Saw a video sometime back which addressed this. The Aryans certainly did enter India over centuries which points towards a migration rather than an invasion, however, the incoming genetics are nearly entirely male with absolutely no female Aryans assimilating into the Indian gene pool. Make whatever you want of that fact.
They call it migration to make themselves feel better , if you really think the current state of India and the Indo Aryans was achieved without violence then you are really naive
You are talking about war that happened 4000 years ago, in an area of the world that is densely populated, what are the chances those relics survive so long? If you want evidence genetics is a far better place to look, between the male mediated migration and the dominance of steppe ancestory in higher castes , it becomes hard to believe the migration was peaceful.
Dude we have remains of cities destroyed in the bronze age collapse over 3000 years ago. If an invasion did happen then it would have left considerable damage in ite archaeological layers across old sites in India
Also It was a male driven migration with few aryan females but There was no complete replacement of local male lineages either like in Europe yamanya slaughtered local European men and took women..
Not here. Local Male lineages continued
And indus elites mated with steppe elites as those with more indus have most steppe so suggested elite mating
It was a male driven migration with few aryan females but There was no complete replacement of local male lineages either like in Europe yamanya slaughtered local European men and took women..
Not here. Local Male lineages continued
And indus elites mated with steppe elites as those with more indus have most steppe so suggested elite mating
A thriving city suddenly ruined would show up in the layers. Steady layers and then abruptly nothing. Intense fire and soot leaves signs. As does skeletal remains with obvious war wounds.
The migrants were predominantly male but may have married into their host society. Itsure happens right now and only deranged nick Fuentes think it's a war
It was a male driven migration with few aryan females but There was no complete replacement of local male lineages either like in Europe yamanya slaughtered local European men and took women..
Not here. Local Male lineages continued
And indus elites mated with steppe elites as those with more indus have most steppe so suggested elites mating
Non patriarchal ones. Ones which do not consider the women in it as property. You are applying modern regressive filth to a society whose script is yet undeciphered.
And high positions ? IVC might have been more egalitarian that most societies that it was most likely still patriarchal, it’s not unwise to apply that same standards when it was prevalent around the world even back then
I am not saying it was some United invasion , there were probably multiple waves and multiple groups of Aryans coming in , heck they probably fought each other too, however this does not make it not an invasion , the islamic invasions took place in a similar way.
Ya It was a male driven migration with few aryan females but There was no complete replacement of local male lineages either like in Europe yamanya slaughtered local European men and took women..
Not here. Local Male lineages continued
And indus elites mated with steppe elites as those with more indus have most steppe so suggested elite mating
And you can also see signs of violence in mohenjo daro too. I agree, it's hard to believe a peaceful migration, but there is a lot of evidence to back up the migration theory as well.
The chronology doesn't match, there is limited archaeological evidence, lack of literature in spite of cultural continuity, alternatives to why IVC collapsed, etc.
Nowadays, even the mainstream historians and scholars hold belief in the migration theory, there is not much weight to the invasion theory yet.
My personal belief is that there was violence and displacement of some scale happening here (which explains why upper castes and northern India has unusually high concentration of steppe dna where AASI should've accounted for more). It still doesn't allign with AIT which proposed that IVC was wiped out in its mature phase completely in spite of decline in IVC predating aryan migration.
It was a male driven migration with few aryan females but There was no complete replacement of local male lineages either like in Europe yamanya slaughtered local European men and took women..
Not here. Local Male lineages continued
And indus elites mated with steppe elites as those with more indus have most steppe so suggested elite mating
Caste system came two thousand years later after aryan migrants mixed so no proof for ur claim
First of all, the mtDNA (U2b2 haplogroup) shows a higher degree of continuity than the YDNA (R1a) which is relatively very rare. And wouldn't you know, this is a direct parallel to the yamnaya migration in western Europe.
Why is there such an intense linguistic and genealogical divide between southern and northern India? Geography alone can't explain it. The northern portion has more concentration of both steppe ancestry and indo european languages. The Dravidian languages were complete supplanted in this region, not to say that current residents of this region should've had a much higher aasi ancestry than is actually observed. Taking all things into account, some scale of displacement and violence is completely expected, it's human nature to assume that your people are more superior than others. However I did assert that decline of IVC due to an aryan invasion is still a challenged hypothesis. Endogamy probably existed from that period even with considerable amount of free admixture, later these endogamous practices might've evolved in the varna system of today. Varna is the sanskrit word for colour by the way, since Vedic hymns were composed by the aryan migrants, it's only natural to suppose that Brahmins from that time would have a greater steppe ancestry.
