The Aryan Invasion Theory is nothing but a Myth – British Imperialism’s ugly vestige that is still today taught in Indian schools and all over the world. The whole theory was created out of imagination to put the Europeans as superior race (which they certainly are not). The myth was born in 19th century when Indology became the talk of the day and scholars like Arthur Schopenhauer, Hern Wilhelm von Humboldt and August Wilhelm von Schlegal studied the Vedic literatures.
When these scholars learned about the profound knowledge and wisdom, they couldn’t help buy praise the ancient Indian culture publicly. Unfortunately for many Europeans, this was a shock! They simply couldn’t accept the fact that a far more advanced and a far more sophisticated civilization could exist outside the European boundaries since the ancient times – long before Moses or Abraham even came to existence. Of course, they had to defend Christianity while establishing racial supremacy as well as cultural supremacy. This is where the Aryan Invasion Theory came in.
However as of date, not only the theory stands challenged but proven completely false and mythical. In this article (which will be slightly long), we intend to point out numerous evidences that will debunk the entire Aryan Invasion Theory and at the same time, crush the Western cultural and racial hegemony.
Debunking the Myth of Aryan Invasion Theory
The Birth of Aryan Invasion Theory
As already mentioned, some scholars started praising ancient Indian wisdom and knowledge publicly which other Europeans couldn’t take well. The Europeans started commissioning Indologists who were not historians or archeologists in strict sense. They were just missionaries who got hired by their governments to immediately embark on missions of establishing Western hegemony both in terms of racial and cultural supremacy.
Their starting point was attacking the languages. They immediately started with the assumption that European, Iranian and Sanskrit languages belonged the language family known as Indo-European languages and that these languages separately evolved from a common language that was spoken by the people who came from a different homeland. This mother language was named as PIE or the Proto-Indo-European language. The next logical step was to identify the homeland. How could they? They had no evidence whatsoever and hence, they assumed once again! This time they said that the homeland was located somewhere in Southeast Europe or somewhere in Central Asia.
Still, they needed some evidence to grab on to and then came the event of unearthing the Indus Valley ruins, i.e. the ruins of the civilizations of Harappa and Mohenjo-daro. Immediately after finding the ruins, the Europeans leaped on to that stating nomadic tribes from some other foreign place came and plundered those civilizations and ruined them. They carried on stating that this plundering took place before the so called Aryan Invasion took place. Great! But proof? They didn’t have any verifiable proof to offer and they never did.
Cooking Up the Time Frame for Aryan Invasion Theory
It was very important to assign a date to the so called Aryan Invasion. So, what those missionaries – the so called historians and archeologists did was that they broke down the Vedic literature of the pre-Buddhist era in layers stating that each layer was developed at a gap of 200 years (give or take a few years). The years were calculated using Biblical chronology and the Aryan Invasion was assigned the date somewhere between 1500 BCE and 1000 BCE. As per Biblical chronology, the world was created in 4000 BCE and 2500 BCE was the year for Noah’s flood. Logically, Aryan Invasion was literally impossible before 2500 BCE and hence the time frame of 1500-1000 BCE was the best choice.
Using Excavated Human Skeletons As Proof of Aryan Invasion Theory
Even if the Biblical chronology-based dates were correct, the so-called Indologists had to come up with some hard evidence. Harappa and Mohenjo-daro were excavated for 9 years straight – from 1922 to 1931. During this period some bones of the ancients were found. Guess what? The Europeans immediately said that these bones are direct proof that the Aryans invaded and massacred the indigenous people on a large scale!
May be! BUT…
Professor G. F. Dales who worked at Berkeley University, USA as the Dean of the Department of South-Asian Archeology and Anthropology, wrote a book titled: “The Mythical Massacre of Mohenjo-daro”. In his book, professor Dales points out that the excavation site had a 3-mile circuit and only 37 skeletons (some complete, some partial) were recovered. Problem is, as Professor Dales points out, that these skeletons were recovered in groups and in twisted positions which clearly indicated nothing other than orderly burials. What else? All the skeletons or the partial bones were unearthed from lower town area.
