Aryan Civilization Myth Mystery History Or Invasion

History of Aryan Race:

Aryan Civilization Myth, Mystery, History or Invasion? 

Starting in approximately 2000 BC - 1500 BC, nomadic cattle herders from Central Asia began to cross the range of Mountains and to settle within the verdant Indus Valley. These nomads were, of course, the Aryans. The myth speaks that the Aryans were powerful invaders, preferably Mongols, who reign the Indian subcontinent thus collapsing the Indus valley civilization. There's not much evidence to support this theory. Rather, it seems that the Aryans filled the void post the collapse of the Indus valley civilization.

Aryavrata Reign Map

The Indo-Aryans (or Indo-Europeans) are one of the two major sub-divisions of the Indo-European language group. Along with the Indo-Iranians, the Aryans comprised the ancestors of nearly all people in the Eurasian Steppe, North Africa, the Caucasus, Central Asia, parts of West Asia, and parts of North America and Oceania. The term Indo-Aryans (generally considered to be a superficial name, and not an accurate one in any case) first appeared in the 4th century BCE history of Aryans tribe in India.  Aryan tribe in India also has their family name as Shave and as Kshva, in some areas. The Aryan race in India lives in north India and Sri Lanka, they also use the word Raksha as in India. 

India has a lot of Arya tribes in India have three spellings: The ancient tribe living in Sri Lanka, north Asia and so many other countries have a family name, Zvate (Heu, Hu, hu), Shvate (Shuva, Shuva, Shva). 

The ancient tribe living in India and different part of the world have a family name in the third name( Kshava) which mean; “all the human culture, all the results of art, science, and technology, are almost exclusively the creative product of the aryas, he alone was the founding father of all higher humanity, it was he who laid the foundations and erected the walls of each great structure in human culture”, clearly this man is talking about the Aryans, and this man is Der Fuhrer Hitler and his followers, the Nazis justified their crimes, the holocaust - killing voluminous Jews because they believed that Aryans were a very superior race which they were the descendants of this ancient, noble race. They adopted the swastika as their symbol. 

Now - while the swastika in India, it remains, prefers it has for millennia, a beloved holy symbol, and this is often where the connection starts. Because India is one in every one of the sole places where civilization has continued uninterrupted since the time the Aryans lived here. 

Q1 - So who were these people - the Aryas? 

Q2 - What's the identity of India’s people today? 

Briefly: 

Are we Aryan? 

So - who were the Aryans? 

Were they Nordics? 

There's hardly evidence of that. 

Another evidence points towards the realm which is now Iran. The term Aryan contains a cognate within the Persian language, ērān. This word is that the source of the trendy country name, Iran. Persian kings like Darius and Xerxes are described in historical records as ‘aryas of arya stock.’ This possibly refers to the first aryans coming from Central Asia, and this leads us to the concept that the Aryans might originally are from the Eurasian steppes; this is often where the Germans got their ideas from. 

Truth is, it’s tough to induce to the facts; one in all the reliable pieces of data we do have is from the time they arrived in India. While some historians argue that they may are native to India. Evidence suggests they were not native to India which they arrived, somewhere from the north. 

Rakhigarhi could be a pre-Aryan site. What evidence, what records can we have? Hardly any. But there's one thing which although not exactly contemporary, is…"The Rig Veda". 

Rig Veda - The Vedic Sanskrit Hymns

The Rig Veda is one of every of the oldest written texts that we've now, not just in India but within the entire world. It's largely a spiritual book. wasn't meant as history. It's not contemporary but it was recorded by the Aryans themselves and is a very precious, unique, and pure source in what it tells us about the earliest history of India, the origins of the Indian society and religion as they're today. 

What Does the Rig Veda Tell Us About the Aryas?

Around 3000 BCE a gaggle of individuals descended onto the land that lies between the tributaries of the river Indus. They came with their families to find a home. Their systems were fully developed and the land that they found near the river Indus was amazing for them and that they decided to settle here. They later gave it the name of Sapta Sindhu, “the land of the seven rivers”. These people were tall, fair-skinned, prominent-nosed, proudly called themselves Aryas. We all know this because within the Rig Veda they describe themselves as Aryas.

