search this blog

Monday, May 8, 2017

ESHG 2017 abstracts


The titles are already up but the abstracts will only be available this Saturday, May 13. The programme planner and abstract search engine are here. Below are links to a few random abstracts that caught my eye.

To be brutally honest, I suspect that the Rai et al. presentation on South Asian population history (first link below) won't amount to much more than a preemptive strike against the impending confirmation via ancient DNA that the Aryan invasion really did happen. In other words, I expect them to argue for strong genetic continuity in South Asia since at least the Neolithic and against the Aryan Invasion Theory (AIT).

Perhaps I'm being overly cynical and I'll apologize if I'm wrong, but I think it's a good bet, considering the many papers put out by Indian scientists over the past 15 years or so arguing that both the Indo-Aryans and "Aryan" Y-chromosome haplogroup R1a are native to South Asia. At best this is naive, and at worst plain crazy, but that doesn't seem to bother many of our Indian friends. Nevertheless, the ancient DNA sequenced as part of the Rai et al. study, when analyzed properly, should be very useful and I look forward to seeing it.

E-P18.02 - Reconstructing the human population history of the Indian subcontinent using ancient population genomics

C14.5 - Complex spatio-temporal distribution and genogeographic affinity of mitochondrial DNA haplogroups in 24,216 Danes

E-P18.03 - Genomic analysis of ethnic regions in Armenia

E-P18.21 - Detailed study of the genetic structure of the Volga-Ural region populations

P18.28D - The migrations and barriers that shaped the Central Asian Y-chromosomal pool

I don't have the time right now to do a detailed search of the database, so there might be many more titles that deserve attention. Feel free to post your favorite abstract in the comments below.

Update 13/05/2017: The Rai at el. abstract is up. It doesn't reveal any results, but it does list the types of ancient samples that they're testing. Emphasis is mine.

The more than 1.3 billion people who live in Indian subcontinent correspond to several large ethnic groups who are highly diverse and complex. Importantly, India’s genetic past remains a subject a great debate due to numerous hypotheses surrounding population origins and migrations within and from outside India. In order to reconstruct and explain the patterns of genetic diversity evident in modern humans, an understanding of both past and present population dynamics is crucial. Several studies have shown that genetic data from ancient individuals are indispensable when reconstructing past population histories. We for the first time use the ancient genomics approach in South Asia to reconstruct the complex human population history of Indian Sub continent. We are exploring the recent technological advancement to directly test these hypotheses using ancient and modern human DNA in India. We have collected several ancient skeletal remains from different time scale of human civilization ranging from early Mesolithic, Neolithic, Harappan (Indus Valley civilization) and Megalithic culture. With the whole/partial genome NGS data, we are reconstructing the prehistoric peopling and migration of modern human in the Indian subcontinent. We are also testing the pervasive founder events and gradient of recessive genes accumulation by comparing the ancient genome with the modern human population of India.

161 comments:

Matt said...

I don't really see a whole lot wrong with Kumarasamy Thangaraj or Niraj Rai's (publication history, to be honest. (Or generally any of Indian geneticists who've been involved in much of the work on the major ancient dna and population genetics papers recently, Swapan Mallick, Chaubey, etc.).

Thangaraj - https://scholar.google.co.in/citations?user=AYZNs9wAAAAJ
Rai - https://scholar.google.co.uk/citations?hl=en&user=h4mkNRsAAAAJ&view_op=list_works&sortby=pubdate

Davidski said...

In regards to that last name, have a look at these...

http://eurogenes.blogspot.com.au/2015/08/comic-relief.html

http://www.dnaindia.com/india/report-new-research-debunks-aryan-invasion-theory-1623744

Jijnasu said...

The interview is from 2011 before we had aDNA and even Y DNA studies on modern individuals were limited. Papers published by western authors too were very cautious in talking about any immigration to India at that time.

Davidski said...

Speaking of 2011, here's a bit of history.

http://eurogenes.blogspot.com.au/2011/11/origins-of-r1a1a1-in-or-near-europe-aka.html

Arza said...

Yamnaya + migration
C14.6 - From lost empires to modern cities with ancient GPS
E. Elhaik1, R. Das2, M. Pirooznia3, U. Esposito1;
1University of Sheffield, Sheffield, United Kingdom, 2Manipal University, Manipal, India, 3NIH, Bethesda, MD, United States.

Davidski said...

Elhaik lost the plot a long time ago.

http://eurogenes.blogspot.com.au/2016/07/khazar-shmazar-2.html

Arza said...

Ah, good to know. Apparently their GPS is really ancient if they are lost.

Jingus Jendal said...


@Jijnasu

"The interview is from 2011 before we had aDNA and even Y DNA studies on modern individuals were limited."

Yes, and yet he was claiming to have absolutely debunked AIT at that time, beyond any doubt, despite having so little DNA to study. He keeps saying "we have proved", "we have conclusively proven", so on and so forth. That's not cautious, in fact it's pretty irresponsible.

"Interestingly, the team found that instead of Aryan invasion, it was Indians who moved from the subcontinent to Europe."

I don't think he was talking about Gypsies.

So, their study slipshod and obviously designed and packaged to support OIT, which was always half-baked at best.
It's got nothing to do with caution.

MaxT said...

Will there be any Paleolithic or Mesolithic DNA studies from South Asia and Central Asia?

Davidski said...

Yeah, there's at least one Late UP or Mesolithic genome from Kyrgyzstan coming soon.

But I don't know if this Rai et al. study will have any Mesolithic South Asian samples. Maybe?

Karl_K said...

That 'news' article, and their publications, really make me wonder what their motivations are.

Absolutely all scientists conduct studies that give results in conflict with the original hypothesis. And they generally are very aware when they manipulate their interpretation of the data to meet up with expectations. Most feel very guilty and try to slowly slip over to the better model without making a big deal of it.

So, if the current study has a similar tone as the older ones, then we have to assume that they are either totally delusional, or politically/religiously motivated, perhaps also for monetary gain.

Nirjhar007 said...

AIT is already dead for long , its alive because of political issues in India and of course the play of Eurocentrism in academia which is not an exaggeration .

Lets just wait for the data now , instead of talking trash about the authors .

With such data anything is possible , and that is what makes it thrilling .

About Key words, a worthy (although pure speculation) suggestion can be that they found Mesolithic to Neolithic continuity, but during harappan a change was detected , going with archaeological there was a change in ~3800 BC i.e. migration . .

Karl_K said...

@Nirjhar007

That sounds very reasonable.

I am not wanting to trash the authors at all. It's just that level of certainty and the sweeping generalisations in their comments was way out of line for the modest amount of data that they actually had. It is bizarre to hear that from even one scientist, let alone three working together on such a controversial topic.

Karl_K said...

Usually you hear phrases like: "the data is consistent with..." or "these results lead us to believe..."

But instead, we get "We have conclusively proved that there never existed any Aryans or Dravidians in the Indian sub continent." and "Africans came to India through Central Asia during 80,000 to 60,000 BCE and they moved to Europe sometime around 30,000 BCE"

Wow. Now tell me how those are scientific comments.

postneo said...

@karl_k
where do you find such comments?

Karl_K said...

Of which type?

postneo said...

@kk
these:
"We have conclusively proved that there never existed any Aryans or Dravidians in the Indian sub continent." and "Africans came to India through Central Asia during 80,000 to 60,000 BCE and they moved to Europe sometime around 30,000 BCE"

Karl_K said...

http://www.dnaindia.com/india/report-new-research-debunks-aryan-invasion-theory-1623744

Nirjhar007 said...

“Africans came to India through Central Asia during 80,000 to 60,000 BCE and they moved to Europe sometime around 30,000 BCE. The Indian Vedic literature and the epics are all silent about the Aryan-Dravidian conflict,” said Dr S Kalyanaraman


I think you can not take very seriously the words of Dr S Kalyanaraman , he is like Dave . He is not part of the researches of Genetics and archaeology .

However , its a news article which myself were not aware of and can't be sure who said exactly what . Its also very old to be relevant now .But they have tons of data and one by one they will be released ...


Nirjhar007 said...

Yes, and yet he was claiming to have absolutely debunked AIT at that time

Dingus,

AIT is dis proven and its a FACT many years before that article even , they are right on that .

Davidski said...

Well, I wasn't aware that AIT was dead.

But if true, then it's about to make a comeback from the grave thanks to ancient DNA from South Asia.

Karl_K said...

@Nirjhar007

Well, many (or actually all) of the authors on this abstract have said similar things in publically available news articles.

I sincerely hope that you are correct, though, and scientific reason prevails in their paper.

postneo said...

Seems like those comments are not from the authors. Dr K is not a geneticist ..at point he was not sure hominids and humans came from Africa. I sent emails to him to correct him. This has no bearing on the recent abstract It's like equating Nike and Immelda Marcos.

postneo said...

N
We cannot say AIT is disproven. It is mainstream today. One can argue it has never been proven.

Nirjhar007 said...

I don't take News articles very seriously as they are subject to wrong interpretations from the journalist who don't have much idea of the issue,also errors occurs on exact quotations . I do take them seriously if its a thorough interview or an article written by an expert himself . Or a new archaeological find etc which are verifiable .

Dave,

If you think dude, that Yamnaya type ancestry, then my answer is yes , but the POINT is how deep....

Nirjhar007 said...

postneo,

Yes on Genetics we will have to see , but you know the pattern ;) .

JohnHutchins12 said...

Is there any information on the Volga-Ural study? This could be very interesting depending on how old the samples are.

Acharya Agnimitra said...

"Well, I wasn't aware that AIT was dead"

There is a word for believing in things without a single evidence....hmm....what was it?

Dave, I think this is the twelfth hour for you. You should immediately start with damage control. At the very least start working on an 'Aryan Osmosis theory' or an 'Aryan voltage gated theory'. Or there wont be anything left of YOUR reputation in another month.

Nirjhar007 said...

Yes John I am also very interested on that , though I don't know .

Acharya,

There is no need to be rude . You study the archaeology, indological etc researches on S Asia well, then you know what the situation is .And what should be the future situation also .

Nirjhar007 said...

But AIT gets totally smashed or not, ultimately you need big data for PIE . You need to kick out models first , strategically sequence all the key areas from Neo to Iron age . Subcontinent , whole of Europe, Near East , C Asia . Its a ocean like task , but it must be done, collaborate all the experts of each specific areas .

After that, you will see a stable pattern or two , then you will be able to base a scientifically achieved model , I wait for that to happen , I know it can be done!.

batman said...

Really nice to see that one of the good ol' giants among geneticians, Richard Villems, is back - with an indepth check of the peoples that populated Europes largest river-route - where our oldest pottery is found and the very first silk- and spice-route to Europe was established.

In 2000 he finished the first analyzis of the y-dna N, known to follow the boreal woodlands along this main waterway between Europe and Asia. Tagging the R3-TAT (today N1c) he was able to construct a "spread-pattern", concluding that this y-dna would have spread from the Baltics to the Caspian. Later his former student, Siiri Rootsi, would team up to contradict that - arguing that "a number of bottlenecks and founder-effects" could explain a migration in the oposite direction - along with her mt-dna C/Z.

Today it seems clear that post-doc Rootsi was only half right. As in the female part of the equation. The dog-sledge- and boat-builders that kept the first Volga-trade going was obviously men of European origin, just as the distant relatives - from the R1a-line - that later came along with their cattle and barley - to make butter and beer, all the way to China and India.


A year later the unstoppable Villems were part of the first study of the Indian population, reaching this basic inisght:

"20%–30% of Indian mtDNA haplotypes belong to West Eurasian haplogroups, and the frequency of these haplotypes is proportional to caste rank, the highest frequency of West Eurasian haplotypes being found in the upper castes. In contrast, for paternally inherited Y-chromosome variation each caste is more similar to Europeans than to Asians. Moreover, the affinity to Europeans is proportionate to caste rank, the upper castes being most similar to Europeans, particularly East Europeans."

"We conclude that Indian castes are most likely to be of proto-Asian origin with West Eurasian admixture resulting in rank-related and sex-specific differences in the genetic affinities of castes to Asians and Europeans."

http://genome.cshlp.org/content/11/6/994.short

I would be surprised to see if the comming publication is diverting substantially from this. What this genetic analyzis couldn't determine, though, was the period(s) of time when these immigration happened. Thus we have to consider the influx of y-dna H and J already to be "aryan". The latter should also be held responsible for the arrival of the (first) Indo-European language, along with the early, I-E symbols and writing.

Now finally Willems have taken on the basic travel-, trade- and migration-route between Europe and India, via As-dra-kan at the Kast-berg Sea, where the first "aryans" (ari/asi/aser/ashur/azer/azi/yuezi) would arrive - from the west. Which may explain why the oldest sample of y-dna J - a brotherline of the mesolithic "aryans" of G and I, were found in Carelia, on the way out east. Courtesy of the boat-rids ran by the boreal N1c...

To pursue Mallorys I-E language-line, from Ireland to Tocharia and India,
we may reflect on this 'Suevian knot' from Ganda-hara, 300 BC. It should reflect the on a bactrian whig of R1a, perhaps known as massa-getae or tyssa-getae. Which apparently was accompanied by m-dna U4, more often than not...
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gandhara#/media/File:HaddaTypes.JPG

Another famous relief from Gandhara is the drinking-scene, where 'Dionysos' - with the sack of wine - is flanked by his royal parents and siblings. As well as a cousin from the tropical side of Hindu Kush, seemingly the one bringing the wine into the royal premisses of the As-vin-as, aka Ashur/Azor/Asi/Yuexi, Ari/Arya.
https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/6/6d/DrinkingScene.JPG

Close-up-study highly recommended. The ornamentation of His Fathers grail is pretty informative.

Nirjhar007 said...

Though not Indicating anything as of Dave did as well . These following words are also missing in the abstract apparently :

Dravidian

Munda

R2a

Invasion

Language
.........................................................................

Salden said...

Hey there Hindu Nationalist.

Karl_K said...

Perhaps people would be less dramatic if it was just renamed the Indo-European Migration Theory (IEMT). No need for an invasion of disagreable peoples. Just that some migration of some people occurred, and they brought another language, and some new genetics. Nothing unusual.

Nirjhar007 said...

Just that some migration of some people occurred, and they brought another language, and some new genetics

The second part has no sense . Of course there were trade connections which brought people in and out .

Perhaps people would be less dramatic if it was just renamed the Indo-European Migration Theory

AIT and AMT are the same thing , changing a word don't change the incorrect paradigm . I hope it remains the same in case of aDNA too.

Salden ,

I am not a nationalist .

Karl_K said...

@Nirjhar007

Honestly, I don't get it. You acknowledge that, in your own words "there were trade connections which brought people in and out."

So... what is to argue about? There is basically zero chance that PIE, or even R1a-Z93 originally came from South Asia. Yet they are there today. So again... what is the difference? Don't we all agree that they came from somewhere else during the Bronze Age? Am I missing something?

Nirjhar007 said...

Couple of more interesting abstracts :

P18.46B/B - The time and place of European admixture in Ashkenazi Jewish history
J. Xue1, I. Pe'er2, S. Carmi3;
1Harvard University, Cambridge, MA, United States, 2Columbia University, New York, NY, United States, 3The Hebrew University of Jerusalem, Jerusalem, Israel.

P18.36D/D - Genetic signature of ancient humans in Lakshadweep Island: A complex scenario as mainland India
M. Naveen1, N. Rai2, G. Chaubey3, S. Prakash2, K. Thangaraj2, M. S. Mustak1;
1Department of Applied Zoology, Mangalore University, Mangalore, Karnataka, India, 2CSIR-Centre for Cellular and Molecular Biology, Hyderabad, Telangana, India, 3Department of Evolutionary Biology, Estonian Biocentre, Riia23b, Tartu, Estonia.

Carlos Aramayo said...

@David

Why you use the term Aryan Invasion Theory? It`s outdated among mainstream academics. After the demise of the term they christened Aryan MIGRATION theory.

Nirjhar007 said...

Karl,

I mainly suggested on your AIT/AMT stance , of course there were migrations but I can't bet on invisible ones, which left huge impact as Dave suggest with words like ''Massive'' or in ''Late Bronze age'' .

But there was as said around 3800 BC and another around 800-600 BC, the latter of course is too late for the Aryan invasion and not involving the whole of the subcontinent. Here some remarks from the book of Possehl:


https://books.google.it/books?id=pmAuAsi4ePIC&pg=PA175&lpg=PA175&dq=iron+age+sarai+khola+discontinuity&source=bl&ots=8z5evY6wGZ&sig=wV_dTde6vBVO7hMREsgUOjbKhvM&hl=it&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwj_vKKntY_SAhVBqiwKHaCjC6wQ6AEIIzAB#v=onepage&q=iron%20age%20sarai%20khola%20discontinuity&f=false


About R1a and PIE coming from S Asia , I can't comment . It will depend on what comes . I personally don't favor OIT .

Karl_K said...

@Carlos

I agree. Davidski does like to provoke people a bit. Perhaps it increases the numbers of comments, so he can make a few more cents from the advertisements?

Karl_K said...

@Nirjhar007

Alright. So you are mostly arguing about the exact timing of the migrations, and perhaps how they actually relate to the modern culture?

That makes sense to me. It was obviously complicated.

Nirjhar007 said...

Both modern and ancient , both modern and ancient...

JohnP said...

Wow, I had heard about Hinducentrists before, but it's my first time seeing them live.
It's incredible how they believe in their dogmas when it would have to twist and perverse history, linguistics and genetics like never before to work.
If anything, there's only ONE point worth taking from OoI, and it's not even exactly "Out-of-India" - The origins of Teal people of the Caucasus.
Teal people may be a group of Bright Green who either:
1. Migrated North from India (in this case, there would be an "Out-of-India" event, but totally unrelated with the Indo-European question), took refuge on the Caucasus and after thousands and thousands of years, and after they mixed a little with Orange people, they became the Teal.
2. The Bright Green was on their way to India, they hadn't made their way down there yet, when a group of them separated and moved to the Caucasus. Again, after millennia and mixing a bit with Orange people, they became the Teal. In this scenario there would be NO OoI event.

Now, concerning the Aryan question, the Indo-European question, there's absolutely no way it:
A. Didn't happened. It's one historical event that has been throughoutly recorded, studied and researched.
B. Occurred the way Hinducentrists suppose. For this, there would be the need to find massive influences of Bright Green in Indo-Europeans, and there's no such thing in Europeans for instance, who have Teal instead. One thing in common with all Indo-European populations is the Blue from European Hunter Gatherers and the Teal from the Caucasus - Bright Green from India is far from being a "thing" outside of the subcontinent and adjacent regions (I would argue even that the Bright Green found in Central Asians and Iran dates from way back, from Harappa/IVS).

