory or the alternative view.
However, the trend has changed in the recent years. Scientists owe this to the kind of samples that
were there to survey. Earlier the samples that were provided were mostly females which showed a
very little difference . However, with the availability of fresh evidences and mtDNA, a remarkable
change is being viewed . A 17.5% change in the standard results was observed when comparing
the male DNA. This shows not only that the migration was indeed a reality , what it also shows it
that migration was largely male-dominant in nature.

A high presence of R1a1 haplogroup(identifiable with the traditional Aryan DNA) in the so called
“upper castes” of today was already remarkable but with the new studies pouring in everyday ,
there is a reference to influx of a new group into the Indian Genetic pool around 3000 years ago.

In a paper titled An Ancient Harappan Genome lacks Ancestry from Steppe Pastoralists or Iranian
Farmers (Vasant Shinde et al) (published Oct 5,2019) and reviewed by some of the major names
in the field of genetics supports the Aryan Migration theory. This paper was one of the
most-awaited studies based on an ancient skeleton found in Rakhigarhi in 2014.Aside from the
various explicit inferences in the paper , on being asked what the major takeaway from his study
would be , Dr Vasant Shinde replied –“Some time in the first half of the second millennium BCE,
descendants of Steppe pastoralists entered South Asia from the north, eventually contributing
0-30% of the genes of groups living today (varying depending on the present-day group), and also

16
almost certainly bringing Indo-European languages. There is no evidence that the actual people
who brought these genes to South Asia were pastoralists by occupation - their ancestors were
pastoralists.”

CONCLUSION
To conclude in a space colluded by only interpretations and inferences and no hard facts is indeed
a tedious work. However this is as exciting as researching about the topic and forming opinions.

The Aryan Migration theory is generally unanimously accepted by the scholars worldwide with
little conflict on dates. The Indigenous Aryan theory , on the other hand, was developed as a
counter-narrative to this standard view and gained momentum only after discovery of the Indus
Valley Civilization
On some prospects, the Indigenous Aryan theory does seem to come very close and actually be a
better portrait of what the reality would have been but at the same time, the counter-views put
forward by the people of the standard views also seem to counter them ,although not completely,
in a major way.

The Aryan Migration theory has been developed over the years by mutual consensus and after
much deliberation on various discoveries made during the course of time. To tumble over this set
standard, the Indigenous Aryan theory would need much evidence and would need to satisfy many
questions beyond the scope of doubt .Although I believe existence of a counter theory provokes
constant and cumulative research and provokes thought , The Indigenous Aryan theory, at this
point of time , is not powerful enough to be considered the complete truth !.

17
BIBLIOGRAPHY
● Trautmann TR, The Aryan Debate (Oxford University Press 2015)
● Sanjeev Sanyal, Land of Seven Rivers: A History of India’s geography (Penguin Random
House India Private Limited, 2012)
● Koenraad Elst, Still no trace of Aryan Invasion: A collection on Indo- European Origins
(Aryan Books International, 2018)
● Tony Joseph, Early Indians: The Story of Our Ancestors and Where We Came From
(Juggernaut Books, 2018)
● https://www.ancient.eu/Aryan/
● https://learn.culturalindia.net/aryans.html
● https://www.archaeologyonline.net/artifacts/aryan-invasion-theories
● https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indus_Valley_Civilisation
● https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indigenous_Aryans
● http://diehardindian.com/aryan-theory/
● https://frontline.thehindu.com/static/html/fl1725/17250730.htm

18
19