Aryans Migration Route

The Aryans spread quickly, occupying one district after another of this land, burning and clearing away dense forests, creating habitable land, establishing cities and dynasties along its sparkling rivers while chanting their sacred hymns. However, don’t comfortably imagine that they found a form, submissive, open-armed welcome into this land. For this land already had inhabitants and that they failed to want these pretty new invaders just waltzing in. The Aryas faced stout resistance from the natives who were already living here, who pushed back on every inch of land the Aryas set foot on. This conflict between the invaders and also the natives became generations of hard battles and competition for control of this land. The Aryas called these natives “Dasa”. 

The Aryan's record within the Rig Veda about these original inhabitants of India as being dark-skinned (krishnatvach), snub-nosed (anāsa), of unsweet-sounding grunt-like speech and worshipping phallic emblems. Their language was unsophisticated and brutish, their manners and habits were crude, their religion was unrefined, they didn’t perform sacrifices, they looked scarcely human. They gave it the name to the native Dasa, which comes from the ancient word Das, which suggests waste. The Dasas, despite such impassioned rhetoric meant to dehumanise them by the Aryas, weren't so barbaric and unworthy on balance. 

They were skilled good architects that they had built numerous strong fortified towns. The Dasas had considerable wealth and a few names of their kings - like Chumuri, Dhuni, Pipru, Sambara - are demonized within the Rig Veda. That is, once you read the names of those demons, they were no demons but just the kings of the local Dasa clans. The Dasas were good warriors too because otherwise wouldn't have successfully resisted and thwarted the arya tribe.

Q - So who were the aryans? 

Q - Where did they come from?

The Migration Route

We know that the Aryans came from the north. Their exact identity I'm afraid to mention is lost till now. Sadly even the Aryas themselves don’t tell us where they originally came from, there's evidence that means they were Europeans. Of course at one point in his work, Patanjali - the father of Yoga - says that Pingalakeshni or hiranyakeshini - blonde hair is one of the essential qualities in a true Brahmana. 

However for any Indian to assume that we are their descendants - well - the genes got too immersed over these 4000-5000 years. There were aryas, there were many local tribes, then there were invasions from the Macedonians under Alexander the Great, from the Central Asians, from Mongols, from Afghans, from the British… so we cannot claim that we are aryan any more than we can claim we are Mongols or British. We do know that all of this started when the Aryas left their homeland and came down. And why did they do that? Well, why does one leave their home when they are not nomads and Aryans we’re not nomads. And this question...is more than what it seems. This is the whole point of why this whole story begins that changed the course of Indian history and human history. I'll answer this question soon.

The Linguistic Analysis of Aryan Race:

Remember how some Sanskrit speakers called themselves Aryans?

Ancient Manuscript In Sanskrit Language

In Sanskrit the word Arya is a surname that signifies “honorable”. The Sanskrit word Arya defines to those who speak Vedic Sanskrit and followed Vedic culture, rituals  and beliefs. By the time of Budha the Arya took the meaning of “noble”.

In 1786 an English guy named William Jones gave a speech that essentially founded the fashionable field of linguistics. Unfortunately, that very same speech was instrumental in creating the thought of an “Aryan race.” Jones’ speech is thought today for proposing the existence of the Indo-European language family, the concept that the majority of the languages of Europe, Iran, and therefore the Indian subcontinent are all variations of what wont to be one single language. But at the time it wasn’t clear what to call this language family. “Indo-European” eventually became the quality, for obvious reasons, but some people wanted to call them the “Japhetic languages” after a personality from the bible, and a few people in Germany wanted to call them the “Indo-Germanic languages” due to course they did. But some people noticed that a minimum of a number of the authors of ancient Sanskrit texts called themselves “Aryans,” and from there inferred that the initial Proto-Indo-Europeans also called themselves “Aryans,” and thus they preferred to call it the “Aryan language family.” At the same time that tribes were fighting over what to call this group of languages, people were also arguing about what the characteristics of this grouping were exactly, and a few pretty weird theories were getting thrown around. 

