Read Online Hinduism: A Short History by Klaus K. Klostermaier - Free Book Online Page A
Authors: Klaus K. Klostermaier
Ads: Link
subjected and on which they imposed their culture and their religion.
A recent major work 7 offers “seventeen arguments: why the Āryan invasion never happened.” It may be worthwhile to summarize and analyze these briefly:
The Āryan invasion model is based on linguistic conjectures which are unjustified (and wrong). Languages develop much more slowly than assumed by nineteenth-century scholars. Speakers of Indo- European languages may have lived in Anatolia as early as 7000 B.C.E.
The supposed large-scale migrations of Āryan people in the second millennium B.C. first into Western Asia and then into northern India (by 1500 B.C.) cannot be maintained in view of the fact that the Hittites were in Anatolia already by 2200 B.C.E. and the Kassites and Mitanni had kings and dynasties by 1600 B.C.E.
There is no memory of an invasion or of large-scale migration in the records of Ancient India – neither in the Vedas, in Buddhist or Jain writings, nor in Tamil literature. The fauna and flora, the geography and the climate described in the
Ṛgveda
, are those of northern India.
There is a striking cultural continuity between the archeological artefacts of the Indus-Saraswatī civilization and subsequent Indian society and culture: a continuity of religious ideas, arts, crafts, architecture, and system of weights and measures.
The archeological finds of Mehrgarh of c.6500 B.C.E. (copper, cattle, barley) reveal a culture similar to that of the Vedic Indians. Contrary to former interpretations, the
Ṛgveda
shows not a nomadic but an urban culture
(puruṣa
, “man,” “person,” is derived from
pur vāsa
= town-dweller). 8
The Āryan invasion theory was based on the assumption that a nomadic people in possession of horses and chariots defeated an urban civilization that did not know horses, and that horses are depicted only from the middle of the second millennium onwards. Meanwhile archeological 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 B.C.E. have been found in Ukraina. Horse-drawn war chariots are not typical for nomadic breeders but for urban civilizations.
The racial diversity found in skeletons in the cities of the Indus civilization is the same as in today’s India; there is no evidence of the coming of a new race.
The
Ṛgveda
describes a river system in North India that is pre-1900 B.C.E. in the case of the Saraswatī river and pre-2600 B.C.E. in the case of the Drishadvati river. Vedic literature shows a population shift from the Saraswatī
(Ṛgveda)
to the Ganges (Brāhmaṇas and Purāṇas), also evidenced by archeological finds.
The astronomical references in the
Ṛgveda
are based on a Pleiades-Kṛttika (Taurean) calendar of c.2500 B.C.E. Vedic astronomy and mathematics were well-developed sciences (again, these are not features 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
XVI.19) reports that Aristobulos had seen thousands of villages and towns deserted because the Indus had changed its course.
The battles described in the
Ṛgveda
were not fought between invaders and natives but between people belonging to the same culture.
Excavations in Dwārakā have led to the discovery of a site larger than Mohenjodaro, dated c.1500 B.C., with architectural structures, use of iron, and a script halfway between Harappan and Brāhmī. Dwārakā has been associated with Krishna and the end of the Vedic period.
There is a continuity in the morphology of scripts: Harappan – Brahmi – Devanāgarī.
Vedic
ayas
, formerly translated as “iron,” probably meant copper or bronze. Iron was found in India before 1500 B.C.E. in Kashmir and Dwārakā.
The Purāṇic dynastic lists, with over 120 kings in one Vedic dynasty alone, fit well into the “new
A recent major work 7 offers “seventeen arguments: why the Āryan invasion never happened.” It may be worthwhile to summarize and analyze these briefly:
The Āryan invasion model is based on linguistic conjectures which are unjustified (and wrong). Languages develop much more slowly than assumed by nineteenth-century scholars. Speakers of Indo- European languages may have lived in Anatolia as early as 7000 B.C.E.
The supposed large-scale migrations of Āryan people in the second millennium B.C. first into Western Asia and then into northern India (by 1500 B.C.) cannot be maintained in view of the fact that the Hittites were in Anatolia already by 2200 B.C.E. and the Kassites and Mitanni had kings and dynasties by 1600 B.C.E.
There is no memory of an invasion or of large-scale migration in the records of Ancient India – neither in the Vedas, in Buddhist or Jain writings, nor in Tamil literature. The fauna and flora, the geography and the climate described in the
Ṛgveda
, are those of northern India.
There is a striking cultural continuity between the archeological artefacts of the Indus-Saraswatī civilization and subsequent Indian society and culture: a continuity of religious ideas, arts, crafts, architecture, and system of weights and measures.
The archeological finds of Mehrgarh of c.6500 B.C.E. (copper, cattle, barley) reveal a culture similar to that of the Vedic Indians. Contrary to former interpretations, the
Ṛgveda
shows not a nomadic but an urban culture
(puruṣa
, “man,” “person,” is derived from
pur vāsa
= town-dweller). 8
The Āryan invasion theory was based on the assumption that a nomadic people in possession of horses and chariots defeated an urban civilization that did not know horses, and that horses are depicted only from the middle of the second millennium onwards. Meanwhile archeological 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 B.C.E. have been found in Ukraina. Horse-drawn war chariots are not typical for nomadic breeders but for urban civilizations.
The racial diversity found in skeletons in the cities of the Indus civilization is the same as in today’s India; there is no evidence of the coming of a new race.
The
Ṛgveda
describes a river system in North India that is pre-1900 B.C.E. in the case of the Saraswatī river and pre-2600 B.C.E. in the case of the Drishadvati river. Vedic literature shows a population shift from the Saraswatī
(Ṛgveda)
to the Ganges (Brāhmaṇas and Purāṇas), also evidenced by archeological finds.
The astronomical references in the
Ṛgveda
are based on a Pleiades-Kṛttika (Taurean) calendar of c.2500 B.C.E. Vedic astronomy and mathematics were well-developed sciences (again, these are not features 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
XVI.19) reports that Aristobulos had seen thousands of villages and towns deserted because the Indus had changed its course.
The battles described in the
Ṛgveda
were not fought between invaders and natives but between people belonging to the same culture.
Excavations in Dwārakā have led to the discovery of a site larger than Mohenjodaro, dated c.1500 B.C., with architectural structures, use of iron, and a script halfway between Harappan and Brāhmī. Dwārakā has been associated with Krishna and the end of the Vedic period.
There is a continuity in the morphology of scripts: Harappan – Brahmi – Devanāgarī.
Vedic
ayas
, formerly translated as “iron,” probably meant copper or bronze. Iron was found in India before 1500 B.C.E. in Kashmir and Dwārakā.
The Purāṇic dynastic lists, with over 120 kings in one Vedic dynasty alone, fit well into the “new
Similar Books
