A presentation by Michel Danino

(revised August 2017)

This presentation offers a brief introduction to the topic and has been designed
as an educational module. It claims no completeness, and the student wishing to
study the topic further is invited to consult the resources listed at the end.

Credits for images have been supplied as far as possible; suggestions for
additions or corrections are welcome.

Not for publication or any commercial use: for private circulation and educational
purposes only.
 Introduction

The pioneering Orientalist William Jones, founder in

Calcutta of the Asiatic Society, was among the first
Europeans to master Sanskrit and translate Sanskrit
texts into English. In his famous praise of the language
(1786), he found it to be of wonderful structure, more
perfect than the Greek, more copious than the Latin,
and more exquisitely refined than either. ... [All three
must] have sprung from some common source.

The linguistic kinship between Sanskrit and European languages (which

was actually noted by a few Jesuit scholars before Jones) gave rise to the
concept of an Indo-European language family, and consequently to the
search for its common source later called Proto-Indo-European
and its original homeland. In the 19th century, numerous homeland
theories were proposed, from India to Nordic regions, from the Russian
steppes to Germany....

1
 Sanskritist and philologist Friedrich Max Mller
produced the first complete edition of the Rig-Veda.
He regarded the ryas as a conquering race and
romanticized how the [British] descendants of the
same [Aryan] race, to which the first conquerors and
masters of India belonged, return ... to accomplish
the glorious work of civilization, which had been left
unfinished by their Aryan brethren. (1847)

This confusion between language and race, which Max Mller himself
later rejected, persisted for a long time (and still persists in India). It was
exploited not only by the British, who portrayed their colonial rule of
India as one more Aryan wave, but also by rising German nationalism in
the 19th and early 20th centuries. It eventually became an ideological
foundation of Nazism, which claimed that Germans were the purest
descendants of the Aryan race.

2
 The Aryan theory in a nutshell
 A new people / conquering race, speaking an early form of Sanskrit,
entered India around 1500 BCE, subjugated indigenous populations,
making them adopt its language, its Vedic culture and a caste-based
social order.
 The Aryans were generally fair, the indigenous people dark in
complexion. The colour of the skin may have been an important mark of
their identity. (D.N. Jha, Ancient India in Historical Outline, 1998)
 Depicted in the Veda as dark-skinned, stub-nosed Dasyus or Dsas,
the indigenous people have been variously identified with ancestors of
tribals, Shudras, Dalits, Dravidians, or (later) with the Harappans.
 In older versions of the theory, the invading Aryans destroyed the Indus
cities; in softer versions, they migrated peacefully into the subcontinent,
possibly in several waves. More recent versions have abandoned the
race concept, keeping only the arrival of Indo-Aryan speakers.
 The Aryans settled in the Indus and Sarasvati valleys, composed the
Rig-Veda around 1200 BCE, and moved into the Ganges Valley, whose
thick forest cover they cleared with their iron tools.
3
 Seven approaches to the Aryan issue

1. Literary: What do the texts actually say?

2. Geographical: What was the Aryans geography?
3. Archaeological: Has archaeology found traces of their
invasion / migration?
4. Cultural: Is there a cultural break between pre- and post-
Aryan?
5. Anthropological & genetic: Can an Aryan race or ethnic
entity be defined and identified?
6. Astronomical: Is there astronomical data to date early
Sanskrit texts?
7. Linguistic: Does linguistics demand or depend on the
Aryan scenario?

4
1. The Literary Evidence
 Several Indian figures and scholars pointed out that the Rig-Veda (the
earliest Sanskrit text) does not mention an original homeland.
 Swami Vivekananda: According to some, they
came from Central Tibet, others will have it that
they came from Central Asia. ... Of late, there was
an attempt made to prove that the Aryans lived on
the Swiss lakes. I should not be sorry if they had
been all drowned there, theory and all. Some say
now that they lived at the North Pole. Lord bless
the Aryans and their habitations! As for the truth
of these theories, there is not one word in our
scriptures, not one, to prove that the Aryan ever came from anywhere
outside India.... (1897)
 And what your European Pandits say about the Aryans swooping
down from some foreign land snatching away the land of aborigines
and settling in India by exterminating them, is all pure nonsense,
foolish talk. ... And all these monstrous lies are being taught to our
boys! (1901)

6
  Sri Aurobindo: Race is a thing much more obscure
and difficult to determine than is usually imagined.
In dealing with it the trenchant distinctions current
in the popular mind are wholly out of place.
 [The racial identification of supposed Aryans and
non-Aryans is] a conjecture supported only by
other conjectures ... a myth of the philologists.
 There is no actual mention of such an invasion [in the Rig-Veda]....
There is no reliable indication of any racial difference [between Aryans
and Dasyus]. (191416)
 Sri Aurobindo rejected the European scholars historical interpretation
of the Rig-Veda; he argued that the Veda could not be understood
unless the symbolic language of the hymns was unravelled. In his view,
most of the Vedic hymns reflect the Rishis quest for light and
immortality and their struggle to defend the cosmic order (ritam)
threatened by forces of darkness. This is in line with other mythologies
of the ancient world.

7
 B.R. Ambedkar: The theory of [Aryan] invasion is an
invention. ... The theory is based upon nothing but
pleasing assumptions and the inferences based on such
assumptions. ... The theory is a perversion of scientific
investigation. It is not allowed to evolve out of facts. On
the contrary, the theory is preconceived and facts are
selected to prove it. It falls to the ground at every point. ...
1. The Vedas do not know any such race as the Aryan race.
2. There is no evidence in the Vedas of any invasion of India by the
Aryan race and its having conquered the Dasas and Dasyus
supposed to be the natives of India.
3. There is no evidence to show that the distinction between Aryans,
Dasas and Dasyus was a racial distinction.
4. The Vedas do not support the contention that the Aryas were
different in colour from the Dasas and Dasyus. (Who Were the
Shudras, 1946, Chapters 4 & 5)
 From this it follows that if the Brahmins are Aryans the Untouchables
are also Aryans. (The Untouchables, 1948, Chapter 7)
8
 Does the Veda refer to dark-skinned,
stub-nosed aboriginals living in forts?
 Phrases such as wrapped in darkness / a dark envelope
(krishnagarbh, krishn tvac, 2.20.7 etc.) are consistent with the
conflict between forces of light and forces of darkness at the centre
of most world mythologies. Sri Aurobindo emphasized the Rig-
Vedas quest for the light: light of truth (ritasya jyotis), immortal light
(jyotir amritam), Aryan light (jyotir ryam), etc. (1.23.5, 7.76.1, 6.9.4,
10.43.4)
 Maria Schetelich: If ... krsn tvac is translated with dark cloth, dark
cover but not with dark skin in the sense of dark complexion it fits
better into the habits of thinking of the Rgvedic poets, rather than the
rather trivial translation current till now. (1990)
 Thomas R. Trautmann: The [Dasyus] image of the dark-skinned
savage is only imposed on the Vedic evidence with a considerable
amount of text-torturing. ... Why project an alien [racial] discourse
onto the distant Indian past? (1997)

