|
Who were the Aryans and to what extent did they influence development of religion (and culture) in ancient India?
Research findings by Laura Shulman
(accompanying PowerPoint
presentation)
The term Arya means noble, spiritual (Frawley) or pure
(Daniel). No one is really sure who the Aryans were or from where they originated. Their existence is a theory that explains common elements of culture, language, and religion found throughout ancient Europe, the ancient Near East (Iran) and the Indian Sub-continent. The theory holds that, having tamed horses, they were a powerful, migrant people who invaded, influenced, and sometimes took over cultures as widespread (some versions of the theory suggest) as the Celts in northwestern Europe (Ireland), the Norse of Northern Europe, India, and even western
China.
Though debated by some (e.g., Frawley), there does seem to be consensus that there were/are two distinct groups of peoples in India: the Aryans in the North (72%) and the Dravidians of the South (28%) (who may have migrated there in ancient times from the North). But there is question that the Aryans (and the Vedic tradition associated with them) actually originated outside of India.
The Aryan Invasion Theory:
As Ninad Jog puts it: “Hinduism was born out of a synthesis of Aryan and Dravidian cultures.”
According to general Indian legend, the Aryans arrived in north India somewhere from Iran and southern Russia at around 1500 BC. Before the Aryans, the Dravidian people resided in India. The Aryans disregarded the local cultures. They began conquering and taking control over regions in north India and at the same time pushed the local people southwards or towards the jungles and mountains in north India. According to this historical fact the general division of Indian society is made.
Daniel, Aharon; “Aryans and Dravidians - A controversial issue”
http://adaniel.tripod.com/aryans.htm
European scholars following Max Muller in the nineteenth century decided that the Vedic people whom they called the Aryans after a misinterpretation of that Vedic term - invaded India around 1500 BC. They were said to have overthrown the primitive and aboriginal culture of the time, which was thought to be Dravidian in nature, and brought a more advanced civilization to the land (though they themselves were still regarded as barbarians). The indigenous aborigines were identified as the Dasyus or inimical people mentioned in the Vedas.
Frawley David; "The Development of the Aryan Invasion
Idea" http://www.hindubooks.org/david_frawley/myth_aryan_invasion/the_development/page1.htm
Questioning the theory: This standard theory is, today, questioned and considered controversial:
- Were there really any so-called Aryans?
- If so, were they really invaders rather than indigenous peoples of India?
- As such, were the Vedic influences on Hinduism foreign or indigenous?
The counter-arguments to the standard theory tend to be posed by Hindus/Indians themselves. Such arguments are found on a number of Hindu/Indian Websites.
Dr. David Frawley (a Western convert to Hindu/Vedic Dharma, raised a Catholic) seems to be the most referenced critic encountered in my research.
These counter-arguments suggest that the theory is a fiction created by Western/European scholars to explain similarities amongst the Indo-European languages and to promote the superiority of Western culture (from where the Aryans are said to have come).
Dinesh Agrawal points out that “we have concrete history and archeology of a vast civilization of 'Dravidians' lasting thousands of years that left no literature, and a huge literature by the Vedic Aryans who left no history and no archaeological records. The situation gets more absurd when we consider that there is profuse archaeological and literary records indicating a substantial movement of Indian Aryans out of India into Iran and West Asia around 2000 BC.” He concludes that the “Aryan Invasion Theory” is a lie: “no invasion by nomadic hordes from outside India ever occurred and the civilization was not destroyed but the population simply moved to other areas, and developed a new syncretic civilization and culture by mutual interaction and exchange of ideas.”
Yet at least one Hindu source I located, while recognizing this as “a speculative theory” leaves open the possibility for a mixing of foreign and indigenous culture/religion: “Perhaps the ancient Persians, who had the Ahuras as the good ones and Daevas as the bad ones, were the Vedic Aryans on the west of Indus Valley who had wars in Indus Valley as in our Puranas!”
(“Is This the Real Ancient History of India?” http://www.bnaiyer.com/hinduism/hist-33.html)
Defending the theory:
A Professor M.M. Ninan in “AN OBJECTIVE CHRISTIAN RESPONSE TO HINDU PHILOSOPHICAL SYSTEMS”
(http://www.acns.com/~mm9n/hindu/ai/ai.htm) cites a Prof. Uthaya Naidu, discussing a series of Aryan invasions within India beginning in the Northwest around 1500 BCE and continuing further south until, by 600 BCE “the whole land of India from the Himalaya to Srilanka came under the control of the Aryans.” A connection is made between these historical events and the stories told in the Vedas and the great Indian epics (Ramayana and Mahabharata). However, professor Ninan, although apparently an Indian, strikes me as a questionable source as he is professor of Biblical and Apologetic studies and this work appears at a site dedicated to the promotion of Christian causes.
