Why this is only unacceptable to Hindus.
No not only to the Hindus but it is well known in rest of the world that Aryan Invasion Theory is wrong.
It looks like you are more impressed with the 120 year myth created by F. Max Muller in 1848. And is biased towards western Indologist ,ignoring new research conducted by Hindu scholars and their opinions despite the solid evidence provided by them and not mentioning thousands of articles present over the Internet showing that Aryan Migration Theory is Debunked.
Aryan Invasion Theory was reinforced by western scholars on Hindu people (Hinduism) and on the rest of the world and became the accepted history of Hinduism until some time back.
It is accused that the theory is put forward for racist ideas: These are some of the points I have compiled.
- it suggested that Indian culture was not a culture in its own right, but a synthesis of elements from other cultures
- it implied that Hinduism was not an authentically Indian religion but the result of cultural imperialism
- it suggested that Indian culture was static, and only changed under outside influences
- it suggested that the dark-skinned Dravidian people of the South of India had got their faith from light-skinned Aryan invaders
- it implied that indigenous people were incapable of creatively developing their faith
- it suggested that indigenous peoples could only acquire new religious and cultural ideas from other races, by invasion or other processes
- it accepted that race was a biologically based concept (rather than, at least in part, a social construct) that provided a sensible way of ranking people in a hierarchy, which provided a partial basis for the caste system
- it provided a basis for racism in the Imperial context by suggesting that the peoples of Northern India were descended from invaders from Europe and so racially closer to the British Raj.
- it gave a historical precedent to justify the role and status of the British Raj, who could argue that they were transforming India for the better in the same way that the Aryans had done thousands of years earlier
- it downgraded the intellectual status of India and its people by giving a falsely late date to elements of Indian science and culture.
In books such as The Myth of the Aryan Invasion of India and In Search of the Cradle of Civilization, David Frawley criticises the 19th century racial interpretations of Indian prehistory, such as the theory of a conflict between invading Caucasoid Aryans and Dravidians. In his Frawley along with Georg Feuerstein and Subhash Kak has rejected the Aryan Invasion Theory and supported the Out of India theory.
The Indus valley culture was pronounced pre-Aryans for several reasons
that were largely part of the cultural milieu of nineteenth century
European thinking. As scholars following Max Muller had decided that
the Aryans came into India around 1500 BC, since the Indus valley
culture was earlier than this, they concluded that it had to be
pre-Aryan. Yet the rationale behind the late date for the Vedic
culture given by Muller was totally speculative. Max Muller, like many
of the Christian scholars of his era, believed in Biblical chronology.
This placed the beginning of the world at 400 BC and the flood around
2500 BC. Assuming to those two dates, it became difficult to get the
Aryans in India before 1500 BC.
The Vedic culture was thus said to be that of primitive nomads who came out of Central Asia with their horse-drawn chariots and iron weapons and overthrew the cities of the more advanced Indus valley culture, with their superior battle tactics. It was pointed out that no horses, chariots or iron was discovered in Indus valley sites.
These are the points mentioned By David Frawley in his book.
1) This was how the Aryan invasion theory formed and has remained since then. Though little has been discovered that confirms this theory, there has been much hesitancy to question it, much less to give it up.
2 ) Further excavations discovered horses not only in Indus Valley sites but also in pre-Indus sites. The use of the horse has thus been proven for the whole range of ancient Indian history. Evidence of the wheel, and an Indus seal showing a spoked wheel as used in chariots, has also been found, suggesting the usage of chariots.
3) Moreover, the whole idea of nomads with chariots has been challenged. Chariots are not the vehicles of nomads. Their usage occured only in ancient urban cultures with much flat land, of which the river plain of north India was the most suitable. Chariots are totally unsuitable for crossing mountains and deserts, as the so-called Aryan invasion required.
Further excavation revealed that the Indus Valley culture was not destroyed by outside invasion, but according to internal causes and, most likely, floods. Most recently a new set of cities has been found in India (like the Dwaraka and Bet Dwaraka sites by S.R. Rao and the National Institute of Oceanography in India) which are intermediate between those of the Indus culture and later ancient India as visited by the Greeks. This may eliminate the so-called dark age following the presumed Aryan invasion and shows a continuous urban occupation in India back to the beginning of the Indus culture.
In other words there is no racial evidence of any such Indo-Aryan invasion of India but only of a continuity of the same group of people who traditionally considered themselves to be Aryans.
According to this theory, the Vedic people were nomads in the Punjab,
coming down from Central Asia. However, the 'Rig Veda' itself has
nearly 100 references to ocean (samudra), as well as dozens of
references to ships, and to rivers flowing in to the sea. Vedic
ancestors like Manu, Turvasha, Yadu and Bhujyu are flood figures,
saved from across the sea. The Vedic God of the sea, Varuna, is the
father of many Vedic seers and seer families like Vasishta, Agastya
and the Bhrigu seers. To preserve the Aryan invasion idea it was
assumed that the Vedic (and later Sanskrit) term for ocean, samudra,
originally did not mean the ocean but any large body of water,
especially the Indus river in Punjab. Here the clear meaning of a term
in 'Rig Veda' and later times - verified by rivers like Saraswati
mentioned by name as flowing into the sea - was altered to make the
Aryan invasion theory fit. Yet if we look at the index to translation
of the 'Rig Veda' by Griffith for example, who held to this idea that
samudra didn't really mean the ocean, we find over 70 references to
ocean or sea. If samudra does not mean ocean, why was it translated as
such? It is therefore without basis to locate Vedic kings in Central
Asia far from any ocean or from the massive Saraswati river, which
form the background of their land and the symbolism of their hymns.
In a article Frawley also talks about Aryan-Dravidian divide ,this is what he says.
Dravidian history does not contradict Vedic history either. It credits
the invention of the Tamil language, the oldest Dravidian tongue, to
the rishi Agastya, one of the most prominent sages in the Rig Veda.
Dravidian kings historically have called themselves Aryans and trace
their descent through Manu (who in the Matsya Purana is regarded as
originally a south Indian king). Apart from language, moreover, both
north and south India share a common religion and culture. Prior to
Vedic Sanskrit there may have been a language that was the basis of
both the Dravidian and Sanskritic languages in India.
Above all read this article - Harvard University’s international scandal unravels a global Hindu conspiracy.
North & South Bharatiyas Share Tissue Antigens, Distinct From Those of Europeans.
North & South Bharatiyas Share mtDNA, Which Is Distinct From That of Europeans.
Conclusion: The stark lack of similarities in the gene pools of the
Indian subcontinent and Europe, vividly evident in the mtDNA and the
MHC complex, destroys any ' Aryan invasion' notions, and confirms the
genetic uniformity of peoples of the Indian subcontinent. Chandrakant
Pansé, Professor of Biotechnology
Considering all this points and based on many more such new conclusions by Hindu scholars , Institutions ,colleges both indian as well as western .Hindu people and Scholars strongly deny Aryan Invasion Theory. And is dead. So it's not just Hindu People but rest of the world also.