DOI Page / Citation link:
https://doi.org/10.11588/diglit.9541#0048
26
HISTORY OF IXDTAX AUCHITECTTRTC.
and peoples who, in all ages, so far as we know, poured across the
Indus from the westward to occupy her fertile plains.
As mentioned above, the great master fact that explains almost
all we know of the ancient history of India is our knowledge that
two or three thousand years before the birth of Christ a Sanscrit-
speaking nation migrated from the valleys of the Oxus and .laxartes.
They crossed the Indus in such numbers as to impress their civilisation
and their language on the whole of the north of India, and this
to such an extent as practically to obliterate, as far as history is
concerned, the original inhabitants of the valley of the (hinges, whoever
they may have been. At the time when this migration took place the
power and civilisation of Central Asia were concentrated on the lower
Euphrates, and the Babylonian empire never seems to have extended
across the Carmanian desert to the eastward. The road, consequently,
between Bactria and India was open, and nations might pass and
re-pass between the two countries without fear of interruption from any
other people.
If any of the ancient dynasties of Babylonia extended their power
towards the East, it was along the coast of Gedrosia, and not in a
north-easterly direction. It is, indeed, by no means improbable, as
hinted above, that the origin of the Dravidians may be found among
the Accadian or in some of the Turanian peoples who occupied southern
Babylonia in ancient times, and who may, either by sea or land, have
passed to the western shores of India. Till, however, further informa-
tion is available, this is mere speculation, though probably in tin-
direction in which truth may hereafter be found.
When the seat of power was moved northward to Nineveh, the
Assyrians seem to have occupied the country eastward of the Caspian
in sufficient force to prevent any further migration. At least, after
that time—say B.C. 1000-—we have no further trace of any Aryan
tribe crossing the Indus going eastward, and it seems mainly to have
been a consequence of this cutting oft' of the supply of fresh blood that
the purity of their race in India was so far weakened as to admit of
the Buddhist reform taking root, and being adopted to the extent it
afterwards attained.
During the period of the Achennvnian sway, the Persians cer-
tainly occupied the countries about the Oxus in sufficient strength
to prevent any movement of the peoples. So essentially indeed
had Bactria and Sogdiana become parts of the Persian empire, that
Alexander was obliged to turn aside from his direct route to conquer
them, as well as the rest of the kingdom of Darius, before advancing
on India.
Whether it were founded for that purpose or not, the little Greek
kingdom of Bactria was sufficiently powerful, while it lasted, to keep
the barbarians in check; but when about the year 127-12(i B.C.,
HISTORY OF IXDTAX AUCHITECTTRTC.
and peoples who, in all ages, so far as we know, poured across the
Indus from the westward to occupy her fertile plains.
As mentioned above, the great master fact that explains almost
all we know of the ancient history of India is our knowledge that
two or three thousand years before the birth of Christ a Sanscrit-
speaking nation migrated from the valleys of the Oxus and .laxartes.
They crossed the Indus in such numbers as to impress their civilisation
and their language on the whole of the north of India, and this
to such an extent as practically to obliterate, as far as history is
concerned, the original inhabitants of the valley of the (hinges, whoever
they may have been. At the time when this migration took place the
power and civilisation of Central Asia were concentrated on the lower
Euphrates, and the Babylonian empire never seems to have extended
across the Carmanian desert to the eastward. The road, consequently,
between Bactria and India was open, and nations might pass and
re-pass between the two countries without fear of interruption from any
other people.
If any of the ancient dynasties of Babylonia extended their power
towards the East, it was along the coast of Gedrosia, and not in a
north-easterly direction. It is, indeed, by no means improbable, as
hinted above, that the origin of the Dravidians may be found among
the Accadian or in some of the Turanian peoples who occupied southern
Babylonia in ancient times, and who may, either by sea or land, have
passed to the western shores of India. Till, however, further informa-
tion is available, this is mere speculation, though probably in tin-
direction in which truth may hereafter be found.
When the seat of power was moved northward to Nineveh, the
Assyrians seem to have occupied the country eastward of the Caspian
in sufficient force to prevent any further migration. At least, after
that time—say B.C. 1000-—we have no further trace of any Aryan
tribe crossing the Indus going eastward, and it seems mainly to have
been a consequence of this cutting oft' of the supply of fresh blood that
the purity of their race in India was so far weakened as to admit of
the Buddhist reform taking root, and being adopted to the extent it
afterwards attained.
During the period of the Achennvnian sway, the Persians cer-
tainly occupied the countries about the Oxus in sufficient strength
to prevent any movement of the peoples. So essentially indeed
had Bactria and Sogdiana become parts of the Persian empire, that
Alexander was obliged to turn aside from his direct route to conquer
them, as well as the rest of the kingdom of Darius, before advancing
on India.
Whether it were founded for that purpose or not, the little Greek
kingdom of Bactria was sufficiently powerful, while it lasted, to keep
the barbarians in check; but when about the year 127-12(i B.C.,