If indeed there was an Aryan Invasion, the indigenous people would have made their last stand at the fortified citadel deep inside their territory and the area should have been littered with evidences like arrow heads, burned fortresses, armor pieces and weaponry. Nothing, absolutely nothing of the sort was found in the area, clearly indicating that the Aryan Invasion Theory was nothing more than a myth.
On top of that, it is completely impossible to imagine that a civilization that was invaded and annihilated by the Aryans was made up of just 37 people. Mass massacre? Really?
Questioning the Very Origin of the Aryan Race
The major problem is that the very word ‘Aryan’ is of Sanskrit origin and it refers to a person who is noble and righteous. Sometimes, the word is used for referring to someone – male or female – as Aryaputra or Aryakanya. Immaculate combing through the whole bunch of Vedic literature never reveals even one single instance of the word Aryan being used to refer to a language or race.
In 1853, Max Mueller introduced the word Arya in English and assigned it the meaning of either a race or a language. The only reason Mueller did this was to add an extra hand of credibility to the myth of Aryan Invasion Theory. It was not until 1888 that Mueller’s definition of the word Arya came under heavy criticism from highly learned historians and scholars. That is when Mueller issued a statement refuting the theory he forwarded! Irony! The exact statement he issued is quoted below:
“I have declared again and again that if I say Aryas, I mean neither blood nor bones, nor hair, nor skull; I mean simply those who speak an Aryan language…to me an ethnologist who speaks of Aryan race, Aryan blood, Aryan eyes and hair, is as great a sinner as a linguist who speaks of a dolichocephalic dictionary or a brachycephalic grammar.”
Unfortunately, it was too late. By the time Mueller issued his statement, French and German nationalist and political groups had already picked up the word to propagate and establish the idea of Aryan race – a race of white people who they considered to be supreme among all mankind.
Problem With Mueller’s Definition of Arya
Though Mueller refuted his own theory at a later stage, his very definition was flawed from the onset. As per the etymological definition provided by Mueller, the word Arya comes from ‘ar’, which literally means, ‘to cultivate’ or ‘to plough’. So, if ‘ar’ is where Arya comes from, then Arya means a cultivator or a farmer. As per the Aryan Invasion Theory, the Aryans were actually a nomadic race who wandered from one place to another. We know that nomadic races were not into farming. There is a clear mismatch in the very definition and the whole concept of nomads.
Use of Incorrect References from Vedas
What makes the Aryan Invasion Theory really funny is that it claims that the invading nomadic Aryans ended up writing the Rig Veda or Rg Veda. As per the theory, these white or light-skinned people from Southeast Europe or Central Asia came to Indian subcontinent, destroyed the indigenous people, mass massacred them, captured and enslaved them and then imposed their very own culture on the Indian subcontinent. Once they did so, they managed to write down all their exploits in Rig Veda.
So, where does this claim comes from? Apparently, Rig Veda speaks of conflicts between dark-skinned Dasyus and light-skinned Aryans. Backing this information from Rig Veda was the discovery of a few charred skeletons that were excavated from Indus Valley.
Based on their flimsy understanding of the Rig Veda and the archeological discoveries of charred skeletons, the stupid Europeans claimed that Rig Veda consists nothing more than epic poetry tales of conflicts between the nomadic foreign tribes and the indigenous dark-skinned tribes. They had absolutely no clue whatsoever about the true meanings of Dasyus and Aryans. How could they even possess that knowledge for they were unwise and blinded by the need for establishing racial supremacy.
The Europeans completely misunderstood the meaning of Rig Veda either because they simply overlooked the same to make their point or because they were too ignorant to even understand the deep meaning of the text. In Rig Veda it is clearly mentioned that India is a land where different tribes thrive together and it is also stated in this sacred text that: “We pray to Indra to give glory by which the Dasyus will become Aryans”. This clearly means two things:
- Aryans weren’t created by birth and hence the notion of Aryans being a superior race of people from some other land is completely falsified.
