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

Admittedly, the presence of horses in the Harappan excavation sites is not as overwhelming in quantity as in the neolithic cultures of Eastern Europe.  However, the relative paucity of horse remains is matched by the fact that the millions-strong population of the Harappan civilization, much larger than that of Egypt and Mesopotamia combined, has left us only several hundreds of skeletons, even when men sometimes had the benefit of burial which horses did not have.

The implication for the question of the horses is that any finds of horses are good enough to make the point that horses were known in India, and that they were available to a substantially greater extent than a simple count of the excavated bones would suggest.  The cave paintings in Bhimbetka near Bhopal, perhaps 30,000 years old (but the datings of cave paintings are highly controversial), showing a horse being caught by humans, confirm that horses existed in India in spite of the paucity of skeletal remains.³⁴ There is, however, room for debate on whether the animals depicted are really horses and not onagers.  Other cave paintings, so far undated, show a number of warriors wielding sticks in their right hands and actually riding horses without saddles or bridles.³⁵

The fact that both the Austro-Asiatic and the Dravidian language families have their own words for �horse� (e.g. Old Tamil ivuLi, �wild horse�, and kutirai, �domesticated horse�) not borrowed from the language of the Aryans who are supposed to have brought the horse into India, should also carry some weight.  Partly because of the uncongenial climate, horses must have been comparatively rare in India (as they would remain in later centuries, when Rajput forces were attacked by Turkish invaders with an invariably superior cavalry), but they were available.

The evidence concerning horses remains nonetheless the weakest point in the case for an Indian Urheimat.  While the evidence is arguably not such that it proves the Harappan culture�s unfamiliarity with horses, it cannot be claimed to prove the identity of Vedic and Harappan culture either, the way the abundance of horse remains in Ukraine is used to prove the IE character of the settlements there.  At this point, the centre-piece of the anti-AIT plea is an explainable paucity of the evidence material, so that everything remains possible.

A fossil has been discovered from the Siwalik hills (Himalayan foothills): with short-pillare teeth and find limbe the horse is 15-hands long and perhaps date back to the stone age. (J.C.Ewart, Animal remains, in J.Curle, A Roman frontier post and its people (The Fort of Newstead), Glasgow: J. Mackehose and Sons, 1911, Appendix II, pp. 364,368). E.J. Ross reported the discovery of bones scattered over an area of about 40 ft., of a domesticated horse in the lowest level of Rana Ghundai I, close to Mohenjodaro and Ga_ndha_ra (pre-Harappan, contemporary with Hissar IA, Susa B and Middle Uruk in Iraq, assigned to ca. 3500-3400 B.C.) in a chalcolithis site of Northern Baluchistan . �It should be noted, however, that these remains are not, as might be expected, those of small pony-like animals. The teeth were well examined by an expert veterinary officer before their dispatch to the Archaeological Department and he assured us that they are indistinguishable either in structure or in size from those of our modern cavalry horses. This points to a very long previous period of domestication�. (E.J. Ross, Rana Ghundai, a chalcolithic site in Northern Baluchistan, Journal of Near Eastern Studies, 5, 1946, pp. 284-516; R.H. Dyson, Problems in the relative chronology of Iran 6000-2000 B.C. in R.W. Ehrick, Chronologies in old world archaeology, Chicago, Univ. of Chicago Press, 1965, pp. 215-50).

A.K.Sharma, The Harappan horse was buried under the dunes of..., in Puratattva, Bulletin of the Indian Archaeological Society, No. 23, 1992-93, pp. 30-34]: "At Surkotada the bones of the true horse (equus caballus Linn.) identified are from Period IA, IB and IC. (radiocarbon dates: 2315 B.C., 1940 B.C. and 1790 B.C respectively). With the correction factors, the dates fall between 2400 B.C. and 1700 B.C... In 1938 Mackay (FEM, Vol. I, p. 289) had remarked on the discovery of a clay model of horse from Mohenjodaro. 'I personally take it to represent horse. I do not think we need be particularly surprised if it should be proved that the horse existed thus early at Mohenjo-daro'. About this terracotta figurine Wheeler wrote: (Indus Civilization, Cambridge, 1968, p. 92): 'One terracotta from a late level of Mohenjodaro seems to represent a horse, reminding us that the jaw bone of a horse is also recorded from the same time, and that the horse was known at considerably early period in northern Baluchistan ... It is likely enough that camel, horse and ass were in fact all familiar feature of the Indus caravans.'... appearance of true horse from the neolithic sites of Koldihwa and Mahagara in Uttar Pradesh..." (Note: camel is also not depicted on Harappan inscriptions) The identification by Sharma has been endorsed by Prof. Sandor Bokonyi, Director of the Archaeological Institute, Budapest, Hungary (an archaeozoologist); he wrote in a letter dated 13 Dec. 1993 to the Director General of the Archaeological Survey of India: 'Through a thorough study of the equid remains of the prehistoric settlement of Surkotada, Kutcha, excavated under the direction of Dr. J.P. Joshi, I can state the following: The occurrence of true horse (equus caballus L.) was evidenced by the enamel pattern of the upper and lower cheek and teeth and by the size and form of incisors and phalanges (toe bones). Since no wild horses lived in India in post-Pleistocene times, the domestic nature of the Surkotada horses is undoutbtful. This is also supported by an intermaxilla fragment whose incisor tooth shows clear signs of crib biting, a bad habit only existing among domestic horses which are not extensively used for war."  

I don't even know why i am taking the bate. But its the way you word it.