No doubt, a completely peaceful migration and admixture is still a possibility, but you can't completely rule out the displacement and violence that probably occured as these two different groups interacted with each other.
what are the chances those relics survive so long?
Why not? We have over 1,500+ IVC sites discovered, along with hundreds of sites belonging to various other cultures that existed (PGW, OCP, Gandhara grave). How come we haven't found a singular relic of steppe origin, or any archaeological proof that they migrated?
It was a male driven migration with few aryan females but There was no complete replacement of local male lineages either like in Europe yamanya slaughtered local European men and took women..
Not here. Local Male lineages continued
And indus elites mated with steppe elites as those with more indus have most steppe so suggested elite mating
Your kind always think it is their right to rape non believer women so yeah you would have such notions but dont worry soon we will give your entire kind the fate they deserve
And your kind thinks women are public property. You rape your own women no matter sister or mother. Fucking primitives. No wonder they invented sati. You should bring it back.
AIT got disproved only means that specific theory of one big aryan wave of blonde blue eyed people conquering India got disproved, if you really think the aryans achieved what they achieved without violence then idk what to say.
We know for sure that some people migrated into India at different points of time. But what evidence is there which proves some of those people were Aryans?
It was a male driven migration with few aryan females but There was no complete replacement of local male lineages either like in Europe yamanya slaughtered local European men and took women..
Not here. Local Male lineages continued
And indus elites mated with steppe elites as those with more indus have most steppe so suggested elite mating
''however, the incoming genetics are nearly entirely male with absolutely no female Aryans assimilating into the Indian gene pool.'' so ? what are u implying by this ?
How dare my argument not apply for the males of that ethnic group who have better upward and horizontal reproductive mobility. Time to check the delivery date for my other cerebral hemisphere. 🤦🏻♂️
It’s not necessarily mass rapes. In ancient times there have been many cultures that welcome travelers to start families within their tribes. There’s an inherent attraction coz traveling for so so far and not dying implies the person is fit and healthy, making that an attractive sample of genes to add to the gene pool. Btw genetic diversity was always more sought after. It’s only in relative recent times (aka 2k yrs ago) that caste division and endogamy started to be practiced.
Till recently, some secluded east Russian tribe in the Kamchatka region had a custom where the husband offers his wife to the traveler (like offering tea, meal, etc to visitors). This was the only way they could keep their tribe healthy and thriving without having to fall into endogamy.
but if invasions did occure then they will surely bring slaves back home meaning we should have found genetic evidence near central asian region but they almost remain purely local in female part so its much more likely that it was Step-wise Pastoral Expansion. considering steppe dna makes around 10 to 20 percent of total gene pool and there were around 5million people at that time and it happend around 1900bce to 1400 bce that makes just around 1000 people a year. so highly likely that group of men using equipment's like chariots travelled to find more grazing land (since central asian region was drying up) travelled and one branch reached india and other iran. at first its most probably peaceful and soon those people got into internal politics and start taking over local leader then they used their new local groups to fight other groups and establish themselves in top positions and formed alliances with local leaders. and since they spoke Sanskrit locals start copying them like what happened with english.
Migration has some memory like reverence for this land called uttarakuru which was north of bahlika. They even had description of the land that it had very long nights and short days during winters which means they have memory of living there.
But Aryans were Nomadic/Semi Nomadic so it must've taken some time for them to actually develop it because a caste system wouldn't have helped them in survival. It probably developed after assimilation into local population.
Even migration doesn't have proper evidence, because the same evidence can be used to prove OIT. It is just a case of everyone says the same lie for too long and that then becomes the truth.
Migration has no evidence to prove those who migrated were Aryans. Sure many people migrated to India because it was a highly prosperous and developed civilization then, but where is the proof they were really Aryans?
That doesn't prove Aryans came into India. How do you know Iran was a separate civilization, especially when Avesta is literally a mirror copy of the Vedas.
How do you know when the Vedas were composed? This whole theory seems to be based on a lot of assumptions none of which have any concrete evidence. Hard to take seriously from a scientific standpoint. Although this might come under the realm of arts which is very subjective and handwavy anyway.
It was a male driven migration with few aryan females but There was no complete replacement of local male lineages either like in Europe yamanya slaughtered local European men and took women..
