The Aryan Invasion Controversy
- Which of the theories about the Bronze Age history seems more plausible to you? Why?
The readings present a piece of evidence proving that there was no Aryan invasion and the Indo-European is not responsible for culture. Moreover, the article discusses Harappa a place that has not been found; there is no substantial evidence despite taking the similarity of city names. Some of the Vedic text in the article gives plausible to rituals and sacrificial rites which resemble the practices that might have been common at the Harappa period.
I see there is a lack of horse remains evidence in the second reading thus meaning there might be no Aryan invasion. The Aryans invasion does not affect the continuation of the language of this religion. It is not easy to conserve a language the moment there is an introduction to a new culture. In my trust there was no Aryan migration and therefore the only culture in the Indus valley was Vedic culture. I believe that based on the geological evidence, there is more elaboration from the loss of Harappa showing lack of warfare evidence. The only cultural transformation that took place in this region was natural but not a force.
- Have you ever encountered a negative attitude toward non-western cultures (perhaps your own)?
I have encountered a negative attitude towards nonwestern cultures. Many individuals may perceive nonwestern culture being not relatable. As a result there are stereotypes presented by the mass media and minimal exposure and interaction with nonwestern people. I don’t have an Asian background though I understand some suggestions made about nonwestern culture. Many people tend to consider challenge in understanding nonwestern culture as ugly. Resulting to lack of understanding the historical and hidden meaning in such culture. Some people have a negative attitude towards nonwestern culture. Instead of hating such cultures, there is need of learning more on something so that people can end up liking it more rather than disrespect.