Now, tell me, how Indians today have Blue? How in hell would they have European ancestry if not by the Aryan Invasions?
Well, According to OoI theorists, they would explain this as: "They went OoI, migrated all the way up to Europe and Anatolia spreading their language and culture and being affected genetically by peoples on their way who conquered them and impregnated their women - That would explain lack of Indian DNA in Indo-Europeans, but loads of Indo-European DNA in Indians."

Seriously, there comes a time when a Man has to abandon their Pride and admit they were wrong - in fact, this is the attitude of the higher man, of the one who seeks truth to permeate him, not dogmas.
Out-of-India is a theory made by people who made the incredible mistake of trying to look for evidences for a pre-made theory, whereas they should have made a theory from zero based on all evidences. I'll put Arthur Conan Doyle's phrase here to you:
"It is capital mistake to theorize before one has data. Insensibly one begins to twist facts to suit theories, instead of theories to suit facts."

AT least you guys are not as bad as Afrocentrists, but I could be wrong on that.

John Smith said...

Nihjhar said:

>AIT is dis proven and its a FACT many years before that article even , they >are right on that .

Let me guess. You propose that about 3000 BCE, Indians moved north and propagated IE culture (and R1a/b) to Europe? I bet you also propose that Sanskrit is the oldest IE language and all the European languages branched from it? Oh, and I bet you think the Rig Vedas are like 8000 years old (and not 3500 years old like every scholar in the field believes).

Please just stop. Anyone who believes OIT is a complete moron.

Karl_K said...

Take it easy Johns. Nirjhar007 already explained her position. She agrees that there may have been migrations in either direction. So stop with the annoying bull shit.

Plains Wanderer said...

@John Smith

No need to be so rude, especially to Nirjhar007.

In the past I believe she has voiced support for a PIE origin around the Iranian Plateau or South-Central Asia. In this scenario, IE is associated with an Iran_N or Steppe-like component which spread into India (becoming Indo-Aryan Harappans) and into the steppe (becoming Yamna).

Nirjhar, if this is wrong please correct me. Can you post a link to somewhere outlining your ideas on PIE origins and spread?

Nirjhar007 said...

Anyway , I trust in Archaeology ,Anthropology ,Linguistics,Ancient Texts etc . I think a certain pattern is already established . Don't think it will change via aDNA . Though we never know , that's the fun...

Acharya Agnimitra said...

Karl, Plains,

I think she means she is actually a he.

Nirjhar007 said...

PW,

At the moment I am model less .

My Linguistic understanding supports an origin from around Caucasus to Northern Iran and SC Asia . A version of model which I supported is described in this article :
http://new-indology.blogspot.in/2014/10/can-we-finally-identify-real-cradle-of.html

But its about updating , but various points there shown are changeless .Need more aDNA now.

Jingus Jendal said...


@nirjhar007

Hey, are you going to leave the internet forever when no pre-IE M417 is found in India, like you promised? Just wondering.

Matt said...

Jijnasu: The interview is from 2011 before we had aDNA and even Y DNA studies on modern individuals were limited. Papers published by western authors too were very cautious in talking about any immigration to India at that time.

Yes, Reich was super cautious about what ANI was and whether it had an IE element as well. Note that Thangaraj was a co-author on the first significant paper for "Genetic evidence for recent population mixture" in 2013, as well as Lalji Singh quoted in Davidski's links, and Priya Moorjani. If they've got some deep commitment against gene flow into India, then they pretty much fell at the first hurdle.

Also, look at this in the context of what people were saying about post-glacial repopulation of Europe and the impact of farming, where you still had some people in the mainstream of claiming that repopulation was LCGM, and then farming was mainly cultural diffusion. The models were quite simple, it was not intuitive about how much divergence would be expected between populations over a given time scale, and models indicated high population size in India over time (something still not resolved as to how real this is, vs as an effect of recent population admixture). I'd dread to read what some people here were saying back in 2011, or make predictions of what their recent work would be based on that.

Realistically, I will predict that these Indian researchers, who have a strong recent pedigree on pretty current papers, will more or less find a sensible result, and get make the real big discovery, and what will be left for us bloggers and commentators who aren't data producers will be picking at the crumbs (e.g. EMBA or MLBA, and revising sharper estimates and models, etc). I could well be wrong, but I would be surprised if so.

P Piranha said...

So many events lately that shake our confidence in the scientific community and its mechanisms of self-correction... Hopefully the paper would say something like "we sequenced genomes from the Indus valley, which autosomally cluster with Dravidian and Munda populations of India, and detected R2a, similarities were discovered with neolithic and mesolithic genomes from Iran, indicating gene flow from west eurasia during neolithic or mesolithic time periods." and completely leave out the Aryan issue, leaving people infer the solution. Unlike Haak they can't publish something with an inflammatory title like "massive migration from the Steppe ... source of Indo-European languages" and expect not to get lynched by a subset of their countrymen.

John Smith said...

Aren't these Indians from the same culture of the ones rumored to have L? There is no doubt in my mind that the Indus Valley Cilivilation was dominated by L. R1a came from the steppe probably not the most likely dead end Yamna though but a cousin of Yamna. Since the steppe gave India R1a, and Indus Valley Civilization gave it L that makes me think that R2a and J2 are recent (4,000-3000) migrations from Iran and may be associated with each other and are even newer than R1a. I dont even have an hypothesis of where the H and C1 are from.

Kristiina said...

I think that the alternative model for the steppe invasion theory is the southern route of expansion of the Indo-Iranian languages which was discussed on Eurogenes c. six months ago under Dead cat bounce:

http://eurogenes.blogspot.fi/2016/10/dead-cat-bounce.html

I think that it is much more popular among the scientists than the Out-of-India theory which probably survives only in India.

It is interesting to see which route the ancient DNA from India will support.

Jingus Jendal said...


"Sergi the Harrapan".

Someone needs to draw this.

Davidski said...

@Carlos Aramayo

Why you use the term Aryan Invasion Theory? It`s outdated among mainstream academics. After the demise of the term they christened Aryan MIGRATION theory.

As far as I can see, the genetic data available strongly suggests that it was an invasion. So I'm using the term that fits.

If I'm proven wrong with upcoming ancient DNA, then I'll admit it was a migration.

Carlos Aramayo said...

@David

There`s also another issue I want to share with you. In a previous post you mentioned Yamnaya, Afanasievo and Poltavka as being Early to Middle Bronze Age (EMBA) cultures, but as Parpola (2012) points out, the following is the timing for these cultures: Yamnaya (c.3200-2500 BCE), Afanas´evo (c.3100-2500 BCE, and Poltavka (c.2500-2100 BCE). This puts the three cultures within Early Bronze Age (EBA)(3300-2100 BCE), not within EMBA.

The same can be said on your statement that Sintashta, Andronovo and Srubnaya are Middle to Late Bronze Age (MLBA), when they`re actually Middle Bronze Age (MBA)cultures: Sintashta (c.2100-1700 BCE, Andronovo (c.2000-1450 BCE),and Srubnaya (c.1850-1450 BCE.

Davidski said...

@Carlos Aramayo

In that post I'm working within the framework set by Lazaridis et al. 2016.

http://eurogenes.blogspot.com.au/2016/06/the-genetic-structure-of-worlds-first.html

batman said...

Karl,

"Perhaps people would be less dramatic if it was just renamed the Indo-European Migration Theory (IEMT). No need for an invasion of disagreable peoples. Just that some migration of some people occurred, and they brought another language, and some new genetics. Nothing unusual."

Perhaps even as ordinary as an "Eurasian Network" – constituted by dynasties related by y-lines that branched from a common, "aryan" (aka arctic) ancestry.

If we go into the common I-E myths we find the «asi» or «ari» to be these very survivors, re-occuring to re-connect with their distant cousins down south - after no less than 12.000 years of separation (MIS 2 = LGM+YD).

As simple as that.

Davidski said...

@Everyone

Please ignore batman. He is completely insane.

Jaap said...

Nah, he´s not. There´s more people holding up the sky than just you and your cronies, Dave.
Nah, Jaap, that´s too negative, doesn´t fit. Dave has been patient with many aspergers, bless him!
Still I would have liked to finish reading batman´s post, without anyone´s ruling aa to its pathology. It was touching on the motivation of the migration (not about it, but touching).
The migration is a fact. Uncontested. When? How? Why? Along what route?
1. When? 3000 BC; 1800 - 1500 BC; 1200 BC?
2. Invasion; steady trickle; otherwise?
3. Motivation: tricky issue! What were they migrating for?? Were they driven or were they pulled? If pulled, by what? Did they know where they were going? What was the grapevine like in those days? Did they know who to appease and who to attack? Nobody goe3s out invading into the blue! In my case: I find it difficult to imagine a northern route through BMCA-country. But I´m not a knowledgeable person here ...
4. See above
I´m a thinking person. A thinking person is always a moron! Because he/she can´t be otherwise. Morons need education. So my request is: please educate me, Xyman, Batman, Goiello (yes, my friend!), Olympus and all the rest ...

Ariel said...

Thinking that the CHG people that went (genetically) into the steppe and the anatolian farmers that went in Europe both spoke IE some 9000 years ago it's not much more sane that what batman is saying. One had WHG and no ANE, the other population had ANE and only traces of WHG. Did we know if they had any contact? What type of culture are we talking about? Those are supposed to be the stelae people? Too me it's just an "ad hoc hypothesis" made just for countering another one, we no real evidence, and a wild violation of the Occam's razor. Like for the similar "Iranian plateau hypothesis" we are speculating about a "ghost population" with no material culture associated with, we no reference in hystory book. There are no proofs or even circumstancial evidences of people in the caucasus been associated with western anatolian farmers. Plus it would put the origin of PIE way back, in like 10000 BCE...

Jingus Jendal said...


@Jaap

It's not anyone else's job to educate you, the information is out there, if you want to learn you'll learn.

Davidski said...

The Bell Beaker Behemoth is coming this week...

https://twitter.com/pontus_skoglund/status/862056974376210433

Anthro Survey said...

To tie in with what's been discussed in the other post---Does anyone here believe in the possibility that a second, smaller-scale "pre-Aryan", but post-Neolithic migration took place to India from a Chalcolithized Iranian plateau? Can this explain some "western" affinities observed in Punjab and Sindh people remarked on?

postneo said...

@ariel
EEF migrations to Europe was not an instantaneous one timed at 9000 yrs. I'm sure there was traffic with demographic impact till at least 5000 or 4000 bc. Just before yamnaya same goes for chg it would not have sat around for millennia to just seed yamnaya and no one else.

Ariel said...

Postneo

I'm not so sure about that, later anatolians were CHG shifted, later European farmers were not, especially in western/northern Europe. Maybe there were some movements from anatolia to the balkans and Italy in the chalcolithic/early bronze age, but that's it. And btw, why is that relevant?

JohnP said...

@Anthro Survey

Those are supposed to be the Harappans, Elam and Sumeria would be related too.
I think they're either Iran_LN-like or Iran_ChL-like populations.

Seinundzeit said...

Anthro Survey,

For whatever it's worth, I don't think so. At least for the moment (I'm just basing this on the current evidence).

Honestly, we still don't have a totally satisfactory understanding, with regard to which of those ancient Iranian plateau populations constitute a better primary genetic base for South Asians.

I mean, some methods actually suggest widespread Iran_Chalcolithic-related ancestry deep into South Asia, while other methods only show Iran_Chl in South Central Asia (Tajikistan/Uzbekistan/Turkmenistan, Afghanistan, and western/northern Pakistan), with Iran_Neo/Iran_Hotu being the primary ancestral stream for all South Asians east of the Indus.

For this, IVC and BMAC aDNA should provide definitive clarification.

But, all methods do agree that South Central Asians skew far harder towards Iran_Chl in comparison to Iran_Neo/Iran_Hotu (the Kalash, and perhaps the Pashayi and Nuristani of Afghanistan, might constitute exceptions to this general rule), while proper northern South Asians (Punjabis and Sindhis) do display a much stronger affinity towards Iran_Neo/Iran_Hotu when compared to Afghans/northwestern Pakistanis.

Basically, in terms of Iran_Neo/Iran_Hotu vs Iran_Chl/CHG-like ancestry, Punjabis and Sindhis aren't really much more western in relation to other South Asians, so I don't think there was a post-Neolithic migration into South Asia from the Iranian plateau.

Of course, I could be wrong; we need that Rakhigarhi aDNA.

Although, Sindhis are definitely more western than other South Asians, because they are primarily West Eurasian, while North Indians are somewhat closer to being an even mix (Sindhis seem to be 20%-25% ASI, while North Indians like the Chamar are anywhere between 35%-45% ASI). But, the ancestral streams are still the same, even if the proportions differ (while in South Central Asia, it's not just the proportions, but the presence of an additional more "modern West Asian"-like element which allows for heightened differentiation from peninsular South Asians).

Still, we're pretty close to finally seeing some South Asian aDNA, so everything will be cleared up soon enough.

JohnP said...

@Seinundzeit

>>so I don't think there was a post-Neolithic migration into South Asia from the Iranian plateau.<<
Does "Iranian Plateau" encompasses their easternmost parts such as South-Central-Asia (Afghanistan + Pakistan)? Does "post-Neolithic migration" encompasses the Aryans too?
If yes, how would you explain the European Hunter Gatherer DNA on modern Indians today? But I could be reading too much into your statement, if yes, sorry.

Seinundzeit said...

JohnP,

I'm afraid you did read too much into it (but it's okay); I said "I don't think there was a post-Neolithic migration into South Asia from the Iranian plateau".

If I'm not mistaken, the steppe is quite distinct from the Iranian plateau.

Anthro Survey said...

@Seinundzeit

So there isn't statistically more "eef-like" DNA in Saraiks/Punjabis, Sindhis, etc. than in other Indics as some folks were suggesting?

As for more a greater degree of lean towards IranChalco in SouthCentral Asia: yes, it does seem like there's a clear gradient of IranChalc-IranNeo as one goes from Isfahan to Bukhara/Ferghana, with Marw/Tus/Herat triangle probably being a midpoint. Actually, it can even be visualized indirectly in the Eurogenes K13 spread if you have a sense of how ratios of those artifact K categories reflect actual ancient ancestral populations.

I do have to point though, that "Pakistan" is not such a meaningful area to orient yourself around. It is a relatively modern concept(dating back to the 1940s to be exact). The Indus river does not constitute a geographical barrier to human movement and the Indic-speaking populations of, say, Karachi's outskirts or Multan are not that distinct from their counterpats living in the Western Indo-gangetic plain of state we call India. In general, modern political borders in general are rather artificial and piss-poor when it comes to assesing meaningful population structure, be it Pakistan, Algeria, Italy, you name it. I much rather prefer terms like Levant, Thace, Numidia, Padania, Pashtunistan, Pannonia, Yellow River Basin, etc. Areas like these usually constitute bio-geo-cultural realities.

But yes, the Pashtuns and Baloch inhabiting the mountains and deserts of Pakistan do represent a clear, sharp transition in every respect from the Indics of P-stan as their topography reflects.

So, what would would you attribute this "modern West Asian"-like pull in those Balochs and Pashtuns to? Any kind of a distinct migratory pattern or merely a "geographic" effect spanning centuries of gradual dna diffusion?

And yeah, really looking forward to that ancient DNA. I sincerely hope it hasn't been tampered with to doctor support for an autochtonous/OOI hypothesis.

Anthro Survey said...

@Seinundzeit and everyone:

Given how "clean" and undiluted the migration of Oghuz tribes to Anatolia was(according to Dienekes, historical records and scant archaeological data), it's a very distinct possibility that whichever wave brought Potapovka-like DNA to Greater India was a "clean" one.

There is no reason to hold steadfast to the idea of mandatory mixing with BMAC's sedentary IranNeo/Chalco crowd on their treck to India. In fact, such a scenario(or an approximation of it) would be quite consistent with Laz's results. If we assume the "Aryans" to have been 50-50 or even 75-25 steppe/Iran and subtract this out, then we'd be left with very ASI-rich DNA in most cases. Can this be realistic? I think not based on how HGs were "replaced" in Europe but I do concede that it is still a hunch.

Anthro Survey said...

*INconsistent

Seinundzeit said...

Anthro Survey,

For what it's worth, I don't think there's any evidence to suggest that Punjabis and Sindhis have more Iran_Chl in comparison to other South Asian populations.

Rather, they're just more West Eurasian, but it's the same sort of West Eurasian ancestry seen in peninsular South Asia (Iran_Hotu/Iran_Neo + Eurasian steppe ancestry).

Although, some Sindhis with Balochi admixture might display the sort of tendency we've been discussing.

Also, I actually agree, with regard to political boundaries; but I still use those categories, for the sake of simplifying conversation.

Because in my experience, many of the individuals involved in these discussions tend to think solely in terms of contemporary national borders, so I really have no choice in the matter.

Now, if all of my interlocutors thought of things the way you do, I wouldn't have to resort to using terms like Pakistan, Afghanistan, etc. It would also make things much easier, and allow for more accurate discussion.

Regardless, when it comes to the Indus river, I think one should remember that it has long been construed as the boundary of India proper (for many centuries).

I mean, if you've ever crossed the Indus river, the reasons for this are quite evident. The transition one sees in the general climate, topography, culture, and even in the physical appearance and general emotional temperament of the inhabitants, is quite intense.

Anyway, when it comes to the exact genetic ancestry of the Aryans, I guess we will have to wait on those Swat valley samples.

Jijnasu said...

@seinundzeit
India proper probably included a few territories west of the Indus ie Gandhara as well

postneo said...

@ariel
"I'm not so sure about that, later anatolians were CHG shifted, later European farmers were not, especially in western/northern Europe. Maybe there were some movements from anatolia to the balkans and Italy in the chalcolithic/early bronze age, but that's it. And btw, why is that relevant?"

Because any, some or all of them by 4000 BC could have been IE speaking. Over time the genetic of anatolian and/or caucasian population would diminish as the european population grew but linguistic impact may have still happened. Kum tepe and ice man had CHG.

Just ruling out a 9000 year old linguistic impact is meaningless, you also have to rule it out for the for other millennia.

Nirjhar007 said...

Dingus,

There is no such thing as ''Pre-IE M417'' , of course it will there in the Civilization .

But it had millions of people and several other Hgs are guaranteed to come .

batman said...

Davidski,

You claimed:

"As far as I can see, the genetic data available strongly suggests that it was an invasion. So I'm using the term that fits.

If I'm proven wrong with upcoming ancient DNA, then I'll admit it was a migration."

