Hinduism in India: Originated From Steppes
Archeologists from Russia are claiming that they have identified about 20 “spiral shaped” settlements, which are believed to be 4000 years old in a remote part of Southern Siberia (bordering Kazakhstan). The Russians knew about these settlements for about 20 years. This information was revealed by historian Bettany Hughes on the BBC program “Tracking the Aryans”.
Items dug up from these Bronze Age sites include a chariot, pottery and make-up equipment. Some of the items were daubed in Swastikas which can be a symbol for the sun. Equally importantly evidence of horse sacrifice and burial were found at these sites as well. These sites have been described in the media as “ancient Aryan settlements”.
The term Aryan and the Swastikas that they are associated with are highly controversial in nature particularly in the West. In India most of us are familiar with the Aryan Invasion Theory (AIT). There are a lot of Indians including historians who believe the AIT is true and others who believe that this theory is a creation of the European colonizers.
Those who disagree with the AIT believe that the Europeans came up with this theory to explain advanced civilizations, languages and scriptures in places like India that was outside what they considered to be the civilized world. But this argument has holes. DNA analysis of people in India clearly shows that some of our ancestors migrated from places like Southern Russia and parts of Ukraine fairly recently (a few thousand years) as compared to others whose ancestors were in India almost 60,000 years ago.
We also now know that the languages spoken in India belong to very different language “families”. One of the language groups known as the Indo-European language family is believed to have originated from Central Asia, Southern Russia or Ukraine. The exact origin of the Proto Indo-European (PIE) language is subject to debate. But very few experts believe that they originated in India. Sanskrit is an Indo-European language. The question is who introduced Sanskrit or the roots of Sanskrit to India. Is it the Indo-European migrants?
Answering the question of precisely when these migrants arrived in the Western and Northwestern parts of India is the key to resolving another hotly debated subject. Was the Indus Valley Civilization a civilization of the incoming European migrants or was it a Dravidian civilization representing the older inhabitants of India? If it was Dravidian did the civilization end because of the migration of the Indo-Europeans? The answer is we do not know. Hopefully we will know more once the Indus Valley script is deciphered.
Then there is a subject that many Indians do not want to discuss. Assuming that the DNA evidence about human migration into India is valid (there is no reason to believe otherwise) and assuming that the origins of Sanskrit and the other Indo-European languages lie outside of India, the question is who wrote the classic “Indian” literary works like the Vedas and the Upanishads? Are these scriptures the works of those whose ancestors were in India for a long period of time, the work of those who were recent immigrants or are these works written outside of the “Indian” context?
Language is a very important tool when it comes to propagating a culture. The reality is that we know very little if any about the authors of the Vedas (not the people who documented it finally but those who created it initially). The period from 1500 BCE to 500 BCE is traditionally known as the Vedic period. It is believed that the Vedas were transmitted orally for most of this period and then written down towards the end of this period. The fact that the Vedas were transmitted orally in Sanskrit and then written down in Sanskrit (Vedic Sanskrit which is now dead) is a strong indicator that the creators were Indo-Europeans.
Ashva is the Sanskrit word for the horse and there are numerous references to it in the Vedas. The Rigveda (one of the oldest documents within the Indo-European language family) has many scenes involving the horse and the chariot. It is interesting to note that many believe that the horse was domesticated around 4000 years ago in the Steppes where the “Aryans” are from (horse remains along with chariots have been found in the graves of the Sintashta and Petrovka cultures in the Ural mountains).
The Rigveda in general portrays a transient semi-nomadic life. It is possible that the Rig Veda was created before the migrants from the steppes reached the plains of India. This would mean that the other three Vedas and ancillary texts were written in an Indian setting or context.
In Vedic India the greatest sacrifice is the horse sacrifice. Rigveda has descriptions of horse sacrifice. Ashvamedha (horse sacrifice) is described in detail in the Yajurveda and the Shatapatha Brahmana (the ritual also involves a symbolic mating of the queen with the sacrificed horse. Such traditions are found in other places where these steppe migrants went. There is an “Irish ritual of enthronement” where the King is coupled (ritual) with the mare!!). Many Indian experts have tried to distance themselves from the sacrifices mentioned in the Vedas by blaming the interpreters and their interpretations.
