The Problem Of Aryan Origins

FOREWORD TO THE SECOND EDITION

It is a matter of some satisfaction that a second edition can be hazarded of a book which flew in the face of historical orthodoxy on several counts.

A dogma which seems to be fast fading among a number of archaeologists is that Aryan invaders had a prominent hand in destroying the Harrappā Culture of the ancient Indus Valley. But the dogma that the Aryans of the Rigveda came into this Valley from outside India around the middle of the second millennium B.C. still dies hard. And naturally then the "heresy" that the Rigvedics preceded the Harappā Culture is too difficult to entertain. As difficult also appears the contention that there are not two prominent races in India - the Aryans and the Dravidians - but only one internally diversified race which we may call "Dravidaryan" and whose original common tongue developed into Sanskrit and Tamil, a pair of languages disclosing on a penetrating scrutiny more affinities than common linguistics can suspect. Finally, there is the general view of the Rigveda as the record of a fight between Aryan Rishis and devilish-seeming non-Aryans who were dubbed Dāsa-Dasyus. Here nobody thinks of asking: "If the Rigvedics did not destroy the Harrappā Culture, what enemies did they fight - enemies credited by them with an array of 'forts' (purah)?" None answering to the Rigvedics' account are to be found between the end of the Harrappā Culture in c. 1500 B.C. and the postulated Aryan advent. Nor, if we make the Rigveda anterior to the Harrappā Culture, do we have evidence of a confrontation of fortified Dāsa-Dasyus by Rishi-led fighters. A spiritual and symbolic interpretation of the Rigvedic hymns such as Sri Aurobindo has worked out in detail seemes to be necessary: it would see the "forts" as centres of demoniac opposition in occult planes to the Rishis' inner psychological progress, their Yogic adventure.

How vehement the stand can be against putting the Harrappā Culture posterior to the Rigveda may be judged

from the reaction of a German Indologist to a preview leaflet sent by Mr. Sita Ram Goel, the publisher of my second book in the historical field, Karpāsa in Prehistoric India: A Chronological and Cultural Clue. The scholar had already placed an order for the book, obviously taking it to be a story of the development and use of cotton in early times. Now realising what its main thesis was, he wrote back to cancel his order, saying; "It is the most nonsensical book I have ever known." The publisher sent him a complimentary copy when the book came out, with a covering note that its author would be most interested to have his brief torn to pieces by an expert. There has been no response up till now.

I have been asked by my patron - now Mr. Sita Ram Goel in place of Mr.Tarapada Majumdar of the first edition - to make whatever revision and enlargement of The Problem I thought fit. I cannot thank enough so generous and open-minded a helper, ever ready to encourage adventurous spirits to whatever lengths their new visions may logically lead them. I have changed some sentences and inserted a few passages directly relevant to my theme while avoiding repetition here of the ground variously covered by Karpāsa. Five Supplements have been appended, a very substantial addition valiantly welcomed by my new publishers, Aditya Prakashan.

The penultimate, the shortest, touches on some probable implications of the recent maritime excavations at Dwaraka, the legendary town of Sri Krshna. The third Supplement meets on several fronts the latest revival - under a somewhat different aspect - of Wheeler's sensational vision of Rig-vedic barbarians on the rampage. The second deals with a number of problems arising from my venture to break a lance with the Finnish scholar Asko Parpola apropos of whether the Harrappā Culture knew the horse or not. The last and longest is a detailed analysis of Parpola's latest and most systematic treatment, on both archaeological and literary grounds, of the whole Indo-Aryan problem - his highly original concept of who the Rigvedics as well as their

enemies, the Dāsa-Dasyus, might be and where, how and when their conflict could take place. Here my chronology has been forced by many factors to go further back into the past than I had once thought necessary. The first Supplement reproduces a slashing criticism of my book along with a riposte to it by me. Encountering an all-round fault-finder is always a healthy experience for an author. It helps him strengthen his points wherever possible and see the overall situation in a sharper light. Of course, if any of the attempted hits are valid he will do well to drop the vulnerable parts and assess whether their absence will mortally damage his position or still leave its centre intact. On careful consideration I have found myself far from having suffered a knock-out. Hence my assent to the generous suggestion to reprint the book and keep its challenge to historical orthodoxy ringing in the public's ear.

August 30, 1991

K.D.S.