When I asked you about what data you errased the question. Then you posted:

"Please ignore batman. He is completely insane."

Inuendos and paternalizing doesn't make much of a case. In fact, such ad hominems are normally signalling you're insecure about your own thesises.

My alternative explanation of the aryan migrations and the spread of the IE languages are nothing but sane. Besides, they're not even mine. I'm only wrapping them around the upcomming facts comming out of the genetic labs.

Moreover i have really taken the time to explain that the Steppe-theory you keep defending is NOT built on genetics - but on an old a-s-s-e-s-m-e-n-t from the lingusitic sciences, built on old and outdated o-p-i-n-i-o-n-s made by GW Childe (about agriculture) from the 1950-ties, that led Maja Gimbautas to believe - by assesment - that the tumulis (kurgans) from Ukraine were the oldest in Europe. Which in turn had Mallory and others search for the IE origins in this very area. Which led to some popularized, though premature, conclusion by some prominent, american lingists that fund-searching geneticians found it wothwhile to adress - practically unhinged.

Today we know that agriculture did not spread as a exclusisive package from Anatolia. Moreover we know that both pit-graves and tumulis from western Europe can be just as old as the trans-caucasian.

When new facts arise, as from new, precise dating-methods, it's actually insane not to change ones (theoretical) map. When series of new excavations changes the entire timeline in question - about horses, wheels, pit-graves and tumuli - it becomes xenofobic not to change ones 'opinion'.

Still claiming that the arid steppes in the colder parts of Europe - north of the Caspian Sea - to be THE origin of the agricultural-borne spread of the IE is, by now, have lost it's base from an archaeological point of view. Thus thee's nothing but a couple of linguists left to uphold the assumed "urheimat" - besides A FEW genetical exercises performed to fit the bill.

Even professor Slim knows that - which is why he's refusing to claim that the "Yamna-hypothesis" is anything but "a tentative synthesis". So who's fooling who?

AFAIK you have never been able to encounter - with facts - ANY of the alternate explanations I've been steadily reffering to. Erasing posts with new facts or interpretations doesn't change the facts. Nor does it enrich your own, professional horizon, data-base or sanity.

Davidski:

"Perhaps I'm being overly cynical and I'll apologize if I'm wrong..."

We'll soon enough see who's sense and logic is the more solid. ESHG and BB aren't the only papers about to go online - and your're not be the only one getting sneak-peaks.

Seinundzeit said...

Jijnasu,

It's rather more complicated than that.

And, even if we forget the ambiguity, we should remember that Gandhara was essentially equivalent to the vale of Peshawar, not much else.

Also, even the ancient Greeks thought that India was bounded by the Indus, a notion they shared with the ancient Persians.

On top of that, if my memory serves me right, we see hints of this notion in "The Laws of Manu" (I could be mistaken on this one, as it's been a long time since I read that text).

Anyway, when discussing more recent history, like the Mughal era (which is when the current ethno-linguistic boundaries seem to have become stabilized), the concept of Gandhara doesn't have much relevance.

One can even go a little further back, like during the time of Ibn-Battuta. For what it's worth, he went even further than putting the boundary at the Indus, and stated that the first truly Indian city to be encountered coming from the northwest was Hansi, in contemporary Haryana.

I think that's rather extreme, but that is what he actually wrote.

Vara said...

@Seinundzeit

It wasn't for the Persians. Everything east of Sistan was India till the Tahirid Era, where Eastern Afghanistan was added to the Khorasan region. The heartland of India to the Persians was always Kabul, Hindu Shahis ring a bell?
And you don't have to look at Ibn Battuta when you have Biruni he clearly mentions that Afghans come from the mountains of India. Or you can go back to Ferdowsi where he clearly says Alborz, i.e Hindu Kush, Lies in india.

Maybe not even for the Greeks as well, they called Arachosia: White India.

Jingus Jendal said...

@nirjhar007

"There is no such thing as ''Pre-IE M417'"

In the context of SA you know exactly what I mean.
And you didn't answer the question.

Anthro Survey said...

@Seinundzeit:

The Indus river nearly straddles the Sulaiman mountain chain but there is a sliver of flat Indus valley soil in between them, with Indics inhabiting it. Essentially, it coincides with a real, physical boundary--Sulaiman mtns/Hindu Kush--- that impeded human migrations but is not a true boundary in an of itself.

The rubicon, the portal to(and out of) India, has traditionally been the Khyber Pass which was used by conquerors from Alexander to Ghaznavids to Genghis to Babur to the Brits. Most likely, the people who brought Potapovka DNA also utilized it.

The Gedrosian desert has also been used but it's a more treacherous crossing.

As for why Ibn Battita referred to Hansi as the first truly Indian city? Hard to say but I am guessing it has to do with the fact that the Punjab has been under heavy cultural influence from Khorasan---mediated by Ghaznavid and Delhi sultanate rule----which must have manifested itself architecturally, in terms of clothing(salwar kameez), etc. It must be noted, however, that these were surface aspects and likely syncretic with local styles.

batman said...

Jaap,

Let's see if the following summary - in the light of Villems 2000 - can survive the R1a-slash-burners:

It's obvious that there were a tropical population in post-glacial India, as well as in southern China, that had survived the YD in substantial numbers. The extremely minimized, arctic refugia were nothing like the tropical ones in terms of population-size. The severe genetic bottle-neck in the north is a clear-cut trace from the megafaunal extinction event – where the descendants of the Cro-Magnons hardly made it – at all. Unlike Africa and Asia, where the populations were thousenfold larger and the genetic diversity continous.

There's no real indications that the first visits of the arc-tic ari-ans were warlike or brutal. The success of the arians were basicly a reault of their skills as craftsmen, agriculturalists and linguists. The inter-actions that developed the spice-route - from the maharjas of India to their royal relatives in the Baltics.

The Vedic describes the Aryans as carriers of knowledge and wisom, rather than swords and sprears. Thus we may safely assume that the status of the arians – as well as their adoption into the tropical tribes – were a result of their skills and knowledge, along with their trade of rare, 'arctic treasures'. That may explain these dignitaries or 'deities' as ambassadeurs and 'good-doers' - who earned their status by their deeds, rather than by brute violence. IIRC the term 'aria' means 'noble' in some (old?) indian language.

The mix of arctic males and females with tropical males and females obviously led to various re-combinations - as Villems et al already described. In the above carving from Gandahar it seems like the resulting line of Indo-Arian royals and nobilities ended up in two separate, but related dynasties; one in the tropical south (tamil, hg H1/3), the other in the semi-tropical north (hindi, hg J2). Later it seems that a branch of the Indo-Aryan y-dna J2/J1 was migtating Out of India – to become new rulers in the old Sumeria.

The stone-carving from Gandahar (above) may even depict one of them (re)visiting his relatives in a main capitol of the north, bringing vine to the royal court of his fatherline's 'urheimat' - in the vineless arctic. Perhaps the 19th century Indian scholar BG Tilak was right about an "arctic origin" described in the Vedas – to arrive in India during the late mesolithic.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Arctic_Home_in_the_Vedas

Davidski said...

@batman

I delete posts on a whim here if I think they break the rules or they're utterly stupid and pointless.

The post of yours that I deleted recently was the latter. Why? Since you comment here regularly then you should know that I've been blogging about the Aryan Invasion Theory (AIT) for several years now.

I've put together a very strong argument in favor of the AIT in a series of regular blog posts that are also easy to find with the search function. So there's no reason why you should have missed them.

The blog posts, and the analyses and results they contain, have since been supported more or less in a number of papers in peer reviewed journals put out by teams of scientists from very well known institutions.

I'll help you out and give you some examples. In these posts I lay out my discovery that South Central Asians and high caste North Indians have very high levels of steppe-related ancestry, and conclude that they're probably a mixture of ancient populations from the steppe, Iran and South Asia. I date the steppe admixture to the Bronze Age.

http://eurogenes.blogspot.com.au/2015/07/the-real-thing.html

http://polishgenes.blogspot.com.au/2015/07/around-65-lneba-european-ancestry-in.html

http://eurogenes.blogspot.com.au/2015/08/children-of-divine-twins.html

This was subsequently backed up in Lazaridis et al. 2016. And I trust that you can at least navigate to the correct parts in the paper and supplementary section dealing with South Asia to have a look for yourself.

http://eurogenes.blogspot.com.au/2016/06/the-genetic-structure-of-worlds-first.html

Now stop wasting my time and quit posting bullshit about Ice Age migrations from the Arctic or thereabouts to South Asia. No one's interested. You're just spamming. Pull your head out of your ass or I'll start treating you like xyyman and start deleting all of your posts.

Nirjhar007 said...

In the context of SA you know exactly what I mean.
And you didn't answer the question.


Well I understand you are a complete buffoon , with that you try to be logical.

I repeat, there is nothing like Pre-IE R1a-M417 and it will be there in the civilization , like Sun Rises and Full Moon occurs ...

The amount of Eurocentrsim and blind following the dogma, from Guys like Dingus Jingus , is just pathetic .

Stop fooling yourself ....

But its also true that we never know what is in the bag of pre-history , but its also true that there is good and also bad interpretations .

Seinundzeit said...

Vara,

Slow down there tiger.

Al-Biruni never mentions "Afghans/Pashtuns".

And speaking of Ibn-Battuta, he does mention Pashtuns (apparently, he was attacked repeatedly by Pashtun highwaymen, and wasn't exactly a big fan). He mistakenly claims that Pashtuns are a sort of Persian-related people.

He's obviously wrong; but his mistaken conflation of Pashtun with Persian does tell us a good deal concerning how people of his day viewed the cultural affinities of Pashtun highlanders.

On top of this, Babur was an astute observer, and the first anthropologically-minded writer on this region.

For him, what is now Afghanistan was clearly an extension of his true abode of Ferghana, while "Hindustan" was a very distinct region (one which he described with great exoticism).

Anyway, the Persians surely didn't construe Kabulistan as being the heartland of India (I have no clue as to where one would derive such a notion).

In fact, Kabulistan plays quite an important role in many Iranic myths. For example, Rustam (of Shahnameh fame) was supposedly half Kabuli and half Zabuli.

In addition, the Shahi and Zunbil were ethnically Kushan or Hepthalite. And lets be real here; Buddhism and Hinduism have a strong history further to the north of contemporary Afghanistan, with the same contextual basis seen in Afghanistan. Yet, despite that, I don't think anyone would seriously suggest that Tajikistan is an extension of greater India.

Anthro Survey,

So far, we have yet to disagree.

Although, I would note that the Khyber has not been as important as is often assumed.

In fact, based on a multitude of sources, I think that routes through the Kurram area have likely played a bigger role.

batman said...

Davidski,

Good to see that your work have proceeded.

I've been following this debate since Villems 2000, where the exact same issue was at hand. Your blogs included, of course.

The only major difference between his and your conclusions is the points of reference.

What you call "Steppe" they called "European" or "East European".
What you think is "bronze-age" they leave undated.
What you call "Invasion" Villema call "migration" or "influx".

Thus I've adressed the question of relation vs. causation. Is the y-dna of the I-E Caspian steppe really the cause (origin) of the I-E Europeans? Or is it actually the other way around?! In that case Villems term - "East-European" - would be more to the point.

Which narrows the question of origin to the parallels of the Carelian-Caspian highway between east and west.

Besides this I've made some points according to evidence from archeology, mythology and symbolism/writing. Most of which - actually - gives a lot of credence to the basic outline regarding the IA migrations of both Villems and you.

The only discrepancy between your and my summary is the question of dates and time-lines. Which is something genetics alone can't possible answer.

In any case - to refute the claim of a mesolithic migration from East Europe to India you have to explain from where the major indian y-lines - H and J - actually came. Otherwise the interpretations you do - based on the serious rundowns - may end up as a lot of spam.

Critical thinking always start with self-criticism. On a better day I hope you may see my continous 'spamming' as a contribution to the falsification of your thesis.

Davidski said...

You don't have a clue what you're talking about. The fact that you're referencing outdated papers by Villems et al. proves it.

batman said...

I never saw anyone claiming that the results of Villems 2000 was wrong. So what's the issue?

Then, again, from where and when did the y-dna of H and J enter the Indian subcontinent?

Davidski said...

Then, again, from where and when did the y-dna of H and J enter the Indian subcontinent?

Probably during the Neolithic from West Asia via Iran.

I don't care what a paper from 2000 says on the matter. I wouldn't even quote a paper from 2010 when it comes to South Asia, since 90% of papers on South Asia don't make much sense.

Vara said...

@Seinundzeit
"In the western frontier mountains of India there live
various tribes of the Afghans, and extend up to the
neighbourhood of the Sindh Valley" - Tarikh Al-Hind


"I will leave this lands of magicians and go with my boy toward India. I’ll disappear from men’s sight, and take this handsome child to the Alborz mountains.” - Shahnameh


Doesn't matter who were the Hindu Shahis, they ruled "India". Just like the Indo-Sassanids, Indo Parthians and Indo-Scythians.

Kabulistan plays no important role in Persian myths before the Saka conquered Afghanistan, the only thing mentioned about it is that it's the land of sorcery where Keresaspa was seduced. Rostam is not an old Iranian hero but a Scythian one merged with the house of Keresaspa. You can read Daryaee's articles about that. And yes, Kabulistan is linked to Azi Dahaka, who is a foreigner.

Babur was way long after Iranics started entering India.

I know that Pashtuns have a problem with India but these are the facts.

Jijnasu said...

@seinundzeit
Agree that gandhara has little relevence in the Modern Era or for that matter much of the 2nd millenium. Infact Hindu merchants in the 19th century would perform purification ceremonies on crossing the Indus near attock. What I meant was, that Gandhara was part of the territory of late vedic Indo-Aryans unlike the non-Indic people further west who adopted Hindu-Buddhist ideas later.

As per orthodox authorities (Manu & Predecessors) Aryavarta has vinashana (the site of disappearance of the Saraswati) as its western extremity and kalakavana (eastern UP ) at its eastern end. While Brahmavarta was the lands between the Saraswati & Drishadvati (Mainly parts Haryana/western Up) occupied by the kuru-panchalas

Jingus Jendal said...


@nirjhar007

"we never know what is in the bag of pre-history"

Really? Because you seem pretty sure about everything most of the time, sure enough to call anyone who disagrees with you a retard, like you do all the time here. Don't backpedal too hard, you might fall over.

And you still didn't say whether you'd keep your promise(to leave the internet)if no neolithic M417 was found in India.
I assume that's what you meant when you said that M417 "was present in the subcontinent long before any hypothetical(actually a retarded one) migration".

The bit about the "retarded" migration is classic nirjhar, by the way, bravo.

Seinundzeit said...

Vara,

I'm afraid I'll have to repeat this again:

Al-Biruni never mentions Afghans/Pashtuns. Not sure where you're getting that translation from; he talks of violent tribes on the western borders of India, of Hindu extraction, and does not use the term Afghan.

More importantly, it is stated in the Hudud-Al-Alam that the ruler of Nangarhar has Hindu, Muslim, and "Afghan" wives.

"Hindu" in this context has nothing to do with religion (that's a much later dynamic, tied to the British arrival); it's a geographic reference which implies "Indian" wives.

So, in the tenth century, Indian and Afghan implied distinct geographic origins ("Hindustan" and "Afghanistan").

"Kabulistan plays no important role in Persian myths before the Saka conquered Afghanistan, the only thing mentioned about it is that it's the land of sorcery where Keresaspa was seduced. Rostam is not an old Iranian hero but a Scythian one merged with the house of Keresaspa. You can read Daryaee's articles about that. And yes, Kabulistan is linked to Azi Dahaka, who is a foreigner."

Hmm, so Scythians weren't Iranian? And it just isn't at all important that Rustam's ancestry is pinned in modern Afghanistan? Fascinating stuff Vara, please tell us more.

"Babur was way long after Iranics started entering India."

You're kinda missing the forest for the trees here.

"I know that Pashtuns have a problem with India but these are the facts."

Oh boy. Deep down, I knew that this was the direction in which we we're headed. Speaking of which, you kinda sound like someone I know (is that you Rami, my old pal? If not, it's okay, but you're beginning to sound like him)...

Anyway, yes, surely Pashtuns have grave problems with India; like this guy, a perfect example of the problematic relationship between Pashtuns and Indians:

https://taimur.files.wordpress.com/2014/01/ghaffarkhan.jpg

https://d1u4oo4rb13yy8.cloudfront.net/article-fbyzuqykeg-1453277067.jpeg

Lol.

(For those who don't quite understand sarcasm; I was being sarcastic, right above)

Jijnasu,

I actually agree with you on this.

Regardless, what you've said here:

"Infact Hindu merchants in the 19th century would perform purification ceremonies on crossing the Indus near attock."

Exactly, that's the historical scale I was operating on, while you were looking much deeper into history.

EastPole said...

It looks like

The Beaker Phenomenon And The Genomic Transformation Of Northwest Europe:

http://s22.postimg.org/n07dnet4h/screenshot_175.png

and


The Genomic History Of Southeastern Europe:


http://s22.postimg.org/s09f93o4x/screenshot_176.png


will be published within hours, now both are still processing.

https://twitter.com/biorxivpreprint

batman said...

Davidski,

"Probably during the Neolithic from West Asia via Iran."

Then it just remains to explain why both y-dna H and J roamed West Asia during the entire Mesolithic, before they came to NE Iran and India, to form the major dynasties of this subcontinent.

Besides, does this imply that they both inhibernated in "Western Asia" during the glacial end-time? Is there any evidence of where such refugia - in "Western Eurasia" - did occur?

Vara said...

@Seinundzeit

I'm not Indian or Rami and I don't care. However, I care about Indo-Iranians. And definitely two guys hugging reflect whats going on over that area right? I don't want to get into that though.

"Al-Biruni never mentions Afghans/Pashtuns."
Chapter 38, Tarikh Al-Hind.

""Hindu" in this context has nothing to do with religion (that's a much later dynamic, tied to the British arrival); it's a geographic reference which implies "Indian" wives.

So, in the tenth century, Indian and Afghan implied distinct geographic origins ("Hindustan" and "Afghanistan")."

Was it used in that context during Indo-Sassanid Bahram? Also, can you tell me about Afghanistan during the Sassanid era? No? Read Daryaee's works they're wonderful and they say that to the Sassanids Kabul was a part of India.

"Hmm, so Scythians weren't Iranian? And it just isn't at all important that Rustam's ancestry is pinned in modern Afghanistan? Fascinating stuff Vara, please tell us more."

Lovely, it's 3:30am here. Read what I said again. Scythian =/= Old Iranian. Rostam is a post 2nd century, anti-Zoroastrian hero whose mother is a foreigner from Kabul.