As with all scriptures the Vedas and Upanishads also have contradictory information. There are many verses that indicate that sacrificing the horse or the cow should not be carried out. But this is very likely a reaction to the rising popularity and growth of Buddhism which was preaching non-violence towards all forms of living organisms. It is very possible that the priests of the Vedic religion became “vegetarians” over a period of time in order to ensure the survival of their religion.
The discoveries in places like Russia is confirming what many linguistic and DNA experts already knew. A group of people from the Steppes domesticated the horses and migrated to different parts of the world. They carried their culture, language and mythologies wherever they went. Elements of what we call Hinduism was created by people whose ancestors were members of these groups.
Related posts:
- Hinduism: Myth vs. Reality
- Tamil is Part of Indian Heritage
- History of India: The First Indians
- Indian Culture Includes Western Culture
- Thirumala Venkateswara Temple: From Buddhism to Hinduism
Category: Culture & Religion
I’ve always felt that what we are is more important than what we were. For example, Buddhism originated in India, but flowered to its fullest outside India. So who has a “claim” to it (if any such word can be used)? If anyone does, it’s the Chinese.
It doesn’t matter where we came from. Where we are now is what matters. Suppose we discover that life came to earth from a meteor, does that make us less proud of the planet we live on today? I don’t think so…
Good point Bhagwad. But to many who are religiously inclined what we were is more important than what we are today.
Actually none of the countries are what they were initially…even modern countries, example the UK are migrants from Central Europe and their language English is a mix of the languages of the migrants, their religion traveled across the Mediterranean to become their acquired faith…modern USA has no history beyond its discovery other than the Red Indian history which was quite conveniently squashed.
India is no different, but very different because she was a ancient rich and bountiful civilization into which many cultures merged to create a diverse and colourful mosaic…she has every religion on Earth and people from every corner of the Earth…all still able to maintain their cultural identity with pride. The very fact that India accepted other cultures and religions shows the maturity of her civilization.
Talking about UK, a few days ago Britain finally recognized “Druids” as a religion. Druid was one of the religions practiced in the British Isles before it was invaded by the Romans. India has a similar history. Many religions came in and was adopted by Indians and I believe aspects of Hinduism is one of them.
Well, who ever wrote this, need to have/go through more knowledge/wisdom before giving such stupid assumption of their thoughts over here.
Please….
Anyway, if this was given to get more knowledge, do post a mail to know the facts…I’d be happy to let you know in detail ok..
Thank You
Wishes
Shiva,
If you have something to say that can contribute to this conversation then do it. If you do not then just move on. No one is willing to give you the benefit of the doubt that you know something unless you are willing to prove it.
hari,
I do not think your argument is of any latest. The argument that the Indian civilization is foreign-born has been in circulation for a long time not only in India but across the globe. It came into existence as per my knowledge since the 18 th century creation of a new world history by the European colonists.
since that history creation was based on racist ground it was later on attacked by and defeated all over the world except in India.
Due to its vastness all that I have learned about it cannot be included in a comment.
However, one of your hypothesis is that Sanskrit is an Indo-European language. But this argument was also discarded as a deliberate colonial fabrication. in the following link you can read how this fabrication is dispelled.
http://www.datanumeric.com/dravidian/index.html
The support for this argument is still sustained in India because of the Hinduthva movement which in my understanding is based on foreign ideologies.
I cannot write more on that in this comment. perhaps I try later.
Prasanna,
Welcome. I did not suggest in my article that my arguments are new nor did I suggest that Indian civilization is foreign born.
Whatever the Europeans did or said is sort of irrelevant to this discussion at this point. DNA analysis done on Indians living in India today by reputed organizations like National Geographic (Genographic Project), Harvard University and prestigious Indian institutions like Center for Cellular and Molecular Biology have confirmed that there are many migrations into India (directly from Africa initially and from other parts of the world much later). One such group migrated to India fairly recently (a few thousand years) from the steppes. We can keep denying all we want but it is in our DNA!!
