"Recently a tendency to reverse this part of the historical model has been gaining momentum. In general, the positing of intercultural diffusion has gone out of fashion, as the pressures of the postcolonial era have confronted scholarship with a demand for special care in matters which might be interpreted as implying cultural hierarchy. Explanations of changes in ancient cultures through migration theory have given way to accounts that stress “indigenous cultural development.” An Indian scholar brings out the postcolonial issue: “While most of them [past scholars] broadly belonged, in one way or the other, to the School of Hyper-diffusionism initiated by Elliot Smith, locating the birth of Civilization at one or two places only, such as Egypt and Mesopotamia, some of us totally reject it and call it as [sic] ‘hangover’ of Imperialism of some European countries with no substance in it.” Witzel concurs about the change in scholarly attitude, saying, “There has been, recently, a strong reaction against the invocation of external agents of change, such as migration and diffusion.” But he goes on to suggest doubts about this reaction, saying, “However, that such forces [as migration and diffusion] were operating in the past is clear from innumerable historical examples.”"