Nikolai Suvorov − An Example of the Illiterate Rubbish Published in IE

Studies

Shrikant G. Talageri

There is an article published in Academia.edu, "The origin of the Aryans and

their advance into India", by Nikolai Suvorov (Master of South Asian Studies
at the University of Hamburg!), written/published in 2019, which can serve as
an example of the kind of outdated and half-baked rubbish that is being written
and published in academies all over the world in respect of Indo-European
studies with particular respect to India:

https://www.academia.edu/39095040/The_origin_of_Aryans_and_their_advanc
e_into_India

The writer starts out by telling us: "The origin of the Aryans generates so-
called ‘Aryan problem’, i.e. when, where, from and in which ways the
Aryans came to India. A dispute with respect to this matter has been waged
by scholars for decades." After giving a very primary introduction to the
history of IE studies with particular respect to India, this childish paper gives us
the four theories or "predominant views on the original home of the Aryans"
(meaning apparently the four views other than the Steppe theory): The Arctic
Region; Central Asia and Kazakhstan; The Middle East; India.

The extremely outdated nature of this paper is demonstrated by:

a) the extensive way in which it writes about the Arctic Home,

b) the number of times it quotes the extremely outdated nonsense written by

R.N.Dandekar,

c) the fact that the writer refers repeatedly to the Punjab as pañcanada (and
even writes "the Vedas mention Panchanada"!) a word which is neither here
nor there (na ghar k , na gh k ), i.e. neither the present name for the Punjab
nor the one used in the Vedic texts, but a late Sanskrit word especially used by
early twentieth century writers (like Savarkar and Dandekar) on such topics, and

d) the fact that its section on India (i.e. on the view that India was the
Homeland of the IEs), though it seems to have been written/published in 2019,
seems totally in the dark about the OIT case presented by me, and while it
refers to the "Out of India theory" (a phrase first used by Edwin Bryant, and
made popular by the case presented by me), this academic "scholar" postulates
"the book “The Vedic Age” the editor-in-chief of which was R. C.
Majumdar. The book’s authors indicate that the Vedas mention
Panchanada (contemporary Punjab region) as an original homeland of the
Aryans (deva-k ta-yoni or devanirmita-de a )", a book written in 1951, as
the main source book of the OIT! After a glorious battle with some elementary
statements from this book which serves as a straw man to attack the OIT, with
the aid of the antiquated fossil writings of Dandekar, and by quoting the most
elementary and childish among the AIT postulates or arguments (too many to
be detailed here: read the article in the original for these Gems of Illiteracy), this
buffoonish "scholar" triumphantly concludes that "The possibility for the
Aryans to be autochthonous for India is rejected".

Particularly noteworthy is the juvenile, polemical and illiterate way in which it

refers to the OIT, and makes it clear that while the buffoon who wrote this
article is completely blank about the data and facts, and about the state of the art
about the debate, he is very clear in his political agenda: "Nowadays, some
representatives of Indian science revealing their outright nationalist or
extremist nature continue to consider the Indian peninsula to be the
ancestral home of the Aryans. Often such conclusions are made without
any evidence, only to mislead an Indian average man and sell him the idea
that Indians are superior to the world’s population. The latter is especially
beneficial to chauvinistic and outright fascist circles of India, like the
Rashtriya Svayamsevak Sangh (RSS). Various attempts have been made to
rewrite history."

This is the extremely low intellectual level of writings in the western

Universities and academic circles when it comes to anything concerning India,
its history and its culture.
Unfortunately, because of the sepoy mentality of most (though obviously not
all) English-educated (or English-education-admiring) Indian writers, anything
written by western academicians or written in western journals constitutes
gospel truth and is swallowed wholesale by such Indians who are powerful in
the Indian media and in internet cliques. And this is the reason why the most
pathetic and oft-repeated objection to my writings amongst these zealots is that
my books and articles are not "peer-reviewed" in western academic journals: in
short, the only way in which my books and articles will become acceptable to
them is if the "scholars" controlling these journals accept that they were wrong!
The fact that my writings are completely stonewalled not because they are not
worthy of consideration, but because they are unanswerable, is something these
blind devotees of the West will never be able to understand, any more than a
religious zealot would be able to understand that something written in his Holy
Book could possibly be wrong.

Appendix added 11-8-2023:

The Bluster of the Terrified:

I received (not from Koenraad) a copy of the following twitter exchange

illustrating the "clutch-at-any-straw-to avoid-facing-defeat-in-debate"-Bluster of
the Terrified:
But they are right on one point: there is no basis for any kind of discussion with
bigoted zealots, and I have repeatedly made it clear that I am not interested in
discussing anything with people who have no scruples at all and are proud of it!

But, by "vitriol", "audacity" and "appalling language", perhaps they were

referring to Suvorov's comments on "some representatives of Indian science"
and the "Rashtriya Svayamsevak Sangh (RSS)"??