- Dasyus (who were basically the ignorant ones) could transform themselves into Aryans (the wise and the noble men) by gaining knowledge. This fortifies the meaning of Arya as defined in Sanskrit and also fortifies the fact that invasion or massacre or Dasyus or the ignorant ones simply out of question.
All the Europeans did was misinterpret the Rig Veda and instead of portraying the social struggle between different races of Indian subcontinent, they simply picked one Indian indigenous race and portrayed it as a superior European race. Really funny!
No Religious Sites Outside Indian Subcontinent
Yet another major problem with the Aryan Invasion Theory is the absence of religious sites outside the demographic boundaries of the Indian Subcontinent. If at all the theory is correct and if the Aryans were nomads belonging to a superior race of light-skinned people and blue eyes, here is one simple logic that requires proper validation:
“Nomads travel around, settle in a place and then move to another location and in the process when they encounter any indigenous people of a certain location, they destroy them.” If that is true, Aryans should have actually been to different places, pillaging, plundering and destroying indigenous people of the places they have been to. They must have established their own culture and religion in those places. They must have built their own religious sites too and they must have written texts similar to Rig Veda.
Unfortunately, no such religious Vedic texts exist outside India. There are no religious sites built outside India. Rig Veda only mentions religious sites inside India. Rig Veda didn’t glorify the Aryan accomplishments in foreign lands. Why so? If Aryans were really the great European race, they should have mentioned their previous trophies in the Vedic text.
This simply means that the Aryans didn’t come from outside India. They were indigenous to India. They were simply Indians and they didn’t belong to superior race. They were simply wiser and belonged to a higher-caste civilized society. The Europeans simply cooked up the whole thing out of jealousy and to prove that they were superior to all races in world and that Christianity was the only religion that is true. Ironic!
Nomad Influx In 1500 BCE Was Imaginary
According to the Aryan Invasion Theory, the nomadic Aryans invaded India between 1500 BCE and 1000 BCE. This again is a brain child of the stupid Europeans. Cornell University’s Kenneth Kennedy has proven this that between 4500 BCE and 800 BCE, India didn’t experience any significant influx of nomadic tribes that could possibly destroy the indigenous tribes.
On top of that, the Indus Valley area had sites stretching well over 1000 miles. Even if a nomadic tribe managed to get in to invade, it is absolutely impossible to believe that people populating the whole area of 1000 miles will abandon their homes for a single invading tribe and flee. Making things even more unbelievable is that a bunch of nomadic war-monger people will write down texts like Vedas and Upanishads of such profound wisdom.
Conflicting the Aryan Invasion Theory, the Rig Veda states that Aryans were urban dwellers and that they had built several hundred cities harboring an assorted collection of professions and managed using metropolitan societal rules. The text also mentioned that the Aryans were seafaring people.
So, a herd of nomads will write that they built hundreds of cities, they had different professions and a very well-organized city? Time to grab a laugh or two!
Furthermore, archeological evidences clearly indicate that after Harappa was deserted, no other people inhabit the area. So, if the nomadic Aryans did destroy Indus Valley civilization, why the hell did they not inhabit the region? And, since they did not inhabit, why the hell did they write a text like Rig Veda stating that the Aryans were urban dwellers? Things don’t really match up.
Aryan Invasion Theory Humiliates Itself By Mentioning Horses and Chariots
Rig Veda has extensively used the word ‘Asva’, which is a Sanskrit word for horse. However, every single use of the word is figurative and not literal. Rig Veda has used the word ‘Asva’ to indicate speed. Nowhere in Rig Veda has it been mentioned that people rode to battles on horses and chariots.
The Aryan Invasion theory only picked up the word Asva and twisted the meaning. As per the theory, the nomadic Aryans came riding to India on horses and chariots. This gave the Aryans military supremacy which helped them to destroy the indigenous people. The early European Indologists cooked up a story stating that just before 1500 BCE, horses were domesticated and then used them to invade India.