Any individual who migrates takes their food, culture, religious beliefs etc. along with them. The question is what did these central Asians bring with them to India? Are some aspects of the religions and rituals mentioned in the ancient Sanskrit documents a creation of individuals whose ancestors are from the steppes? Vedic religions are a tiny aspect of what we call as “Hinduism” today. “Hinduism” is also not synonymous with “Indian Civilization”. So let us not confuse these terms.
I am not sure how you came to the conclusion that the argument that Sanskrit is an Indo-European language “was also discarded as a deliberate colonial fabrication. In the following link you can read how this fabrication is dispelled”? When was this concept discarded? The latest language journals and books still subscribe to this theory. I read the article that you pointed out. The author seems to be suggesting that Sanskrit is a Dravidian language!! The author is clearly in the minority as far as believing that Sanskrit is a Dravidian language. The vast majority of language experts all over the world including Indians clearly believe that Sanskrit is an Indo-European language.
“Hindutva is a movement based on foreign ideologies”? Somehow I am not surprised that you are blaming the foreigners for this too.
Please do elaborate more on your theories when you have the time :)
Hari you should be proud that you are following a religion of foreign origin.A religion which came up where your white masters live.Good for you!Isnt it?But please read some of the works of your foreign masters, like Leo Tolstoy [Letter to a Hindu],Arthur Schopenuer,Kant etc.May be you would understand better if it comes through your white masters.
However the best would be Margaret Noble’s works[Sister Nibedita] or Sister Christine’s works.If you donot find them please let me know.
Sumit,
In a previous comment (Nobel Prize for Liu) you referred to India as a “beggar nation” and praised China. You also said that our first Prime Minister (Nehru) was a “British agent”. Now you are suggesting that a fellow Indian like me has “white masters” and “foreign masters” all because I have a different opinion than you on some aspects of Hinduism. You do not think individuals like me are capable of looking at information and coming to our own independent conclusions.
Your ideologies and beliefs have taken you to the very fringe of society. You need to rethink where you are headed.
wow…we all descended from the Russians! Nowadays people think anything they believe is true has to be true. You could even link swedes to the negros! What stupidity.
I wonder why we dont look more like the russians though. Why do we not have red hair and blue eyes? And why do all Indians look less like anyone else in the entire world? You can look at a guy and immediately say he’s from the Indian subcontinent. We do have peculiar features. If we were from elsewhere then there has to be some other region where the people look exactly like us?
The AIT is a dead horse that pseudo historians like the author of the article here want to desperately keep alive. There isnt an ounce of reliable DNA evidence for the AIT that the author here proudly claims. I wonder why such a stupid theory even receives any credence at all?
If anyone wants to know the truth then please look into Dr.David Frawley’s findings from his decades of indepth research into the subject. Stop relying on such misinformed people as the writer of this blog.
Ananth,
You state “And why do all Indians look less like anyone else in the entire world? You can look at a guy and immediately say he’s from the Indian subcontinent. We do have peculiar features.” Can you tell me one “peculiar feature” that an “Indian” has that no one else has? Statements like these tells me that you are not aware of the tremendous diversity that is there in India.
You tell us not to believe genetic studies done by very many universities and research labs in the world (including from India) that clearly shows that human beings migrated from Africa and populated the earth. Do you have any evidence that suggests that these studies are wrong or are you trying to caste doubt because DNA contradicts your beliefs?
The fact is that human beings from many different parts of the world (including from the Steppes) migrated to India. They carried many of their traditions, cuisine, religion etc. with them wherever they went. Whether these migrants from the Steppes are the Aryans that scriptures like the Vedas talk about is debatable.
I’m not sure why you mention the out-of-Africa theory here (btw this theory is still very much in the realm of speculation and there are many scientists that still find fault with it). You know I’m talking specifically about the so-called Aryan invasion and in particular about this peculiarly dubious theory of their Russian origins!
My point is that the people of North India (I’m Tamilian myself) don’t look like anyone else in the whole wide world. Certainly not like the Russians or even the Europeans. Have you seen one blonde or red-haired Indian? There are no cultural similarities either and nor are there similarities in accents, food habits etc. Infact, you gimme a group of people hailing from various regions and I’ll pick out the North Indian (this includes Pakistanis, Afghans etc.) among them with 99% accuracy. I leave out the 1% coz there are some exceptions. But then, to obsess with the exceptions and ignore the rule is retarded.