"The Zunbils were linked with the Kabul-Shahs of the Turk Shahi dynasty; the whole river valley was at this time culturally and religiously an outpost of the Indian world, as of course it had been in the earlier centuries during the heyday of the Buddhist Gandhara civilization" -wiki

Rob said...

Batman . Just pipe down and learn buddy

Seinundzeit said...

Vara,

Well, I have to hit the sack, as I have work in a couple of hours.

So, I'll be brief, and I'll respond to any further points tomorrow.

"Chapter 38, Tarikh Al-Hind"

Again, no mention of Afghans.

"Was it used in that context during Indo-Sassanid Bahram? Also, can you tell me about Afghanistan during the Sassanid era? No? Read Daryaee's works they're wonderful and they say that to the Sassanids Kabul was a part of India."

You can't just latch onto specific nuggets of historical information, ones which you find to be palatable on some personal level, and then ignore everything else. You have to adopt a holistic approach.

So, with that in mind, what does a holistic approach entail with regard to Afghanistan's cultural position in relation to West, Central, and South Asia?

Well, a holistic approach suggests that Afghanistan is an area where Central, South, and West Asia melt into each other; it can't be defined strictly as being wholly Central Asian, wholly West Asian, or wholly South Asian. All three streams of cultural influence are strongly intertwined in this area.

At the same time, no serious scholar would ever suggest that Afghanistan is an extension of greater India, while many serious scholars do readily lump Afghanistan with West Asia or Central Asia.

Geographically speaking, contemporary Afghanistan is the eastern edge of the Iranian plateau, and the southern edge of Central Asia (the same applies to western Pakistan + northern Pakistan).

In strictly geographic terms (ignoring history, culture, and politics) South Asia starts in eastern Pakistan (Punjab + Sindh). This is an undisputed fact of geography/geology/ecology; do some reading on plate tectonics, or even on ecozones.

Turning towards the cultural data, the area has certainly been subject to considerable influence from greater India; but so has Tajikistan, Uzbekistan, Turkmenistan, etc.

Prior to the Turkic influx, all of the "stans" had robust cultural links with greater India (hell, they still do. I personally know many Uzbeks and Tajiks who can't get enough of Bollywood movies, and who demonstrate a very deep fascination with Indian culture).

So, does that make all of Central Asia merely a continuation of India? I mean seriously; the South Asian influence is undeniable, and very important. But, let's stick to reality; it's a strong "influence" on a region with different socio-cultural roots. Afghans, and related peoples in Pakistan, are simply not proper South Asians.

Their tastes in cuisine, their traditional ethnic clothing styles, their modes of village organization, their political segmentary structures, their linguistic affinities, and their physical appearance, consistently point either west or north, not to their southeast.

And, most importantly, real South Asians don't recognize these people as being South Asian, which is an absolutely essential angle.

I mean, in my very extensive experiences with Pakistanis and Indians, it's been made quite clear to me that the peoples of South Central Asia are usually not regarded as being within the socio-cultural orbit of greater India (eastern Pakistan, India, Bangladesh, and Sri Lanka). That's how things are IRL.

For any further hair splitting, refer to my previous posts; I've already mentioned specific details on historical sources, multiple times.

I'll catch up with you tomorrow Rami. (I'm only joking pal. Or am I? lol)

Nirjhar007 said...

Dingus,

I like to keep the valid possibilities open , mostly by in depth observations . But I don't know of a 100% successful model of PIE , I don't think anyone has . BUT for AIT/AMT etc there is almost definitive expectations of what will happen.

You are acting like a buffoon , so What should I call you?.

But yes I said such thing . About leaving internet , we we will see , there are many .

Snapi720 said...

Vara from neutral perspective there is war going on borders between Afghanistan army (pashtuns) and Pakistan army(mostly punjabi), that could be reason for sein contempt for indic history of Kabul. Save to say these two groups don't get along with each other and Pakistan may soon get disintegrated if taliban win.

Vara said...

@Seinundzeit

I quoted the book, gave you the chapter number, what else do you want?

Yes, modern Afghanistan is West Asian now as is Central Asia nowadays, but can you find Indian movies during Al-Biruni's time or Bahram's? You speak of the 21 century but our original discussion was of Greco-Persian times, in which I gave you more than one proof that India wasn't bounded by the Indus.

Oh, hey Central Pennsylvania is full of blonde Christians! They were there since the Greco-Persian times!1!1!11

You just keep going in circles trying to avoid what I've said. Let me fix my PC and I'll link you the book.

@Snapi720

I know, I had a Pashtun roommate in college who told me this. I had to bring it up because it's clear they wish to avoid having a land associated with India.

Seinundzeit said...

@Vara/Rami

The Tarikh-Al-Hind does not mention Afghans.

I have a hardcover translation with me, in my personal library; on the other hand, you seem to be quoting stuff from the internet about the Tarikh Al-Hind.

"You speak of the 21 century but our original discussion was of Greco-Persian times, in which I gave you more than one proof that India wasn't bounded by the Indus."

I knew I would be forced to directly quote the primary sources.

Is Strabo good enough?

Here:

"It was particularly apparent from my former discussion that the summary account set forth in the third book of his geography by Eratosthenes of what was in his time regarded as India, that is, when Alexander invaded the country, is the most trustworthy; and the Indus River was the boundary between India and Ariana, which latter was situated next to India on the west and was in the possession of the Persians at that time; for later the Indians also held much of Ariana, having received it from the Macedonians."

Straight from an ancient Greek source; India was bounded by the Indus, and directly west of the Indus lay "Ariana".

Not sufficient?

Here is Eratosthenes (as quoted by Strabo):

"India is bounded... on the west by the Indus River."

Couldn't be more blunt.

If that isn't sufficient evidence, this conversation is pointless.

Looking at your previous posts, you've ignored everything else I've written on different historical sources, so this will probably fall on deaf ears (again).

Quite frankly, you're the one who has been going around in circles; I always post a new angle, and you always bring up the exact same ideas.

Anyway, I'll read Daryaee's work (as if I already don't have enough material on the Sassanids).

Also, it's nice that you had an imaginary Pashtun roommate; what else did he tell you? (lol)

Anyway, since this discussion isn't going anywhere (at this rate, I'll have to start pulling out direct quotes from Louis Dupree and Olaf Caroe), it's done.

@Snapi720

"sein contempt for indic history of Kabul..."

Really, I have "contempt" for the "Indic history" of "Kabul"?

As someone else mentioned recently, we've seen a very unfortunate decline, with regard to the quality of comments posted at this blog.

I'm seeing the same trends at Anthrogenica. I guess it was inevitable...

Snapi720 said...

Vara one may get that impression reading comments. Indus river was not barrier for Indian civilisation. Only some centuries ago pashtun nomads have taken over land. Peshawar in fact was still indic majority as recently as 1947. Similarly Hindu Shahis were dominant force in Kabul before Islamic Turkic invasions.

Vara said...

http://www.columbia.edu/cu/lweb/digital/collections/cul/texts/ldpd_5949073_001/pages/ldpd_5949073_001_00000264.html?toggle=image&menu=maximize&top=&left=

Page 208

"Beyond is Arachosia. And the Parthians call this White India; there are the city of Biyt and the city of Pharsana and the city of Chorochoad and the city of Demetrias; then Alexandropolis, the metropolis of Arachosia; it is Greek, and by it flows the river Arachotus. As far as this place the land is under the rule of the Parthians." - Isidorus

Wohoo I can quote Greeks too. But I quoted Persians as well.

"Looking at your previous posts, you've ignored everything else I've written on different historical sources, so this will probably fall on deaf ears (again)."

I ignored cuisines and movies and modern day culture because these things didn't exist back then. You ignored everything I quoted and just went on to say that no proper blah blah would say this and cuisines this lol. Bruh I'm not trying to prove that you're Indian, relax.

"Also, it's nice that you had an imaginary Pashtun roommate; what else did he tell you? (lol)"
Schizophrenia kicking in?

"As someone else mentioned recently, we've seen a very unfortunate decline, with regard to the quality of comments posted at this blog."

"People disagree with me and I'm sad."

Seinundzeit said...

@Rami/Vara/Pegi

Bruh, why does it always end like this?

I've always understood the fact that you're kinda dense, and do have some trouble with putting things into the proper contextual frame of any given argument.

For example, witness your total forgetting of the context in which those comments on cuisine/Bollywood occurred, and your convenient blocking of what I said concerning Ibn Batutta, Babur, Hudad-Ul-Alam, etc.

But, stupidity can't be the sole explanation.

I feel like a few Freudian assumptions are in order (to explain your style of communication).

I mean, I always have detected a chip on that shoulder of yours.

Perhaps, just maybe, that could satisfactorily explain why you always end up wallowing in your own feces, by the end of any given conversation.

By now, it's a fairly typical pattern.

All I'm saying dude, for your own well-being (and you know I care deeply about you, lol), just get that chip on your shoulder examined somewhere.

Also:

"Schizophrenia kicking in?"

I'm deeply sorry to hear about that friend, I had no clue you suffered from this.

My heart goes out to you.

(PS: Hitting the road, so we'll have to talk later. Can't wait, lol)

Vara said...

I'm not rami or pegi. Lol schizophrenia is really something. Actually rami and I are stalking you. We are all part of the Illuminati. Lol

Hudud Ul Alam clearly means that Afghans of that period aren't Hindus and we already know that.

But you ignored Biruni again even though you have an imaginary copy of the book, just like you ignored Ferdowsi, Isidorus and the Rostam part.

It's okay. Go hit the imaginary road. Maybe lay down watch some Indian movies and enjoy those cuisines you've been talking about all day. LOL!

Vara said...

Snapi720

Correct. Sein uses modern Afghanistan, which is 300 years old as proof against this. Of course that doesn't make any sense.

Seinundzeit said...

Oh silly Vara/Pegi,

You can't be part of the Illuminati; I have yet to spot you, at any of our monthly meetings. (Lol)

Regardless, I'm back from that totally imaginary road.

The rain was imaginary too, just like how my copy of Al-Beruni's work is in a suspended state of Russellian "inexistence".

Anyway, I see that in my absence you've had a chance to display some of that classic, and immensely erudite, brilliance that we've all come to know and love.

I'll hit on one point; Hinduism as a religious construct is a massive, immensely complex, and deeply rich set of distinctive historico-cultural dynamics and processes.

To make a very long and complicated story short: at the time of the Hudud Ul Alam, the term "Hindu" was not tied to religious identity. It was a geographic descriptor. In Farsi/Dari, "Hindu" traditionally meant Indian.

So, the author of that work was implying that the ruler of Nangarhar had wives of both "Indian" and "Afghan" ancestry.

Still, who cares about reality/facts, right Vara?

But you know what Vara, you have given me some great ideas.

In fact, I think I'll have myself some fun; I'll kick-back, relax, arrange for some delicious South Indian "Chicken 65", and watch a few classic Bollywood movies, all in your honor. (Lol)

Vara said...

You keep repeating the Hindu-Afghan part. Have I ever said that Afghans are Indians or Hindus? No strawmen please. And stop with that Indian complex because it's really not healthy.

I'm not Pegi or Rami, lol. Stop having imaginary arguments with me. I'm a new poster but a long time reader. Ask david he'll tell you from my IP address. You better go see a therapist or whatever. You need that medication for that severe schizophrenia.

Seinundzeit said...

Your whole argument has been that Afghanistan is an extension of greater India.

If that isn't so, why have you wasted so much of our time? Are you just stupid, sensu stricto?

Or, have you finally realized how baseless your conceptual scheme looked (from an external viewpoint), and have thus decided to walk back those claims?

Anyway, I'm pretty sure you are Rami (as if there isn't any way that you could conceal your actual IP address, lol).

Regardless, even if you aren't Rami, you're like a perfect empirical articulation of his true Platonic form; so, I think you should really embrace the association (I mean, you do have the same ratio of imbecility-to-obsessiveness, and you argue in his fashion).

But absolutely dude, I'm working on my "Indian complex" (man, the idiocy that some people can just pull straight out of their asses); as I already told you, I'm eating Indian food, and watching Bollywood movies, which is the exact treatment that you recommended for me (lol).

And, that is heartwarming bro; thank you. I'll make sure to get help for the schizophrenia, probably from the same clinic that you utilize (although, it isn't really working too well in your situation, but I guess everyone's different).

Finally, lets just put aside both your imbecility and my attempts at humor; we'll be serious for a moment (but only for a moment, because this discussion no longer warrants any seriousness).

You have just dropped the main basis for this whole argument. Apparently, you agreed with me all along.

So, I'd rather be done with this conversation, since you already see things my way. Also, it's quite tiring to debate things with someone who doesn't know WTF they're talking about.

Be sure to medicate (I totally understand, with schizophrenia and all).

Vara said...

Man let it out more. Please more paragraphs. Tell me how butthurt you are so I can adopt my new persona as Rami.

Just because Pashtuns live in Kabul now doesn't mean they've always lived there. Forget about your Anti-Indian complex for one sec.

"Your whole argument has been that Afghanistan is an extension of greater India."
I never said that have, have I? Or maybe I did when we were having a conversation in side your brain. I said east of Sistan, i.e beyond the Helmand, is India to the Persians. Moar strawmen, let it out. You're just another crazy nationalist apparently.

Yeah, let's end this, since you haven't refuted anything. I shouldn't make fun of your schizophrenia, sorry and I hope you get better.

Seinundzeit said...

"Man let it out more. Please more paragraphs."

Such a Rami-thing to say. He told me the exact same thing, but a mere few weeks ago, at this very blog while we were caught up in a "debate" (if it deserved that title) about a similar topic.

Anyway bro, you said you want more paragraphs, so I'll hook you up...

"Just because Pashtuns live in Kabul now doesn't mean they've always lived there. Forget about your Anti-Indian complex for one sec."

It's good that you mentioned this.

Primarily because the Pashtun-Kabul event is the only documented example of "spontaneous generation".

You heard that right; it is said that Pashtuns literally emerged out of thin air, to the astonishment of shocked Tajik Kabulis.

Adequate explanations are still lacking though, as the event violated clear bio-physical principles. (lol)

Also, with regard to the "Anti-Indian complex"; I'll fess up man, since this is an intervention.

Honestly dude, I just can't control myself. To be quite frank, I stand powerless before the immense neuroses implicated in my "Anti-Indianism". No joke bruh, it's a debilitating/crippling condition. In fact, it's so far-reaching that I experience violent/convulsive reactions whenever I encounter Native American artifacts and depictions ("American Indian", so it counts).

Help me Vara. Save me.

"You're just another crazy nationalist apparently."

Yeah dude, just another crazy nationalist.

In fact, I'm one of those crazy nationalists who believe that national borders are pointless/always artificial, that all modern "ethnic" nation-states lack foundations in deep ontology, that the concept of "ethnicity" is epistemologically suspect, and that cultural exchange/interaction is absolutely essential for human flourishing.

So yes, I'm a real hardcore nationalist, and that too a crazy one, lol. (For those who don't know what "nationalism" means, like Vara, I'll make it simple. I'm the polar opposite of a "nationalist")

"since you haven't refuted anything..."

Right, because I wasn't presented with anything to refute. Rather, all you gave me were:

1. Garbled/vague references to a non-existent statement in the Tarikh Al-Hind.

2. An immense mischaracterization of ancient Persian conceptualizations concerning "India".

3. And a totally false/misguided understanding of the Rustam myth, as it is found in the Shahnameh.

Basically, I am under no obligation to refute crap.

"I shouldn't make fun of your schizophrenia, sorry and I hope you get better."

Of course you shouldn't make fun of schizophrenia, especially when you're the victim of it. Still the sentiment is, as I've already noted, a "sweet" one. So again bro, thank you.

"Yeah, let's end this."

Finally; took you long enough. Goodbye, and have fun (and again, make sure to medicate)!

adinke said...

@Anthro Survey You can use the term, the Indus Basin as it is pretty much interchangeable with Pakistan
http://writerbeat.com/images/12319/Indus_Basin1.jpg

@Seinundzeit Gandhara's major regions was the Potohar Plateau/Salt Range, with Taxila (in NW Punjab) serving as the most important place.

The Indus River was hardly a boundary in old times, given the large number of trans-Indus kingdoms/states in the region. Sindh, for example lies on both the east and west side of the Indus (being named after the river as well). It's major populations centers (Karachi, Larkana, Sehwan etc.) all are west of the Indus.

Historically, most of Baluchistan was part of Sindhi kingdoms like the Rai dynasty, Chachs and Soomros, which also reached upto the Suleiman Mountains/Southern Afghanistan.

Same goes for Punjab and Pakhtunkhwa, both were united under the Hindu Shahis and Kabul Shahis before the Islamic expansion. As well as ancient civilizations like the IVC and Rig Vedic period, where Sapta Sindhu (land of the seven rivers) included Punjab as well as Pakhtunkhwa (represented by the rivers Kurram and Swat). The Kabul is a tributary of the Indus.

Regarding the differences in food/clothing you have stated east of Indus and west of Indus, are exaggerated. Clothing is pretty similar, the same shalwar kamiz/waistcoat style you see in Punjab and KPK. The Pashtun lungay looks curiously almost identical to the Punjabi turban.

Given all this, is it really a surprise that Pashtuns of KPK and Eastern Afghanistan cluster so close genetically to Punjabis and Sindhis?

Rami said...

Don't use my name mofo InSein, anyways its good your channeling your Jihadi aggression/tendencies in a more constructive way but your bizarre obsession with me needs to stop. You can keep churning out your pseudo intellectual BS but you can do it without mentioning me.

Vara said...

@Seinundzeit

1) I linked the book and gave you the page number.
2) It's not mischaracterized.
3) It's not my fault you have 0 knowledge in Persian myths. Also, Alborz in India lol.


@adinke

This 100%. Thank you. I forgot to mention Makran.

@Rami

This schizophrenic dude is obsessed with you. You better watch out. You never know if he's peeping from the windows like a crazy stalker.

Seinundzeit said...

@Adinke

I'll respond in two parts, to cover both the cultural and genetic aspects.

Let’s just put it this way; the boundary of India proper has shifted across the centuries, and the region of eastern Afghanistan/northwestern Pakistan has vacillated between Iranian and Indian control.

Still, I think that we tend to project current ethno-linguistic dynamics deep into history.

For example, we often forget that before the Islamization of Central Asia and the Iranian plateau, and before the Turkic influx into Central Asia, the regions of "Iran", "Turan", and "Hind" were deeply interconnected.

These regions (especially eastern West Asia, southern Central Asia, and northern South Asia) have always constituted enmeshed networks of socio-cultural exchange.

