|
TAMIL NATION
LIBRARY:
History & Geography
* indicates link to
Amazon.com
online bookshop
Book Review by Subramaniam Thambirajah
Publishers Note
[see also 1.
Demise of Aryan Invasion Theory
Dinesh Agrawal and 2.The
Tamil Heritage - History & Geography]
Book
Review by Subramaniam Thambirajah:
This is a remarkable book, more so for the questions it raises than the answers
it provides.
The book poses a credible challenge to the
Aryan invasion theory of India. Put forward by Max Muller in 1861, the
theory holds that the decline and final disappearance of the Indus valley
civilisation was caused by invasion of nomadic tribes from central Asia, the
Aryans. These invaders are said to have entered India around 1500 BCE, destroyed
the advanced civilisation in North Eastern India leading to the migration of the
original inhabitants down south and establishing themselves over much of
northern India. There, they are said to have composed
their literature, the most important of which is the
Rg veda. Recorded history of India is said to begin with the invasion.
The discovery of archaeological sites in Harappa and Mohenjodaro with their
magnificently planned cities, a drainage system and public buildings is
considered to point towards an advanced civilisation that existed before the
invasion. Dravidians are thought to be descendants of this original inhabitants
of India who migrated south
following the invasion.
Ever since the theory was propounded by Muller, it has been viewed as a fact of
history, one of the �givens� and hardly ever subjected to scientific
investigation. The last is precisely what this book does: treats the assertions
as theory and make it a
subject of scientific inquiry.
In
doing so it points out the euro-centric bias and the underlying political
motives behind such theories, gently chiding the �natives� for swallowing the
European version of history in toto without scarcely any
critical review. The authors quote establishment historians like Romila Thapar
whose interpretation of Indian history , on this account at least, has blindly
followed that of Max Muller. Once the
theory was formulated as the �truth� others followed suit.
Archaeologists like John Marshall and Mortimer Wheeler interpreted the
archaeological findings in the Indus valley in conformity with the invasion
theory.
Max Muller�s invasion theory was based on one and only one source of evidence,
linguistic evidence. As the authors� point out, interpretation of ancient
history needs to be based on several independent sources of evidence using
archaeology, geology, satellite photography, literature and so on.
Max Muller was not conversant with Sanskrit and did not take the trouble to seek
literary evidence , particularly from the
Rg Veda. His theory stands on the simple premise that �Indo-Aryan� languages
are related. For example, the similarity of the
word for fire ignus and
agni is
taken as evidence of invasion. And ,even here, it is held to be unidirectional,
from West to East. The alternative, that it could have been in the other
direction was never considered.
Rajaram, a mathematician and Frawley, a Vedic scholar, impute that that invasion
theory served the political purpose of psychological subjugation of the people
of India by implying the very country
they were colonising was in, in fact,
invaded and occupied by Western powers in the past. The authors see the �Aryan�
invasion of India as a product of European politics- notably German nationalism
( Max Muller was a German financed by the British) and British colonial policy.
The authors draw on a variety of sources to mount their challenge.
The most potent argument comes from interpretation of Vedic literature. They
take issue with the use of the word �Aryan� by Max Muller. In Sanskrit �arya�
does not refer to any race nor to a family of languages. Quoting extensively
from the Vedas, they assert that in Sanskrit literature the word �arya�
means �good� or �noble�. A few quotes
from the book may be appropriate: � The Buddha presented his religion as
arya dharma ( noble law): it certainly had no racial indication
in his time. When Arjuna refused to fight on the battlefield of Kuruksetra,
Krsna accused him of acting in an un-arya
(ig-noble) manner: he was not casting a racial slurr on Arjuna� the word
arya goes all the way back to the
Rg Veda where it occurs thirty six times, generally as an adjective . It
never occurs as the name of a people
or race but only as a certain type of
character or behaviour of people.�
The research also casts serious doubts on the
Aryan-Dravidian conflict that has been the presumed to form the basis of
racial divisions in India.
The battles described in Rg veda, the authors� assert, were between forces of light and the
forces of darkness. According to the invasion theory, this refers to the
struggle between light-skinned people (the invading Aryans) and dark-skinned
people (the indigenous Dravidians). This literal interpretation by foreigners
not very proficient with the language and culture, is contested by the authors.
The book does not address this issue at any great length for its main aim is to
purpose of to draw our attention to the
falsification of history by the Aryan invasion theorists. The authors refer to
Aurobindo�s writings in the Veda and the Mahabharata war to indicate that
their line of thinking has a long heritage.
As the forward by Klaus K. Klostermair, professor of
religion at University of Minitoba
points out :
� Massive evidence available today ( from
archaeology, geology,satellite photography, and a more adequate
understanding
of ancient literary documents ) disproves most of the assumptions
on which the Aryan- invasion theory and chronology of early Indian
literature were based�The facts referred to in this work are
incontrovertible. The conclusions have a high degree of plausibility.
Consequently, the implications are nothing less than sensational�
There is a wealth of material in the book for those
interested in Ancient Indian history. The book practically re-writes the
chronology of ancient Indian civilisation.