Now, what I’m on the brink of describing will make more sense if you're thinking that about the intellectual climate of the 1800s. It hadn’t been that way back that the enlightenment had called into question the literal accuracy of lots of biblical narratives, and science was within the process of suggesting lots of recent ideas about the history of the planet and the origin of humanity. But, at the identical time, the out-of-Africa theory for the origin of humans and our modern understanding of our evolution from chimpanzee-like ancestors was still a protracted way off. 

Mix all that uncertainty along with the thought of an Aryan language family still as a giant old heaping of racism, antisemitism, and nationalism and you get some weird ideas. Ideas like: maybe the initial speakers of proto-Aryan were all race, and every one Caucasian race are descended from those original Aryan people and that’s where Caucasian race come from!, maybe those Aryans conquered India on the other hand interbred with the native black population, and that’s why modern Indians have brown skin. Maybe this sacred Indian religious symbol was a logo of these ancient Aryans who invaded India. Maybe Aryans interbred with other races in Europe too, but who interbred with who in what ratios produced all the various modern European nations, aside from Germany which is that the only place where there are still pure Aryans. 

The Aryan Invasion Myth or History? 

The Vedas describe a warrior society of semi pastoralist nomadic tribes called Aryans who engaged in warfare and cattle raiding, and it had been long believed that these so-called Aryans came from outside of India but this theory is now very unpopular in India today and also the word Aryan is solely accustomed describe the high castes who come from India. 

The Aryan Tribe

Despite being unpopular it's now agreed by scientists to be correct, the tutorial roots of the Aryan invasion theory are attached with the Indo-European theory which was developed by Sir William Jones, a Welsh judge who lived in India during nation Raj, and what he realised is that the standard holy language of the Vedas “Sanskrit”, was undoubtedly related to Latin and Greek and also even to Germanic and Celtic languages, and this was in 1786 the linguists' historians and archaeologists developed a theory to know that there are one people from whom of those languages derived and these are called Indo-Europeans. 

Now originally many European scholars believed that the Indo-Europeans came from Asia and some even believed they came from India until a German named Heinrich Schultz in 1826 first suggested an europian-origin for the Indo-Europeans. In 1851 the Englishman Robert Latham developed this idea and argued specifically for a southern Russian origin for the Indo-Europeans and this theory became the foremost popular and that has become dominant even now. 

The origin for Indo-European languages was widely agreed upon by linguists because there are a greater diversity of assorted Indo-European languages in Europe than anywhere else within the globe and although there are many Indo-European languages in India quite closely related. The term "Aryan Race" had already been accustomed apply, not just to those specific Indo-Europeans who invaded India, but also more widely to their ancestors, the Indo-Europeans who founded all the Indo-European languages, but it's a mistake to associate the thought that the Aryan invaders were European with the Nazis because some scholars like Herman Guntert argued for an Asian origin for the Aryans, and he was a Nazi affiliated scholar, that the thought of an EU origin isn't a Nazi invention within the most effective many Nazis believed within the Asian origin. 

After the war, the Russian origin hypothesis was developed by scholars slightly rather like the feminist author, Marija Gimbutas who thought of the Indo-Europeans as warlike people from the steppes of Russia and Ukraine, and Western Kazakistan. Her opponent Sir Colin Renfrew believed that Indo-Europeans originated in Anatolia and these two theories were almost that the only real ones live since the war. Nobody at that stage took seriously the thought of an Indian origin for the Indo-Europeans. If the primary Indo-Europeans were from Europe then it stands to reason that the Indo-Aryans who are later descendants of these, and also people who brought Sanskrit and Vedic religion into India are of European origin and eventually the thought that the Aryans came from outside India was an extremely common and popular theory in India for a very very while. 

