search this blog

Saturday, January 27, 2018

mtDNAwiki on "Steppe folk" mtDNA and Indo-Iranian origins


Fascinating stuff from Samuel at mtDNAwiki. Emphasis is mine:

Steppe folk were people who resided in what are today Southern Russia and Eastern Ukraine between 6,000 and 4,000 years ago. They were very different from the Anatolian farmers I discussed earlier.

Ancient DNA shows that, between 3000 and 2000 BC, Steppe folk migrated en masse into Northern Europe, Central Asia and Siberia. Shortly afterwards, Steppe folk settled in South Europe, South Asia (India, Afghanistan, etc.), and Iran.

They contributed huge chunks of ancestry to countless modern ethnic groups. Modern-day Europeans are for the most part a two-way mixture between Steppe folk and European Neolithic farmers (who were mostly of Anatolian origin).

...

As much as 33% of Tajik mtDNA really does derive from Eneolithic/Bronze Age Eastern Europe. No doubt about it. Yes, Tajiks are an exception, because they have a lot more Steppe mtDNA than essentially all other South Central Asians. However, significant frequencies of Steppe mtDNA exist in every population in this region. For example, the mtDNA in the Kalasha, a small ethnic group from the Hindu Kush, is mostly made up of founder effects involving Steppe mt-HGs U4a1, U4b1a4, U2e1h, and J2b1a. Each of these haplogroups has been found in remains from Eneolithic/Bronze Age Eastern Europe.

Typical European haplogroups such as U5a1a1, H2a1, T1a1, H5a1, H6a1, J1b1a1, J2b1a, H7b, etc. consistently pop up in every South Central Asian population. Realistically, none of these haplogroups are more than 10,000 years old. Indeed, all of them are likely to be less than 7,000 years old. The European-related mtDNA in South Central Asia isn’t derived from distant, Paleolithic shared ancestry between Europeans and Asians. It’s recent stuff from the Steppe.

For over a decade Y-haplogroup R1a-M417 perplexed many geneticists because it was the most common Y-haplogroup in two geographically very distant peoples; Balto-Slavs of Eastern Europe and Indo-Aryans of South Asia. But thanks to ancient DNA, it has now been confirmed that R1a-M417 is an European Steppe lineage which expanded both west and east from the Pontic-Caspian Steppe between 4,600 and 3,500 years ago.

Interestingly, I’ve found mtDNA haplogroups which correlate very well with R1a-M417; meaning that they either exist in South Asians & Eastern Europeans, or in South Asians & ancient Central and Eastern Europeans rich in R1a-M417, such as the Corded Ware and Srubnaya peoples.

J1c1b1a: Russia, Ukraine, Hungary, Romania, Denmark, UK, Spain, Tajik, India. Srubnaya (R1a-Z93), Corded Ware (R1a-M417).
H2a1a: Russia, Hungary=2, Finland, Britain, Ireland, France, Pathan, Tajik=16, Turkey, Siberia. Eneolithic Ukraine (R1a-M417), Bronze age Scotland, Unetice.
H5e1: Russia=2, Hungary, Greece, Tajik=3.
T1a1b: Russia=4, Poland=3, Hungary=2, Iran=2, Turkey, Tajik=4, India. Bronze age Latvia, Sycthian=2.
N1a1a1a1: Estonia=3, Finland=2, Italy, Turkmen, India=2. Sintashta, Sycthian, Sarmatian.
K2a5: Estonia, Ireland, Iran, Sindhi, Pathan, India. Corded Ware Germany, Corded Ware Sweden.
U4b2: Russia, Ukraine, Sweden, Spain, Burosho, Tajik, India.
U4b1a4: Kalash, Tajik, Iran, Siberia=3. Catacomb, Sycthian.
U2e1h: Kalash=3, Tajik=8, Siberia, Italy. Sintashta, Potapovka

The most important mt-HGs here are U2e1h, H2a1a, U4b1a4, T1a1b, and N1a1a1a1. They directly link modern Indo-Iranian speakers in Asia with Eneolithic/Bronze age Eastern Europeans generally considered by historical linguists and archaeologists to be Proto-Indo-European- or Proto-Indo-Iranian-speakers (i.e. Sintashta and Potapovka).

When I put all of this data together, and saw the undeniable links between modern-day Indo-Iranian speakers and Eneolithic/Bronze Age Eastern Europeans, I was amazed. The results confirmed to me, beyond any doubt, that the ancient migrations from the western Steppe deep into Asia long hypothesized by historical linguists and archaeologists did happen. Indo-Iranian languages really did originate in Eastern Europe, probably in what is now Ukraine, then took the long journey all the way to the Indian Subcontinent.

Case in point: ancient DNA sample I6561. That’s his lab ID, but he’s a man who died in what is now Ukraine ~5,500 years ago. He belonged to Y-HG R1a-M417 and mt-HG H2a1a. Today H2a1a is most common in the Tajik people of South Central Asia. The most common Y-HG in Tajiks, and many of their neighbors, such as Pashtuns, Kalasha, northern Indians, etc. is R1a-M417.

All of the evidence suggests that Mr. I6561 belonged to a PIE community whose descendants would go on to settle lands that stretch all the way from modern-day Norway to India. His people are important founders of countless modern ethnic groups; Russians, Czechs, Tajiks, Pashtuns, Indians, and so on. Oh yeah, and also the ancient Scythians, who dominated much of Asia around 500 BC, derived directly from his people. Pretty amazing.

...

It’s been known for a while, via archaeological data, that Steppe folk traded with these farmers. But now, thanks to ancient DNA, it’s clear that they exchanged more than just goods. Enneolithic and Bronze Age genomes from what are now Ukraine, Romania, and Bulgaria show that the Steppe and farmer folks began mixing by at least 4400 BC.

Hence, when Steppe folk expanded both west and east, they took with them at least a little Anatolian admixture. This is also true for the Steppe folk who went to South Asia. Several of the mt-HGs that I labeled “Steppe” are in fact Anatolian mt-HGs that the Steppe folk acquired through admixture with farmer peoples before their mass migrations. These include mt-HGs H1b1, H5a1, H7b, J1c1b1a, J2b1a, N1a1a1a1, K1b1a1, HV6, and HV9.

It’s often said, in scientific literature as well as on various genetic blogs and forums, that the Steppe folk who moved into South Asia didn’t harbor any Anatolian ancestry. But my mtDNA data easily debunks this claim. South Asians do indeed carry some Anatolian-derived mtDNA which they, in all likelihood, acquired from their Steppe ancestors.

See also...

Another look at the genetic structure of Yamnaya

Ancient herders from the Pontic-Caspian steppe crashed into India: no ifs or buts

Descendants of ancient European (fair?) maidens in Central Asia's highlands

Late PIE ground zero now obvious; location of PIE homeland still uncertain, but...

250 comments:

1 – 200 of 250   Newer›   Newest»
Shahanshah of Persia said...

Thanks for sharing this. Excellent stuff from Sam, as usual.

André de Vasconcelos said...

Just a small correction, it's spelled 'Scythian' not 'Sycthian'. Interesting stuff nontheless, but not unexpected

Davidski said...

@AdV

Thanks. Typo fixed.

Shahanshah of Persia said...

@DavidskI had to update minor typos in my original comment, sorry about that. This is one comment in which I don't want typos.

In light of this new evidence, when are Indian nationalists and Out of India proponents finally going to accept the Aryan INVASION Theory? It certainly was not non-existent or even a peaceful "migration", whatever that means. It would be interesting to see the look on their faces when the actual data is release by Harvard, hopefully early next month. I would love to see the response of the Indian media. Will it be more of the "colonialist" name calling, or will it be more of a twist of the realities? I cannot say, however, knowing Indian nationalists I think it's safe to say that the upcoming study will send shockwaves across the Subcontinent. I also hope that European nationalists maintain their composure in regards to the matter once the study is out.

Once it is finally proven that the Vedic Aryans were not native to India, the majority of Indian nationalists will realize their LARPing for the past few years has been all for not.

Here's just my recap of how things went down in South Asia:

>A population very similar to the archaic Onge people migrates to South Asia and settles down.
>A massive influx of Neolithic Iranian farmers arrive in the Indus Valley River Basin and eventually form one of the first civilizations in world history, and also establish a caste system to separate themselves from the native tribals, who may or may not have been later migrants to the region.
>Vedic Aryans from the Pontic-Caspian steppe migrate to South Asia without making much contact with the BMAC culture, but likely pass through the Ferghana Valley, picking up insignificant amounts of Neolithic Iranian ancestry. They settle in the Swat Valley, and then hear of great cities and vast riches further east. Many of the Vedic Chiefs plan an invasion.
>Utilizing their vastly superior tactics of warfare, characterized by the use of chariots, horses, and weapons made of Bronze, the Vedic Aryans decisively crush a vastly numerically superior army sent by the local elites of the Indus Valley Civilization at the Saraswati River.
>Local elites begin to panic, as now they do not have an army to defend their cities. A meeting in called, and many elites fear for the safety of their cities.
>Vedic Aryans conquer each and every city in the Indus Valley River Basin one by one, enslaving and massacring a great many civilians in the process.
>Content with their spoils, the Vedic Aryans settle down and establish the Hindu Caste System, and formulate a series of hymns commemorating their triumphs against their enemies, the Dasyu.
>These hymns will become known as the Vedas.

Fast forward to today, and you have "Indian" nationalists vehemently rejecting the existence of these great and majestic peoples, and claiming their legacy for themselves.

supernord said...

This "Steppe people" most likely moved to South Asia is not directly from the steppe, but from Central Europe of CWC. Farmers mtDNA is thence.

Shahanshah of Persia said...

@Davidski Somehow it still has two errors. Anyways, what did you think of my summary? Is it a fairly accurate retelling of how things went down in Bronze Age South Asia? Maybe you should make your own hymns of how you decisively humiliated Indian nationalists once the Harvard study is released.

I can get you started:

They came with their nonsense,
But I warned them about their delusions,
Then they came with more nonsense and delusions,
Again, I warned them about their nonsense and delusions,
But they again came with their nonsense,
Then the study was released by Harvard,
And I humiliated them about their nonsense,
Then they never again returned.

That would be a good epic^

We can call it the Davedas.

Davidski said...

@Shahanshah of Persia

Anyways, what did you think of my summary? Is it a fairly accurate retelling of how things went down in Bronze Age South Asia?

I honestly don't know. Maybe I'll have an idea after the ancient DNA from South Asia comes out.

Nirjhar007 said...

Nice arrangement of showing some fascinating shared ancestry again . Will be quite useful .

Anthro Survey said...

@Supernord

I agree. CWC horizon is probably where the migration process originated.

Along the way, I do think they mixed with some steppe-like folks in modern Russia and/or Kazakhstan to more closely resemble the Srubna outlier or Eneolithic Samara 434. This probably diluted, but did not eliminate their EEF ancestry. Even if it did, the mtDNA lineages Sam highlighted would still be a relic of CWC origins.

Alberto said...

@Samuel

That's a good work of compiling and analysing all those samples. But I have one question regarding the picture that you make. How many ancient samples (pre-2000 BC) from East Iran, Turkmenistan, Uzbekistan, Tajikistan, Kyrgyzstan, Afghanistan, Pakistan and North India are part of your database? I personally only know of one (Afghanistan, 2500 BCE, H2a), but I admit I might have missed others.

I ask this because if you lack those samples, how can you draw those conclusions? Is there any reason why some of those mtHGs can't be found in that area before any steppe admixture could happen? If, say, T1a1b or N1a1a1a1 (or any other of those "important" ones) appear in any of the places mentioned above by 2500-4000 BCE. Not possible? And if possible, would it change anything?

aniasi said...

What I am curious about is the near absence of Proto-Indo-Iranian MtDNA in South Asia itself. The Kalash are probably more South Central Asian, but they seem to be a reversed situation of only 20% r1a, and 70% pre-Bronze age Ydna markers, with nearly 100% West Eurasian mtdna markers. Something happened between the highlands and the plains, and it may explain why the Indo Aryans and the Kalash look like a complete flip in Ydna & Mtdna

@Davidski, do you remember a paper you posted on a secondary wave of Paleolithic migration to India? There were a number of West Eurasian mtdna lineages (HV was one) found in a small number of Dravidian speaking women.

@ShahofAttilaTotalWar

Where did you get any of that from? None of that is in the Rig Veda, nor is it supported by the archaeological record.

1) "Vedic Aryans from the Pontic-Caspian steppe migrate to South Asia without making much contact with the BMAC culture, but likely pass through the Ferghana Valley, picking up insignificant amounts of Neolithic Iranian ancestry. They settle in the Swat Valley, and then hear of great cities and vast riches further east. Many of the Vedic Chiefs plan an invasion. "

Where is the evidence for that? The cities of the IVC were already in decline, and the Cemetery H culture indicates an attempted continuation by a far less wealthy populations. Also the Rg Veda points to a society that was constantly at war with its own. We don't have any indication of a Temujin, Alaric, Attila/Rugila figure who was able to unite the Vedic chiefs for a concerted effort.

2) "Utilizing their vastly superior tactics of warfare, characterized by the use of chariots, horses, and weapons made of Bronze, the Vedic Aryans decisively crush a vastly numerically superior army sent by the local elites of the Indus Valley Civilization at the Saraswati River."

You've been playing too much Total War. There isn't a shred of evidence for this. Battlefield remains? IVC texts?

3)"Local elites begin to panic, as now they do not have an army to defend their cities. A meeting in called, and many elites fear for the safety of their cities.
>Vedic Aryans conquer each and every city in the Indus Valley River Basin one by one, enslaving and massacring a great many civilians in the process.
>Content with their spoils, the Vedic Aryans settle down and establish the Hindu Caste System, and formulate a series of hymns commemorating their triumphs against their enemies, the Dasyu. "

Where are you inventing this stuff? It doesn't correspond to any historic parallels. The IVC cities show no signs of violent overthrow, and the Swat Valley Culture doesn't have any booty, spoils, or loot. Unlike Crete, there are no signs of burn marks characteristic of an invasion, large numbers of unburied dead bodies, or even graves piled with the booty you describe.

Finally, the Dasyu are Central Asian. The cognates are found only there (Dahi, Daha, Dahae) in everything from the term for man to the names of actual groups. The circular forts of the Dasyu, as per the RV, do not match any IVC sites.

I don't like Indian Nationalists making things up, but this is little better than the fantasies of flying chariots spreading "Vedic science" to Europe.

Shahanshah of Persia said...

@aniasi It's called using creativity to fill in the blanks. Clearly, what I said happened more or less in one way or another.

Romulus said...

This is the first time I've seen an ancestry distribution map done in pencil crayon, bravo. What's next macaroni art migration maps?

Shahanshah of Persia said...

@Romulus That map is a joke. Iranians are 20 to 30% Steppe MLBA ancestry and barely any is shown. I don't know why he coloured it in with pencil/crayon, to be honest.

epoch2013 said...

@Samuel

Congratulations. Your project is about to make a difference.

Samuel Andrews said...

@Alberto,
"I ask this because if you lack those samples, how can you draw those conclusions? Is there any reason why some of those mtHGs can't be found in that area before any steppe admixture could happen? If, say, T1a1b or N1a1a1a1 (or any other of those "important" ones) appear in any of the places mentioned above by 2500-4000 BCE. Not possible? "

Yes, it is impossible. For someone to argue these mHGs existed in SC Asia before IE-invasion would be like arguing R1a M417 existed in SC Asia before IE-invasion. It's really just special pleading.