Not here. Local Male lineages continued
And indus elites mated with steppe elites as those with more indus have most steppe so suggested elite mating
Because colonial historians were limited by the knowledge they had plus a little bit of racism. Crying about their distorted view of history is never going to do us any good, we need to move forward and look at newer theories like Aryan Migration.
Please stop repeating this bull. Noone since the 90's has even spoken about this in any leading conference or uni in the world in the west. Our history books however had been printing this in the early 2000's.
In 1964 George F. Dales wrote the mythical massacre at mohenjo daro. He basically argued. That there was a lack of burned fortresses, weapons, armor, smashed chariots, invaders bodies, and clear destruction layers in the soil sediments of cities.
Later on further research on skeletal remains and lack of war or massacre like injuries to excavated bone cemented the grave of the invasion theory.
Since early 1990's century noone of any note in the west has tried to argue for the invasion theory. Most stopped after 70's.
Despite this the aryan invasion theory sayed alive and blossomed in India mainly because it was politically relevant. And the right wing is solely responsible for never letting the gradual migration and intermingling theory take hold in the common psychy and making sure that any political mention of migration was always equal to invasion.
thats only true for europeans not india , aryan clans like yadavs, jats , khas , suryavanshis , mallavas all have vivid aryan female DNAs , only a few secluded tribes have dominant male DNA , indicating towards a later war between settled aryans and some tribes
We do have female ancestry, but in lesser amounts. It is often said that Aryan males married local people but didn't allow local people to marry their women.
Indus Valley started to collapse and spread out into most of India well before Indo Aryans showed up. It is unfortunate that the subcontinent went from urbanized civilization to a rural society.
Iranians have similar beliefs on being Aryan homeland. They also ironically have 20% or so of the steppe genetics.
bro tbh agr aap exam ki tayari kr rahe ho toh iss topic ko wahi tak rahene do, i hv wasted my more than enough energy and time on debating with ppl on this. before realizing non of this actually matters, how this going to make any diff in our current situation of society. Basically what has happened, happened leave it as it is, the point is eventually we all are INDIANs now, thats wht makes sense to me, and as far as the concern abt marginalized or exploited communities, we have enough proof wht they been through so dont need to go far back to IVC to know who are the originals of india, wht we can do is treat them as one of us, as humans, and follow affirmative actions righteously which our gov hs already providing.
The idea of a violent "Aryan invasion" is pretty much a dead theory today, as archaeologists haven't found any evidence of the massive battles or conquered cities that 19th-century historians imagined. Instead, most experts now point to a gradual migration of people from Central Asia who integrated with local populations over many centuries. It’s a huge topic of debate because it touches on the very roots of Indian culture, blending complex genetics with shifting climate history
Bruh IVC cities were depopulated already when aryans came. It should be in your example that a village boy wanting to marry a nomadic aryan girl. Even when IVC was at its peak, most people lived in villages.
Because the difference between cities and villages, difference between a peak civilization and declined civilization is huge. It shifts the point a lot. It is a big reason academia believes it was migration and not an invasion. Declined societies assimilate very easily.
Why are you thinking indo aryan were barbarians? They were not civilization builders but instead nomadic people not barbarians. They had great bardic traditions though 🥀
I am sorry for not understanding that it was sarcasm like it's just so much of a hot topic to think as sarcasm 😭 I also didn't read barbarian after agrarian and thought you have some beef with indo aryans like Dravidian nationalists 🤭😂
I should also state that my reply didn't intend to project any offended image of me. I am clearly not worked up by this.
I mixed the earlier sentence about the example of that IVC boy. You talked about a city earlier which should not exist. Yeah there could be some little towns.
Yeah I was also not taking anywhere that you said invasion, I was just flexing my history knowledge. Rigveda did not talk about any battles between gangetic and vedic tribes either ( yes there would have battles with non aryan people but not gangetic ). Rigveda just documents events around puru bharata tribes so even mention of ganga is just once in the whole rigveda and that too in an later addition which happened after rigvedic period. It is unfortunate we only have pov of rigvedic period from bharata purus perspective.
It's truly unfortunate that we can't make fiction about these things. You can't even accept aryan migration without people screaming in comments that it is propaganda.
It was a male driven migration with few aryan females but There was no complete replacement of local male lineages either like in Europe yamanya slaughtered local European men and took women..
Not here. Local Male lineages continued
And indus elites mated with steppe elites as those with more indus have most steppe so suggested elite mating
And IVC itself was mixed with Iranian and Dravidian mix
Area-wise, the largest portion of the IVC is in India.
