Scientists reconstruct faces of Indus Valley people

Indo-Aryan

Regular Member
Joined
Jun 6, 2018
Messages
769
Likes
808
Country flag
A genetic study published in Nature in July 2016 found that WSHs were a mixture of EHGs and "a population related to people of the Iran Chalcolithic". EHGs were modeled as being of 75% Ancient North Eurasian (ANE) descent. A significant presence of WSH ancestry among populations of South Asia was detected.

How is Iran Chalcolithic related to Iran Neolithic population who forms the major ancestry component of Harappans?

EHG have 3/4th of their ancestry related to Tarim People between 2000-1500bce. Did Tarim ancestry ever percolate into the South Asian populations of Afghanistan & Kashmir.

What does steppe ancestry really mean?
Does it mean we carry some parts of Iran Chalcolithic and ancient North Eurasian ancestry among us?

How similar these original ancient North Eurasian were to the people who migrated there from Asia.
 

Indo-Aryan

Regular Member
Joined
Jun 6, 2018
Messages
769
Likes
808
Country flag
Another assumption is Yamnaya spoke Ancient/late PIE which again has no basis to it.
 

Indo-Aryan

Regular Member
Joined
Jun 6, 2018
Messages
769
Likes
808
Country flag
No one really talks about the impact of Harappans on BMAC.

No one talks about the impact of Sakas on South Asians.
 

Tshering22

Sikkimese Saber
Senior Member
Joined
Aug 20, 2010
Messages
6,064
Likes
11,130
Country flag
If these AIT propagandists call "Out of India theory" as Hindutva Fantasy, then call their AIT as Mleccha fantasy or Marxshit fantasy , that's it simple.
The problem is that we Indians let colonizers define our history rather than put our own research forth. For example, European and the West still classify us, northeastern people, as "Tibeto-Burman". There was no clear defined racial lines in the ancient world as the cultures were common.

Tibetans intermarried with mountain-dwellers as well as those living in the Gangetic plains and oriental features were never seen as 'foreign' in Indian history; EVER. Even Tibetans were used to non-oriental-looking Indians ("Indo-Aryans" as the colonizers call it) because of intense cultural exchanges, pilgrimage to Kailash, etc.

Only Chinese, Japanese & Koreans were seen as foreigners because of the sheer distance & very distinct features.

The weird part about all this is that both Tibetan and Burmese heavily borrow from Sanskrit. This was done to make the language more eloquent like Sanskrit is and done so voluntarily by the kings of Tibet and Burma.
Burmese is written in a script derived from Sangam-era script; much of the ASEAN countries' scripts are all based either in Tamil or Sanskrit.

But when we put this forward, they dismiss this completely as though we are uttering some imaginary shit. And the worst part is, we let them control the narrative.
 

Latest Replies

Global Defence

Articles

Top