Most of the mtDNA links between SC Asia and ancient/modern Europe are fairly young and belong to mHGs which are apart of bigger families that are rooted in Europe such as U4 & U5a1. There's no evidence in modern mtDNA of an old presence of U5a1 or U4 in SC Asia yet they have a alot of it and in many of the same forms found in Europe.

Also I found two mHGs which today are exclusive to Asia and also found ancient eastern Europe; U2e1h & U4b1a4.

U2e1h: Kalash=3, Tajik=8, Siberia, Italy. Sintashta, Potapovka
U4b1a4: Kalash, Tajik, Iran, Siberia=3. Catacomb, Sycthian.

How could anyone explain that away?

Samuel Andrews said...

@epoch,
"Congratulations. Your project is about to make a difference."

Wow, thanks so much. I hope so.

Samuel Andrews said...

I used to be *slightly* skeptical of the Kurgan narrative on the origins of Indo Iranian languages. After looking at SC Asian mtDNA, especially Tajik mtDNA, in the last week it was like someone shoved it right in my space. This isn't just an explanation we have come up with in the present day this is something which literally did happen 3,000 or whatever years ago.

There's ifs ands or buts. It's pretty obvious this thing really happened. There were people similar to Andronovo who moved en masse down into Pakistan, Afghanistan, and India. The links between some SC Asians and ancient eastern Europeans leaves no other alternative.

And it is no coincidence that the Myceneans harbordered some Steppe ancestry but the Minoans didn't. "Steppe folk" were the Proto-Indo Europeans.

Shahanshah of Persia said...

@Samuel Andrews Why don't you just call them Aryans? No need to use modern terms like "Proto-Indo-European" and "Steppe folk" to describe them.

Samuel Andrews said...

Alberto, sorry for being so dogmatic in my last post. Still working on expressing an opinion without sufficating people with it.

Anyways, has anyone noticed the significance of the Ukraine HG mtDNA to the origins of Steppe mtDNA?

Let me lay it out......

The Ukraine HGs belonged primary to two lineages; U4b1 & U5a1b. Neither of those lineages have popped up, at a significant frequency, in anyother European HGs.

Today, U4b1a and U4b1b, exist in all the usually Steppe ancestry, IE hotspots. Europe, iran, Siberia, SC Asia. In all those place you find many of the same very young forms of U4b1 especially U4b1a1a1 & U4b1b1.

Like how mHG H1 in different European populations is similar, mHG U4b1 all over the world is similar. Just looking at modern mtDNA I can see Iran, Siberia, Europe all got their U4b1 from a related and relativly recent source.

That source is the Ukraine HGs. They fit the bill perfectly. They lived 7,000-8,000 years ago. Probably like 20% of them belonged to the same forms of U4b1 that are all over Eurasia (of course very rare) today. 20% is a lot.

Now let's look at U5a1b. U5a1b also pops up where ever there is Steppe ancestry. Its subclade U5a1b1 is pretty frequeny in Europe. Like 10% of Northern Bell Beaker folk belonged to U5a1a & U5a1b.

Point of all this is, Ukraine HGs and their relatives could very well be the source of the U5a1b & U4b1 seen later in Steppe folk. U4a1, U4a2, U4c1 & U5a1a likely descend from different HGs.

Samuel Andrews said...

@Shah,
"@Samuel Andrews Why don't you just call them Aryans? No need to use modern terms like "Proto-Indo-European" and "Steppe folk" to describe them."

Cuz the name Aryan only applies to the ones who went to India. Even if Aryan applied I'd use the term Indo-Aryan to be safe. Not because I'm PC but because for good reason in our culture the word Aryan has a different meaning. It means uber white race who euphemizes all the inferior people. I want to stay far away from that. World War two happened only 3 generations ago brodog.

Shahanshah of Persia said...

@Samuel Andrews No, I was referring to the ones who went to India and Iran, not all of them, obviously. Sorry, I was not clearer before.

Samuel Andrews said...

@Shah,

Even in that case I might not use the word Aryan. Lots of my customers don't know the word Aryan refers to an actual people group from the Eurasian Steps who moved into India & Iran in the Bronze age. Lots of people think it means Master German race.

In this recent post, this wasn't an issue because I didn't have a reason to make direct reference to the Aryans. If I did have a reason maybe I'd say Aryan but probably not.

Samuel Andrews said...

@Shah,
"That map is a joke. Iranians are 20 to 30% Steppe MLBA ancestry and barely any is shown. I don't know why he coloured it in with pencil/crayon, to be honest."

Lol, I made that map at 1am in the basement of my college dorm cuz my roommate was asleep. Sorry, it isn't up to your standards. I think it is pretty good.

Before I made my blog I looked hard for ways to make distribution maps on my computer. I couldn't find anything. Colored Pencil works much better than Microsoft Paint.

Shahanshah of Persia said...

@Samuel Andrews Alright, I understand your reasoning there in regards to the use of the term Aryan and I agree. And Lol! It was alright I guess, not that bad. I think you could've looked at the data a bit and made a legend as well.

Nathan said...

"Typical European haplogroups such as U5a1a1, H2a1, T1a1, H5a1, H6a1, J1b1a1, J2b1a, H7b, etc. consistently pop up in every South Central Asian population."

More proof that I.E. speaking Steppe herders colonized South Asia; not that any reasonable person needed more proof. Unsurprising that Tajiks, who are far less ASI than South Asian populations, show greater frequency of Steppe MtDna.

The major (MtDna) M clades present in South Asian populations is not found in Europe. Pretty dam telling!

Shahanshah of Persia said...

@Nathan Much of the ASI in Tajiks is actually pseudo due to their East Asian admixture. I doubt they have more than 3 to 5% actual ASI ancestry. A similar occurrence can be observed in Iranians.

74d9d9b8-55ef-11e7-bd4d-43c094282792 said...

@Sam Andrews,
It has been known (since atleast 2004) that Kalash Genome (mtDNA and yDNA) includes both Central and South asian characteristics, which is not surprising.
Without ancient DNA, it is a stretch to assume EEF admixture is conclusive based on a few shared mtDNA (which then brings the question about why the PIE people traveled from Eastern Europe with men and now women all the way to South Asia in an "invasion" if it did happen). We should note that NE mtDNA haplogroups such as C4a and D are shared as well, along with yDNA Q, which all only comes together in Central Asia and well before the Bronze age. Hence I am still swayed towards an Out of Central Asia migration to the west and south. Neither OEE nor OIT makes logical sense.
Can you publish an mtDNA tree based on the FMS data that you have gathered?

bellbeakerblogger said...

I like the wiki format, very clean and brain friendly. Nice job, Sam.

Samuel Andrews said...

All of you should subscribe to my blog to stay in the know-how of the mtDNA subsection of genetics.

http://mtdnawiki.com/

Click on the sidebar. At the bottom just type in your email and then you'll get an email notification every time I make a new post.

Nathan said...

Shahanshah of Persia

I agree it was not a peaceful 'migration'. Western indologists are pushing this "Migration" lie, because of Political Correctness, pressure from Indian nationalists, fear of being branded racists and fear of being blamed for communal unrest between castes and between those who self identify as Aryans and Dravidians. The Indian government has been trying to genocide Dravidian culture ever since independence, by trying to impose Hindi on the South. That's why it should be termed Aryan Colonization Theory. AMT implies a passive introgression of Aryans into South Asia.

Aryan intrusion into South Asia would been a gradual process that featured significant assimilation and adoption of native culture and peoples, but also punctuated with violence against the natives. The retroflexion in Sanskrit has been explained as native speaking adopting Sanskrit.

In the Americas, the Europeans fought the natives, but they (various European powers) also allied with Native tribes against other Europeans. I imagine something similar happened in South Asia; a complexion mix of violence,colonization and assimilation.

Davidski said...

@74d9d9b8-55ef-11e7-bd4d-43c094282792

We should note that NE mtDNA haplogroups such as C4a and D are shared as well, along with yDNA Q, which all only comes together in Central Asia and well before the Bronze age.

They came in dribs and drabs over thousands of years and had nothing directly to do with the Indo-European expansions.

Hence I am still swayed towards an Out of Central Asia migration to the west and south.

Then how do you explain the widespread presence of young Eastern European-derived lineages in Central and South Asia, like those derived from Ukrainian foragers and farmers?

If your Out of Central Asia fantasy was true, wouldn't you expect to see young Central Asian-derived lineages in all over Europe?

How hard is it to be objective with the data and accept reality?

74d9d9b8-55ef-11e7-bd4d-43c094282792 said...

@Davidski
Where is the data from ancient as well as modern genomes from Central/South Asia with the same depth and numbers for you to unilaterally be "Objective"?
Why are these Eastern European derived? because you only sampled Eastern Europe and nowhere else?
Reality is that both Europe and South Asia are sinks for migration of primitive peoples into more settled cultures. Europe has a bigger fraction of yDNA and mtDNA belonging to these primitive people because EUropes farming communities were smaller and less sophisticated and hence there were no big civilizations when the new migrations of ANE rich people from Central Asia occurred. My perspective is as much a fantasy at this point as yours is because we don't have data. Once that comes in, I will accept reality and so will you.

Davidski said...

@74d9d9b8-55ef-11e7-bd4d-43c094282792

Where is the data from ancient as well as modern genomes from Central/South Asia with the same depth and numbers for you to unilaterally be "Objective"?

They're not really crucial for this. It's already game over, because obviously it's possible to make very strong inferences from the data that are already available.

You're basically arguing that up is down and down is up, and just waiting for your coup de grâce when the ancient data from South Asia are finally released.

I really don't see the point. It's such a waste of time and energy.

Salden said...

Attention: Yamnaya and similiar groups cluster nearest towards Eastern to Northern Europeans. They are accepted as the candidates for the Proto-Indo-Europeans.

Shahanshah of Persia said...

@Nathan I agree with your assessment there, as you have summed up the situation perfectly. Unfortunately for Indian nationalists now they will have to deal with the possibility that there were two major invasions/migrations of India. They have been always upset about the Aryan Invasion Theory, well now they will be even more upset and angry since the data will also prove a Dravidian invasion/migration, which saw the arrival of Neolithic Iranian farmers to the Indus Valley River Basin, and the establishment of the Indus Valley Civilization. Though, in this case I think it was a migration and not an invasion. Nonetheless, my understanding is that the Aryans most certainly did invade India and it was fairly bloody, and later on they began colonizing further inland. Unfortunately for Indian nationalists, it seems that neither the Indus Valley Civilization, nor the Vedic Civilization, were native to India, as one came from Iran, and the other from Europe, basically.

Both Dravidians and Aryans are invaders of South Asia, and Indian nationalists need to recognize this fact. I hope they do soon enough. I still prefer the term Aryan Invasion to Aryan Colonization because it was initially the very bloody invasion. Also, assimilation was always difficult, especially since both the Aryans and Dravidians created strict caste systems to segregate themselves from the native Tribal population. So, to recap:

>There was not one but two invasions/migrations into India.
>The first one resulted in the emergence of the Indus Valley Civilization.
>The second one resulted in the emergence of the Vedic Civilization.

So, to conclude, NEITHER, the Indus Valley Civilization NOR the Vedic Civilization were native to India. No IFS or BUTS!

Shahanshah of Persia said...

@Salden We know, we know. Just some people here have issues with this reality.

Vara said...

@Shah

You speak of reality yet you wrote the biggest piece of pseudo-intellectual fiction on this blog. I didn't know you were an aspiring fantasy writer. I commend you for it was extremely hilarious. The Mantra of Ice and Fire is taking over, so homeboy GRRM better watch out!

@all

I'll play the devil's advocate here. A migration from India to the Steppes 6kya is impossible. I think we can say with surety that these mtDNA lineages made it from the steppes to South Asia. However, we cannot determine when did the migrations occur without samples from LBA and IA South Asia. They could have reached SA with the Steppe folk that migrated and ruled over South Asia from 2nd century BCE to 6th century CE. The idea of them not having an impact after 800 years is absurd to me.

Mike the Jedi said...

@Shahanshah of Persia

"I cannot say, however, knowing Indian nationalists I think it's safe to say that the upcoming study will send shockwaves across the Subcontinent."

They'll have to get over it. Nobody's ancestors just sprang from the soil their ethnicity now occupies. All peoples are descended of migrants. And it's something that should be celebrated, not feared.

"Fast forward to today, and you have "Indian" nationalists vehemently rejecting the existence of these great and majestic peoples, and claiming their legacy for themselves."

Why shouldn't they? They're the Indo-Aryans' descendants, and the heirs to the culture they brought to South Asia.

"I also hope that European nationalists maintain their composure in regards to the matter once the study is out."

Who cares what they think? They're cousins to the Indo-Aryans, not their descendants. Any pretensions they might have to India are patently ridiculous. Do Swedes have a right to claim Italian or Greek culture because they have more steppe ancestry than the people living there now? Of course not.

"Why don't you just call them Aryans? No need to use modern terms like "Proto-Indo-European" and "Steppe folk" to describe them."

That's a bad idea for obvious reasons. That word should be reserved for Indo-Iranians (and Indo-Aryans in particular). Using it another way sounds dated. Some linguists thought so even in the 30s. When the Nazis asked Tolkien if he had any Aryan blood, he snarkily replied that he had no Iranian or Indian ancestors that he knew of. So we don't use "Proto-Indo-European" just because it's "PC"; we use it because it's better usage than applying a term associated with a very specific IE culture to Proto-IE.

Japhetic is another stupid term for IE that thankfully is no longer used. Hamitic disappeared because the family was proven invalid. Too bad "Semitic" wasn't replaced in turn with something less... biblical.

Shahanshah of Persia said...

@Vara Very amusing... Anyway, anything I have said is more credible than you and your Out of Iran fallacies. I am sure David would agree.

@Mike the Jedi

"They'll have to get over it. Nobody's ancestors just sprang from the soil their ethnicity now occupies. All peoples are descended of migrants. And it's something that should be celebrated, not feared."

Yeah, agreed!

"Why shouldn't they? They're the Indo-Aryans' descendants, and the heirs to the culture they brought to South Asia."

Exactly, you are on point. I have always stressed that the South Asian Upper Castes are the true inheritors of Vedic Civilization, no doubt. My only problem here is that Indian nationalists are rejecting the existence of their ancestors, so then why should they claim Vedic heritage, if they cannot recognize the people who brought it with them?

"Who cares what they think? They're cousins to the Indo-Aryans, not their descendants. Any pretensions they might have to India are patently ridiculous. Do Swedes have a right to claim Italian or Greek culture because they have more steppe ancestry than the people living there now? Of course not."

Yeah, I definitely agree with you. This is an excellent point you have made. All of these civilizations emerged in the places in which they did due to blending of cultures and civilizations, not due to the amount of Steppe admixture the invaders had. I have always pointed out this reality. I despise those types of people who lay claim to the heritage and civilization of others.

"That's a bad idea for obvious reasons. That word should be reserved for Indo-Iranians (and Indo-Aryans in particular). Using it another way sounds dated. Some linguists thought so even in the 30s. When the Nazis asked Tolkien if he had any Aryan blood, he snarkily replied that he had no Iranian or Indian ancestors that he knew of. So we don't use "Proto-Indo-European" just because it's "PC"; we use it because it's better usage than applying a term associated with a very specific IE culture to Proto-IE."