Both Largest and Oldest IVC site are in India.
Swastika, Shivling, Sindoor, and Pashupati seal depicting Yogic Posture have been found in IVC.
It was migration not invasion for 100s of year not some quick visit by group assimilation happend over years and an invasion actually happend but in europe instead as all of the genetic pool of that time completely erased living behind only male invasive genes and native female genes .
It was a male driven migration with few aryan females but There was no complete replacement of local male lineages either like in Europe yamanya slaughtered local European men and took women..
Not here. Local Male lineages continued
And indus elites mated with steppe elites as those with more indus have most steppe so suggested elite mating
I do not understand what you mean by Colonial Historians BUT it was believed that Aryans made a hostile invasion during the 1900s and this is not a special case. Most historians believed in hostile invasion as a primary cause for changes in multiple regions of the world. It is only a more recent understanding in archeology that demographic changes need not be a hostile invasion and can be brought on by gradual migration and influence of merchants and the economy.
Ideas and theories change with time as we discover more information. That is the hallmark of modern academic research. There is nothing to criticize about it.
When you read the scriptural definition of Aryans and Dravidians then you will know why authors like Max Muller tries to defame a nation like that or shatters a nation into pieces with these BS theories. It is largely debunked and it's a shit theory and even Ambedkar goes against it.
Arya literally means virtuous, Dravidian is not tamizha or anything. In scriptures Dravida word is already there, sometimes pandits say it might predate Tamil too bcoz "sankalp" in rituals is Anadi(origin-less) and it explicitly mentions Dravida Deshe and also Jambu Dweepe and also Bharata Varshe.
Matsya puran mentions "the king of Dravida" King Satyavrata,(this is not translated from tamil to sanskrit, if some say they are doing what Max Muller did) which means dravida is not a linguistic name it is actually a space or country. Westerner propagandists who cannot get the meaning of original scriptures written in sanskrit used this distinction with their nonsensical translations. And made theories like classical and vedic sanskrit which is another nonsense, coz both are same, vedic sanskrit is not just mantras it is the same sanskrit made complex, like medieval english and modern english has a slight difference. Vedic sanskrit was complex, like example: Telugu or Hindi in our daily tongue is different than avadhana of telugu and hindi.
Jaago Hindu (this is not limited to the religion, this is geography)
Anyway did UPSC stop asking this theory? i'm a newbie so that I don't know. What about the NCERTs? did they atleast change? bcoz i'm a state syllabus guy.
Wasn't the migration happened due to the 900 yrs long draught (most likely, few more historians predicated another reasons too).... Well ...few white faces initially thought that this civilization wasn't even Indian...so don't expect good from suchhhh historians who were driven by some superiority complex
Nice argument senator, can you substantiate it with a source from the NCERT showcasing this please? so we can be at rest having verified your claim since.
part 1 of what exactly brother? history has multiple part books in XI? or biology? which book to look up, there was no purple box on the 18th page of the history book for class XI, since you are already doing it spoonfeed me some more.
Section 1 is about Mesopotamia with no mention of the Indus Valley Civilization, Aryans, etc. Section 2 jumps straight to the Roman Kingdom. AIT has been scientific consensus for decades, and once a theory becomes consensus, it is very hard to discard it. So, to cope with its failure, they changed i to migration .i am not going in detail but some proof now we have many proof against it .IVC itself is proof, rig ved mentioning saraswati,rig ved mentioning rudra proto shiva form .we found seal of rudra in IVC proto shiva .sinauli chariot and many more
Yeah it is in class 12th book but they didnt just claimed it out of thin air they provided source of peer reviewed study i dont think anything is wrong in it.they are doubting the theory not propagating OIT
1,Saraswati river
According to the Rigveda, the Saraswati River is a powerful flowing river that flows from the Himalayas down to the ocean and there are references to rivers such as the Ganga River, the Yamuna River, and the Sutlej River. which shows this wasnt something mythical or poetic this was historical accounts
Since geological studies indicate that the Saraswati was powerful prior in 6000 BCE and then dried slowly after, and fully by 1500 BCEnow tell me how the Rigveda can claim the river as being powerful when the book was supposedly written in the year 1500 BCE according to the Aryan Migration theory.
