Myth of Race: The Aryan Question

The word Arya and Swastika both had a positive connotation before the Nazis exploited them for their insidious motives. Today, the word and the symbol are taboo in the west while it continues to be used and respected in India and the East. How come these positive Sanskrit terms meaning Noble and good luck came to be known for racism, both in the west and also in some cases in India?

True Meaning & Origin of Aryan

The word Aryan comes from the word Arya, meaning noble. Arya was used by ancient Indians (both Vedic & Nastika faiths) and also by ancient Iranians (Iran itself is a corruption of Ariana). When European linguistics found a common link between Indian languages, Iranian languages and European languages they theorized that ancient Indians, Iranians and Europeans must have shared common ancestors and common ancestral language (Proto Indo-European). They initially had no name for these hypothetical ancestors and so they decided to denote them as ‘Aryan’. The Swastika symbol was also a common link among all major Indo-European cultures, and thus this symbol was made the mascot of the hypothetical Aryan race.

As European colonisation was at its peak, the white supremacist narrative was gaining momentum along with the concept of a pure race. Some historians were theorising that probably these ‘Aryans’ (Indo-Europeans) were originally white people who eventually conquered most of the world. Indians, who looked darker as compared to the Europeans were considered to be a mixture between the Aryan (white) and Dravidian (dark). Dravidian languages of South India didn’t share common features with the Indo-European languages except for some borrowed words. Hence, they were considered a separate race. Now it was theorised that Aryans invaded India and subjugated the native Dravidians. The British used this propaganda for establishing their legitimacy over India calling themselves the new age Aryan. They also constructed their government buildings in Indo-Saracenic architecture to display themselves as a new age Mughals as well. The British used this propaganda to divide and rule north against the south, and upper castes against the lower castes. The idea of a race till now was being considered to be absolute.

Not a historian but an artist decided to use this idea to promote his political ideology. This man was Adolf Hitler. Unlike historians like Max Muller, a politician does not update his beliefs as per new findings. He made the narrative very black and white, both figuratively and literally. Rest is history. Now, this racial supremacist concept is so looked down upon that it is taboo to use words and symbols like Aryan or Swastika. But times have changed, new archaeological findings, genetic data, and linguistic interpretation have led to more clarity on this subject. Aryan, today is used only for denoting the Indo-Aryan and Iranian offshoot of the Proto Indo-Europeans.

Now let us understand what is Aryan. Proto Indo-Europeans (bearers of R1 Y haplogroup DNA) diverged into many groups like Celts, Germanic, Latins, Greeks, Slavs, Balts and Aryan. The Aryan branch migrated to India and Iran from what is Central Asia, while the rest were tribes only distantly related to the Aryans. So, there you go. Celts, Germanic, Latin, Greek, Balts and Slavs never Aryan. But in the terminology of the Aryans, this was never an ethnic identity. It was a cultural one. Someone of a different stock if part of the culture was considered to be Aryan, while someone originally from Aryan stock who was not part of the culture was not considered as Aryan. There you go. The identity was more cultural than ethnic or racial.

(The R1a and R1b DNA is considered originally Indo-European, but new genetic groups were assimilated into the culture over the period. Like I haplogroup in Europe and Q haplogroup in Central Asia and India.)

Were the Proto Indo-Europeans really white people with blonde hair and blue eyes? No, they were swarthy people with darker hair and eyes, some did have blue eyes. We know this from ancient skeletons and their DNA. Their descendants gained these fair, blond features from the native North European Hunter-Gatherers. Therefore, the whole concept of race is self- contradictory. Skin and hair colours do not confirm genetic continuity, and genetic continuity does not always have common skin and hair colour features.

In modern India, Brahmins are considered by some to be of a pure Aryan race, while some backward castes are considered to be of a Dravidian race. So much so, that Brahmins are considered to be foreign by some prejudiced leftists. But genetic data proves that there was intermixing between various ethnic stocks from the beginning till around 100 CE. This mixing abruptly stopped in the first century CE and endogamy begun. Hence, caste identities cannot determine an Aryan race.

Aryan Genetic Data:

Kota is a Tamil speaking tribe with 19.35% R1a DNA among males, Chenchu is a Telugu speaking tribe with 26% R1a DNA. Manipuri or Meitei people who speak a Sino-Tibetan language and look East Asians have around 50% R1a DNA. The fair-skinned hazel-eyed Konkanastha Brahmins have only 32% R1a DNA and are genetically much closer to other groups found in Maharashtra. Therefore, language, facial features and caste hierarchy does not define Aryan origin.

Now let us come to this old theory which is still often debated and discussed even after new findings.

OUTDATED ARYAN INVASION THEORY: 

Fair-skinned pastorals invaded India with horse chariots and established Vedic culture, and became the Brahmins, Kshatriya & Vaishya.

Riding chariots and entering India from Central Asia via mountainous regions is impractical. Pastoral occupation cannot be the only occupation they had. Indus Valley Civilisation had fortresses. They were advanced enough to defend themselves from barbarian attacks. Their downfall was caused by climatic changes.

THEREFORE, THE MODERN UPDATE OF THE THEORY IS: 

People carrying R1a DNA migrated to India, probably brought horses but not chariots, established Vedic culture with the existing population, and founded an amalgamated society.

Hence, language, religion, genetic marker, skin tone, eyes and hair colour do not determine race. Excluding isolated tribes, most of the modern humans are a result of genetic admixtures that have been happening since pre-historic times. The swastika is a symbol of good luck, and Aryan means a noble person. Nothing more, nothing less.

BIBLIOGRAPHY:

1. Fortson W, Benjamin. (2011). Indo-European Language and Culture: An Introduction. John Wiley & Sons. Page 209-210

2. Joseph, Tony. Early Indians Story of Our Ancestors and Where We Came From. (Juggernaut, 2018)

3. T. Kivisild, S. Rootsi, M. Metspalu, S. Mastana, ... R. Villems. (2003). The Genetic Heritage of the Earliest Settlers Persists Both in Indian Tribal and Caste Populations. American Society of Human Genetics. vol. 72 (issue 2), Page 313-332. https://doi.org/10.1086/346068

4. Swarkar Sharma, Ekta Rai, Prithviraj Sharma, Mamata Jena, Shweta Singh, Katayoon Darvishi, Audesh K Bhat, AJS Bhanwer, Pramod Kumar Tiwari and Rameshwar NK Bamezai. (2009). The Indian origin of paternal haplogroup R1a1* substantiates the autochthonous origin of Brahmins and the caste system. Journal of Human Genetics. Issue 54, Page 47–55

5. ArunKumar, G. Soria-Hernanz, DF. Kavitha, VJ. Arun, VS. Syama, A. Ashokan, KS. (2012). Population Differentiation of Southern Indian Male Lineages Correlates with Agricultural Expansions Predating the Caste System. PLOS ONE. 7 (11): e50269.

6. Underhill, PA. Myres, NM. Rootsi, S. Metspalu, M. Zhivotovsky, LA. King, RJ. Lin, AA. Chow, CE. et al. (2009). Separating the post-Glacial coancestry of European and Asian Y chromosomes within haplogroup R1a. European Journal of Human Genetics (published April 2010). 18 (4): 479–84. doi:10.1038/ejhg.2009.194

VIDEO LINKS: