Arguments Against Aryan Invasion Theory

Fairdinkum: Here is something about Syeds, you might enjoy reading it. Please do not take it too seriously, if you are one or have special regards for them. This is just one person`s opinion.

Before the invasions of Mahmud Ghaznavi, Islam was mainly spread by Ismaili and Shia preachers. Being the followers of Ali, a claim for the descendency from Muhammad was very helpful in justifying their stands on various issues. It is possible that some of these earlier preacher settled in Sindh, or they endowed the title of Syed to the elders of newly converts. Some of these people later on switched to Sunni branches but kept their honorable surnames. Same might not be true for Syeds from other regions of sub-continent. My guess for UP Syeds as well as Qureshi, Farooqi, Usmain, Alavi, etc. is that they are substitutes for their non-Muslim surnames following conversion. In Sindh and Punjab, newly converts kept on their previous surnames, for example, Aslam Cheema, Ghulam Muhammad Bajwa and Abdullah Janjua but in UP there are probably no Aslam Tiwari, Ghulam Muhammad Sharma or Abdullah Singh Yadav. Then there are people who became Syeds by virtue of their position or by just inhaling enough germs from a Syed sneezing nearby. That is all I can say about the history of Syeds of Sindh. It is surprising to see a person like Asif Zardari can simultaneously claim himself as a Baloch and a Syed. It is impossible to separate the “true” Syeds from “acquired” , “adopted” or “phony” Syeds.

Lets have some fun by exploiting this topic further. Let us assume that any one who claims to be a Syed is in fact a descendent from Muhammad. Let us say there are 5 million Syeds in the sub-continent. Scientifically speaking, there should be additional 5 million people, descendents from Syed females ending up marrying non-Syeds and do not carry Syed surname but have the same genetic make up as any other Syed.

The present day Syeds are roughly 50th generation from Muhammad (1400 years/30 years). It is impossible to accept that no infidelity occured at any time during the last 50 generations of Syeds. Some degree of infidelity has always been present in all societies at all times. Infidelities occured in the earlier generations, say first 15, must have been grossly magnified by now among 5 million Syeds without anybody knowing or caring about it. Similarly, Syed men must have fathered large number of children with women, not their wives and thus do not carry their surname. The surnames from the father is really a social phenomenon; scientifically a surname from mother is at least, equally if not little more, important.

From atomic and molecular point of view, all of us share atoms from each others body during their lives as well after their death--throught he process of organic matter decaying to carbon dioxide, spreading around the world through diffusion and winds (trade, tropical etc.). Statisically, we are all Syeds including Jay and Rsaxena by virtue of sharing Muhammad at atomic level. But atoms do not determine chemical/ biological properties, molecules do. At molecular or genetic level, nobody is a Syed because Muhammad’s genes much have been diluted to less than one percent by now, during 50 generations. Fatima carried 50 percent, Imam Hussain 25 percent and Zain-Ul-Abideen 12.5 percent of Muhammad’s genes; not very difficult to figure out the the percent down to 50th Asif Ali Zardari generation, excluding the possibility of Syeds marrying exclusively amongst themselves. Moreover, you have to consider the possiblity of this much less than one percent of Muhammad’s genes residing in the inactive or less important 90+ percent of our genetic material thus not contributing any recognizable features.

It is possible for successive Syed generations to pass certain distinct or honorable values through nurturing. But what stops parents next door, non-Syeds, not to instill similar good values to their offsprings and raising them to be good members of the society.

Surnames are nothing but one of the several way to identify onself with certain segments of a society. It is wrong to use lineage for acquiring benefits and wrong for others to accept superiority of Syeds or Pandits, even in the matters of religion. But then religions demand obedience to their respective dogma and not some rational or logical discussion, particularly on the matters which may be detrimental to the status and well being of the priestly classes. That is why, despite no atomic, molecualr, social or moral superiority--Syeds or Pandits are generally more respected than other surnames only because it is a state of mind for a large number of people from South Asia.