9
 George Erdosy: Evidence for the characterization of Dsas and
Dasyus as black is tenuous in the extreme. Even apparently clear
indications of historical struggles between dark aborigines and Arya
conquerors turn out to be misleading.... The hymns neither use
language or race as markers of ethnic affiliation, nor refer (explicitly)
to a home outside South Asia. ... Instead of such traits, it is adherence
to social and religious norms which were required of ryas. (1994)
 H.H. Hock: Closer examination suggests an alternative interpretation
of the terms black or dark as referring to the dark world of the
dsas / dasyus in contrast with the light world of the ryas, an
interpretation which is in perfect agreement with the contrast between
good / light and evil / dark forces that pervades the Vedas (and has
parallels in many, perhaps most other traditions around the world). ...
The evidence of the Rig-Vedic passages just examined thus does not
establish a difference in race or phenotype between ryas and
dsas / dasyus. (2005)

10
 The word ansa occurs only once (5.29.10) in the Rig-Veda. It has been
interpreted as stub-nosed (a-nsa, according to Max Mller), and seen
as a reference to South Indians, or as mouthless (an-sa, according
to the Vedic commentator Syana). The second meaning is more
consistent with depictions of Dasyus as those who do not utter
mantras correctly (mrdhravcah). The difference between rya and
dasyu in the Rig-Veda is cultural, as most scholars now accept. In any
case, South Indians are neither noseless nor stub-nosed.
 The Dasyus so-called purs have been variously interpreted as
massive stone fortresses or cities (T. Burrow) or as small temporary
circular structures made of palisades, mud and stones (H. Zimmer, W.
Rau). Neither view works: gods (Agni, Maruts) and rivers (Sarasvati)
are also invoked as purs, and the Aryans also have purs.
 A.A. Macdonell & A.B. Keith: [Pur is] probably only metaphorical
(Vedic Index). Erdosy: It is clear that the forts belong to the realm of
mythology. Nicholas Kazanas: [Pur refers to] a supernatural, occult
or magical protective force or field.
 In summary, the Rig-Veda does not support forced colonial and racial
readings of dark-skinned, stub-nosed aborigines living in forts.
11
 Tamil Sangam literature (first centuries BCE/CE)
 The earliest Tamil literature goes back to 200 or 300 BCE according to
some scholars; 100 CE according to others. We would expect it to have
mythologized a clash with incoming Aryans and a southward migration.
 There is no reference to either event. T.R. Sesha Iyengar : In the oldest
extant Tamil classics there are no traditions pointing to a home outside
the Tamilakam [Tamil land]. (1925)
 On the other hand, Tamil Sangam poems and texts often praise Vedic
and classical Hindu gods and goddesses, the Vedas, the chanting of
Vedic hymns, Vedic sacrifices, fire rituals, etc. For instance, the
Purannru, one of the oldest collections, invokes Shiva, Vishnu,
Lakshmi (Tiru or Shr), and mentions Indra, Arundhat, the Pndavas
and the Kauravas, Rma and St.
 K.A. Nilakanta Sastri: There does not exist a single line of Tamil
literature written before the Tamils came into contact with, and let us
add accepted with genuine appreciation, the Indo-Aryan culture of North
Indian origin. This would hardly be the case if the two cultures had
clashed brutally as the result of an Aryan invasion.
12
2. Geography, Ocean and Rivers
 The Rig-Veda has numerous references to the ocean (samudra),
ships, sailing, storms, waves, treasures of the ocean, pearls,
shell, etc. Bhujyu is repeatedly mentioned as having been saved
by the Ashvins from a storm at sea. Such an intimacy with the
sea seems incompatible with recent immigrants from Central
Asia.
 The Rig-Vedas geography is the Saptasindhava: the Indus, its
five tributaries, and the Sarasvat. It also knows Irina, identified
with the Rann of Kachchh. Such an extensive geography is also
not easily compatible with what a few nomadic tribes entering
the subcontinent a couple of centuries earlier would be familiar
with.

14
 (Map by Michel Danino)
 The Saptasindhava based on the Nadstuti Skta. Why
should immigrating Aryans list rivers from east to west?
 Why should they praise the Sarasvat as a river flowing
from the mountain to the sea when it had dried up by
1900 BCE? (see Module on Sarasvati River) 15
3. Archaeology
 (Map by Michel Danino)

Mature Harappan
(urban) phase:
26001900 BCE,
about 1 million km2,
over 1,200 sites.
Note the density of sites
in the Sarasvati basin (see
Module on Sarasvati
River).
17
 Decline of the Urban Order
By 1900 BCE, most of the Harappan cities ceased to be functional; some
were abandoned while others reverted to a rural lifestyle, with no
planning or standardization. The following factors have been suggested
as having contributed to the decline of the urban order:
 Invasions
Invasions? Now discounted, see further below.
 Geographical overstretch?
overstretch May have contributed to instability.
 Economic decline
decline? Trade with Mesopotamia ends around 2000 BCE.
 A great drought from 2200 BCE (see Module on Sarasvati River),
which may have strained agricultural resources.
 Overuse of resources
resources? The Harappans may have accelerated the
regions ecological degradation through deforestation: their brick,
copper, seal, stone-bead industries required huge quantities of
firewood; much fodder was also extracted for their cattle.
 Drying-
Drying-up of the Sarasvat around 1900 BCE (see Module on
Sarasvati River).

18
 Mortimer Wheeler and Mohenjo
Mohenjo--daros skeletons

Mortimer Wheeler, then director

general of Archaeological Survey of
India, spoke of a final massacre at
Mohenjo-daro, basing himself on 33
skeletons found in a few streets:
Indra stands accused. (1947)
(Photos courtesy ASI) 19
 But ...
 U.S. archaeologist George Dales in 1964 called Wheelers thesis a
mythical massacre and showed that the skeletons probably did
not belong to the same epoch (the Indian archaeologist B.B. Lal
raised the same objection). Dales proposed they were the result of
a sloppy burial. He asked, Where are the burned fortresses, the
arrowheads, weapons, pieces of armor, the smashed chariots and
bodies of the invaders and defenders?
 In the 1980s, U.S. bioanthropologist Kenneth A.R. Kennedy found
that most of the so-called injuries either were the result of post-
mortem erosion or had actually healed well before death.
 The Indian archaeologist S.P. Gupta proposed that they were
victims of repeated floods which the city experienced from the
Indus. They belonged to different periods of time and they are
found embedded in silt and clay. (1999)
 The skeletons have nothing to do with a final massacre by
invading Aryans; Wheelers theory is now abandoned (although
some history textbooks still swear by it).
20
 Is there any evidence of the arrival
of a new material culture around 1500 BCE?
 Jim G. Shaffer: Current archaeological data do not support the existence
of an Indo-Aryan or European invasion into South Asia any time in the
pre- or protohistoric periods. (1984)
 J.-F. Jarrige: Nothing, in the present state of archaeological research ...
enables us to reconstruct convincingly invasions that could be clearly
attributed to Aryan groups. (1995)
 B.B. Lal: There is no evidence of invaders, represented either by
weapons of warfare or even of cultural remains left by them. (1997)
 J.M. Kenoyer: There is no archaeological ... evidence for invasions or
mass migrations into the Indus Valley between the end of the Harappan
Phase, about 1900 B.C. and the beginning of the Early Historic period
around 600 B.C. (1998)
 Dilip K. Chakrabarti: A purely archaeological history of the subcontinent
can be written without reference to the idea of Aryan invasions. (2006)
 The time gap between 1900 (end of Indus civilization) and 1500 BCE
(supposed arrival of the Aryans) shows that, in any case, the latter could
not have been the cause of the Harappan decline.
21
 (courtesy J.M. Kenoyer)
The Late Harappan Phase or Localization Era saw many regional
cultures of a rural nature, some of which have been tentatively
associated with incoming Aryans.
22
 For instance, the Cemetery H culture (left:
motifs on pottery) first identified at Harappa:
 V. Gordon Childe: the Cemetery H
intruders may belong to the Aryan
invaders (1934).
 D.D. Kosambi: Cemetery H culture is
undoubtedly Aryan (1962).
 B. & R. Allchin felt tempted to associate
[Cemetery H pottery] with the arrival of
IndoAryans. (1982)
 D.N. Jha: Cemetery H ... is believed to
have belonged to an alien people who
destroyed the older Harappa; he
identifies those aliens as Aryan
barbarians. (1998)
 So is Cemetery H an Aryan culture?

