Indus civilization: Scholarly blunders!
In the Nineteenth and beginning of twentieth century scholars were too hyped by the Aryan Invasion Theory and kept themselves busy in constructing cultural and linguistic history of Europe and Indian subcontinent based on the hypothesis of Indo-European Language group. Racist outcome of the Aryan theory did tremendous harm to the Europe. Indian scholars too jumped on the theory because it boosted superiority of certain class of Indian society. Though later on it was proved beyond doubt that the so-called Aryan race never existed, the shadows of this theory has marred the sociocultural history of India and even Europe.
Let us see here how the theory has been used and modified by deliberate misinterpretation in India from time to time to ultimately establish sociocultural dominance of Vedic people over others in India
1. Before scholars even knew about the existence of the Indus culture, in 19th century, it was assumed that Aryan’s, in groups, invaded Indus valley and settled in the region after defeating aboriginals like Das, Dasyu, Asur tribes and enslaved them. Various Rig Vedic verses mentioning some wars were handily taken as a proof to support invasion theory. The theory was well accepted by Indian scholars as well, especially Brahmin community, as it boosted their ego as the theory implied their historical invasion and superiority in warfare and culture.
2. Politically, present rulers, British too, being ancient Aryans per this theory, too theoretically became their blood brothers of ancient times. Social reformer like Vishnushastri Chiplunkar publicly reminded British of their ancient brotherhood. AIT thus helped British in tightening their rule through Brahmanical administrators, as so called local Aryans aka Brahmanical society was blood-linked to them.
3. Bal Gangadhar Tilak, president of the Indian National Congress, took so much so pains to scholarly pen down “Arctic Home in Veda’s” and “Orion” in support of AIT, proving the Aryan homeland being in Arctic regions. With Tilak, who was a national figure, accepting and propagating the theory, almost every Vedic scholar readily jumped into the bandwagon of the racial ego.
4. The non-Vedic masses were baffled at this shocking revelations. They were victimized of inferiority complex because the AIT theory implied how they were enslaved by the mighty invading Aryans thus causing their past and present status inferior in the society. Mahatma Jotirao Phule, a great pioneering social thinker of nineteenth century, used this theory to liberate masses from Brahmanical clutches. His argument was since invading Arya-Brahmins enslaved aboriginals, they being foreigners had no role whatsoever in aboriginal society of India and fought against the birth-based inequality that had been result of so-called victories of Aryans over the aboriginals.
The Aryan Invasion theory did tremendous social harm, as the caste conflict turned to be racial conflict, making it even bitter. Dravidian's demanded separate nation as they thought north Indians race and their languages being of Aryan origin when Dravidian race, culture and languages were independent of them. The strife has been violent sometimes. In a way society got divided between Aryans and Non-Aryans.
5. The supporters of AIT were baffled when the excavations at Indus valley brought forward an ancient civilization that was far developed, mature and widely spread. They did not know initially how to react to these findings.
But as usual scholars cunningly found their way out. They started proposing that those were invading Aryans who destroyed the cities after clearly defeating inhabitants of the Indus valley. To support this new hypothesis they again used some verses of Rig Veda’s, in which Indra is depicted as destroyer of the fortified cities.
But to prove this new founded hypothesis, they had to stretch back the timeline of Vedic period. Vedic period, till then, was widely accepted being 1500 to 1200 BC, but carbon dating had proved time of Indus Culture being as early as 3100 BC. Vedic scholars again readjusted time of Veda's to meet their requirement. This was another blunder committed.
But none of the Indus site could provide them with any slightest proof of violent wars taken place in or around the Indus settlements. Still the scholars believed in AIT and defeat of the Indus people at the hands of the invading mighty Aryan’s!
In all, to them AIT was true and most believable theory, keeping them busy in finding original home of the Aryans, either in Ural, Central Asia or on northern pole regions, but to no avail!
5. In later times, about middle of the last century, Aryan Invasion Theory became problematic, widely being denied on lack of any physical proof, staunch supporters of AIT again were confused. The new theory was proposed that, if AIT was not true then Aryans migration in waves would have taken place. There were lot many takers to this theory as well, but it didn't click for Indian nationalist scholars. What was special about Aryans if they just were migrated to India with their religion and culture? They wanted more spice to it to prove Aryan supremacy.
