Readers Respond: I disagree (or agree) with the article on Aryan Invasion, because...

Responses: 115

By K. Kris Hirst, About.com Guide

See More About

(Continued from Page 5)

I remain skeptical about the theory because it smacks of early 20th century historical romanticism and racially-charged pseudo-histories. That said there are a few questions that need to be answered: where did the caste system originate from? and why does it seem inherently racist? is this evidence in favor of a fair-skinned invader?
—Guest Who cares?

Aryans never mentioned abt their supposed homeland in Central Asia in the Vedas, not even a trace ! The oldest Veda talks about a river which dried up in 2500 BC, how possibly could Aryans know abt it if they came in after 1400 BC ! There is no proof of any massacre by the so called invading aryans ! This invasion theory was postulated by colonial Europeans who just wouldn't accept that they were brothers of the ppl they enslaved. Period.
—Guest commonsense

This invasion theory is a racist and colonist propaganda created by the "biblical" invaders in India to dilute away the rich cultural and golden heritage of locals. As the new evidence suggests (Saraswati river valley civilization) an ancient culture existed much before the so called "invasion". So it's a lie to fit in the "biblical" superiority of europeans over native Indians with a superior culture and heritage
—Guest Niraj

The Aryan invasion is a myth, that was invented by the European coliniser of India. They did it for two reasons. One was that they could not logically explain the fact that Indians spoek a language linguitically related to Europeans. Secondly, in their bid to divide and conqueor India, it allowed them to make the North Indians feel superior. The Northerners obviously took the bait hook, line and sinker. In fact the North Indian are mixed race people, mixed with Persian, Mongols and who ever else colonised India. In fact it was the Southern Indians who are said to be the true keepers of actual Hindu tradition and rituals. Even the temples in the South are a lot older than the North. An in fact people from all over India come on pilgrimages to South India, as they believe the oldest Hindu rituals are only practised in the South. This was because unlike the North, the South had not been so easliy conquered and influenced by the invaders. Remember the North India's beloved Taj Mahal, has b
—Guest Nilesh

anything and everything is possiblemits in human's nature never to stay put.Invaders came to India too as they went anywhere else,so what?they mostly came by land and that was north India.And the natives always got pushed to south.The native Indians seemed Dark colored too.Remember when the landmass on this earth was just one piece,called Panjea(am i right?)so India broke away from Africa,hence the dark looks.now thats the way i think and it is a free world right????????????
—Guest guest whosoever

Of course there was Invasion, perhaps at first trade along the major travel routes. Route by water or land route by use of mounts. Horse-riding nomads, also had their horses trained to fight at their side. An Arab and his horse could fight as a team. The India horses were powerfull and warlike. Over history in all cultures everyone spreads their country to those weaker. Not so much today but still politics and religion try their best to "Invade" over others :)
—Guest Laura H.

How come the Hindu and Hitler's Swastikas have similarities and the Hindu cast-system clearly support the superiorty of one race over the other.
—Guest Shami

ok here wat happend and any one object should shut up. 1.the aryans very from iran thruth provided by historical evidence. 2. a different civilization in india aslo true. 3.The indus civilisation attacked by aryans true but they did not every reach past punjab india but however i could be wrong we have to wait until the uncode the writing of the indus to find the real story theories will be theories but the truth will came out!!!!!! the indus valley descendant most likely the pakistanis and indians should just be proud and not think of wat some stupid historian thinks (most cases they are all wrong hahaha) we r just so awesome
—Guest u dont know me

I DISAGREE THAT ARYANS INVADED INDIA BECAUSE IT IS IMPOSSIBLE FOR ANYBODY TO HAVE SUCH A CIVILIZATION WITHIN A SHORT TIME
—Guest ABHAYLAL

Aryan invasion in India is a totally artificially made up story. Aryans didn't invade Bharat,but went out of Bharat ,especially after the great flood around 3000 B.C. just after Mahabharata war and settled in different parts of world,especially "Europe". Aryans(also called Aryavat) were the original inhabitants of ancient India.Around 6000 B.C -5000B.C was the golden era of vedas.During this time there were many small kingdoms emerging ruled by Aryan kings.Hastinapur empire was the major oldest civilization which emerged around 3500 B.C ruled by king Bharat which is exactly how Bharat(also called Bharatvarsh) got its name which is India in English.The archeological evidence of Hastinapur still exists. The fact is that the Bharatvarsh is the world's oldest civilization.
—Guest Rakesh

I had read that Arya was ancient Iran and that the Aryan people were the ancestors of the Iranians as we know them today. I hadn't heard that Aryans were considered to be ancestors of the Germans, except that Nazis considered the Aryan race to be blond hair blue eyed people. That's the myth.
—Guest Heather

i agree with the theory that aryans invaded india before vedic times as a migrant people from else where and settled in northern most part of india because of the following points. 1. the colour of the northeners. 2.the language of northern belt 3.the various rituals/practices of northeners as compared to others. 4. the food habits. 5. the strong caste system until now practised/gothras as formulated during vedic times.
—Guest k.c.mukund

K. Kris Hirst
Archaeology Guide