Aryan Invasion Hypothesis

[Indo-Aryan]

We will need more ancient DNA and archeological evidence to confirm that.

I wonder how much ancestry was contributed by Parathian and Kushanas. For some reason lack of East Asian component among NW Indians point to no real impact of Saka ancestry. But the question should be were these Sakas really East Asian shifted & same with the White Hunas.

Some studies point to heterogeneous nature of Scythians.

 

[Indo-Aryan]

 

[asaffronladoftherisingsun]

-I think they believe that because of apparent archeological continuity between SE Iranian Neolithic sites to mehrgarh and eventually IVC.
- Based on antrophometrically heterogeneous skulls, I am guessing they had always guessed it be heterogeneous.
-This was believed due to-* Earliest 'substrate' (I don't know what it means) on rigveda being different from Dravidian languages which is observed in later parts only.
* It has something to do with tonality(again I have only vague idea what it means lol) present in Punjabi, that earliest substrate and possibly munda languages.
Though someone on that forum suggested it was a sister language to proto dravidian.

Do note that Barley was domesticated in Syria wala area was two row. Iran had barley near zagros non brittle six rowed barley at ali kosh in 8000 bce. Further enhancement in the quality of Iranian barley is noted in the form of naked barley mostly from six rowed forms which appear at Deh Luran from 7000 bce.

This 7th row naked barley which occurs in 7000 bce in Iran was already present in SINDHU SARSVATI in 9000 bce and 8000 bce. So clearly from SINDHU SARASVATI mehrgarh the barely was arrived to Iran and fun fact that Ganj dareh immigrants suddenly appear at those Iranian sites at about the same time as this eastern BHARTIYA type of Barley

 

[Ikariyasan]

Do note that Barley was domesticated in Syria wala area was two row. Iran had barley near zagros non brittle six rowed barley at ali kosh in 8000 bce. Further enhancement in the quality of Iranian barley is noted in the form of naked barley mostly from six rowed forms which appear at Deh Luran from 7000 bce.

This 7th row naked barley which occurs in 7000 bce in Iran was already present in SINDHU SARSVATI in 9000 bce and 8000 bce. So clearly from SINDHU SARASVATI mehrgarh the barely was arrived to Iran and fun fact that Ganj dareh immigrants suddenly appear at those Iranian sites at about the same time as this eastern BHARTIYA type of Barley

I think Ganj Dareh were replaced by Iran Chalcolithic population.

 

[Ikariyasan]

....For some reason lack of East Asian component among NW Indians point to no real impact of Saka ancestry.....

Yes, that's what I have heard.

 

[asaffronladoftherisingsun]

I think Ganj Dareh were replaced by Iran Chalcolithic population.

Ganj Dareh dna were not the gross representative of the Iranian Neolithic, but they represent a segment which was very small .

 

[asaffronladoftherisingsun]

The BUAUDHAYANA SHRAUT SUTRA mentions the migration of three people to Iran, Bactria and Armenia (Ararat) respectively during the chalcolithic period.

 

[Indo-Aryan]

Here is one interesting pointer

Everyone agrees post 2000bce Harappans migrated eastwards and southward right. They migrated because of aridity, draught and drying up of the river right.

So the question must be asked as to why semi-pastrolists from steppes that too in very large numbers would occupy a territory which was no longer considered suitable by the Harappans themselves?

Geography of Rig Veda matches Harappan civilization. In the later Vedic times they moved into the Gangetic plains post 2000bce.

 

[Indo-Aryan]

Scholars are off by 1000 years

Early Vedic age = >2000bce
Later Vedic age = ~2000bce-1500bce
Mahabharat = ~1500bce
Mahajanapadas = ~1500bce-500bce
Buddha = ~500bce

 

[Vamsi]

Scholars are off by 1000 years

Early Vedic age = >2000bce
Later Vedic age = ~2000bce-1500bce
Mahabharat = ~1500bce
Mahajanapadas = ~1500bce-500bce
Buddha = ~500bce

Mahabharata cannot be 1500BCE , simple reason because Saraswati river is still flowing during Mahabharata war and hence should be around 3000BCE.
Buddha cannot be 500BCE because it was the time of Adi Shankaracharya and hence buddha must be earlier probably around 1800 BCE.
Saraswati is mighty river in Rigveda and hence early Vedic period must be before 5000BCE probably 7000-8000BCE when Saraswati is in its mighty form

 

[Indo-Aryan]

Mahabharata cannot be 1500BCE , simple reason because Saraswati river is still flowing during Mahabharata war and hence should be around 3000BCE.
Buddha cannot be 500BCE because it was the time of Adi Shankaracharya and hence buddha must be earlier probably around 1800 BCE.
Saraswati is mighty river in Rigveda and hence early Vedic period must be before 5000BCE probably 7000-8000BCE when Saraswati is in its mighty form

Wait! I think I read somewhere that Saraswati depleted by Mahabharata. Disappeared underground re-emerged somewhere in Rajasthan and formed pools of water .........and disappeared again.


Let me recheck on it.

