Dear
Colleagues,
Much of what is stated below is known fact. But since the question has been raised a reply is desired.
The
idea of an ‘Aryan’ origin of the Harappan Culture is not very old, at least not
old as a well circulated theory. The first decades after the discovery of the
Indus Valley Civilization saw the unanimous idea of its pre-Vedic character. Among works known to me it was the Vedic Age,
George Allen and Unwin, 1951 ed R.C.Majumdar and A.D.Pusalkar, i.e. Volume
I of the HCIP, that first brought such an idea to the notice of
serious scholars. The second figure in Plate VIII facing page 177 is that of a ‘MODEL
ANIMAL (?HORSE).’
Pusalkar (p.194) stated, “some scholars still regard the Vedic civilization as
older than that of the Indus Valley.” Pusalkar's hints were vague. From my knowledge of other publications I
can ascertain that R. C. Majumdar, S. K. Chatterji, B. K. Ghosh. Amalananda
Ghosh, D.D.Kosambi and B. B. Lal of the fifties did not subscribe to the idea
of an Aryan origin of the Harappan Culture.
In
the seventies I first heard the argument of some historians stationed in Varanasi
that since the Sarasvati had dried up during the Harappan age the Ṛgvedic mention
of the river as a mighty stream overflowing with water means that the Vedic descriptions
pre-date the Harppan civilization. This, I admit calls for a plausible
explanation. My own idea is that even according to the Mahabharata the whole of
the Sarasvati never dried up. Professor Shivaji Singh of Gorakhpur brushed away
my argument and asked me to read the literature of the proponents of the idea. In fact it is not that I have not read. But I am not convinced. Specialists on the history of rivers should clarify.
Since
the seventies the theory has found increasing number of adherents. Even B. B. Lal
is said to have the same idea.
I
have not verified what B.B.Lal has actually said but many questions must be
answered by those who speak for the Vedic origin of the Harappan Culture.
There
is no definite evidence that the Harappans knew the horse. Why?
The
early Ṛgvedic culture is overwhelmingly pre-agricultural pastoral while the Harappan
one, as far as the archaeological remains show, is urban. Under the
cicumstances three major transitions must have taken place and left their
traces in literature:
a.
The
transition from the Rgvedic culture to the urban Harappan civilization
b.
The
advent of the dark age indicated by the millennial non-urban gap between the
decline of the Indus Valley Civilization
and the rise of the Mahajanapadas in the first millennium B.C.E.
c.
The
rise of the cities in the first millennium B.C.E. then must be a renewal.
Where are the traces of these
three transitions?
There
are many other questions that have not been raised here and that should be satisfactorily
answered before a Vedic origin of the Harappan culture can become a plausible
theory. Till now the scale is heavier in favour of the orthodox archaelogists' and philologists' view.
I must add here that I do not deny the possibility of Harappan influence on the Vedic culture. Rather, my evidences point to this.
Best
Dipak
Bhattacharya
From: alakendu das <mailmealakendudas@REDIFFMAIL.COM>
To: INDOLOGY@liverpool.ac.uk
Sent: Saturday, 28 January 2012 7:18 PM
Subject: [INDOLOGY] ORIGIN OF THE ARYANS.
To all,
Can anyone elaborate me on the fact the inhabitants of Harappa and Mohenjodaro in the Indus valley civilisation were a part of the indigenous Aryan culture. any references or texts will of help to me.
Thanking you Alakendu Das.
mailmealakendudas@rediffmail.com
| Follow Rediff Deal ho jaye! to get exciting offers in your city everyday. |