Yeah, good point! I definitely agree with you here.

"Japhetic is another stupid term for IE that thankfully is no longer used. Hamitic disappeared because the family was proven invalid. Too bad "Semitic" wasn't replaced in turn with something less... biblical."

I guess Semitic makes sense in a cultural, linguistic, and religious sense.

Ja D said...

Very interesting.

Nathan said...

@Mike the Jedi
"Why shouldn't they? They're the Indo-Aryans' descendants, and the heirs to the culture they brought to South Asia."

These Indian nationalist ideologues who concoct OIT and other lies, are predominantly from the upper castes (especially Brahmins). They want to claim Aryans are indigenous, partly because doing so allows them to claim their Aryan ancestors built the Indus Valley Civilization, and everything Hinduism is Aryan. Because Hinduism's roots obviously goes back to IVC and pre-Aryan religion.


Before IVC was fully excavated and people became aware of its age and what it was, European intellectuals who studied Indian history credited Hinduism and Indian civilization to the Aryans. Europeans just assumed that anything resembling civilization and high culture could only have been created by Aryans because pre-Aryan South Asians were savages, incapable of creating civilization.

When the Rig Veda was translated, and it spoke of Indra slaying dark-skinned people living in cities, Europeans at the time dismissed such accounts as not being credible, because they could not fathom the dark-skinned natives were civilized long before the Aryans. When IVC was unearthed and it dawned on everyone that this was a Civilization that preceded the Aryans and could very well be the cities mentioned in the Rigveda, Europeans grudgingly accepted they were wrong to think Aryans were the civilizers.

So Indian history went from giving Aryans the credit for everything to admitting that non-Aryans created cities and developed much of what we know as Hinduism. The Hindutva/OIT proponents want to turn the clock back and give Aryans the credit for everything, including the IVC.

So who is the real racists here ! OIT proponents and those South Asians claiming Aryans built the IVC routinely accuse AMT/AIT proponents of Eurocentrism and racism, when the reality is that OIT proponents are the ones pushing racist revisionism, to glorify the Aryans as bringers of civilization and the natives as uncivilized.


Claiming Aryans were responsible for IVC is no different to White Nationalists claiming Europeans built Sumer , Ancient Egypt and Mesoamerican civilizations.

Brahmins and other upper-castes claiming Aryans built IVC = We wuz Priest Kangz and Sheet !

Rob said...


@ Shah

"Yeah, I definitely agree with you. This is an excellent point you have made. All of these civilizations emerged in the places in which they did due to blending of cultures and civilizations, not due to the amount of Steppe admixture the invaders had. I have always pointed out this reality. I despise those types of people who lay claim to the heritage and civilization of others. "


Ha !
"Even if the Greek results do not show much change in the later eras, it won't change the reality that the origin of Greek culture was on the Steppes, not in Greece.'
"http://eurogenes.blogspot.co.id/2017/12/corded-ware-as-offshoot-of-hungarian.html"

Shahanshah of Persia said...


@Nathan

"These Indian nationalist ideologues who concoct OIT and other lies, are predominantly from the upper castes (especially Brahmins). They want to claim Aryans are indigenous, partly because doing so allows them to claim their Aryan ancestors built the Indus Valley Civilization, and everything Hinduism is Aryan. Because Hinduism's roots obviously goes back to IVC and pre-Aryan religion."

Yes, you are on point!

"Before IVC was fully excavated and people became aware of its age and what it was, European intellectuals who studied Indian history credited Hinduism and Indian civilization to the Aryans. Europeans just assumed that anything resembling civilization and high culture could only have been created by Aryans because pre-Aryan South Asians were savages, incapable of creating civilization."

Unfortunately, yes. The Indus Valley Civilization was much more advanced than the Aryans were, initially, but by the time the Aryans arrived the IVC was in decline due to many factors, chief among which was the drying up of rivers and the arrival of Onge-like peoples from further east, which caused social and cultural destabilization.

"When the Rig Veda was translated, and it spoke of Indra slaying dark-skinned people living in cities, Europeans at the time dismissed such accounts as not being credible, because they could not fathom the dark-skinned natives were civilized long before the Aryans. When IVC was unearthed and it dawned on everyone that this was a Civilization that preceded the Aryans and could very well be the cities mentioned in the Rigveda, Europeans grudgingly accepted they were wrong to think Aryans were the civilizers."

Yeah, they were ultimately proven wrong. Though, they may have been partially correct, if you know what I mean.

"So Indian history went from giving Aryans the credit for everything to admitting that non-Aryans created cities and developed much of what we know as Hinduism. The Hindutva/OIT proponents want to turn the clock back and give Aryans the credit for everything, including the IVC."

Yeah, lol!

"So who is the real racists here ! OIT proponents and those South Asians claiming Aryans built the IVC routinely accuse AMT/AIT proponents of Eurocentrism and racism, when the reality is that OIT proponents are the ones pushing racist revisionism, to glorify the Aryans as bringers of civilization and the natives as uncivilized."

Great point!

"Claiming Aryans were responsible for IVC is no different to White Nationalists claiming Europeans built Sumer , Ancient Egypt and Mesoamerican civilizations."

White nationalists are a deluded bunch who are think that Europeans built ancient Iranian and Indian civilizations. They also claim the BMAC, and IVC as well, a quite few many of them.

@Rob Yes, of course. All I wanted to say was that Greek culture had influences from the pre-existing Minoan civilization.

Obviously, Greek civilization, Iranian civilization, Indian civilization, all had their roots ultimately on the Steppes.

By the way, you are just jealous that Iranians are 90 to 95% similar to Iron Age Iranians. I suggest you stick to Southern Europe since you are always trying to promote that EEF were some sort of master race. Admit it, you Greeks are admixed with Slavic invaders. For once I say something in your favour and you reply by smirking at me? Not cool!

Vara said...

@Cheerleader

"all had their roots ultimately on the Steppes."

But the Kurgan culture came from the Caucasus. Doesn't that mean their roots were actually from there?

Look, I'm going to give you an advice and I know you'll thank me for it later. Quit your school's cheerleading team and join the wrestling team. Disillusionment will kick in in 30 mins. You can go back to ripping off the Secret History of the Mongols afterwards, but atleast you'll understand that your fantasies are just fantasies.

Shahanshah of Persia said...

@Vara You're the one who is disillusioned. No further comments from me.

Davidski said...

Please stay on topic.

No more discussions about your own genetic origins.

Shahanshah of Persia said...

@Davidski Yessir!

MomOfZoha said...

@SamuelAndrews:

Congratulations, Sam. This thread went to shits again, but it was originally an homage to your new mtDNA site, so focusing on that fact, good on you for your big opening.

And, of course, your sense is correct: It is a terrible business idea to use the term "Aryan" in your analyses -- unless your target market is one of those organizations with "Aryan" in their title. Words do change their meaning over time, unfortunately, especially in their non-original languages...

In fact, as a rule of thumb, especially if you uphold any variation of the "steppe migration" or "Aryan migration" or even "Aryan invasion" hypotheses, you should follow the *exact opposite* advice of anything that ShahOfSunset has to say. I'm almost certain at this point that he is a character invented by the Out Of India folks to discredit all variations of steppe-migration-into-India theories. I *almost* regret shutting him down previously as he does a great service to "the left" in general too whenever he blurts out things (white Chad things, "HAHA South European has recent Semitic ancestry HAHA" things, etc...), things that most right-of-white also think but are too self-disciplined to say out loud. I have zero interest in the "out of India" theory and see good evidence of steppe migration into India, but for this last reason, I won't shut down the ShahOfSunset again. He is just too damned useful really...

As for the actual subject of this -- yet again -- hijacked thread: As a descendant of much more recently steppe-nomadic people due to both of my grandmothers in particular, I am interested in the ability to trace the most recent migrationary effects *or* lack thereof. That is, I wonder if you could distinguish whether or not my mtDNA is of more recent Anatolian origin -- given that H in general is of ancient Anatolian origin -- or of more recent "migrant" origin. I honestly would be very happy either way: I would be happy for more "recently autochthonous" mtDNA. But, I would also be happy to learn that the mtDNA first went far away and then somehow returned to its origin. Both possibilities are interesting to me.

While I would be quick to label my family's Y-DNA to be "recently autochthonous" (or in the case of my maternal grandfather, from the general Caucaso-Near Eastern vicinity), the complication arises from the fact that my maternal grandmothers are from known Turkmen (recently nomadic) villages. (Perhaps ironically in the minds of others, it is my grandfathers who were likely not that Turkic, particularly my maternal grandfather who was probably not "Turkic" at all, in an uncomplicated way given that his parents were cousins.) And, my grandmothers' Turkmen descent is also evident in my parents' autosomal analysis, as we have quite a bit more "Siberian" affinities than the average Anatolian Turk. It is also known, however, that the largest mass migration into the Konya region involved not only Turkmen (which is already a quite mixed concept by the time of entrance into Anatolia if not much further East), but also Tajiks, both escaping the Khorasani "Mongolian invasions", taking refuge in Seljuk lands.

In fact, you might know of one such Tajik migrant . His name was Mevlana Jalaluddin Rumi. I am fortunate that my deceased grandparents rest in the Ucler Cemetery directly across the street from that great soul. I cannot visit one without visiting the other.

I won't check this thread again for obvious reasons. But, so long as you continue to be a reasonable guy, I may check up with you later to help me answer some questions on my family's maternal origins.

Best regards and good luck too.

Samuel Andrews said...

Rob, what do you think of my new blog? Your mHG is more common than you might think. I know a thing or two about.

Interested in an mtDNAwikiReport?
http://mtdnawiki.com/order-an-mtdna-report-6/

David, I can take a look at your mtDNA for free. I might be able to find your H7 subclade.

Rob said...

Sammy congrats. I’ll have a look in detail soon and ask some Qs
Have you thought about using MitoMix or other programmes ?

Shahanshah of Persia said...

@Davidski Can you tell this "MomOfZoha" character to stop insulting me personally? She said that I made erroneous claims, whereas almost everything I have said has been on point, unless it was in a sarcastic tone. How does what I say discredit AIT? WTF?! If I am a so-called invented character, then how come I am one of the few people on the blog who actually make sense in their interpretations of all the genetic, linguistic, and socio-cultural evidence we have?

@MomOfZoha About the recent Semitic ancestry in Southern Europeans, see:

http://eurogenes.blogspot.ca/2016/01/ancient-greeks-and-romans-may-have.html
http://eurogenes.blogspot.ca/2017/09/modern-day-greeks-italians-vs-mycenaeans.html

If I was wrong (and I never said Greeks do, but Southern Italians and Sicilians do!), then how come David's models prove there to be significant Bedouin related ancestry in Sicilians, and similar admixture in Southern Italians. Also, by recent I mean post-neolithic, obviously.

Stop being rude, as I have never stooped so low to personally insult you or your character. I know you may not agree with me, but no need to hurl insults.

I do not want to hear any more of this nonsense from you, also no one cares whether you are actually a Turk or not. That's your business, stop telling us like we care.

Shahanshah of Persia said...

@MomOfZoha Speaking of Rumi, he probably had no Asiatic or Turkic ancestry. He was a Persian from Balkh, and was probably a heavily Steppe shifted post-BMAC Iranic like modern Yaghnobis.

Nirjhar007 said...

While enjoying the circus here , which's star performer I think have great direct experience . Let me clearly point here, that there are tragic misconceptions regarding the concept of Arya and regarding the origin of the term . I am sure it will be helpful if some people take a look at this post :

https://new-indology.blogspot.in/2017/01/the-term-aryan-and-its-semitic-cognates.html

Bob Floy said...

@nirjhar
I think most of us here probably know that the Nazi "Aryan" concept is incorrect.

Alberto said...

@Samuel

Thanks for the explanation. I know the constraints on Y-DNA R1a-M417 not being from the steppe in South Asia, but mtDNA is much more blurry - at least to me. But if things are so clear to you, I'll take your word while we wait for aDNA.

How much is the overall percentage of this steppe mtDNA in North India? (My estimate of possible Sintashta-like admixture there is that it can reach 15% in some groups, but on average is more like 5-10%. Does the mtDNA match roughly these figures?).

Shahanshah of Persia said...

@Nirjhar007 No one is debating what Arya actually means, what we are debating is whether or not the people who called themselves originated from India or not. So far, it seems that they arrived sometime during the Bronze Age, see here: http://eurogenes.blogspot.ca/2017/10/best-of-davidski-on-south-asian.html

@Alberto Sintashta-like admixture is barely found in South Asia.

Nirjhar007 said...


bob,
The post is about the concept of Arya + regarding the origin of the term in whole ....

postneo said...

@sandrews

Anatolia is much closer to South Asia vs Ukraine/southern Russia. Since mtdna diffuses very broadly the small mtdna connections between S Asia and Anatolia cannot exclusively be via steppe. Also we have 9000 years for such mtdna to diffuse so it could have come from anywhere. mehargarh 7000 bc in Pakistan has been linked with cultures from syria and eastern Anatolia.

Shahanshah of Persia said...

@postneo

"Also we have 9000 years for such mtdna to diffuse so it could have come from anywhere. mehargarh 7000 bc in Pakistan has been linked with cultures from syria and eastern Anatolia."

You're joking, right?

postneo said...

@shah
"you are joking... and what not"
about what ? have you heard of mehargarh in baluchistan or the papers linking barley cultivation and cultural similarity with settlements further west?

"local elites of the Indus Valley Civilization at the Saraswati River"

ahh so "at the Saraswati river" is a single point on the map for you and "Indus" chieftains simply saunter over there for pow wows. What about the ongeez? shouldn't they be consulted as well?

Bob Floy said...

@nirjhar
"The post is about the concept of Arya + regarding the origin of the term in whole ...."

Yeah, I read it, dosen't really add anything to the topic at hand, but the author did seem very concerned with debunking the already long debunked idea of a superior, Germanic, Aryan "race".

Shahanshah of Persia said...

@postneo

"about what ? have you heard of mehargarh in baluchistan or the papers linking barley cultivation and cultural similarity with settlements further west?"

You're a joker! By implying that European MtDNA lineages reached South Asia 11,000 years ago, you are only fooling yourself, no one else!

"ahh so "at the Saraswati river" is a single point on the map for you and "Indus" chieftains simply saunter over there for pow wows. What about the ongeez? shouldn't they be consulted as well?"

The Ongeez were mostly in bondage and had lower caste status in Indus Valley societies, so no they were not consulted.

Davidski said...

@postneo

Anatolia is much closer to South Asia vs Ukraine/southern Russia.

This is irrelevant, because he's referring to very specific lineages, not random Anatolian admixture.

Since mtdna diffuses very broadly the small mtdna connections between S Asia and Anatolia cannot exclusively be via steppe.

But the lineages that he's talking about moved into South Asia via the steppe and Central Asia.

Also we have 9000 years for such mtdna to diffuse so it could have come from anywhere.

No, they came via the steppe.

Davidski said...

OK, please stay on topic.

Enough about Aryans and Nazis. The topic is Steppe folk mtDNA and Indo-Iranian, and thus Indo-Aryans, origins.

Bob Floy said...

@davidski
I agree, but couldn't not point out how irrelevant that link was to this discussion. That'll be the last time, though.

postneo said...

@shah
"This is irrelevant, because he's referring to very specific lineages, not random Anatolian admixture."

