It was Sir William Jones, in 1786, who established that Sanskrit, Greek, Latin, Persian, Celtic, Gothic any several other modern European languages had a common origin. It led to the birth of modern disciplines of philology and ethnology. Having established a common origin of the Indo-European family of languages, the Western investigators looked for a common original homeland of Indo-European people (Aryans). Marija Gimbatus of UCLA identified it in southern Russian steppes, north of Caspian sea; Gordon Childe earlier suggested eastern Europe but later believed it to be Anatolia (Turkey) and Gustav Kossinna proposed northern Germany as the original homeland of the Aryans. There have been at least ten other places, from Tibet to Scandinavia, suggested by various investigators.

Although Max Muller made it very clear that Aryan, in scientific language, is utterly inapplicable to race but it has been used to designate a cultural group of prehistoric people of extra-Indian origin who spoke an archaic form of Sanskrit. According to Will Durrant, the word Aryan originally meant peasant. It is most likely derived from Sanskrit root ri-ar, “to plough” and Latin aretrum, “a plough”. However, the word Aryan describes nobleman in Rig-Veda, the oldest source of ancient Indian history.

The Aryan Invasion Theory (AIT) was postulated by eminent Oxford scholar Max Muller in 1882 and later advanced by several western investigators. The salient features of AIT could be summed up as:

1) Since there are similar sounding words in most Indo-European Languages for the most commonly used vocabulary, there must be a proto-Indo-European language. The language must have been carried by people to Europe, Iran and Indian sub-continent.

2) The Aryans entered Indian sub-continent from northwest circa 1500-1200 BC. The time frame is suggested to coincide with the violent destruction of Indus valley civilization of Harappa and Mohenjo-daro as proposed by Mortimer Wheeler in 1968. This period also coincides with excavated clay tablets in Anatolia describing a treaty between Indo-European speaking Hittites and Mittani rulers mentioning deities names sounding like Mitra, Varuna and Indra.

3) The Aryan, a semi-nomadic pastoral people, came in successive waves. They were swift horse-men armed with broad axes or riding horses drawn two-wheeled chariots overwhelming their enemies with showers of arrows.

4) The pre-Aryans, non-Aryan or Dravidian moved south and east for safety after their cities in the Indus valley were destroyed by advancing Aryans.

5) The Aryans settled down in villages, created an Aryan dominant cultural and political elite, composed Rig-Veda and, in time, their language, culture and religion became dominant in the Indian sub-continent.

The older generation of European scholars and orientalists had erroneously traced all good or great elements of Indian civilization to Vedic Aryans. Recent archaeological discoveries and linguistic paleontology have, however, greatly changed our perspective of Vedic Aryans life, culture and religion. A great deal of pre-Aryan or non-Aryan influence on Aryan or Vedic language, culture and religion is now generally acknowledged. Suniti Kumar Chatterji in “Indian Heritage” insinuated that we owe more than 75 percent of culture and civilization to non-Aryan fore-fathers. Hinduism is truly the legacy of non-Aryans. The pre-Aryan worship of Sun and Serpent (Naga) is part of Hinduism. Sun was worshipped in the Vedic age under various names as Surya, Savitri, Pushan, Bhag, Mitra, Varuna and Visavant. Similarly Rudra, Siva, Krishna, Sakti, Kubera, Ganesha and Hanumana are deities of pre-Aryan origin. More importantly yoga and dhayana were practiced in Harappa and Mohenjo-daro and thus a pre-Aryan origin.

Despite the above mentioned modifications of AIT, to accommodate recent archaeological and linguistic paleontological evidences, it remains controversial on several grounds. The remainder of this article deals with the recent scholarship which practically dismisses the whole notion of an Aryan invasion during 1500-1200 BC. Here are point by point refutations of the salient features of AIT:

1) Although Max Muller proposed migration of the speaking people responsible for the phonologically regularities of commonly used words in different Indo-European vocabulary, it is only but one of the possible process of language transfer. The words can be transferred through diffusion to neighboring areas and keep moving like a wave ending up influencing the languages of far off places. It also takes place by loan-words from one culture to another usually associated with the development of new products or processes. Moreover, the list of words used for comparison between different languages included more names of animal species than of plants. Why did a migrating people chose to maintain words for animals and other commonly used words like father, mother, water etc., and not the words for many plants and grains when the supposed migrations took place several thousand years into the Neolithic age? The words for barley, wheat, cotton and other agriculture products are often different in different languages.

