Do Tamilians Support the Aryan Invasion Theory? A South Indian Perspective

I am a South Indian from Telangana, and based on my cultural and historical understanding, I strongly reject the Aryan Invasion Theory (AIT). To Tamilians and other Dravidian-speaking people, the AIT presents a deeply held view of cultural invasion and replacement that we do not support.

Understanding the Aryan Tribes

The Aryans are often portrayed as nomadic tribes that came in 'waves' and are a specific group of people who invaded India, similar to the Mughals and British. However, this is a mischaracterization. The Aryanic tribes were a people group from Asia Minor who moved into India, akin to how human caravans move into the USA today. They had nothing, and their primary goal was to be 'taken care of' by the land and people they invaded. The Roma people today are an example of how Aryan tribes moved and settled in developed areas, adopting and integrating local religions and cultures.

Tamilian and Dravidian Perspective

To Tamilians and the broader Dravidian community, the Aryans are seen as over-breeding low-quality tribal people who introduced their system and culture, effectively creating what we know as Sanatana Dharma. Unlike historical invasions by foreign powers such as the Mughals and British, the Aryans did not bring any external technological or linguistic advances. Instead, they created a caste system, which they used to elevate themselves above the indigenous Dravidian population, much like a cuckoo bird laying its eggs in a crow's nest. This is why the Indus Valley civilization is in ruins, and the Dravidians are pushed to the southern part of India.

Historical and Linguistic Evidence

I, as a South Indian, have never believed in the AIT. Here are some points to support this view:

1. The Saraswati River

The Rig Veda mentions the Saraswati River, which dried up around 1800 BC. The Vedas were written when the Saraswati was flowing, estimated to be around 5000 BC. This indicates that the Vedas were composed long before the proposed Aryan migration.

2. Genetic Evidence

The oldest strain of R1a1 was discovered in Gujarat, suggesting that R1a1 originated in India. This contradicts the AIT, as it supports the theory that the Aryans were indigenous to India rather than invading from outside.

3. Linguistic Evolution

Sanskrit, the ancient Indian language, evolved around 1500 BC. European languages, such as those in Europe, evolved around 500 BC. If Aryans were responsible for bringing European languages to India, we should find evidence of a Proto-Aryan language. However, no such evidence has been found. Instead, it is more likely that Indian merchants traveled to Europe for trade, borrowing some words and syntax from Indian languages, which can be seen in the sentence structure and syntax.

Shared Syntax Example

For instance, the sentence in Sanskrit, Aham Griham Gacchami, translates to 'I am going to home' in Hindi as me ghar jatha hu. In Telugu, it is nenu intiki velthanu. Notice that in both Hindi and Telugu, the syntax is Subject-Object-Verb (SOV), while in English, it is Subject-Verb-Object (SVO).

Conclusion

The Aryan Invasion Theory, as it is often presented, is a misrepresentation of history and cultural exchange. To Tamilians and other Dravidian-speaking communities, the idea of the Aryans as invaders is deeply offensive. We believe that the cultural exchanges, if any, were much more peaceful and natural, and do not support the violent and invasive portrayal of the AIT.