Regardless, despite the intense interconnection, the three regions have always been understood to be distinct/independent cultural zones (related, and linked, but still quite different).

Furthermore, even though the Indus River has not always been the boundary, the fact remains that it usually has been.

I mean, the word "Sind/Hind/India" is derived from it.

Also, obviously the southern portion of it doesn't constitute much of an ethnic boundary. But, the northern portion surely constitutes a rather abrupt ethnic boundary.

In addition, the Hindu Shahis and Kabul Shahis were Hepthalite or Kushan, not ethnically Indian. They came from Central Asia, and they ruled an area which spanned the eastern edge of the Iranian plateau, the southern edge of Central Asia, and the northwestern edge of South Asia.

Their religion did not make them Indians; at one point, Indic Buddhism and Hinduism had a presence as far north as the Tarim Basin.

Anyway, shifting gears towards the present; the differences in clothing that I noted were not at all exaggerated.

I don't think you've been to Pakistan, but I've spent time in both Pashtun and Punjabi villages, and the manner of traditional dress is quite distinct. Also, many village Punjabis make fun of the Pashtun khet partug (lol); that’s not how they roll.

Furthermore, the similarities that exist today are a function of living in the same contemporary nation-state.

At the end of the day, the men of the Punjab have always preferred tightly-fitting shirts of cotton, while Pashtun men have always traditionally worn very loose shirts made of wool (even during periods of intense heat). The traditional clothing of women is even more divergent.

Also, the turban is a West Asian import into Central and South Asia (even though no one really wears it in West Asia now, it only survives strong in South Central Asia and northern South Asia).

The Pashtun lungay is only worn by the southern Karlani, and it is worn in a totally different manner (and also differs in size) to the Punjabi pagri.

Northern Karlani, northern Sarbani, and the Gharghast don't wear turbans.

And lol, the food is really, really different.

I can't even begin to compare. I mean, seriously dude, is the Punjabi love of spicy/very rich lentils, ghee, Nihari, "parathas", and fried foods at all similar to the Pashtun fear/avoidance of everything even vaguely spicy (for which they are often caricatured in Pakistan, lol), and with the Pashtun obsession for lamb/veal and goat meat (and that too lamb/veal and goat meat without any spices added, only salt)?

Even though I am Pashtun, I like my food hot, and I am not a fan of lamb. As a result, my relatives always joke that I'm a Punjabi by heart (lol).

Seinundzeit said...

Continuing from where we left off...

Finally, the genetic data is quite clear. The Pashtuns of KPK might cluster close to Sindhis, but there are some consistent differences.

The ASI levels double between KPK Pashtuns and Sindhis. Most KPK Pashtuns are 10% to 15% ASI, while Sindhis are more around 20%-25% ASI.

On top of that, at the very least KPK Pashtuns show 10% Iran_Chal; it's essential to model them. And once you hit FATA, the Iran_Chal can rise to 35%! On the other hand, most Sindhis don't need any Iran_Chal, they usually get 0%.

Also, the levels of steppe ancestry differ, with Sindhis showing less. Many Pashtuns also show Scythian or Steppe_MLBA percentages, while Sindhis stick to Steppe_EMBA.

Not to mention that most Pashtuns get at least 1%-2% Siberian admixture, and some can hit 5% (myself). Sindhis always get 0%.

So, the differences in genetic ancestry are pretty obvious (more BMAC-related ancestry in Pashtuns, half the ASI, more steppe ancestry in Pashtuns, a stronger tendency towards Steppe_MLBA/Scythians/Sarmatians in Pashtuns, and non-noise levels of Siberian admix in Pashtuns vs 0% in Sindhis).

Punjabis are more complicated, as we don't have good sampling. But, the PJL samples are extremely different from Pashtuns, not at all close.

And based on old ADMIXTURE involving some people at Anthrogenica, Pakistani Punjabi Jatts and Rajputs are somewhat more genetically "South Asian" (more Iran_Hotu/Iran_Neo-shifted and more ASI-shifted) in comparison to Sindhis.

So, the differences between Pashtuns and Pakistani Punjabis will be even greater than what I outlined above for Pashtuns and Sindhis.

In terms of clustering, eastern Pashtuns cluster very close to Northern Pakistanis (Chitralis, Kalasha, Kohistanis, etc) and Dardic + Nuristani Afghans. Western Pashtuns cluster in between Pamiri Tajiks and Balochistanis.

I hope that clarifies the genetic picture.

Seinundzeit said...

Rami,

Good to see you using that username; it must get mentally taxing, using so many, right?

Always good to see you pal. Cheers.

Saqib said...

@adinke

Pakistani punjabis and Sindhis are not different in terms of ASI as one can see from dozens of Pakistan punjabi samples on anthrogenica and harappadna.

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1XGY-UIBC2GcUWGl1FizNvu9ofle4ZPHvfNmbrVYxGMo/edit#gid=6

http://www.harappadna.org/

2011 eurogenes blog article on Pakistani ethnic groups, 25 punjabi arains cluster right along sindhis and pathans.

http://dienekes.blogspot.com.es/2011/01/genetic-map-of-pakistan.html

5 high ASI PJL samples look from low caste communities without much proto indo-aryan ancestry. Someone need to analyse all of over 100 PJL samples and divide them in to ABC like Gujarati samples.

Rami said...

Awww Sein being polite, thats a first, I guess because your check on the 15th is coming up. Sorry for the late reply I do not live on David's blog like you do.

Seinundzeit said...

Oh Rami,

You know me so well; I'm always sucking on that government tit.

Since you’re a Canadian, I'm sure you have much more experience than me with that sort of thing. (You still living in public housing?)

Regardless, that's what I've consistently liked about you; your burns always make sooo much sense. (lol)

And, I do understand bruh; you were indisposed to respond, what with that whole Vara phase you were going through. (Lol, even if that wasn't you, although I am pretty sure it was, you two need to meet up; kindred spirits)

Regardless, I'm always polite Ram-man. Honestly, I dial the politeness up and down, in accordance with my interlocutor’s general tone.

So, when you go full-on douche, I'm forced to take the conversation in a salty direction. Eye for an eye; you know the deal.

Hopefully, this should be our last exchange for today, or even better yet our last exchange ever (it's gotten kinda old, ya dig?).

With great brotherly love (lol),

Cheers.

Vara said...

@Sein

Again you spend 20 paragraphs about food and clothes, and you still didn't answer adinke's points about Sindhi Kingdoms.

"In addition, the Hindu Shahis and Kabul Shahis were Hepthalite or Kushan, not ethnically Indian. They came from Central Asia, and they ruled an area which spanned the eastern edge of the Iranian plateau, the southern edge of Central Asia, and the northwestern edge of South Asia. "

Genius. Persians ruled Egypt for 300 years, does that make Egypt Persian?


"Also, many village Punjabis make fun of the Pashtun khet partug (lol); that’s not how they roll."

Is this how you got your Indian Complex? LOL

"And, I do understand bruh; you were indisposed to respond, what with that whole Vara phase you were going through. (Lol, even if that wasn't you, although I am pretty sure it was, you two need to meet up; kindred spirits)"

Here we go again. You can't admit you're wrong, even though you are, can you?

"Regardless, I'm always polite Ram-man. Honestly, I dial the politeness up and down, in accordance with my interlocutor’s general tone. "

No, you weren't polite. You couldn't refute anything, got butthurt and thought I was Rami. LOL

Anyway, that was fun see you one day when I get Psychology degree.

Seinundzeit said...

Vara,

"Again you spend 20 paragraphs about food and clothes, and you still didn't answer adinke's points about Sindhi Kingdoms."

I spent 11 paragraphs on history, and created a separate response with regard to genetics.

Adinke specifically mentioned food and clothing. Was I not supposed to respond? You got something against food and clothes, bruh? (Lol)

"Genius. Persians ruled Egypt for 300 years, does that make Egypt Persian?"

Okay, now you're just confusing yourself. Don't hurt your brain like that.

"Is this how you got your Indian Complex? LOL"

Absolutely, you got me dude. I was shaken to the core of my being; my life was never the same again. (Lol)

"Here we go again. You can't admit you're wrong, even though you are, can you?"

I'll tell ya what you wanna hear; I can't. The sky could collapse, but I won't budge.

"No, you weren't polite. You couldn't refute anything, got butthurt and thought I was Rami. LOL"

You had no arguments.

Again, you presented:

1. A nonexistent quote.

2. A faulty and wholly idiosyncratic assessment of ancient Persian conceptions concerning India.

3. And, displayed willful ignorance of the details seen in Iranic mythology.

On the other hand, I patted you on the back, held your hands, and sang you lullabies, all whilst I tried to point you towards a multitude of different historical sources, informed you of the overwhelming scholarly consensus, and even went into contemporary cultural details. What did I get in return? Bitching and whining.

Also, isn't it cute how you answer for Rami?

In addition, isn't it crazy how your grammar, punctuation, and general style is just like Rami.

Lol, I'm pretty sure you are Rami; making sock-puppet accounts is something you've always done. You shared that fact with me quite some time ago, at Anthrogenica.

I guess the schizophrenia taunts were based on your own phenomenological experiences. As Trump would say: sad.

Of course, maybe you aren't Rami. Perhaps, you two write just like each other, and have a shared emotional affinity towards each other, because you're both equally stupid?

Yeah, that's a solid possibility.

"Anyway, that was fun see you one day when I get Psychology degree."

Beat you to it; I attained my Psychology degree at the age of 15 (I'm not joking on this one).

Finally, aren't you tired of arguing? It's like you're my girl or something; getting kinda weird.

Basically, I'm forced to get blunt; when are you going to f**k off?

We've hijacked this thread; because of us, David's comment section is getting clogged with petty stupidity.

I think he'd be happy if we cut it out. We owe it to him.

If you want to snipe further, you are welcome to it; but I have stuff to get done in the real world, and can't visit the site every two hours to see what shots you've freshly fired (and then spend 3-5 mins of my own time to respond to your imbecility. Unfortunately, I can't control myself, have to hit back, lol).

As the Beatles once said, "let it be... oh let it beeee!".

Goodbye.

Vara said...

@Sein

Okay, last one I swear.

Since you get to choose people's identities here, I should do the same. Osama Bin Laden is what you're gonna be called from now on. I know for you it's better than being called Indian LOL.

1. http://www.columbia.edu/cu/lweb/digital/collections/cul/texts/ldpd_5949073_001/pages/ldpd_5949073_001_00000264.html?toggle=image&menu=maximize&top=&left=

It's not my fault that you can't find it in your imaginary copy of the book.

2. and 3. is your opinion, in other words: "I'm butthurt and I don't like it". You know it takes 3 secs to google what I've said.


"On the other hand, I patted you on the back, held your hands, and sang you lullabies, all whilst I tried to point you towards a multitude of different historical sources, informed you of the overwhelming scholarly consensus, and even went into contemporary cultural details. What did I get in return? Bitching and whining."

Which scholarly consensus? The 20 paragraphs about cuisine? The Greek quotes which I replied to with another Greek quote? Or this:
"The Zunbils were linked with the Kabul-Shahs of the Turk Shahi dynasty; the whole river valley was at this time culturally and religiously an outpost of the Indian world, as of course it had been in the earlier centuries during the heyday of the Buddhist Gandhara civilization"?


"In addition, isn't it crazy how your grammar, punctuation, and general style is just like Rami.

Lol, I'm pretty sure you are Rami; making sock-puppet accounts is something you've always done. You shared that fact with me quite some time ago, at Anthrogenica."

This is really creepy dude. You're mentally ill. All jokes aside, go see someone for real.

"Finally, aren't you tired of arguing? It's like you're my girl or something; getting kinda weird."

Stop trying to act cool, hahahahaha. We both know you don't have one. LOL!


"We've hijacked this thread; because of us, David's comment section is getting clogged with petty stupidity."

You mean people showing up and correcting you with you replying about food and pajamas?


Anyways, this was really fun, Osama. I admit you're correct, okay? Just don't send someone that will blowup my apartment after that intellectual beat down I just gave you. I'll go sleep. Fare thee well!

adinke said...

@Sein You realize what Sindh meant, initially? The word Sindhu meant sea, and was used by the Rig-Vedics to refer to the Indus River, given that it was almost as wide as a sea. The Rig Vedics called their land, Sapta Sindhu which meant ‘the land of the seven rivers’. This included the Rivers Kurram and Swat in modern KPK, as well as the famous five rivers of Punjab. This was also mentioned in the Avesta Vendidad as one of the seven blessed lands created by Ahura Mazda, called Hapta Hindwa. What is now KPK used to be part of ‘greater Punjab’.

There is no proper consensus among scholars regarding the origins of the Hindus Shahis and Kabul Shahis, however many theorize them to be native Indic Brahmins (possibly Mohyals of the Salt Range) or Janjuas. There is nothing conclusive to say that they were Hepthalites or Kushans.

Haven’t been to Pakistan? I am writing this comment from Pakistan.

I am not saying that traditional Pashtun and Punjabi dress is totally similar or both are interchangeable, but there are numerous similarities. The basic ‘shalwar kamiz’ is quite similar indeed, with minor variation (the Pashtun one being looser, compared to the Punjabi one). And this is not just limited to Pakistani Punjabis (add Kashmiris to this as well) but also can be seen in Indian Punjabis/Himachalis/Jammuites.
You can see this for yourself, here among members of the National Assembly of Pakistan.
http://na.gov.pk/en/all_members.php

Regarding turbans being a West Asian import, one can’t be certain about that. Similar forms of headgear have always been worn in South and South-Central Asia.

Compare this (Punjabi turban)
https://media-cdn.tripadvisor.com/media/photo-s/01/38/6c/a4/punjabi-gentlemen-outside.jpg

with this (Pashtun, Waziri turban)
https://image.slidesharecdn.com/pakistan-october2009r-091029091427-phpapp01/95/pakistan-october-2009-9-728.jpg?cb=1256807767

The lungay does not seem to be ‘worn totally differently’ to the Punjabi pug, let’s get real. Apart from it’s patterns, one can hardly tell it apart from the traditional Punjabi ceremonial turban.

Traditional Punjabi food isn’t spicy, it is mostly dairy based. Nihari was introduced by Urdu speaking Muhajirs from UP-Bihar, it isn’t a native Punjabi dish. In India, Punjabis are stereotyped for consuming more meat.

adinke said...

@Sein Coming to genetics, which calculator are you talking about when you talk about ASI? Because on HarappaDNA, KPK Pashtuns sure as hell aren’t 10-15% ASI. They range from 20-22% on Harappa DNA, with Sindhis being from 22-28% and Punjabis 25-30%. Other admixture calculators mirror this trend, with varying proportions.

Siberian admixture can be slightly elevated among some individual Punjabi samples on calculators on gedmatch.

Punjabis (Jatts, Arains, Gujjars, Awans, Kambohs et al.) consistently get Pashtuns as one of their closest populations in admixture calculators.

Sindhis indeed seem to have lower steppe ancestry, however Punjabi Jatts have almost the same amount of steppe related/WHG components as Pashtuns, with Haryanvi Jatts having even more in admixture calculators, some scoring near the Pamiri average.

The PJL samples are as representative of Punjabis as were some of the ~35% SI HGDP ‘Pathan’ samples from the Kurram Agency. They are in all likelihood mostly chuhra/Christian samples, not representative of Punjabis as a whole, as they differ from other Punjabi samples a lot.
Would you accept kasabgar/hamsaya samples as representative of Pashtuns?

Iran_Neolithic itself peaks in Balochs, being an ‘Iranic’ population, west of the Indus and is quite high in certain Iranian groups (Mazandaranis and Bandaris for example).
Overall, Punjabi aren’t significantly more SI shifted than Sindhis.

I am not saying that Pashtuns are South Asians (they are not). They are South-Central Asians and Punjabis (and Kashmiris, Sindhis etc.) are North-Western South Asians, however SC Asians cluster closest to NW South Asians rather than to other Iranics or West Asians. This is reflected also, in the history and culture of the region.

adinke said...

@Saqib
Exactly, most of these experiments/runs tend to use PJL for the Punjabi average, despite them being much more SI shifted than the various Punjabi samples from different tribes/groups on Anthrogenica, HarappaDNA, MDLP Project and others.

Overall, all ethnicities of Pakistan (Pashtun, Sindhi, Punjabi, Baloch, Dardic etc.) are part of the Indus Basin cluster.

Seinundzeit said...

@Vara (or, as I like to call you, "Rami Redux")

You are sooo f***king stupid.

Although, seeing your responses always allows me the chance to get out a few good chuckles, so I guess you do serve a purpose.

@adinke

Okay, this might take a few parts, so bear with me...

"You realize what Sindh meant, initially?... "

Is the Vedic Aryan cultural conception in any way relevant to the contemporary politico-cultural context of the region?

And, is "India" not derived from "Sindh" (as it became "Hind" in Persian)?

"There is no proper consensus among scholars regarding the origins of the Hindus Shahis and Kabul Shahis... "

Most scholars do agree with Hepthalite or Kushan identification. (I can post direct quotes later, when I have more leisure)

"Haven’t been to Pakistan? I am writing this comment from Pakistan.

I am not saying that traditional Pashtun and Punjabi dress is totally similar or both are interchangeable... "

Lol, in that case I apologize. Your phrasing seemed to suggest that you had never been to Pakistan.

And, I do agree; there are consistent differences.

Funnily enough, Punjabis tell me that if they can't tell a "Pathan" from his facial features/fair complexion, they can usually tell from his manner of dress (and if that fails, the Urdu accent, lol).

Also, a West Asian origin for the turban is quite well-known; but it just faded away in that region, and survived in South Central Asia + northern South Asia.

Regardless, the older gentlemen you posted aren't really wearing turbans in the traditional southern Pashtun style. In their area, turbans are way bigger, and often made of a different fabric.

Being IDPs, I'm sure that they have far more on their minds; how to wrap their turbans must be pretty low on their list of priorities.

Also, as you noted, that Punjabi gentleman is wearing a ceremonial turban, not something he’d wear every day.