RE: Fairdinkum, Sameer

Scout is a tough customer eh?

fairdinkum #36, ``From reading your various posts on other boards, I assume that you are quite interested in Islam and other religions. ``

Not really. I just think religion is a personal matter which should be respected and should be separated from other ``worldly`` matters to some extent.

``Have you ever thought about why Allah is so interested in ancient history? ``

No I never thought about it, and probably never will. And thinking about it will still not answer my question about the relevancy of Aryans to present day Desi society. Why bring religion into this?

``What relevance does Ancient Egyptian history has for present day South Asians?``

Well, the Egyptians were a bright lot and have effected ``world`` culture greatly as is obvious by their art, architecture, etc. Women still use the Egyptian inspired Henna and Kohl. It`s not much, but it`s still something. We have a country full of Egyptians, of Egyptian culture and heritage.

How can you even compare it with the Aryans?

``Remember that Quran is addressed to mankind rather than just Muslims… I hope you get my drift!? ``

Again, why bring religion into it? Secondly, I don`t get your drift. Sorry if I`m missing the whole point of your reply.

But thanks for replying.

SR #35:

Thank you Sohail. It is always a pleasure to read your thoughtful posts.

Sameer#34:

Thank you for this. How is the `story` progressing?

One must be passionate about life. There is more to life than (earning a) living. Those who have no passions are dullards doomed to the dustbin of Present (& Past.)

Keep writing!

regards,

temporal

Sameer,
I look forward to your post.. I, being a Sindhi Syed myself, know a little bit about our history...but not much.. so it will be interesting to read your post.

Re: Scout #33

Dear Scout,

I did not mean to brush you aside. I regret that you felt that way. I realize that you are genuinely curious about the relevance of ancient history in present times. I also understand that relevance of more recent history is obvious, whereas study of ancient history is more of an acquired taste rather than a popular pursuit. Here is a brief account of how and why I got interested in ancient history. I actually never went through this stage of questioning the relevance of ancient history for present times… So, it may not be very helpful to you. Still, it may shed some light on the issue at hand.

I know that I advised Sameer not to justify his work on moral/religious grounds, and I stand by my statement (ok, I never practice what I preach :)). I’ll repeat that academic value of this kind of research work is justification enough. And Sameer has addressed the relevance issue quite eloquently and sufficiently.


From reading your various posts on other boards, I assume that you are quite interested in Islam and other religions. Have you ever thought about why Allah is so interested in ancient history? His book, the Quran, uses ancient history with supreme persuasiveness, and unmatched eloquence to draw lessons for present and future generations of mankind. What relevance does Ancient Egyptian history has for present day South Asians? Remember that Quran is addressed to mankind rather than just Muslims… I hope you get my drift!?

Take care.

Regards,
Faidinkum

Thanks for writing this article Sameer. Really enjoyed reading it. A while back another article with a very similar slant (though not as well research) appeared on The Chowk. Perhaps those interested would like to look it up:

http://www.chowk.com/bin/showr.cgi?ashim_mar3198

It is an understatement to say that there exist great gaps of ignorance in our knowledge of the ancient past. In fact what we have are only gaps of knowledge in our sea of ignorance.

In recent years much archeological work has been done in the subcontinent. Lahore museum, for instance, has been participating with several multinational groups (American, French, Japanese) to unearth and interpret the past along the Indus Valley. Similar work has been done in Rajistan, Sindh, Mysore, and along the Ganges Valley to name just a few.

The earliest human activity in India goes back to the Second Inter-galactic age (before circa 200,000 BC). The culmination of a slow cultural evolution was the highly advanced Harappa Culture (c. 2500 BC), with still older ones in Baluchistan (Nal Culture) and Makran coast (Kulli Culture) and some others along the rivers of Punjab, Rajistan and the Kathiawar region. The Harappa Culture was the most advanced ancient culture which seems to have a city-state setup. Spread over a thousand miles there were cities in areas as far as Rajistan (Kalibangan), Punjab (Rupar), Sindh (Kot Diji) and Gugrat (port-town of Lothal). There was commerce and trade between The Indus Valley people and those of the Persian Gulf and Mesopotamia. This civilization declined and went belly-up by 1500 BC, which is when the so-called Aryans come into the picture.