So, why did they cook up this story? That’s because, initial archeological digs did not reveal any evidence of chariots and horses in the whole of Indus Valley region. Unfortunately, new excavations by Dr. S. R. Rao have turned up remains of horses belonging to both Early and Late Harappan Periods, both of which predates 1500 BCE by over 2500 years. He even found a clay model of a horse-driven chariot in Mohenjo-daro, which too predates the date of mythical Aryan Invasion.
Ever since Dr. Rao’s discovery, many other archeological digs were conducted by other scholars who recovered horse bones of both domestic and combat variants – all of which predates the 1500 BCE mark. On top of that archeological excavations in Ukraine has also revealed that horse riding was pretty much in practice as early as 4000 BCE. So, the claim that the Aryans domesticated horses somewhere in 2000 BCE and used them to ride into India in 1500 BCE is an example of epic display of stupidity.
Even if we do not take account of the archeological evidences that horses were pretty much in use as early as 4000 BCE, there are other problems with the Aryan Invasion Theory. Chariots cannot be operated in deserts or on mountains. They require flat lands such as Northern India’s Gangetic plains.
If for the time being we assume that yes, Aryan Invasion was not mythical and it really happened then, the nomadic Aryans who were Central Asians or Southeast Europeans as per the theory, had to enter India by crossing desserts and mountains and not just any mountain – the formidable Hindu Kush! Chariots crossing mountains is way too far-fetched. Don’t you think so?
What else? Many recent archeological digs of both Indus Valley civilization and pre-Indus Valley civilization have turned up seals which look like spoked wheels of a chariot and of course, evidences of horses have also been found. So, there is absolutely no way that nomdic Aryans were the first to use horses and chariots somewhere in 2000 BCE. The theory just humiliated itself by making such claims!
The Invading Aryans Were Iron Based Culture. Really?
As per the Aryan Invasion Theory, the invading nomadic Aryans managed to gain military superiority because their weapons were made of iron. This idea popped out of the fact that Rig Veda mentions the word ‘ayas’. The early Indologists translated the word as ‘iron’. Unfortunately, in other Indo-European languages, ‘ayas’ means copper, bronze or simply some metallic ore. Those Indo-Europeans tagged ‘ayas’ as iron simply because no evidence of iron was found in archeological digs of the Indus Valley region.
Though Rig Veda has used the word ‘ayas’, that usage is very limited but gold has been frequently mentioned. No other metal has been mentioned in Rig Veda. ‘Ayas’ has however been mentioned in two other Vedas – the Atharva Veda and the Yajur Veda and interestingly, both Vedas have mentioned different colors for ayas at different times. This means that ayas was a generic term used in Vedic era to denote just any metal. More over, Vedic literature also mentions that Dasyus used ayas for building their own cities.
So, if we take the Aryan Invasion Theory as true then Dasyus (who, according to the theory were indigenous people of India) also made use of iron and hence, nomadic Aryans were not the only ones to make use of iron. Thus, the claim of invading Aryans being an iron culture is not validated.
Harappa Was Vedic Culture Long Before the So Called Aryan Invasion
B.B. Lal from Archeological Survey of India unearthed Yajna-Vedhis in Harappa. He excavated a site named Kalibagan in the Harappan site. Kalibagan was from 3rd millennium BCE. Yajana-Vedhi is actually a fire altar that is built for fire sacrifices. The Vedic texts have extensively mentioned Yajna-Vedhis and yajnas or fire sacrifices. The Vedic text called Satpatha-brahmana has a detailed explanation of the whole geometry and structure of the Yajna-Vedhis. Berkeley’s University of California compared the geometry of the fire altar unearthed by Mr. Lal with Ancient Greek and Mesopotamian geometries and found that under no circumstances, the fire alter can be any younger that 1700 BCE, which predates the date of mythical Aryan Invasion by at least 200 years. So, Harappa was actually a part of the Vedic era that was already prevalent in India for long.