(courtesy ASI)
23
 But ...
 Typical Cemetery H designs bulls, gazelles, peacocks and pipal
leaves, starts and fishes, etc. are actually classic Mature motifs;
they are not innovations. The painted decoration ... shows
overwhelming craft continuity with that of the preceding period (B.
& R. Allchin, 1982)
 Cemetery H culture may reflect only a change in the focus of
settlement organization from that which was the pattern of the
earlier Harappan phase and not cultural discontinuity, urban decay,
invading aliens, or site abandonment, all of which have been
suggested in the past (J.M. Kenoyer, 1991). The Punjab Late
Harappan (Cemetery H) shows continuity from the Mature
Harappan (M. Rafique Mughal, 1992).
 Thus, if the Cemetery H culture is Aryan, so is the preceding
Mature phase.

24
 It was similarly proposed that the Jhukar culture (parts of Sindh
and Baluchistan), the Gandhara Grave culture (northwest
Pakistan) or the Pirak culture (plains of Baluchistan) were the
relics of the arrival of the Aryans. But as with Cemetery H, recent
research has shown those cultures to be in continuity with the
preceding Mature phase. Archaeological evidence runs against a
cultural break that the arrival of a new people would have caused.
 Various other post-Harappan cultures outside the subcontinent
(see next slide) have been assumed to be Aryan, with no
agreement among scholars.
 The real question is, How to materially define and identify an
Aryan culture? The choice of criteria is arbitrary.
 French archaeologist J.-M. Casal: Until now, Aryans have eluded
all archaeological definition. So far, no type of artefact, no class of
pottery has been discovered that would enable us to say: Aryans
came this way; here is a typically Aryan sword or goblet! (1969)

25
 (courtesy Wikipedia)

A few cultures have been associated by various scholars with Indo-

European migrations, with no consensus. (BMAC = Bactria-
Margiana Archaeological Complex, an urban culture dated c. 2100
1500 BCE). 26
 The horse issue: the argument
 The Rig-Veda constantly invokes ashva, the horse, horse-drawn
chariots, etc. The horse is central to Vedic culture (R.S.
Sharma) and is supposed to have been brought into the
subcontinent by the invading / migrating Aryans. (Below: fanciful
depictions in textbooks used in Tamil Nadu of Aryans entering
the subcontinent or right Indus cities in horse-drawn carts.)
 However, no horse remains were found in Indus cities and the
horse is never depicted in Harappan art.
 Therefore Harappan culture cannot be Vedic.

27
However, at least 12 Harappan sites (also a few
Neolithic and pre-Harappan sites) have yielded
remains of horse bones and teeth according to
experienced archaeozoologists.
Right: Bone remains of the domesticated horse
from Surkotada (Gujarat); these and a few teeth
were identified as such by the Indian

(Courtesy ASI)
archaeologist A.K. Sharma and confirmed by the
late Hungarian archaeozoologist Sndor Bknyi,
an authority on the prehistory of the horse.

Mortimer Wheeler: The bones of a horse occur at a high level at Mohenjo-

daro, and from the earliest (doubtless pre-Harappan) layer at Rana
Ghundai in northern Baluchistan both horse and ass are recorded. It is
likely enough that camel, horse and ass were in fact all a familiar feature
of the Indus caravans. (1968)

28
 It is true that the horse is not
depicted on Harappan seals. But nor
are the lion, the cow, the camel, the
wolf, the cat, the jackal, all of which
were known to the Harappans: non-
depiction is a cultural choice, not a
proof of non-existence.

(Courtesy ASI)

(Above) Figurine from Lothal:

opinions are divided, but note
the bushy tail.

(Right) Statuette of a horse at

Mohenjo-daro, identified as
such by Ernest Mackay (1930s).
29
 Methodological issues with the argument
 In the Aryan scenario, we should see an increase of horse remains
and depictions after 1500 BCE. However, many early historical sites
have yielded few or no horse remains; a few clear horse figurines do
appear (at Pirak, Hastinapura and Atranjikhera), but the horse is
rarely depicted in India until the Mauryan age. There is no radical
change between pre-1500 and post-1500 BCE.
 In the Rig Veda, the adversaries (dasyus and panis) also have
horses (e.g., 1.83.4, 3.34.9, 4.28.5, 7.18.19, 10.108). If the horse is taken
as a cultural marker, it should also be accepted as a marker for the
Aryans adversaries. The equation horse = Aryan is invalid.
 In Vedic hymns to the dawn, Ushas is praised as gomati
ashvavati literally full of cows and horses. Sri Aurobindo (c.
1915): ashva often does not refer to the animal, but is used as a
metaphor for energy and speed, just as go (cow) is often a metaphor
for light: Ushas is thus full of light (go) and energy (asva). If so,
the horse as an animal is not central to Vedic culture.
 We need to stop thinking of the Rig Veda as a garbled history book
(E. Leach) and look at it afresh.
30
 British anthropologist Edmund Leach: The prominent
place given to horses and chariots in the Rig Veda ... , if
anything, suggests that in the real society (as opposed
to its mythological counterpart), horses and chariots
were a rarity, ownership of which was a mark of
aristocratic or kingly distinction. (1990)

 If the horse was a rarity, then the Harappan civilization

cannot be excluded from candidates to a Vedic culture
on grounds of the horse argument alone.

31
4. Cultural Break or Continuum?
 The Harappan legacy

 With the fading away of the Harappan civilization,

urbanism seems to disappear; seals and script fall into
disuse; long-distance trade networks break down.
 In the Aryan paradigm, the Ganga-Vindhya civilization was
seen as completely disconnected from the Harappan, with
a Dark Age or Vedic Night separating them.
 Recent archaeological evidence has however led to a
growing perception of a substantial Harappan legacy, both
tangible and intangible. The following slides offer a brief
review of some aspects of the Harappan legacy.

