What's the cost of book ?

It seems very interesting..tks

Oh what a book it is!! Thanks for posting a favorite!!

Cliched topic on which views of either side never quite seem to evolve :) I don't think this really needs to be a very "political" issue. Unfortunately the problem with several Indians is that they miss the nuance and caricaturize the whole theory. You have the "HIndu" nationalists who take offence at the thought that some aspects of their culture may have originated beyond the Indus. What they overlook is that these migrations are very very ancient almost pre-historic migrations and one needn't take offence about the same. Then you have the low-caste formations in different parts of India who use this "migration theory" to promote hate against the "haves" of society. Again this is very very flawed. It is ridiculous to use very ancient mass movements and cultural shifts to explain the social realities of modern India. A lot of water has passed under the bridge.

whatever the westerners says who cares about that.This theory is already refuted long back & those macaulayian kids promoting it now need to change their views on this theory.If at all this theory would have been valid,there would have been a mention about it in Vedic period or pre Vedic period literature or any other such evidence.I wonder how and why the british discovered evidences to bring out this thoery

'Vedas' are religious documents that tell you precious little about the lay secular life and history of the people who wrote it. A lot of the Vedas were very much a product of a composite Indian society in India. Nobody denies that. The Indo-aryan migrations, as per most scholars predate a very very vast majority of Vedic literature

The reality of this planet is that migrations have happened! It is so very stupid to deny that. There is a scientific consensus that the human race originated in Africa! So everybody really is a migrant. Ofcourse some are later migrants (e.g. - Indo-Euroepan language speakers as opposed to Dravidian cultures which represent an earlier strata of migrations). But migrations cannot be denied, unless one chooses to be obscurantist.

You present the issue as a nationalist one, as Indians versus westerners. But that does not describe the situation well. Scholars holding different views on the IE migration issue exist in various parts of the world. Both views have been supported by scholars in India and also in Europe, for example. As Bryant's book shows, in fact.

Refuted? When, where, by who?

Aaryans, ancient sanskrit word originated in Bharat, used by british imperial interest, thats all.

Shri Ram and all pure blood lines used to be called arya, paradox is, this word in modern times get explanation by people who have mix blood line.

Could have been better named "Who destroyed evidences of ancient India" :P By the by is it scripted after Saraswathi river discovery ?

Wow, so interesting. Must read it.

Shrikanth Krishnamachary is continued to write without knowing and putting evidences in support of Aryan Migration, Why Aryans has to migrate from anywhere else to India, Who told them about India as a destination, migration is a fantasy of illiterates who make arguments without evidences

The Aryan migration theory assumes that all other branches of Indo Europeans were uneducated illiterate nomadic type tribe, Only Vedic Aryans were the intelligent and superior among all Indo Europeans, hence, none of Indo European branches could produce any literature, even literature inferior to Vedas that Vedic Aryans produced. Ha Ha Ha

The Aryan migration theory also assumes that Aryans were infact originally aliens and hence no record of their existence found in history of Hurrians or Hittites or Mesopotamians, What is this fun, they came to central asia directly from heavens and then migrated to India, that is the whole endeavor of our JNU type historians, what do you think Shrikanth Krishnamachary Ji ?

Mishraji namaste. I have nothing to say. You are free to believe what you want. I don't simply "believe" in things. I am interested in figuring things out. And my views aren't set in stone. For instance, 10 years ago I subscribed to the orthodoxy that Harappan culture was completely non Aryan. Now I believe it's quite possible that Harappan culture had indo-european influences and the divide between Harappan culture and the successor Vedic culture was probably not as clear cut as people think.