This was even the prevailing view among Indian nationalists at the time of Indian independence and within the best, the first Indian Prime Minister Nehru wrote a book called 'Discovery of India' in 1946 within which he said that the Aryans invaded India. This was made into a movie within the 80s within which the identical points are reiterated it wasn't just in India that this was an accepted historical fact that the Aryans invaded India.

Mohenjo Daro City Entrance Re-Creation 

You will be ready to see so during this documentary from the BBC called 'Buried Treasure’, sudden tragedy brought this rich ancient civilisation to an end. I’d suggest you to imagine for a flash that you just just just simply are back in 1500 BC and are looking over the straight streets and brick houses of mohenjo-daro suddenly smoke and flames begin to rise amongst them and at one in every one of the foremost streets there streams a horde of swordsmen led by a swaying figure in an outlandish chariot. The story I'm telling you doesn't fantasy it is an interpretation of actual discovery. This may be often the place where one altogether the massacres befell.

Rakhigarhi Archeological Excavation 

Thirty Four Centuries after it happened, the archeologists of the 20th century dug and located these bones the massacred mute evidence of how an age-long civilization perished within the hour, moreover we'll relate this evidence with the earliest literature of India. The Rig Veda, which it’s agreed, tells during a non-traditional and symbolic way, of the Indus Valley and its invasion by the Aryans the hymns within the Rig Veda explicate that the Aryan invaders differed from the long static citizens which they invaded. 

But more recently a conspiracy theory has developed which states that not only is that the Aryan invasion theory untrue but, both the Indo-European linguistic theory itself, are lies invented by Europeans for colonial purposes - they divided and ruled the people of India and they made up this lie so that they may therefore distinguish between different races of Indians - and this is not only popular among certain left-wing subversive groups within the mid-twentieth century in Europe but has become a prevailing view among Indian nationalists. 

The Genetical (genomes) Analysis of Aryan Race:

Genetic studies revealed that there was an invasion into India, otherwise you could call it a migration if you like, in which people migrating into India during the Bronze Age, brought European ancestry into India. Leading these studies was the American professor at Harvard, David Reich. 

During the analysis we will have to study earlier DNA and early pieces of evidence, nowadays DNA studies observe autosomal DNA which points at all of the genomes that are held in common by different populations to determine how people are related, at some markers on the paternal line which we call a Y haplogroup, which shows our ancestry going an extended way back on the male line.

Now early studies already picked, informed the very fact that races in Eastern Europe and other races in South Asia, mainly the high caste Brahmins or Aryans in India, share a Y haplogroup which is named r1a which means somewhere along with the history they have shared ancestry but it didn't tell us where that came from. 

Meanwhile, in Eastern Europe the population forms called the Yamnaya, we've got data from the Far Eastern Europe, near the Urals. that they are intermediate between the northern tip of this near Eastern Group and also the hunter-gatherers of Eastern Europe around 4000 or 3000 BC the DNA from (by archaeologists) Yamnaya enters Europe. This was proven in 2015 in an exceedingly study by Haak and colleagues entitled ‘Massive Migration’ from the steppe may be a source for Indo-European languages in Europe. 

Now the Yamnaya were a chariot riding, equestrian, pastoralist people of the Russian steppes, and these are the similar people as Kurgans that Marija Gimbutas said were the Indo-Europeans. 

Sir Colin Renfrew, has now admitted that his Anatolia theory was wrong, in light of evidence from the DNA, which proves an enormous migration into Europe from the steppe. what's clear however is that Marija Gimbutas showed a series of remarkable insights when she emphasized the importance of what she called the Kurgan invasion, what we'd now call the Yamnaya invasion, which is now abundantly documented by ancient DNA. 

I believe Maria's Kurgan hypothesis has been magnificently vindicated by recent works. Now if we all know that the Yamnaya were those who brought the Indo-European languages into Europe then we should always expect to determine Yamnaya blood in modern Indians if they're those who brought the Indo-European languages into India. 