This was something not easy to digest. Superiority complex is a thing that does not die that easily. Nationalist scholars like Shrikant Talageri came forward with a theory to prove that the Aryans did not invade or migrate to India, rather they migrated in branches towards Iran and Europe from Punjab. Thus trying to prove the Aryans were indigenous and not foreigners. The problem before Out of India theorists was the location of Saraswati river that has been abundantly praised in Rig Veda. Unless the location of Saraswati was fixed out of India theory had no ground to stand upon.
Ghaggar-Hakra, now a monsoonal river, came to their rescue. Vehemently they started arguing that the Ghaggar-Hakra was known as Saraswati to ancient Aryans. Ghaggar-Hakra has been widely researched on every geological and glaciological grounds since last fifty years.
It is a fact that the river used to be live in remote past when the climate was wet five thousand years ago. The scientific proofs also show that it never was a glacier-fed river. This fact goes against Rig Vedic description of the Saraswati as Vedic Saraswati originates from Himalayan mountains!
But neglecting this, nationalist scholars renamed the Ghaggar as Saraswati, and now are demanding that instead of Indus culture, it should be named as Saraswati culture!
Other blunder was brewing. The efforts for proving Ghaggar as Saraswati had a reason! There are over 1000 Harappan settlements so far are found across the banks of Ghaggar! They could not miss any opportunity to prove that the progenitors of Indus (Harappan) civilization were none but Vedic Aryans!
And what were the proofs?
1) Ghaggar being claimed as ancient lost river Saraswati.
2) Fire pits found at the two settlements out of over 2500 Harappan settlements!
There is no concrete proof that Ghaggar was ever ancient Saraswati. All the Vedic and Geological proofs go against this notion. The fire pits were tried to connect with the Vedic sacrificial altars by Dr. S. R. Rao and Dr. M. K. Dhavalikar. The insufficient logic employed was, when sacrificial fire altars are found in Indus valley culture, it must have been founded by the Vedic people.
Now, if you look carefully at the remains of the so-called altars, they are circular or oblong shaped pits, except one rectangular situated at the corner of the wall.
But let’s first understand the construction of the fire altars used for sacrificial purpose by the Vedic people, as explained carefully in Brahmanical texts. They were either rectangular or square…but none are described as being circular or oblong. Constructing fire altar had always been a special ritualistic science followed very carefully by Vedic people. Also sacred fire altars could not be so close to each other making it impossible to the performers of the sacrificial ritual to sit around the altars to conduct variety of ritualistic activity. In sacrificial fire (Yajna) each direction has its own function and relevance in the process. Most importantly sacrificial altars were no permanent structures and fire sacrifices were taking place in temporary pavilions, not within the closed walls of the home and as congested as we see in the photo.
Hence the fire pits those have been found at two sites at any case cannot be sacrificial fire altars!
Then what are those remains?
They are simply fire pits called “Tandur Bhatti”, ( Earthen Oven) abundantly in use even today to roast meat and bread! Many scholars admit to the fact that the fire pits were none but earthen ovens.
This is how a theory is created to anyhow prove superiority of Vedic people by misinterpreting the facts while constantly propagating the pseudo-science for stealing the credit of Indus civilization!
As we have observed how they have misused every theory, AIT or AMT, to prove Vedic Aryan superiority. While doing so they neglected the thousands of other proofs those were contrary to their theories, such as Indus trade, seals, script, Pashupati, forms of Shaivait worship practices, the script, use of cotton cloth, art of weaving cotton etc. which does not find a slightest mention in Rig Veda!
They even neglected the Vedic texts where it is mentioned that Saraswati was flowing between Yamuna and Satlej rivers. The geological proofs show that before Ghaggar dried up Satlej and yamuna used to be tributaries to the Ghaggar, confluence taking place at the upper part of the course, as evidenced by satellite images. Considering this fact the Rig Vedic description itself falsifies the Ghaggar = Saraswati equation, as historically Ghaggar never was a glacial fed river, but monsoon fed small river. Not a mighty river as Rig Vedic verses describe.
Finds of only two fire pits and assuming Ghaggar was the lost river Saraswati, they build a hoax! To claim Ghaggar being the lost river Saraswati they misused and conveniently misinterpreted the geographical proofs!
We, in brief, have seen how a blunder after blunder has been committed by the scholars in an order to keep supremacy of their so-called Vedic religion or caste. We have to see the history with unbiased vision and accept the facts. But....