Asko Parpola is an acclaimed expert on the history, archaeology, and linguistics of South Asia, and in this book he offers a general survey of the consensus in his field that is fairly accessible to a popular audience, while at the same time he advances a few novel ideas of his own.
The theme of this book is how many strands have come together to produce Hinduism, a religion that lacks a central authority and has struck many as not a single unified faith at all. On one hand, Sanskrit and the Vedic scriptures composed in that language have played a prominent role for Hinduism’s Brahmin priesthood and political elites, and we know that the Sanskrit language entered the Indian Subcontinent from the northwest. On the other hand, the peculiar concerns of the Vedic scriptures (horse sacrifice, worship of the deity Indra, etc.) have little relevance to local traditions of Hinduism from one village to another across India, where the focus is on other deities and means of worshiping them. Indeed, as Parpola shows, many of these popular local rites are indigenous to India and may date back to the Harrapan civilization, well before the arrival of Sanskrit and the Vedic tradition.
Parpola thus approaches Hinduism from the two sides. The initial part of the book is essentially an introduction to Indo-European studies, showing how the Sanskrit language – just like most languages of Europe today – can ultimately be traced back to the Proto-Indo-European language spoken somewhere in the steppe north of the Black Sea. The Indo-European languages began to spread in the early Bronze Age, and Parpola lists the successive archaeological cultures that gradually show this language spread towards Central Asia and then the Indian Subcontinent. The population that spoke Proto-Indo-European had a religion of its own, and some features of it even survived all those centuries and cultural influence down to the Indian Subcontinent. The other side of this book is on the non-Indo-European archaeological cultures of India and the religious rituals they point to, as well as non-Indo-European India’s interaction with ancient religions of Western Asia.
There is a strain of Hindu nationalist (Hindutva) thought that bristles at the idea that anything of Indian culture or religion could have come from outside India. Instead, as these fanatics have it, India was the center of world civilization and wisdom and could only have spread their divine language to the outside world, so English, Latin, etc. must be descended from Sanskrit. Though this view can be taken about as seriously as, say, the USA’s young-earth creationists claiming that Adam and Eve lived with dinosaurs, Hindutva is unfortunately politically ascendant in India and able to throw its weight around on online fora though sheer force of population numbers. I see that already this book has received some negative comments from that side.
Yet in spite of Hindutva claims that the mainstream international consensus on South Asian history and archaeology continues 19th-century racist claims of "Aryan invaders" sweeping into the continent, Parpola shows that even the "Aryan" contribution to India had already been a result of lively cultural mixing. Those who brought Sanskrit just happened to speak an Indo-European language, but their religious traditions were derived in large part from an indigenous non-IE culture of Central Asia. That is, the peoples of the so-called Bactria–Margiana Archaeological Complex had come to adopt an Indo-European language while continuing many aspects of their indigenous culture, and it is this hybrid that came to India with the Vedas. Scholars today are very aware that there is no such thing as a pure anything, that every culture and religion we see today has involved mixture.
So why only three stars? If Parpola’s book had appeared just a few years earlier, it might have seemed as major an event as David W. Anthony’s The Horse, the Wheel and Language, a similar pop-sci presentation of Indo-European studies. Unfortunately, and not by any fault of Parpola’s own, his manuscript finally reached print just as the field was benefiting from new archaeogenetic studies that have somewhat altered our view of when various Indo-European languages spread and which archaeological cultures were linked to each spread. That means that Parpola’s survey of Indo-European studies will already strike experts as outdated, though the book does still retain value for a pop-sci audience.
A similar flaw of the book is Parpola’s treatment of material from the Uralic languages. This language family of Eastern Europe and Western Siberia, which comprises Finnish, Hungarian, and others, is not Indo-European. However, it has borrowed a number of world from the language ancestral to Sanskrit, helping to trace the spread of Indo-European languages towards the Indian Subcontinent. Uralic studies, too, have made some progress in recent years and some of Parpola’s data is now outdated.
Still, for anyone interested in South Asian history or trying to make sense of the myriad and diverse popular strands of worship in India, The Roots of Hinduism is still worth reading. Even for someone working in linguistics like myself learned a few new things here.