No Invasion no Aryan Massacres.

[Guest guest]

No invasion, no Aryan massacre

Dr Dinesh Agarwal

 

(Beginning with the issue, dated February 27, 2005 we are carrying

this comprehensive document on the Aryan Invasion Theory. The writer

here deals with all aspects of the controversial issue, extensively

quoting from authoritative sources)

 

Colin Renfrew, Professor of Archaeology at Cambridge, in his famous

work, Archaeology and Language: The Puzzle of Indo-European Origins,

Cambridge University Press, 1988, makes the following comments about

the real meaning and interpretation of Rig Vedic hymns:

 

" Many scholars have pointed out that an enemy quite frequently

smitten in these hymns is the Dasyu. The Dasyus have been thought by

some commentators to represent the original, non-Vedic-speaking

population of the area, expelled by the incursion of the war-like

Aryas in their war-chariots. As far as I can see, there is nothing

in the hymns of the Rig Veda which demonstrates that the Vedic-

speaking population were intrusive to the area: this comes rather

from a historical assumption about the `coming' of the Indo-

Europeans. It is certainly true that the gods invoked do aid the

Aryas by overthrowing forts, but this does not in itself establish

that the Aryas had no forts themselves. Nor does the fleetness in

battle, provided by horses (who were clearly used primarily for

pulling chariots), in itself suggest that the writers of these hymns

were nomads. Indeed the chariot is not a vehicle especially

associated with nomads. This was clearly a heroic society,

glorifying in battle. Some of these hymns, though repetitive, are

very beautiful pieces of poetry, and they are not by any means at

all warlike.

 

Shiva and Shambhu are not derived from the Tamil words civa (to

redden, to become angry) and cembu (copper, the red metal), but from

the Sanskrit roots.

 

" ...When Wheeler speaks of the Aryan invasion of the `land of the

seven rivers, the Punjab', he has no warranty at all, so far as I

can see. If one checks the dozen references in the Rig Veda to the

seven rivers, there is nothing in any of them that to me implies an

invasion: the land of the seven rivers is the land of the Rig Veda,

the scene of the action. Nothing implies that the Aryas were

strangers there. Nor is it implied that the inhabitants of the

walled cities (including the Dasyus) were any more aboriginal than

the Aryas themselves. Most of the references, indeed, are very

general ones such as the beginning of the hymn to Indra. (Hymn 102

of Book 9)

 

To thee, the Mighty One, I bring this mighty hymn, for thy desire

hath been gratified by my praise.

In Indra, yea in him victorious through his strength,

The gods have joyed at feast, and when the soma flowed.

The seven rivers bear his glory far and wide, and heaven and sky and

earth display his comely form.

The Sun and Moon in change, alternate run their course that we, 0

Indra, may behold and may have faith...'

 

" The Rig Veda gives no grounds for believing that the Aryas

themselves lacked forts, strongholds and citadels. Recent work on

the decline of the Indus Valley civilisation shows that it did not

have a single, simple cause: certainly, there are no grounds for

blaming its demise upon invading hordes. This seems instead to have

been a system collapse, and local movements of people may have

followed it. "

 

M.S. Elphinstone (1841), (first Governor of Bombay Presidency, 1819-

27) in his magnum opus, History of India, writes:

 

Hindu scripture.... " It is opposed to their (Hindus) foreign origin,

that neither in the code (of Manu) nor, I believe, in the Vedas, nor

in any book, that is certainly older than the code, is there any

allusion to a prior residence or to a knowledge of more than the

name of any country out of India. Even mythology goes no further

than the Himalayan chain, in which is fixed the habitation of the

gods...

 

" ...To say that it spread from a central point is an unwarranted

assumption, and even an analogy; for, emigration and civilisation

have not spread in a circle, but from east to west. Where, also,

could the central point be, from which a language could spread over

India, Greece, and Italy and yet leave Chaldea, Syria and Arabia

untouched? "

 

And, Elphinstone's final verdict:

 

" There is no reason whatever for thinking that the Hindus ever

inhabited any country but their present one, and as little for

denying that they may have done so before the earliest trace of

their records or tradition. "

 

Demise of Aryan Invasion Theory-III

 

So what these eminent scholars have concluded based on the

archaeological and literary evidences is that there was no invasion

by the so-called Aryans, there was no massacre at Harappan and

Mohenjo-daro sites, the Aryans were indigenous people, and the

decline of the Indus Valley civilisation was due to some natural

calamity.