33
 Urbanism and
Architecture

A large Harappan
house, with rooms
centred around a yard:
this design will become
common in rural India,
up to present times. (ASI)
34
 Wells with trapezoid bricks (to prevent inward collapse) will
survive in the Ganges plains, although the technique of terracotta
rings will become more widespread. (Courtesy J.M. Kenoyer) 35
 The concept of
auspicious
proportions: Mohenjo-
daros acropolis, with a
length double the
breadth.
(Courtesy M. Jansen)

36
 Proportions in Mohenjo-daros
acropolis: non-utilitarian in
nature, they must have had a
cultural value of auspiciousness.
(Adapted from ASI plans)
37
 A major building in
Mohenjo-daros lower
town. (Adapted from ASI)

Dimensions:
18.9 x 15.3 m
ratio = 1.24
(or 5:4 within 0.9%)

38
(Courtesy J.M. Kenoyer)

The same 5:4 ratio in Harappas so-called granary: 51.2 x 40.8 m (= 1.255).
Individual chambers follow a precise ratio of 5:2.
39
Proportions at Lothal:
280 x 225 m (taking the
middle point for the
northern side);
ratio = 1.244 or 5:4.

Dockyard:
217 m x 36 m;
ratio = 6:1. (ASI)
40
 Dholavira in the
Rann of Kachchh: all
major structures follow
simple ratios (study by
R.S. Bisht; M. Danino).

41
 Most Harappan
structures follow
simple ratios :
a deliberate choice,
not a random
distribution.
(Research & graph
by M. Danino)
42
The mahvedi connecting earth and heaven: an
increase of 1.25 or 5:4, a ratio widely used by
the Harappans too (see previous slides).

43
 Possible continuity with Vstu-Vidya of classical times

 Varhamihira: The length of a kings palace is greater than the

breadth by a quarter [1 + 1/4 = 5:4].... The length of the house of a
commander-in-chief exceeds the width by a sixth [1 + 1/6 = 7:6].
(Chapter 53 of Brhat Samhit). These are the proportions of
Dholaviras Castle and Middle Town respectively. Coincidence
or legacy?
 Mnasra, a text of Hindu architecture, specifies that the length of
the mansion [to be built] should be ascertained by commencing
with its breadth, or increasing it by one-fourth [5:4], one-half [3:2],
three-fourth [7:4], or making it twice [2:1], or greater than twice by
one-fourth [9:4], one-half [5:2] or three-fourths [11:4], or making it
three times [3:1]. (35.18-20) All these ratios are found at Dholavira
and other Harappan settlements.
 Other transmissions in town-planning: fortifications (detailed study
by Piotr Eltsov), sanitation (partly), some construction techniques.

44
 Metrology

(Courtesy ASI)
 Lothals measuring scale (above, 27 graduation lines spanning
46mm): 1 unit = 1.77 mm. Metrologist V. Mainkar: 10 Lothal units come
close to the value of the angula in Arthashastra, 1.778 cm in his
estimate (1984).
 Mohan Pant & Shuji Funo, studying dimensions of cluster blocks at
Mohenjo-daro, Sirkap (Taxila) and later historical towns, proposed an
angula of 1.78 cm (2005).
 A rough terracotta scale at Kalibangan yielded a unit of 1.75 cm (R.
Balasubramaniam & J.P. Joshi, 2008).
 M. Daninos independent calculations at Dholavira pointed to an
angula of 1.76 cm (2008).
 A continuous tradition of metrology? (However, scale-like objects at
Mohenjo-daro and Harappa do not fit in this system.)
45
 The Harappan standardized weight system

 A first sequence growing in geometric progression:

1 (= 0.86 g), 2, 4, 8, 16, 32, 64
 A second sequence consisting of multiples of the previous series:
160, 200, 320, 640, 1,600, 3,200, 6,400, 8,000, 12,800.

46
 John E. Mitchiner compared Harappan and traditional Indian
weights and found they followed the same pattern (1978):

 Measuring thousands of punch-marked coins from Taxila, D.D.

Kosambi found every likelihood of the earlier Taxila hoard
being weighed on much the same kind of balances and by
much the same sort of weights, as at Mohenjo-daro some two
thousand years earlier (1941).
 The Harappan origin of Indias traditional weights is accepted
by many archaeologists.
47
 Crafts, Ornaments, Games

(Courtesy J.M. Kenoyer)

The Harappan legacy of craft traditions and techniques
(especially in bead-making) is well established. 48
(Courtesy ASI)

Traditional ornaments
such as bangles or
anklets were used in
the Indus civilization.
(Above) Figurine from
(Above) Fragment of a
Nausharo (2800 BCE)
bronze figurine,
with sindr (vermilion)
Mohenjo-daro.
at the parting of the
(Right) The dancing
hair, a living tradition
girl, bronze figurine
in India.
from Mohenjo-daro.

49
 (adapted from J.M. Kenoyer)
(Left) Gamesmen from Lothal: a
possible ancestor of the game of
chess, according to S.R. Rao.
(Courtesy ASI)

(Above) Modern-looking dice

from Harappa.

50
 (Right) Conch shell used for

(adapted from J.M. Kenoyer)

trumpeting, with its tip sawn off.
(Bottom) Conch shell with its mouth
cut open, probably used to pour
libations (note the incised grooves
filled with red pigment, suggesting a
ritual use). These two objects are
still in use for the same purposes.

51
 Agriculture
Harappan agriculture was largely
dependent on barley and wheat.
Harappans also grew rice at a few
sites, pulses, millets and various
(Courtesy ASI)

vegetables, and domesticated

cattle, sheep, goats and fowls.

Kalibangan: (Above) A field with

perpendicular furrows, c. 2800
BCE. (Right) A nearby field in the
1960s, with a similar pattern. This
is an effective intercropping
system for winter crops, with
taller plants in the long north-
south furrows and shorter crops
in the east-west furrows. An at
least 4,800-year-long tradition! 52
 Iconography
There is a strong case for considerable legacy in iconography:
symbols, designs, art styles and conventions, etc. A few examples.

The endless knot on a Mohenjo-daro copper plate (left, ASI), in a Gujarati

inscription (Dhruva II of Gujarat Rashtrakuta dynasty, 884 CE, centre, from H.
Sarkar & B.M. Pande), and at Fatehpur Sikri (1569-1584 CE, right, from R.S. Bisht).
Whether the symbol was one of royalty in Harappan times, as it was later, is
unknown, but the transmission seems clear.
53
 The swastika was depicted
on numerous tablets (left)
and is found on Painted
Grey Ware (right, c.1000
BCE). It will become a
sacred symbol in Hinduism,
Buddhism and Jainism.

A tree on a raised platform

on an Harappan tablet (left).
The iconography survives
on punch-
punch-marked coins
(right, c. 500 BCE).

