New findings into genetics

Forgotten Prince

Regular Member
Joined
Mar 2, 2019
Messages
106
Likes
225
So now we are being told that Indus valley people were population admixture of zargos farmers and south Asian hunter gatherers.

Let's put therm around 5000 bce
At the same time period near the zargos mountain near the north lies turkey caucas mountain and central Asia.
We have been told proto indo european lived in the region around 5000 bce

Now to those people who claim ivc to be Dravidian or protodravidian, can they explain the Iranian admixture in ivc population? For me recorded mixing of Dravidian and Aryas happened in sangam age between 300 bce -300 CE

Any idea as to who were the zargos farmers?
 

Srinivas_K

Senior Member
Joined
Jun 17, 2009
Messages
6,124
Likes
7,600
Country flag
Yup but Is their any clarity over who these farmers were?

At times I feel as if these scholars can't digest the fact that things can be developed on their own. Now they attribute farming to Iranians and hunter gather life style to south Asians.
How many rivers Iran has and how many India has?

India is a agri based civilization from the beginning. We might have taught the farming techniques to others.
 

Vishwamitra

Regular Member
Joined
Oct 30, 2018
Messages
78
Likes
145
Most likely those farmers were influenced by Neolithic civilizations such as Sumer and learned farming from their ancestors such as old Phoenician Neolithics.

I am glad they migrated here though, we have second hight Neolithic influence after baloch people.
 

anupamsurey

Senior Member
Joined
Jun 19, 2014
Messages
1,032
Likes
507
Country flag
Even the rigveda mentions aryan tribes in afganistan and Iran- ie: pakhtus(pashtuns) and Parsu (persians). You get an out of india migration here, after the battel of 10 kings ,these two tribes were expelled from mainland, because they wanted to seprate themselves from local tribes there they called themselves aryans(nobles) and thus the modern name Iran.
The mittani kings in antolia were indo aryans ...it is well accepted by archeologists...they were outsiders for antolia...why not propose that they migrated from iran or india to the anatolia region
Recent findings indiacate that the IVC and Rigveda are of same timeline so they were part of a common society.
 

Forgotten Prince

Regular Member
Joined
Mar 2, 2019
Messages
106
Likes
225
Even the rigveda mentions aryan tribes in afganistan and Iran- ie: pakhtus(pashtuns) and Parsu (persians). You get an out of india migration here, after the battel of 10 kings ,these two tribes were expelled from mainland, because they wanted to seprate themselves from local tribes there they called themselves aryans(nobles) and thus the modern name Iran.
The mittani kings in antolia were indo aryans ...it is well accepted by archeologists...they were outsiders for antolia...why not propose that they migrated from iran or india to the anatolia region
Recent findings indiacate that the IVC and Rigveda are of same timeline so they were part of a common society.
As far as my understanding ( using linguistic and history) goes late harappa coincides with early vedic age and mature harappa coincides with Zend Avestan. Only bone of contention is one was horse centric and other wasn't.

But I don't know how much horses are mentioned in rigveda, could anyone clarify? What I know for sure is that cow was very important may be even more important than horse.
 

Forgotten Prince

Regular Member
Joined
Mar 2, 2019
Messages
106
Likes
225
Also could anyone clarify what dasa means?

As per highschool history books:

Dasa = slave ( I thought it means servant)
Dasa = earlier Aryan tribes
Divodasa/sudas = Aryan king

Very conflicting views in the same book :scared2:
 

Forgotten Prince

Regular Member
Joined
Mar 2, 2019
Messages
106
Likes
225
Or could it be that both Harappan and vedic people lived together. Just like bronze age harrapans were living with chalcolithic cultures.
 

Shaitan

Zandu Balm all day
Mod
Joined
Aug 3, 2010
Messages
4,654
Likes
8,267
Country flag
Yup but Is their any clarity over who these farmers were?

At times I feel as if these scholars can't digest the fact that things can be developed on their own. Now they attribute farming to Iranians and hunter gather life style to south Asians.

People from the fertile crescent, or people east of it influenced by them.
 

Shaitan

Zandu Balm all day
Mod
Joined
Aug 3, 2010
Messages
4,654
Likes
8,267
Country flag
Personally, I dont think the Indo-Aryans invaded IVC. I think IVC already died out and the people went back to village life by then. Indo-Aryan four runner lang, religion, genetics, hierarchy are there - which are huge indicators, but everything else is not of central asian origin.

What they adopted wasnt IVC culture, architecture, etc. but a mixing of indigenous village culture with their own outside methods. If you see the reliefs images of ancient India right with Maurya, and all the successors all over India, you would never think it was an offshoot of C. Asian culture. Which basically means IVC was already ruined when the arrival happen. These nomads usually save and adopt local effective methods of doing things, up until they converted to Islam.

So basically what I am saying is, somewhere there was compromise of sorts, which probably happened with the republics.

An incursion did without a doubt happen, however.
 
Last edited:

Forgotten Prince

Regular Member
Joined
Mar 2, 2019
Messages
106
Likes
225
Personally, I dont think the Indo-Aryans invaded IVC. I think IVC already died out and the people went back to village life by then. Indo-Aryan four runner lang, religion, genetics, hierarchy are there - which are huge indicators, but everything else is not of central asian origin.

