Kingdom of the Ganges The Invasion of the Aryans

Aim: Why is the Aryan invasion considered a theory?  Do Now: In your notebooks, explain the difference between a theory and a fact?

What is a theory?  An assumption based on limited information or knowledge; a conjecture  Examples?

What is a fact?  a truth known by actual experience or observation  something that actually exists; reality;  Examples?

 Remember Mohenjo-daro and Harappa?  What caused those ancient Indus Valley Civilizations to disappear?  Was that a fact or a theory?

Who were the Aryans?  Nomadic group of Indo- Europeans  In some versions of the Aryan migration theory, the Indo-Aryans migrated to India via the Khyber Pass

Where did the Indo-Europeans originate from?

How do we know about them?  The Vedic Age 1500 BCE – 500 BCE  Scholars have determined that the Rig Veda, the oldest of the four Vedas, was composed about 1500 B.C.  “Veda” means wisdom, knowledge or vision

 What evidence do we have that the Aryans invaded and destroyed Harappa and Mohenjo- Daro?  How have archaeologists/historians derived this evidence?

Aryan Invasion Theory – Rig Veda  Indra has torn open the fortresses of the Dasyus, which in their wombs hid the black people.  He created land and water for Manu [=Aryan man]"; "lower than all besides, hast thou,  O Indra, cast down the Dasyus, abject tribes of Dasas"; "after slaying the Dasyus, let Indra with his white friends win land, let him win the sun and water";  "Indra subdued the Dasyu color and drove it into hiding." With all- outstripping chariot-wheel, O Indra,  Thou, far-famed, hast overthrown the twice ten kings... Thou goest from fight to fight, intrepidly  Destroying castle after castle here with strength. (RV 1.53)

Aryan Invasion Theory  Light-skinned nomads (perhaps Nordic) or from Central Asia invaded the Indian subcontinent and wiped out the indigenous Indus Valley culture, enslaved or butchered the people and imposed their own culture upon them

Were the Vedas misinterpreted?  Battle between “dark” and “light”  The “Aryans” and the “Dravidians /Dasyus”  Could this be a battle between different Indian tribes?  The Vedas mention that the India was already a land of mixed races

Aryan Invasion Theory – Debunked?  Read Selection 1:  According to the reading by Thapar, what information disproves Aryan invasion theory?  How does Thapar contest this assertion?

Read Selection 2: The Indo Aryan Controversy  How does Patton arrive at her theory?  What fundamental question are they both trying to answer?

 After reading the two selections, what conclusions have you drawn?  Was there an invasion of Aryans or was there a gradual migration of nomadic Indo- European people

Flawed Arguments? Unproven Theories?  All the main points of the Aryan invasion in its various incarnations have been disproved.  There are no references to an invasion in the Vedic manuscripts  The Sanskrit word "Aryas" means "noble", not a superior cultural group."Aryas" means "noble"  Secondly, recent archaeological evidence suggests that the Indus civilization was shut down by droughts combined with a devasting flood, not a violent confrontation.  Recent archaeological evidence also shows that many of the so-called "Indus River" valley peoples lived in the Sarasvati River, which is mentioned in the Vedic manuscripts as a homeland.  There is no biological or archaeological evidence of a massive invasion of people of a different race.

Horses, Chariots And IronHorses, Chariots And Iron – Iron?  The Invading Aryans gained the upper hand because their weapons were made of iron.  This was based upon the word ‘ayas’ found in the Vedas, which was translated as iron but is generic term for all types of metal  Another reason was that iron was not found in the Indus Valley region.

Horses?  The Invasion Theory was linked to references of horses in the Vedas  Did the Aryans bring horses and chariots with them which gave them military superiority that made it possible for them to conquer the indigenous inhabitants of India.  Indologists tried to credit this theory by claiming that the domestication of the horse took place just before 1500BC. Their proof for this was that there were no traces of horses and chariots found in the Indus Valley.  The Vedic literature nowhere mentions riding in battle and the word ‘asva’ for horse was often used figuratively for speed.  Recent excavations have discovered both the remains of a horse from both the Late Harrapan Period and the Early Harrapan Period (dated before the supposed Invasion by the Aryans), and a clay model of a horse in Mohenjo-daro  Archeologists have uncovered numerous horse bones of both domesticated and combat types since  New discoveries in the Ukraine also proves that horse riding was prevalent as early as 4000BC – thus debunking the misconception that the Aryan nomads came riding into history after 2000BC.

Chariots?  Nomadic tribes do not use chariots!!  They are used in areas of flat land  An invasion of India would require crossing mountains and deserts – a chariot would be useless for such an exercise.  Much later, further excavations in the Indus Valley revealed horses and evidence of the wheel on the form of a seal showing a spoked wheel (as used on chariots).  Your conclusion??

Ancient Saraswati River  Described in the Rig Veda  Had dried up by 1500!  Archaeologists date it to pre BCE  Known to the Aryans! …  Your Conclusion??

Summary: Explain why you agree or disagree with this thesis statement.  Thesis: The destruction of the Indus valley civilizations were caused by the invasion of Aryan people.