Its relevant please read the post. He is trying to bolster the steppe trajectory by claiming a small Anatolian component.

"Hence, when Steppe folk expanded both west and east, they took with them at least a little Anatolian admixture. This is also true for the Steppe folk who went to South Asia. Several of the mt-HGs that I labeled “Steppe” are in fact Anatolian mt-HGs that the Steppe folk acquired through admixture with farmer peoples before their mass migrations. These include mt-HGs H1b1, H5a1, H7b, J1c1b1a, J2b1a, N1a1a1a1, K1b1a1, HV6, and HV9"

As for the more exclusively steppe mtdna lineages... all that is fine except ancient remains outside of Eastern Europe need to be sampled too. for example the lineages are present in afanasievo it seems and perhaps in Bronze Age Turkmenistan as well pretty close to Tajiks.


Shahanshah of Persia said...

@postneo Why did you reply to Davidski by referring to me? Refer to the man straight up if you want an honest answer. Your time is up and your delusions are about to be shattered.

1. Aryans were not natives of India or the Indian Subcontinent.
2. Dark skinned Dravidians were mostly pushed south after the Aryan invasion.
3. South Asian society transitioned from complex urban settlements to mainly rural settlements.
4. The IVC peoples were not the same as the Vedic Aryans.

Thus, it then logically follows that all European Y-DNA and MtDNA found in South/Central Asians originated on the Pontic-Caspian Steppes.

Now please stop bothering David. Thank you!

Davidski said...

@postneo

Afanasievo people came from Eastern Europe, you knucklehead.

https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B9o3EYTdM8lQdzRlWXBQaXlnMGc/view?usp=sharing

Samuel Andrews said...

@Alberto,
"How much is the overall percentage of this steppe mtDNA in North India?"

I don't know. Most of my Indian data comes from Palanichamy 2015 which only sequenced their West Eurasian mtDNA. Of the Indian mitogenomes in West Eurasian mHgs that they sequenced about 50% belong to Steppe and or European (EEF but not Steppe) haplogroups.

In the small amount of data I have, North India has about 35% West Eurasian mtDNA, Bengali has 20%, Dravidian has 1%. So that'd be maybe 13% European/Steppe mtDNA in North India, 10% in eastern parts, 0.5% in southern India.

I only have low coverage mtDNA data from Pathan. BUt I can clearlly see most of it is of Iran Neolithic-type origin; U7, I1, W, HV. More is of ASI origin than Steppe origin.

Tajik, Kalash, and probably other people in that area are exceptions. The Steppe signal in them is just so freaking obvious. The occasional very European EEF mHG that pops up in them; V1a1, K1b1a1, J1c2o, T2b4, etc. is no councidence. All early Indo Iranians had some EEF admixture.

Shahanshah of Persia said...

@Davidski

"Afanasievo people came from Eastern Europe, you knucklehead."

No, they were ASI-rich East Asians. 😂

Seriously though, there's absolutely no logic behind their arguments. These Nirjhar and Postneo types remind me a lot of that buffoon N. S. Rajaram.

Samuel Andrews said...

@posteno,
"Anatolia is much closer to South Asia vs Ukraine/southern Russia. Since mtdna diffuses very broadly the small mtdna connections between S Asia and Anatolia cannot exclusively be via steppe"

The haplogroups I'm talking originated in Europe.From the outside point of view mtDNA looks like a confusing mess where anybody from any background can belong to any haplogroup. The reality is most haplogroups can be found almost anywhere but if you study mtDNA like I have you see there are very real patterns.

Most Europeans belong to European-specific mHGs....
http://mtdnawiki.com/2018/01/21/what-is-european-mtdna/

33% of Tajik(s) belong to Steppe mHGs, most of whom are basically European-specific in their distribution. Several of them are EEF-derived and close approximates to them have been found in Neolithic Europe; H5a1, H7b, J1c1b1a, J2b1a, K1b1a1.

Other than the EEF-derived Steppe mtDNA Southcentral Asians already carry I see a bunch of other EEF-derived mtDNA. I made a list of them for Tajik and India on my blog post. Here they are again.

India, Anatolian farmer mtDNA.
H3g, H5a1, HV6, V2a, J1c1b1a, J1c8a, J1c5, J1c8, K1a1b2a, K2a5, N1a1a1a1.

Tajik, Anatolian farmer mtDNA.
H1, H5a1, H5b, H7b, V1a1, K1b1a1, T2b34, J1c2o, J2b1a2a.

This ain't no coincidence. It'll make you laugh if I told you some of the places in Europe where these mHgs are most common. For example there's a J1c2o founder effect in Denmark and a V1a1 founder effect in Finland. Yet we see each in Tajikistan. It's for the same reason Tajik(s) have a bunch of the same U5a & U4 lineages found in pre-historic Europe.

Nirjhar007 said...

Yeah, I read it, dosen't really add anything to the topic at hand,

Of course this thread was not about the concept of what is meant by Arya or where the word actually comes from , but you forget, that they are directly related to the origins of Indo-Iranians and also to the Proto- Indo-European question and as you will see there, even beyond .


but the author did seem very concerned with debunking the already long debunked idea of a superior, Germanic, Aryan "race".


If one reads the post and its findings he or she will understand why those nonsense ideologies were important to mention a bit .







ak2014b said...

Got back recently from holidays, so belated Happy 2018 to all. So I'm guessing the South Central Asia papers are still not out? On the other hand, I just noticed there's a mention of a paper about Native Americans, which is just as exciting and which I'm going to have to read.


Great work, Sam!

"Interestingly, I’ve found mtDNA haplogroups which correlate very well with R1a-M417;" (J1c1b1a, H2a1a, H5e1, T1a1b, N1a1a1a1, K2a5, U4b2, U4b1a4, U2e1h)

"The most important mt-HGs here are U2e1h, H2a1a, U4b1a4, T1a1b, and N1a1a1a1. They directly link modern Indo-Iranian speakers in Asia with Eneolithic/Bronze age Eastern Europeans generally considered by historical linguists and archaeologists to be Proto-Indo-European- or Proto-Indo-Iranian-speakers (i.e. Sintashta and Potapovka)."


To see how it all breaks down, I had a look at the data from the Palanichamy et al 2015 paper which David had a post about earlier on. That paper covered West-Eurasian mtDNA in modern India and Bangladesh. The total number of their samples was 14198, out of which 492 were from Bangladesh and the rest from India. Of these,

* U2e1h: 0 samples of U2e1h.

However, there are a total of 47 samples at U2e or under, none from Bangladesh.
Of these, 22 are U2e and are mostly marked South India, Middle-Caste and Dravidian speaking.
There's 7 x U2e1, mostly in North India ("Uttar Pradesh").
1 x U2e1a1, middle caste, Dravidian speaking from South India.
There's 10 x U2e1b, mostly South India.
There's 2 x U2e3 and 5 x U2e3b mostly from North India.


* H2a1a: 2 samples, 0 from Bangladesh. Of these, one is marked Muslim from South India and one is Tibeto-Burman speaking from Northeast India.

* U4b1a4: 0 samples.

* T1a1b: 1 sample under T1a1b. It is T1a1b1, and is marked North India, Upper-Caste, Indo-European.

* N1a1a1a1: 4 samples, none from Bangladesh. One is marked as South India, Tribe, Indo-European speaker. The remaining 3 are marked as Muslim, one from South India, the other 2 from East India.
Since N1a1a1a1 appears to be associated with Muslims, could this finally be an indicator of Turkic presence arriving from Central Asia to South Asia, bearing a maternal steppe line?

* J1c1b1a: 1 sample. Marked South India, Middle-Caste, Dravidian.

* H5e1: 0 samples. No samples H5 or under.

* 2 x K2a5. Both marked South India, Dravidian. One marked Middle-Caste, one Upper-Caste.

* 1 x U4b2. Marked Tibeto-Burman, Tribe, Northeast India "Ladakh".
(There is only a single sample at or under U4b. It is U4b2 in a Tibeto-Burman speaker, marked Tribe from "Ladakh".)


All in all, of the mtDNA Hgs identified, that comes to 11 matching samples in India and 0 in Bangladesh, out of the paper's pool of 14198 samples. But only 2 of these matches were found in Upper-Caste individuals (one Dravidian by language affiliation and the other Indo-European).

ak2014b said...

I've now also quickly gone through the Pakistan mtDNA papers I was able to find earlier. These cover the population groups Makrani, Saraiki, Sindh and 3 papers on Pathans.
The papers are Siddiqi et al 2014, Hayat et al 2014, Shahzad Bhatti et al 2016. And for Pathans, a different paper by Shahzad Bhatti et al 2016, Rakha et al 2010, Tabassum et al 2016.

Between them, the total number of Pakistan samples comes to 795, which is what the following are out of.


* U2e1h: 2 samples, both found in Pathans.
* K2a5: 1 sample. Pathan.

But 0 samples of any of H2a1a, U4b1a4, T1a1b, N1a1a1a1 (there is however a N1a1a1a in a Pathan sample, if relevant), J1c1b1a, H5e1, U4b2.
(On earlier Eurogenes posts, I'd already gone over the more general H2a/H2a1 in these papers' Pakistan samples in some comments)

So 3 samples from Pakistan out of a total of 795 samples matched those steppe mtDNAs. All 3 matches moreover were found in Pathans.

Shahanshah of Persia said...

@Davidski You gotta love that almighty pulse of EBA Steppe DNA, eh?

Nirjhar007 said...

@Samuel Andrews

I think your work as said earlier is very nice , you have worked hard for it and the data will be quite useful!. But it is vital to see the aDNA of vast regions of SC Asia and India first , to determine which clades have what kind of evolution . With that it is not needed to be said again that the subcontinent still needs to be sampled comprehensively , given the population .

epoch2013 said...

@Samuel

Please make backups with a regular interval, and store where they're safe. I'd say store two copies in different locations.

Trust me, it will be worth the effort.

Shahanshah of Persia said...

@Nirjhar007

"I think your work as said earlier is very nice , you have worked hard for it and the data will be quite useful!. But it is vital to see the aDNA of vast regions of SC Asia and India first , to determine which clades have what kind of evolution . With that it is not needed to be said again that the subcontinent still needs to be sampled comprehensively , given the population ."

We'd already have the ancient DNA if it was not for Indian scientists and politicians delaying the release of the study, unfortunately. I know what you're trying to do there, and I don't appreciate it. We will have the data as soon as your nations' scientists and politicians allow Harvard to release the study. It should be an eye opener for you, and a beautiful thing.

ak2014b said...

14 matches out of almost 15,000 combined samples from Pakistan, India and Bangladesh (actually 0 matches from Bangladesh) feels underwhelming, being just around 0.09%. Far under a percent.

But if the steppe hasn't made anything of an impact on the mtDNA of the region, the expectation was anyways always of a male dominated invasion rather than a proper folk movement. (Presumably, only tiny numbers of women were brought along from the steppe, though it'd be interesting if it turns out that some steppe lineages only first entered the region with the Turkic-Mongols, the Moghuls, instead, for example.)

Once the South Asia papers come out, we may expect from the aDNA papers and the extensive discussions from past years that the Y and autosomal impact on the region will be very notable, quite contrastive to the disappointing paucity of steppe mtDNA in the same area.

Anthro Survey said...

@MomOfZoha

So, regarding your grandparents on the Turkoman side---would you say they had visible Mongoloid/Turanid features or were they merely of a generic West Asian type instead?

You grabbed my attention when you mentioned Rumi. See, I've always wondered what Anatolian cities were settled by Khorasani Tajik refugees, not to mention the existence of other, similar prominent personalities. No doubt, these urbanites must have played a pivotal role in the Persianization/Islamification of Anatolian cities.

Was Sheikh Edebali also a Tajik? I've heard about these guys, also:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ahis
but, other than that, not terribly knowledgeable.
Prior to Kemalism and the mandatory Turkic surname adoption laws, were Anatolian Muslims of Khorasani origins aware of their ancestry and/or carried nisbas suggestive of that(e.g. Marvazi, etc.)?
Are you pretty well versed in this subject?

I should also add that "Tajiks" in Samuel's analyses and Dave's datasheets is somewhat of a misnomer, per the word's traditional connotation. The samples are Yaghnobis and East Iranic speakers(Pamiri) living a lifestyle dissimilar that with city-dwelling Farsi speakers across Greater Iran.
Today, "proper Tajiks" have significant variability and, indeed, the sampling strategy would be tricky. Kabuli Tajiks have Pashtun-like south asian affinities. Samarqandis have Turkic admixture and perhaps a different steppe/Iran_Chl ratio than, say, Isfahanis. And so on. To complicate matters further, they can be quite an unstable blend, having mixed recent ancestry from diff oases/cities, as I understand it.

Hit me up on Anthrogenica if you've got a good handle on this. Apparently the site's been up for some time but somehow I missed the memo.

Nirjhar007 said...

@ ak2014b

Thank you for the analysis :) .

Anthro Survey said...

@Samuel Andrews

Congrats on your page, man. Can we start posting on it? Or, will you instead have a .blogspot page running soon? I wanted to see if you could look into something re/these steppe lineages.

Samuel Andrews said...

@ak2014b,
"14 matches out of almost 15,000 combined samples from Pakistan, India and Bangladesh (actually 0 matches from Bangladesh) feels underwhelming, being just around 0.09%. Far under a percent."

The thing is Steppe mtDNA includes a lot more than the mHGs associated with R1a M417. An estimate for Steppe mtDNA can't be made with just them. I'd say at the very least 5% of Indian mtDNA is of Steppe origin.

Davidski said...

@ak2014b

Are you being dishonest, or are you just plain stupid?

Samuel Andrews said...

"Congrats on your page, man. Can we start posting on it? Or, will you instead have a .blogspot page running soon? I wanted to see if you could look into something re/these steppe lineages."

You guys can start posting at my blog whenever you want to. You don't need to have a wordpress account

ak2014b said...

@David

What part, David?

All I said was that despite the mtDNA impact being underwhelming (underwhelming for me personally, then), the actual expectation remains that the steppe would have heavily impacted the South (Central) Asia region via a male dominated invasion, and that this should therefore be detectible in the Y instead of mtDNA. The proportion of R1a-M417 in South Asia would be noticeably higher than any of the steppe mtDNA listed.

The discussions here and at anthrogenica, and the general papers on Indo European languages and dispersal usually argued for a male dominated invasion of South Asia anyway. And I don't remember that any of the aDNA papers has specifically refuted that notion yet, to demonstrate that comparable portions of both steppe women and men must have entered South Asia rather than mostly steppe males.

So I'm not sure what you find objectionable, as I thought the expectation of a mostly male steppe impact on South Asia is quite in line with what you've been arguing for too?

If you specifically doubt the numbers, you can easily verify them, as I cited the sources. It's possible I may have made a mistake in transcribing numbers from the spreadsheets of the papers' data, or even some error in using basic spreadsheet tools to organise the data content for summarising, but that's hardly dishonesty on my part. And it's what the purpose of my citing the papers is for, so that anyone can check my summations of the published data for themselves.

If necessary and requested, I could try to locate where I noted down the actual titles of the Pakistan mtDNA papers, instead of just the first author name and year that I already provided for the papers.


Or maybe you specifically object to my suggestion that Central Asian Moghuls for instance may have introduced N1a1a1a1 to the South Asia region, but I did indicate this to be no more than speculation on my part.