The genetic relationship between different skeletons (DNA) or modern people (DNA samples) as seen in the people in India form a cline, and people in India who speak Indo-European languages are closer to modern Europeans than those Indians who speak Dravidian languages are. This is because some Indian people have more ancestry from the Yamnaya than others. 

When the Yamnaya entered Europe, they mixed with those who were already there; Neolithic European farmers, and this created a new group of a race called the Corded Ware culture of Germany. Skeletons from the Corded Ware culture show that almost all of their DNA is the same as that of Yamnaya mixed during this population and the actual contribution from the corded ware complex people is a minimum of 70%. 

It is a massive replacement of the German population and however afterward in Northern Europeans there's an oversized proportion of ancestry from this group, this might be the most significant contributor to European populations in many places, especially it comes from the east, but there is a vital distinction while most Yamnaya men carried the r1b haplogroup, most of the Corded Ware people of Germany carried the r1a haplogroup, barely like the high caste in India do. High caste Hindus today can have the foremost amount as 30% of their DNA from Yamnaya-like people of the Bronze Age steppes. 

So, speaking slightly bit more broadly to the question 'is their steppe related ancestry in India?’. In 2016 a paper published on ancient DNA from the traditional nation resulted that the thermal conditions make DNA preservation tougher (in India), although progress is now being made, if you examine the proportion of ancestry from the steppe and Iranian inferred West Eurasian related ancestry, steppe ancestry is confidently inferred to exist in almost every Indian group.

Yamnaya DNA can't have come directly from Yamnaya going into India because the haplogroups are different, the timeframe for when this DNA entered India is after the time when the Yamnaya existed. The oldest example of r1a ever found was published in 2017 during a paper called 'the genomic history of southeastern Europe' by Mathieson and colleagues, it comes from Ukraine, not India and it dates to about 5500 years ago, it was a component of the proto-Yamnaya culture. 

Yet on a principal component analysis chart, it clusters near the corded ware samples and this might be approximately 1000 years before the corded ware culture expanded. It presents that both r1a and r1b were ancient Eastern European haplogroups that were spread across Europe and Asia by Indo-Europeans. 

The corded ware culture migrated east into Asia to establish Sintashta and Andronovo cultures thus the males of both of those Bronze Age steppe cultures carried the r1a Y haplogroup within the paper mentioned by Reich earlier from Lazaridis and colleagues in 2016 it says that; Andronovo people couldn't brought the Yamnaya DNA into India because we do not see that Neolithic European farmer DNA in modern Indians and since Andronovo were descended from the corded ware culture which was a mix of Neolithic farmer from Europe and Yamnaya, we'd see both the Yamnaya which Neolithic European farmer DNA if it had been brought in by Andronovo. 

However newer evidence brings the claim into question, even before DNA evidence existed, the Andronovo culture was strongly argued to be the bearers of the proto-Indo-Iranic language because of their location and also the archaeological presence of chariots. the oldest depictions of wheeled vehicles ever, which predate even the Indo-Europeans, come from Eastern Europe. shortly at the moment, the indo-Europeans began to spread this technology across the Eurasian steppe, the earliest fully developed spoked wheeled horse chariots are from the discoveries of the Andronovo culture dating to about 2000 BC. 

Aryans The Chariot Riders

Chariots played an extremely important role within the primary Aryan religion in India; many of the gods ride chariots as they're doing in other Indo-European religions similar to the Nordic one of the Roman one, the spoke wheel remains an extremely important symbol in India today and it's even on the Indian flag. 

The presence of European phenotypes in South Asia has long been noted country were very alert to the actual incontrovertible fact that prime caste Indians had a lighter complexion than low castes and presumed this was related to European admixture, the European phenotypes like tallness fair-skin and blue or green eyes discovered in North India and Pakistan compared to in South India and this were argued to result to the sooner presence of Aryans within the northwest. 

The foremost effective rates of European phenotypes in South Asia occur today among the Kalash people of the Chitral district of Pakistan, 18.2% of whom have the r1a haplogroup and also the Kalash people wear an average near 50% Yamnaya ancestry. Blue eyes evolved in Europe among Mesolithic hunters and blondism spread in from Europe during the Bronze Age, thus these phenotypes came from Europeans at some point but DNA has shown that the Yamnaya, although European, were brunettes and failed to have blonde hair and blue eyes. 

