SV: Hindu traditional view

[Paul Kekai Manansala]

Lars Martin Fosse wrote:
>
> [Lars Martin Fosse]
> Paul Kekai Manansala wrote:
>
> Remember that the whole AIT theory is based on very liberal
> interpretation of a group of religious hymns whose date of origin is
> highly speculative.
>
> [Lars Martin Fosse]
> The AIT is not simply based on the interpretation of the Vedas (if that is
> what you refer to as a group of religious hymns).  The AIT is based on the
> combined interpretation of a vast material of a literary, linguistic and
> archaeological character, involving Iranian as well as Greek, Italic,
> Germanic, Slavonic, Baltic sources. In the final analysis, the AIT depends
> upon the interpretation of the Indo-European material as a totality.

I disagree.  While some of the other evidence you cite might help
explain the theory of Indo-European linguistic and cultural influence,
it hardly has any bearing on the Aryan Invasion Theory (AIT).

There is nothing in external historical sources that suggests an
invasion of India, and really nothing in the archaeological or
anthropological record either.  I believe the archaeological record now
strongly shows that IVC was *not* overthrown by invaders from the North
or West.  Also, there is no biological evidence to show a sudden
intrusion anywhere near the time of the downfall of IVC.

Regards,
Paul Kekai Manansala