@Sam
I merely looked up the mtDNA Hgs you specifically mentioned. Obviously, you'd know exactly which Hgs are relevant. So if there are further steppe specific mtDNA Hgs that you think ought to be considered, I could try looking them up. Or better yet, you may prefer to go through the already mentioned papers' supplementary data yourself and provide totals for further Hgs worth including.

Jaydeep said...

ak2014b,

Good analysis and don't get disheartened by David's rude behaviour. He is not someone to certify anything. Keep up with your good work. It is quite apparent that unlike many others, you put in a lot of effort before commenting with your stuff. Thats really worth appreciating !

David,

I wonder why you're so rude to ak2014b's fairly reasonable and objective post but are so polite to that bigot called SOP ? Is it because he is a yes man of yours ? Because I do not see that SOP fellow writing anything worth reading while ak2014b really comes up with some very informative posts.

Nirjhar,

Thanks for the paper. So it now appears that SE Iran (more specifically the Jiroft civilization) was a center of early Zoroastrian Iranians. We may also note that besides this paper by Massimo Vidale, there are couple of papers cited on Giacomo's website, which clearly show the cultural link between the Jiroft civilization and Indus. Moreover we clearly see the Zebu present in Jiroft. So there is definitely a picture emerging from the mists.

Davidski said...

@Jaydeep

ak2014b's analysis was, at best, limited, and at worst designed to deceive...fools like you and Nirjhar.

postneo said...

My message was directed at sandrews before u hijackrd it

postneo said...

@sandrews, @ak2014b

you cannot both be correct. Perhaps sandrews's is only covering Tajiks and kalash?
David comments are useless, it would be better to hear from both of you.

Shahanshah of Persia said...

@Jaydeep

David's not rude to me because I don't act like an obnoxious idiot and deny the Aryan Invasion Theory, or suggest something which calls into question the scale of the AIT. This clown ak2014b clearly wrote something to deceive you and your ilk on this thread. Instead of harassing David, why don't you go and form your own blog? No one wants you nuts here and all you are doing is taking up bandwidth.

@postneo Your comments are useless. You three stooges here (you, Jaydeep and Nirjhar) are about to have your fantasies and fallacies destroyed in a month's time. Hopefully, then you can remain quiet if you want to save face.

Bob Floy said...

@nirjhar
"If one reads the post and its findings he or she will understand why those nonsense ideologies were important to mention a bit"

No, just a useless distraction and you know it.

Shahanshah of Persia said...

@Bob Floy Why are you bothering to argue with this nut? He's no better than that idiot Afrocentrist Xyyman. I'm surprised that David has not already banned him. I think once the data is finally released, Nirjhar will have seen his last days on this blog.

Bob Floy said...

@shah
"about to have your fantasies and fallacies destroyed in a month's time"
Don't hold your breath, someone is obviously very determined to keep that information in limbo.

"Hopefully, then you can remain quiet if you want to save face."
You must be knew to this. These guys will say absolutely anything and have no shame whatsoever when it comes to protecting their origin myths. Their favorite trick is to accuse their opponents of doing what they themselves are doing, I've noticed.

Bob Floy said...

@shah
"Why are you bothering to argue with this nut?"
Why are you?

Alberto said...

@ak2014b

Thanks for taking the time to get those numbers. Appreciated.

As Samuel said, the mHGs quoted by Davidski above are just a subset of the ones he considers to be from the steppe. In his blog (linked above) he has a complete (?) list. Still, the discrepancy is quite big, because if you include all the others you might get 3x or even 5x more matches, but that would still be <0.5%, so there must be a mistake somewhere (or maybe not, and the matches will go >50x up?).

@Samuel

Regardless of the discrepancy in those figures, one other question. Where do you think that the non-EHG mtDNA from the steppe came from? Shouldn't it be from a CHG-like population?

Again, I ask this for a specific reason. In your blog you have Armenians at 4% steppe mtDNA. That's a bit low for their supposed Yamnaya admixture (probably 5-10%?), though not too far off. However, apart from the Yamnaya admixture, Armenians have some extra 30-40% CHG admixture. Shouldn't that make their steppe mtDNA be much higher? Like >30% or so? (IIRC, there was a quite comprehensive study of Armenian mtDNA that showed continuity since the Neolithic (?), so modern drift seems to not be the problem).

Shahanshah of Persia said...

@Bob Floy

1) Well said, I agree with you. The Indian scientists involved in the study are going to do everything and anything they can to withhold the data as long as possible, mark my words. They are certainly not going to release the information easily unless it's on their terms, I can guarantee you.

2) I've been here since late-2017, so a relative newcomer, but nonetheless I've grown accustomed to their BS. I think you're right, and I don't think I should expect the unexpected from these people. They have a toxic presence on David's blog, and are nothing more than a waste of bandwidth.

Shahanshah of Persia said...

@Bob Floy

Good point, these nuts need to be humiliated and exposed for the liars and LARPers they are. But I noticed the best way to irk them is to keep reminding them of the Aryan Invasion and how it played out.

Bob Floy said...

@ Shah
It's like arguing with creationists, they'll say anything, press any perceived loose end into the service of their cause. And then accuse anyone who dosen't agree of bias. It's the most obnoxious thing imaginable.

Shahanshah of Persia said...

@Bob Floy Agreed!

Vrka said...

@Nirjhar

"But it is vital to see the aDNA of vast regions of SC Asia and India first , to determine which clades have what kind of evolution . With that it is not needed to be said again that the subcontinent still needs to be sampled comprehensively , given the population ."


If you and your friends were searching for the truth, you must have accepted it long ago.

Aryan invasion did happen, 'cause modern Indians have R1a-Z93 and steppe admixture, especially IE-speaking upper-caste folks of India.

aDNA papers (if not done by biased Indian scientists) may change some details of the Aryan invasion theory, but they certainly won't turn it upside-down.

Even the current data we have is pretty enough to prove that Indo-Aryans came from the steppe, but you don't really want to find the truth.

Out Of India, Out Of Central Asia, Out Of Iran and Out Of Blah Blah are all dead and buried already.

Samuel Andrews said...

@ak2014b,
"So if there are further steppe specific mtDNA Hgs that you think ought to be considered, I could try looking them up"

I listed them all on my blog post in the section "List of Steppe mtDNA Haplogroups"

http://mtdnawiki.com/2018/01/27/steppe-mtdna/

Many of them require full mtDNA sequenced to be found. So, you can't measure the frequency of Steppe mtDNA only using low coverage data like the data in Palanichamy 2015. This is why I only measured Steppe mtDNA frequencies in five populations. I don't have enough mitogenome data from any other pops to make estimates.

About 50% of the Indian mitogenomes in West Eurasian mHGs sequenced by Palanichamy 2015 belong to either mHGs I classified as Steppe or to lone European EEF mHGs.

Vara said...

@Vrka

The dogmatic views of some of you is simply mazing. While the Steppe theory is very solid, why couldn't the steppe admixture and mtdna have arrived 2nd century BCE with the Indo-Scythians? Steppe folk ruled over South Asia for 800 years. I think it's very probable that they have left a large impact. So no the current data is not enough to prove anything except that Out of India is dead.

And no Out of Caucasus is not dead. Where do you think metallurgy, cattle and kurgans came from?

Samuel Andrews said...

@Alberto,
"Regardless of the discrepancy in those figures, one other question. Where do you think that the non-EHG mtDNA from the steppe came from?"

The only EHG mtDNA from the Steppe falls under U5a1 & U4 & U2e1 & K1b2. Everything else is either EEF or CHG.

"However, apart from the Yamnaya admixture, Armenians have some extra 30-40% CHG admixture. Shouldn't that make their steppe mtDNA be much higher? Like >30%"

Logically that makes sense. Steppe folk's CHG ancestors carried different subclades of the same mHGs as Armenian's CHG ancetors.

It is like how most European-specific mHGs are of EEF origin but rarely ever found in the Middle East even though there's plenty of EEF-type ancestry in the Middle East.

http://mtdnawiki.com/2018/01/21/most-european-mtdna-is-from-neolithic-anatolia/

Shahanshah of Persia said...

@Vrka The funniest of these hypotheses is definitely the Out of India one. The Anatolian and Out of Iran hypotheses are also not convincing anyone. The Out of Central Asia hypothesis might have had more credibility if the Central Asian samples were found without the discovery of the European samples, but as you know, that's not the case, so it's dead as well.

Indian nationalists should do everyone a favour and go underground for the next few months, perhaps years. We are on the verge of exposing their LARPing and lying, whether the Indian scientists involved in this upcoming study want it or not. The truth is, and I am going to be frankly honest here. I apologize if this rattles a few feathers, but nonetheless Indian nationalists deserve it.

The fair skinned, light eyed, fair haired Vedic Aryans invaded India and enslaved and massacred much of the dark skinned natives, and forced a great many more to flee further inland and down south. Basically, this whole fair skinned invaders dominating dark skinned natives is too much to hear for Indian nationalists, so they hopelessly craft their own narrative of the dark skinned Indians civilizing and subjugating the fair skinned Europeans. Indians do not like hearing this specific narrative. Hence, they reject the Aryan Invasion Theory, and cook up their own fallacious and absurd arguments to counter this fact and reality. I will say no more.

Shahanshah of Persia said...

@Vara

"And no Out of Caucasus is not dead. Where do you think metallurgy, cattle and kurgans came from?"

Your another nut who has absolutely no idea about what they are saying. Do us a favour and stop spouting your nonsensical and baseless theories. If you knew any better, you would not be acting as foolishly as Indian nationalists.

Samuel Andrews said...

@Alberto,

Here's a list of mHGs in Steppe folk I think are of CHG origin......The mtDNA connection between Steppe and Middle East may be less distant than you think.

H2a1, H6a1, H13a1a, H15a1, U1a1 (?), T1a1, T2n (?), J1b1a1, J2a2b (?), X2e2 (?), W3a1, W3b (?), W6, W4, W1c, I1a1, I3a, I4a

The mHGs with question marks have not been found ancient Steppe mtDNA. I think they are of Steppe origin because they are typical Middle Eastern mHGs which consistently pop up in Europe.

H15a1 is really common in Iran, Armenia, and Turkey. It is rare but not unheard of in Europe. It was found in a Yamnaya person from Ukraine. No suprise there.

J1b is super common in the Middle East. Its phylogeography indicates an origin in Iran. J1b1a1 is simply a Steppe-branch of a larger CHG-lineage which has plenty of other subclades.

W3a1, W3b, W6, I1 are all very common where ever there is heavy CHG/Iran Neo ancestry. W3a1 & W6 have been found in Yamnaya. I think W3b is of Steppe origin based on modern mtDNA.

Davidski said...

@Alberto

There's definitely a mistake here. ak2014b is the mistake.

To give you a simple analogy, try finding R1a-Z93 in datasets in which the results only go up to R1a-M198.

Shahanshah of Persia said...

@Davidski

"There's definitely a mistake here. ak2014b is the mistake."

There are more many other mistakes here, not only ak2014b. Nirjhar007, Jaydeeb, postneo, and Vara are all mistakes who are taking up your precious bandwidth, and are not constructively contributing to the discussions. These are the types of people who have no clue about what they are saying, and are hanging on to old delusions which they need to shed if they are to gain a respectable footing on your blog.

Vrka said...

@Vara

"The dogmatic views of some of you is simply mazing. While the Steppe theory is very solid, why couldn't the steppe admixture and mtdna have arrived 2nd century BCE with the Indo-Scythians?"

Ha ha!
Indo-Scythians?! How can a small ruling elite leave such a big impact on a big region like India?! (Let's forget about other stuff such as archaeological, linguistic, and other genetic evidences).

You can't hide your own dogmatism by calling others dogmatic, Vara.





"And no Out of Caucasus is not dead."

We're talking about the Indo-Iranian homeland. Out of Caucasus is a poor alternative choice for Early Indo-European homeland. Even if the EIE homeland was in the Caucasus, PIE would still be on the steppe and the rest of the story: PIEs started their massive expansions... finally some branch of them ended up in Iran and India.
Hmm, it's still the same thing.

Indo-Iranians were way different from the people that you imagine. Try to deal with it.

Vara said...

@Vrka

"Indo-Scythians?! How can a small ruling elite leave such a big impact on a big region like India?! (Let's forget about other stuff such as archaeological, linguistic, and other genetic evidences)."

First of all archaeology isn't clear on the Indo-Iranians. Let me list the theories on Yaz alone.

1. It's the I-I homeland
2. It's the Proto-Iranian homeland
3. It's the Eastern Iranian homeland

It isn't clear with the current data as you think. There's the BMAC as the PII homeland and now some are saying Indo-Aryans did not go through BMAC.

The Indo-Scythian impact wasn't small. There is a reason the West Iranians renamed the land after them. Also, I'm not saying the Indo-Scythians alone brought all of this. Many steppe folk migrated to South Asia. Indo-Scythians, Kushanites, Hepthalites...etc. Basically 800 years of Steppe rule.

"You can't hide your own dogmatism by calling others dogmatic, Vara."

I do not have any pre-conceived view on this issue. I said it before that Out of Caucasus, Balkans and Steppes are all plausible theories.


"We're talking about the Indo-Iranian homeland."

You mentioned Out of India and Out of Central Asia, so I thought you were speaking of PIE. If you're speaking of Indo-Iranians then you're contradicting yourself because Andronovo itself lies in Central Asia.

Caucasus is the best candidate for Early PIE for it can solve the issue with Anatolian languages.

supernord said...

Kurgans did not come from the Caucasus, there is no evidence of this. The kurgans known in the Sredny Stog/Novodanilovskaya cultures, there is no evidence that they appeared in the steppe later than in the Caucasus. That they came from the Caucasus it is distributed some dreamers as fact. So they just might come to the Caucasus from the steppe.

aniasi said...

@ShahTooMuchTotalWar

"The fair skinned, light eyed, fair haired Vedic Aryans invaded India and enslaved and massacred much of the dark skinned natives, and forced a great many more to flee further inland and down south. Basically, this whole fair skinned invaders dominating dark skinned natives is too much to hear for Indian nationalists, so they hopelessly craft their own narrative of the dark skinned Indians civilizing and subjugating the fair skinned Europeans. Indians do not like hearing this specific narrative. Hence, they reject the Aryan Invasion Theory, and cook up their own fallacious and absurd arguments to counter this fact and reality. I will say no more."

Indian nationalists may be making stuff up, but right here so are you. Your bizarre skin colour obsessions and fantasies are almost making me sympathise with the OIT idiots. On the last South Asian post, you even put down a rape fantasy of "fair skinned chad Aryans humiliating and crushing virgin dark skinned Dravidians". That statement just bursts with facts and science based evidence.

There is no evidence for your postulation. This is your own fantasy, with no evidence in archaeology or science, or any fact-based system. It's racist, creepy, and downright Richard Spencer.

1) The Yamnaya people were darker than today's Europeans, dark haired, and dark eyed. They weren't golden haired and blue eyed.
https://doi.org/10.1073%2Fpnas.1316513111

2) We don't know what the IVC people looked like. If they were predominantly of Iranian Neolithic descent, then they weren't too dark. If I remember correctly, the Ganj Dareh woman had one light skinned allele, but was missing another. (https://www.nature.com/articles/srep31326)

Populations change over time, and selection pressures can alter appearance within a given population. As an example, prior to the 20th century, Ashkenazi Jews were stereotyped as being red headed. Obviously this is one trait that has changed within a relatively short period.