Aryan Invasion Theory Challenged With Language & Literature
According to the Aryan Invasion Theory, the nomadic Aryans came and implemented their own culture and language on the indigenous people. In the ancient times, the area of Indus Valley was one of the most densely populated places on this planet and of course they had their own languages. How is it possible that a horde of nomads just came in, conquered and wiped out the indigenous languages. By all accounts of history, such an event has never happened. Indigenous people, irrespective of the country or area have retained their languages despite foreign invasions.
Compared to classical Sanskrit (that started somewhere in 500 BCE at the time of Panini), the Vedic Sanskrit is known to have way more linguistic changes. These changes take a very long time to happen and does not occur over a period of just two centuries. Remember that the early Indologists said that the four Vedas were created at a gap of 200 years each. Linguistic changes in Vedic Sanskrit simply do not conform to this division and scream that the Vedas were separated by longer periods of times.
Moreover, in none of the four Vedas there is a single mention of any foreign invasion. In fact, all Vedas focus on Sapta-Sindhu (the area of 7 rivers). Apart from that the Puranas explicitly mention that Indians migrated outwards, i.e. out of India. This is proven by the fact that many Aryan names can be found in treaties made with kings of Middle East. Moreover, West Asian texts belonging to the second millennium BCE have names of Vedic gods. This also imply that Indians migrated outwards and that there was no incoming nomadic invasion.
Lord Siva Gives a Big Blow to Aryan Invasion Theory
The proponents of the Aryan Invasion Theory argued that those who lived in the Indus Valley area worshiped Siva and hence, they were Dravidians from South India who inhabited the Indus Valley region. They came up with this argument using two points:
- South Indians are today known to be hardcore Siva worshipers.
- There are two Tamil words – Civa and Cembu. Civa means to become red or angry. Cembu refers to the red metal copper. However, the early European Indologists took Civa for Siva and Cembu for Sambhu.
They failed to decipher the fact that both the words Siva and Sambhu originate from Sanskrit and not Tamil. ‘Si’ in Sanskrit means benevolent, helpful, gracious and auspicious. ‘Sam’ in Sanskrit means existing for happiness or causing happiness or being kind and helpful or benevolent.
Vedic texts have always used these words in the exact same sense they were first created. There has been no change. There are other important points to remember:
- Lord Siva’s home is Mount Kailasa which is located in extremely inhospitable and remote area which today falls in Tibetan Himalayas. That’s north!
- Varanasi, which is Saivism’s most auspicious seat is also located in the north.
- Rig Veda has extensive mentions of Siva and Rudra where he has been portrayed as a very important and powerful deity.
Based on these points it is argued that Siva was never strictly a Tamil or South Indian god as the proponent of the Aryan Invasion Theory wanted us to believe. Also, Siva was completely a Vedic god.
During the initial excavations of the Indus Valley region, some terracotta structures were found in the fire altars. These structures were presented by the early European Indologists to us as Siva Lingas. They did this to make us believe that those who lived in the Indus Valley were Siva worshipers. Later scholars have disproved this and have shown that those structures were used by merchants and shopkeepers for weighing commodities and that each one of those structures had perfect integral ratio.
The Aryan Invasion Theory Eliminated the North-South Division
One may argue that division is not good (as we know that divide and rule policy of the British was not at all good). However, when we talk about the mythical Aryan Invasion, evidence of North-South division becomes absolutely necessary. If at all the theory is correct (which is not), there are a few questions that the proponents failed to answer:
- If the Aryans came from north with a whole different culture and history and drove the Dravidians to the south, how come there is not marked and visible difference in literature, history etc. between north and south? There should have been a North-South division with two different set of historical, religious and cultural developments.
- Were there no people living in the south of the subcontinent before the Aryans invaded?
