It was a pleasant surprise to see an article by Dr. Steve Simske, an old acquaintance from graduate school, here on Chowk. In the article, and the ensuing debate, the point that South Asians are technically Caucasians keeps coming up. Surprised the hell out of me, it was like Max Muller rising like the mythical phoenix, from the ashes of a debunked, and I thought discredited, theory - spooky, what?

A little background.

Friedrich Maximilian Muller, 1823-1900, German philologist and Orientalist. An authority on Sanskrit and Eastern religions, he taught at Oxford. He did more than any other scholar to popularize philology and mythology, e.g., his lectures Science of Language (1861, 1863). (The Concise Columbia Electronic Encyclopedia, 3rd Edition).
The brief reference made in the blurb above scarcely does justice to the far reaching effect of Max Muller's contribution to the "Science" of Language - modern linguistics. During his translation of the Rig Veda, he could hardly fail to notice that Sanskrit had many similarities to Latin. Thus was formed the theory of the Indo-European languages. Unfortunately, the temptation to apply linguistic theories to notions of geopolitical history was too strong to resist. Thus was born the theory of the Aryan Invasion of India and the off shoot, that South Asians are really Caucasians.
The authors of the Rig Veda, describe themselves as Arya, the noble.
Max Muller dated the Rig Veda as being written around 1200 BC. The basis for this dating appears to derive from his belief that the world was formed at exactly 9 am on 23 October 4004 BC - the Bible says so! After accounting for the great flood and other Biblical events, the earliest the Rig Veda could have been written was 1200 BC!!!
The similarity of languages must imply that the original speakers migrated from some central European homeland, with branches going East, West and South, thus accounting for the geographical spread of the Indo-European languages.
The aforementioned migration must have occurred around 1200 BC.

Without belaboring the self referential nature of these arguments, it is astounding to discover that there was no physical evidence worth the name to support these theories. Subsequent archeological discoveries in Indus sites if anything, contradict it.
There is no evidence of the Indus cities being destroyed by invasion.
Skeletal remains indicate multiracial inhabitation of the Indus cities well before the supposed invasion.

If the linguistic evidence is paramount then what prevents the ancient Aryans from having migrated from the Indian Sub-Continent in sundry directions. But then it would be Europe that owes its culture and identity to India, rather than (as in the case of the Caucasian theory) the other way round. Much better to draw up images of pale skinned Indo-Aryans sweeping down from the central Asian plains driving the dark skinned Dravidians into the bowels of southern India.
So what is the real story behind this? Was Max Muller a fool or a knave? As is inevitable perhaps, the debate has been grossly politicized and there is the real danger of replacing Max Muller's brand of propaganda with an indigenous version. That would be tragic. The fact remains, however that there is little, if any, evidence to support the Aryan invasion of India and until we can unearth evidence to substantiate alternative theories, we are probably best served by simply leaving it at that.