Indian native Ninad Jog also defends the Aryan Invasion Theory in his 1999 essay “The Aryan Influx into India: Debunking the Myth of India as the Aryan Origin Point”
(http://www.wam.umd.edu/~ninad/assorted/Aryans.html) Apparently in his mid to late 30s, Jog does not claim or seem to have any special scholastic knowledge on the subject (his education in India and the USA is in the sciences). Jog concludes from his research into language origins not only that the Aryans originated outside of India but that the Dravidians (usually identified as indigenous to India) also entered India from the northwest predating the Aryans by some 5500 years! Jog contradicts Frawley’s observation that the southern Dravidians have an animosity to the northern Aryan culture.
Dinesh Agrawal argues against the Aryan Invasion
Theory by noting that there are no references in the Vedas (attributed to the
Aryans) of any "homeland" beyond India itself - taken as evidence
that the Aryans originated within India. However, we might explain this
lack of reference to a foreign homeland by comparison to ourselves as
"Americans". The Vedas were not written until hundreds of years after the Aryans would have entered India. By that time they
likely would have thought of themselves as Indians just as we think of ourselves as Americans, even though our ancestors are from other lands. And what became of the Native Americans is not unlike what became of the Native Indians - both native peoples were absorbed into what became the culture as influenced by the foreign "invaders" (we would hardly think of ourselves as "invaders" but I am sure that is what the Native Americans thought of our ancestors hundreds of years ago).
Our history is American history as the Aryan history is that of
India - even if neither we nor the Aryans can trace our ancestral heritage as
originating in the land we now call "home".
Conclusion:
While it is apparently unclear who the Aryans were or from where they originated, it is clear that there is heated debate on the issue from both sides of the argument. A precise answer to our question does not seem possible and, in fact, the question itself assumes something (an independent, foreign Aryan culture) that is itself in question.
One thing remains unquestioned: the Vedic tradition is, at least to some degree, associated with the Aryans and their existence (if not origin) is not questioned. In fact, we might conclude that the Aryans must have been a significant people and culture given that so many scholars – both European and Indian – want to claim them as their own!
Resources:
Patterson, Patrick; “India” (from Patrick Patterson's History Courses, Honolulu Community
College) http://www.hcc.hawaii.edu/~patrick/151/india.htm
Presents the standard theory most taught in Western colleges and presented in most Western texts on India
“The Aryan Invasion: theories, counter-theories and historical
significance” http://members.tripod.com/~INDIA_RESOURCE/aryan.html
this article seems to take a moderate position.
Frawley David; “The Myth of the Aryan Invasion of India“
http://www.hindunet.org/hindu_history/ancient/aryan/aryan_frawley.html
and related articles at http://www.hindunet.org/hindu_history/ancient/aryan/aryan_link.html
Frawley’s work is available at numerous other sites as well, including http://www.geocities.com/dipalsarvesh/aryan4.html
and summarized at http://www.hindubooks.org/david_frawley/myth_aryan_invasion/index.htm
Daniel, Aharon; “Aryans and Dravidians - A controversial issue”
http://adaniel.tripod.com/aryans.htm
[Daniel does not seem to offer his credentials] presents the standard theory (see above) but also suggests the theory may be flawed.
Agrawal, Dinesh; “My Turn: Aryan Invasion Theory”
http://www.hinduismtoday.com/archives/1996/7/1996-7-09.shtml
A lengthy piece that reviews the traditional theory and explores the “flaws” in the theory.
Jog, Ninad; (1999) “The Aryan Influx into India: Debunking the Myth of India as the Aryan Origin Point “
http://www.wam.umd.edu/~ninad/assorted/Aryans.html
Defends of the standard theory that the Aryans did, in fact, originate outside of India
Ninan, M.M.; “ARYAN INVASION AND EXPANSION IN INDIA”
http://www.acns.com/~mm9n/hindu/ai/ai.htm
(part of his online publication: AN OBJECTIVE CHRISTIAN RESPONSE TO HINDU PHILOSOPHICAL
SYSTEMS) Assumes without question that the Aryans originated outside of India
Hooker, Richard; (1996); Ancient India: The Aryans http://www.wsu.edu:8080/~dee/ANCINDIA/ARYANS.HTM
(Hooker is a professor of World Civilizations at Washington State University) Presents the Aryans as outsiders who may have “concurred” India initially, but ultimately mixed gradually with the indigenous cultures, transforming their own. “By 200 BC, this process of mixing and transforming was more or less complete and the culture we call "Indian" was fully formed.”
return to top
|