VEDIC PERIOD
The Aryan question:
There are more than a dozen theories about the original home of the Aryans or the Indo-
Europeans and many views about the routes they followed out of their homeland. Initially the
term ‘Arya’ was especially associated with the people who spoke Vedic and Avestan languages,
but gradually speakers of entire Indo-European languages came to be recognized as Aryan.
Historians have determined the main traits of the Aryan culture on the basis of Vedic, Iranian
and Greek literary texts and cognate terms found in the Proto-Indo-European languages.
The original homeland of the Indo-European and Indo-Aryans is the subject of continuing
debate among philologists, linguists, historians, archaeologists, and others. The common view
that the Indo-Aryan came to India for outside is strongly refuted by the Hindu fundamentalists
and the western champions of the continuity of the local cultural tradition. In an attempt to
legitimize the indigenous origin of Indian culture and civilization it has been propagated, though
vacuously, that the people who composed the Vedas called themselves Aryans and were the
original inhabitants of India.
Some historians are of the opinion that Aryans came to India in several waves. The earliest
wave is represented by the Rig Vedic people, who appeared in the subcontinent in about 1500
B.C. They came into conflict with the original inhabitants called the dasas, dasyus, etc. The
dasas are also referred to in the earliest Iranian literature. They seem to have been a branch of
the early Aryans. The war lord of Rig Vedic Aryan i.e. Indra led many battles against dasas,
dasyus and panis. The dasyus seem to have been original inhabitants of India and an Aryan
chief who conquered them was hailed as trasadasyu.
The Vedas reflect a close connection with Iran. But we do not know when, where, or why the
Indo-Iranians and Indo-Aryans parted ways. Today, most historians discarded the idea of Aryan
invasion of the Indian subcontinent in favor of a theory of several waves of Indo-Aryan
migrations. However, there is no consensus on the routes or timings of these migrations. The
Indo-Aryan languages of India include the non-Sanskritic or non-Dardic languages spoken in the
mountains of the north-west, which may represent an earlier wave of Indo-Aryan immigrants.
Superior military technology and the use of the horse and chariot may have given the
immigrants the crucial initial advantage, enabling them to establish their political dominance in
the land of seven rivers.
VEDIC SOCIETY:
The Rig-Veda displays some consciousness of the physical appearance of people in north-
western India in about 1500-1000 BC. Varna was the term used for color, and it seems that the
Indo-Aryan language speakers were fair and the indigenous inhabitants dark in complexion.
Color may have provided the identifier for social orders, but its importance has been
exaggerated by writers with an excessive belief in racial distinctions. The factor that contributed
most to the creation of social divisions was the conquest of the indigenous inhabitants by the
Indo-Aryans. The dasas and the dasyus, who were conquered by the Aryans, were treated as
slaves and shudras. The Rig Veda mentions the arya varna and dasa varna. The tribal chiefs and
the priests acquired a larger share of the booty and naturally became wealthy at the cost of
their kinsmen, thereby creating social inequalities in the tribe. Gradually the tribal society was
divided into three occupational groups, warriors, priests and the common people on the same
patterns as in Iran. The fourth division called the shudras appeared towards the end of the Rig
Vedic period. The term shudras is mentioned for the first time in the Rig Vedic period. The term
shudra is mentioned for the first time in the Rig Veda in its 10th book, which is the latest
addition.
We repeatedly hear of slaves who were primarily women employed for domestic purposes. It is
clear that in Rig Vedic times slaves were not used directly in agriculture or other productive
activities.
In the age of Rig-Veda, differentiation based on occupation had begun, but this was very sharp.
We hear of gifts of cattle, chariots, horses, slaves, etc. unequal distribution of the spoils of war
created social inequalities, and this aided the rise of princes and priests at the cost of the
common tribal people. However, as the economy was mainly pastoral and not food producing,
the scope for collecting regular tributes from many people was very limited. We do not find
gifts of land, and even gifts of cereals are rare. We find domestic slaves but not wage-earners.
The tribal elements in society were stronger and social divisions based on the collection of taxes
or accumulation of landed property did not exist, and thus the society was still tribal and
egalitarian.