In most cases, this is how southern Karlani Pashtuns wear unceremonial turbans (again, everyday turbans):

https://i.ytimg.com/vi/TedKlibzdiU/hqdefault.jpg

http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7004/6511053405_79dd3ce31f_z.jpg

http://cdn.yeniakit.com.tr/images/news/625/afganistanda-talibana-agir-darbe-70-olu-h1460639346-503fe6.jpg

By contrast, in my experience, this is how Punjabis wrap their turbans (whenever they actually do; in my experience, it's very rare to see a Pakistani Punjabi wearing a turban):

http://c8.alamy.com/comp/A6CR62/pakistan-punjab-lahore-old-city-punjabi-men-sitting-A6CR62.jpg

http://www.narrativepak.com/wp-content/uploads/slider3/faces.jpeg

https://photos.smugmug.com/Destinations/Pakistan-Islamabad/i-XMcrvkk/0/a30986da/X2/_DSC2790_10x15-X2.jpg

And, if traditional Punjabi food isn’t spicy, I clearly have not had traditional Punjabi food in any of the villages I stayed at. (Lol)

Anyway, the point does stand that Punjabi cuisine is radically different from Pashtun fare. Although, I didn't know that Nihari was something Muhajirs brought to Punjab, that's quite interesting.

Seinundzeit said...

Continuing from where we left off...

"Coming to genetics, which calculator are you talking about when you talk about ASI? Because on HarappaDNA, KPK Pashtuns sure as hell aren’t 10-15% ASI. They range from 20-22% on Harappa DNA, with Sindhis being from 22-28% and Punjabis 25-30%. Other admixture calculators mirror this trend, with varying proportions."

Ah, you're referring to ADMIXTURE. I'm not.

There is no ASI component in ADMIXTURE; instead, one always gets a component peaking in South India, a component which is always a complex mix of ENA, Iran_Neolithic-related, and perhaps some extra ANE.

Rather, I'm referring to methods that try to gauge ENA levels (basically, “ASI” as understood in the original academic paper).

Here are some examples:

Punjabi_Lahore

27.1% Iran_Neolithic + 20.6% Iran_Hotu
34.5% Onge
17.8% Srubnaya_outlier

Distance=0.8041

(So, the PJL samples are 35% ASI, and close to 20% Steppe_EMBA. Also, they have an affinity towards older, more ANE-rich spins on Iran_Neo)

Sindhi

54.5% Iran_Neolithic
25.9% Srubnaya_outlier
19.6% Onge

Distance=0.4429

(So, Sindhis are close to being 25% Steppe_EMBA, and are around 20% ASI)

Now, compared to the Pakistani Pashtun samples that I have:

Northeastern Sarbani Pashtun, KPK

46.35% Iran_Neolithic + 5.95% Iran_Chalcolithic
31.80% Srubnaya_outlier +1.95% Srubnaya
13.95% Onge

Distance=0.2685

He is the most geographically eastern Pashtun in my data-set, and he hails from an area that was once in possession of Indo-Aryan people.

Yet, he is quite distinct from an Indo-Aryan Pakistani.

As one would expect, the ASI component takes a dip, his steppe ancestry is higher, he shows some Steppe_MLBA, and he has some Iran_Chal.

Basically, he represents the transition one sees, once one crosses the Indus into Pashtun areas.

Northeastern Sarbani Pashtun, FATA

28.6% Iran_Chalcolithic + 23.2% Iran_Neolithic
34.9% Srubnaya_outlier + 0.3% Srubnaya
13.3% Onge

Distance=0.153

Me (I have ancestry from Afghanistan, FATA, and KPK, but here it goes)

35.0% Iran_Neolithic + 17.4% Iran_Chalcolithic
32.1% Srubnaya_outlier + 4.4% Scythian_Pazyryk
11.1% Onge

Distance=0.2032

Southern Karlani Pashtun, FATA

38.8% Iran_Chalcolithic + 12.8% Iran_Neolithic
30.5% Srubnaya_outlier + 6.8% Srubnaya + 1.0% Scythian_ZevakinoChilikta
10.1% Onge

Distance=0.1488

This individual is much more similar to Pamiri Tajiks than he is to Sindhis/Punjabis, and he clusters near Ishkashami Tajiks on PCA plots.

Anyway, all of these individuals are quite distinct from Punjabis and Sindhis, and are very similar to either Dardic Afghans/northern Pakistanis, or are on a Baloch-to-Pamiri Tajik cline.

Seinundzeit said...

Finally...

“Punjabis (Jatts, Arains, Gujjars, Awans, Kambohs et al.) consistently get Pashtuns as one of their closest populations in admixture calculators.”

That’s because those calculators don’t have Jatt, Arain, Gujjar, Awan, Kamboh, etc, population samples in the oracles.

Eastern Pashtuns get the Kalash before Punjabis and Sindhis, and would probably be closer to Kohistanis, Torwalis, Chitralis, Pashayi, Tirahi, Nuristanis, etc. In many cases, they can be equidistant to Pamiri Tajiks and Sindhis.

After fellow Pashtuns, southerners get Pamiris way before they see Punjabis or Sindhis on their list of closest populations.

Still though, I wouldn’t take ADMIXTURE too seriously, and that too calculators created for use at GedMatch, and on top of that Oracles that are usually affected by the “calculator effect”.

“Overall, Punjabi aren’t significantly more SI shifted than Sindhis.”

Of course, I completely agree; I never claimed that.

Rather, based on the results I’ve seen of some Pakistani Punjabi Gills and Awans at Anthrogenica, they might have 2%-5% more ASI than the average Sindhi, and might also show an Iran_Hotu affinity lacking in Sindhis. This is what I meant when I said that they are somewhat more genetically South Asian than Sindhis (again, higher Iran_Hotu affinity, and a few percentage points more ASI).

Anyway, it seems that Indian Punjabi Jatts have much less ASI than their Pakistani counterparts. It’s out of whack with geography, but it’s a consistent pattern.

They also have much more Northern European affinity than the few Pakistani Punjabi Jatts whose results we’ve seen, and this discussion has been centered on Pakistani Punjabis.

“I am not saying that Pashtuns are South Asians (they are not). They are South-Central Asians and Punjabis (and Kashmiris, Sindhis etc.) are North-Western South Asians… “

Exactly, I totally agree.

“… however SC Asians cluster closest to NW South Asians rather than to other Iranics or West Asians.”

This is bit inaccurate.

Although, you’re totally correct about West Asians (they have too much Anatolia/Levant_Neolithic affinity and much less Steppe ancestry).

Northern Pakistani Pashtuns cluster with Afghan Pashtuns from Nangarhar/Kunar/Laghman, central Pakistani Pashtuns cluster with Afghan Pashtuns from Greater Paktia, and southern Pakistani Pashtuns cluster with Afghan Pashtuns from Greater Kandahar. Those Afghan areas constitute the eastern portion of the Iranian plateau.

In terms of deeper local ancestry, northern Pakistani Pashtuns are very similar to Nuristanis and isolated Dardic peoples, populations which are considered remnants of pre-Iranic Central Asia.

While central and southern Pakistani Pashtuns cluster in-between Pamiri Tajiks and Baloch, so surely they are closest to contemporary Iranic populations.

And, at the end of the day, due to intra-ethnic gene-flow, northern, central, and southern Pashtuns are slightly (genetically) closer to each other than they are to neighboring populations, despite the Pamiri + Baloch affinity of the southerners, and despite the Dardic/Nuristani affinity of the northerners

“Overall, all ethnicities of Pakistan (Pashtun, Sindhi, Punjabi, Baloch, Dardic etc.) are part of the Indus Basin cluster.”

I think that’s somewhat inaccurate. Pashtuns cluster with co-ethnics in Afghanistan, and again, those Afghan areas are quite far from the Indus Basin.

Dardic Pakistanis are basically identical to Afghan Dards, and are probably also very similar to Afghan Nuristanis.

The Pakistani Baloch/Brahui are very distinct/unique in the context of South Central Asia, and probably have a strong affinity towards other Baloch people in Iran and Afghanistan.

Seinundzeit said...

@adinke

Anyway, thanks for being civil.

Seriously, I do appreciate it; I’ve gotten tired of having to become an idiot, just so that I can communicate on that special Rami/Vara level (lol).

Kamus said...

@Sein, you are correct, areas like the Hindu Kush (Paropamisus), Arachosia, and Kabulistan were moreso frontier regions where East Iranians, Nuristanis and Dards melded and they can’t be neatly categorized. Strabo tells us in the 1st century that the country of Ariana is distinct from India and is bounded on the east by the Indus River. He also tells us that the western parts of the Hindu Kush were ruled by the Bactrians who invariably had a cultural and linguistic impact on the area. In other periods some provinces of Ariana did however fall under the Indian realm.

"The Paropamisadae, today part of Afghanistan, has sometimes been politically part of India, but throughout the Macedonian period it had been considered to belong to Iran, even though Indian or semi-Indian races might extend north and west of the Kunar river; the mixture of races is reflected in the fact that the satrapy had no racial name like Media or Bactria, but was only known to Greeks as 'the Paropamisadae',the peoples of the Paropamisus or Hindu Kush; if it had an official name it is lost. Alexander had appointed a succession of Iranian satraps to the country-Proexes, Tyriaspes, Oxyartes; Eratosthenes had expressly distinguished it from India; a number of the old local names are said to be Iranian; and it had received the regular organisation of a Seleucid satrapy, the division into eparchies" (W. W. Tarn, The Greeks in Bactria and India, p. 96).

Regarding Ferdowsi, just as the concept of “Turan” varies throughout the Shahnamah (areas in Transoxiana like Samarqand are sometimes considered part of Turan and at other junctures part of Iran), so does Ferdowsi’s conception of Iran. Here is an excerpt from the text in which Ferdowsi defines Iran in the story Davazdah Rokh. The governor of Turan, Piran, agrees to evacuate his troops from Iran in exchange for peace with the Iranians who are led by Goudarz.

http://www.bbc.com/persian/arts/2011/05/110516_l23_persian_lan_gel_shahnameh_city_rm.shtml

هر آن شهر کز مرز ایران نهی/ بگو تا کنم آن ز ترکان تهی

^Piran says-“Any city/land you set forth as part of Iran, name it so I can empty it of Turks."

As opposed to earlier where Koh-e-Alborz in southern Balkh is considered part of India, here Ferdowsi situates three important Hindu Kush valleys (Andarab, Bamiyan and Panjshir) as part of Iran and the latter two specifically as the seat of the mythical Iranian Kayanian dynasty. Venerated figures like Goshtasp and Lohrasp were part of this dynasty as opposed to the Zahhak-descendants who ruled Kabulistan:

دگر «طالقان» شهر تا «فارياب» - هميدون در «بلخ» تا «اندرآب»‏
دگر «پنجهير» و در «باميان» - سر مرز ايران و جاى كيان

Then from the city of Taluqan up to Faryab
Now to Balkh until Andarab

Then Panjher (Panjsher) and unto Bamiyan
The frontier/border of Iran and seat of Kiyan

All of the other territories mentioned in the excerpt as part of Iran are also located in Afghanistan, Tajikistan and Uzbekistan since the first two-thirds of the Shahnamah is based on the mythology and folklore of the inhabitants of Ariana/Khorasan/South Central Asia.

Seinundzeit said...

Kamus,

Thank you for that; very fascinating.

Also, what you've very succinctly described has always been my general contention, throughout the whole "debate" with "Vara".

As you've noted, this region is exceedingly complex in terms of history/geography, has repeatedly shifted between Iranian and Indian political affiliation, and has always partaken of both the Greater Iranian and the Greater Indian cultural spheres.

Afghanistan and northern/western Pakistan simply can't be fitted neatly as being wholly West Asian, wholly Central Asian, or wholly South Asian (although, the Central Asian socio-cultural element is obviously the most basic/extensive).

And, looking at the last 1,000 years, the region has been far more continuous with Central and West Asia, and has been quite distinct from South Asia proper (which begins in the plains of Punjab/Sindh).

This was my general contention, and one which you've put in far sharper/clearer relief (again, thanks for that).

Anyway, I'd like to read Tarn's book, seems like it could prove be very interesting.

Davidski said...

The South Asian abstract is up. I've added it to the blog post.

Jijnasu said...

Very interesting if they have samples from the South Indian Megalithic and Mesolithic India if that's what they mean

adinke said...

What I meant by that, is that the earliest conception of 'India', was a trans-Indus entity, encompassing both modern day KPK and Punjab.

The Avesta Vendidad also mentions 'Hapta Hindwa', the land of the seven rivers, which included the Rivers Kurram and Swat in modern day KPK.
http://www.avesta.org/vendidad/vd1sbe.htm
This also mentions Kabul as being part of the Indic or Brahmanic sphere of influence.

Regarding the Hindu Shahis/Kabul Shahis, their origin are discussed here (they have provided a lot of sources). Some of them have connected them to Kushans or Hepthalites, others to native Indic dynasties.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kabul_Shahi#Hindu_origins_and_Turkic_influences

In Hindu texts, the boundary of India is not clearly described, given that even Punjab (called Aratta-Vahika) is described as a pseudo-mlechha land, outside of the boundary of 'Brahmavarta/Aryavarta' in the Mahabharata
https://books.google.com.pk/books?id=AqKw1Mn8WcwC&pg=PA238&lpg=PA238&dq=aratta+vahika&source=bl&ots=Ogi6yIhNM8&sig=8kGAj6FAXMTvXjurkpuj0kEHN9k&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwj47-fZwezTAhVF7RQKHX9dCI0Q6AEILjAI#v=onepage&q=aratta%20vahika&f=false

Sindh and Balochistan historically have been united with numerous trans-Indus kingdoms and states. Plus, the presence of Brahuis (apparently a Dravidian speaking population) in the centre of Balochistan, who used to rule most of Balochistan as part of the Kalat state.

Those are good examples of Pashtun and Punjabi turban styles. In rural Punjab, turbans are still worn, mostly by the village elders.
The turban of the Punjabi man I posted, does resemble that of the other Punjabis you posted. Also, the Punjabi turban wearing style of the men you posted seems to near identical to the one of the Pashtun IDPs from South Waziristan that I posted.

When talking about the ceremonial turban, I meant this.
http://www.tiwanasociety.com/images/p4.jpg

(uniform of the Punjab Rangers)
https://etribuneblogs.files.wordpress.com/2015/08/51.jpg

compared to this

https://i.ytimg.com/vi/DRiZVR0yhQY/maxresdefault.jpg

https://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/736x/a9/e4/23/a9e42339eff3850daf895540c22f58fc.jpg

Again, both are different indeed, but not radically so.

Punjabi food would be spicier as compared to Pashtun cuisine, however what I was saying was that most of it, in rural Punjab, was mostly dairy based. Some of the dishes you mentioned (like lentils for example) are consumed by Pashtuns themselves.
http://www.afghancultureunveiled.com/humaira-ghilzai/afghancooking/2010/01/dal-afghan-soul-food.html

adinke said...

With regards to the genetics part, there are certain admxiture calculators that try to do the same, isolate the pure ASI part from West Eurasian of the 'South Indian' component like Eurogenes ANE K7, Iran_Neolithic K6 etc. From Iran_N K6
https://i.gyazo.com/e415a1c13c4e921bf32f5b8aad1edef6.png

When it comes to formal methods, the 'Punjabi' used is usually PJL, which are not representative of Punjabis as a whole.
Here, you used PJL as an example again.
You did not address this point, would you consider hamsaya/kasabgar samples to be represtative of Pashtuns? Because in the HGDP Pathan samples from the Kurram Agency, some reached upto 36% ASI. Now, would you consider it to be fair if only those were used in formal methods to represent Pashtuns and to show Pashtun similarity to South Asians?

About the Indo-Aryan Pakistanis, the Kalash and other Chitrali Dards you mention as being South-Central Asians and clustering with Pashtuns, are Indo-Aryans themselves.

Sindhis are indeed less steppe shifted (similar to Balochs) than Pashtuns, but what about running some Punjabi Sikh Jatts or Haryanvi Jatts using formal methods?

On PCA plots, Pashtuns cluster with Punjabis/Sindhis and other North-Western South Asians, there are numerous examples of this.
From Eurogenes blog itself
http://dienekes.blogspot.com.es/2011/01/genetic-map-of-pakistan.

Most of the admixture based calculators on gedmatch, have a large number of South Asian references, including many different Punjabi ones. You can see this for yourself on HarappaWorld, puntDnal, MDLP Project and others. Still, the fst distances in the oracles to Pashtuns are very small and close. I can post many examples if you want.

Here, a large number of admixture calculators results of NW South Asians and SC Asians, you can see how close they are.
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1XGY-UIBC2GcUWGl1FizNvu9ofle4ZPHvfNmbrVYxGMo/htmlview#gid=7

Kalash, Chitralis and Burusho themselves arent very far from Punjabis/Sindhis and other North-Western South Asians. Overall, they are part of the same cline.

I think you need to be specific about which calculator you are referring to when talking about certain Punjabis being more SI shifted than Sindhis. Have you seen these Punjabi Awans being more Iran_Hotu and SI shifted than Sindhis using formal methods?

With regards to Pakistani Punjabi Jatts, they usually tend to have different sub-clusters. The Gills you are referring to are all from Indian Punjab (Hoshiarpur region) and more SI shifted than other Punjabi Jatts (Dr McNinja at Anthrogenica has noted this). Then there are Pahari Jatts from the northern Punjab hills, they arent more SI shifted than Sikh Jatts, but have lower steppe and higher Caucasus/Gedrosia or other similar Iran_Neolithic based components. Then there are a couple of Pakistani Punjabi Jatts on gedmatch, that have similar admixture (wrt to steppe and ASI) as Sikh Jatts. Pakisani Punjab is more diverse (being a larger region) in this respect. However, when it comes to genetics, I am talking about all Punjabis or NW South Asians in general.

adinke said...

Eastern Afghanistan (where Pashtuns are concentrated) is part of the Indus Basin, due to the River Kabul being a tributary of the Indus, hence it could be said that they are part of the Indus Basin cluster.

When people talk about Afghanistan being at the crossroads of Central, West and South Asia (both in the cultural and genetic sense) it somewhat makes sense. The Central Asian proper affinity is due to the Uzbeks, Turkmens and Hazaras, the West Asian affinity is due to Khorasan and Farsiwans/Tajiks and the usage of Dari/Farsi and South Asians due to Pashtuns, Pashais and Nuristanis, however when talking about places like Swat, Mardan, the Peshawar Valley, Waziristan, Charsadda etc. these places cant be said to be at the crossroads of 'Central, West and South Asia'. These are NW South Asian shifted South-Central Asian regions.

Given that there is a North-South genetic divide between Pashtuns (Lar and Bar), with the Northern ones from KPK and Eastern Afghanistan being more South Asian shifted than the ones from Southern Afghanistan and North Balochistan, some have also theorised Pashtuns of KPK to be mostly Pashtunized Dardics/Indics or a mixture of the original Pashtuns from the Suleiman Mountains and local Dards.

Who would you say Pashtuns (of KPK and Eastern Afghanistan) are genetically closer to, Iranian Persians, Luris, Kurds etc. or to Punjabis, Sindhis and Kashmiris?

