Aryan Invasion Theory

by Shrikant G. Talageri

This works examines critically the evidence presented by the invasionist scholars and points out its contradictions as well as its acrobatics. Author presents positive evidence in support of his own thesis that India is the original homeland of the Aryans. His most original contribution is the evidence he has marshalled from the Puranas which alone provide the proper perspective for interpreting correctly the evidence contained in the Vedic literature.

Genres: India, History

401 pages, Hardcover

First published January 1, 1993

About the author

Shrikant G Talageri was born in 1958, educated in Mumbai, India where he lives and works. Talageri has revolutionized the research into Rig Veda. He has successfully identified several historical information from Rig Veda, which he used to chronologically arrange the ten Mandalas of Rig Veda (6, 3, 7,, 4, 2, 5 and 8,9,10) . He explored the history of the kings and the sages who composed the Rigvedic hymns. Talageri utilized for his analysis, the Anukramanis in Rigveda, which are often neglected by scholars. He also studied the geographical basis of Rig Veda. As a corollary of his analysis, he establishes that Rig Veda was composed by sages living in Saraswati river valley between Saraswati and Ganga rivers (Hariyana) who were patrons of the kings who ruled in this area. These patron kings were especially the Puru and particularly the Bharata branch of the Purus. He also analyzed the probable location of origin (Punjab) of the Iranians and the Europeans. Talageri equates the Vedic-Aryans to the Purus and the Iranians to the Anus a sibling branch of the Purus. Other sibling branches includes the Drahyus, the Yadus and the Turvasus.

Reviews

[Riku Sayuj]

This is an extremely scholarly work with more than half of any given page given over to references and cross-references. The whole book is like a response to some of the popular 'invasionist' scholars and the author goes into painstaking detail to discredit the arguments line by line. All the extensive referencing serves only towards drawing attention to deficiencies in the standard theory and no referencing is given towards the thesis that Shrikant is proposing. In the end, the work does create an impression that a lot of the popularly held views are insubstantial but fails to make a concrete case for a new theory. This to me marks a failure on its part and makes the reading of it an exercise in futility. Nevertheless, some of the chapters were very informative and the depth of research is admirable. Over all, for anyone with interest in this topic, wikipedia and some of the more modern works would be a better alternative.

[aparna yadav]

bvbvbv