Maybe we all originated from the same people but if the migration to India happened only a few thousand years ago, why would the North Indians suddenly turn so different from Europeans/Russians and so on? Maybe there are similarities with skull structure etc but that’s about it and that could have easily been the result of migrations millions of years ago.
There is indeed enough diversity among North Indians too. But there is still a definite common strain even within this diversity and this could only have resulted due to several thousands of years of intermingling.
The Indian subcontinent has always been a land that welcomes guests with respect and genuine love and allows foreign cultures to seamlessly assimilate with the culture of the land. Why is it not possible that this was what probably happened? Why do you have to assume Sanskrit originated outside the subcontinent? After all, there is no single mention in the entire wide array of Sanskrit literature of any place outside of the sub-continent. Were the mythical Aryans struck by a sudden attack of amnesia? Sanskrit and the The Vedas were unheard of to the European world before British occupation. AIT just leaves too many questions unanswered.
Swami Vivekananda has made some witty remarks on the AIT and they come to mind here:
“Our archaeologists’ dreams of India being full of dark-eyed aborigines, and the bright Aryans came from – the Lord knows where. According to some, they came from Central Tibet; others will have it that they came from Central Asia. There are patriotic Englishmen who think that the Aryans were all red haired. Others, according to their idea, think that they were all black-haired. If the writer happens to be a black-haired man, the Aryans were all black-haired. Of late, there was an attempt made to prove that the Aryans lived on Swiss lake. I should not be sorry if they had been all drowned there, theory and all. Some say now that they lived at the North Pole. Lord bless the Aryans and their habitations! As for as the truth of these theories, there is notone word in our scriptures, not one, to prove that the Aryans came from anywhere outside of India, and in ancient India was included Afghanistan. There it ends…”
“And the theory that the Shudra caste were all non-Aryans and they were a multitude, is equally illogical and irrational. It could not have been possible in those days that a few Aryans settled and lived there with a hundred thousand slaves at their command. The slaves would have eaten them up, made chutney of them in five minutes. The only explanation is to be found in the Mahabharat, which says that in the beginning of the Satya Yoga there was only one caste, the Brahmins, and then by differences of occupations they went on dividing themselves into different castes, and that is the only true and rational explanation that has been given. And in the coming Satya Yuga all other castes will have to go back to the same condition.”
Ananth,
I will conclude our conversation by stating the following:
The out of Africa human migration theory is a fact. I have written an article about the DNA analysis that I did that shows that my ancestors arrived in India fairly recently from Central Asia. This study was conducted by the National Geographic (Genographic Project). In the past 10 years many similar studies have confirmed this find. The National Georgraphic project received full approval from many prestigious scientific institutions and universities all over the world including those in India.
The DNA findings clearly indicate recent migration to India from the Steppes. There are also similarities between the languages spoken by people who migrated from the Steppes to places like India. These languages are called the Indo European languages and Sanskrit is one of them. These Indo European languages are different from Dravidian languages like Tamil. We also cannot ignore the strong cultural and linguistic similarities between the Rig Veda and the Iranian Avesta (sacred texts of the Zoroastrianism)). The Zoroastrian god Mitra is also a god of the Veda.
I can choose to believe in the direction that many different branches of science is pointing to or I can follow your statement that “Infact, you gimme a group of people hailing from various regions and I’ll pick out the North Indian (this includes Pakistanis, Afghans etc.) among them with 99% accuracy. I leave out the 1% coz there are some exceptions”. What you speak of is not objective science but stereotyping.
