In the late 19th century, The hypothesis of the Aryan invasion of India was invented. Linguistic Friedrich Max Muller first suggested it in 1884. The British government appointed him to translate the Rig Veda. He observed that the Sanskrit, Latin, Persian & Greek languages had many common words. He thought that people speaking similar words must have been related sometime in the past and might have common ancestors. Therefore, some people might have come from some other country in India. Max Muller & other historians suggested that around 4000 years ago, a fair-skinned race migrated from Central Asia to Europe & Iran. Later, a few groups from the Iranian migrants also invaded India. The poets of Rigveda were considered to be ‘Arya.’ The British called them the Aryans.
It was an attack on Indian History by Western imperialists, both political and cultural. They made us think that the Rig Veda is the work of a barbaric invading horde. Consequently, there is no culture and civilization in the Rigveda. The Christian missionaries got an excuse to show that Vedic culture came from Middle Eastern culture, the cradle of the Bible and Christianity, showing that Hinduism or Vedic religion is an offshoot of the religion and civilization of the West.
By not showing the primitive nature of the Vedas, the sciences of India were mentioned as Greek knowledge. This approach also discredited the Puranas genealogy and the long list of Kings before the Krishna, Shri Ram, and Buddha as having no historical basis. Hindu and Buddhist traditions and culture are projected as fantasies and myths. Thus, it paved the way for India’s cultural, social, and political domination, with Western civilization’s superiority and religion gaining the upper hand. Therefore, this approach made the Hindus feel ashamed of their culture as having no scientific and historical basis. The Western Missionary scholars did in the intellectual sphere what the British army did in the political realm, discrediting, dividing, and conquering the Hindus.
Even after seventy-three years of India’s independence, Indian Historians and educationalists are silent about it. Taking a stand against this theory would cause a reexamination of many of the old ideas about India. Most of the Indian scholars continue to accept the misinterpretation of their own culture and history passively. They take all these things lightly, perhaps failing to realize that a historically defined culture creates the perspective from which it is viewed in the modern social and intellectual context.
These Hindu scholars are proud of ‘Tolerance,’ which does not mean allowing a false view to reign, causing many injuries to India’s health. They take less interest in what India’s great seers have said, as guided by Western, Christian scholars in particular. This explains why most English educated students, intellectuals, pressmen, and media persons are Hindu-haters.