Reassessing the Horse in the Indus-Sarasvati Civilization: Archaeological Evidence and Methodological Flaws

Summary

The presence of the horse in the Indus-Sarasvati civilization remains a contentious issue, central to debates about the Aryan invasion theory. Critics argue that the Rig-Veda's frequent mention of horses implies a post-Harappan Aryan presence, while the absence of horse remains in Harappan sites is cited as evidence of their pre-Vedic, non-Aryan status. However, extensive archaeological findings challenge this narrative. Horse remains, including skeletal and dental evidence, have been reported from multiple Harappan and pre-Harappan sites, such as Kodekal, Hallur, Mohenjo-daro, Ropar, Lothal, and Surkotada. Experts like A.K. Sharma, B.B. Lai, and Hungarian archaeozoologist Sandor Bokonyi have identified these remains as belonging to domesticated horses (Equus caballus), with Bokonyi confirming their domestication through dental and skeletal analysis. Carbon dating further supports this, with samples from sites like Mahagara yielding dates between 2265 and 1480 BCE, predating the proposed Aryan arrival. Despite these findings, skepticism persists, with some scholars dismissing the evidence as misidentifications of wild asses or questioning dating methods. However, the consistent identification of horse remains across multiple sites and the presence of horse figurines, such as at Mohenjo-daro, undermine the argument for their absence. The low proportion of horse remains relative to other animals is explained by their limited role in daily consumption compared to cattle or sheep. The evidence overwhelmingly indicates that horses were present in the Indus-Sarasvati civilization long before the Aryan invasion theory's proposed timeline, challenging conventional narratives and highlighting the need for a re-evaluation of historical assumptions.