Ethnological researchers believe that there were at least six racial groups in the ancient subcontinent: the Nigrito, Proto-Australoid, Alpine, Mongoloid, Mediterranean and much later on those assigned the term `Aryan`. Skeletal remains at Harappan sites do not include the `Aryan`.

`Aryan` is in fact a term applied to a speech-group not a race. To refer to the migration of the Aryans is technically inaccurate. However, it has become so customary that it will sound rather pedantic to refer to the `Aryans` as ``the groups of people who spoke Indo-European languages``.

There is indeed no evidence of ``invasion``. To say that a great Aryan army ``invaded`` the Indus Valley is a very simplistic model. But there is another possibility:

The immigrants were nomadic barbarians who came over to a settled agrarian civilization. Like the Germanic people who ``invaded`` Italy centuries later, these Aryan people were immigrants, rather than marauding invaders. They may have brought new diseases with them that the natives did not have in their natural habitat. These `migrants` from Central Asia were most likely simple `economic refugees`. They left a harsh landscape, perhaps due to worsening climatic conditions and failing crops and ended up in the fertile lands of the subcontinent. India was fertile and prosperous and the West Asian landscape was harsh and inhospitable. Perhaps they brought diseases with them against which the local population had no immunity. The plagues that came with the refugees may have done worse than any invading army could possibly have done.

The recent example of North America can serve as a model here. (Native American populations were decimated as a result of new diseases, and NOT due to military disasters at the hands of the Old World immigrants.) A hundred years from now the `brown invasion` of the US will have changed the racial make up here. (In 2030 more than 50% newborns will be non-white.) In five hundred years the only `pure whites` may be left in the hills of Montana, Wyoming and the Badlands of the Dakotas. Will we then be justified in saying that there is no evidence of a `brown invasion` of North America? :)

The Sanskrit term `arya` did come to mean `noble` but that was a later Brahaminical innovation. The original word comes from the Sanskrit root `ri-ar` which means ``to plough``; cf: the Latin ``aratrum``, a plough, and ``area``, an open space. On this theory, as you also point out, Wil Durant suggests that the word `Aryan` originally meant not nobleman but peasant.

The `Painted-Grey Ware` culture which is associated with the Neolithic speakers of Indo-European languages shows a gradual spread eastward in the subcontinent along the Ganges plain. Carbon 14 tests demonstrate this with reasonable certainty today and the dates of the gradual progression range from 1500 to 500 BC. Material from Atranji Khera (near Alighar) considered to be the mid-point of the migration is dated at 1025 BC (margin of error = 110 years).

It is entirely plausible that as the native populations were destroyed by the mysterious plague, the relatively immune migrants simply took over their vaccant lands and thrived and multiplied, spreading east and south. At some point, the surviving native populations developed natural immunity against those foreign bugs which had dwindled their numbers over the previous couple of centuries.

...SR

I am puzzled by the persistency of the debate about the relevance of this piece to people of South Asia at the individual and/ or collective level. As far as I remember from my high school years, the first chapter in the history textbook was always about the old history, Harappa, Mohenjodaro, Aryans etc. It never occured to me until 3-4 days ago that it was irrelevent. I suppose same can be said about any subject, any topic and any thing.

At individual level it is normal for people to like or dislike a subject but a judgement of irrelevency for collective South Asian people is quite a different thing. It must be backed by argument or credible data/ reasoning to support it. It is one of the easiest thing to be critical of anything based on disinterest alone. As the responses indicate there are quite a few chowkwallas who do not consider it irrelevent.

Why would a person with background in Chemistry and Chemistry being his bread and butter for all his professional life will be interested in history, archaeology, religions, philosophy and host of other subjects when he could have spent all his life reading Chemistry literature. People do buy and read books other than their major area of interest, not just for entertainment but also to broaden their horizon. Any subject dealing with any aspect of India/ Pakistan are bound to be relevent to some South Asian people.