 

Presence of Horse at Indus-Saraswati Sites

 

It is argued that the Aryans were horse-riders, used chariots for

transport, and since no signs of horse was found at the sites of

Harappa and Mohenjo-daro, the habitants of Indus Valley cannot be

Aryans. Well, this was the case in 1930-40, when the excavation of

many sites was not completed. Now numerous excavated sites along

Indus Valley and along the dried Saraswati river have produced bones

of domesticated horses. Dr S.R. Rao, the world-renowned scholar of

archaeology, informs us that horse bones have been found, both from

the `Mature Harappan' and `Late Harappan' levels. Many other

scholars since then have also unearthed numerous bones of horses:

both domesticated and combat type. This simply debunks the non-Aryan

nature of the habitants of the Indus Valley and also identifies the

Vedic culture with the Indus Valley civilisation.

 

Origin of Shiva-worship

 

The advocates of AIT argue that the inhabitants of Indus Valley were

Shiva-worshippers and since Shiva cult is more prevalent among the

south Indian Dravidians, therefore, the habitants of Indus Valley

were Dravidians. But Shiva-worship is not alien to Vedic culture and

not confined to south India only. The words Shiva and Shambhu are

not derived from the Tamil words civa (to redden, to become angry)

and cembu (copper, the red metal), but from the Sanskrit roots si

(therefore meaning " auspicious, gracious, benevolent, helpful,

kind " ) and sam (therefore meaning " being or existing for happiness

or welfare, granting or causing happiness, benevolent, helpful,

kind " ), and the words are used in this sense only, right from their

very first occurrence. (Sanskrit-English Dictionary by Sir M. Monier-

Williams).

 

....When Wheeler speaks of the Aryan invasion of the `land of the

seven rivers, the Punjab', he has no warranty at all, so far as I

can see.

 

Moreover, most important symbols of Shaivites are located in north

India: Kashi is the most revered and auspicious seat of Shaivism

which is in the north; the traditional holy abode of Shiva is

Kailash mountain which is in the far north; there are passages in

Rig Veda which mention Shiva and Rudra and consider him an important

deity. Indra himself is called Shiva several times in Rig Veda

(2:20:3, 6:45:17, 8:93:3). So Shiva is not a Dravidian god only, and

by no means a non-Vedic god. The proponents of AIT also present

terra-cotta lumps found in the fire-altars at the Harappan and other

sites as an evidence of Shiva linga, implying the Shiva cult was

prevalent among the Indus Valley people. But these terra-cotta lumps

have been proved to be the measures for weighing commodities by the

shopkeepers and merchants. Their weights have been found in perfect

integral ratios, in the manner like 1 gm, 2 gms, 5 gms, 10 gms, etc.

They were not used as the Shiva lingas for worship, but as the

weight measurements.

 

Discovery of the Submerged City of Krishna's Dwarka

 

The discovery of this city is very significant and a kind of

clinching evidence in discarding the Aryan invasion as well as its

proposed date of 1500 b.c. Its discovery not only establishes the

authenticity of the Mahabharata war and the main events described in

the epic, but also clinches the traditional antiquity of the

Mahabharata and Ramayana periods. So far, the AIT advocates used to

either dismiss the Mahabharata epic as a fictional work of a highly

talented poet or would place it around 1000 b.c. But the remains of

this submerged city along the coast of Gujarat were dated 3000 b.c.

to 1500 b.c. In Mahabharata's Musal Parva, the Dwaraka is mentioned

as being gradually swallowed by the ocean. Krishna had forewarned

the residents of Dwaraka to vacate the city before the sea submerged

it. The Sabha Parva gives a detailed account of Krishna's flight

from Mathura with his followers to Dwaraka to escape continuous

attacks of Jarasandh on Mathura and save the lives of its subjects.

For this reason, Krishna is also known as ranchhorh (one who runs

away from the battle-field). Dr S.R. Rao and his team in 1984-88

(Marine Archaeology Unit) undertook an extensive search of this city

along the coast of Gujarat where the Dwarikadeesh temple stands now,

and finally they succeeded in unearthing the ruins of this submerged

city off the Gujarat coast.

 

(To be concluded)

 

www.organiser.org, March 13, 2005