Also, This may shock you, but Aishwarya Rai, Vidya Balan and Tanya Ravichandran are from non-Brahmin Dravidian backgrounds. They are all actresses in a film industry with a light-skin obsession that could make your comments look normal.

3) There is no archaeological evidence for what you say. No looted and destroyed cities, no mass graves or unburied remains, no evidence for massacres and enslavement, nada. Before you post one of your creepy race fictions, point to actual evidence. I don't want your claims that "this is what happened" or assertions that it is "clear" as though you were there. I want you to point to a study, or remains, or textual evidence, or a historic parallel.

The only assertions that do have any evidence are that a) there was a steppe incursion into the Indian Subcontinent b) which resulted in the dominance of the steppe people over the indigenous population, and that c) these people lived in a warrior-based society. We also know that d) lighter skin is more concentrated in the upper castes. Skin colour, however, may be partly due to selectional factors. The Ajanta frescoes from the classical period depict an Indo-Aryan speaking elite that is on the darker end of the Indian spectrum, and certainly not in keeping with today's preference for light skin.

Rob said...

The earliest kurgans come from the Farmer steppe border in NW Black Sea as early as 47/4500
They appear in Caucasus 40-3800 in Majkop-Leylatepe

Vara said...

Citations? Is this another Uzboy/Zoroaster Burial thing? There are no Sredny Stog Kurgans. The oldest Kurgans are from Leyla Tepe and Maykop.

Did Cattle make it from the Steppes to the Caucasus too? Did metallurgy?

Shahanshah of Persia said...

@Davidski https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eWkrQQly6xU

Nostalgic stuff^

@Vara I somewhat agree with you for once. Though, I think there's good reason to believe that the Vedic Aryans/Indo-Aryans did not go through BMAC, since they lack Chacolithic Iranian admixture. For this reason, I highly doubt that the Indo-Aryans went through BMAC, but likely went around it by crossing into South Asia via the Ferghana Valley.

Yaz was not the Proto-Iranic homeland, but probably the homeland of later West and East Iranic groups such as the Achaemenids, Medes, Sogdians, Bactrians, etc. The Scythians and Sarmatians were pre-BMAC Iranics, and hence lacked any admixture from Iran. Anyway, my understanding here is that the Iranics who entered Iran had a decent amount of Iran Chalcolithic ancestry, around 20 to 30%, but were mostly Steppe MLBA derived (70 to 80%). The Steppe was later diluted over time, probably by the late Achaemenid period. So, I somewhat agree with you here but I do not think that Yaz was the homeland of the Proto-Iranics.

"The Indo-Scythian impact wasn't small. There is a reason the West Iranians renamed the land after them. Also, I'm not saying the Indo-Scythians alone brought all of this. Many steppe folk migrated to South Asia. Indo-Scythians, Kushanites, Hepthalites...etc. Basically 800 years of Steppe rule."

You are right, but outside of a few tribes and castes, I do not believe that any of these groups had an impact, or they had a limited impact.

"I do not have any pre-conceived view on this issue. I said it before that Out of Caucasus, Balkans and Steppes are all plausible theories."

No, they are as dead as Out of India.

"You mentioned Out of India and Out of Central Asia, so I thought you were speaking of PIE. If you're speaking of Indo-Iranians then you're contradicting yourself because Andronovo itself lies in Central Asia."

Anronovo originated on the Steppes, though.

"Caucasus is the best candidate for Early PIE for it can solve the issue with Anatolian languages."

No, it's not and it cannot.

Vara said...

^ was @supernord

@Rob

Can you link me a paper?

Thanks!

Bogdan said...

@Shah

You come across as an immature obnoxious shill. I recommend you settle down.

The Vendic idea of a war between light and darkness has nothing to do with skin color. Floods could have more to due with demise/displacement of IVC as “light skinned/eyed” Nomadic Steppe “invaders” whom you rather abnoxiously believe “enslaved” and “massacred” much of the “dark skinned” natives...

EastPole said...

@Vara

“While the Steppe theory is very solid, why couldn't the steppe admixture and mtdna have arrived 2nd century BCE with the Indo-Scythians.”

Because Vedic Sanskrit, the language of Rigveda, is closer to Slavic than it is to Hindi.

supernord said...

"And no Out of Caucasus is not dead. Where do you think metallurgy, cattle and kurgans came from?"

Metallurgy in the steppe comes not from the Caucasus, that's for sure. When in the Steppe was already the Chalcolithic in the Caucasus comes barely Neolithic. The first metal products in the Caucasus would come through the steppe, they are made of Balkan copper.
Cattle also can be from East of the Caspian sea or from the West, no only Caucasus. No evidence.


Shahanshah of Persia said...

@aniasi

"Indian nationalists may be making stuff up, but right here so are you. Your bizarre skin colour obsessions and fantasies are almost making me sympathise with the OIT idiots. On the last South Asian post, you even put down a rape fantasy of "fair skinned chad Aryans humiliating and crushing virgin dark skinned Dravidians". That statement just bursts with facts and science based evidence."

I never said it in a racial way, I just simply stated the facts. The Indus Valley people were probably fairly dark because Neolithic Iranians and ASI were both fairly dark. Based on this we can conclude that the IVC people were likely also fairly dark skinned. I never even made mention of rape or anything of that sort, stop putting words in my mouth. It is true, though, as all evidence points to an invasion, see here: http://eurogenes.blogspot.ca/2017/07/the-indo-europeanization-of-south-asia.html

"There is no evidence for your postulation. This is your own fantasy, with no evidence in archaeology or science, or any fact-based system. It's racist, creepy, and downright Richard Spencer."

Yamnaya =/= Vedic Aryans, though. Have you forgotten about this: http://eurogenes.blogspot.ca/2017/05/through-time-and-space.html

Also, no one mentioned Richard Spencer, why are you bringing those nuts into this? Is it to discredit me?

"1) The Yamnaya people were darker than today's Europeans, dark haired, and dark eyed. They weren't golden haired and blue eyed."

I never claimed they were, you're putting words in my mouth again.

"2) We don't know what the IVC people looked like. If they were predominantly of Iranian Neolithic descent, then they weren't too dark. If I remember correctly, the Ganj Dareh woman had one light skinned allele, but was missing another. (https://www.nature.com/articles/srep31326)"

Yeah, but the IVC people were probably admixed with Ancestral South Indians by the arrival of the Vedic Aryans. So, they likely were fairly dark.

"Populations change over time, and selection pressures can alter appearance within a given population. As an example, prior to the 20th century, Ashkenazi Jews were stereotyped as being red headed. Obviously this is one trait that has changed within a relatively short period."

Okay, your point?

"Also, This may shock you, but Aishwarya Rai, Vidya Balan and Tanya Ravichandran are from non-Brahmin Dravidian backgrounds. They are all actresses in a film industry with a light-skin obsession that could make your comments look normal."

No, not shocked or surprised at all, and I actually knew this. However, they are of upper caste South Indian stock. Besides, their looks are rare. Why are you using obvious outliers to represent an entire population? Most South Indians are fairly dark, both you and I know this fact. Also, a lot of Jatts are darker than you would expect them to be, but that does not mean that Aishwarya Rai, Vidya Balan, etc., are more Steppe derived and less Onge derived than them, that would be as ludicrous an assertion as what OIT proponents say.

Shahanshah of Persia said...

@aniasi

"3) There is no archaeological evidence for what you say. No looted and destroyed cities, no mass graves or unburied remains, no evidence for massacres and enslavement, nada. Before you post one of your creepy race fictions, point to actual evidence. I don't want your claims that "this is what happened" or assertions that it is "clear" as though you were there. I want you to point to a study, or remains, or textual evidence, or a historic parallel."

There is a lot of evidence, especially in the Rig-Vedic literature. Anyway. I think you should do some research on your own. One thing is clear, something caused the Indus Valley Civilization to fall, which was likely due to many factors, among of which was the Aryan Invasion. The upcoming study should shed a lot of light on this.

"The only assertions that do have any evidence are that a) there was a steppe incursion into the Indian Subcontinent b) which resulted in the dominance of the steppe people over the indigenous population, and that c) these people lived in a warrior-based society. We also know that d) lighter skin is more concentrated in the upper castes. Skin colour, however, may be partly due to selectional factors. The Ajanta frescoes from the classical period depict an Indo-Aryan speaking elite that is on the darker end of the Indian spectrum, and certainly not in keeping with today's preference for light skin."

You could be right about selection factors and I agree, but in a way you contradicted yourself. The light pigmentation genes must have come from somewhere, and we both know where they came from. There's no need to take this argument any further. I will give you a hint, the light pigmentation genes did not come from India.

Bob Floy said...

@eastpole
"Because Vedic Sanskrit, the language of Rigveda, is closer to Slavic than it is to Hindi."

And that's the key to the whole thing for me. Even before the recent revelations regarding m417, there was never really any way to explain this other than some kind of population movement from eastern Europe into south Asia.

Shahanshah of Persia said...

@Bogdan

"You come across as an immature obnoxious shill. I recommend you settle down."

How so?

"The Vendic idea of a war between light and darkness has nothing to do with skin color. Floods could have more to due with demise/displacement of IVC as “light skinned/eyed” Nomadic Steppe “invaders” whom you rather abnoxiously believe “enslaved” and “massacred” much of the “dark skinned” natives..."

Unfortunately for you, it's not just me who believes the Aryan Invasion happened, see here:

1) "The Indo-Europeanization of South Asia: migration or invasion?": http://eurogenes.blogspot.ca/2017/07/the-indo-europeanization-of-south-asia.html

To quote:

"I already strongly believe that it was an invasion, or rather a series of invasions. I'll change my mind if, at the end of the day, the evidence says otherwise. But if you favor a migration scenario, then consider these points:

- the population in the northern part of the Indian subcontinent during the Bronze Age, even after the collapse of the Indus Civilization, was likely to have been very large for its time, and yet there was a massive pulse of admixture across South Asia from the steppe and a turnover in Y-chromosomes, especially amongst the ruling classes, suggesting that something very dramatic took place that had a major impact on the social and political fabric of the region

- early Indo-Europeans in the Near East, from the Hittites to the Scythians, are often recorded as warlike and expansionist, with a habit of invading and subjugating other peoples, like the Hattians, Hurrians and Mitanni (who apparently ended up with an Aryan elite)

- if early Indo-Europeans outside of South Asia had a penchant for invasions, then there's no reason to believe that the M.O. of the early Indo-Europeans in South Asia would have been any different, unless some sort of direct empirical evidence says so, but what kind of direct empirical evidence?

Please note, I agree that the suggestion of a potentially violent invasion of South Asia by Indo-Europeans, and, indeed, Aryans, sounds provocative, and will always be politically controversial no matter how much evidence is gathered in its favor. But what if it really happened?"


2) "Ancient herders from the Pontic-Caspian steppe crashed into India: no ifs or buts": http://eurogenes.blogspot.ca/2017/06/ancient-herders-from-pontic-caspian.html


Sure, I exaggerate a few details and add a bit of my own spice to the tale, but you get the general idea.

Bob Floy said...

Population movement in the bronze age, that is. I don't see how anyone could suggest that the Scythians can explain the situation in India.

Shahanshah of Persia said...

@EastPole @Bob Floy

No guys, you have it all wrong. Indians brought Sanskrit to Europe which later evolved into the European branches of the Indo-European language family. The reason why Vedic Sanskrit is closer to Slavic than it is to Hindi is because Hindi is a bastardized language created by invading Turks by mixing Persian, Arabic, and Sanskrit. It is not India's true language.

Shahanshah of Persia said...

"Population movement in the bronze age, that is. I don't see how anyone could suggest that the Scythians can explain the situation in India."

Me neither, lol.

Bob Floy said...

Once you understand the position of Sanskrit within the IE family, there are really only two options, and one of them(OIT) is completely absurd, so there really isn't a whole hell of a lot of room for speculation. All of this hair splitting in a desperate attempt to avoid facing the reality(that indo-European languages were brought to south Asia from the steppe)is just pitiful.

postneo said...

@shah:

"The fair skinned, light eyed, fair haired Vedic Aryans invaded India and enslaved and massacred much of the dark skinned natives, and forced a great many more to flee further inland and down south"

Aw gee, and when did this happen? did they all come via the ferghana valley. Were there any females in this group? where were they immediately before this what archeological culture?

And the natives before the invasion, were they like the ongi or Iran neolithic? What about the dna from Harappa or Haryana what is your prediction of their autosome?

supernord said...

Tree of PIE https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/ru/8/89/Starostin_IE.png

Vrka said...

@Vara






"First of all archaeology isn't clear on the Indo-Iranians."
"It isn't clear with the current data as you think."

You're just going into details. Of course the details are still unclear, but the basics tell us that Indo-Iranians had their roots in the steppes. There's no if or but about the basic stuff.








"The Indo-Scythian impact wasn't small."

How did you calculate the genetic legacy of them?







"Many steppe folk migrated to South Asia. Indo-Scythians, Kushanites, Hepthalites...etc. Basically 800 years of Steppe rule."

You're overestimating the effect of empires. An empire doesn't necessarily change the genepool of its region. Take a look at history, there'll be countless examples.







"If you're speaking of Indo-Iranians then you're contradicting yourself because Andronovo itself lies in Central Asia."

I think you didn't get my point again. By "Out of X" I mean "Out of It's Native People". Andronovo people were the descendants of Corded Ware-related (or at least Yamna-related) people. They were not native to Central Asia. They just made their way through it from Eastern Europe.







"Caucasus is the best candidate for Early PIE for it can solve the issue with Anatolian languages."

I've got no specific opinion about this, since we can hardly say anything about it without having some genomes from noble Hitties or other ancient Anatolian speakers. If they don't show any steppe-related sign, then we can consider the Caucasus theory. Albeit other alternatives may pop up suddenly.
I don't know if we have such genomes, do we?

Vrka said...

Sorry here I meant "Late PIE" but I wrote PIE.

Vara said...

@supernord

I'm assuming you're talking about the Early PIE candidate, 4200-3600 BCE Khvalnysk. When Khvalynsk were using flint daggers, Maykop 3800 BCE were using bronze swords. It is believed that both Yamnaya and Corded ware's bronze smithing comes from Maykop.

Also, yes cattle and copper could've come from the Balkans. One of the reasons why I think Indo-Hittite Out of Balkans is plausible.

Shahanshah of Persia said...

@Bob Floy

"Once you understand the position of Sanskrit within the IE family, there are really only two options, and one of them(OIT) is completely absurd, so there really isn't a whole hell of a lot of room for speculation. All of this hair splitting in a desperate attempt to avoid facing the reality(that indo-European languages were brought to south Asia from the steppe)is just pitiful."

Then there's this joke of a video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qPaCUJsZyPU&t=

Points to look at: 1:00 to 2:20, and 23:30 onwards. You can watch it all I guess, it's pretty amusing and you will be laughing for a week afterwards. Try not to laugh yourself to death at the image he shows around the 1:30 mark.

Davidski said...

@Vara

Metallurgy was not invented by the Proto-Indo-Europeans. In fact, it seems like it was adopted by them from their non-Indo-European neighbors.

So trying to pinpoint the Proto-Indo-European homeland by looking for a people who were advanced in metallurgy isn't much of a strategy.