2) There are no archaeological evidences suggesting people invading Indian sub-continent in successive waves. It is highly unlikely that Aryan people took off from their homelands with the specific purpose of invading Indian sub-continent. They must be the people on the move for any of a number of possible reasons. They must have stopped along the way to replenish their stocks and strength. It would have taken them several generations with settling down along the way. Again, there is a lack of supporting archaeological evidences along the proposed migrating routes. The Neolithic age came to Indian sub-continent much earlier than previously thought. A French archaeologist named Jean-Francois Jarrige, has conducted an outstandingly successful excavation at the site of Mehrgarh, near the Bolan pass in Balochistan. Most surprising of this excavation is the evidence of cultivation of cereal crops (barley, einkorn, emmer and wheat) dating back to circa 6000 BC. Although it is possible for Mehrgarh to be the easternmost end of Mesopotamia but impossible for it not to influence and initiate a move towards farming in the nearby Mohenjo-daro and the rest of Indus valley. Indian population at the end of last Ice Age, around 10,000 BC, is estimated to be about 100,000 hunter gatherers. By the time Mehrgarh was thriving around 6000 BC, it is estimated to be 250,000 and 3000 years later during the zenith of Indus valley civilization, it is estimated to be 5 millions and would be tens of millions during the supposed Aryan invasion period of 1500-1200 BC. Not only it is impossible for small bands of invaders to overtake tens of millions of people; it also suggests a cultural or trading relationship between Mesopotamia, Anatolia and Indian sub-continent as a result of the cultivation of cereals of Mesopotamian origin. Thus appearance of the names of Indian deities in Hittites-Mittani accord is irrelevant to a supposed Aryan invasion from the northwest.

3) Being semi-nomadic pastoral should actually be a handicap to Aryans. It was farming which increased the population very quickly. The total number of Aryans must have remained lower than farming communities. Both horses and chariots were already present in the Indus valley. The Neolithic age and links with Mesopotamian and Anatolian civilizations during the preceding 4000 years must have introduced horses to the Indus valley. It is more probable that all the wars and destruction described in Rig-Veda are the accounts of intra-Indus valley wars. In Rig-Veda, there is no mention of Aryans or their descendants to have any memory of their homelands outside Indian sub-continent.

4) It was generally assumed that the pre-Aryan or non-Aryan people of Indus valley were Drividians. There is no evidence for Harappa or Mohenjo-daro to be Drividian except for the presence of Drividian speaking Brauhi on the east side of river Indus across from Mohenjo-daro. The current scholarship suggests Indus valley to be a plural society with archaic Sanskrit speaking living side by side with Dravidians, Australoids (speaking Munda languages) as well as Negroid and some Mongoloids. There are no accounts of Dravidians being forced to move south, even in the oldest Dravidian literature.

5) It is almost certain that Aryan invasion never took place and Hinduism is the legacy of Aryan/ non-Aryan Indians. The Rig-Veda in archaic Sanskrit was in the making as far back as Mehrgarh flourishing period of circa 6000 BC. The Old Sanskrit is remarkably similar to Old Persian of Avesta, suggesting an exchange of ideas, culture and products through Bolan pass as far back as 6000 BC. On the basis of modern scholarship, Colin Renfrew has proposed Anatolia as the original homeland of Aryans and their interaction with Indian sub-continent was taking place around 6000 BC, coinciding with the arrival of Mediterranean people (Dravidians) through Bolan pass in Balochistan. There may have been a second northwestern route much later with minimal influence on the language culture and religion.

In essence, a careful study of the contents and language of Rig-Veda and excavations at Mehrgarh has practically dismissed the AIT. Even in 1931, Lachmi Dhar was proposing Indian sub-continent as the original homeland of Indo-Europeans. His theory is taken seriously only by few Indian scholars. Recently, there is another theory proposed by some Indian scholars with collaboration from Veda and yoga researchers in the West ( “In Search of the Cradle of Civilization” by George Feuerstein, Subhash Kak and David Frowley) suggesting that the cradle of Indus valley civilization was actually 400-500 east of Indus river, along the banks of Ghaggar river. They propose that Ghaggar river is the remnant of a mighty river, Saraswati, ran dry supposedly due to catastrophic tectonic shifts of around 1900 BC. It once passed through modern day Thar desert. There are actually large number of settlements excavated, including Kalibangan in Rajasthan and Dawaraka in Gujrat, along the supposed path of Saraswati. There are some evidences of dry river bed at places along the supposed river path but they are not yet conclusive. According to their theory, the drying up of river Saraswati forced people to move both east and west, towards Ganges valley and Indus river respectively. They came in conflict with the residents in the Indus valley. It was the Saraswati cultural elite composing Rig-Veda, making heroes out of migrating Saraswati people coming in conflict with the existing communities to the west of Saraswati. This theory is also not yet taken seriously by reputed scholars in this area.