Satish: Thanks for your post about Saraswati river. There is nothing unusual about finding dry river beds because river do change path over time. Similarly noone can deny the excavation of settlements along the old river paths all over the world--alongside Nile, Indus, Tigris, Euphretis and Mississipri-Missouri. However, it takes catastrophic event for people to abruptly migrate. A slow migration with the slow changing of river conditions usually do not lead to major and sudden conflicts. My personal feeling is that there were minor conflicts which were mythologized by Veda literature in the same way as conflicts between Jewish tribe and Egyptian Pharoah are exaggerated and mythologized by Jewish literature.

fairdinkum: I will post response to Sindhi Syeds later today, though I do not know great detail about it. But you may find my post interesting!!!

fairdinkum,

Don`t assume I mean all history is irrelevant. Read my posts again carefully.

As to the relevance of the whole Aryan Invasion Fiasco, enlighten me please instead of brushing me off.

I want to learn the relevance of the Aryans to present day South Asia. I sincerely do.

Re: Arun

You asked about geological proof of Sarasvati River and the year of its drying up. There has been a little work on this, and they have got some very useful results. Based on remote sensing satellite data, they have mapped the course of Sarasvati along the Ghaggar-Hakra channels. they have found water at as a little depths as 30 feet along this channel and their geological models place the drying up of the basin at about 2000BC. The ground water along this channel has been analyzed using tritium dating methods and found not to have been recharged from surface water for at least 4000 years. (You probably know that tritium is generated in surface water by cosmic rays, and decays fast when the water goes underground.) They have used some other dating techniques as well. You could find the details about this at the Sindhu-Sarasvati web site (I have forgotten the exact url, but it is quite easy to dig out, and also in the writings of Prof. Kalyanraman. Some of the recent issues of Current Science and Resonance, two journals from Bangalore had articles on Sarasvati Basin.

Scout #27

Dear Scout,

Let me refresh your memory:

You said: [I think exploring and perusing old world history is nothing but bored men dying to have an intellectual discussion to kill time and make themselves look smart.] Post #4

In fact, I`ve put it quite mildly, and in polite terms by saying that you probably didn`t see any point in the study of history.

You say: [What will studying Aryans do for us? Will it provide us with a better understanding of Pakistanis and Indians in this day and age?
Think about it.]


I understand that you fail to see relevance of history for present times or for the future. Relevence will dawn on you through contemplation... whenever you have some spare time (away from your very productive and enlightening, India v Pakistan mud slinging matches), take a deep breath and think about it :)
And I am not trying to put you down by being sarcastic.

As for history being the domain of ``bored men``, I do not concur with you there either.. There are quite a few prominent women historians who are also bored, trying hard to kill time & dying to look smart too :)

Take care, and stay cool!

Regards,
Fairdinkum

SalmanGorsi

I think I am one of the guilty as charged. I have already clarified in my response number 18 that I like to see author`s work at an academic level. It will be great dishonesty if you do not admit that Sameers effort is as objective as it could get and does qualify the academic merit. My point in my respose # 12 was of academic nature-where I wanted to elaborate the difference between a hypothesis and a theory and Sameer has hilighted the point in his response. I agree with him.

My response# 18 is also of an academic nature. I dont beleive that historians should work with a specific agenda in their mind. I think they should refrain from political and social nature of interpretation of their findings.History is already a very subjective subject and a historian should be the last person who should do the ``political`` and ``social`` interpretation for the ``reader``.

fairdinkum #27 ``As for people like scout who find it difficult to see any point in the study of history, well, you can’t really help them by writing a couple of responses.``

I don`t quite remember saying that :). I think history pertaining to people should stay within AD

and limited to useful data. Leave the BC centuries to the ecologists and environmentalists studying global warming etc, which is relevant to us in this day and age.

What will studying Aryans do for us? Will it provide us with a better understanding of Pakistanis and Indians in this day and age?