May I add something from the Central-European (definitely not British) point of view? I have a few Indian friends that told me I looked just like Indian, though there have been no migrants from Asia (nor Romani)in my family for generations. I have kind of round face, dark straight hair. Actually my eyes are blue, but it’s just like with Aishwarya Rai, isn’t it? Actually in my hometown – Poland, you can find any hair and eye colour, just as in Russia, Germany or France. You can tell somebody is from the Eastern Europe because of the wide cheekbones (actually Aishwarya would not “stand out” that much here from this point of vue), while almost all native Scandinavians (=people from the North) are blue eyed blondes while Spaniards, Italians, Greeks and Portuguese are virtually all dark-eyed and dark-haired. Red hair is something really rare anywhere but somewhat associated with Celtic nations (so it is a pride of Ireland for instance). By no means are most Russians red-haired;)
And just a short lesson of Polish (as we learn at school – an indo-european language, related to Russian): “piec” (with Polish diacriticals I cannot use here…) pronounced [pench] means five, “wiedza” [vyetza] is wisdom/knowledge, “ogien” [oghyen] is fire, “wies” [vyesh'] is rural village. “Warunek” [varuneck] is a condition and “mir” [meer] is an ancient word for peace. I know that God in Lithuanian is “Viespati”…
I think it is pretty possible and probable we are all far cousins, and what’s wrong with that? Even with the AIT Indian culture is about two thousend years older than the British…
There is nothing wrong with what you stated. As Margaret Mead once said “Always remember that you are absolutely unique. Just like everyone else“.
Perhaps I should give a clearer conclusion. I know what I am writing is not “scholarly”, I’m just explaining a European common sense view of the topic. It is no surprise you won’t find native Indian blondes because features like pale skin and blond hair won’t be very practical for those who need to spend several hours under the tropical sun unprotected – at best they would not look very atractive afterwards. That was pretty important a few thousand years ago.
If you would like to know what kind of look I was writing about, you can check out some Polish born actresses: Isabella Scorupco or Kalina Jedrusik. Or try to compare Preity Zinta and Kasia Cichopek (this is not to tell you the latter would be just as beautiful;) )
Kasia … I think we are trying to pay too much attention to the looks. There are millions of people in India (and for that matter in the Middle East and North Africa) who have “pale skin”. There are many people in Pakistan/Afghanistan who have blue eyes.
I think that we should stick to what DNA is pointing towards.
As i am very much interested in these theories i read what ever materials i access.i agree with mr.hari as it is more scientific and logical.mr.ananth’s comments are not rational but desperate bursts of a conservative indian.mr.ananth’s argument that all indians look alike is not based on the wide knowledge of indian races.i do not know whether he has seen ‘chitpaavanas’,goud saraswatas,and havyakas(these are various brahmin sects)in the south itself,kasmiri pundits, rajaputs and for that matter even many punjabis have (may not all of them for obvious reasons)much resemblance to european race.i have got enough material(not my own but rendered by many scholars including many Indian scholars to show that even in vedas especially,in rig veda there are references to different geographic regions and the gods of yester years.more and more scientific evidences are opening up even in the area of history and we must open our mind to such concrete proof.i will write in detail regarding this matter.i am not a scholar either in history or in religion but an open minded skeptic.any way,healthy discussion on these matters is always welcome.
Welcome Aaditya and thank you for your feedback.
You are grossly wrong…Seems you have no idea of the research done on this issue in the last 2 decades…This aryan invasion theory has no archeological proof, as of now….Genetics in fact suggests the other way- out of india migration. Grow up, the whole world has thrown this crap theory into dustbins : where dates were decided based on bilbical accounts by racist europeans:
[edit]
My suggestion: Before posting stuff on any issue, please read and research well, other wise you will be a laughing stock. (sorry for being blunt!)
Neil,
The only laughing stock are those individuals who still believe in outdated theories like “out of India migration theory”. I have clearly stated in the article and my comments that the “Aryan invasion theory” is debatable. But what is quite clear now is that in our recent past people from Central Asia/Russia have migrated to places like India. This is in our DNA. If you want more information go to “Genographic Project” site of National Geographic.
“Any fool can criticize, condemn and complain and most fools do” – Benjamin Franklin
Aryans are origin in India and they are here many many thousands of years here.
By archeology,we can get details upto 10,000 years or more. Aryans migrated out of India and for which very clear details in Rigveda.
We have also very clear details from clay tablet excavated outside India.
Here is the details.