Archeological Excavation Finding

The Andronovo people were fairly often blonde and blue-eyed, if the Yamnaya DNA had reached India directly from a Yamnaya invasion into India then none of those phenotypes would be present in South Asia and thus the male Brahmins would have the r1b haplogroup and not the r1a haplogroups.

In 2018 a paper was published by Narasimhan and colleagues entitled 'the genomic formation of South and Central Asia' in 2017, Reich said, that no ancient samples from South Asia had been obtained, but now it has been proven that there was a migration of middle to late bronze age, steppe peoples into India who carried Neolithic European DNA and certain spoke Indo-Aryan languages the paper included middle to late bronze age samples from a pathway leading from Central Asia into India because to the inner Asian mountain corridor, the samples were clearly of Eastern European migrant populations. 

Most of these people cluster with Bronze Age Eastern Europeans and some even cluster with Bronze Age central Europeans they're very near modern people from Russia and Ukraine who speak Slavic languages, using the West Siberian hunter-gatherer individuals as a reference population along with other pre-chalcolithic groups that are previously reported within the traditional DNA literature we document the presence of a genetically relatively homogenous population spread across an unlimited region of the Eastern European and trans-Ural-steppes between two thousand and fourteen hundred years before the epoch. 

Indus Valley Seal Sculpture

Many of the samples from this group are individuals buried in association with artefacts of the corded ware, Srubnaya, Petrovka, Sintashta, and Andronovo complexes, all of which harboured a mixture of steppe early-to middle-Bronze-Age ancestry and ancestry from European middle Neolithic agriculturists. 

David Reich admits in his book 'who we are’, he made his findings on Indian genetics more palatable to Indians after the Indian collaborators wouldn't cooperate after he shared his initial findings. 

Terms like Indus periphery and ancient ancestral South Indians and ancestral North Indians are deliberately obscure terms designed to hide the facts which what's being described is an invasion of European ancestry into India. The Yamnaya-like ancestry is commonly described in media reports on this paper as "Central Asian" because it came via Central Asia and never mentions that Yamnaya was themselves descended from prehistoric Eastern European hunter-gatherers or that the middle-late-Bronze-Age invaders were even more like modern Europeans than Yamnaya were, many accustomed think the Aryans were related to the Bactria-margiana archaeological complex. 

The people of Bactria-margiana were mostly descended from people related to Iranian Neolithic farmers with a touch ancestry from Anatolian farmers and even slightly of Siberian admixture but this paper shows three things; first, the BMAC people did not contribute much genetically to South Asia within the slightest degree second Yamnaya like step ancestry only arrives among the BMAC people around 2000 BC and third, there's evidence of Indian migration into the BMAC rather than the reverse. 

The actual incontrovertible fact that Yamnaya-like ancestry shows up within the BMAC region so late means the Aryan invasion of India can't have happened until after 2000 BC which is already a few years after the Yamnaya culture ended. Before the Aryan invasion, there was a grand civilisation within the Indus Valley, this might be the one Sir Mortimer wheeler was talking about Mohenjo-Daro. It's quite likely to be this source of Dravidian languages in India and it contributed to the genetics of all Indians today. 

The findings from that paper were reinforced by yet more samples released later in 2018 as an element of a paper by Damgaard and colleagues entitled 'the first horse herders and also the impact of early Bronze Age steppe' expansions into Asia it said: another interesting undeniable fact that the DNA seems to point is that it seems likely the Dravidians were also migrants which they arrived from Iran before the Aryans. 

