New Delhi: The Indian Council of Historical Research (ICHR) has launched a project to bring together the latest scholarly works on the Aryans, aiming to move beyond “outdated colonial frameworks” and present new and recent research on the subject.
The Aryans were ancient people linked to Vedic culture and who are believed to have helped shape early Indian society. Many theories exist about their origins and movements, including invasion, migration, and indigenous perspectives.
The ICHR, under its project, ‘The Arya History & Culture’, will publish a composite volume covering 10 key areas—historicity, linguistics, literary traditions, archaeology, archaeometry (astronomy and astrology), geology, society and culture, the river Saraswati, genetics, and environment.
According to officials from the Council, an autonomous body under the Ministry of Education, the project will compile both the existing published work of renowned scholars and latest unpublished research of young scholars on the subject.
The project was cleared at the ICHR’s general council meeting held in October.
“This volume aims to collate critical research across disciplines to advance a more nuanced, evidence-based understanding of early Indian history, society, and culture,” the concept note prepared by the Council states.
ICHR member secretary (officiating) Om Jee Upadhyay said the aim of the project was not merely to “refute” the colonial frameworks, including the Aryan invasion theory, Aryan migration theory, or even the “tourism theory”.
“Rather, we are trying to bring together research that goes beyond these debates. Whether it is the invasion, migration, or tourism theory, none of them has conclusive evidence. Our objective is to compile all possible perspectives on the history of the Aryans, not simply present a counter-argument to colonial interpretations,” he told ThePrint.
The project is likely to include the works of scholars of ancient civilisation and archaeology, including David Frawley, an American writer on Hindu traditions; Kapil Kapoor, an Indian scholar of history, linguistics, and literature; archaeologists Vasant Shinde and Sanjay Manjul; and Indologist Michel Danino, among others.
“We are going to include the work of relatively new scholars as well. The Council has set up a timeline of six months for the project,” Upadhyay added.
Also Read: Who were the first Indians? Research says Dravidians, not Aryans
Theories on Aryans
According to the ICHR concept note, several hypotheses regarding the Aryans exist, including the Aryan invasion theory, Aryan migration theory, and even Aryan autochthonism.
The invasion theory is considered a colonial-era hypothesis, which claims that a group called the Aryans invaded the Indian subcontinent around 1500 BCE. They overpowered or displaced the people of the Indus Valley Civilisation and introduced Vedic culture, Sanskrit language and early Hindu religious traditions.
The theory claims that India’s ancient history was shaped by a powerful group of outsiders who brought civilisation from abroad.
Pratik Kumar, assistant professor of history at Delhi University, said many theories about the Aryans, including the invasion theory, were framed to suggest that “Indian culture was borrowed”.
“The theory was meant to show that if something came from outside during the medieval period of Indian history, it should be accepted without objection,” he said, adding that this perspective was primarily promoted by a group of historians in post-Independence India.
Kumar said the Rigveda describes the Saraswati as an ever-flowing river, while geological and archaeological studies show it had dried up around 2000 BC. “There is scientific data supporting this, which means the Rigveda must have been composed before 2000 BC.”
He added that this challenges German philologist and Orientalist Max Müller’s chronology, which dated the Rigveda to around 1200 BC and formed the basis of the Aryan migration narrative. “If the Rigveda predates 2000 BC, Müller’s timeline doesn’t hold. There was cultural continuity from the time of the Harappans, suggesting that the Harappans themselves may have authored the Rigveda, indicating there was no invasion.”
Kumar also referenced the writings of renowned archaeologist Professor B.B. Lal, who asserts that there is no evidence for warfare or invasion, and described the theory of “Aryan migration” as a myth. According to ICHR member secretary Upadhyay, the migration theory and later “tourism theory” had come into existence.
While migration theory states that the Aryans gradually moved into India over centuries instead of invading, the “tourism theory”, which is relatively colloquial one, suggests that the Aryans did not invade or permanently settle in India but visited the subcontinent periodically for trade, cultural exchange or seasonal movement. “Another theory, parallel to these, is the Indigenous Aryans theory, which claims that the Aryans were native to India and migrated from here to different parts of the world,” Upadhyay said.
More room for research?
In recent years, there have been efforts to debunk the Aryan migration theory in school textbooks. For instance, last year, the National Council of Educational Research and Training (NCERT) revised its Class 12 history textbook to incorporate findings from DNA studies from skeletons at Rakhigarhi, one of the largest ancient city sites of the Indus Valley Civilisation, located in Hisar district of Haryana.
The text added new information that says Harappan genetic continuity dates back to 10,000 BCE and persists in present-day South Asians, suggesting that the Harappans and early Vedic people may have been closely connected, rather than the Aryans being external migrants. The Aryans and Vedic people are interchangeably mentioned in historical texts.
Experts believe there is room for fresh perspectives and new research on the subject.
Indologist Danino said there are two distinct issues in the Aryan debate that are often conflated. “First is colonial, racial (and often racist) and highly divisive background, which unfortunately persists in India, especially in some states’ textbooks and in politics; and second is the linguistic, literary, archaeological, genetic and cultural questions surrounding the origin of Sanskritic languages and culture,” he told ThePrint.
“With a few exceptions, most scholars from both sides of the debate address these issues without fully recognising their complex ramifications. A spate of studies has appeared in the last two decades, yet there is still space for new insights and research.”
Kumar said that history is not a static subject; it must be written on the basis of newer sources, and there is always room for reinterpretation. “If the ICHR is bringing out a comprehensive volume of all the work done on the Aryan invasion so far, it will help readers and researchers access material that presents varied perspectives.”
R. Mahalakshmi, professor of ancient history at Jawaharlal Nehru University (JNU), however, said that the Aryan invasion theory has been challenged long ago.
“The obsession with discarding the Aryan invasion theory is unnecessary as well as an attempt to divert attention from real issues, such as the migration of Indo-Aryan speakers from the Steppes via the Bactrian region. This would also mean acknowledging that the Harappan civilisation was distinct from the Vedic,” she said.
(Edited by Nida Fatima Siddiqui)
Also Read: Archeologist who found 4,500-yr-old skeletons in Haryana doesn’t buy Aryan invasion theory