Why Hindutva hates Aryan Invasion Theory VIEWPOINT
Did the Aryans originate somewhere in Central Asia and migrate to (or invade) an already-settled India? Or, were they among the original settlers of the subcontinent? (The human species originated in Africa).
The “Aryan Invasion Theory” arose in the 19th century. Historians cited linguistic connections between Sanskrit and other IndoEuropean languages and visual physical similarities between North Indian and Central Asians. Other historians argued that the Aryans were original settlers.
DNA testing provides a very powerful tool. Studies based on mitochondrial DNA (which is passed down unchanged by a mother to her children and can provide a genetic chronology of maternal ancestry) didn’t provide much evidence either way. Now, a new study looking at Y-chromosome DNA (which is passed without much modification from father to son) suggests that the Aryans may have entered the subcontinent in predominantly male bands.
Y-chromosome DNA testing is a relatively new technology. A haplogroup is a set of genes inherited from a single parent. The haplogroups in Y-chromosome DNA can identify a single male line of descent. A lot of Indians – about 17.5 per cent, or one in six – have the R1 haplogroup, which is widely distributed across Eurasia. This R1 haplogroup appears earlier west of the subcontinent.
A key new study in is the multiauthor peer-reviewed paper “A genetic chronology for the Indian Subcontinent points to heavily sexbiased dispersals” (published in BioMed Central). It suggests male groups came into India relatively later, while maternal mitochondrial DNA indicates that female lines of Indian descent come from earlier settlers.
This would gel with the idea of invasion/migration initiated by male bands of warriors, who then settled and married into local populations. Earlier studies, including the ongoing Indian genome project, suggest that there has been a great intermingling of genes over the past few millennia. The genes of the ancestral south Indian group and the ancestral north Indian group started mixing several thousand years ago. Again, that is fairly consistent with waves of migration.
The conclusions of these studies are tentative and may well be refined, or changed, as the understanding of genetics improves. Indeed, ongoing studies mentioned in The Guardian (“Rakhigarhi: Indian town could unlock mystery of Indus civilization”) and TheUNZ Review (“The Dravidian Migration Theory Vindicated”) investigating Indus Valley DNA could even indicate that Dravidians were also invaders/migrants and not original settlers.
Similar research has taken place across the world. In most places, this sort of genetic detective work is considered arcana of special interest only to academics working in areas such as genetic research, archaeology and history. However, India has seen howls of protest from the Hindutva brigade at the thought that the “Aryan Invasion Theory” might be true.
Why should anybody outside that specialised band of academics care about the ancestry of Indians? On the surface it sounds really strange since most Indians would be hard put to name their great-grandparents. So, why would anybody care about interracial sexual arrangements of the dim-distant, prehistoric past?
Ancient Indians had little sense of history. Despite being superb mathematicians and making extremely accurate calculations of astronomical (and astrological) data, they did not bother to record history, or to create dating systems. The dating of Indian history really begins with Alexander’s invasion in 326 BCE because the Greeks did keep dated records. From then on, odd data points are provided by travellers such as Faxian (399-414 CE) and Xuanzang (7th century). The recording and maintaining of continuous dated records only started with the influx of Muslims in the seventh century. The Muslims kept meticulous records tied to the Hijrah (622) as base-date.
That word, “invasion” gives us a clue. In the toxic ideology of Hindutva, “invader” is often used as a code word to indicate Muslims. Christianity came to India circa 30CE with the apostle Thomas. But Christians are also called “outsiders” since they are followers of an “alien” religion, which did not originate in the subcontinent.
The “alienness” and “invader-ness” of minority religious groups is cited as ample and sufficient reason for communal hatred. The “justification” for such a majoritarian communal ideology will be badly diluted if it turns out that the “pure” Vedic Aryans and even the Dravidians were also invaders.