Guest guest Posted August 16, 2004 Report Share Posted August 16, 2004 --- indologia2000 <indologia wrote: > Thu, 12 Aug 2004 15:03:23 -0000 > "indologia2000" <indologia > vediculture-owner > Open new Horizonts in Indology > > me > ICJ Home > Issues On-line > ICJ Vol 6, No 1 > June 1998 > > Questioning the Aryan Invasion Theory and > Revising Ancient > Indian History > > > SECTION GUIDE > ·Issues On-line > ·Journal Information > ·Subscribe to ICJ > ·ICJ Home > ·Home > > Questioning the Aryan Invasion Theory and > Revising Ancient > Indian > History1 > Klaus Klostermaier > NB. The footnotes for this article are > linked to a > separate footnote > page. > Introduction > Tacitus, the classical Roman writer, > claimed to have > described past > events and personalities in his works > sine ira et studio, > free from > hostility and bias. This motto has > guided serious > historians through > the ages, and it became their highest > ambition to write > history > 'objectively', distancing themselves > from opinions held > by > interested parties. > The ideal was not always followed, as we > know. We have > seen > twentieth century governments > commissioning re-writings > of the > histories of their countries from the > standpoint of their > own > ideologies. Like the court-chroniclers > of former times, > some > contemporary academic historians wrote > unashamedly biased > accounts > of events and redesigned the past > accordingly. > When, in the wake of World War II the > nations of Asia and > Africa > gained independence, their intellectuals > became aware of > the fact > that their histories had been written by > representatives > of the > colonial powers which they had opposed. > More often than > not they > discovered that all traditional accounts > of their own > past had been > brushed aside by the 'official' > historians as so much > myth and > fairytale. Often lacking their own > academically trained > historians-or worse, only possessing > native historians > who had taken > over the views of the colonial > masters-the discontent > with existing > histories of their countries expressed > itself often in > vernacular > works that lacked the academic > credentials necessary to > make an > impact on professional historians. > The situation is slowly changing. A new > generation of > scholars who > grew up in post-colonial times and who > do not share the > former > biases, scholars in command of the tools > of the trade- > intimacy with > the languages involved, familiarity with > the culture of > their > countries, respect for the indigenous > traditions-are > rewriting the > histories of their countries. > Nowhere is this more evident than in > India. India had a > tradition of > learning and scholarship much older and > vaster than the > European > countries that, from the sixteenth > century onwards, > became its > political masters. Indian scholars are > rewriting the > history of > India today. > The Aryan Invasion Theory and the Old > Chronology > One of the major points of revision > concerns the so > called 'Aryan > invasion theory', often referred to as > 'colonial- > missionary', > implying that it was the brainchild of > conquerors of > foreign > colonies who could not but imagine that > all higher > culture had to > come from outside 'backward' India, and > who likewise > assumed that a > religion could only spread through a > politically > supported > missionary effort. > While not buying into the more sinister > version of this > revision, > which accuses the inventors of the Aryan > invasion theory > of malice > and cynicism, there is no doubt that > early European > attempts to > explain the presence of Indians in India > had much to with > the > commonly held Biblical belief that > humankind originated > from one > pair of humans- Adam and Eve to be > precise (their common > birth date > was believed to be c.4005 BCE)-and that > all peoples on > earth > descended from one of the sons of Noah, > the only human to > survive > the Great Flood (dated at 2500 BCE). The > only problem > seemed to be > to connect peoples not mentioned in > Chapter 10 of Genesis > ['The > Peopling of the Earth'] with one of the > Biblical > genealogical lists. > > One such example of a Christian > historian attempting to > explain the > presence of Indians in India is the > famous Abbé Dubois > (1770-1848), > whose long sojourn in India (1792-1823) > enabled him to > collect a > large amount of interesting materials > concerning the > customs and > traditions of the Hindus. His (French) > manuscript was > bought by the > British East India Company and appeared > in an English > translation > under the title Hindu Manners, Customs > and Ceremonies in > 1897 with a > Prefatory Note by the Right Hon. F. Max > Müller.2 Abbé > Dubois, loath > 'to oppose [his] conjectures to [the > Indians'] absurd > fables' > categorically stated: > It is practically admitted that India > was inhabited > very soon > after the Deluge, which made a desert > of the whole > world. The fact > that it was so close to the plains of > Sennaar, where > Noah's > descendants remained stationary so > long, as well as its > good > climate and the fertility of the > country, soon led to > its > settlement. > Rejecting other scholars' opinions which > linked the > Indians to > Egyptian or Arabic origins, he ventured > to suggest > them 'to be > descendents not of Shem, as many argue, > but of Japhet'. > He explains: > 'According to my theory they reached > India from the > north, and I > should place the first abode of their > ancestors in the > neighbourhood > of the Caucasus.'3 The reasons he > provides to > substantiate his > theory are utterly unconvincing-but he > goes on to build > the rest of > his migration theory (not yet an 'Aryan' > migration > theory) on this > shaky foundation. > Max Müller (1823-1903), who was largely > responsible for > the 'Aryan > invasion theory' and the 'old > chronology', was too close > in spirit > and time to this kind of thinking, not > to have adopted it > fairly > unquestioningly. In his Prefatory Note > he praises the > work of Abbé > Dubois as a 'trustworthy authority. . > .which will always > retain its > value.' > That a great deal of early British > Indology was motivated > by > Christian missionary considerations, is > no secret. The > famous and > important Boden Chair for Sanskrit at > the University of > Oxford was > founded by Colonel Boden in 1811 with > the explicit > object 'to > promote the translation of the > Scriptures into Sanskrit, > so as to > enable his countrymen to proceed in the > conversion of the > natives of > India to the Christian Religion'.4 Max > Müller, in a > letter to his > wife wrote in 1886: 'The translation of > the Veda will > hereafter tell > to a great extent on the fate of India > and on the growth > of millions > of souls in that country. It is the root > of their > religion, and to > show them what the root is, I feel sure, > is the only way > of > uprooting all that has sprung from it > during the last 3 > 000 years.'5 > > When the affinity between many European > languages and > Sanskrit > became a commonly accepted notion, > scholars almost > automatically > concluded that the Sanskrit speaking > ancestors of the > present day > Indians were to be found somewhere > halfway between India > and the > Western borders of Europe-Northern > Germany, Scandinavia, > Southern > Russia, the Pamir-from which they > invaded the Punjab. (It > is also > worth noting that the early armchair > scholars who > conceived these > grandiose migration theories, had no > actual knowledge of > the terrain > their 'Aryan invaders' were supposed to > have transversed, > the passes > they were supposed to have crossed, or > the various > climates they > were believed to have been living in). > Assuming that the > Vedic > Indians were semi-nomadic warriors and > cattle-breeders, > it fitted > the picture, when Mohenjo Daro and > Harappa were > discovered, to also > assume that these were the cities the > Aryan invaders > destroyed under > the leadership of their god Indra, the > 'city-destroyer', > and that > the dark-skinned indigenous people were > the ones on whom > they > imposed their religion and their caste > system. > Western scholars decided to apply their > own methodologies > and, in > the absence of reliable evidence, > postulated a timeframe > for Indian > history on the basis of conjectures. > Considering the > traditional > dates for the life of Gautama, the > Buddha, as fairly well > established in the sixth century BCE, > supposedly pre- > Buddhist Indian > records were placed in a sequence that > seemed plausible > to > philologists. Accepting on linguistic > grounds the > traditional claims > that the Rigveda was the oldest Indian > literary document, > Max Müller > allowing a time-span of two hundred > years each for the > formation of > every class of Vedic literature, and > assuming that the > Vedic period > had come to an end by the time of the > Buddha, established > the > following sequence that was widely > accepted: > Rigveda c. 1200 BCE > Yajurveda,Samaveda,Atharvaveda, c. > 1000 BCE > Brahmanas, c. 800 BCE > Aranyakas,Upanishads, c. 600 BCE > Max Müller himself conceded the purely > conjectural nature > of the > Vedic chronology, and in the last work > published shortly > before his > death, The Six Systems of Indian > Philosophy, > admitted: 'Whatever may > be the date of the Vedic hymns, whether > 1500 or 15 000 > BCE, they > have their own unique place and stand by > themselves in > the > literature of the world' (p.35). There > were, even in Max > Müller's > time, Western and Indian scholars, such > as Moriz > Winternitz and Bal > Gangadhar Tilak, who disagreed with his > chronology and > postulated a > much higher age for the Rigveda. > Indian scholars pointed out all along > that there was no > reference in > the Veda of a migration from outside > India, that all the > geographical features mentioned in the > Rigveda are those > of > north-western India and that there was > no archaeological > evidence > whatsoever for the Aryan invasion > theory. On the other > side there > were references to constellations in > Vedic works whose > timeframe > could be calculated. The dates arrived > at, however, 4500 > BCE for one > observation in the Rigveda, 3200 BCE for > a date in the > Shatapatha > Brahmana, seemed far too remote to be > acceptable, > especially if one > assumed-as many nineteenth century > scholars did, that the > world was > only about 6 000 years old and that the > flood had taken > place only 4 > 500 years ago. > Debunking the Aryan Invasion Theory: The > New Chronology > Contemporary Indian scholars, admittedly > motivated not > only by > academic interests, vehemently reject > what they call the > 'colonial-missionary Aryan invasion > theory'. They accuse > its > originators of superimposing-for a > reason-the purpose and > process of > the colonial conquest of India by the > Western powers in > modern times > onto the beginnings of Indian > civilisation: as the > Europeans came to > India as bearers of a supposedly > superior civilisation > and a higher > religion, so the original Aryans were > assumed to have > invaded a > country on which they imposed their > culture and their > religion. > A recent major work offers 'seventeen > arguments: why the > Aryan > invasion never happened'.6 It may be > worthwhile > summarising and > analysing them briefly: > The Aryan invasion model is largely > based on linguistic > conjectures which are unjustified (and > wrong). > Languages develop > much more slowly than assumed by > nineteenth century > scholars. > According to Renfrew speakers of > Indo-European > languages may have > lived in Anatolia as early as 7000 BCE > The supposed large-scale migrations of > Aryan people in > the second > millennium BCE first into Western Asia > and then into > northern > India (by 1500 BCE) cannot be > maintained in view of the > fact that > the Hittites were in Anatolia already > by 2200 BCE and > the Kassites > and Mitanni had kings and dynasties by > 1600 BCE > There is no memory of an invasion or > of large-scale > migration in > the records of Ancient India-neither > in the Vedas, > Buddhist or > Jain writings, nor in Tamil > literature. The fauna and > flora, the > geography and the climate described in > the Rigveda are > that of > Northern India. > There is a striking cultural > continuity between the > archaeological > artefacts of the Indus-Saraswati > civilisation and > subsequent > Indian society and culture: a > continuity of religious > ideas, arts, > crafts, architecture, system of > weights and measures. > The archaeological finds of Mehrgarh > (copper, cattle, > barley) > reveal a culture similar to that of > the Vedic Indians. > Contrary to > former interpretations, the Rigveda > shows not a nomadic > but an > urban culture (purusa as derived from > pur vasa = town- > dweller). > The Aryan invasion theory was based on > the assumption > that a > nomadic people in possession of horses > and chariots > defeated an > urban civilisation that did not know > horses, and that > horses are > depicted only from the middle of the > second millennium > onwards. > Meanwhile archaeological evidence for > horses has been > found in > Harappan and pre-Harappan sites; > drawings of horses > have been > found in paleolithic caves in India; > drawings of riders > on horses > dated c. 4300 BCE have been found in > Ukraina. > Horsedrawn war > chariots are not typical for nomadic > breeders but for > urban > civilisations. > The racial diversity found in > skeletons in the cities > of the Indus > civilisation is the same as in India > today; there is no > evidence > of the coming of a new race. > The Rigveda describes a river system > in North India > that is > pre-1900 BCE in the case of the > Saraswati river, and > pre-2600 BCE > in the case