Is the Aryan Invasion a Myth?

Ashish Chandra achandra at WNMAIL.WNDEV.ATT.COM
Mon Nov 30 17:37:59 UTC 1998

Pardon my intrusion into the world of this marvelous debate of linguistics
vs. archaeology. But I have a doubt about archaeology that I would I would
like to express with the following story.

There was a town and in that town lived a man. The town was really old,
perhaps dating back 1000 years before one man got there, and it had
dilapidated buildings and all the pathways and pavements were paved with
old 1000 year old bricks. This man, anguished at the state of this town
decided to give it a facelift and started a project. He worked very hard
for 30 years but was only able to replace about half of the town with new
bricks and buildings. After that, he died. Then, a few years later, another
man came to live in that town and he noticed the disparities in the town
outlook. So he, anguished from the mixed appearance of his town, decided to
replace the older structures with new ones. He worked for 40 years and by
the time he died, one could fathom that he had finished 75%of the work that
the man before him could not finish. And then came another man and so on.
Finally, in a thousand years, the town's oldest building was the one the
first man had built, in order to replace the past 1000 year old dilapidated
structures. Then one day, an archaeologist came to this town and in his
supreme knowledge, declared this town to be 1000 years old. He cited
radio-carbon dating performed on the town bricks as his evidence. The whole
world was happy at this man's achievement and this was written down in
history books where this archaeologist was eulogized. In all his humility,
this archaeologist sang paeans of the man who initially started the
original project work, whose work in turn was inscribed on some of the
inscriptions found in this town. How old was the town originally ?

I am not trying to put archaeology down as even its proponents admit that
it is not an exact science. I am merely trying to find out if archaeology
can be considered as evidence to make blanket historical declarations which
affect modern day civilizations.

Please don't send me any emails like "you have amply demonstrated the size
of your puny intellect by this observation". I am not knowledgeable in
archaeology but I do question its use to write modern day history of old

Ashish Chandra

More information about the INDOLOGY mailing list