(Images on left courtesy J.M. Kenoyer;

motifs on right adapted from ASI) 54
Possible survival of Harappan
signs and motifs on punch-
marked coins.
(Adapted from Savita Sharma & ASI)
55
 (Left) The Pashupati seal:
 Three faces / heads, a classic motif
in Hindu-Buddhist iconography.
 Yogic posture (mlabandhsana in
later terminology).
 Seated on a platform with two
(Courtesy ASI)

antelopes beneath.

(photo M. Danino)
(Right) A statue of Buddha (Ajanta
Caves) seated on a platform with
two deer beneath, suggestive of
iconographic legacy.
56
 Decorated arches: (top left) a deity standing
below an arch on a Harappan tablet; (top centre)
standing Shiva below an arch of fire.
Note the pipal leaves (green circles, also right):
the pipal (ashvattha in Sanskrit, Ficus religiosa)
was revered by the Harappans; it is also a sacred
tree in the Rig-Veda and often depicted in
classical Indian art. 57
 Both styles of mother-goddess figurines depict a headdress of huge
flowers, big ear-rings, necklace, pendant, belt. (The main difference is
the loss of lateral cups connected to the head, which with Harappan
figurines served as oil lamps, and the fan-like top.) 58
 Religion

These two images not only point to

iconographic legacy, but also
suggest Harappan roots of later
Indian religions, as noted by many
(courtesy J.M. Kenoyer)

scholars.

(Top) A linga from Kalibangan. (ASI)

(Right) A broken seal depicting a
trident or trishla.

59
(courtesy J.M. Kenoyer)

A terracotta tablet depicting the ritual slaying of a buffalo:

an antecedent of Durga as Mahishasuramardini?

60
(Courtesy M. Jansen)

Mohenjo-daros Great Bath: a kings pleasure bath or a pushkarini

(D.D. Kosambi) for purificatory rituals? 61
 The existence of fire altars in the
Indus-Sarasvati civilization has
(photos courtesy ASI)

been regarded as controversial

as it is suggestive of Vedic
culture. Yet the evidence at
several sites is substantial.

The above structure at Lothal (Gujarat)

was located in a street; it is too large for
cooking purposes (at 2.7 m square); the
large jar suggests offerings. The apsidal
structure at Banawali (Haryana, right)
housed an apsidal altar full of fine
loose ash (R.S. Bisht); fire worship
seems the best explanation for it.
Neither structure contained bones,
which would be expected from regular
cooking or animal sacrifice. 62
 (Right) Seven hearths in a row
in the upper town of Kalibangan
(Rajasthan), containing ash and
charcoal. They were identified
as fire altars by excavator B.B.
Lal and accepted as such by
Raymond Allchin. (ASI)

courtesy ASI)
(courtesy
(courtesy V.H. Sonawane)

Fire altars at Vagad,

Saurashtra, according to
excavator V.H. Sonawane.
63
 Archaeologists have interpreted such
figurines as evidence for some
Harappan practice of yoga. The so-
called priest-king (below right) is
depicted in contemplation. (Note also
the cloth thrown over the left shoulder
and the bead holders in the middle of the
forehead and on the right arm.)

64
 Summary of the Harappan legacy

 Transmission of concepts and practices of urbanism,

technologies and crafts.
 Survival of symbols and iconographic motifs, ornaments, etc.
 Many aspects common to popular Hinduism: tree worship
(including the pipal tree), mother-goddess worship, animal
sacrifice, etc.
 Probable presence of fire worship (in the Sarasvati region and
Gujarat).
 Possible linga worship.
 Hints to a tradition of yoga and meditation.

65
 A cultural continuum

 John Marshall: The [Harappan] religion is so characteristically

Indian as hardly to be distinguished from still living Hinduism. (1931)
 Jim Shaffer: The previous concept of a Dark Age in South Asian
archaeology is no longer valid. (1992)
 Jean-Franois Jarrige: This famous vacuum that was sometimes
called Vedic night ... has been filling up more and more thanks to
numerous findings. [The transition is best understood] within the
framework of a continuity with the preceding millennia, without any
radical break of the sort too often proposed earlier. (1995)
 Jonathan M. Kenoyer: Current studies of the transition between the
two early urban civilizations claim that there was no significant break
or hiatus. (1998)
 The Harappan cities disappear but the culture lives on, some of it
transmitted to the Ganges civilization of the 1st millennium BCE.

66
5. Bioanthropology & Genetics
Despite early warnings, considerable confusion between race and
language has been a hallmark of the Aryan theory. This confusion has
been especially persistent in India and is still found in textbooks.

 British archaeologist Isaac Taylor rejected this association and

found the theory of a single Aryan migration out of Asia extremely
shadowy [resting] on no solid grounds whatever. (1890)
 French archaeologist Salomon Reinach : To speak of an Aryan race
existing three thousand years ago is to put forward a gratuitous
hypothesis; to speak of it as though it still existed today is quite
simply to talk nonsense. (1892)
 Yet in India, colonial ethnology set about dividing native
populations into imaginary races 43 of them described by H.H.
Risley for the 1901 Census of India. Tribals and some low castes
were said to be aboriginals, while higher castes were assumed to
be relics of the Aryan race. In the 20th century (and especially after
World War II), bioanthropology rejected all such classifications.

68
 Indian sociologist Bhupendra Nath Datta: We have no right to
identify the Vedic Aryans with a particular biotype. (1936)
 U.S. anthropologist Franz Boas: Anatomical type, language and
culture have not necessarily the same fates; a people may remain
constant in type and language, and change in culture; it may
remain constant in type, but change in language; or it may remain
constant in language, and change in type and culture. ... The
assumption that a certain definite people whose members have
always been related by blood must have been the carriers of this
[Aryan] language throughout history; and the other assumption, that
a certain cultural type must have always belonged to peoples
speaking Aryan languages are purely arbitrary ones, and not in
accord with the observed facts. (1938)
 U.S. anthropologist Ashley Montagu: The term race itself, as it is
generally applied to man, is scientifically without justification and
as commonly used the term corresponds to nothing in reality. Let
us be human beings first and put the dangerous myth of race in its
proper place in the Museum of Ugly Human Errors. (1942)

69
 Recent research based on studies of hundreds of skeletons

 Indian anthropologist Pratap C. Dutta found a genetic continuum

between the Harappans and the present-day people of the region. (1984)
In other words, Harappans were the ancestors of todays Haryanvis,
Punjabis, Rajasthanis, Sindhis and Gujaratis.
 U.S. bioanthropologist Kenneth A.R. Kennedy: Biological
anthropologists remain unable to lend support to any of the theories
concerning an Aryan biological or demographic entity. ... All prehistoric
human remains recovered thus far from the Indian subcontinent are
phenotypically identifiable as ancient South Asians. ... In short, there is
no evidence of demographic disruptions in the north-western sector of
the subcontinent during and immediately after the decline of the
Harappan culture. (1995)
 Brian Hemphill & John Lukacs (1991, 1997) found two discontinuities in
the populations of the western and northern fringes of the Indus Valley:
The first occurs between 6000 and 4500 BC... [with] another
discontinuity at some point after 800 BC but before 200 BC. A biological
continuity from 4500 to 800 BCE leaves no room for any mass
immigration around 1500 BCE.
70
Archaeogenetics or genetics of ancient populations is a relatively new
discipline, based on the study of Y-DNA (transmitted from father to son)
and mtDNA or mitochondrial DNA (transmitted by the mother alone).
DNA molecules undergo random mutations, which are transmitted to
descendants. Genetics cannot define races, only haplogroups of
people having common sets of genetic mutations. It can measure the
genetic proximity or distance between ethnic groups (roughly, by how
many or how few genetic mutations they share).

