pastoral group of outsiders called the
Aryans. The language of the Aryans,
Sanskrit, shows certain structural rela-
tionships with classical European lan-
guages and even closer connections to
the Avesta, religious texts of ancient
Iran. Based on an analysis of the rela-
tionships between these languages and
the rate at which these languages have
changed, scholars have inferred that all
these languages came from a common
mother language, and that people
speaking this parent language originated
in central Asia, somewhere near the
Caspian Sea. From there, some went
west to Europe, some went southwest to
Turkey, and some went south toward
Iran, and later to India. This entire theory
is thus based almost solely on the
observed similarities between lan-
guages and assumptions about the rate
of linguistic change—some of which are
necessarily arbitrary.
The one piece of material evidence
for this theory comes in the remains of
horses found at the Indus Valley sites.
The horse was an established part of
Aryan life, according to references based
on the Aryan religious texts, the Vedas,
whereas it seems to have been absent
from the Indus Valley cities—it is not
portrayed on any of the carved seals,
which show many other animals, and
the only bones that have been recovered
from the Indus Valley cities are found in
the most recent archeological strata.
This theory describes a period of con-
tact and possible conflict between the
Aryans and Indus Valley peoples, after
which the Aryan culture and religion
became the dominant force in Indian
life. The Indus Valley cities were com-
pletely forgotten until they were exca-
vated in the early twentieth century.
The Aryan migration theory accounts
for the dissemination of various lan-
guages, but is not universally accepted.
Many modern Indians subscribe to the
Indigenous Aryan (IA) theory, which
contends that the Aryans are the original
inhabitants of India, and as proof points
to the artifacts found in the Indus Valley
civilization. Some IA supporters are
reacting against the Aryan migration
theory’s perceived colonialist bias,
since the theory was developed by
Europeans and assumes that the domi-
nant groups in modern India must have
come from outside. Other supporters
are the proponents of Hindutva, who
identify being Hindu with being an
Indian. The IAtheory allows Hindutva
proponents to claim that all Indians are
“really” Hindus and thus one social
group, whatever their particular reli-
gious beliefs. This assertion has pro-
found political implications in modern
India, where Christians and Muslims
are not only religious communities,
but social and political ones. By con-
necting Hindu identity and good
Indian citizenship, Hindutva propo-
nents are marginalizing Christians and
Muslims as outsiders.
Such claims are intriguing, but there
is slim evidence for them. The real truth
is that researchers have recovered lots
of material objects, but what these
things mean is open to interpretation.
At the very least, we know that this
culture flourished for about a thousand
years. Its final collapse—because of
a prolonged drought, according to
one theory—took place around 2000
B.C.E. For further information see
Walter Ashlin Fairservis, The Roots of
Ancient India,1975.Indus Valley Religion
Although some experts have made
definitive claims about the religion of
the Indus Valley civilization, it must be
remembered that all these claims are
highly speculative, since they are solely
based on the remains from the cities.
Artifacts such as grains, animal bones,
traces of fabric, and building founda-
tions give us a good basis for knowing
about the material life of this culture—
what people ate, what they wore, and
the types of dwellings they lived in.
The notion of religion, however, is far
more abstract. It is thus not only harder
to infer what types of religion were prac-
ticed from the artifacts that have beenIndus Valley Religion