Saqib said...

@Seinundzeit

The method you use to calculate ASI shows huge difference between PJL and Sindhi. Sindhis are closer to pathans genetically then Pakistani Punjabis in your method. Because 5 PJL samples used here score 50-55% ASI in old admixture calculators compared to 29% Sindhis. And we know from dozens of samples with known castes that Pakistani punjabis are not that different then HGDP Sindhis as far as ASI is concerned.

In fact unlike few pathans and Sindhis, there are dozens of Pakistani punjabi samples with caste background posted on anthrogenica, harappadna etc Not even counting 25 Xing punjab arain samples where they score 31%. Vast majority of Pak punjabis are in between 30-33% south indian, some 35-36%.

Do Sikh jatts score lower ASI then muslim jatts in west punjab? True, on harappadna 5 muslim jatts average out 30% while sikh jatts 28%. But for some reason Haryana and Rajasthan jatts score even lower ASI and higher steppe then sikh jatts despite living further east and south of Indian Punjab.

5 PJL samples used here are poor representation of punjabis. They likely belong to christians or muslims from similar caste who don't make up majority of population. Anyone from Pakistan knows what I'm talking about.

Anyway Razib Khan tested all of 100+ PJL samples and divided them in to ABCD and this is what he said.

"The “Punjabis” sampled from Lahore were very diverse. Many were clustering with Pathans in the HGDP (by the way, there were two Pathan clusters, so that I suspect that one of them is “Pathanized,” and I removed these). But there were others, such as Punjabi_ANI_4, who were not that different from more generic South Asians. I suspect these are Muhajirs who have become ethnically assimilated more or less (or, the 1000 Genomes just labeled everyone from Lahore as Punjabi),"
http://www.unz.com/gnxp/south-asians-in-the-1000-genomes/

They are not muhajirs but belong to certain other castes. Which btw were also found in NWFP by British officials (current day KPK) involved in menial work.

adinke said...

@Saqib If you look at the Harappa DNA individual SI spreadsheet, you can see that many individual Sindhi and Punjabi Arain samples are scoring SI in the 20-25% range, which is also the range for KPK and Eastern Afghanistan Pashtuns in Harappa DNA
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1NUEhOvige0h7k3I8JeRjk9phENtUj_bwgQNC-UDNmxI/htmlview#

Saqib said...

@adinke

There are differences even with in same caste in this case arains. It's like you said choosing couple of HGDP pathan samples who score 35-36% ASI but on average HGDP pathan samples as a whole are similar to generic pathan samples as we have seen on anthrogenica etc.

In case of PJL samples are from random and diverse castes and hence differences are even bigger from one end to another.

adinke said...

The PJL likely are mostly from Christians. I think it was very naive of 1000genomes not to ask their caste/tribe before sampling them, as every other genetic study on South Asia had shown a clear caste-based difference in genetics. They are genetically quite far away from other Punjabis. Lahore has a lot of Christian Missionary Hospitals, many dating back to the British era. It is likely that the PJL samples were collected from one of them.

Seinundzeit said...

Adinke,

Again, bear with me, as this will take a few parts...

"What I meant by that, is that the earliest conception of 'India', was a trans-Indus entity, encompassing both modern day KPK and Punjab."

I mean, the Aryans didn't really have a conception of India as we understand it (mainly, India today is almost synonymous with South Asia), since they started their expansion from the northwestern quadrant of the sub-continent, and overlapped into South Central Asia.

Honestly, I don't think we should project our current picture of Indo-Iranian cultural relations and boundaries that far back, since the Aryans and their Iranian cousins were very similar at this point (the Avestan language is strikingly similar to Old Vedic Sanskrit), and South Asians and Central Asians didn't even exist yet in the current genetic sense.

"Sindh and Balochistan historically have been united with numerous trans-Indus kingdoms and states. Plus, the presence of Brahuis (apparently a Dravidian speaking population) in the centre of Balochistan, who used to rule most of Balochistan as part of the Kalat state."

True, but the Baloch certainly aren't South Asian. As Pashtuns are south Central Asians, Baloch are probably best construed as eastern West Asians (you can find millions of Baloch in Iran, and also in Afghanistan).

In addition, the Brahui aren't really Indian Dravidians; considering that they represent the genetic peak for Iran_Neo, they might constitute the final remnants of an Elamo-Dravidian substratum from West Asia (also, you can find Brahui in Afghanistan).

"Those are good examples of Pashtun and Punjabi turban styles..."

Thank you; I tried to find examples which fit what I saw IRL.

"Punjabi food would be spicier as compared to Pashtun cuisine, however what I was saying was that most of it, in rural Punjab, was mostly dairy based. Some of the dishes you mentioned (like lentils for example) are consumed by Pashtuns themselves.
http://www.afghancultureunveiled.com/humaira-ghilzai/afghancooking/2010/01/dal-afghan-soul-food.html"

For what it's worth, I've found that Punjabis really like fried dishes, while Pashtuns often do boiled dishes, or prefer slow-cooked meat. Pashtun food is just much less spicy, and heavily meat-centered (depending on tribe, either veal/lamb or goat meat is preferred, although most prefer lamb).

And obviously, lentils aren't restricted to Punjabis. Everyone loves lentils!

But, it's a crucial part of Punjabi cuisine, while not so much in Pashtun fare.

To be continued…

Seinundzeit said...

"From Iran_N K6 https://i.gyazo.com/e415a1c13c4e921bf32f5b8aad1edef6.png"

This one I don't like so much; it doesn't have EHG/ANE, so the eastern affinity is compensated via generous East Asian percentages.

Honestly, David's Basal K7 is the best ADMIXTURE run out there right now; it always makes sense, in terms of what we see with formal methods.

"Here, you used PJL as an example again.

Honestly, I only use PJL because I don't have any Pakistani Punjabi data.

If you have access to some Pakistani Punjabi autosomal data, send the file to David, so that he can give you the PCA coordinates. Then, provide those to me, and I'll see how they compare.

“You did not address this point, would you consider hamsaya/kasabgar samples to be represtative of Pashtuns…"

No, but I have a simple/clear reason for that; they aren't ethnically Pashtun.

Wouldn't you say that Punjabis have a different conception of ethnicity? If I'm not mistaken, Punjabis have a South Asian understanding of ethnicity; everyone speaking Punjabi and assuming Punjabi origins is "Punjabi", but there is a caste dynamic.

So, a Punjabi Jatt and a Chamar are both equally Punjabi; but they represent different castes.

By contrast, Pashtuns are a tribal people; everyone is linked via a genealogy, and is thus assumed to be of the same origin/closely related. In this sense, Pashtun conceptions of ethnicity are very similar to other tribal Central Asian/Near Eastern peoples.

Sidenote, but even though such individuals shouldn't be used to represent Pashtun genetic structure (it would be like using Ashkenazim Jews to represent the genetic ancestry of Eastern Europe), I do think that if such individuals identify as Pashtun, they should be recognized as such IRL. The fact that they look different from other Pashtuns doesn't mean anything; if they speak Pashto, and see themselves that way, they are Pashtuns in my book.

"About the Indo-Aryan Pakistanis, the Kalash and other Chitrali Dards you mention as being South-Central Asians and clustering with Pashtuns, are Indo-Aryans themselves."

They may be Indo-Aryan, but that does not make them South Asians.

I mean, I doubt that we'd say Sintashta/Andronovo were South Asians, due to their language. Or, to be on more historical/solid footing, I don't think we'd say that the Mitanni were South Asian.

"but what about running some Punjabi Sikh Jatts or Haryanvi Jatts using formal methods?"

But, how would Indian Jatts be relevant to a discussion on the genetic transition one sees once the Indus River is crossed?

And, even though Indian Jatts have less ASI than Pakistani Punjabi Jatts, they still have quite a bit more than even the most genetically South Asian-shifted KPK Pashtun (I have one Indian Jatt's data), and they still lack Iran_Chl, which is often the biggest genetic component for a Pashtun.

To be continued...

Seinundzeit said...

Finally...

"On PCA plots, Pashtuns cluster with Punjabis/Sindhis and other North-Western South Asians, there are numerous examples of this.
From Eurogenes blog itself
http://dienekes.blogspot.com.es/2011/01/genetic-map-of-pakistan"

That's Dienekes' blog; it only has Pakistanis, so who else can they cluster with?

“When people talk about Afghanistan being at the crossroads of Central, West and South Asia (both in the cultural and genetic sense) it somewhat makes sense…”

Again, one shouldn't project the current ethno-linguistic landscape deep into the past.

Anyway, Afghanistan is at a crossroads, because portions of it have (at various times) constituted crucial parts of ancient Iran, ancient Turan, and ancient Hind, and all three cultural influences constitute a strong substratum for nearly every group in Afghanistan/northwestern Pakistan.

“Given that there is a North-South genetic divide between Pashtuns (Lar and Bar)…”

Lol brother, that’s not what "lar aw bar” means.

“with the Northern ones from KPK and Eastern Afghanistan being more South Asian shifted than the ones from Southern Afghanistan and North Balochistan, some have also theorised Pashtuns of KPK to be mostly Pashtunized Dardics/Indics or a mixture of the original Pashtuns from the Suleiman Mountains and local Dards.”

For what it’s worth, the northern Pashtuns don’t have more ASI; there is a difference of like 2%. Indian and Pakistani Punjabi Jatts probably show a greater difference in ASI, compared to northern and central/southern Pashtuns (I'm referring to actual ASI, not South Indian-centric ADMIXTURE components).

But, northern Pashtuns have more Iran_Neo, while the central /southern Pashtun show much more Iran_Chal.

In simplistic terms, you can say that central/southern Pashtuns are anywhere between 60%-40% Pamiri Tajik-related, and 40%-60% Baloch-related. So, central/southern Pashtuns are a mix of eastern West Asians (Baloch-related people) and Central Asians (Pamiri Tajik-related people).

Northern Pashtuns are usually around 60% central/southern Pashtun + 40% Dardic/Nuristani-related. So, there was some “population replacement” (60% is a hefty amount to share with central/southern Pashtuns). So, northern Pashtuns are mostly Iranic southern Central Asian (since, again, they share around 60% of their genetic ancestry with fellow Pashtuns to their south and west), with heavy admixture from Indo-Aryan Central Asians (Dardic peoples, with whom they share 40% of their genetic ancestry).

“Who would you say Pashtuns (of KPK and Eastern Afghanistan) are genetically closer to, Iranian Persians, Luris, Kurds etc. or to Punjabis, Sindhis and Kashmiris?”

How could they be close to Persians/Luri/Kurds/etc, when those people have so much Anatolia/Levant affinity, and when those people have way less LNBA European-related admixture?

Also, I'll post some models later, as confirmation of the above estimates...

Seinundzeit said...

My memory is terrible...

A friend of mine did send me some Saraiki data, a few months ago.

Pakistani Saraiki:

45.0% Iran_Neolithic + 11.8% Iran_Hotu
22.4% Srubnaya_outlier
20.8% Onge

Distance=0.3225

Compared to Sindhis:

54.5% Iran_Neolithic
25.9% Srubnaya_outlier
19.6% Onge

Distance=0.4429

Not to toot my own horn, but just as I expected.

This individual has more Iran_Hotu, a little more ASI, and less Steppe_EMBA.

Now, compare the Pakistani Punjabi individual to my most eastern Pashtun sample:

Northeastern Sarbani Pashtun, KPK

46.35% Iran_Neolithic + 5.95% Iran_Chalcolithic
31.80% Srubnaya_outlier +1.95% Srubnaya
13.95% Onge

Distance=0.2685

Obviously, quite different.

For the king said...

West shifted south Asians like some Jatts/Punjabis/Saraikis have ancestry from Iranic central Asians, and they shouldn't be used as an example for proper south Asians due to their extremely low numbers + obvious central Asian Iranic ancestry. Western shifted Sindhis seem Balochi or even Iranian admixed in some cases, same applies to some Kashmiris(relatively high caucasian, somewhat lower ASI).

@Sein you should use Sapporo's coordinates. Khanabadoshi has them. He's one of the most western shifted Indic speaking south asians.

Saqib said...

@Sein

This proves what I've said, your seraiki sample score 36-37% south indian compared to HGDP Sindhis average 29% unless you are only using some random sample. Yet ASI in your method have difference of just 1% between sindhi and seraki. Safe to say most of Pakistani punjabis with known background/tribes who actually score between 30-33% will have less ASI then HGDP Sindhis in your method. To me it looks like HGDP SIndhis high N.Iran/Baloch component is hiding some ASI.

ASI results you post are not that different then Gedmatch Gedrosia ASI K9 with added advantage of using dozens of samples for better comparison.


Seinundzeit said...

@Saqib

This is a random sample.

I don't think he scores 37% South Indian; if I'm not mistaken, he scores 30% with HarappaWorld.

adinke said...

My point wasnt ever that Pashtuns are South Asians. I think I already said this, I dont consider Pashtuns to be South Asians. They are South-Central Asian.

Same goes for the Baloch. They are best described as South-Central Asian rather than 'Eastern West Asian' owing to their cultural, historic and genetic affinities. The vast majority of them are in Pakistan with most of their major centres (Dera Bugti, Kohlu, Jhal Magsi) being right next to the Indus Plains, not to mention the many Seraiki and Sindhi Baloch.

The Punjabi conception of ethnicity is complex and tough to describe, but technically everyone living in Punjab is supposed to be a Punjabi, even a Sindhi or Kashmiri migrant after 1-2 generations would be considered one. In this regard, it does differ from the Pashtun conception of ethnicity.

However one thing to note is that hamsaya/kasabgars (artisans/menial workers thay have apparent phenotypic/genetic differences with the main body of the population) are another 'trans-Indus' phenomenon, with pretty much the same set up existing in Punjab and Sindh as well. Chamars/Christians are found in KPK and FATA as well and many consider themselves to be 'non-Muslim Pashtuns' along with Sikh Khatris and are becoming FATA Maliks, not to mention the Muslim hamsayas (mullahs, damans etc.)
https://tribune.com.pk/story/538810/multi-tongued-peshawars-happy-hindus-and-sikhs/
http://www.radiotnn.com/fata-reforms-from-the-stand-point-of-its-minorities/

The problem with using the PJL to represent all Punjabis is that they genetically differ from the main body of Punjabis just as hamsaya/kasabgars who consider themselves Pashtuns differ genetically from the main body of Pashtuns.

I never called Chitralis and other Dardics South Asians either, I agree, the term South-Central Asian fits them best however, I just pointed out that they are Indo-Aryan as well.

You may not like ANE K7, but what about the other admixture calculators? Here are a whole bunch of them, you can compare the results of Pashtuns and NW South Asians yourself.
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1XGY-UIBC2GcUWGl1FizNvu9ofle4ZPHvfNmbrVYxGMo/htmlview#gid=7

" But, how would Indian Jatts be relevant to a discussion on the genetic transition one sees once the Indus River is crossed?"

By comparing the results of Indian Jatts (east of the Indus) to Pashtuns (west of the Indus) one can try to see the apparent genetic transition that one is supposed to see once the Indus River is crossed. I think it's pretty obvious.

Regarding the ASI of Indian Jatts and Pakistani Jatts, I have already addressed this in a previous comment. And when you talk about difference in ASI, do you refer to admixture calculators or formal methods? Anyway, this is what I said:
" With regards to Pakistani Punjabi Jatts, they usually tend to have different sub-clusters. The Gills you are referring to are all from Indian Punjab (Hoshiarpur region) and more SI shifted than other Punjabi Jatts (Dr McNinja at Anthrogenica has noted this). Then there are Pahari Jatts from the northern Punjab hills, they arent more SI shifted than Sikh Jatts, but have lower steppe and higher Caucasus/Gedrosia or other similar Iran_Neolithic based components. Then there are a couple of Pakistani Punjabi Jatts on gedmatch, that have similar admixture (wrt to steppe and ASI) as Sikh Jatts. Pakisani Punjab is more diverse (being a larger region) in this respect."

I did make a mistake, thats from dienekes, but what about plots like these?
http://s10.postimg.org/3lm1810ft/1_2.png
http://oi65.tinypic.com/2pov3v7.jpg

adinke said...

@ Seinundzeit Have you compared Pakistani Punjabi Jatts with Indian Punjabi Jatts, using formal methods to be making statements like that? And there is variation among 'Indian Jatts' themselves.

"How could they be close to Persians/Luri/Kurds/etc, when those people have so much Anatolia/Levant affinity, and when those people have way less LNBA European-related admixture?"
Hence them being part of the Indus Basin cluster.

One's version of 'quite different' depends on perspective. If formal methods had oracles, that Northern Sarbani KPK Pashtun would get the Seraiki quite close in his oracle and would cluster close with him on a PCA.
Obviously, one cant expect both of them to score the exact same percentages and components either, but that was never my point.

@For the king Jatts/Seraikis/Punjabis dont have any 'Iranic Central Asian' ancestry as you say and I never said to take them as an example for 'proper South Asians' just like how South-Central Asians like Pashtuns/Eastern Tajiks/Balochs cant be taken as an example for 'proper Iranics'. If anything, its them who are Indic shifted and not the other way around.

Those Sindhis are not Iranian or Baloch admixed in all likelihood, given that Sindhi Hindus and Memons have pretty much the same admixture. Same goes for the Kashmiris.

Seinundzeit said...

adinke,

"My point wasnt ever that Pashtuns are South Asians. I think I already said this, I dont consider Pashtuns to be South Asians. They are South-Central Asian."

Sure; we already agree on this.

"Same goes for the Baloch. They are best described as South-Central Asian rather than 'Eastern West Asian' owing to their cultural, historic and genetic affinities. The vast majority of them are in Pakistan with most of their major centres (Dera Bugti, Kohlu, Jhal Magsi) being right next to the Indus Plains, not to mention the many Seraiki and Sindhi Baloch."

On this, I feel some difference of opinion.

There are 1.5-2.5 million Baloch people in Iran, and nearly a million in Afghanistan.

Also, Bandari Iranians (ones with minimal African admixture) are very similar to Baloch/Brahui, and I doubt that anyone would construe them as belonging to any "Indus Basin" cluster.

"You may not like ANE K7, but what about the other admixture calculators? Here are a whole bunch of them, you can compare the results of Pashtuns and NW South Asians yourself.
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1XGY-UIBC2GcUWGl1FizNvu9ofle4ZPHvfNmbrVYxGMo/htmlview#gid=7"

I actually like the ANE K7; the test you showed was Iran_N K6.

Anyway, ADMIXTURE isn't a formal test of admixture, nor a very effective method of properly parsing direct/shared ancestry between populations.