What they adopted wasnt IVC culture, architecture, etc. but a mixing of indigenous village culture with their own outside methods. If you see the reliefs images of ancient India right with Maurya, and all the successors all over India, you would never think it was an offshoot of C. Asian culture. Which basically means IVC was already ruined when the arrival happen. These nomads usually save and adopt local effective methods of doing things, up until they converted to Islam.

So basically what I am saying is, somewhere there was compromise of sorts, which probably happened with the republics.

An incursion did without a doubt happen, however.
Let's check how central Asian and European genetics ended up in India.

Around 800 bce Scythians began their movement around the world. Around 500 bce under Cyrus,Darius etc Indus valley became part of Persian empire. Between 300bce-300ce , we had indogreeks, grecobactria, parathians,sakas,kushans,Hun's etc. All these were horse centric cultures. Later on we had turks,mongols,arabs,west Europeans etc.

Majority of this ancestry can still be found among pashtuns,punjabis and north west Indians like rajputs,jats,gurjars etc then there is the case of chitpavan brahmins with high Caucasian ancestry and individual cases of other clans spread through out India.

One curious case is of south India.

They had roman explorers and traders in sangam age followed by south east Asian and Arab merchant mix in medieval age.
 

Forgotten Prince

Regular Member
Joined
Mar 2, 2019
Messages
106
Likes
225
With so much intermixing I kinda fail to understand why scholars say intercaste marriages were absent and frowned upon
 

Shaitan

Zandu Balm all day
Mod
Joined
Aug 3, 2010
Messages
4,654
Likes
8,267
Country flag
Let's check how central Asian and European genetics ended up in India.

Around 800 bce Scythians began their movement around the world. Around 500 bce under Cyrus,Darius etc Indus valley became part of Persian empire. Between 300bce-300ce , we had indogreeks, grecobactria, parathians,sakas,kushans,Hun's etc. All these were horse centric cultures. Later on we had turks,mongols,arabs,west Europeans etc.

Majority of this ancestry can still be found among pashtuns,punjabis and north west Indians like rajputs,jats,gurjars etc then there is the case of chitpavan brahmins with high Caucasian ancestry and individual cases of other clans spread through out India.

One curious case is of south India.

They had roman explorers and traders in sangam age followed by south east Asian and Arab merchant mix in medieval age.

The first wave was Indo-Aryan, which would produce the Vedic culture, etc.. By the time the Scythians came, it's hard to say if they 100% knew their origins outside India. They obviously knew they were different from different lower castes. They also were already mixed at that point. Mixing happened on a large scale at first.
 

anupamsurey

Senior Member
Joined
Jun 19, 2014
Messages
1,032
Likes
507
Country flag
As far as my understanding ( using linguistic and history) goes late harappa coincides with early vedic age and mature harappa coincides with Zend Avestan. Only bone of contention is one was horse centric and other wasn't.

But I don't know how much horses are mentioned in rigveda, could anyone clarify? What I know for sure is that cow was very important may be even more important than horse.
Presence of Horse is a major tool employed by leftis and so called invasionists, their common argument is that IVC didnt have horses..but it is disproven archeologically, IVC had horses and chariots too. IVC traded with present day oman, central asia and mesopotamia so no way that they wrnt aware of horses. Then horse bones have been excavated by archeologist all over ivc sites so rhis argument falls flat. Even rigvwda doesnt give overt importance to horses, but much importance is given to chariot and wheel- phrases like Rathi, maharathi, and chakravartin are attestment to that.
On genetic side, all indian cattles are derived from Indian Zebu. So if aryans were so fond of cows they would have brought their own european zebus with them but they didnt.
Antropologically, importance of animals change from time to time for example'', som 6 -7 decades back rich people used to maintain huge herd of cattle but now they give more inportance to dogs....you can put 1 +1 .
 

S.A.T.A

Senior Member
Joined
Mar 28, 2009
Messages
2,569
Likes
1,548
India had horses for 40,000 years now


Bhibhetka cave paintings.

Now don't u tell me these are donkeys.
Bhimbetka caves are in central India and far removed from the the IVC core. Moreover the paintings could be anthropomorphic figures, much like the IVC unicorn. However the paintings are interesting in their own right.

There are reports of horse bones being found in late mature IVC site in surkotada, but there are arguments over whether it was a domestic horse type or not. Given the fact that it was found in the later date, migrationist have argued that it proves migration of horse riding Indo-Aryans into India.
 

S.A.T.A

Senior Member
Joined
Mar 28, 2009
Messages
2,569
Likes
1,548
Applying science of genetics to unravel archeological or linguistic mysteries is still in its infancy. Genetic scientist will find themselves running Into the same brick wall that others have run into, called inter disciplinary consensus..This is the same issue what the linguists from the previous decades had faced from the then emerging science of Archaeology. Archeologists were unable to corroborate the picture of the Indo-European world that was being painted by the linguists.

Shared genetic profile of Neolithic farmers from NW Iran with present population in NW India is interesting, but there are gaps and other genetists have contended that the impact on the over all population was limited. Of course this migration has nothing to do with the Indo-Aryans...
 

Latest Replies

Global Defence

New threads

Articles

Top