 After Africa, the Indian subcontinent has the greatest genetic

diversity in the world. The first genetic studies (in the 1990s) found
evidence of an Indo-Aryan immigration, but this was simply
circular evidence: the migration theory was accepted in the first
place. (A few recent studies dividing Ancestral North Indians and
Ancestral South Indians are based on the same circularity.)
 A 2003 study (next slide) showed the complexity of Indian
populations: one of those nearest to Central Asia (from where the
Aryans are supposed to have come) is the Chenchus, Dravidian-
speaking tribals from Andhra Pradesh. Punjabis and Konkani
Brahmins should have been close to Central Asia, but are distant.
71
72
 Toomas Kivisild et al.: We believe that there are now enough reasons
not only to question a recent Indo-Aryan invasion into India some
4000 BP, but alternatively to consider India as a part of the common
gene pool ancestral to the diversity of human maternal lineages in
Europe. (2000)
 The Indian mtDNA tree in general [is] not subdivided according to
linguistic (Indo-European, Dravidian) or caste affiliations. ... [There is] a
lack of clear distinction between Indian castes and tribes. (2003) This
important observation runs against the Aryan scenario.
 Mait Metspalu et al.: Language families present today in India, such as
Indo-European, Dravidic and Austro-Asiatic, are all much younger than
the majority of indigenous mtDNA lineages found among their present-
day speakers at high frequencies. It would make it highly speculative
to infer, from the extant mtDNA pools of their speakers, whether one of
the listed above linguistically defined group in India should be
considered more autochthonous than any other in respect of its
presence in the subcontinent. (2004)

73
 The above 2006 study by Sanghamitra Sahoo et al. confirms the genetic
proximity between castes in north and south India, also between castes
and tribes: The caste populations of north and south India are not
particularly more closely related to each other than they are to the tribal
groups Southern castes and tribals are very similar to each other in
their Ychromosomal haplogroup compositions. It was not possible to
confirm any of the purported differentiations between the caste and
tribal pools.
 The study also found overwhelming support for an Indian origin of
Dravidian speakers. 74
 Several more studies have reached similar conclusions, ruling out a
major addition to the Indian gene pool in the 2nd millennium BCE
and thus negating the old invasion theory.
 The colonial concept of divsi (original inhabitant) is rooted in
discredited 19th-century race theories and has no scientific basis. As
of now, genetics cannot determine which Indian populations are
di. Most of them appear to have been settled in the subcontinent
for 50,000 years or more.
 Similarly, the colonial concepts of an Aryan race or a Dravidian
race have no scientific foundation.
 Skin colour, in particular, is not an indication of race. It is caused
by melanin, a pigment which, all over the world, increases in
latitudes closer to the tropics or equator so as to protect the skin
from increased sunlight (e.g., an Italian has a darker skin than a
Swede; a Mexican than a Canadian).
 Archaeogenetics is a fast evolving discipline, so caution is required.

75
6. Archaeoastronomy
Archaeoastronomy is the study of astronomy in ancient cultures.
Because of the precession of equinoxes (a spin-top motion of the earths
axis which shifts the equinoctial points westward along the ecliptic by 1
in about 72 years; 25,800 years for a full rotation), the celestial longitudes
of constellations observed, say, 3,000 years ago, have shifted by 3,000 /
72 = 42 today. For over 200 years, scholars have used this clock to
date astronomical configurations in ancient Indian texts. A few examples:
 The Indian scholar and freedom-fighter Bal Gangadhar Tilak and the
German Indologist Hermann Jacobi independently interpreted in 1893
certain Rig-Vedic hymns as referring to the vernal (spring) equinox in
the nakshatra* Mrigashrsha (part of Orion) and the start of the rainy
season in Phalgun (a double-star constellation in Leo): this points to a
time between 4500 and 3500 BCE.
 Jacobi also pointed out that the Polestar referred to in Grihya Stras
cannot be todays Polestar: the texts date to about 500 BCE and
because of the precession, there was no Polestar then. They must have
preserved a memory of the previous Polestar, Alpha Draconis, pointing
to about 2800 BCE. (Recently R.N. Iyengar, analyzing the Dhruva myth,
reached the same conclusion.)
* See next slide. 77
 The Yajur-Veda lists 27 nakshatras (or lunar mansions mapping the
Moons path seen from the Earth). It begins with Krittik (Pleiades); the
Shatapatha Brhmana, a Vedic commentary, states that Krittik does
not deviate from the east ... all other nakshatras do, which points to
24002900 BCE. (By the time of the Srya Siddhnta in the classical
period, Krittik has moved to the 3rd position in the list of nakshatras.)
 Indias oldest text of astronomy, the Vedanga Jyotisha, deals mostly
with time division and calendar making. It records the location of the
summer and winter solstices in the middle of the nakshatra shlesh
(in Hydrae) and the beginning of Dhanishth (in Delphinus): this points
to about 1400 BCE.
 More such references have been proposed, all of them pointing to a
high antiquity incompatible with a composition of the Rig-Veda around
1200 BCE as demanded by the Aryan scenario. The counter-argument
has been either to dismiss these references as meaningless (yet they
are precise and present a consistent picture), or to suggest that the
Vedic texts somehow preserved the memory of much more ancient
astronomical events but why, then, could they not also record
contemporary events of 1200800 BCE?
78
7. Linguistics
 (Right) Map of Indias
linguistic families,
dominated by the Indo-
European (IE) and the
Dravidian. The formers
origins and evolution
were extensively studied
by linguists in the 19th
century, leading to the
reconstruction of a
Proto-Indo-European
language (PIE).

