BBC UK website Exposes Aryan Invasion Hoax

[Guest guest]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/religion/religions/hinduism/history/history5.sht

ml

The Aryan Invasion Theory

One of the most controversial ideas about Hindu history is the Aryan

invasion theory.

 

This theory, originally devised by F. Max Muller in 1848, traces the

history of Hinduism to the invasion of India's indigenous people by

lighter skinned Aryans around 1500 BCE.

 

The theory was reinforced by other research over the next 120 years,

and became the accepted history of Hinduism, not only in the West

but in India.

 

There is now ample evidence to show that Muller, and those who

followed him, were wrong.

 

Why is the theory no longer accepted?

The Aryan invasion theory was based on archaeological, linguistic

and ethnological evidence.

 

Later research has either discredited this evidence, or provided new

evidence that combined with the earlier evidence makes other

explanations more likely.

 

Modern historians of the area no longer believe that such invasions

had such great influence on Indian history. It's now generally

accepted that Indian history shows a continuity of progress from the

earliest times to today.

 

The changes brought to India by other cultures are not denied by

modern historians, but they are no longer thought to be a major

ingredient in the development of Hinduism.

 

Dangers of the theory

The Aryan invasion theory denies the Indian origin of India's

predominant culture, but gives the credit for Indian culture to

invaders from elsewhere.

 

It even teaches that some of the most revered books of Hindu

scripture are not actually Indian, and it devalues India's culture

by portraying it as less ancient than it actually is.

 

The theory was not just wrong, it included unacceptably racist ideas:

 

it suggested that Indian culture was not a culture in its own right,

but a synthesis of elements from other cultures

it implied that Hinduism was not an authentically Indian religion

but the result of cultural imperialism

it suggested that Indian culture was static, and only changed under

outside influences

it suggested that the dark-skinned Dravidian people of the South of

India had got their faith from light-skinned Aryan invaders

it implied that indigenous people were incapable of creatively

developing their faith

it suggested that indigenous peoples could only acquire new

religious and cultural ideas from other races, by invasion or other

processes

it accepted that race was a biologically based concept (rather than,

at least in part, a social construct) that provided a sensible way

of ranking people in a hierarchy, which provided a partial basis for

the caste system

it provided a basis for racism in the Imperial context by suggesting

that the peoples of Northern India were descended from invaders from

Europe and so racially closer to the British Raj

it gave a historical precedent to justify the role and status of the

British Raj, who could argue that they were transforming India for

the better in the same way that the Aryans had done thousands of

years earlier

it downgraded the intellectual status of India and its people by

giving a falsely late date to elements of Indian science and culture