Word "Aryan" is priced becoz of its Indic(Hindu)

I would also quibble with the use of the term "migrant".  A migrant is someone going to another land looking for work, food, a place to live, etc.  A migrant is usually in a lower position compared to the people he is seeking to live amongst.   What happened to India was a military invasion backed by the best technology of the time.  The people invading should be more likened to a Nation, rather then mere individual migrants.

The story I have gained here so far is of a homogenous group (I won�t say invaders) from (wherever) entered India from (somewhere in the North). They went on to overlay their culture on the pre-existing culture (I won�t say set up a caste system). There was (a largely unnamed) culture there who (for unknown reasons) assimilated the incoming culture. I hope I got all that right.

This more homogenous group soon were considered noble because for they acquired land and planted crops. Then these noblemen lorded it over the now disenfranchised peasants. In which country on earth has this cycle never happened? Look at the Greeks who celebrated noble ancestry through ancient farming festivals (Hieros Gamos) and the Roman noblewomen who made a religion out of it (Bona Dea).  

Now Aryan can mean �noble� but also means �tiller of the soil� according to Friedrich Max Muller, the first scholar to translate the Rig Vedas into English. The controversy started for every nationalist minded group wanted to claim their race originally started growing food rather than staying with being hunter-gatherers.

We must be talking about a Neolithic age here, an essential stage in the social evolution of emerging groups. There are two major versions of settling in village farms, the Semitic and the Indo-European. The Semitic claim is backed up by the Old Testament Bible as shared by three major faiths, Jewish, Christian and Moslem. The Book says Cain and Abel were the first tillers of the soil. However, the Book has a spiritual rather than historical meaning.

At one time most sought to find Biblical evidence for world settlement (some still do). But impartial investigation led to other ways of life, with separate ways of development, language and ways of religion. One would think the far more developed Semitics would have been better organized, but their language and customs fragmented into areas and groups. Perhaps early on their once fertile lands started drying out, more competition for land occurred and no overall agreement was reached between the competing groups.

On the other hand there is the linked language group called Indo-Aryan, (now known as Indo-European). Their settlements went into India, the European wilderness and Asian plains. Their dynamic speech and customs had nothing to do with Semitic model yet their �natural law� system made the basis for Western law, they did have overall legal agreements. That these people were in India like first stated makes an attractive idea, but when examining the PIE (Proto Indo-European) root words another location emerges, where that was remains a matter of speculation.