Is there a link to this post above
Aryan Idols: Indo-European Mythology as
Ideology and Science
Aryan Idols: Indo-European Mythology as Ideology and Science
By Stefan Arvidsson
Translated by Sonia Wichmann
The University of Chicago Press
Judged on merit, various Aryan theories rank among the weakest examples of scholarship, riddled with scientific contradictions and weighed down by political and racial prejudices. But in influence and longevity, especially in politics, they compare with the theories of Einstein and Darwin. The 'Aryan nation' became the mantra of German unification, while in colonial India, Aryans became the common ancestors of the Indians and the British. Neither Relativity nor the Theory of Evolution can match this.
While the scientific, racial and political aspects of the Aryan theories have been debated threadbare, a basic question remains: what drove the Europeans, Germans in particular, to a land and a people so far removed from them in space and time to define themselves? This question is effectively answered by Swedish scholar Stefan Arvidsson in his new book Aryan Idols. In the process, he has also shed light on European cultural currents leading to the persistence of these theories in western academia and their proneness to ideological abuse.
A useful point that Arvidsson makes is that the goal of this discipline, now called Indo-European studies, was not so much to understand Indian origins as to "show that there existed a rich 'German' mythology that could successfully compete with classical Judeo-Christian traditions". It is hardly surprising that anti-Semitism was tied up with it.
<b>A little known aspect of Aryan theories, at least in India, is the major contribution of German folklore. Wilhem and Jacob Grimm, who compiled German folk tales, were also philologists. "For over two hundred years, a series of historians, linguists, folklorists, and archaeologists have tried to recreate a lost culture. Using ancient texts, medieval records, philological observations, and archaeological remains they have described a world, a religion, and a people older than the Sumerians, with whom all history is said to have begun."</b>
There are, of course, no Indo-European texts. "No objects can definitely be tied to them, nor do we know any 'Indo-European' by name. <b>In spite of that, scholars have stubbornly tried to reach back to the ancient 'Indo-Europeans', with the help of bold historical, linguistic, and archaeological reconstructions, in the hope of finding the foundation of their own culture and religion there."
This helps answer the question why some western academics react viscerally whenever their theories are thrown in doubt by new findings in archaeology, natural history or genetics.</b> As Arvidsson notes: "There is something in the nature of research about Indo-Europeans that makes it especially prone to ideological abuse, perhaps something related to the fact that for the past two centuries, the majority of scholars who have done research on the Indo-Europeans have considered themselves descendants of this mythical race." This 'ideological abuse' reached its culmination in the Nazi regime. More recently, it raised its head when California education authorities tried to change the syllabus in elementary schools, replacing theories like the Aryan invasion with more recent findings.
Speaking of Indology, the book observes: "The theory about India as the original home of the Indo-Europeans, and the Indians as a kind of model Aryans, lost supporters during the nineteenth century, and other homelands and other model Aryans took their place instead." <b>The Aryans (or Indo-Europeans) and their homeland were gradually moved westward until they were made to settle in Eurasia and even Germany. In the hands of German scholars, Aryans became "Indo-Germanische".</b>
In summary, "the main reason why scholarship about the Indo-Europeans has tended to produce myths is that so many who have written [and read] about it have interpreted it as concerning THEIR OWN ORIGIN". <span style='color:red'>While this accounts for the European attachment to the Aryan myth, it fails to explain why many Indian scholars continue to cling to it. The answer will have to come from an Indian scholar. WHY?</span>
Aryan Idols: Indo-European Mythology as
Ideology and Science
Aryan Idols: Indo-European Mythology as Ideology and Science
By Stefan Arvidsson
Translated by Sonia Wichmann
The University of Chicago Press
Judged on merit, various Aryan theories rank among the weakest examples of scholarship, riddled with scientific contradictions and weighed down by political and racial prejudices. But in influence and longevity, especially in politics, they compare with the theories of Einstein and Darwin. The 'Aryan nation' became the mantra of German unification, while in colonial India, Aryans became the common ancestors of the Indians and the British. Neither Relativity nor the Theory of Evolution can match this.
While the scientific, racial and political aspects of the Aryan theories have been debated threadbare, a basic question remains: what drove the Europeans, Germans in particular, to a land and a people so far removed from them in space and time to define themselves? This question is effectively answered by Swedish scholar Stefan Arvidsson in his new book Aryan Idols. In the process, he has also shed light on European cultural currents leading to the persistence of these theories in western academia and their proneness to ideological abuse.
A useful point that Arvidsson makes is that the goal of this discipline, now called Indo-European studies, was not so much to understand Indian origins as to "show that there existed a rich 'German' mythology that could successfully compete with classical Judeo-Christian traditions". It is hardly surprising that anti-Semitism was tied up with it.
<b>A little known aspect of Aryan theories, at least in India, is the major contribution of German folklore. Wilhem and Jacob Grimm, who compiled German folk tales, were also philologists. "For over two hundred years, a series of historians, linguists, folklorists, and archaeologists have tried to recreate a lost culture. Using ancient texts, medieval records, philological observations, and archaeological remains they have described a world, a religion, and a people older than the Sumerians, with whom all history is said to have begun."</b>
There are, of course, no Indo-European texts. "No objects can definitely be tied to them, nor do we know any 'Indo-European' by name. <b>In spite of that, scholars have stubbornly tried to reach back to the ancient 'Indo-Europeans', with the help of bold historical, linguistic, and archaeological reconstructions, in the hope of finding the foundation of their own culture and religion there."
This helps answer the question why some western academics react viscerally whenever their theories are thrown in doubt by new findings in archaeology, natural history or genetics.</b> As Arvidsson notes: "There is something in the nature of research about Indo-Europeans that makes it especially prone to ideological abuse, perhaps something related to the fact that for the past two centuries, the majority of scholars who have done research on the Indo-Europeans have considered themselves descendants of this mythical race." This 'ideological abuse' reached its culmination in the Nazi regime. More recently, it raised its head when California education authorities tried to change the syllabus in elementary schools, replacing theories like the Aryan invasion with more recent findings.
Speaking of Indology, the book observes: "The theory about India as the original home of the Indo-Europeans, and the Indians as a kind of model Aryans, lost supporters during the nineteenth century, and other homelands and other model Aryans took their place instead." <b>The Aryans (or Indo-Europeans) and their homeland were gradually moved westward until they were made to settle in Eurasia and even Germany. In the hands of German scholars, Aryans became "Indo-Germanische".</b>
In summary, "the main reason why scholarship about the Indo-Europeans has tended to produce myths is that so many who have written [and read] about it have interpreted it as concerning THEIR OWN ORIGIN". <span style='color:red'>While this accounts for the European attachment to the Aryan myth, it fails to explain why many Indian scholars continue to cling to it. The answer will have to come from an Indian scholar. WHY?</span>