of the Drishadvati river. > Vedic literature > shows a > population shift from the Saraswati > (Rigveda) to the > Ganges > (Brahmanas and Puranas), also > evidenced by > archaeological finds. > The astronomical references in the > Rigveda are based on > a > Pleiades-Krittika (Taurean) calendar > of c. 2500 BCE > when Vedic > astronomy and mathematics were > well-developed sciences > (again, not > a feature of a nomadic people). > The Indus cities were not destroyed by > invaders but > deserted by > their inhabitants because of > desertification of the > area. Strabo > (Geography XV.1.19) reports that > Aristobulos had seen > thousands of > villages and towns deserted because > the Indus had > changed its > course. > The battles described in the Rigveda > were not fought > between > invaders and natives but between > people belonging to > the same > culture. > Excavations in Dwaraka have lead to > the discovery of a > site larger > than Mohenjodaro, dated c. 1500 BCE > with architectural > structures, > use of iron, a script halfway between > Harappan and > Brahmi. Dwarka > has been associated with Krishna and > the end of the > Vedic period. > A continuity in the morphology of > scripts: Harappan, > Brahmi, > Devanagari. > Vedic ayas, formerly translated as > 'iron,' probably > meant copper > or bronze. Iron was found in India > before 1500 BCE in > Kashmir and > Dwaraka. > The Puranic dynastic lists with over > 120 kings in one > Vedic > dynasty alone, fit well into the 'new > chronology'. They > date back > to the third millennium BCE Greek > accounts tell of > Indian royal > lists going back to the seventh > millennium BCE. > The Rigveda itself shows an advanced > and sophisticated > culture, > the product of a long development, 'a > civilisation that > could not > have been delivered to India on > horseback' (p.160). > Painted Gray Ware culture in the > western Gangetic > plains, dated ca > 1100 BCE has been found connected to > (earlier) Black > and Red Ware > etc. > Let us consider some of these arguments > in some detail. > As often > remarked, there is no hint in the Veda > of a migration of > the people > that considered it its own sacred > tradition. It would be > strange > indeed if the Vedic Indians had lost all > recollection of > such a > momentous event in supposedly relatively > recent times- > much more > recent, for instance, than the migration > of Abraham and > his people > which is well attested and frequently > referred to in the > Bible. In > addition, as has been established > recently through > satellite > photography and geological > investigations, the Saraswati, > the > mightiest river known to the Rigvedic > Indians, along > whose banks > they established numerous major > settlements, had dried > out > completely by 1900 BCE-four centuries > before the Aryans > were > supposed to have invaded India. One can > hardly argue for > the > establishment of Aryan villages along a > dry river bed. > When the first remnants of the ruins of > the so-called > Indus > civilisation came to light in the early > part of our > century, the > proponents of the Aryan invasion theory > believed they had > found the > missing archaeological evidence: here > were the 'mighty > forts' and > the 'great cities' which the war-like > Indra of the > Rigveda was said > to have conquered and destroyed. Then it > emerged that > nobody had > destroyed these cities and no evidence > of wars of > conquest came to > light: floods and droughts had made it > impossible to > sustain large > populations in the area and the people > of Mohenjo Daro, > Harappa and > other places had migrated to more > hospitable areas. > Ongoing > archaeological research has not only > extended the area of > the > Indus-civilisation but has also shown a > transition of its > later > phases to the Gangetic culture. > Archeo-geographers have > established > that a drought lasting two to three > hundred years > devastated a wide > belt of land from Anatolia through > Mesopotamia to > Northern India > around 2300 BCE to 2000 BCE. > Based on this type of evidence and > extrapolating from the > Vedic > texts, a new story of the origins of > Hinduism is emerging > that > reflects the self-consciousness of > Hindus and which > attempts to > replace the 'colonial-missionary Aryan > invasion theory' > by a vision > of 'India as the Cradle of > Civilisation.' This new theory > considers > the Indus-civilisation as a late Vedic > phenomenon and > pushes the > (inner-Indian) beginnings of the Vedic > age back by > several thousands > of years. One of the reasons for > considering the Indus > civilisation > 'Vedic' is