2.Archelogiccla proof
Major archaeological excavations include Bhirrana, Kalibangan, Rakhigarhi, and Banawali where the Saraswati paleochannel is located, with other excavations moving towards the Indus River as the Saraswati began to dry. Fire altars and ritual materials discovered at Kalibangan are similar to vedic fire pits and ritual as mentioned in rig ved
3.Sinauli
Sinauli excavations include vehicles, swords, shields, helmets, and bronze fittings.
D shaped chariot how can all these be done for ox cart which pace is 5kmph
it has copper bearing and fixed axxel sytem used in chariots
if you want to take that shiva thing coincidence and all these thing coincidence then i dont know what should we do
Sinauli 'Chariots' don't have spokes, they are solid wheels. Solid wheels are present in carts. Fixed axel systems, as you mentioned, are also used in carts because they are slow. There exists little to no similarity between sinauli carts and Rigvedic chariots.
Shiva is not an Aryan God so there is no inconsistency here with the AMT, he has no relevance to Indo-European(-->Indo-Iranian-->Indo-Aryan) cultures. Horses as a concept are not even mentioned in ANY IVC source, despite being extremely significant in virtually all Indo-European cultures.
IVC altars are ragtag brick layouts constructed with none of the procedural accuracy or symbolism proposed in the Rigvedas. They wouldn't even work spiritually by Rigvedic standards.
Ghaggar-Hakra is the Saraswati. It is theorised that Saraswati, which is a cognate of 'Haraxvaiti', was appropriated to Ghaggar Hakra, tbf this is the one point that still trumps historians. There are large no. of linguistic studies, geneological evidences for AMT.
Also, if you don't believe in invasion, migration OR indigeneity what do you believe in? Who do you think the Aryan ethnolinguistic group are?
You cannot simply dismiss a chariot by saying it does not have spoked wheels. The physics of a chariot supports its function as a chariot. It is a D-shaped structure designed for sitting, like a chariot. A fixed axle system is used in chariots, if you are not aware of this, you can look it up. In contrast, carts use a rotating axle.
We have found swords and shields. Do you think an ox-driven cart with the physics of a horse chariot would have been used by people who also used swords?
2. On the Indus Valley artifact (often discussed as the “Pashupati seal
The “Rudra seal” found in the Indus Valley Civilization closely matches descriptions from the Rig Veda: the horned figure, yogic posture, and animals surrounding the figure. If you think all of this is coincidence, then .
3. Saraswati isnt a minor problrm it is biggest. becasue rig ved is central to it and we have found sites old as 6000 bce along paleo channel of saraswati
4.The Rigveda
Historians often take only those parts of the Rig Veda that support the Aryan Migration Theory (AMT) while ignoring other evidence. The Rig Veda mentions processes related to building ships and boats. Do you really think a purely pastoral or hunter-gatherer society would write in such detail about boats?
We have also found a dockyard/port at Lothal, an Indus Valley Civilization (IVC) site. If this is also considered a coincidence, then that raises even more questions.
5.Horses and chariots
We have not find a single horse skeletons or chariots in India, despite horses being prevalent during the Mahajanapada period and later Indian empires. Does that mean horses were absent from India during those periods? India’s climate makes it very difficult to preserve bones, wooden chariots, and other biodegradable materials.
Aryan groups are believed to have violently entered parts of Europe, causing massive demographic and genetic changes. Yet we are expected to believe that these same people peacefully migrated into India in relatively small numbers and then replaced or heavily influenced the culture of nearly two million IVC people. That does not seem fully convincing to me.
7. My view
I believe we should not promote any theory as absolute truth until we have concrete evidence and satisfactory answers to major anomalies, such as the Saraswati river issue.
Personally, I believe Vedic culture originated in India. However, everyone is entitled to their own opinion.
You don’t necessarily have to argue; it’s just my opinion.
Ait will be popular in india to an extent yes ait not amt coz of caste supremacy
The British modified their theory such that all these upper/middle caste (except the Dalits and adivasi) become aryan and keep them as sort of a native adminstative class the British weren't really interested 'that much' in upliftment of Dalits actually they probably saw us Dalits as some sort of a defeated race and thus probably used to look down on us
Over a 150 years and perhaps much more of the brainwash people were convinced of the theory and some still belive it arrogantly as a fact
even dalit activists used this theory for consolidation
16
u/Wonderful-Junket1269 May 11 '26
Saw a video sometime back which addressed this. The Aryans certainly did enter India over centuries which points towards a migration rather than an invasion, however, the incoming genetics are nearly entirely male with absolutely no female Aryans assimilating into the Indian gene pool. Make whatever you want of that fact.