Editing Aryan race (section)

== History ==
=== Debates on linguistic homeland ===
In the late 18th century, [[Proto-Indo-European]] (PIE) was constructed as the hypothesized common [[proto-language]] of the [[Indo-European languages]].{{sfn|Bryant|2001|p=20}}{{sfn|Anthony|2007|pp=4–5}} [[William Jones (philologist)|Sir William Jones]], who was acclaimed as the "most respected linguist in Europe" for his ''Grammar of the Persian Language'' (1771), was appointed one of the three justices of the [[Supreme Court of Judicature at Fort William|Supreme Court of Bengal]].{{sfn|Anthony|2007|p=6}} Jones, who arrived in [[Calcutta]] and began his study of Sanskrit and the [[Rig Veda]], was astonished by the [[Lexical similarity|lexical similarities]] between [[Sanskrit]] and other Indo-European languages such as [[Persian language|Persian]], [[Gothic language|Gothic]], [[Greek language|Greek]], and [[Latin]], and concluded that Sanskrit—as a [[descendant language]]—belonged to the same proto- or parent-language in the [[language family]]—that is PIE, as the other Indo-European languages,{{sfn|Anthony|2007|p=7}} in his ''Third Anniversary Discourse on the Hindus'' (1786).{{sfn|Santucci|2008|p=40}} However, the [[linguistic homeland]] of the [[Proto-Indo-Europeans|original speakers]] of Proto-Indo-European was a politicized debate among the archaeologists and [[Comparative historical research|comparative historical linguists]] since the start, entangling in [[Chauvinism|chauvinistic]] causes.{{sfn|Anthony|2007|pp=4–5}}{{sfn|Zvelebil|1995|p=34}}{{sfn|Anthony|2007|p=10}} Some European [[Nationalism|nationalists]] and [[dictator]]s, most notably the Nazis, later attempted to identify the Proto-Indo-European homeland in their country or region as racially superior.<ref name="colin89">{{cite journal|journal=[[Scientific American]]|volume=261|number=4|date=October 1989|title=The Origins of Indo-European Languages|first=Colin|location=[[United States]]|last=Renfrew|url=https://www.jstor.org/stable/24987446|page=108|doi=10.1038/scientificamerican1089-106 |jstor=24987446 |bibcode=1989SciAm.261d.106R }}</ref>{{sfn|Anthony|2007|p=5}}

According to [[Leon Poliakov]], the concept of the Aryan race was deeply rooted in philology, based on the work of Sir William Jones' claiming that Sanskrit was related to Greco-Roman (European) languages. Other thinkers invented secularized origins for European civilization that were not based on the biblical genealogies from which Europe's aristocracy had long claimed descent.<ref>{{cite book |last1=Leoussi |first1=Athena |title=Encyclopedia of Nationalism |date=2001 |publisher=Taylor & Francis |location=United Kingdom |page=11 |quote="The process was further assisted by a romanticism which gloried in the exotic and encouraged the idea that the greatest civilizational achievements of Europe could be attributed to the stimulus of ancient Aryan tribal movements...Historians seemed increasingly bent on discovering in each case a vigorous national past from which could be projected an even greater future. Scholars searching for Aryan pedigree also availed themselves of such newer disciplines as ethnology and anthropology."}}</ref><ref>{{cite journal |last=Judaken |first=Jonathan |title=Leon Poliakov, Philosophy, and the Secularization of Anti-Judaism in the Development of Racism |journal=Graduate Faculty Philosophy Journal |date=6 March 2024 |volume=35 |issue=1 |url=https://www.academia.edu/37191095|pages=193–195 |quote=It seemed as in the Europeans of the scientific age, having freed themselves from the conventional Noachian genealogy and rejected Adam as a common father, were looking around for new ancestors but were unable to break with the tradition which placed their origin in the fabulous Orient. It was the science of linguistics which was to give a name to these ancestors by opposing the Aryans to the Hamites, the Mongols—and the Jews.}}</ref>

=== Romanticism and Social Darwinism ===
{{See also|Romantic nationalism|German nationalism#Romantic nationalism}}
The influence of [[Romanticism#Germany|Romanticism]] in Germany saw a revival of the intellectual quest for "the German language and traditions" and a desire to "discard the cold, artificial logic of [[Age of Enlightenment|Enlightenment]]".{{sfn|Anthony|2007|pp=7–8}} After [[Charles Darwin|Darwin]]'s 1859 publication of ''[[On the Origin of Species]]'' and publicization of the theorized model of [[Proto-Indo-European language]] (PIE), the Romantics convicted that language was a defining factor in [[national identity]], combined with the new ideas of [[Darwinism]].{{sfn|Anthony|2007|p=8}} The [[German nationalism#Romantic nationalism|German nationalists]] misemployed the [[scientific theory]] of [[natural selection]] for the rationalization of the supposed [[Fitness (biology)|fitness]] of some races over others, although Darwin himself never applied his [[Survival of the fittest|theory of fitness]] to vague entities such as races or languages.{{sfn|Anthony|2007|p=8}} The "unfit" races were suggested as a source of genetic weakness, and a threat that might contaminate the superior qualities of the "fit" races.{{sfn|Anthony|2007|p=8}} The misleading mixture of [[pseudoscience]] and Romanticism produced new racial ideologies which used distorted [[Social Darwinism|Social Darwinist]] interpretations of race to explain "the superior biological-spiritual-linguistic essence of the [[Northern Europe]]ans" in self-congratulatory studies.{{sfn|Goodrick-Clarke|1992|pp=12–14}}{{sfn|Anthony|2007|pp=8–9}} Subsequently, the German Romantics' quest for a "pure" national heritage led to the interpretation of the ancient speakers of PIE language as the distinct progenitors of a "racial-linguistic-national stereotype".{{sfn|Anthony|2007|pp=8–10}}<ref name="frederic_94">Mish, Frederic C., Editor in Chief ''Webster's Tenth New Collegiate Dictionary'' Springfield, Massachusetts: 1994. Merriam-Webster p. 66</ref>