the evidence of town-planning > and > architectural design > that required a fairly advanced > algebraic geometry-of the > type > preserved in the Vedic Shulvasutras. The > widely respected > historian > of mathematics A. Seidenberg came to the > conclusion, > after studying > the geometry used in building the > Egyptian pyramids and > the > Mesopotamian citadels, that it reflected > a derivative > geometry-a > geometry derived from the Vedic > Shulva-sutras. If that is > so, then > the knowledge ('Veda') on which the > construction of > Harappa and > Mohenjo Daro is based, cannot be later > than that > civilisation > itself.7 > While the Rigveda has always been held > to be the oldest > literary > document of India and was considered to > have preserved > the oldest > form of Sanskrit, Indians have not taken > it to be the > source for > their early history. The Itihasa-Purana > served that > purpose. The > language of these works is more recent > than that of the > Vedas and > the time of their final redaction is > much later than the > fixation of > the Vedic canon. However, they contain > detailed > information about > ancient events and personalities that > form part of Indian > history. > The Ancients, like Herodotus, the father > of Greek histo- > riography, > did not separate story from history. Nor > did they > question their > sources but tended to juxtapose various > pieces of > evidence without > critically sifting it. Thus we cannot > read Itihasa-Purana > as the > equivalent of a modern textbook of > Indian history but > rather as a > storybook containing information with > interpretation, > facts and > fiction. Indians, however, always took > genealogies quite > seriously > and we can presume that the Puranic > lists of dynasties, > like the > lists of paramparas in the Upanishads > relate the names of > real > rulers in the correct sequence. On these > assumptions we > can > tentatively reconstruct Indian history > to a time around > 4500 BCE. > A key element in the revision of Ancient > Indian History > was the > recent discovery of Mehrgarh, a > settlement in the > Hindukush area, > that was continuously inhabited for > several thousand > years from c. > 7000 BCE onwards. This discovery has > extended Indian > history for > several thousands of years before the > fairly well > dateable Indus > civilisation.8 > New Chronologies > Pulling together available > archaeological evidence as it > is > available today, the American > anthropologist James G. > Schaffer > developed the following chronology of > early Indian > civilisation: > Early food-producing era (c. 6500-5000 > BCE): no > pottery. > Regionalisation era (5000-2600 BCE): > distinct regional > styles of > pottery and other artefacts. > Integration era (2600-1900 BCE) : > cultural homogeneity > and > emergence of urban centres like > Mohenjo daro and > Harappa. > Localisation era (1900-1300 BCE ) > blending of patterns > from the > integration era with regional ceramic > styles. > The Indian archaeologist S.P. Gupta > proposed this > cultural > sequencing: > Pre-ceramic Neolithic (8000-600 BCE) > Ceramic Neolithic (6000-5000 BCE) > Chalcolithic (5000-3000 BCE ) > Early Bronze Age (3000-1900 BCE) > Late Bronze Age ( 1900-1200 BCE) > Early Iron Age (1200-800 BCE) > Late Iron cultures > According to these specialists, there is > no break in the > cultural > development from 8000 BCE onwards, no > indication of a > major change, > as an invasion from outside would > certainly be. > A more detailed 'New Chronology' of > Ancient India, > locating names of > kings and tribes mentioned in the Vedas > and Puranas, > according to > Rajarama9 looks somewhat like this: > 4500 BCE: Mandhatri's victory over the > Drohyus, alluded > to in the > Puranas. > 4000 BCE Rigveda (excepting books 1 > and 10) > 3700 BCE Battle of Ten Kings (referred > to in the > Rigveda) > Beginning of Puranic dynastic lists: > Agastya, the > messenger of > Vedic religion in the Dravida country. > Vasistha, his > younger > brother, author of Vedic works. Rama > and Ramayana. > 3600 BCEYajur-, Sama-, Atharvaveda: > Completion of Vedic > Canon. > 3100 BCE Age of Krishna and Vyasa. > Mahabharata War. > Early > Mahabharata. > 3000 BCEShatapathabrahmana, > Shulvasutras, > Yajnavalkyasutra, > Panini, author of the Ashtadhyayi, > Yaska, author of the > Nirukta. > 2900 BCE Rise of the civilisations of > Ancient Egypt, > Mesopotamia > and the Indus-Sarasvati doab. > 2200 BCE beginning of large-scale > drought: decline of > Harappa. > 2000 BCE End of Vedic age. > 1900 BCE Saraswati completely dried > out: end of > Harappa. > Texts like the Rigveda, the > Shatapathabrahmana and others > contain > references to eclipses as well as to > sidereal markers of > the > beginning of seasons, which allow us by > backward > calculation, to > determine the time of their composition. > Experts assure > us that to > falsify these dates would have been > impossible before the > computer > age. > Old verses new? Or scientists verses > philologists? > We are left, at present, with two widely > differing > versions of > Ancient Indian History, with two > radically divergent sets > of > chronology and with a great deal of > polemic from both > sides. Those > who defend the Aryan invasion theory and > the chronology > associated > with it accuse the proponents of the > 'New Chronology' of > indulging > in Hindu chauvinism. The latter suspect > the former of > entertaining > 'colonial-missionary' prejudices and > denying originality > to the > indigenous Indians. The new element that > has entered the > debate is > scientific investigations. While the > older theory rested > on > exclusively philological arguments, the > new theory > includes > astronomical, geological, mathematical > and archaeological > evidence. > On the whole, the latter seems to rest > on better > foundations. Not > only were the philological arguments > from the very > beginning based > more on strong assertions and bold > guesses, civilisations > both > ancient and contemporary comprise more > than literature > alone. In > addition, purely philologically trained > scholars-namely > grammarians-are not able to make sense > of technical > language and of > scientific information contained even in > the texts they > study. > Consider today's scientific literature. > It abounds with > Greek and > Latin technical terms, it contains an > abundance of > formulae composed > of Greek and Hebrew letters. If scholars > with a > background in the > classical languages were to read such > works, they might > be able to > come up with some acceptable > translations of technical > terms into > modern English but they would hardly be > able to really > make sense of > most of what they read and they > certainly would not > extract the > information which the authors of these > works wished to > convey to > people trained in their specialities. > The situation is > not too > different with regard to ancient Indian > texts. The > admission of some > of the best scholars (like Geldner, who > in his > translation of the > Rigveda, considered the best so far, > declares many > passages 'darker > than the darkest oracle' or Gonda, who > considered the > Rigveda > basically untranslatable) of being > unable to make sense > of a great > many texts-and the refusal of most to go > beyond a > grammatical and > etymological analysis of these-indicates > a deeper > problem. The > Ancients were not only poets and > litterateurs, but they > also had > their sciences and their technical > skills, their secrets > and their > conventions that are not self-evident to > someone not > sharing their > world. Some progress has been made in > deciphering medical > and > astronomical literature of a later age, > in reading > architectural and > arts-related materials. However, much of > the technical > meaning of > the oldest Vedic literature still eludes > us. > The Rigveda-a code? > The computer scientist and Indologist > Subhash Kak > believes he has > rediscovered the 'Vedic Code' which > allows him to extract > from the > structure, as well as the words and > sentences of the > Rigveda, and > the considerable astronomical > information which its > authors > supposedly embedded in it.10 The > assumption of such > encoded > scientific knowledge would make it > understandable why > there was such > insistence on the preservation of every > letter of the > text in > precisely the sequence the original > author had set down. > One can > take certain liberties with a story, or > even a poem, > changing words, > transposing lines, adding explanatory > matter, shortening > it, if > necessary, and still communicate the > intentions and ideas > of the > author. However, one has to remember and > reproduce a > scientific > formula in precisely the same way it has > been set down by > the > scientist or it would not make sense at > all. While the > scientific > community can arbitrarily adopt certain > letter > equivalents for > physical units or processes, once it has > agreed on their > use, one > must obey the conventions for the sake > of meaningful > communication. > Even a non-specialist reader of ancient > Indian literature > will > notice the effort to link macrocosm and > microcosm, > astronomical and > physiological