80
The western part of the Indo-European family. (Courtesy D.M. Short)
81
The eastern part of the Indo-European family. The family tree
thus has 11 main branches. (Courtesy D.M. Short) 82
 Too many Urheimats
 Most linguistic theories assumed that PIE was spoken by a defined people
(Proto-Indo-Europeans) in a defined homeland (Urheimat in German).
However, linguists have been unable to agree on the homelands location.
Over 20 of them were proposed at different times, from the Baltic region to
Bactria in central Asia. A few recent theories:

Northern Europe (Lothar Kilian)

Central Europe (Igor Diakonov, Pedro Bosch-Gimpera)

The Uralic-Volgan steppes of southern Russia (Marijas Gimbutas, J.P.
Mallory)

Various parts of Anatolia (Colin Renfrew, Aron Dolgopolsky, Thomas
V. Gamkrelidze, Vjaceslav V. Ivanov)

Bactria (Johanna Nichols)
 Such wide divergence does not inspire confidence. U.S. Indologist Edwin
Bryant: The minute one tries to further narrow this vast Indo-European-
speaking area, one enters the quagmire of speculation and disagreement
that has been characteristic of the Indo-European homeland quest since
its inception. (2001)
83
 (Map courtesy Wikipedia)
Marija Gimbutass Kurgan hypothesis. However the actual
migrations in Europe have been archaeologically disputed, as
the evidence for them is meagre.
84
Colin Renfrews Anatolian hypothesis associates the spread of IE
languages with the spread of agriculture: it has been extensively
disputed; among other reasons, agriculture has multiple origins.
85
 The issue of PIEs date
 Dominant theories propose about 4000 BCE for PIEs date. But.
 Sanskritist Thomas Burrow: We have already remarked on the deep
divergences between the various European members of the family, and
this can only be accounted for by pushing back the period of original
division to a period much earlier than is usually assumed. (1955)
 One recent model by New Zealand scholars Russell Gray et Quentin
Atkinson, based on a genetic view of language evolution, argues in
favour of an early dispersal of PIE out of Anatolia from c. 7000 BCE.
 Australian linguist R.M.W. Dixon: Why couldnt proto-Indo-European
have been spoken about 10,500 years ago? Surely the only really
honest answer to questions about dating a proto-language is We dont
know. The received opinion of a date of around 6000 bp [Before
Present] for proto-Indo-European with dates for other proto-
languages being calibrated on this scale is an ingrained one. Yet
it does seem to be a house of cards. (1997)
 British linguist James Clackson: The Indo-Europeanists data and
method do not allow the question When was PIE spoken? to be
answered in any really meaningful or helpful way. (2000)
86
 Underlying theoretical issues of IE linguistics
 Linguist Johannes Schmidt (19th century) proposed a wave model
of linguistics as a substitute for the mainstream tree model.
 N.S. Trubetskoy, a founder of modern linguistics, proposed a model
based on convergence, rather than divergence as implied in the tree
model: The homeland, the race and the culture of a supposed
Proto-Indo-European population has been discussed, a population
which may possibly never have existed. ... The idea of an Indo-
European protolanguage is not absurd, but it is not necessary, and
we can do very well without it. (1930s)
 Linguist Ernst Pulgram: It must be conceded that such a
reconstruction [of PIE] is something of a fiction ... The uniformity
which reconstructed Proto-Indo-European exhibits is not
representative of a reality. (1959)
 Italian linguist Angela Marcantonio: Data contradicting the IE theory
... are ignored, minimalized, or justified at any cost ... It is time to call
into question the validity of the IE theory, because ... it has not been
scientifically founded contrary to common belief. (2013)
87
 U.S. Linguist Johanna Nichols suggests that language spreads are
not mainly the results of migration, but involve a substantial amount
of language shift: ... no major migrations are required to explain
the distribution of IE languages at any stage in their history up to the
colonial period of the last few centuries ... The locus of the IE spread
was ... somewhere in the vicinity of ancient Bactria-Sogdiana.
(1997)
 James Clackson: ... the potential pitfalls for any attempt to relate
the Indo-European languages to pre-historic objects and events, and
to locate pre-historic movements or migrations of peoples. The
reconstructed proto-language is far too removed from actual spoken
languages of the type we are familiar with to make that possible. ...
From the linguistic data alone, without taking into account the
evidence of archaeology or early texts, it is not possible to draw
definite conclusions about the homeland of the speakers or Proto-
Indo-European, or even the age of the language family. The Indo-
European model, as a model of language relationships and of
linguistic descent, tells us nothing certain about the origin of the
Indic civilization. (2012)
88
 More alternatives
 The broad PIE homeland theory: a
PIE homeland, if it existed, need not
have been confined to a small region.
But if the principle is accepted, such
a homeland could also be located
further east: for instance, from the
Caspian Sea to northwest India.
 Italian scholar Mario Alineis
Palaeolithic Continuity Theory
pushes the date for PIE languages into the Palaeolithic (1996, supported by
prehistorian archaeologists such as Marcel Otte).
 French archaeologist Jean-Paul Demoule challenged the concept of Indo-
European (from the 1980s), both on archaeological and linguistic grounds.
 India is generally excluded because of the centre of gravity argument: it
is thought to be too far on the periphery of the IE family. However, a few
scholars (e.g., Koenraad Elst, Nicholas Kazanas, Shrikant Talageri) have
proposed an Out-of-India theory, in which the IE model is reversed, with
PIE originating from India.
89
 A pre-Sanskritic substratum?

It is often argued that the presence of Dravidian or other non-IE words

in the Rig-Veda proves the existence of a Dravidian substratum.
However, there is no agreement on such a vocabulary. Scholars have
proposed:
 500 words (T. Burrow)
 380 words (F.B.J. Kuiper)
 1 word (M.B. Emeneau)
 0 word (P. Thieme)
 100 para-Munda words (M. Witzel)
 H.H. Hock finds all proposals unconvincing.
 No language lives in isolation; the presence of non-Sanskritic
words in the Rig-Veda may just as well indicate long-standing
exchange and borrowing, not necessarily posteriority.

90
 The case of Brahui

 Brahui, a Dravidian language spoken in parts of Baluchistan, is

taken as a Harappan relic in the region and proof that the Harappan
language was Dravidian.
 Brahui, however, has been shown to be a recent import into the
region, going back no more than 1,000 years (J. Bloch, M.B.
Emeneau, H.H. Hock, J. Elfenbein). Its presence has nothing to do
with an assumed linguistic relic from Harappan times.
 Linguistic pockets prove nothing without a historical perspective:
the presence of an Anglo-Indian community in the Nilgiris of Tamil
Nadu does not indicate that Tamil Nadus earliest language was
English!

91
 Evidence of hydronymy
 Hydronymy (river names) is known to be conservative: pre-European
names such as Mississipi, Missouri, Mohawk, Potomac, etc., have
survived in the U.S.
 River names in northwest India are Indo-Aryan (a few below, from
Nadstuti skta, with Greek and English equivalents). This would not
be the case with a peaceful migration; it must be the result either of a
massive and brutal invasion or of a long-standing presence in the
region.

92
Summing up ...
 The question of numbers: massive migration or a trickle?

 Indian historian R.S. Sharma: The Indo-Aryan immigrants seem to

have been numerous and strong enough to continue and disseminate
much of their culture. (2001)
 Indian historian Romila Thapar: I would like to suggest that it was
not in fact a massive migration. (1999)
 From invasion to migration to trickle in theory. U.S. Sanskritist
Michael Witzel: Just one Afghan Indo-Aryan tribe that did not return
to the highlands but stayed in their Panjab winter quarters in spring
was needed to set off a wave of acculturation in the plains, by
transmitting its status kit to its neighbors. (2001).
 R.S. Sharmas large-scale invasion is undetected in archaeology,
bioanthropology and genetics. R. Thapar and M. Witzel avoid this
obstacle, but would a small-scale or trickle in migration have
sufficed to overturn the subcontinents cultural and linguistic
landscape so radically? Even substantial invasions of Persians,
Greeks, Scythians, Kushanas, Hunas could not effect such a change.