In a treaty between the Hittites and the Mitanni, Indic deities Mitra, Varun. a, Indra, and N¹asatya (Asvins) are invoked. A clay text by a Mitannian named Kikkuli uses words such as aika (eka, one), tera (tri, three), panza (panca,¯ve), satta (sapta, seven), na (nava, nine), vartana (vartana, round). Another text has babru (babhru, brown), parita (palita, grey), and pinkara (pi _ ngala, red). Their chief festival was the celebration of visuva (solstice) very much like in India. It is not only the kings who had Sanskrit names; a large number of other Sanskrit names have been unearthed in the records from the area.
But is this language Indo-Iranian, Iranian or Indo-Aryan or to rephrase: did the Mittanis speak the PIE branch of India.That matter was settled in 1960 by Paul Thime
There are several reasons, but to be brief, I shall only give three: 1. the deities Indra,Mitra, Varun.a, and Nasatya are Indian deities and not Iranian ones, because in Iran Varun.a is unknown and Indra and Nasatya appear as demons; 2. the name Vasukhani makes sense in Sanskrit as a “mine of wealth” whereas in Iranian it means “good mine” which is much less likely; 3. satta, or sapta, for seven, rather than the Iranian word hapta, where the initial `s’ has been changed to `h’
According to H. Jacobi (who believed that the Mittanis came from India), since the worship of Vedic deities was happening in 14th century Mittani kingdom, it would have happened in India much earlier. Jamna Das Akhtar and P.E.Dumont thought that the dates were even earlier.
In fact there are many arguments in support of.Archaeologists have not found Central Asian, Eastern European or Caucasian culture in the Mittani kingdom. At the time same time they found the peacock motif – something which could have come from India. Based on this Burchard Brentjes argued that Indo-Aryans were settled in the Near East much before 1600 B.C.E.With all the trading relations between various parts of India and the Near East, dating as far back as 4000 BCE with the find of cotton in Dhuwelia and carnelian bead in Mesopotamia in the third millennium BCE, the migration of Indo-Aryans is not a fantasy tale.
Here,some evil western scholars ask us to believe that those Aryans on the way to India.If it is the case,how those Aryans use their emblem as Peacock very particular to India only.
How they celebrate a festivel which peculiar to India.I have given expert opinion also here.
How they have the name like Dasaratha which other Aryans like Persians not known using for.
Again,recent discovery of dried Saraswathi river as per Rigvedic details proves that the river dried in 1900BC,end of the Harappan era.
See,above details how fit with the clay tablet details outside India.It is proved drying of Saraswathi river forced Aryans to migrate in all directions.We see,near Turkey-Syria border Mittani Indo Aryans in 1700BC,200 years around from India to reach that place as Aryans moving as settlement.
It is no doubt those Mittanis were Harappans who had very close relation with Egyptian Pharaohs,in turn Pharaohs happened to be very ancient Solar dynasty Kings from India.That is why those Mittanis gave their daughters to Egyptian Pharaohs.
We can see those ancient Pyramid builders and Pharaohs of Egypt use to wear ‘U’ mark on their forehead.This is purely Vedic symbol.
True history is like this.But,evil minded western scholars knowingly repeat the lies many times to change as truth.
But,unfortunately,there are lot of Indians with little knowledge to believe those western lies
Aryan Invasion theory in India is the greatest fraud and fake story of last century.
Aryans Origins in India only
This is damn sure!
Rig Veda cannot be used as clinching evidence. There is a lot of debate among academics as to whether Rig Veda is written in the Indian context at all. DNA evidence of modern human beings all over the world and also linguistic evidence clearly points out to people from the Central Asian steppes migrating all over the world (these Indo-Europeans themselves a long time ago migrated to the Steppes from Africa).
You talk about similar sounding names to prove the Indian connection. You state “the deities Indra, Mitra, Varun.a, and Nasatya are Indian deities and not Iranian ones, because in Iran Varun.a is unknown and Indra and Nasatya appear as demons”. Actually Mitraism (worship of Mitra) was very common in the ancient world. The Romans called them Mysteries of Mithras and the Persians (modern day Iranians) call them Mithraism. So Mitra, Varuna and Indra were not exclusively Indian gods. Their compatriots are found in ancient Roman, Greek and Persian religions.
Indians like me want to find out the truth and not just believe in propaganda. So please stop being critical of “evil minded western scholars”. Indians like me are fully capable of looking at evidence and making rational judgments.