"By comparing the results of Indian Jatts (east of the Indus) to Pashtuns (west of the Indus) one can try to see the apparent genetic transition that one is supposed to see once the Indus River is crossed. I think it's pretty obvious."

Indian Jatts don't live right next to the Indus.

"And when you talk about difference in ASI, do you refer to admixture calculators or formal methods...

Have you compared Pakistani Punjabi Jatts with Indian Punjabi Jatts, using formal methods to be making statements like that? And there is variation among 'Indian Jatts' themselves."

As I stated before, that assessment wasn't merely based on ADMIXTURE.

"I did make a mistake, thats from dienekes, but what about plots like these?
http://s10.postimg.org/3lm1810ft/1_2.png
http://oi65.tinypic.com/2pov3v7.jpg"

On plots like those, Pamiri Tajiks will cluster near Pashtuns.

So, are Pamiri Tajiks now part of the "Indus Basin" cluster?

Also, the second plot is a PCA involving ADMIXTURE components, not a genotype-based PCA.

"One's version of 'quite different' depends on perspective. If formal methods had oracles, that Northern Sarbani KPK Pashtun would get the Seraiki quite close in his oracle and would cluster close with him on a PCA.
Obviously, one cant expect both of them to score the exact same percentages and components either, but that was never my point."

He is the most South Asian-shifted "pure" Pashtun I have, yet he doesn't cluster near Punjabis/Sindhis, and is obviosly quite distinct from them in terms of Iran_Chal, lower ASI, higher steppe ancestry, higher Steppe_MLBA affinity, etc.

"@For the king Jatts/Seraikis/Punjabis dont have any 'Iranic Central Asian' ancestry as you say and I never said to take them as an example for 'proper South Asians' just like how South-Central Asians like Pashtuns/Eastern Tajiks/Balochs cant be taken as an example for 'proper Iranics'. If anything, its them who are Indic shifted and not the other way around."

Jatts and Sindhis are quite different from non-Brahmin North Indians. They do skew towards Iran_Neo and Steppe_EMBA.

In other words, Punjabis and Sindhis do deviate in an Iranic direction, if by Iranic we mean Pashtuns.

adinke said...

@Seinundzeit ''There are 1.5-2.5 million Baloch people in Iran, and nearly a million in Afghanistan."

Compared to the 8,211,241 in Pakistan.

"Also, Bandari Iranians (ones with minimal African admixture) are very similar to Baloch/Brahui, and I doubt that anyone would construe them as belonging to any "Indus Basin" cluster."

The Balochs that are more similar to Iranian Bandaris are Makranis, from southern Balochistan, having more SSA, but the majority of Balochs are Suleimani (from the regions I mentioned) living next to the Indus Plains.
And compare the genetic similarities of the Baloch with the HGDP Sindhis, I think it's obvious whom they are closer to. Not even mentioning the vast historic and cultural relationship between the two. The legit 'NW Iranic' connections of the Baloch date back to the Neolithic, with Iran_Neolithic being high in Sindhis as well.

" I actually like the ANE K7; the test you showed was Iran_N K6.

Anyway, ADMIXTURE isn't a formal test of admixture, nor a very effective method of properly parsing direct/shared ancestry between populations."

But in admxiture tests, we have a very large variety of Pashtun and NW South Asian samples to compare, unlike in formal methods. You can't just discard them like this, I mean they have to count for something, by atleast showing the genetic affinities of these populations.

Also, you can compare the ANE K7 results of Pashtuns with NW SA's in that spreadsheet I posted.

" Indian Jatts don't live right next to the Indus."

Well, neither do the Pakistani Punjabi Jatts that you refer to do. Living right next to the Indus (in Attock Fort?) shouldn't be a pre-requisite to your aim of showing the 'genetic transition that one sees once the Indus is crossed'. They live even farther east, so by all means they should be an even better candidate for this comparison.

" As I stated before, that assessment wasn't merely based on ADMIXTURE."

Ok, so can you post some results of Pakistani Punjabi Jatts, Indian Punjabi Jatts and Haryanvi Jats using formal methods in order to compare their results and see how they differ? And using only one sample from each group wouldnt be very representative.

" On plots like those, Pamiri Tajiks will cluster near Pashtuns.

So, are Pamiri Tajiks now part of the "Indus Basin" cluster?"

I think Pamiri Tajiks would be more steppe shifted and have lesser ASI as compared to Pashtuns, and would be plotted north/west of Pashtuns, but won't cluster too far away either.
There are some Wakhis and Pamiris in Gilgit Baltistan, North Pakistan, and the Wakhan Corridor is a part of the literal Indus River Basin.
https://www.stratfor.com/sites/default/files/styles/stratfor_large__s_/public/main/images/indus-basin-india-pakistan.jpg?itok=QMBwkp_i

Btw, in this one, Pashtuns are again posited as being part of the Indus Basin cluster.
http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-yajJw96cRLQ/Umvcdid3laI/AAAAAAAAJUY/fZ-ZXS8XIp8/s1600/journal.pone.0076748.g003.png
(from Di Cristafro et al. 2013)
as well as
http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-ztxlQ68e19Q/TnC0Z0rW6bI/AAAAAAAAEHc/MQny_v-ygqQ/s1600/pca-caucasus.png

adinke said...

@Seinundzeit " He is the most South Asian-shifted "pure" Pashtun I have, yet he doesn't cluster near Punjabis/Sindhis, and is obviosly quite distinct from them in terms of Iran_Chal, lower ASI, higher steppe ancestry, higher Steppe_MLBA affinity, etc."

How does he not 'cluster near' Punjabis/Sindhis? I'm having to repeat the same point now: I am not saying that Pashtuns would score the exact same percentages and components as NW South Asians, however had there been an oracle in formal methods or a PCA, this induvidual would cluster relatively close (but not exactly on top of) to the Seraiki and Sindhi individuals whose results you posted.

" Jatts and Sindhis are quite different from non-Brahmin North Indians.
They do skew towards Iran_Neo and Steppe_EMBA.

In other words, Punjabis and Sindhis do deviate in an Iranic direction, if by Iranic we mean Pashtuns."

Conversely, SC Asians (Pashtuns/Eastern Tajiks/Balochs etc.) are quite different from West Iranics. They skew towards ASI and have lower Natufian/Levant/CHG and deviate towards an Indic direction, if by Indic we mean NW South Asians.
In the end, both these population's results make sense given their geographic positioning.

Seinundzeit said...

@adinke

"Compared to the 8,211,241 in Pakistan..."

And, the vast majority of those 8 million Pakistani Balochis live on the Iranian plateau. Pakistani Balochistan constitutes the most eastern portion of the Iranian plateau.

Also, merely because there are more Baloch in Pakistan, this doesn't mean that their strong/ancient presence in Iran should be taken lightly.

"The Balochs that are more similar to Iranian Bandaris are Makranis, from southern Balochistan, having more SSA, but the majority of Balochs are Suleimani (from the regions I mentioned) living next to the Indus Plains.
And compare the genetic similarities of the Baloch with the HGDP Sindhis, I think it's obvious whom they are closer to."

This is somewhat inaccurate.

All Baloch/Brahui are very similar to those Iranian Bandaris who have very little/no African admixture.

By contrast, Sindhis are very different (in terms of deep genetic ancestry) from all the Balochistanis.

"Well, neither do the Pakistani Punjabi Jatts that you refer to do. Living right next to the Indus (in Attock Fort?) shouldn't be a pre-requisite to your aim of showing the 'genetic transition that one sees once the Indus is crossed'. They live even farther east, so by all means they should be an even better candidate for this comparison."

Indian Punjabi Jatts have been subjected to some extra admixture events/processes, ones for which their Pakistani counterparts don't display any evidence.

Basically, they have much higher steppe ancestry.

Anyway, our original discussion was based on the cultural transitions one sees in Pakistan, once one crosses the Indus. Surely, Indian Jatts have no relevance to that topic.

"Ok, so can you post some results of Pakistani Punjabi Jatts, Indian Punjabi Jatts and Haryanvi Jats using formal methods in order to compare their results and see how they differ? And using only one sample from each group wouldnt be very representative."

I'll make arrangements; and one sample should be just fine when using nMonte (with either Fsts or PCA), as it doesn't quite work like ADMIXTURE.

Seinundzeit said...

Continuing from where we left off...

"I think Pamiri Tajiks would be more steppe shifted and have lesser ASI as compared to Pashtuns, and would be plotted north/west of Pashtuns, but won't cluster too far away either.
There are some Wakhis and Pamiris in Gilgit Baltistan, North Pakistan, and the Wakhan Corridor is a part of the literal Indus River Basin."

Pamiri Tajiks cluster about as close to the average of the original HGDP "Pathans" as the most South Asian-shifted Sindhis do to those same Pashtun samples.

Southern/central Pashtuns from Pakistan/Afghanistan cluster even closer to Pamiris.

So, as per your methodology of assuming the existence of a genetic cluster by simply looking at a visualization of the first two principal components, Pamiri Tajiks belong to the "Indus cluster", despite having virtually no relationship with South Asia when looking at history, culture, language, geography, or phenotype.

To me, that makes the very idea of an “Indus Basin” cluster rather pointless (from a conceptual perspective), since it doesn’t map onto actual “Indus Basin” populations.

Instead, this Indus Basin cluster extends deep into Central Asia (Pamiri Tajiks, Yaghnobi, even Tajiks “proper” from Tajikistan, etc) and West Asia (Iranian Baloch, Afghan Brahui, Bandari Iranians, etc).

So again, it isn’t even a “cluster”; it is a reification, based on how some populations are clustering in the first two dimensions of a Eurasian PCA.

Also, Pamiris in Pakistan aren't "native", and these Pamiri samples are from well inside the borders of Tajikistan.

"Btw, in this one, Pashtuns are again posited as being part of the Indus Basin cluster.
http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-yajJw96cRLQ/Umvcdid3laI/AAAAAAAAJUY/fZ-ZXS8XIp8/s1600/journal.pone.0076748.g003.png
(from Di Cristafro et al. 2013)
as well as
http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-ztxlQ68e19Q/TnC0Z0rW6bI/AAAAAAAAEHc/MQny_v-ygqQ/s1600/pca-caucasus.png"

To continue on the same theme: if they had Central Asians like Pamiri/Yaghnobi, and West Asians like Bandari Iranians, the "Indus Basin" would simply disappear in conceptual terms; instead, northwestern South Asia would be seen to draw towards eastern West Asia and southern Central Asia.

"Conversely, SC Asians (Pashtuns/Eastern Tajiks/Balochs etc.) are quite different from West Iranics. They skew towards ASI and have lower Natufian/Levant/CHG and deviate towards an Indic direction, if by Indic we mean NW South Asians.
In the end, both these population's results make sense given their geographic positioning."

From a purely theoretical perspective, and being totally objective, it would be better to describe NW South Asians as being South Central Asian-shifted relative to North Indians. The converse makes less sense for Pashtuns.

I say this because Pashtuns don't deviate in a strongly West Asian direction, when compared to northwestern South Asians.

Instead, they deviate towards Steppe_EMBA, which is an extinct stream of populations; they deviate towards Steppe_MLBA; they deviate towards Iran_N, which is virtually nonexistent in contemporary West Asia; and they deviate towards Iran_Chal, which is only found in contemporary West Asia via highly mixed forms which display any even greater Levantine/Anatolian shift.

Basically, Pashtuns are being pulled towards populations that no longer exist; but, Punjabis and Sindhis are being pulled towards Pashtuns/Baloch.

So, again, the directionality is better described as being from the northwest towards southeast.

Santosh said...

@Seinundzeit

"Anthro Survey,

For whatever it's worth, I don't think so. At least for the moment (I'm just basing this on the current evidence).

Honestly, we still don't have a totally satisfactory understanding, with regard to which of those ancient Iranian plateau populations constitute a better primary genetic base for South Asians.

I mean, some methods actually suggest widespread Iran_Chalcolithic-related ancestry deep into South Asia, while other methods only show Iran_Chl in South Central Asia (Tajikistan/Uzbekistan/Turkmenistan, Afghanistan, and western/northern Pakistan), with Iran_Neo/Iran_Hotu being the primary ancestral stream for all South Asians east of the Indus.

For this, IVC and BMAC aDNA should provide definitive clarification.

But, all methods do agree that South Central Asians skew far harder towards Iran_Chl in comparison to Iran_Neo/Iran_Hotu (the Kalash, and perhaps the Pashayi and Nuristani of Afghanistan, might constitute exceptions to this general rule), while proper northern South Asians (Punjabis and Sindhis) do display a much stronger affinity towards Iran_Neo/Iran_Hotu when compared to Afghans/northwestern Pakistanis.

Basically, in terms of Iran_Neo/Iran_Hotu vs Iran_Chl/CHG-like ancestry, Punjabis and Sindhis aren't really much more western in relation to other South Asians, so I don't think there was a post-Neolithic migration into South Asia from the Iranian plateau.

Of course, I could be wrong; we need that Rakhigarhi aDNA.

Although, Sindhis are definitely more western than other South Asians, because they are primarily West Eurasian, while North Indians are somewhat closer to being an even mix (Sindhis seem to be 20%-25% ASI, while North Indians like the Chamar are anywhere between 35%-45% ASI). But, the ancestral streams are still the same, even if the proportions differ (while in South Central Asia, it's not just the proportions, but the presence of an additional more "modern West Asian"-like element which allows for heightened differentiation from peninsular South Asians).

Still, we're pretty close to finally seeing some South Asian aDNA, so everything will be cleared up soon enough."

I would like to ask you how all these neolithic Iran vs. chalcolithic Iran vs. some other possible northwestern ancestry figure in the biological discontinuity seen at around 4800 BC in Mehrgarh. I remember reading that the people of the urban phase, i.e. Harappan Civilisation were very closely related to the new chalcolithic people of Mehrgarh but not to the pre-Chalcolithic Mehrgarh neolithic people.

Also, could you tell me if the Dravidian-speaking non-Brahmin populations of South India like the Velama and Mala have any chalcolithic Iran ancestry? Wherever I have read, they are modelled as Iran_Neolithic plus ASI only, so is chalcolithic Iran ruled out for non-Brahmin Dravidians?

Santosh said...

continued from the previous comment:

@Seinundzeit

This is all quite problematic because there is an inferred Kubha-Vipas substrate of the Punjab region in the Vedic language and then there is also Language X which contributed most of the agricultural vocabulary to Hindi, according to Colin Masica. But Southworth wrote in his 2005 book "Linguistic Archaeology of South Asia" that this Language X could very well have been the Indus Valley language as opposed to just the Gangetic plains, because, according to him, the supposed Language X words in Hindi are not limited to Hindi but are present in many other Indo-Aryan languages. Dravidian comes pretty later which implies that it did not have much role to play in the Indus Valley, at least at the time the Indo-Aryans are said to have come to Punjab, i.e. around 1900 BC. Also, didn't these Indus Valley Civilisation people move into the east after their civilisation collapsed, rather than to the south? But there is almost next-to-nothing evidence that Dravidian languages were ever present in eastern North India. Even if we consider that the IVC people who moved were already Indo-Aryan speakers themselves, there should be at least a bit of Dravidian preserved in that very old stage of Vedic in the form of substratum or something. But Dravidian words, adstratum, substratum, etc. appear mainly from central India, western India like Maharashtra, and such places, and these are the places that post-Harappan people do not appear to have moved into. All this makes me think that the mature IVC has nothing much to do with Dravidian as a language at all. Granted, some Dravidian may have been present in the areas of Harappan influence such as Gujarat or Sindh, but that may be due to the northward expansion of South-Dravidian-speaking Dravidians or even due to a little bit of trade.

Also, how do you think genetics figures with the following idea of archaeobotanist Dorian Fuller in his "South Asia: Archaeology" chapter in the book "The Global Prehistory of Human Migration"? He sees a savanna-based pastoralist and millet agriculture system stretching from Gujarat (based on his interpretation of evidence from some c.3500 BC sites of Gujarat) to southern Deccan (the South Indian Neolithic Complex (the earliest stages of which are dated to 2800 BC)) and Fuller considers these early Dravidian-speaking, pastoralist and millet-cultivating Gujaratis to be some branch of mesolithics of that area who got their cattle from the Indus valley Neolithic without shifting to full-fledged agriculture of the normal IVC crops of wheat, barley, etc. (perhaps, because they do not grow well in the Gujarat to South India regions or whatever... or simply because they were resistant to full-fledged agriculture). In my view, there is a lot of promise to this idea, based on what I gathered during my almost-year-long researches on the Dravidian languages and people and culture. Could it be possible that these Gujarati mesolithics were the Iran-Neolithic/Iran-Paleolithic people that we see as a contributor of ancestry to Dravidian-speaking populations? If it's not possible (i.e. all the mesolithics of India must be ASI only), then this idea is probably wrong, or it is the ANIs who language-shifted to Dravidian.

Santosh said...

again continued:

@Seinundzeit

In another scenario (actually my idea it is, so it may be not that great as I'm not a scholar working in these fields), it is the Neolithic people of Mehrgarh (who came there from the Zagros area) that spoke the earliest layers of Dravidian, before being supplanted from their location by these 4500 BC discontinuity people, whoever they are. That also explains why the IVC's dominant language was not Dravidian (which is very likely) and it also explains the Iran Neolithic-like ANI in Dravidians.

There is this other, sort of newer idea proposed by David McAlpin and Franklin Southworth in the same book, "The Global Prehistory of Human Migration", in the chapter "South Asia: Dravidian Language History" that the Dravidian languages are related to Elamite (which itself is a hypothesis with no acceptance in historical linguistics) but that the Dravidian entered India only in the 3rd millennium BC, first into the Indus Valley, as peripheral pastoralists only, and continued their wandering off into the more southerly parts of the country. How does this idea figure with genetics? If they entered at that recent stage into India, shouldn't their descendants have any newer genetic signals than the Iran Paleolithic and Iran Neolithic? Or is it that these Iran Neolithic-like Dravidian Elamo-Dravidian pastoralists of the 3rd millennium BC were somehow some peripheral Iran Neolithic-like people of Iran who wandered off from Iran at that late date, and completely pure, with no Levant admixture seen in the Chalcolithics of Iran? (At any rate though, I have to emphasise here that the Elamo-Dravidian hypothesis is fringe in mainstream linguistics)

The above three (well, two, if you discount the middle one lol) or four (if you include the "Dravidian-speakers were a major prestigious section of IVC and the language of their seals is Dravidian" hypothesis) are the most important hypotheses concerning the origins and the presence of Dravidian languages in India. Which ones appear to be strong contenders from the point of view of genetics?

Thanks a lot if you read the comment.