Think about it.

If it interests people, that`s another matter.

To each his own. And someone should write about it for other interested people, like Sameer did, and it was good.

I`m strictly talking about relevance here.

I`m not trying to put anyone down.

Ref fairdinkum #: 27

You said {A slight digression here… It would be great, if you did some research on the Syeds of Pakistan with a particular emphasis on Sind. I think you’ll find that a lot of these so-called ‘Syeds’ are not able to trace their roots back to Mohammad without a mind-boggling detour.}

Any research, unless based on scientifically irrefutable facts, is likely to be debated endlessly without coming to a conclusion. Recently there was a program on public TV here about an African tribe in Kenya claimimg to be Jews. Since the priestly classes (surnamed Cohen [or Hacohen] and Levi [or Halevi]) among Jews have rather strict rules against intermarriage with the rest of the Jewish community, a large number of Cohens and Levis in Israel were DNA sampled to establish a distinct charateristic. When the same characteristic was found in 50% of the African tribe, compared to much less than that among other Jews in Israel, a conclusion was drawn that this tribe is likely to have a Jewish ancestry.

One perhaps has to do a scientific survey at this level (costing several hundred thousand dollars) to establish with any credibility the lineage of Pakistani Sayyids. On the other hand, with the intermingling of Sayyids with the general population (hasn`t the claim been repeatedly made here on the Chowk that in Islam all people are treated equal?), it may be difficult to locate such a distinguishing DNA marker.

A study along similar lines was done among Brahmins and non-Brahmins by Kamaraj University in India (I don`t have the reference handy but can look it up if anyone is interested) but it didn`t involve a large sample. It might be interesting to establish genetic markers for the various `gotras` of the Brahmins to see if in fact they have any validity either.

Sameer,

A fascinating, mesmerizing, and intriguing topic - and well written. Thank you very much for sharing it with us… First, a brief comment on some of your responses:
Because of the academic nature of this article, I don’t think there is any need to justify this work on moral/religious grounds. Its academic value is justification enough. You are not in the business of providing moral guidance based on your research. You deal with facts in a purely scientific manner. The moment you get into moral justification business, the whole thing will become controversial and you’ll be labelled as something that you really are not. South Asian (and particularly Pakistani) mind is very susceptible to hallucinations – seeing hidden agendas and conspiracies against their religion/faith/culture etc. is the first stage of their delusional state of mind … So, in a way, I agree with ‘urstruly’ that you should keep it at an academic level.

However, that doesn’t stop you from (for example) refuting claims of racial superiority from certain sections of sub-continent population. But, you base your stance on facts rather than give it a moral angle.
As for people like scout who find it difficult to see any point in the study of history, well, you can’t really help them by writing a couple of responses.

Now on the content of the article:

The arguments you’ve presented against AIT are well known and have been around for sometime. In addition to what you have discussed, I find it interesting that the caste system is unique to Vedic people. Why isn’t there any trace of caste system elsewhere in western culture? If Vedic people were fair skinned, then why their heroes such as Rama, Krishna, and Shiva were dark skinned? Why don’t other Indo-European languages follow a consistent structure as Sanskrit does?
There are so many other historical, archaeological, and other facts now available to us (some of them are covered by your article), which are un-explainable on the basis of AIT. However, whereas these newly discovered facts might put AIT into doubt, they do not lead us to an alternative hypothesis to AIT in a conclusive manner yet. The other difficulty is that AIT is deeply entrenched and it will take a while to completely dislodge it. An alternative hypothesis strongly refuting the AIT is only the first step.

A slight digression here… It would be great, if you did some research on the Syeds of Pakistan with a particular emphasis on Sind. I think you’ll find that a lot of these so-called ‘Syeds’ are not able to trace their roots back to Mohammad without a mind-boggling detour.

I also do not understand why so much of criticism and name-calling about this article. If not anything, this article has certainly a very high pedagogic value. Sameer, thanks for an enlightening article, as usual I might say. Keep us informing and enlightened.

Humbly cheraym