Geneticist Razib Khan commented: "because the Dravidians weren't primordial but expanding only somewhat sooner than indo-aryans they were part of an interactive social cultural sphere with the indo-aryans, I feel the very high frequency of r1a1az93 in some non-Brahmin Sou-Aryansian groups even tribal ones suggest social-cultural expansiveness of som-Aryans r1a1, indo-aryan kin networks across the whole subcontinent" in other words the spread of Aryan and Dravidian languages and DNA across India wasn't defined by ju-Aryano events but by an elaborate combination of the various mixings and migrations to create this Indian Cline. Ancient DNA has now shown that there is that y haplogroup r1a in eastern European remains dating to the Mesolithic, Neolithic, Eneolithic and also the Bronze Age, what's more of those Bronze Age peoples who carry this haplogroup do not have any South Asian admixture. 

Conclusion:

A lot of the writings described Aryans as the dominant species. During that time the Aryans were around in Europe. This was like the closest the civilization could be. We learned about the war between the Aryans and the Greeks. They studied the history of how the Aryans and the Greeks have relations because of the Bible. Their history shows how the Greeks and the Aryans were all just one tribe and then they fell apart. Then the Greeks and the Arabs started fighting. Then they wrote all about how they were descended from the Greeks. It’s not in their mythology but the history.

Q: How much do you think, history should influence our own culture?

Aryan history was not very specific. It was not about civilization. It was about an empire of two cities and a battle. It was not that they were civilized or their culture was to be followed or to be praised. It was the story of a war between those two cities. The conquest of one city by one group; the battle; the setting up of the city as a civilization. That’s how they talked about it. It was not a lesson, a lesson of learning from history. It was a battle between two people. The myth is more suitable to what the tribe was.

It’s interesting to know that our Indian history, the school books, and everything was biased. You can tell that they were trying to maintain their civilization. They saw their civilization as a prosperous civilization. The definition of civilization changed.

Q: What about the Battle of the Ten Kings and Aryan civilization, should it be taught to the school students?

What I heard was that only the battle of the Ten Kings can be taught in school. That’s it. And if you ask any historian that kind of education is not correct.

You know the history of the Aryan civilization, the kingdom of Aryans. In that history, the Aryans and the people were the same. Those civilizations were in the same region. It’s the same history, it’s the same history, but it’s just the setting that is different. The civilization of the Aryan empire, the religion, the language, the culture, the weapons, everything was the same. The history of the Hindu kingdom was very similar. They were Aryans, they were those Indians, but in that myth, they are the tribe. There was an Indian tribe in India.

Aryan civilization under the rule of Bharata. They are the ancestors of all of us. 

That’s why we didn’t hear the story of how they were Aryans. How Aryans moved from the East. How they were just one tribe and then they became different. The history of civilization never talks about that. Because the chronology of civilization doesn’t tell you that it is the one civilization that was founded by Bharata. It gives you no information on the expansion of the Aryans and how they moved from the East to the West.

They never said in the Mahabharata how they came to be in India. They say they are the descendants of Aryans. They have a religion and mythology, but the history of civilization is not that one history. It’s the history of a certain empire and those are the people who are trying to establish their civilization as civilization. That’s how they accepted the race they created.

Q: Could we say that by naming one race and calling it Aryans it is validating that all those who say they are non-mono-races have a little bit of civilization? Is it validating their history?

I think no. That’s something different.

There is a myth that Aryans were those who spread civilization. That’s why they were called Aryans. But the civilization that they created was not just the civilization of the Aryans. That’s not what civilization is. Civilization is civilization. It’s the civilization created by one group that conquers a land and becomes a civilization. That’s what we are talking about now.

It’s funny because that’s what they had to teach you. That’s what the myth was about. The education system must teach you about the civilization and the civilization created by that group. The story of the civilization is not only for the Aryans. The story of civilization is for everyone.

This is what I want the schools and the government to teach in the world. Let’s build civilization… let’s build civilization. Let’s look after one another.

Final Words: 

Aryan Civilisation an invasion of people carrying European DNA into India did occur and this has changed the DNA of modern Brahmins and Aryan caste people in India today. Ancient DNA now reinforces what archaeology, linguistics, and modern DNA were already telling us: that the Aryan invasion is a historical fact, not a myth.

Love .... KoolGuruji