processes, to find > correspondences between > the various > realms of beings and to order the > universe by > establishing broad > classifications. Vedic sacrifices-the > central act of > Vedic culture- > were to be offered on precisely built > geometrically > constructed > altars and to be performed at > astronomically exactly > established > times. It sounds plausible to expect a > correlation > between the > numbers of bricks prescribed for a > particular altar and > the > distances between stars observed whose > movement > determined the time > of the offerings to be made. Subhash Kak > has advanced a > great deal > of fascinating detail in that connection > in his essays on > the > 'Astronomy of the Vedic Altar'. He > believes that while > the Vedic > Indians possessed extensive astronomical > knowledge, which > they > encoded in the text of the Rigveda, the > code was lost in > later times > and the Vedic tradition was > interrupted.11 > India, the cradle of (world-) > civilisation? > Based on the early dating of the Rigveda > (c. 4000 BCE) > and on the > strength of the argument that Vedic > astronomy and > geometry predates > that of the other known Ancient > civilisations, some > scholars, like > N.S. Rajaram, George Feuerstein, Subhash > Kak and David > Frawley, have > made the daring suggestion that India > was the 'cradle of > civilisation'. They link the recently > discovered early > European > civilisation (which predates Ancient > Sumeria and Ancient > Egypt by > over a millennium) to waves of > populations moving out or > driven out > from north-west India. Later migrations, > caused either by > climatic > changes or by military events, would > have brought the > Hittites to > Western Asia, the Iranians to > Afghanistan and Iran and > many others > to other parts of Eurasia. Such a > scenario would require > a complete > rewriting of Ancient World > History-especially if we add > the claims, > apparently substantiated by some > material evidence, that > Vedic > Indians had established trade links with > Central America > and Eastern > Africa before 2500 BCE. It is no wonder > that the 'New > Chronology' > arouses not only scholarly controversy > but emotional > excitement as > well. Much more hard evidence will be > required to fully > establish > it, and many claims may have to be > withdrawn. But there > is no doubt > that the 'old chronology' has been > discredited and that > much > surprise is in store for the students > not only of Ancient > India, but > also of the Ancient World as a whole. > Sorting out the questions: > The 'Revision of Ancient Indian History' > responds to > several > separate, but interlocking questions > that are often > confused. > The (emotionally) most important > question is that of > the original > home of Vedic civilisation, identified > with the > question: where > was the (Rig-)Veda composed? India's > indigenous answer > to that > question had always been 'India', more > precisely 'the > Punjab'. The > European, 'colonial missionary' > assumption, > was 'outside India'. > The next question, not often > explicitly asked, is: > where did the > pre-Vedic people, the 'Aryans' come > from? This is a > problem for > archeo-anthropologists rather than for > historians. The > racial > history of India shows influences from > many quarters. > A related, but separate question > concerns the 'cradle > of > civilisation', to which several > ancient cultures have > laid claim: > Sumeria, Egypt, India (possibly also > China could be > mentioned, > which considered itself for a long > time the only truly > civilised > country). Depending on what answer we > receive, the > major expansion > of population/civilisation would be > from west to east, > or from > east to west. The famous lux ex > oriente has often been > applied to > the spread of culture in the ancient > world. India was > as far as > the 'Orient' would go. > It is rather strange that the > defenders of the 'Aryan > invasion > theory', who have neither > archaeological nor literary > documents to > prove their assumption, demand > detailed proof for the > non-invasion > and refuse to admit the evidence > available. Similarly, > they feel > entitled to declare 'mythical' > whatever the sources > (Rigveda, > Puranas) say that does not agree with > their > preconceived notions > of Vedic India. > Some conclusions: > If I were to judge the strength of the > arguments for > revising > Ancient Indian History in the direction > of 'India as > Cradle of > Civilisation' I would rate Seidenberg's > findings > concerning the > Shulvasutra geometry (applied in the > Indus civilisation; > Babylonian > and Egyptian geometry derivative to it) > highest. Next > would be the > archeo-astronomical determination of > astronomical data in > Vedic and > post-Vedic texts. Third is the satellite > photography > based dating of > the drying out of the Saraswati and the > archeo- > geographical finding > of a centuries long drought in the belt > reaching from > Anatolia > through Mesopotamia and Northern India. > Geological > research has > uncovered major tectonic changes in the > Punjab and the > foothills of > the Himalayas. At one point a section > rose about sixty > metres within > the past 2 000 years. > 'Vasishta's Head', a bronze head found > near Delhi, was > dated through > radio-carbon testing to around 3700 BCE- > the time when, > according to > Hicks and Anderson, the Battle of the > Ten Kings took > place > (Vasishta, mentioned in the Rigveda, was > the advisor to > King Sudas). > A further factor speaking for the > 'Vedic' character of > the Indus > civilisation is the occurrence of > (Vedic) altars in many > sites. > Fairly important is also the absence of > a memory of a > migration from > outside India in all of ancient Indian > literature: the > Veda, the > Brahmanas, the Epics and the Puranas. > Granting that the > Vedic > Samhitas were ritual manuals rather than > historic > records, further > progress in revising Ancient Indian > History could be > expected from a > study of Itihasa-Purana, rather than > from an analysis of > the Rigveda > (by way of parallel, what kind of > reconstruction of > Ancient Israel's > History could be done on the basis of a > study of the > Psalms, leaving > out Genesis and Kings? Or what > reconstruction of European > History > could be based on a study of the > earliest Rituale > Romanum?) > An afterword: > Hinduism today is not just a development > of Vedic > religion and > culture but a synthesis of many diverse > elements. There > is no doubt > a Vedic basis. It is evident in the > caste-structure of > Hindu > society, in the rituals which almost > every Hindu still > undergoes > (especially initiation, marriage and > last rites), in > traditional > notions of ritual purity and pollution, > and in the > respect which the > Veda still commands. There is a large > area of Hindu > worship and > religious practice for which the Veda > provides little or > no basis: > temple-building, image worship, > pilgrimages, vows and > prayers to > gods and goddesses not mentioned in the > Veda, beliefs > like > transmigration, world-pictures > containing numerous > heavens and hells > and much more which appear to have been > taken over from > non-Vedic > indigenous cultures. There have been > historic > developments that led > to the developments of numerous schools > of thought, sects > and > communities differing from each other in > scriptures, > interpretations, customs, beliefs. > Apart from its Vedic origins Hinduism > was never one in > either > administration, doctrine or practice. It > does not possess > a commonly > accepted authority, does not have a > single centre and > does not have > a common history. Unlike the histories > of other > religions, which > rely on one founder and one scripture, > the history of > Hinduism is a > bundle of parallel histories of > traditions that were > loosely defined > from the very beginning, that went > through a number of > fissions and > fusions, and that do not feel any need > to seek their > identity in > conforming to a specific historic > realisation. While > incredibly > conservative in some of its expressions, > Hinduism is very > open to > change and development under the > influence of charismatic > personalities. From early times great > latitude was given > to Hindus > to interpret their traditional > scriptures in a great many > different > ways. The ease with which Hindus have > always identified > persons that > impressed them with manifestations of > God has led to many > parallel > traditions within Hinduism, making it > impossible to > chronicle a > development of Hinduism along one line. > The presentation > of a > history of Hinduism will be a record of > several > mainstream Hindu > traditions that developed along > individual lines; only > very rarely > do these lines meet in conflict or merge > to generate new > branches of > the still vigorously growing banyan tree > to which > Hinduism has been > often compared. > Back to Vol. 6, No. 1 ContentsBack to > Top > > Print this page > > > > > Home · About · Worldwide · Culture · ICJ · > Site Information > © 2002 ISKCON > > > > > New and Improved Mail - Send 10MB messages! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.