 

[Indo-Aryan]

Two-hundred-year drought doomed Indus Valley Civilization

Two-hundred-year drought doomed Indus Valley Civilization - Nature

Monsoon hiatus that began 4,200 years ago parallels dry spell that led civilizations to collapse in other regions.

www.nature.com

 

[Indo-Aryan]

Kotla Dahar is a closed basin, filled only by rain and runoff and without outlets. Thus precipitation and evaporation alone determine its water volume. During drought, oxygen-16, which is lighter than oxygen-18, evaporates faster, so that the remaining water in the lake and, consequently, the snails' shells, become enriched with oxygen-18. The team's reconstruction showed a spike in the relative amount of oxygen-18 between 4,200 and 4,000 years ago. This suggests that precipitation dramatically decreased during that time. Moreover, their data suggests that the regular summer monsoons stopped for some 200 years.

 

[Indo-Aryan]

Mahabharata cannot be 1500BCE , simple reason because Saraswati river is still flowing during Mahabharata war and hence should be around 3000BCE.
Buddha cannot be 500BCE because it was the time of Adi Shankaracharya and hence buddha must be earlier probably around 1800 BCE.
Saraswati is mighty river in Rigveda and hence early Vedic period must be before 5000BCE probably 7000-8000BCE when Saraswati is in its mighty form

My issue with those dates is you can't place bhalikas sakas and yavanas pre 2000bce.

Scythians are dated post 1000bce. In my opinion people of Andronovo horizon were also scythians or proto-scythians.

Buddha around 1800bce would mean ajatshatru and mahavira also at 1800bce and in turn will date Mauryan and Nandas to 1500bce x_x

 

[Indrajit]

Mahabharata cannot be 1500BCE , simple reason because Saraswati river is still flowing during Mahabharata war and hence should be around 3000BCE.

Saraswati is mighty river in Rigveda and hence early Vedic period must be before 5000BCE probably 7000-8000BCE when Saraswati is in its mighty form

In the Mahabharata, Sarasvati is already being recognised as drying up in places, its no longer the mighty river of old. Partially flowing but no longer the great river. That can also be noticed with the increased importance of Ganga as evidenced in the Mahabharata w.r.t. Bhishma.

Sarasvati is indeed a mighty river in the Rig veda but seems to reduce in significance after that in terms of mentions. I'm never sure of the dates (except that it has to account for the Sarasvati at full flow and its later disappearance) but pushing dates too far back is also problematic because the gaps between what we know becomes too large to hold. If one assumes a major tectonic plate shift to be responsible for the loss of Sarasvati's greatness, then it is likely it would have happened in a fairly short period of time with possibly the tributaries of Sarasvati flowing towards the Indus & Ganga. While this is admittedly conjecture, there is not much else that explains the great river's disappearance. Accounting for 1000's of years to explain a gradual drying up may not necessarily be valid, a few hundred years may be all it took. It couldn't be too sudden because otherwise it would likely have been recorded somewhere by the people who recorded so much but a few hundred years might explain both its remembered importance as also the changed priority of holy rivers.

 

[dazialsoku]

Mahabharat is 3162 BCE
Buddha Nirvana is 1864 BCE
Mauryans 1600 BCE
Mahavira Nirvana is 1189 BCE

 

[dazialsoku]

My issue with those dates is you can't place bhalikas sakas and yavanas pre 2000bce.

Scythians are dated post 1000bce. In my opinion people of Andronovo horizon were also scythians or proto-scythians.

Bhalikas are probably the pre-BMAC archaeological complexes. My theory is that Shakas were a tribe in south central asia that went north to became the Scythians. It is now known that the first Scythians in the eastern steppe around the Altai moutains in Siberia had BMAC ancestry.

Also Yavanas were and Indian tribe that went west and became the Ionians.

 

[dazialsoku]

Mahabharata cannot be 1500BCE , simple reason because Saraswati river is still flowing during Mahabharata war and hence should be around 3000BCE.
Buddha cannot be 500BCE because it was the time of Adi Shankaracharya and hence buddha must be earlier probably around 1800 BCE.
Saraswati is mighty river in Rigveda and hence early Vedic period must be before 5000BCE probably 7000-8000BCE when Saraswati is in its mighty form

lowest bound for Rigvedic period is 8000 BCE. Astronomy verifies this too, with RigVeda being placed between 11,000-8,000 BCE with the astronomical references.

 

[dazialsoku]

Scholars are off by 1000 years

Early Vedic age = >2000bce
Later Vedic age = ~2000bce-1500bce
Mahabharat = ~1500bce
Mahajanapadas = ~1500bce-500bce
Buddha = ~500bce

You might want to read Vedveer Arya's work

Vedveer Arya - Academia.edu

Academia.edu is a place to share and follow research.

independent.academia.edu

 

[Indo-Aryan]

I was thinking over it for last few days but my brain got dead so I would like some answers.


Claim: IranN was Dravidian speakers

If that was the case then how come related though separated temporarily and spatially Caucasian hunter gatherers were the conduit for Indo-European languages?

Ganj Dareh was genetically similar to Indus Valley people and lived around 10000BP in Western Iran. Around the same time it's hypothesized by max plank institute that another Iranian related hunter gatherers CHG were proto-Indo-European speakers who contributed half the ancestry to Yamnaya people.


Doesn't make sense.

The more I look at it the more I feel IranN was the conduit for Proto-PIE which became PIE around 8000bce and later contributed to the Yamnaya.