In other words, you've got quite a circular argument going there: metallurgy was a Proto-Indo-European trait, therefore the Proto-Indo-Europeans must have been a people who were really good at metallurgy, therefore metallurgy was a Proto-Indo-European trait...



Bogdan said...

@shah

It is not just political, it is also religious. Biased translations of the “Vedas” have been done by Christian missionaries ad nauseam for many, many years. Yes, there is genetic evidence of people’s originating from the Steppes that over time, from whichever routes displacing local populations in India, however that does not necessarily mean it was an ‘invasion’ of “rape and murder” of “dark skinned” people. Again, I advise you to calm it down.

Vara said...

@Vrka

"How did you calculate the genetic legacy of them?"

How did you calculate the genetic legacy of the Indo-Aryans? This is basically my point. We don't have enough data yet.

"You're overestimating the effect of empires. An empire doesn't necessarily change the genepool of its region. Take a look at history, there'll be countless examples."

I am not. The Indo-Scythians weren't similar to the Anatolian Turks, for example. I'd say it was more similar to the Turkic migrations to Central Asia.

"By "Out of X" I mean "Out of It's Native People". "

My bad, I misunderstood you.

"If they don't show any steppe-related sign, then we can consider the Caucasus theory. "

"Steppe" admixture was found in the Balkans and Kumtepe, so I don't think that will be enough.

supernord said...

@Vara

"I'm assuming you're talking about the Early PIE candidate, 4200-3600 BCE Khvalnysk."

Shamefully you always write fiction, generally speaking distribute simple a lie. Now you made up a date for Khvalynsk, although it is almost a thousand years older. Khvalynsk is early copper age, 5000-4500(/4200) BCE.

Do not write that you do not know, all simply already tired from you.

Shahanshah of Persia said...

@Davidski Okay, sorry boss. My bad, I was just annoyed by these questions.

@postneo

"Aw gee, and when did this happen? did they all come via the ferghana valley. Were there any females in this group? where were they immediately before this what archeological culture?"

Actually, they probably did come via the Ferghana Valley, see here:

http://eurogenes.blogspot.ca/2017/12/watch-red-arrows-naysayers.html

Don't tell me that you are a red arrow naysayer. Anyway, we would know the specifics if your buddies had allowed Harvard to release the study, and we wouldn't be asking ourselves these questions, now would we be?

"And the natives before the invasion, were they like the ongi or Iran neolithic? What about the dna from Harappa or Haryana what is your prediction of their autosome?"

The upper castes/classes were mainly Iran Neolithic, and minor Ancestral South Indian/Onge heritage, whereas the lower castes/classes were mostly Ancestral South Indian/Onge, with minor Iran Neolithic ancestry. I personally would say there was a 70/30 split both ways. Let's wait and see what the data has to say.

I hope this reply is better, I did not want to offend anyone but sometimes these I say weird things in the heat of the moment.

Davidski said...

@Vara

The Indo-Scythian explanation for anything but a minority of the steppe signal in South Asia is very weak.

That's because we have Scythian genomes, and Asian Scythians have a lot of East Asian admixture, which most Indians lack.

For your argument to be anywhere near plausible, then the Scythians who invaded India would've had to have been like the early Sarmatians from Pokrovka, western Russia, which is extremely unlikely.

Shahanshah of Persia said...

@Bogdan

"It is not just political, it is also religious. Biased translations of the “Vedas” have been done by Christian missionaries ad nauseam for many, many years. Yes, there is genetic evidence of people’s originating from the Steppes that over time, from whichever routes displacing local populations in India, however that does not necessarily mean it was an ‘invasion’ of “rape and murder” of “dark skinned” people. Again, I advise you to calm it down."

It probably was, though, but I know it's not Politically Correct, so I will refrain from making mention of it again. I just do not like it when Indian nationalists come here and insult us thinking that the Indo-European languages came from India. I have to give them some response, you know. If we play by their rules, we will never be successful in this war of words. Oftentimes they come here and tell us that it was Indians who civilized Europeans, and then there's the video I linked above in my reply to Bob. I advise you to take a look at the image around the 1:30 mark. This is what we are dealing with here, and we need to reply firmly and aptly.

aniasi said...

@Davidski

Do you remember that post you had earlier on Paleolithic West Eurasian MtDNA found in Dravidians? I think it would be worth revisiting.

I'm beginning to wonder if ASI is far too broad a category. The introduction of the female lines in that post of yours, and Ydna groups like H being more prevalent than D makes me think that there were at least two ancestral paleolithic groups in India. I'd like to see who the natives of the Indus-Ghaggra region were.

Bogdan said...

@shah

You ain’t getting many chariots through the Fergana valley, boyo...

Shahanshah of Persia said...

@Davidski

"The Indo-Scythian explanation for anything but a minority of the steppe signal in South Asia is very weak."

Agreed!

"That's because we have Scythian genomes, and Asian Scythians have a lot of East Asian admixture, which most Indians lack."

Yes, of course. But what if the Asian Scythians were not the ones who invaded India, but rather the European Scythians? Also, was there a difference between the European Scythians, Asian Scythians, and the Scythians from northeastern Iran/Turkmenistan?

I am not saying that the Scythians had a significant genetic impact on any of the South Asian regions they conquered, but couldn't they have significantly influenced the formations of some tribes such as the Jats? If not, then where do you think the Jatts get their high steppe from?

"For your argument to be anywhere near plausible, then the Scythians who invaded India would've had to have been like the early Sarmatians from Pokrovka, western Russia, which is extremely unlikely."

True, true. But what evidence do we have to say that this was not the case, since the Indo-Scythians and the Sarmatians from Pokrovka were only separated by a few centuries.

Shahanshah of Persia said...

@Davidski FYI, I am not saying that the Scythians are responsible for the Steppe ancestry in South Asia, but my argument is that they might have significantly contributed to the Steppe admixture in Rajputs, Jatts, and Gujjars. All of the remaining Steppe in South Asia comes from the Vedic Aryans, undoubtedly.

Shahanshah of Persia said...

"You ain’t getting many chariots through the Fergana valley, boyo..."

Hannibal led an entire army, including elephants, across the Alps, what's to say that the Vedic Aryans did not do the same with their chariots in regards to the Ferghana Valley? They were very ingenuitive people, no doubt. I don't doubt that they crossed the Ferghana Valley with their chariots.

Bogdan said...

@shah

Yes I see the vid you linked. Let the data speak for itself. No need to ‘attack’ or ‘defend’. It’s obvious to most at this point there was a genetic shift. How, why, when and from where it happened is interesting. Dogmatism, from either side is not.

Vrka said...

@Vara




"How did you calculate the genetic legacy of the Indo-Aryans? This is basically my point. We don't have enough data yet."

I don't want to calculate the very amount of Indo-Aryan ancestry among Indians and I never made such a claim. You make strange claims but fail to prove.
All I believe is that the truest modern descendants of Indo-Aryans are high caste IE-speaking Indians (except from the Kalash and some of their neighbours), and they show very elevated levels of Steppe-related ancestry compared to the rest of Indians. The same thing is true about R1a-M417 in India.
Well, this can't be a simple coincide. As all of us know, it's got something to do with those ancient Indo-Aryan guys.
You can wait for your "more data that's always needed" anyway.

Davidski said...

@aniasi

All South Asians harbor significant levels of ancestry called ASI that appears to be peculiar to South Asia, so it's impossible to claim that there was West Eurasian ancestry in South Asia during the Paleolithic or even Mesolithic without Paleolithic and Mesolithic ancient genomes from South Asia to confirm this.

That's because it's very difficult to estimate from modern-day DNA when certain markers arrived at a given destination. It makes no difference how highly diverged they are and how local they look. Hence, all we can safely assume for now is that Paleolithic and Mesolithic South Asians were ASI.

For instance, note that Y-haplogroup R2 is often claimed to be a South Asian marker. But very basal R2, or even pre-R2, lineages were found in Neolithic remains from Iran, and modern-day Indians can be modeled as having significant ancestry from this population. So now it's much more difficult to argue that R2 is native to South Asia, rather than from a now extinct population from Iran.

Indeed, all of those West Eurasian markers that look to be native to South Asia might actually be from now extinct populations from Iran and surrounds.

Bogdan said...

@shah

Are you now comparing 180BC Carthage with 1500BC India?
1000 years from now, few will be able to even speak or write in the language we are now speaking/writing in this blog. Relax.

Shahanshah of Persia said...

@Bogdan

"Yes I see the vid you linked. Let the data speak for itself. No need to ‘attack’ or ‘defend’. It’s obvious to most at this point there was a genetic shift. How, why, when and from where it happened is interesting. Dogmatism, from either side is not."

True. Well said!

"1000 years from now, few will be able to even speak or write in the language we are now speaking/writing in this blog. Relax."

Hmm... You have a point, I guess.

Shahanshah of Persia said...

@Davidski Never mind, I took a closer look at the data on Scythians from both Europe and Asia, and there's no way they contributed to the genetic makeup of South Asians, due to their heavy East Asian ancestry, for the most part.

Here's the full study for those who are still wondering about this topic:

https://www.nature.com/articles/ncomms14615

Most of you have probably seen it already, though.

Admixture results:

https://www.nature.com/articles/ncomms14615/figures/7

Shahanshah of Persia said...

@Davidski @Everyone else Speaking of studies on the Indus Valley Civilization, this was a recent one: https://www.nature.com/articles/s41467-017-01643-9

Not bad, I guess.

Vara said...

@Davidski

I think I wasn't clear.

The secrets of smithing aren't easily shared. I already mentioned before how rigid the Yemeni-forged swords were despite them being ruled by the Sassanids, and that the rich Arabs imported weapons from Iran, Syria and India. Proper weapon making made it into the Islamic world after they conquered the already ravaged Syria and Iraq. This can also, be seen in Russia after they conquered the Circassians and adopted their Shaskas and Kindjals. Of course, the Russians already had advanced steel making at that time so it's not the same as the earlier Steppe folk.

If one group has advanced metalwork that is later seen in a less advanced group, it implies 4 things:

1) The less advanced folk got it from trading
2) They conquered the advanced group
3) They somehow hired them
4) The advanced group migrated to the area of the less advanced group

1 is not true because the same "techniques" were found in the later steppe groups. There is no sign that Maykop was conquered, so 2 is not possible. 3 and 4 is dependant on the new data. If they migrated then they probably brought their language with them. I'm leaning on 4 for that theory here we already have a significant amount of CHG in Yamanaya.


As for the Scythians that migrated to South Asia, they weren't the Eastern Scythians. They were from around the Syr Darya and Amu Darya.

Vara said...

@supernord

I thought Khvalnysk was pushed to 4300 BCE recently based on reservoir effects. Either way it doesn't matter. No bronze artifacts existed on the steppes before Maykop, let alone swords.

Speaking of fantasy, mr. "Uzboy dried up 1500 BC", where are the burial texts of Zoroaster or your geologists? You don't even have the decency to admit your mistakes.

Shahanshah of Persia said...

@Vara

"As for the Scythians that migrated to South Asia, they weren't the Eastern Scythians. They were from around the Syr Darya and Amu Darya."

Yeah, unfortunately for you, even those Scythians had East Asian admixture.

Davidski said...

@Vara

If they migrated then they probably brought their language with them.

True, and this might explain the rather limited Proto-Indo-European vocabulary related to metallurgy, because metallurgy was probably not a Proto-Indo-European trait.

https://books.google.com.au/books?id=iNUSDAAAQBAJ&pg=PA241&lpg=PA241&dq=cognates+for+metallurgy+in+Indo-European&source=bl&ots=hpBJYpcmxk&sig=gv9XsmYiecrJNdz9iYQ8klCzJ9Y&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwiji8bJ-vvYAhVGgbwKHX0_BOMQ6AEIKDAA#v=onepage&q=cognates%20for%20metallurgy%20in%20Indo-European&f=false

Davidski said...

@Vara

So just for the sake of clarity, you're proposing the following?

The Proto-Indo-Europeans were master smiths from Maykop in the Caucasus, and yet they somehow failed to develop a rich vocabulary related to metallurgy, and instead chose to get by with a piss poor vocabulary related to metallurgy. Right?

supernord said...

@Vara
"I thought Khvalnysk was pushed to 4300 BCE recently based on reservoir effects."

Do not invent, the reservoir effect was calculated for the Khvalynsk and has been subtracted from the dates that I brought.

Davidski said...

@Vara

It seems that you're new to the PIE homeland debate. I'll throw you a bone in that case.

Metallurgy is not the key to finding he PIE homeland. Horses are...

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

Shahanshah of Persia said...

@Davidski

You should've just linked him this classic: http://eurogenes.blogspot.ca/2015/08/children-of-divine-twins.html

Bogdan said...

I want you all to stop thinking about R1a/R1b and the numerous sub-clade’s as “conqueror/invaders” of “kings and scientists” and more as the derivation (primarily based on mobility) of the world’s first “true entrepreneur’s”, that in many ways had a significant role to homogenize technology, language and customs of disparate ancient cultures up to the more modern age...

Shahanshah of Persia said...

@Bogdan

"I want you all to stop thinking about R1a/R1b and the numerous sub-clade’s as “conqueror/invaders” of “kings and scientists” and more as the derivation (primarily based on mobility) of the world’s first “true entrepreneur’s”, that in many ways had a significant role to homogenize technology, language and customs of disparate ancient cultures up to the more modern age..."

Good point, but do you think it was more of a genetic thing or a cultural milieu thing?

Vara said...

@David

"It earlier meant 'copper' or 'bronze'"

I don't see a problem here. Yamnaya and corded ware had proper metallurgy, so how do you explain it? Mallory himself alludes to the fact that PIE knew of bronze. Limited vocabulary is not a strong evidence, for a famous Indologist once said: "Taking the linguistic evidence too literally, one could conclude that the original Indo-European speakers knew butter but not milk, snow and feet but not rain and hands". Either way Mallory reconstructs the name of the smith god.

All Indo-Europeans, including Hittites, have a smith god or hero. Sometimes he is the helper of the dragonslayer god/world king, as can be seen in Greek and Indo-Iranian mythology.

http://rsos.royalsocietypublishing.org/content/3/1/150645

I only used metallurgy as a strong evidence for a migration to the steppes. Horses were found in Maykop so I do not see a problem here.

Bogdan said...

@shah

Both.

Rob said...

@ Supernord

Shishilna is wrong ?

"A series of 14C dates of human bone samples from the Eneolithic Khvalynsk cemetery and similar graves produced an age range of 5500–4700 cal BC (Chernykh et al. 2000; Telegin et al. 2001; Trifonov 2001). However, the 14C dates of the Khvalynsk cemetery were measured on human bones and on river and sea shells (Dentalium, Penctunculus, Unio sp., Viviparus, and Glycymeris) (Agapov et al. 1990; Kirillova and Popov 2005). A large aquatic component in the diet of the local population is shown by the stable isotope values. Thus, the dates obtained for human bone may show an apparent age of 2–3 centuries due to the reservoir effect; they are older than terrestrial samples, which are not affected by this effect. After applying a reservoir effect correction for the steppe Eneolithic period, the time interval for the Caspian steppe Eneolithic population has now changed to 4300–3800 cal BC."


@ Davidski

"The Proto-Indo-Europeans were master smiths from Maykop in the Caucasus, and yet they somehow failed to develop a rich vocabulary related to metallurgy, and instead chose to get by with a piss poor vocabulary related to metallurgy. Right?"