94
 The Aryan invasion or migration theory finds no support from literary,
archaeological, anthropological or genetic evidence: the so-called
Aryans remain elusive on the ground. The same problem confronts
supposed migrations of Indo-European speakers in Iran, central Asia or
Europe.
 Even in its sub-themes, such as Aryans bringing iron (already present
in the Ganges plains by 1800 BCE) or clearing the Gangetic forests
(which were only pockets), the Aryan scenario has failed.
 The persistent conflation between race, language and culture is
misleading and dangerous. The only legitimate use of the term Aryan
today is linguistic (a better term is Indo-Aryan speakers) or cultural
(a better term is Vedic).
 A final answer may come from an accumulation of archaeological and
genetic evidence, or the decipherment of the Indus script.
 Political uses of the Aryan scenario are wholly illegitimate and
unnecessarily divisive; they are an extension of the colonial agenda.

95
Even today, 44 years after the death of Hitler ... the Aryan
invasions of the second millennium BC are still treated as if
they were an established fact of history.... Why do serious
scholars persist in believing in the Aryan invasions?... Who
finds it attractive? Why has the development of early Sanskrit
come to be so dogmatically associated with an Aryan
invasion?... The details of this theory fit in with [the] racist
framework.... The origin myth of British colonial imperialism
helped the elite administrators ... to see themselves as
bringing pure civilization to a country in which civilization of
the most sophisticated (but morally corrupt) kind was
already nearly 6,000 years old. ... The Aryan invasions never
happened at all. Of course, no one is going to believe that.
British anthropologist
Edmund Leach (1989)

96
 Further reading
Allchin, Raymond & Bridget, Origins of a Civilization: The Prehistory and Early
Archaeology of South Asia, Viking, New Delhi, 1997
Arvidsson, Stefan, Aryan Idols: Indo-European Mythology as Ideology and Science,
The University of Chicago Press, Chicago, 2006
Aurobindo, Sri, The Secret of the Veda, vol. 15 in The Complete Works of Sri
Aurobindo, Sri Aurobindo Ashram Publication Department, Pondicherry, 1998
Bryant, Edwin, The Quest for the Origins of Vedic Culture: The Indo-Aryan Migration
Debate, Oxford University Press, New York, 2001
Bryant, Edwin F., & Patton, Laurie L., (eds), The Indo-Aryan Controversy: Evidence
and Inference in Indian History, Routledge, London & New York, 2005
Chakrabarti, Dilip K., Colonial Indology: Sociopolitics of the Ancient Indian Past,
Munshiram Manoharlal, New Delhi, 1997
Chakrabarti, Dilip K., The Battle for Ancient India: An Essay in the Sociopolitics of
Indian Archaeology, Aryan Books International, New Delhi, 2008
Danino, Michel, The Lost River: On the Trail of the Sarasvati, Penguin Books, New
Delhi, 2010
Elst, Koenraad, Update on the Aryan Invasion Debate, Aditya Prakashan, New Delhi,
1999
Elst, Koenraad, Asterisk in Bharopiyasthan: Minor Writings on the Aryan Invasion
Debate, Voice of India, New Delhi, 2007
97
Frawley, David, The Rig Veda and the History of India, Aditya Prakashan, New Delhi,
2001
Kazanas, Nicholas, Indo-Aryan Origins and Other Vedic Issues, Aditya Prakashan,
New Delhi, 2009
Kazanas, Nicholas, Vedic and Indo-European Studies, Aditya Prakashan, New Delhi,
2015
Kenoyer, Jonathan Mark, Ancient Cities of the Indus Valley Civilization, Oxford
University Press & American Institute of Pakistan Studies, Karachi & Islamabad,
1998
Kochhar, Rajesh, The Vedic People: Their History and Geography, Orient Longman,
Hyderabad, 2000
Lahiri, Nayanjot, (ed.), The Decline and Fall of the Indus Civilization, Permanent
Black, New Delhi, 2000
Lal, B.B., The Earliest Civilization of South Asia, Aryan Books International, New
Delhi, 1997
Lal, B.B., The Sarasvat Flows On: the Continuity of Indian Culture, Aryan Books
International, New Delhi, 2002
Lal, B.B., The Homeland of the Aryans: Evidence of Rigvedic Flora and Fauna,
Aryan Books International, New Delhi, 2005
Lal, B.B., The Rigvedic People: Invaders?/Immigrants? or Indigenous? Evidence
of Archaeology and Literature, Aryan Books International, New Delhi, 2015
98
Lincoln, Bruce. Theorizing Myth: Narrative, Ideology, and Scholarship, The
University of Chicago Press, Chicago, 1999
Macdonell, A.A., & Keith, A.B., Vedic Index of Names and Subjects, 2 vols., 1912;
repr. Motilal Banarsidass, Delhi, 1958-2007
Malhotra, Rajiv & Neelakandan, Aravindan, Breaking India: Western Interventions in
Dravidian and Dalit Faultlines, Amaryllis, New Delhi, 2011
Mallory, J.P., In Search of the Indo-European: Language, Archaeology and Myth,
Thames and Hudson, London, 1989
Mller, F. Max, A History of Ancient Sanskrit Literature, Allahabad, 1859; repr. Asian
Educational Services, New Delhi, 1993
Parpola, Asko, The Roots of Hinduism: The Early Aryans and the Indus Civilization,
Oxford University Press, New York, 2015
Poliakov, Lon, The Aryan Myth: A History of Racist and Nationalist Ideas in Europe,
Sussex University Press, London, 1974
Possehl, Gregory L., The Indus Civilization: A Contemporary Perspective, Altamira
Press, Oxford, 2002; Indian edn, Vistaar, New Delhi, 2003
Renfrew, Colin, Archaeology and Language: The Puzzle of Indo-European Origins
Penguin Books, London, 1989
Sethna, K.D., The Problem of Aryan Origins, Aditya Prakashan, sec. edn, New Delhi,
1992

99
Sharma, Ram Sharan, Advent of the Aryans in India, Manohar, New Delhi, 1999
Staal, Frits, Discovering the Vedas, Penguin Books, New Delhi, 2008
Talageri, Shrikant G., The Rigveda: A Historical Analysis, Aditya Prakashan, New
Delhi, 2000
Talageri, Shrikant G., The Rigveda and the Avesta: the Final Evidence, Aditya
Prakashan, New Delhi, 2008
Thapar, Romila, et al., India: Historical Beginnings and the Concept of the Aryan,
National Book Trust, New Delhi, 2006
Trautmann, Thomas R., Aryans and British India, Indian edn, Vistaar, New Delhi,
1997
Trautmann, Thomas R., (ed.), The Aryan Debate, Oxford University Press, New
Delhi, 2005
Tripathi, D.N., (ed.), A Discourse on Indo-European Languages and Culture, Indian
Council of Historical Research, New Delhi, 2005
Valdiya, K.S., Prehistoric River Saraswati, Western India: Geological Appraisal and
Social Aspects, Society of Earth Scientists Series, Springer, Switzerland, 2017

100