The date of the Mahabharata War, conventionally held
to have taken place in 1400BCE is subjected to scrutiny and the outcome is a
well argued case for placing it in 3102, at the closing of the Vedic period, as
Indian tradition has it. Their chronological synthesis places Harappan
civilisation ( at least for the ruins excavated so far) in the same period as
the Sutra, that is around 3000BC.
There is much about ancient Indian mathematics and
astronomy. We learn that the theorem credited to Pythagoras was enunciated by
the inhabitants of the Indus valley in the Sulbasutras, mathematical appendices
to Srautasutras (3000 BCE). The construction of
Vedic altars demanded a knowledge of geometric algebra and one of the authors
who is a mathematician goes to great lengths to explore ancient Indian
mathematics. They also put forward evidence for a major drought that lasted 300
years, during which Saraswati, the major river mentioned in the Vedas dried up.
The book is essential reading for those interested in
ancient Eastern history. The challenge thrown at the invasion theory is
formidable and cannot be ignored.
The authors� open the book with a quote from Albert
Einstein: ��A theory should not contradict empirical facts�. They have produced
sufficient and necessary material to provide empirical facts to challenge the
invasion theory, which, by the way, delivers a knock out blow to chauvinists who
base their arguments to justify their hegemony on belonging to a superior Aryan
race.
At
a meta level, the message the book conveys is that although one has to be
grateful for the scientific rigor
Western scholarship brought to the
methodology
of the study of social sciences in
the Orient and the East, one has to be aware of the pitfalls of uncritical
acceptance of the contents of such
research .
This has been persuasively pointed out by such gigantic figures
such as Aurobindo in The secrets of the Veda (whom the authors quote). The tendency of
Western Scholarship to interpret discourses of the East in terms of their world
outlook , political imperatives and necessities has been named Orientalism by
Edward Said, the Palestinian scholar.
A recent cookery programme on the television exemplifies
this point. In a discussion on
culinary items in Goa the question of where chillies originated was brought
up. The instant answer from one of the participants was that it was brought
to Goa by the Portuguese from Spain. This Euro-centric view ignores the fact
that chillies has been cultivated in India for centuries before the
Portuguese landed in India and had received mention in Sangam literature!
Rajaram and Frawley�s reconstruction of events holds that the indigenous people
of the Indus valley civilisation were
the original people of India; there was no invasion; geographical calamities in
the form of a long drought and desertifcation lead to the ancient river
Saraswati changing course ( through the loss of its two principal tributaries,
the Yamuna and the Sutlej, to the Ganga
and the Indus respectively): the populace dispersed and migrated in
all directions including the West; Vedic literature belongs to the to the
period of civilisation before the mass movement of the population; the Harapan
civilisation represents the tail end of this period.
Like any other hypothesis, the Rajaram-Frawley theory needs further
investigation and evidence in addition to that provided in the book. New
evidence from archaeological research, particularly the deciphering of the
Harapan inscriptions would shed light on this ancient era. There are other
pieces to the jig-saw that cry out for explanations. For example, how come the
Tamil literature of the Sangam period is devoid of Sanskrit words or its
derivatives?
The area of research that Rajaram and Frawley have delved into is desperately
in need of new approaches utilising a variety of methods. Unfortunately,
incentives for such original work are scarce and problems of funding and
bureaucracy are ubiquitous. The world of archaeology has been more interested in
Egypt and South America than in Indology. Research into this area is important
not only to clarify and understand history but also because human beings have an
inherent need to know who they are, their origins and the history of their
forefathers. Their present is to a large extent determined by the past.
Publishers Note:
Vedic "Aryans" and the origins of civilization arrives at far-reaching
conclusions about ancient history and civilization by combining new insights
into the meaning of the Vedas and other ancient Indian scriptures with
scientific analysis of ancient sources. By systematic comparisons of Indian,
Egyptian, and Babylonian science, it shows that Harappan civilization
corresponds to that of the Sutric period, which came after the Vedic period.
From this, it follows that the Rg Veda is the product of an earlier layer of
civilization (before the rise of Egypt, Sumer, and the Indus Valley). As a
result, this book argues the currently held view of Mesopotamia as the cradle of
civilization is no longer tenable.
Another far-reaching consequence of this research is that the "Aryan"
invasion of India can be challenged by both science and literature. This book
shows that the Aryan-invasion theory is a product of European politics--notably
German nationalism and British colonial policy. It provides evidence that the
demise of civilization in Sumer, Egypt, and the Indus Valley was brought about
by a three-hundred-year drought that began in 2200 BCE.
The book also provides an explanation for the distribution of Indo-European
languages from India to Ireland. Based on accounts of migrations found in
ancient Indian works, it offers a radically new perspective that no one
interested in ancient history can afford to ignore.
And much much more ......
Book Contents:
Foreword by Dr. Klaus K. Klostermaier
Preface
Chapter 1: Political history of the "Aryan" invasion
Chapter 2: The "Aryan" problem in Vedic literature
Chapter 3: A chronological synthesis for ancient Indian civilization
Chapter 4: Vedic India and the origins of civilization
Supplement: The end of Harappa and global climatic changes
Notes
Appendix 1: Ancient Indian and contemporaneous civilizations: Proposed
chornology
Appendix 2: Ancient Indian and contemporaneous civilizations: Conventional
chronology
Glossary
References cited
Index
|