And there is no *PIE word for "rider" either; nor is there any solid evidence for horse-riding. Anyhow, can you cite a source for their "piss poor metallurigcal vocab" ?
And can you explain why what links late Eneolithic cultural sequences were metals : Majkop Usatavo - Vucedol - Bell Beaker and also to Urals -Sintashta ? Isn;t that the central tene of the existence of the Sintashta settlement ?

In any case, what we're looking at is a sequental package of Chalcolithic innovations which were shared in an overlapping manner between putative PIEs and their neighbours, so no simple narrative can be sustained. (eg the supposedly non-IE Majkop have evidence for horses).

Shahanshah of Persia said...

@Bogdan Agreed. Are you Romanian by any chance?

Davidski said...

@Vara

Yamnaya and corded ware had proper metallurgy, so how do you explain it?

Contacts with non-Indo-European peoples from the Balkans and Caucasus, like Varna and Maykop. No doubt they also acquired a lot of their southern admixture in this way.

http://eurogenes.blogspot.com/2017/05/a-plausible-model-for-formation-of.html

But there's actually no evidence that Sredny Stog, Khvalynsk or Yamnaya cultures were founded by migrants from Maykop. Seems like pure fantasy on your part.

Samuel Andrews said...

Shahanshah of Persia, you're not allowed to post at my blog. There's innocent, ignorant racists. But then there are racists who are knowingly perverse, heartless, and dishonest. You're the second kind.

Romulus said...

Not exactly ancient DNA but interesting nonetheless :

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5591018/

study on fertility genes on the human male y chromosome using 62 danish reference samples

"Even though the Y chromosomes studied here belongs to common European haplogroups (R and I) and haplogroup Q we identify 29 novel variants present in all haplogroup I individuals, 66 novel variants present in all Q individuals and 1 novel variant present in all Rs. We also found 174 Insertions and 104 deletions in all individuals, meaning that this sequence has likely been lost or gained in the reference Y chromosome. We used BLAST [25] to investigate if insertions above 500 bp have similarities to other known sequences. One variant found in all haplogroup I individuals is a 3326 bp insertion that shares 98% identity to a segment on the chimpanzee Y chromosome and thus must have been lost in the lineage leading to the reference Y chromosome that is R1b1."

I look forward to they day when the relationship between uniparental markers on y chromosomes and their associated unique genes are fully understood.

Bogdan said...

@Shah

Some. I’m a big boned round head R1b Yamnaya with ancient ancestors extremely proficient at successfully trading horse in Pannonian plain and then later copper from mines in northeast Hungary.

Davidski said...

@Rob

And there is no *PIE word for "rider" either; nor is there any solid evidence for horse-riding.

I don't much care when people started riding horses. Never said anything about that here.

Shahanshah of Persia said...

@Samuel Andrews

"Shahanshah of Persia, you're not allowed to post at my blog. There's innocent, ignorant racists. But then there are racists who are knowingly perverse, heartless, and dishonest. You're the second kind."

How am I a racist, though? I am a nice and kind individual and have not said anything racist on this blog, intentionally at least. I have also received a fair share of unprovoked insults, in case you have not noticed.

"Some. I’m a big boned round head R1b Yamnaya with ancient ancestors extremely proficient at successfully trading horse in Pannonian plain and then later copper from mines in northeast Hungary."

Nice, great to know mate!

Shahanshah of Persia said...

@Bogdan That last reply was to you, the last bit there^

Davidski said...

@All

Please stay on topic. No more discussions about Shahanshah of Persia.

@Shahanshah of Persia

Intentional or not, ethnic slurs and racist connotations are not allowed on this blog. I had to delete one of your posts above because of this problem.

Blog rules are here...

http://eurogenes.blogspot.com/2016/09/new-rules-for-comments.html

Ric Hern said...

@ Rob

What do you mean by this ?

"Thus, the dates obtained for human bone may show an apparent age of 2–3 centuries due to the reservoir effect; they are older than terrestrial samples, which are not affected by this effect."

Do you mean that there is an overestimate of 2 to 3 centuries ? How do you get 4300 cal BC.when you subtract 300 years from 5500 cal BC. ? Correct me if I'm mistaken but shouldn't it then be 5200 cal BC.?

Rob said...

@ Ric

I wasn;t quoting myself; but the author of the paper (Paleoecology, Subsistence, and 14C Chronology of the Eurasian Caspian Steppe Bronze Age). I'd have to look deeper into but might relate to conversion from uncalBP to cal BCE not being linear.

Nirjhar007 said...

No, just a useless distraction and you know it.

I agree , I mean who cares here about the origins ?.

The dogmatic views of some of you is simply mazing

Oh come on Vara , don't you like amazing things? ;) ..


Shahanshah of Persia said...

@Davidski Alright, sorry I understand and will be on my best behaviour from now on.

Shahanshah of Persia said...

@Nirjhar007 We need to see the IVC and Vedic Aryan samples, so we need evidence and less talk from you, until then remain quiet.

Nirjhar007 said...

BTW the view that Rigvedic enviroment was nomadic is not correct , here is an example :

Page : 254
CEREALS AS SOURCE OF FOOD IN RIGVEDA.

А.А. Семененко

Abstract: The article deals with all descriptions of cereals as food in Rigveda. The author demonstrates that references to cereals as food already in the most archaic cycles of the Samhita point to sedentary and agricultural (grain growing) economy of Rigvedic society from the very beginning of its development. Key words: Rigveda, Indo-Aryans, cereals, food.
https://www.academia.edu/33041759/Semenenko_A.A._Cereals_as_source_of_food_in_Rigveda
..........................................................................





Bogdan said...

Shah: as stated previously, settle down. In some Indo-Aryan influenced languages the direct translation of what you have to say is “post less you stupid fool”.

This blog has potential to be a more premier site for in depth discussion of ancient societies, but is dragged down by shills like yourself. I encoroage you to do everyone a favor and listen more, speak less. You’re enthusiasm is great. Re-direct that energy into some actual “findings”....

Nirjhar007 said...

And I think it is needed to be said again , that people who are actually concerned about why Indian Ancient DNA is not published yet, they should contact the relevant people and if they don't get any feed back , then the mature thing to do is to just keep waiting, instead of making all kinds of nonsense .

Shahanshah of Persia said...

@Bogdan You're new here. Don't worry, I know what to say and not to say. I'm not shilling for anyone.

Bogdan said...

Nirjhar: Modern India is one of the most incompetent Democratic societies in the world today. There are lots of layers to get through to get to a published paper like this that burns from inside out.... The overwhelming “proof” will be from outside in, written and proven by others.. Don’t expect the Indians to ever prove or disprove either, at least publically....

Bogdan said...

Shah: i predate you as a participant on this blog. The difference is that for the most part, I just follow dialog and keep my mouth shut, absorb content, fact find myself without need to blather an opinion one way or another.... You would be wise to do the same.

Samuel Andrews said...

@Shah,
"How am I a racist, though? I am a nice and kind individual and have not said anything racist on this blog, intentionally at least. I have also received a fair share of unprovoked insults, in case you have not noticed. "

You say racist things all the time. You insult people all the time. You insulted my blog post earlier in this thread. You belong in theapricity not here or on my blog.

Everyone receives unprovoked insults. But most of the insults directly towards you are not unprovoked.

Shahanshah of Persia said...

@Bogdan

No, you do not. Trust me.

@Samuel Andrews Really? Well, then do not address me from now on if I am so rude. We should both go our own ways, thanks.

Bogdan said...

Just remember Shah, my ancestors thrived and dominated, not just because they were bigger, better and smarter than you. That would be naive...

ak2014b said...

There's a mistake in "H5e1: 0 samples. No samples H5 or under".
This meant to say no H5e samples, including none of the H5e1 that David's specifically mentioned in this blog entry. (But there's a number of other instances under H5, in case that's relevant.)

@Alberto
Thanks for pointing out that Sam's identified several more Hgs as steppe on his blog. If I get the time, I'll look for those. I'll also get the titles of the papers whose data I went through, in case you or anyone else wants to go through them.

"Still, the discrepancy is quite big, because if you include all the others you might get 3x or even 5x more matches, but that would still be <0.5%, so there must be a mistake somewhere (or maybe not, and the matches will go >50x up?)."

Very possible that may explain it. Any or all of the additional Hgs on Sam's blog may be popular in modern South Asia. I didn't know to look them up as they weren't in David's list of R1a-M417 associated mtDNA Hgs, which Sam's also pointed out as being but a subset of steppe mtDNA.

@David
My comments weren't designed to deceive anybody. I went through and quickly looked up the mtDNA Hgs you highlighted, excepting the ones you mentioned in another paragraph as specifically concerning South Central Asia. Sam and Alberto pointed out the limitation in my summary for relying on just that set. If there are any mistakes besides, you can simply correct me by stating them. It's unnecessary to impute sinister motives to me, when I merely aimed to add value to Sam's findings by providing tallies for the Hgs you listed, as this is one of the things I value in other comments here, such as Kristiina's.

@postneo
The discrepancy may be because:
Sam appears to have accounted for a larger set of mtDNA Hgs, whereas I only checked the ones that were emphasised in David's post (see the Hgs I indicated). So that may make the difference in Sam's higher figures? I may well end up with the same percentages as Sam if I looked at all the additional mtDNA Hgs that he's listed on his site.
Sam would also be using a larger modern dataset, perhaps obtaining additional data from ancestry sites where people get genetics tests done.
Or he may be using data from different papers to the ones I consulted, I don't know.

When I checked last year, I didn't find recent papers on Kalash and Tajik mtDNA.

There was however a paper from 2017 on the mtDNA of Hazara in Pakistan. But it's not accessible to me (paywall). Maybe Sam's already included data from there as well?


@Sam
Thanks for the link.
"So, you can't measure the frequency of Steppe mtDNA only using low coverage data like the data in Palanichamy 2015."
But that paper's mtDNA data spreadsheet gives the impression of having resolved samples to very specific subclades. For example, N1a1a1a1 or J1c1b1a. Or do you mean the coverage was inconsistent, being insufficient for some of the samples they used but sufficient for others? I assumed consistency and worked off their data tables.

So if you didn't use Palanichamy et al 2015, then, for comparing notes, what papers do you obtain your modern data from for South Asia and also South Central Asia? (For Iran, I still use Derenko et al 2013.)

Shahanshah of Persia said...

@Bogdan

"Just remember Shah, my ancestors thrived and dominated, not just because they were bigger, better and smarter than you. That would be naive..."

No one said this...

ak2014b said...

I haven't double-checked my findings, but anyone can do so. I've located the titles of the Pakistan mtDNA papers which will help. (Maybe Alberto or Sam are interested in going through these themselves? It could help to ensure I haven't made any mistakes.)

* Genetic characterization of the Makrani people of Pakistan from mitochondrial DNA control-region data, Siddiqi et al 2014 (2015)
N = 100 samples

* Mitochondrial DNA control region sequences study in Saraiki population from Pakistan, Hayat et al 2014
N = 85

* Mitochondrial DNA variation in the Sindh population of Pakistan, Shahzad Bhatti et al Mar 2016
N = 115

* Genetic analysis of mitochondrial DNA control region variations in four tribes of Khyber Pakhtunkhwa, Pakistan, Shahzad Bhatti et al Apr 2016
N = 100

* Forensic and genetic characterization of mtDNA from Pathans of Pakistan
Rakha et al 2010
, N = 230

* Mitochondrial DNA analysis of five Pathan tribes from Pakistan, Tabassum et al 2016
N = 165

* And David already mentioned West Eurasian mtDNA lineages in India, Palanichamy et al 2015, which actually includes both Bangladesh and India.
Total N = 14198, where 492 are from Bangladesh.
Its Table S3 provides useful summary statistics of groups of West-Eurasian mtDNA Hgs by region, language, caste by language, tribe by language, religion (though only for "Sikh", "Christian", "Muslim", not familiar with what "Mixed" means).

Anthro Survey said...

I think Samuel triggered poor "shah" when he chose to shade the area next to the Zagros so lightly. (How dare he!) It's quite spot on, tbh--drawn with a crayon, at that.

Anyway, according to "shah":
-I'm a nut because "nobody uses modern and ancient populations in the same run(let alone those damned Iranian Jews!)"(lol) or because I hint at the very real possibility of admixture with Central Asians along the way.
-Rob is a noob who has no idea about archaeology and should stick to Southern Europe.
-Sam's map is a joke.
-Kurd's ADMIXTURE results are completely wrong and totally off.
-Bogdan is a newbee.

Funny how everyone here seems to be lacking expertise...hmm...

Ironically, shah constantly calling attention to theories of Nirjhar, Vara, Postneo,Jaydeep, etc. only energizes the discussion he seems to be outraged by(lol). If they're mostly wrong(which they are), why bother? There's gonna be a whole lotta of heartbreak anyway when the papers come out. In the meantime, what's the point in stimulating this? Only draws negative attention here.

As for racism---Genetiker is often thought of as such. There are self-described National Socialists on Anthrogenica. And, yet, they never seem to crash threads. If anything, they tend to ADD VALUE to discussions.

The biggest irony, though, is that for someone who emphasizes(and identifies with) "Chads" so much, I've never seen more "virgin"-like behavior. "Chads" are mutually exclusive with trolls and/or shills. High time for someone to get laid and learn the basics.

Bogdan said...

@shah

“No one said this”...

I did...

Shahanshah of Persia said...

@Anthro Survey No comment. Also, don't try to equate me with Genetiker, he's a complete nut.

@Bogdan But how do you know for certain that you have more Steppe ancestry than me? ;)

Shahanshah of Persia said...

@Davidski Please clean up this mess for me, thanks mate.

Alberto said...

@Samuel

I see, so you have enough resolution to detect the correct subclades in both the source and target populations (steppe and modern ones, respectively)? That's good news, given the messy state of how mtDNA is reported across different studies. So good job at finding that out.

@ak2014b

Thanks again for taking another look and for the links. I'm not very familiar with mtDNA trees, subclades, age estimates, etc... and it takes time to gather all that data correctly. I hope Sam can find it sueful, though.

BTW, Sam, is there any easy online resource to check the mtDNA trees, subclades with age estimates, etc...? Like YFULL but for mtDNA?

André de Vasconcelos said...

@Anthro

Dayum! About time someone said that

Shahanshah of Persia said...

@Anthro Survey What? Lol. I agree with you mostly but you don't understand my friend. These Indian nationalists don't learn so easily and they come here and start hurling insults and spreading their nonsense. Someone has to answer them, right? For instance, I only said those things because I knew that they would upset them deeply. Also, David told you that there's no need to model modern populations on both ancient and modern samples unless we do not have sufficient data. In the case of Iranians, we do. It was just weird how you were modelling Iranians on Jews and Arabs instead of Chalcolithic and Neolithic Iranians. On a side note, you're right and I guess I'll leave the lads alone. I just don't like how they're coming here and acting as if they know everything. Also, I've admitted that I exaggerated the details of the Aryan Invasion and added my own spice to the tale for a dramatic effect. Obviously though, the main message was clear. And it's not only me who thinks it was an invasion, David agrees as well.

I'll take your advice and wait for the relevant DNA. Still, I enjoy messing around with them, it feels good.

About the virgin thing, it was meant as a joke.

«Oldest ‹Older   1 – 200 of 250   Newer› Newest»