- If there were people living in the south, how come they just gave up their own culture, their own history and religion and accepted the culture of the nomadic tribes who just invaded the north and stayed there?
These questions were never answered because there were no answers at all. The theory was a made-up with absolutely no truth in it.
Prehistoric Saraswati River Completely Negates Aryan Invasion Theory
We have often heard of the name River Saraswati. It is not mythical. It is just a dried up river that existed during the prehistoric times. Recent data from satellites as well as field works in archeology have verified that River Saraswati indeed existed. It is not that it just existed, it was massive and was 7-kilometer wide. It flowed down from the Himalayas, across the Rajasthan desert into the oceans. Two important things have come out of the studies:
- Dr. Wakankar, a famous archeologist from India and recipient of Padmashree award extensively studied the evidences of River Saraswati and proved that the prehistoric river went completely dry somewhere around 1900 BCE and before it went dry, the river changed its course at least 4 times.
- Satellite data along with Indo-French field expeditions have proven that River Saraswati was a perennial river that came to existence way before 3000 BCE.
Interesting Rig Veda has mentioned River Saraswati for over 60 times and River Ganga has been mentioned for only once. The question that comes normally is that if the prehistoric river went dry in 1900 BCE and if the Aryans invaded Indian anywhere between 1500 BCE and 1000 BCE, how come they even came to know about River Saraswati and mentioned the same several times in Rig Veda?
Satellite data and recent archeological studies from the Indo-French expeditions are definitive proofs that the Rig Veda came to existence sometime in 3500 BCE and the Vedic people were very well-versed with the geography of North India. In fact, the Rig Veda refers to Saraswati as “pure in course from the mountains to the sea”. According to the Vedas, the Vedic culture began with Sage Manu who founded the Vedic culture between the banks of the prehistoric rivers Drishadvati and Saraswati. Also, archeological evidences show that River Drishadvati went dry before 3000 BCE and hence, the only way Rig Veda could mention both these rivers is if the text was written before 3500 BCE.
Finally, Discovery of New Sites Negate Aryan Invasion Theory
After Harappa and Mohenjo-daro were discovered in 1922 along the rivers Sindhu and Ravi, archeologists have actually dug out 2500+ different settlements that stretched from Baluchistan to river Ganga and all the way down to Tapti valley. 70 years ago, people believed that majority of these settlements were all concentrated on the banks of Sindhu. However, modern day studies have shown that most of these settlements (about 75% of them) actually sat along the banks of now dry River Saraswati. Interesting all these settlements spanned over an area of 1.5 million square kilometers. That’s one big chunk of land which proves that the area was one of the most densely populated areas in the world.
Since River Saraswati went dry somewhere in 1900 BCE, the area experienced a mass exodus somewhere between 2000 BCE and 1900 BCE. These people go scattered in different places. Some went to Middle East, some made their way to northwest while the rest headed for southeast. This mass exodus is proven by the appearances of names of Hindu rulers in different dynasties all over west Asia, which neatly proves that people moved from East towards the West.
There are many other evidences that stand up against the mythical Aryan Invasion Theory and completely falsifies the same. The question is, why was the theory put in place in the first place? The answer is simple! The Europeans wanted economical, social and political dominance so that they could hail their own culture and religion as supreme. The Aryan Invasion Theory did a good job by making Hindus (Indians) feel ashamed of their own culture. Hindus were made to believe that civilization first developed in Middle East and Europe and that Indian culture was a secondary development. The best way to do this was to ensure that Vedic culture is shown to have developed after Christianity came to existence.
The truth is exactly opposite. Christianity and western culture came later and by the time they came to existence, Hinduism was already millennials old and highly developed in culture, science and philosophy. One other reason for discrediting Vedic era as one of the earliest mainstream civilizations was to ensure that advanced Indian scientific knowledge of that era could be attributed to the Greeks, Egyptians and Europeans. It is a shame that today in India, we still teach this big lie and we teach our people the Western misinterpretations of our Vedas only helping the propagation of Christianity right inside our home.