“Few days back”:http://varnam.nationalinterest.in/archives/000346.html Romila Thapar in a letter to the editor to The Hindu said that all along she had maintained that there was no Aryan Invasion. I am currently reading her book “Early India: From the origins to the AD 1300”:http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0520238990/jksobservat-20. Here are some exceprts
bq. Indo-European and Indo-Aryan are language labels, but in the nineteenth century these were also incorrectly used as racial labels and this confusion persists. The correct usage should be “Indo-European-speaking people” and `Indo-Aryan-Speaking-people’, but the shortened labels, Indo-European and Indo-Aryan are commonly used. Language is a cultural label and should not be confused with race, which although also a social construct, claims that it has to do with biological descent.
bq. Some migrated to Anatolia, others to Iran, and some among the latterm it is thought migrated to India. In the texts composed by them, such as __Avesta__ in Iran and the __Rig-Veda__ in India, they refer to themselves as __airiia__ and __arya__, hence the European term, Aryan.
bq. There are clearly many sources of information on the beginings of Indian history. Archeological evidence is chronologically more precise, but cannot be used to identify any culture as ‘Aryan’ since archeology, in the absence of a script cannot supply information on a language. Unfortunately, the Harappan script remains undeciphered. The theory of an Aryan invasion no longer has credence.
So there you have it, right from the horse’s mouth. There was no Aryan Invasion. Aryan is a language label. Aryans composed Rig Veda.